Union Responsibility

[drunkenbeagle]

That said, you need to understand that the wage pie is a fixed amount. An increase on one side necessitates a decrease elsewhere. Increases in First Officer pay will result in decreases in Captain's pay.

Really? Is the fuel pie a fixed amount? Gas prices go up, just use less? The MX budget? AD? Can't afford it, we just won't do it?

Management is very capable of negotiating for those costs, they could certiainly do so for compensation of pilots if it were a priority...

 

[BobDDuck]

That said, you need to understand that the wage pie is a fixed amount. An increase on one side necessitates a decrease elsewhere. Increases in First Officer pay will result in decreases in Captain's pay.

Umm.... no.

 

[DV8Pilot]

Would you tolerate flat-dollar-amount increases? In a scenario where management has agreed to a value amount, and it's up to the union to distribute it... instead of doing percentages they could divide that amount evenly between all steps of the pay scale. If a max pay Captain got a $1.20 increase and so did a first year FO, would you find that objectionable on the grounds that the FO got a 6% raise while the Captain only got 1%?

What would be beneficial for the entire industry is compressing the pay scale to enable lateral movement without massive pay destruction. A long and drawn-out pay scale only serves to effectively kill a person's mobility once they get a ways into it. If we could choose to take our skills to a different company without undue suffering, perhaps management would have to think a bit more carefully about how they chose to treat their employees. In the current environment, the majority of pilots end up attached to their company, for better or for worse... simply because they'd take such a massive hit if they left. Compression of the scale can do nothing but help. I realize that first year pay is only for one year, but if you look at it from a standpoint of enabling lateral moves, it becomes much more valuable.



I think you've got this backwards, to be honest. Yes, filling new hire classes helps the company. But where are those new hires coming from? Many are making lateral moves. Voting with their feet, and bailing on their previous employer. The best thing that could possibly happen for this industry is that we enable people to do just that: Leave crappy companies in pursuit of better opportunities. Instead we resign ourselves to "This place sucks and will probably die off at some point, but I can't leave because the bottom of everyone else's pay scale is unbearable."

It's a bad strategy, and it's clearly not working.

I'm ok with any amount, or method of distribution, as long as it's is management who comes to the pilot group saying "Hey, we need to attract more/better pilots, and we'd like to do it this way..." What I'm not ok with is the union saying "hey, first year pay sucks, let's do something about it" thus forcing our hand to give up negotiating capital.

It is so much more than pay that makes it difficult to move laterally. Foremost for me is bidding seniority. I can hustle and pay bills, but I'll never get back seniority that I've given up.

There is a lot of pilots that need to think about this subject in the coming year... There's going to be a lot of us in Section 6 negotiations very quickly.

 

[wheelsup]

It's despicable the way pilot "unions" take from the poor (F/O) and give to the rich (CA). It's repeated throughout history across all groups except for ONE notable exception - UPS. On their last contract, the CAs knew the current F/Os would be F/Os for quite some time and gave the lions share of the gains to them. It was very union like and admirable. It's unfortunate they hire so few, I would like to be at a place where the union really does look out for everyone.

Typically, raises are given in % and you have the guy making $100/hr getting a much bigger $/hr raise than the guy making $22/hr.

Pay scales, ESPECIALLY at the regionals, should be condensed. $45/hr starting $55/hr top out over 5 years for F/Os and $60/hr starting $70/hr top out for CAs over 5 years. Any raises should be straight $/hr raises.

Look at most major contracts, F/Os are paid 70% of CA rates at top longevity. 70% for most regionals would put F/Os around $70/hr. Yet they top out at $40-$45/hr after 18 years. Somewhere those at the helm decided regional F/Os did not deserve the standard longevity scale the majors have, yet still start off at a low hourly wage.

When Lee Moak was asked that question in front of Congress he had no response. It was humorous, but sad at the same time.

 

[jynxyjoe]

It's despicable the way pilot "unions" take from the poor (F/O) and give to the rich (CA). It's repeated throughout history across all groups except for ONE notable exception - UPS. On their last contract, the CAs knew the current F/Os would be F/Os for quite some time and gave the lions share of the gains to them. It was very union like and admirable. It's unfortunate they hire so few, I would like to be at a place where the union really does look out for everyone.

Typically, raises are given in % and you have the guy making $100/hr getting a much bigger $/hr raise than the guy making $22/hr.

Pay scales, ESPECIALLY at the regionals, should be condensed. $45/hr starting $55/hr top out over 5 years for F/Os and $60/hr starting $70/hr top out for CAs over 5 years. Any raises should be straight $/hr raises.

Look at most major contracts, F/Os are paid 70% of CA rates at top longevity. 70% for most regionals would put F/Os around $70/hr. Yet they top out at $40-$45/hr after 18 years. Somewhere those at the helm decided regional F/Os did not deserve the standard longevity scale the majors have, yet still start off at a low hourly wage.

When Lee Moak was asked that question in front of Congress he had no response. It was humorous, but sad at the same time.

I can answer that for Lee Moak. It's been seen historically and (until recently) universally so that no regional FO makes it 18 years. Endeavor, XJT, and Envoy are three I can think of that have 8 year FO's (and I'm doing that off memory), and they're all leaving for Compass if they can get an interview.

Regionals were, for the most part, burning dumpster fires guys would run through and be done with in 2-3 years. Age 65 boned that one up, so the only ones that paid well were targeted during the stagnation. The NMB bargaining cycles really don't allow for quick changes even if Lee Moak gave a damn about regional pilots.

If that confused Congress, just tell them that pilots wanted it that way and there is no shortage of applicants. Poor Vice Admiral Moak Machiavelli, he came to the union to be a big union boss, not have to answer questions about his members. He did go to Delta on Endeavors behalf (a regional) within the last 30 days, probably to figure out what he can do on the management side when he loses the next board vote.

 

[kellwolf]

Market rate based on supply/demand. ALPA at my regional purposefully turned down a significant payraise for 1st and 2nd year FOs. Had there been no union, I would have made more for both of those years.

First off, stop beating that horse. We've talked about this ad naseum for the past SEVEN YEARS. It's dead. Second, I can't believe you honestly believe that. Assuming you took the job at Pinnacle and there had been no union, first year pay would have been abysmal. If they had offered a raise, it likely MIGHT have gotten you to where you already were. Without a union, they'd likely start guys at $19/hr in a CRJ-200 and promise a quick upgrade. Supply and demand wouldn't matter. Guys would trip over themselves to get out of flight instructing or get hired at 200 hours out of some jet transition course. Those were all the rage at the time anyway. The chance to upgrade in a year or two would trump the first year pay. If they needed to hire more and people weren't showing up, they'd just kick it up to about $22-23/hr and call it a huge raise. Which was about what you were already making with the union in place.

As for first year guys paying union dues, I think it has to do with being on probation. Last email I saw here was first year guys at Blue are assessed dues since we don't have a probationary period. The kicker is the company is now saying a DCO system is something we have to negotiate even though EVERY OTHER carrier has it and it costs them nothing to do it. So, as of right now, we all have to write a check to ALPA every month. I think they're trying to play psychological war fare. It'd be VERY easy to sign an LOA on the deal over coffee and donuts. That being said, I'm not impressed at the glacial rate things are moving here. The interim reps don't want to do anything like LOAs since they weren't elected by the membership. I can go with that, and I understand it. But OMG, can just PLEASE have elections already?!?!? We've been ALPA for almost 8 months and we don't even have an MEC or grievance committee in place yet.

 

[kellwolf]

That said, you need to understand that the wage pie is a fixed amount. An increase on one side necessitates a decrease elsewhere. Increases in First Officer pay will result in decreases in Captain's pay.

Not at my airline. Pay rates are set off the 5 year A320 CA rate. All other rates are percentages of that. So, before we voted in the union, the only rate that changed was the 5 year A320 rate CA. It went up, ALL the FO rates went up, too. Amazing how the FOs got a raise, yet the CAs didn't. At my previous carrier, not only did the FOs get raises in negotiations, the CAs did, too. Your pie analogy is seriously flawed unless the pie gets bigger every negotiation cycle.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

First off, stop beating that horse. We've talked about this ad naseum for the past SEVEN YEARS. It's dead. Second, I can't believe you honestly believe that. Assuming you took the job at Pinnacle and there had been no union, first year pay would have been abysmal. If they had offered a raise, it likely MIGHT have gotten you to where you already were. Without a union, they'd likely start guys at $19/hr in a CRJ-200 and promise a quick upgrade. Supply and demand wouldn't matter. Guys would trip over themselves to get out of flight instructing or get hired at 200 hours out of some jet transition course. Those were all the rage at the time anyway. The chance to upgrade in a year or two would trump the first year pay. If they needed to hire more and people weren't showing up, they'd just kick it up to about $22-23/hr and call it a huge raise. Which was about what you were already making with the union in place.

Before my time there, and while you were there, circa Dec 2006, you were presented with a "last final, best offer contract" that 9E ALPA did not accept. Sure, it was a joke, but still better than the 1999 CBA. And honestly what's the difference between 19/hr and 20.73/hr? It's the same as far as I'm concerned, and definitely not a livable wage unless you are young and single. You are correct, they couldn't find enough newhires and were losing too many pilots within 6 months to 2 years, which is why they came out with the LOA to increase year 1 and year 2 FO pay. Call it whatever you like, but 9E ALPA played a huge gambling game and lost. Of course when precious CAs are getting downgraded, LOA 50 passes in flying colors. Yes, heaven forbid a CA have to put up with FO wages, it's not like there already are pilots who have been there 7 years that are still FOs and capped at 4th year pay having never seen a left seat. LOA 50 passed to keep these CAs from just bailing. But the LOA to increase FO pay for the same reason couldn't pass.

As for first year guys paying union dues, I think it has to do with being on probation. Last email I saw here was first year guys at Blue are assessed dues since we don't have a probationary period. The kicker is the company is now saying a DCO system is something we have to negotiate even though EVERY OTHER carrier has it and it costs them nothing to do it. So, as of right now, we all have to write a check to ALPA every month. I think they're trying to play psychological war fare. It'd be VERY easy to sign an LOA on the deal over coffee and donuts. That being said, I'm not impressed at the glacial rate things are moving here. The interim reps don't want to do anything like LOAs since they weren't elected by the membership. I can go with that, and I understand it. But OMG, can just PLEASE have elections already?!?!? We've been ALPA for almost 8 months and we don't even have an MEC or grievance committee in place yet.

Good luck. Hopefully we aren't too far behind to pass it as well.

 

[🦈💜]

Not this one. "Go to hell" comes to mind for anyone who's thinking about offering that.

DON'T BURN BRIDGES, BRO.

-Fox

 

[Autothrust Blue]

DON'T BURN BRIDGES, BRO.

-Fox

We've graduated to nuking said bridge.

 

[propsync]

Its no secret that regional airline first officer pay is horrible. It seems that most pilots that work for regional airlines are unionized. My question is, if these pilots are represented by a union why isn't the union stepping in to do anything since pilots have to pay union fees? Its been a problem that has been going on for a while. I don't know too much about this subject, so correct me if I am wrong.

It's hard to believe, but just about everyone answering your question in my opinion is flat out wrong in their answers.

It's the union who sets the payscales. The union divides up the pool of money and says First Officers can have this much and Captains can have this much. The pilots then vote to accept or reject. Let me illustrate.

Under today's hourly pay scales, a typical airline could look like this (just for illustration)

Year FO Captain
1 23 50
2 31 53
3 36 56
4 37 58
5 -- 60
6 -- 61

There is nothing to stop the union (with a membership vote) to alter the payscales to look something like this

Year FO Captain
1 28 45
2 33 50
3 35 54
4 38 57
5 -- 60
6 -- 61

You get my point. In my opinion, the thing you really need to realize is that Regional Airlines shouldn't even exist as all they are is a B scale. Major Airline pilots sell scope at the bargaining table for higher pay. In order for a major airline pilot to make a lot of money, there needs to be a regional airline pilot at the bottom who doesn't make anything.

You either like this system or you don't. But if you are at the top of the food chain, its doubtful you want anything to change at all.

Just my .02 worth

 

[kellwolf]

Before my time there, and while you were there, circa Dec 2006, you were presented with a "last final, best offer contract" that 9E ALPA did not accept. Sure, it was a joke, but still better than the 1999 CBA.

It also had a 5 year duration, which means taking anything better than the 1999 CBA was just silly seeing as it didn't even bring us up to what guys at XJT, Skywest and ASA (all still separate at the time) were making. Given the fact that people were bailing after a couple of months to go somewhere else for more pay and better work rules, it seemed pretty dumb to sign onto the "Last, Best and Final Offer." We were losing CAs at a rate of 30 a month, so the ball was in the union's court. They were right to shoot it down based on the current industry happenings.

And honestly what's the difference between 19/hr and 20.73/hr? It's the same as far as I'm concerned, and definitely not a livable wage unless you are young and single. You are correct, they couldn't find enough newhires and were losing too many pilots within 6 months to 2 years, which is why they came out with the LOA to increase year 1 and year 2 FO pay. Call it whatever you like, but 9E ALPA played a huge gambling game and lost.

And you need to stop blaming them for you losing out on $$$. You think you were the only one? They did exactly what they should have done, again, based on current happenings. Maybe you could take your crystal ball and the chip on your shoulder back in time and let them know the economy was going to nose dive and the industry would come to a screeching halt. Hell, Delta and Northwest were two separate airlines at the time. Hindsight is always 20/20, and you need to let this go.

Of course when precious CAs are getting downgraded, LOA 50 passes in flying colors. Yes, heaven forbid a CA have to put up with FO wages, it's not like there already are pilots who have been there 7 years that are still FOs and capped at 4th year pay having never seen a left seat. LOA 50 passed to keep these CAs from just bailing. But the LOA to increase FO pay for the same reason couldn't pass.

I can't disagree, but neither one of us have a dog in that fight since we were long gone by then. Your bitterness at not getting your raise handed to you 7 years ago is really showing. Sorry you didn't get the upgrade, either, but last time I checked things worked out okay. I could complain and moan that I didn't get a raise, too. I was still an FO when they shot both the L, B and F offer down and the FO raises. But I agreed with them. If they had given the FO raises, we would have lost a LOT of negotiating capital at the time. The economy took it from us anyway, but there's no way that any of us would have known that was going to happen. You have to deal in the present during contract negotiations, which is what the MEC and NC did. I could also complain that I didn't get a hiring bonus, too. They started that after I was hired, so there ya go. You even got something I didn't.

 

[Maurus]

It's hard to believe, but just about everyone answering your question in my opinion is flat out wrong in their answers.

It's the union who sets the payscales. The union divides up the pool of money and says First Officers can have this much and Captains can have this much. The pilots then vote to accept or reject. Let me illustrate.

Under today's hourly pay scales, a typical airline could look like this (just for illustration)

Year FO Captain
1 23 50
2 31 53
3 36 56
4 37 58
5 -- 60
6 -- 61

There is nothing to stop the union (with a membership vote) to alter the payscales to look something like this

Year FO Captain
1 28 45
2 33 50
3 35 54
4 38 57
5 -- 60
6 -- 61

You get my point. In my opinion, the thing you really need to realize is that Regional Airlines shouldn't even exist as all they are is a B scale. Major Airline pilots sell scope at the bargaining table for higher pay. In order for a major airline pilot to make a lot of money, there needs to be a regional airline pilot at the bottom who doesn't make anything.

You either like this system or you don't. But if you are at the top of the food chain, its doubtful you want anything to change at all.

Just my .02 worth

This is true. One problem is that the membership that can vote is 2nd year and above. That is where the pie game comes in a bit. At the FFD level there is only a set amount of money that is ultimately available to the pilot group. What are the higher seniority guys willing to give up and vote for so the first year guys can make a proper wage?

At this point I can't see the pilot groups voting for an increase to the bottom and a decrease to the top of the scale. It sadly has been woven into the culture of the regionals.

 

[kellwolf]

This is true. One problem is that the membership that can vote is 2nd year and above. That is where the pie game comes in a bit. What are they willing to give up and vote for so the first year guys can make a proper wage?

Wonder what kind of difference it could make if the first years could actually VOTE. The guy that's been at most ALPA carriers for 3 months doesn't get a say in the matter. What if those guys COULD vote? Then they'd have to pay attention to it since that could literally make the difference in a CBA passing or not.

Now, granted, at most regionals the guys on first year probably don't know how 80% of the stuff works yet. They haven't been screwed by scheduling 10 times in 6 months or realized what they're actually worth unless they're coming from another airline.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

It also had a 5 year duration, which means taking anything better than the 1999 CBA was just silly seeing as it didn't even bring us up to what guys at XJT, Skywest and ASA (all still separate at the time) were making. Given the fact that people were bailing after a couple of months to go somewhere else for more pay and better work rules, it seemed pretty dumb to sign onto the "Last, Best and Final Offer." We were losing CAs at a rate of 30 a month, so the ball was in the union's court. They were right to shoot it down based on the current industry happenings.

That 5 year duration would still have been better than serving under a 1999 CBA until Feb 2011. And why do you think 9E had the ability to pay out what XJT/Skywest/ASA were making? Once the ATL 16 -900s came, there was no growth coming to 9E. It was at that point a stagnant business model. The ball was never in the union's court. In fact, PT and the gang knew they were dealing with amateurs when it came to negotiations. The company had them exactly where they wanted.

And you need to stop blaming them for you losing out on $$$. You think you were the only one? They did exactly what they should have done, again, based on current happenings. Maybe you could take your crystal ball and the chip on your shoulder back in time and let them know the economy was going to nose dive and the industry would come to a screeching halt. Hell, Delta and Northwest were two separate airlines at the time. Hindsight is always 20/20, and you need to let this go.

I can't disagree, but neither one of us have a dog in that fight since we were long gone by then. Your bitterness at not getting your raise handed to you 7 years ago is really showing. Sorry you didn't get the upgrade, either, but last time I checked things worked out okay. I could complain and moan that I didn't get a raise, too. I was still an FO when they shot both the L, B and F offer down and the FO raises. But I agreed with them. If they had given the FO raises, we would have lost a LOT of negotiating capital at the time. The economy took it from us anyway, but there's no way that any of us would have known that was going to happen. You have to deal in the present during contract negotiations, which is what the MEC and NC did. I could also complain that I didn't get a hiring bonus, too. They started that after I was hired, so there ya go. You even got something I didn't.

Arguably, the first and second year pay would only have been a very temporary fix, enough so that the rest of the contract could still be negotiated without losing too much bargaining power. And frankly, you hit the upgrade at the 2 year (or less) mark so FO wages didn't make a difference to you beyond 1st/2nd year pay. And you're going to say I'm repeating this for the umtieth time, my biggest issue wasn't even them turning down the first/second year pay raises. At least I understand why they did. As you mentioned, negotiating bargaining chip. My biggest issue (a slap in the face to every FO at the time) was the bonus distribution method. When you tie that to W2s, considering what had happened to FO wages - even though not the union fault that the economy tanked - they still should have known that would not have sit well with pretty much every FO on property. Add in a couple CAs who thought TA#1 just sucked, and it was shot down. Unfortunately, voting down TA#1 was the only way to oppose the union's distribution method of the bonus money. To be fair, the company only said here's the 10 million check, ya'll do what you please with it.

But that's all water under the bridge at this point. I think we can agree we are both better off now. Now lets get this merger done so we can start beotching again

 

[Maurus]

Wonder what kind of difference it could make if the first years could actually VOTE. The guy that's been at most ALPA carriers for 3 months doesn't get a say in the matter. What if those guys COULD vote? Then they'd have to pay attention to it since that could literally make the difference in a CBA passing or not.

Now, granted, at most regionals the guys on first year probably don't know how 80% of the stuff works yet. They haven't been screwed by scheduling 10 times in 6 months or realized what they're actually worth unless they're coming from another airline.

Yup. Definitely a risk/reward proposition.

Brand new guys could easily sway a vote. I think at the end of my first year at XJT there were nearly 400 guys still in their first year. At the time that would be 14% of the L-XJT pilot group. That is definitely a good chunk of people that could sway a vote.

Some experience should be required to vote, but is 1 year too much? I can't honestly answer that since I had a lot more exposure to this stuff than a typical new hire.

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

I've picked up a few overtime shifts this year, so this year I'll easily break the 80k mark on my W-2 flying a single engine airplane. I may never make six figures but it is a comfortably middle class existance especially in the rural area I live. Take home is much less than that of course, but it makes me wonder how regionals expect to lure people like me to solve their supposed staffing issues.

I've already worked 2 years for Mesa Airlines, so I am not exactly gullible.

 

[derg]

Not sure your age or timeline but cost of aircraft rental wet then maybe 20-30.00/hr, with instructor maaaybe 45.00?

Cost now wet without instructor...120-140.00/hr, with instructor 160-175.00....for a single engine!!!

Times have changes and throw a college education in there and it's pretty impossible to come out with less than 75k debt....I had 60k and I attended a po dunk college with a bunch of crappy 150's not ERAU or UND


14k a yr would have been appreciate when you could get all your ratings plus college for less than 30k....not so much anymore.

I do appreciate the increased financial impact of civilian training, however it isn't sequitur to regional pay.

Justification of regional pay isn't something I'm trying to do, but there have been strides made with certainly much further to go.

However if you're a 15-plus year regional pilot complaining about pay (which certainly wasn't this high 15 years ago) and the inability to move up the food chain because of not meeting the competitive requirements of better paying carriers, what do we do? Do we shake our fists at competitive requirements of better paying carriers, bemoan lower regional pay (which in some situations, is significantly better than it was when the pilot entered the profession) or the personal responsibility of a person dropping fistfuls of cash at a profession that didn't pay squat at that time, where pay is a "little" better now.

If I'm going to turn over police cars and light garbage cans on fire, I just want to make sure we're all on the same sheet of music!

 

[propsync]

I do appreciate the increased financial impact of civilian training, however it isn't sequitur to regional pay.

Justification of regional pay isn't something I'm trying to do, but there have been strides made with certainly much further to go.

However if you're a 15-plus year regional pilot complaining about pay (which certainly wasn't this high 15 years ago) and the inability to move up the food chain because of not meeting the competitive requirements of better paying carriers, what do we do? Do we shake our fists at competitive requirements of better paying carriers, bemoan lower regional pay (which in some situations, is significantly better than it was when the pilot entered the profession) or the personal responsibility of a person dropping fistfuls of cash at a profession that didn't pay squat at that time, where pay is a "little" better now.

If I'm going to turn over police cars and light garbage cans on fire, I just want to make sure we're all on the same sheet of music!

What I would like to see is ALPA take a stand and let us know either way their view of the regional airline system. Does ALPA believe in the regional model? Does ALPA believe both should exist? If so, to what scope extent? I don't think there can be any improvement or direction until this question is answered.

There is nobody other than ALPA who can realistically attempt to lay out this vision. Even if the vision is not attainable, it gives the pilots something to align themselves with.

For example, let's say ALPA says yes we think it should exist. Then should it be an up and out type of regional airline or should a pilot expect to make a career at the airline?

If it's an up and out airline, then the payscales should be completely flattened. Only longevity pays more. If it's a place to make a career, then FO's suffer at the expense of senior captains. It's all laid out really nice right here. http://www.airlinepilotinfo.com/fixing-pilot-pay-at-regional-airlines/

 

[MOGuy424]

And because the initial ROI is so poor, it should persuade people even more to not work for the low wages. The fact that it costs so much to become a pilot is 100% irrelevant when it deals with what pay should be. Pay is a function of supply, not initial investment.

You do not need college to get hired at a regional, so the cost of attending a university isn't even necessary for the job. I'm sure you can still get your ratings pt61 and instruct afterwards for far less than they numbers you use.

However people don't want that. They want a fast track program for $75,000 or/and the fancy aviation degree that goes along with it for $50,000 more.

Where does personal responsibility ever come in? Everyone who has taken out a large loan knew that it was a large loan that would require payment one day. Every airline posts their pay for everyone to see when deciding where to apply.

I was on first year Colgan pay back in the day for $21 an hour and it sucked. This was something I knew in advance and still signed up for. Nobody to blame for that but myself.

Good luck moving on from said regional without a college degree.

I don't disagree. People know what they are getting into....but NOBODY ever said "golly gee I sure would like to work for XXX regional for the rest of my life", but poo happens and people get stuck there, lot of 8 yr FO's still running around.