Aer Lingus pilots paid €300,000($441,000)

Different skillsets entirely.

Hospitals need doctors AND accountants.
 
skydog2 said:
No more or less than any other class of employee. You take away a single flight attendant, and that flight is just as grounded as if you took away the Captain. So don't be thinking somehow pilots are unique to the money making ability of an airline. They are essential to making the machine go, but not sufficient.

Gordon Bethune had a great analogy for this. At employee meetings, invariably an employee from one group would question the salary or bonus of another employee group, under the notion that somehow that other employee contributed less than he did. Mr Bethune would hold up his wrist watch, and ask what part of it wasn't needed.
Click to expand...

I know you are all jaded on the industry, and that's why you left.

However, you missed where I was going by a country mile, which means I didn't explain it well.

What you said is true, but not the reason pilots of bigger aircraft should command bigger salaries.

The key is productivity, and everyone seems to forget that with all the ego talk of their specific duties.

Certain people contribute certain amounts to the revenue of the company. CEOs direct the company, and are thusly compensated for it. Someone like Bethune, single handedly put together a team and transformed CAL to a great airline. There were others that contributed but he drove the ship in the right direction.

Mechanics, FAs, Dispatchers, and Customer Service are front line employees that contribute, and indeed, make the airline run. Just like the pilots.

There is a difference, and it has little to do with skill sets, responsibilities or any of that. Again, it's productivity.

A mechanic can only physically do so much work.

FAs are limited to no more than 50 passengers.

Dispatchers can work only so many flights.

Customer Service Agents can only work so many flights and solve so many customer service issues.

Pilots....we can fly 19 seats or 519 seats, depending on the aircraft. How much revenue our we contribute is directly related to the size of the aircraft we fly and how many seats it has. As you know, all airline metrics are measured in Available Seat Miles (ASM) or Freight Ton Kilometers (FTK).

If you can't see why a pilot flying a 19 seat airplane makes less than a pilot flying a 516 seat airplane, I'm sorry. Our productivity, thus contribution to the bottom line, can be a very different depending on the airplane you fly. Same reason a 19 seat airplane will generate less money for an airline than a 519 seat airplane.


As an aside, the AerLingus job posting is for the whipsaw pilots. Basically it will be the Freedom A list type of deal if you work there. In other terms, GoJets. Just FYI. That is for the route announced by United using Aer Lingus Airplanes and neither of their pilot groups.
 
kellwolf said:
There's a reason it took me 20 minutes to get a response from my dispatcher the other day.....
Click to expand...

If you were enroute, that doesn't meet the rapid, reliable communications rule. I'd write a report on that.
 
Polar742 said:
I know you are all jaded on the industry, and that's why you left.

However, you missed where I was going by a country mile, which means I didn't explain it well.

What you said is true, but not the reason pilots of bigger aircraft should command bigger salaries.

The key is productivity, and everyone seems to forget that with all the ego talk of their specific duties.

Certain people contribute certain amounts to the revenue of the company. CEOs direct the company, and are thusly compensated for it. Someone like Bethune, single handedly put together a team and transformed CAL to a great airline. There were others that contributed but he drove the ship in the right direction.

Mechanics, FAs, Dispatchers, and Customer Service are front line employees that contribute, and indeed, make the airline run. Just like the pilots.

There is a difference, and it has little to do with skill sets, responsibilities or any of that. Again, it's productivity.

A mechanic can only physically do so much work.

FAs are limited to no more than 50 passengers.

Dispatchers can work only so many flights.

Customer Service Agents can only work so many flights and solve so many customer service issues.

Pilots....we can fly 19 seats or 519 seats, depending on the aircraft. How much revenue our we contribute is directly related to the size of the aircraft we fly and how many seats it has. As you know, all airline metrics are measured in Available Seat Miles (ASM) or Freight Ton Kilometers (FTK).

If you can't see why a pilot flying a 19 seat airplane makes less than a pilot flying a 516 seat airplane, I'm sorry. Our productivity, thus contribution to the bottom line, can be a very different depending on the airplane you fly. Same reason a 19 seat airplane will generate less money for an airline than a 519 seat airplane.


As an aside, the AerLingus job posting is for the whipsaw pilots. Basically it will be the Freedom A list type of deal if you work there. In other terms, GoJets. Just FYI. That is for the route announced by United using Aer Lingus Airplanes and neither of their pilot groups.
Click to expand...

:clap:

And this bit of labor economics is applicable to employee compensation everywhere. Yeah, I wish I could be a regional FO and make $441,000 (could you imagine!!!) but it can't and won't happen.
 
Not really sure it's about making $441,000 as a regional FO. . .

It's about protecting American jobs from the invasion of foreign companies who won't even bother using their own pilots to fly these legs.

Aer-Lingus "routes"
United "Marketing"
Non-Aer Lingus crews staffing the planes (current seniority list)
Non-United crews staffing the planes
All based in the United States.

That's the problem. At the very least, this flying should be performed by Aer Lingus crews currently with the company. At the very most, the flying should be performed by United crews with United paint on the side.
 
Polar742 said:
There is a difference, and it has little to do with skill sets, responsibilities or any of that. Again, it's productivity.

A mechanic can only physically do so much work.
Click to expand...

What if the mechanic is wrenching on a 747 vs. a B1900? Should the one fixing the bigger airplane, that contributes more revenue, be paid more?

Dispatchers can work only so many flights.
Click to expand...
So a "flight" is how you account for dispatcher pay but throw out what they are dispatching? Should a dispatcher be paid more to dispatch a 747 vs. a B1900? They are dispatching a plane that creates more revenue, after all.
 
Step 1: http://www.consumertraveler.com/today/aer-lingus-united-partner/

Aer Lingus, United partner

by Jon Surmacz on April 8, 2008

Aer Lingus and United Airlines announced a code-sharing partnership Tuesday that will allow customers to begin booking the joined services in September for flights beginning Nov. 1. The Associated Press reports that CEOs Glenn Tilton (United) and Dermot Mannion (Aer Lingus) signed the agreement today in Chicago. United’s senior vice president for alliances and regulatory Affairs, Michael Whitaker, said the deal would “give our customers more non-stop destinations across the Atlantic.”
Click to expand...


Step 2: http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/item.aspx?type=blog&ak=61815736.blog


United, Aer Lingus forge 'an unusual linkup'

Comments 14 | Recommend 3 Buzz up!
Like this story? Share it with Yahoo! Buzz
United and Aer Lingus are expanding their recent codesharing partnership in move that The Wall Street Journal describes as "an unusual linkup." The Journal says "the airlines, which already cooperate on flights between the U.S. and Ireland, plan to begin with flights between Madrid and Washington (Dulles), starting in March 2010. Both carriers will market the flights and have their flight numbers on the route. But Aer Lingus will operate the planes and will be primarily responsible for costs, while United will take the lead on marketing tickets and generating revenue for the operation."
The Associated Press writes that "Aer Lingus' corporate planning director, Stephen Kavanagh, (said) Aer Lingus would provide the crews and aircraft for the Washington-Madrid service — but the bulk of traffic would come from United's U.S. customers. He said the two airlines would split profits and risks equally." The Journal says "Aer Lingus will use an existing $350 million order with Airbus to supply three A330-200s for the partnership -- which includes the route from Washington to Madrid -- as well as two aircraft for two future routes, (Aer Lingus CEO Dermot Mannion) said."
The route represents one of the most-unique attempts yet by airlines to exploit the recently enacted Open Skies agreement between the USA and the European Union. That changes allows European carriers to fly between the U.S. and any EU country, even if it is not an airline's home country. Previously, most European carriers' flights from the U.S. could fly only to their home nations. For Aer Lingus, the route will give the Irish carrier its "first flights from a U.S. city to a destination outside of Ireland," the Baltimore Business Journal writes.
AP says United and Aer Lingus are "mulling other possible joint ventures to exploit the year-old 'open skies' pact between U.S. and EU aviation authorities." Bloomberg News (via the Chicago Tribune) writes "Aer Lingus and UAL will review the partnership after two years and may turn it into a 'full-blown joint venture,' with the Irish carrier owning 51%." Still, AP notes "Thursday's deal comes at a time of unusual uncertainty for Aer Lingus, a formerly state-controlled airline" that is now fighting off a takeover bid from European low-cost giant Ryanair.
And the United-Aer Lingus effort may run into other bumps –- including from United's own employees. Bloomberg News notes the company's pilots union is opposed to the deal, "saying it would allow the Chicago-based carrier to establish an airline operation that doesn't use its own aircraft or employees." Steve Wallach, head of the Air Line Pilots Association at United, tells Bloomberg that he thinks the expanded Aer Lingus partnership "is nothing less than the outsourcing of jobs to an international company."
As for Aer Lingus, it also may be looking to grow its U.S. services even outside the newly announced United pact. AP writes the airline's "Kavanagh said Aer Lingus was 'actively looking' to expand its own trans-Atlantic services from Ireland once again now that fuel prices have plummeted. He said reviving the Los Angeles route was a leading candidate."
Click to expand...


Step 3: Publish articles like the OP posted to make the pilots look like the problem


Step 4: Job openings in a crappy economy...


Step 5: Screw your buddy...
 
wheelsup said:
What if the mechanic is wrenching on a 747 vs. a B1900? Should the one fixing the bigger airplane, that contributes more revenue, be paid more?
Click to expand...

You are in the same boat I was. We have, on average, 3 mechanics working on our airplane for a normal turn. At the regional, you'd have what? One mechanic for the entire bank?

As a person, they can only complete so much work. It's not a knock against our highly skilled technical force. On smaller planes, one person can do a lot of work. On the big planes it takes many more people. It's not that one mechanic is more skilled than another. It's that they can only do so much.

One mechanic working a fleet of 1900s is not more important than one mechanic in a fleet of mechanics working on a 747. Just due to the shear size of stuff, it takes more manpower. It has nothing to do with the importance of the work, or the perceived importance of the aircraft size.

And, just to head it off at the pass, the pilot of a 747 is no more important to the operation than the pilot of the 1900. I'd say the responsibility, the authority and skill level is equal in both. I will say the pilot of the 747 can produce more than the 1900. Then again, if you can make the revenue of a 747 on a 1900, you should patent the idea.

So a "flight" is how you account for dispatcher pay but throw out what they are dispatching? Should a dispatcher be paid more to dispatch a 747 vs. a B1900? They are dispatching a plane that creates more revenue, after all.
Click to expand...

They are dispatching a plane the creates more revenue, but again, a dispatchers measure of productivity is number of flights, not numbers of seat miles. However, perhaps a dispatcher of an international flight would make more than one of a domestic flight, because there is far more work on than dispatching a domestic flight.

I understand where you're coming from, and I disagree with you. It's an argument of how much you can produce, given the metrics of production.
 
That's why I like UPS' single pay scale. I can pick a lifestyle (airframe) that I like and I don't have to chase the dollars.
 
A-300F4-622R said:
That's why I like UPS' single pay scale. I can pick a lifestyle (airframe) that I like and I don't have to chase the dollars.
Click to expand...

How did you NC come to the single scale? Was the methodology a blended-style to come up with the actual number, or was it "this is the rate"?

Thanks
 
wheelsup said:
Rationalization is a beautiful thing.
Click to expand...

So is logic and applying measurable metrics.

If you can come up with a solid, measurable metric that can justify the same pay on a BE1900 as a 747, by all means.

Trust me, I was a regional pilot when the J31 CAs were making 30/hr, and FOs making less. I realize there's a pay issue out there, antd we're not paid for the amount of revenue we can produce. I think pretty much everyone, especially me at this job and my last, is between fairly and vastly underpaid.

I think you're taking my logic for other than what it's intended.
 
Polar742 said:
If you were enroute, that doesn't meet the rapid, reliable communications rule. I'd write a report on that.
Click to expand...

About a year ago, I had to divert to EVV due to weather in STL. My dispatcher finally got back to me with "EVV knows you're coming" while on short final in EVV. The problem is, Pinnacle loads up their dispatchers with so many flights, that when things DO happen, they get swamped. So, between the FO and I, we pretty much did it all ourselves as far as contacting the station and letting them know we were coming. The only thing we COULDN'T do was re-file the release. That was pretty much a low priority on my list at that point, though. Filing flight safety reports hasn't really done much good. That would require the local FSDO to hop out of bed with management. I'm actually surprised the FAA is letting it go this far, but despite our best efforts, they really don't seem to care as long as planes aren't falling out of the sky.
 
The career of the POI shouldn't be intertwined with the relative success of the company he or she is in charge of supervising, but it is in many cases and that seems back asswards.
 
Polar742 said:
So is logic and applying measurable metrics.
Click to expand...

You say it's "right" that pilots are paid more when they fly bigger planes yet dispatchers aren't paid more when they dispatch bigger planes. They are, by your own admission, generating more revenue for the company by dispatching a 747 over a Beech 1900.

That's not logic it's selective reasoning.
 
wheelsup said:
You say it's "right" that pilots are paid more when they fly bigger planes yet dispatchers aren't paid more when they dispatch bigger planes. They are, by your own admission, generating more revenue for the company by dispatching a 747 over a Beech 1900.

That's not logic it's selective reasoning.
Click to expand...

To be completely honest, I have no idea how dispatchers are paid. Perhaps at mainline, they have pay scales based on aircraft size, I really don't know. I see a valid point in dispatchers being paid by weight, or productivity of the aircraft they dispatch, so there's definitely another valid metric to pay them by.

You seem hell bent though that I want to cheat someone out of money. And that is definitely not what I'm about. I'm sincerely sorry you feel that way. However, when you present compensation values to the company, you need to show that you're not getting paid more than you're producing. Pilots seem to do very poorly at that.

I never said it's "right", but it's "logical" difference. If you pay attention to what I write I try to be fair to everyone. For some reason, you seem to be on this bent that I think employees of one group or another should be slighted, and that's just not the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top