MDPilot
Well-Known Member
I did 4 years of AFROTC, never got a reduction in any service committment that I incurred!
nope!
2004 v. 2006 for pilots
- Thread starter meritflyer
- Start date
I did 4 years of AFROTC, never got a reduction in any service committment that I incurred!
nope!
meritflyer
Well-Known Member
Of course it should.
I can keep my million dollars locked up in a safe in my basement or I can invest it into specific areas. Which one carries the risk? Which one carries a "potential" greater return on investment?
A matter of perspective.
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
True. However, to afford a home out here, we're looking at $1300+/month for P&I, insurance, taxes ($2000+/yr), and HOA Fees. We could probably pay that for a condo or townhome, but it would be in a crappy area. Nicer townhomes would be $1500+/month. We just don't have that kind of income (paying a little under $1100/month for a 840 sq ft. apartment now).
Stand alone homes start in the low $200's. That's just too much money for what you get here. I refuse to pay that kind of money for a shack in the ghetto. I would like to move to CLT where we can buy a real home for ~$120k. Maybe next year. My issue with buying here was if the base shuts down, I'm commuting out of an outstation.
Oh, and Merit, yes we are poor
. Average home price 4 years ago was mid $100's, now it's in the $250's+ for an "OK" standalone. Drives me nuts. I wish I could've bought a home 4 years ago.
Trip7
Well-Known Member
True. However, to afford a home out here, we're looking at $1300+/month for P&I, insurance, taxes ($2000+/yr), and HOA Fees. We could probably pay that for a condo or townhome, but it would be in a crappy area. Nicer townhomes would be $1500+/month. We just don't have that kind of income (paying a little under $1100/month for a 840 sq ft. apartment now).
Stand alone homes start in the low $200's. That's just too much money for what you get here. I refuse to pay that kind of money for a shack in the ghetto. I would like to move to CLT where we can buy a real home for ~$120k. Maybe next year. My issue with buying here was if the base shuts down, I'm commuting out of an outstation.
Oh, and Merit, yes we are poor
You guys need to come down to Dallas where you can get a huge, i mean huge house for 300k!
ComplexHiAv8r
Well-Known Member
First, please realize I agree pay for pilots SUCKS!
I do believe pilots get paid something (although small) for every hour they are away from base.
Didn't you know when you took the job it meant traveling and being away from home? Yes it is part of the job, but I know other people (including myself) that don't know if I will be home tonight to next week yet due to work related travel, have had to move to remain employed, and loose money when moving. I just understand that to be part of this industry I am in. I was getting paged (not alot of cell phones then) when my son was born from my boss, plant manager, and higher ups to why I wasnt at plant getting the line started as it was costing $6000+ an hour when down. That and I had to quit a job when 3 days before my wedding they wanted to send me to France to work for 8 weeks.
I thought it was safer to fly then drive??
I thought we all had better odds buying it on the way to/from the field then in the air.
You do have the medical to remain employeed, but I have seen good from a union related to not being able to perform the job due to medical. Retraining and replacement, followed by retirement was that solution. And part of it was "flight status"'.
I think the biggest thing that hurts a pilot's career is that they cannot change jobs without restarting. This is an area that I think the unions need to work on to allow the 3 year FO to change companies and still make 3 year FO pay. Almost all other industries hire based on total experience, not just company experience.
I do believe pilots get paid something (although small) for every hour they are away from base.
Sorry for this Doug..
Didn't you know when you took the job it meant traveling and being away from home? Yes it is part of the job, but I know other people (including myself) that don't know if I will be home tonight to next week yet due to work related travel, have had to move to remain employed, and loose money when moving. I just understand that to be part of this industry I am in. I was getting paged (not alot of cell phones then) when my son was born from my boss, plant manager, and higher ups to why I wasnt at plant getting the line started as it was costing $6000+ an hour when down. That and I had to quit a job when 3 days before my wedding they wanted to send me to France to work for 8 weeks.
I thought it was safer to fly then drive??
I thought we all had better odds buying it on the way to/from the field then in the air.You do have the medical to remain employeed, but I have seen good from a union related to not being able to perform the job due to medical. Retraining and replacement, followed by retirement was that solution. And part of it was "flight status"'.
This is an area that needs to change. Education of the masses is needed. I will AGREE with that 200%
I think the biggest thing that hurts a pilot's career is that they cannot change jobs without restarting. This is an area that I think the unions need to work on to allow the 3 year FO to change companies and still make 3 year FO pay. Almost all other industries hire based on total experience, not just company experience.
Therein lies the twist. I didn't get into a low-compensated profession and started complaining about the curtains. I followed this career track because it "financially recognized" your personal sacrifices.
Now after doofus paycuts every Tom, Dick and Harry driving a milk delivery truck says, "Hell maing! Dat's twice whut I make, but they aint gotta drive in rush hour traffic on the 101".
Now after doofus paycuts every Tom, Dick and Harry driving a milk delivery truck says, "Hell maing! Dat's twice whut I make, but they aint gotta drive in rush hour traffic on the 101".
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
What a lot of people don't realize, and what I think we often forget ourselves is that flying is inherently risky. We happen to make it safe with standardization and attention to detail. I think most guys tend to get knocked back towards reality-land when they lose a friend or two to this job.
Think about this for a second; you're moving at 600 mph in a pressurized tin can. How in the world is that naturally safe in any way? It only causes few accidents because professionals make it so.
Think about this for a second; you're moving at 600 mph in a pressurized tin can. How in the world is that naturally safe in any way? It only causes few accidents because professionals make it so.
My point was regarding what pilots get paid, vs. their duty time. I'm not referring to sleeping in the hotel. How many hours do you spend at the airport, between flights, etc., on a given day, to get paif for 4 hours of flying.
My post was in response to someone who said that the average American works 160 hours per month, but a Delta pilots works 65 hours per month (focusing on guarantee). Pilots do not just work 65 hours per month. They are "at work" just as much, or more than the average American, and do not get paid for all of that time. There is more to it than just flying the airplane.
I swear my hand on my heart I do not spend 160 hours "on duty" each month to get my 85 hours of flying - and as many people on this board know I work for an airline with just about the crappiest work rules out there.
For a family life this isn't the greatest job in the world, but anybody who got into this job thinking they'd be home at 5:30PM each night just didn't do their homework. In comparison to MANY people's lives it's pretty easy, even with the cuts. Before the cuts it was daylight robbery!
The statistics just don't say it's a dangerous job, depsite all this stuff about being in a tin tube traveling at 600MPH. It's not coal mining, it's not construction, it's not lot's of dangerous jobs.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
You're pretty naive if you don't think that this job is inherently risky. I'm not saying other jobs are not as risky as flying, because there are a lot of things that can get you killed pretty quickly too, but if things start going wrong up there you don't have many places to go.
You do make an excellent point. There are a lot of jobs that require people to travel, and spend a lot of time away from home, and family. It should also be noted, that a lot of people work more than just 40 hours per week. Now days, many people spend 50-60 hours, sometimes more, at work.
Statistically, flying is very safe. I think Jtrain, and other's points, were that it is the pilots that make it safe. There are, however, certainly plenty of jobs that are just as dangerous, or arguably, more dangerous than flying an airplane.
Once you get past flight instructing, and first year FO pay, pilots do make what would be considered by most, as "good salaries", that are better than the average American. If you look at it, a regional captain even makes in the top 10-15% of income in this country. They fall within the top two quartiles as for as income. Some would still say that what major captains make, is daylight robbery. BUT, considering everything, pilots deserve top dollar.
desertdog71
Girthy Member
I will point your attention to this article to dispute the lack of danger.
http://money.cnn.com/2006/08/16/pf/2005_most_dangerous_jobs/index.htm
http://money.cnn.com/2006/08/16/pf/2005_most_dangerous_jobs/index.htm
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
You guys have got to actually look at what I'm saying and parse it out:
-Flying, in and of itself, is VERY dangerous
-The only reason why the ACCIDENT RATE (which I don't think we can equate to danger level) is so low is because of all the highly trained professionals that we have working in this industry.
Or to put it another way, I'd love to see somebody argue that nuclear weapons are perfectly safe; their record shows such. With how many nuclear weapons that have been produced, only a few hundred thousand people have actually died because of them. The sheer fact that such a weapon can bring MASSIVE amounts of devistation is the measure of it's danger level. Maybe I'm a pessemist, but I look at things in terms of going wrong instead of going as planned.
Hence, I measure danger (at least in my line of work) by how many things CAN go wrong, the chances of which are increased the more you do it.
-Flying, in and of itself, is VERY dangerous
-The only reason why the ACCIDENT RATE (which I don't think we can equate to danger level) is so low is because of all the highly trained professionals that we have working in this industry.
Or to put it another way, I'd love to see somebody argue that nuclear weapons are perfectly safe; their record shows such. With how many nuclear weapons that have been produced, only a few hundred thousand people have actually died because of them. The sheer fact that such a weapon can bring MASSIVE amounts of devistation is the measure of it's danger level. Maybe I'm a pessemist, but I look at things in terms of going wrong instead of going as planned.
Hence, I measure danger (at least in my line of work) by how many things CAN go wrong, the chances of which are increased the more you do it.
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
Same thing can be said for electricians, John.
Chris_Ford
Well-Known Member
So why should pilots be paid more than electricians?
(Not disagreeing, wanting to hear reasoning)
(Not disagreeing, wanting to hear reasoning)
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Couldn't tell you, I'm not much of one for debates about economics and all that other stuff since I don't know too much about it. I'd like to say that the free market *should* end up dictating that a higher risk job that requires special skills should be paid more because there are less people that can do this job. But I don't think the free market REALLY exists in the way that we talk about it, so that kind of nullifies that argument.
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
While you weren't talking to me, keep in mind unions have artificially raised the pay for many jobs. At the risk of getting flamed I would even venture to say piloting would be one of them. Keep in mind I didn't say this is bad; just they've raised the pay. Maybe the correction you saw post-911 was coming?
Electricians also have a union, if I remember correctly, which has raised the value of their pay, and they get paid fairly well. The more effective the union (ie the UAW) the higher their pay is out of whack with similar jobs.