National Seniority List
10-22-2006, 06:51 PM
#11
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Posts: 89
stupid idea
A National Seniority List was tried once. It was done in the Soviet Union when a dozen or so carriers were loosely affiliated into the national airline. Like the Soviet Union itself, their national seniority list collapsed.
It would be a stupid idea here.
It would be a stupid idea here.
10-23-2006, 11:36 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 777, sofa
Posts: 1,183
Interesting responses.
I would have expected a lot of debate over the details of implementing the NSL, but had no idea pilots would be opposed to the idea in an of itself.
Widow's Son: Actually in the Soviet Union Aeroflot did everything that we would consider civilian aviation. Operating FBOs, to cropdusting to flying SSTs. One organization, one government bureacracy. If you're going to pull out the Commie card, get the details straight. By the way this argument is also a logical falicy. "The USSR was bad. The USSR had a NSL. Therefore a NSL is bad." It just doesn't logically follow.
Xenu: The most Junior non furloghee was hired about the time we were in grade school. I was hired less than two years ago. They think its a good idea, and I do. DOH is irrelevent to the value of the idea.
HoursHore: There are many who would argue that wages are being supressed to rock bottom without a NSL.
You point out a problem we have with the current seniority system. We are bound to our employers because changing jobs is cost prohibative. In fact I had originaly written "starting over is cost prohibative" Why should we have to "start over" every time we change jobs? This doesn't happen in most industries. Career Portability means that wages have to be flatter. A 12 year scale is a liability for pilots.
Why would FEDEX hire a widgeter with 12 years experience, instead of a widgeter with no experience?
The answer to that question, like almost all questions that begin with "Why do(don't) they..." is money.
FEDEX has to pay a pilot an average wage of somthing like $150 to $175 an hour, over a career. If the top out wasn't $225, and starting pay wasn't $54, but both were closer to the average, then there would be a reduced incentive to hire the guy off the street. Then they would want to hire that furloghee with 12 years experience. In fact they want to hire him now, they just want to pay him $54 an hour.
Hacker15e: This is why I think a flattened National Pay Scale is an important part of the equasion. FedEx has an inherent disincentive to hire a furghloee if they have to pay a premium for that labor. Remove that disincentive, and they will seek out the best, most experienced pilots they can get. A pilot has an inherent disincentive to switch carriers as they have to pay an overwhelming financial penalty. Remove that penalty and pilots will go to the companies that are the best managed and treat thier people the best.
Space Monkey: Great points. How do we get pilot groups to agree on this? I think IBT, APA, SWAPA & ALPA are all AFL-CIO affiliated. Perhaps an agreement on that level to recognize the NSL & NPS while each union still maintains its representation of its members at thier airline? As far as seniority, my personal view is day one at a 121 carrier. But I realise there are other points of view as well.
Stamps: What CEO would not be interested in a guarentee that they will not pay a penny more for thier labor than thier competition does? FedEx and UPS pay more or less the same for Labor. They pay about the same for fuel, real estate, insurance, etc. Their costs are similar across the board.
They compete on service.
As a consumer, isn't that what you'd prefer to pay a premium for?
Old Coastie: You've hit another key sticking point. Why would UAL, DAL, and NWA give up anything? They are fighting over who will have the highest pay in the industry.
Oh wait its not 1999 any more.
Hindsight (foresight?) might convince some that today's darling is tomorrow's dreg, and vice versa. Let's not propose anybody at UPS, FDX, or SWA give up anything; lets bring everybody else up to thier level. Thinking about this some more I envision the biggest obstacle will be from the guys at the top of the scale who have spent a lifetime paying thier dues. So figure out a way for them to opt out of the pay scale. Make it a "B scale" without the negative connotation of the original B scale.
Another good point you make, how does a carrier in chapter 11 afford the NPS? The same way they afford fuel. Nobody in Chapter 11 has gone to a judge to ask for a rebate on thier fuel costs.
And another: How will it affect morale when you make less money than a guy who bids junior to you? My point of view is that bidding ahead of the "newbie", or making more than the "old hand" is its own reward. But that's just me. Probation any time you start at a new carrier? I guess so. On first glance it seems logical and fair to me. I expect others might have different views.
fatmike: I don't want an end to competition. I want to end Labor vs Labor competition. Airlines do not now compete on price, and essentially never have. (I know about SWA, everywhere they go fares across the board drop to thier level - still no competition.) In almost every industry you can expect to find a job similar to yours at the same, or perhaps higher wage. True, there is no guaruntee. But how many headhunters have called you to see if you'd be inerested in a job at UAL?
Some of you other points - If a contractor needs an electrician or a plumber they get one on the Union rolls. That's the point of the National List; hire experienced pilots first. Nothing in this proposal requires a change in free enterprise or the national business model or any law. Nothing. The problems you encountered as a software guy are exactly the reason unions were invented. And all the more reason to strengthen ours.
Thanks for all your feedback. I realize that the NSL & NPS will face management opposition. Getting electric lights in crewrooms faces management opposition. Anything ever proposed in collective barganing requires negotiation, compromise, and concession. That's why I think the NPS should be cost neutral for the industry leading contracts. But in the end I think it can benefit management by moving Labor costs outside of competition. That way airlines can compete by providing superior service, not by seeing who can get pilots to pay the most for the privledge of flying.
I would have expected a lot of debate over the details of implementing the NSL, but had no idea pilots would be opposed to the idea in an of itself.
Widow's Son: Actually in the Soviet Union Aeroflot did everything that we would consider civilian aviation. Operating FBOs, to cropdusting to flying SSTs. One organization, one government bureacracy. If you're going to pull out the Commie card, get the details straight. By the way this argument is also a logical falicy. "The USSR was bad. The USSR had a NSL. Therefore a NSL is bad." It just doesn't logically follow.
Xenu: The most Junior non furloghee was hired about the time we were in grade school. I was hired less than two years ago. They think its a good idea, and I do. DOH is irrelevent to the value of the idea.
HoursHore: There are many who would argue that wages are being supressed to rock bottom without a NSL.
You point out a problem we have with the current seniority system. We are bound to our employers because changing jobs is cost prohibative. In fact I had originaly written "starting over is cost prohibative" Why should we have to "start over" every time we change jobs? This doesn't happen in most industries. Career Portability means that wages have to be flatter. A 12 year scale is a liability for pilots.
Why would FEDEX hire a widgeter with 12 years experience, instead of a widgeter with no experience?
The answer to that question, like almost all questions that begin with "Why do(don't) they..." is money.
FEDEX has to pay a pilot an average wage of somthing like $150 to $175 an hour, over a career. If the top out wasn't $225, and starting pay wasn't $54, but both were closer to the average, then there would be a reduced incentive to hire the guy off the street. Then they would want to hire that furloghee with 12 years experience. In fact they want to hire him now, they just want to pay him $54 an hour.
Hacker15e: This is why I think a flattened National Pay Scale is an important part of the equasion. FedEx has an inherent disincentive to hire a furghloee if they have to pay a premium for that labor. Remove that disincentive, and they will seek out the best, most experienced pilots they can get. A pilot has an inherent disincentive to switch carriers as they have to pay an overwhelming financial penalty. Remove that penalty and pilots will go to the companies that are the best managed and treat thier people the best.
Space Monkey: Great points. How do we get pilot groups to agree on this? I think IBT, APA, SWAPA & ALPA are all AFL-CIO affiliated. Perhaps an agreement on that level to recognize the NSL & NPS while each union still maintains its representation of its members at thier airline? As far as seniority, my personal view is day one at a 121 carrier. But I realise there are other points of view as well.
Stamps: What CEO would not be interested in a guarentee that they will not pay a penny more for thier labor than thier competition does? FedEx and UPS pay more or less the same for Labor. They pay about the same for fuel, real estate, insurance, etc. Their costs are similar across the board.
They compete on service.
As a consumer, isn't that what you'd prefer to pay a premium for?
Old Coastie: You've hit another key sticking point. Why would UAL, DAL, and NWA give up anything? They are fighting over who will have the highest pay in the industry.
Oh wait its not 1999 any more.
Hindsight (foresight?) might convince some that today's darling is tomorrow's dreg, and vice versa. Let's not propose anybody at UPS, FDX, or SWA give up anything; lets bring everybody else up to thier level. Thinking about this some more I envision the biggest obstacle will be from the guys at the top of the scale who have spent a lifetime paying thier dues. So figure out a way for them to opt out of the pay scale. Make it a "B scale" without the negative connotation of the original B scale.
Another good point you make, how does a carrier in chapter 11 afford the NPS? The same way they afford fuel. Nobody in Chapter 11 has gone to a judge to ask for a rebate on thier fuel costs.
And another: How will it affect morale when you make less money than a guy who bids junior to you? My point of view is that bidding ahead of the "newbie", or making more than the "old hand" is its own reward. But that's just me. Probation any time you start at a new carrier? I guess so. On first glance it seems logical and fair to me. I expect others might have different views.
fatmike: I don't want an end to competition. I want to end Labor vs Labor competition. Airlines do not now compete on price, and essentially never have. (I know about SWA, everywhere they go fares across the board drop to thier level - still no competition.) In almost every industry you can expect to find a job similar to yours at the same, or perhaps higher wage. True, there is no guaruntee. But how many headhunters have called you to see if you'd be inerested in a job at UAL?
Some of you other points - If a contractor needs an electrician or a plumber they get one on the Union rolls. That's the point of the National List; hire experienced pilots first. Nothing in this proposal requires a change in free enterprise or the national business model or any law. Nothing. The problems you encountered as a software guy are exactly the reason unions were invented. And all the more reason to strengthen ours.
Thanks for all your feedback. I realize that the NSL & NPS will face management opposition. Getting electric lights in crewrooms faces management opposition. Anything ever proposed in collective barganing requires negotiation, compromise, and concession. That's why I think the NPS should be cost neutral for the industry leading contracts. But in the end I think it can benefit management by moving Labor costs outside of competition. That way airlines can compete by providing superior service, not by seeing who can get pilots to pay the most for the privledge of flying.
10-23-2006, 01:59 PM
#15
Thx Age 65
Joined APC: Jul 2005
Position: MD11CAP
Posts: 1,041
A NSL requires people to give up something to help out others, in other words it relies on the benevolence of man to give up something for another man. In this case pilots at whatever carriers are successful at the time would artificially supress thier wages to artificially bolster those at carriers that aren't doing as well.
So like anything else that relies on good will, it is doomed.
So like anything else that relies on good will, it is doomed.
10-23-2006, 08:33 PM
#16
New Hire
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 3
I posted this a few weeks ago over on the other site and I think it applies to this thread:
I acknowledge that there are problems with a national seniority list. However, I'm convinced that solutions can be formulated. I see three major problems with a national seniority list. The first is how to devise a system that does not cause companies to have incentive to discriminate against applicants with more longevity than other applicants. If the choice is between a person with 15 years longevity (higher cost) and another person with five years longevity (lower cost), then why would a company hire the guy with 15 years? Second, companies must be able to maintain discretion in their hiring processes. Corporate culture is an important part of a company's success. A company's desire to preserve it's culture through the hiring process is a legitimate need and should be respected. If the national seniority list penalizes companies for not hiring applicants who do not fit their culture, then it is unfair. Finally, a national seniority list must determine a fair and reasonable way to establish which date is used for establishing seniority. Simply using first date of hire at a 121 carrier is not reasonable. That would over-penalize military pilots who spent time serving their nation. Is that fair? It would also over-reward those pilots who latched onto the first 121 carrier they could find. In my opinion, some combination of testing, hours, and service at a major airline or at some level in the military (for example: aircraft commander or flight lead) could be used to establish the seniority date.
The above are the real problems that I see in a national seniority list. However, there are some issues that are not real problems or are simply red herrings. For example, how will companies, esp those in financial trouble, be able to afford the higher rates? This is fairly simple. The national seniority list could establish a floor for labor rates and companies would be free to raise them if they wanted to attract better talent. If labor becomes a fixed cost and not subject to a downward spiral, then airlines will learn to deal with it the same way that they do with other fixed costs like oil and airplane payments. Another example: a national seniority list will not work because pilots are too selfish to support it. Not if a pilot loses all seniority each time they start at a new carrier. That is a significant hit and is enough to satisfy even the most cold-hearted and smug pilots who stay put at their airline. It would also provide a powerful incentive to pilots to not jump haphazardly from one airline to another. Additionally, the national seniority would be recognized for the incredible power and leverage it would hand to pilots as a whole. This plays very much to the hearts of all selfish pilots. Pilots would realize that they truly could vote with their feet if things were going seriously downhill at their airline. Can we do that now?
The bottom line is that our current unionized seniority system is BROKEN. It does not work. I happen to be lucky enough to be employed at a very stable major airline right now. However, I'm not foolish enough to think that my luck couldn't turn. And that is what is really sad about what piloting as a career under our current seniority system has become...it's all about luck. That's it; luck. It does not allow you to make mistakes or adjust your career for changing circumstances. In fact, our seniority system can devastate you and your family if your luck runs out or if you weren't prescient enough to have nailed down all of the developments pertinent to and that might impact a piloting career over the typical 30-year span of said career.
The answer is to forge ahead with a new system; to adapt to the realities of the 21st century airline world. Yes, there are problems with a national seniority list but there are bigger problems with the way things currently are. We can find answers, and no, they won't be perfect answers. However, they will be better answers than the ones we've currently given ourselves.
...pilots are their own worst enemy. However, it's not simply the fact that there are pilots who are willing to work for horrible wages. That is only part of the story. In my opinion, the major reason pilot's wages have decreased so dramatically is that pilots have a completely ineffective organized labor strategy. We have emasculated ourselves with our own narrow vision and shortsightedness.
We pilots have personally handed management the upper hand. Management is thrilled with the way we have hamstrung ourselves. We have devised an organized labor system where pilots have zero portability in our jobs once we have been employed more than a couple of years. At one of my previous airlines, an executive came and spoke to us. He reminded us of this very fact. He seemed to revel in it. He told us that if he loses his job, he can go to another company and make almost as much or even more money. He said that if a pilot loses his job, he has to start again from the bottom. When you think about it, it truly is insane. And, here's the kicker: we did it to ouselves!
For example, what real options did the NWA pilots have when they were recently threatening to strike? If the company shut down, all of the NWA pilots would have to start over from the bottom at some other airline or launch themselves from the beginning into some new career. On the other hand, management at NWA would have simply been forced to look for new jobs at other companies; jobs that would have paid in the ballpark of what they were making at NWA. They were not faced with having to start over. Who had the upper hand? Whose position was more precarious? The pilot group was not in the driver's seat and management knew it. The results speak for themselves. The same was true at United, Delta, Eastern, etc.
Today, building a successful pilot career is much more a matter of luck than anything else. If you're one of the lucky ones who manages to pick a growing, profitable airline that employs you until age 60, then all is well. But then, what if you were one of those guys who went to some airline where all was well and the future was bright. Ten years later, things have taken a nosedive. What do you do? What if you are one of the luckless many who is not able to divine the future? The effects can be devastating for you and your family. Our current union system leaves you with very few viable options. A member of management, conversely, who has realized that he is on a sinking corporate ship can abandon it with nowhere near the penalty that a pilot incurs for doing the same.
And we do this to ourselves? Insanity! This system may have worked well when our grandfathers and fathers flew. However, it is a fatally flawed system that is currently destroying our profession. We must adapt to today's realities. A union system that was designed for the realities of the 1950's and 60's does not serve us well today nearly half a century later. The airline industry's landscape has dramatically changed since then. However, the way we have decided to organize ourselves and fight the battles of today hasn't really changed. We are fighting today's battles with yesterday's weapons. Why? An army that tried to do that would be slaughtered as we are currently being slaughtered in terms of pay, work rules, quality of life, and prestige. Pilots must realize that we are all in this together. We must unify on a national level. We must come together and do what is best for all of us in the 21st century. It is time to put short sightedness behind us. Look at where it has gotten us.
I am convinced that all of what I said is completely true. For those who made comments suggesting that the idea of a national seniority list is stupid, then I have to ask how is our current system not stupid? We pilots have personally handed management the upper hand. Management is thrilled with the way we have hamstrung ourselves. We have devised an organized labor system where pilots have zero portability in our jobs once we have been employed more than a couple of years. At one of my previous airlines, an executive came and spoke to us. He reminded us of this very fact. He seemed to revel in it. He told us that if he loses his job, he can go to another company and make almost as much or even more money. He said that if a pilot loses his job, he has to start again from the bottom. When you think about it, it truly is insane. And, here's the kicker: we did it to ouselves!
For example, what real options did the NWA pilots have when they were recently threatening to strike? If the company shut down, all of the NWA pilots would have to start over from the bottom at some other airline or launch themselves from the beginning into some new career. On the other hand, management at NWA would have simply been forced to look for new jobs at other companies; jobs that would have paid in the ballpark of what they were making at NWA. They were not faced with having to start over. Who had the upper hand? Whose position was more precarious? The pilot group was not in the driver's seat and management knew it. The results speak for themselves. The same was true at United, Delta, Eastern, etc.
Today, building a successful pilot career is much more a matter of luck than anything else. If you're one of the lucky ones who manages to pick a growing, profitable airline that employs you until age 60, then all is well. But then, what if you were one of those guys who went to some airline where all was well and the future was bright. Ten years later, things have taken a nosedive. What do you do? What if you are one of the luckless many who is not able to divine the future? The effects can be devastating for you and your family. Our current union system leaves you with very few viable options. A member of management, conversely, who has realized that he is on a sinking corporate ship can abandon it with nowhere near the penalty that a pilot incurs for doing the same.
And we do this to ourselves? Insanity! This system may have worked well when our grandfathers and fathers flew. However, it is a fatally flawed system that is currently destroying our profession. We must adapt to today's realities. A union system that was designed for the realities of the 1950's and 60's does not serve us well today nearly half a century later. The airline industry's landscape has dramatically changed since then. However, the way we have decided to organize ourselves and fight the battles of today hasn't really changed. We are fighting today's battles with yesterday's weapons. Why? An army that tried to do that would be slaughtered as we are currently being slaughtered in terms of pay, work rules, quality of life, and prestige. Pilots must realize that we are all in this together. We must unify on a national level. We must come together and do what is best for all of us in the 21st century. It is time to put short sightedness behind us. Look at where it has gotten us.
I acknowledge that there are problems with a national seniority list. However, I'm convinced that solutions can be formulated. I see three major problems with a national seniority list. The first is how to devise a system that does not cause companies to have incentive to discriminate against applicants with more longevity than other applicants. If the choice is between a person with 15 years longevity (higher cost) and another person with five years longevity (lower cost), then why would a company hire the guy with 15 years? Second, companies must be able to maintain discretion in their hiring processes. Corporate culture is an important part of a company's success. A company's desire to preserve it's culture through the hiring process is a legitimate need and should be respected. If the national seniority list penalizes companies for not hiring applicants who do not fit their culture, then it is unfair. Finally, a national seniority list must determine a fair and reasonable way to establish which date is used for establishing seniority. Simply using first date of hire at a 121 carrier is not reasonable. That would over-penalize military pilots who spent time serving their nation. Is that fair? It would also over-reward those pilots who latched onto the first 121 carrier they could find. In my opinion, some combination of testing, hours, and service at a major airline or at some level in the military (for example: aircraft commander or flight lead) could be used to establish the seniority date.
The above are the real problems that I see in a national seniority list. However, there are some issues that are not real problems or are simply red herrings. For example, how will companies, esp those in financial trouble, be able to afford the higher rates? This is fairly simple. The national seniority list could establish a floor for labor rates and companies would be free to raise them if they wanted to attract better talent. If labor becomes a fixed cost and not subject to a downward spiral, then airlines will learn to deal with it the same way that they do with other fixed costs like oil and airplane payments. Another example: a national seniority list will not work because pilots are too selfish to support it. Not if a pilot loses all seniority each time they start at a new carrier. That is a significant hit and is enough to satisfy even the most cold-hearted and smug pilots who stay put at their airline. It would also provide a powerful incentive to pilots to not jump haphazardly from one airline to another. Additionally, the national seniority would be recognized for the incredible power and leverage it would hand to pilots as a whole. This plays very much to the hearts of all selfish pilots. Pilots would realize that they truly could vote with their feet if things were going seriously downhill at their airline. Can we do that now?
The bottom line is that our current unionized seniority system is BROKEN. It does not work. I happen to be lucky enough to be employed at a very stable major airline right now. However, I'm not foolish enough to think that my luck couldn't turn. And that is what is really sad about what piloting as a career under our current seniority system has become...it's all about luck. That's it; luck. It does not allow you to make mistakes or adjust your career for changing circumstances. In fact, our seniority system can devastate you and your family if your luck runs out or if you weren't prescient enough to have nailed down all of the developments pertinent to and that might impact a piloting career over the typical 30-year span of said career.
The answer is to forge ahead with a new system; to adapt to the realities of the 21st century airline world. Yes, there are problems with a national seniority list but there are bigger problems with the way things currently are. We can find answers, and no, they won't be perfect answers. However, they will be better answers than the ones we've currently given ourselves.
Last edited by Humuakalaka; 10-23-2006 at 08:39 PM.
10-24-2006, 07:22 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: SF340
Posts: 244
The idea of job portabiliy is a good idea but I think the way you have it laid out it a little too extreme to be stomached by the management of any company. You can't force it on a company so it will never work. Especially the hiring of furloughed pilots first in the manner of a recall, only at a different carrier. You essentially set up a communist state of the airlines.
If you dropped all of the requirements to hire and vacation transfers, keeping only the seniority pay portion it might work with an adjustment of pay scales. I still doubt management would go for it though because they would be losing a form of control over the workforce.
Portability of the profession is a nice dream though.
If you dropped all of the requirements to hire and vacation transfers, keeping only the seniority pay portion it might work with an adjustment of pay scales. I still doubt management would go for it though because they would be losing a form of control over the workforce.
Portability of the profession is a nice dream though.
10-24-2006, 07:57 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by robthree
fatmike: I don't want an end to competition. I want to end Labor vs Labor competition. Airlines do not now compete on price, and essentially never have. (I know about SWA, everywhere they go fares across the board drop to thier level - still no competition.)
What??? This is absurd. Exactly why do you think airlines go bankrupt and/or park airplanes due to revenue coming in lower than required to make a profit?
Last edited by Gunter; 10-24-2006 at 08:05 AM.
10-24-2006, 08:01 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Originally Posted by HoursHore
A NSL requires people to give up something to help out others, in other words it relies on the benevolence of man to give up something for another man. In this case pilots at whatever carriers are successful at the time would artificially supress thier wages to artificially bolster those at carriers that aren't doing as well.
So like anything else that relies on good will, it is doomed.
So like anything else that relies on good will, it is doomed.
When you can't even get the senior guys at one airline, say UPS or CAL, to raise first year pay above 30K a year, how can you motivate the dudes at one airline to help out dudes at another?
10-24-2006, 08:06 AM
#20
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,293
Originally Posted by fatmike69
So why don't we just mandate that every airline merge into one company then? I don't get it: one master seniority list where everyone gets paid the same amount, no company competes with the other on price, and each company is forced to hire pilots from other companies before they can hire outside? And in what other "real world job" are you gaurunteed your pay if you make a move? Are you speaking of "pay comensurate with experience"? While true the airlines don't have this, this is by no means a gauruntee of any sort of compensation in other "real world jobs".
This idea basically goes completely against a "free enterprise society". In order to make something like this work, much of the rules of our country's current "business model" would have to be re-written, not to mention much government intervention. This undercutting you speak of is not just occuring in the airline industry. I was a software engineer for years, before my job was outsourced to India where someone was willing to do my job for much cheaper than I was. And we didn't even have a seniority list, management was basically allowed to axe whoever they wished which (suprise suprise) turned out to be those who had been there the longest and were the highest paid.
This idea basically goes completely against a "free enterprise society". In order to make something like this work, much of the rules of our country's current "business model" would have to be re-written, not to mention much government intervention. This undercutting you speak of is not just occuring in the airline industry. I was a software engineer for years, before my job was outsourced to India where someone was willing to do my job for much cheaper than I was. And we didn't even have a seniority list, management was basically allowed to axe whoever they wished which (suprise suprise) turned out to be those who had been there the longest and were the highest paid.
It does not have anything to do with free enterprise. Airlines could still compete in numerous other ways, just not pilot pay. Besides it's only a free enterprise isssue if the government were to mandate it...if we do it ourselves, it's just labor organization.
ATC doesn't have any resemblance to free enterprise.
The military services compete viciously...but not using their labor costs, which are at fixed rates for all military personnel.
I have plenty of real-world job experience, and the reality is that my compensation level was portable from job to job. Of course there are no absolute guarantees in life, but for all practical purposes I would never have to take a pay cut to get a new job.
The underlying justification for a big change in pilot seniority and/or payscales is that the old ssystem assumed you would stay at one job your entire life (yeah, right)...well, management has learned how to use that to their advantage by shuffling jobs around to keep pilots at the bottom end of the arbitrary longevity scale. That's not free-market, that's cheating...and f*cking with people's lives in the process.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
