A lot of Union talk lately, so why.....

[Velocipede]

Fight? Fight who? Fight what? This is not a war.

Actually it is. ALPA volunteers man the battlements EVERY DAY protecting individual pilots and the contract from assault by airline managers. Contrary to your opinion, middle managers spend a huge amount of time attempting to circumvent our contract...on a daily basis.

They do everything they can to sharpshoot wages and benefits even stooping so low as to shortcheck unsuspecting pilots who don't review their pay stubs and paysheets EVERY MONTH.

Believe me, I've seen it all.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Fight? Fight who? Fight what? This is not a war. There is not a star chamber of eeeevil airline managers hunkered down in some smoke filled room plotting to "stick it to the pilots." Management is just a group of people trying to figure out how to make money by flying people or things on airplanes.

Ahhh, so naive.

 

[kellwolf]

Fight? Fight who? Fight what? This is not a war. There is not a star chamber of eeeevil airline managers hunkered down in some smoke filled room plotting to "stick it to the pilots." Management is just a group of people trying to figure out how to make money by flying people or things on airplanes. Not that they are doing a very good job, mind you, but that is a different story.

Which regional carrier in contract negotiations have you worked for? I can assure you, it IS a war. It's a war to cut costs by any means necessary, and ALPA reps are the ones standing up for the pilots. If it were up to management, they'd walk all over the contract and tell us "Sue us. We're making money." There's plenty of ways that the two groups can work together and make plenty of money for the airline moving passengers from point A to point B. From what I've seen here in the nearly 2 years I've been here, those proposals from the union side have fallen of deaf ears, even when it could have made MORE money for the company. Management didn't think of it, so it must not be a good idea.

Guess what? ALPA hasn't done much for anyone lately. Just ask USAir pilots or any other group that has been stomped on. ALPA needs to revise their tactics. Most pilots are ready for a new union.

B/c those people are confusing the acts of their own, locally elected reps with ALPA national. The local reps went AGAINST the recommendation of ALPA's consultants, and look where it got them. Now, those that don't know how it works, blame ALPA national for their troubles instead of leveling blame where it belongs: local representation.

The ironic thing is ALPA COULD have been one big trade union. The debate was on back in the 30s when ALPA first started. The original ALPA heads decided it would be better to have several contracts instead of one national contract. This way they could use pattern bargaining to "jack up the house" and get better pay and benefits. One contract gets signed, then the next contract ups that one, and so on and so on. When the original contract is up for re-newal, then there have been multiple contracts since then to build on. Wanna know why CAL wants to enter negotiations early? So they don't have to one up a contract signed by Alaska, Delta, etc in post-bankruptcy conditions.

 

[scramjet]

Fight? Fight who? Fight what? This is not a war. There is not a star chamber of eeeevil airline managers hunkered down in some smoke filled room plotting to "stick it to the pilots." Management is just a group of people trying to figure out how to make money by flying people or things on airplanes. Not that they are doing a very good job, mind you, but that is a different story.

The job is what it is. It is not going to go back to something even remotely resembling what it was. Airline pilots are still going to make a good salary, but it is not going to be like it was pre-9/11. The only thing you can do is decide if the rewards are worth the costs. If they are, great! Enjoy your career. If not, well then there are plenty of other ways to make a 6 digit income. But don't fool yourself into thinking that you are somehow going to reverse the past 30 years.

Defeatism! Sure, maybe things will never be the same, but we can work to make things closer to what they were. That's one reason we have unions.

 

[scramjet]

Let's use an example here. Imagine if corporations that employed lawyers attempted to slash their wages so much so that a new lawyer at said corporations was making around $18k a year. We're talking professional labor here. What do you think would happen? Now substitute pilot, another labor group that meets the sociological definition of a professional (requiring use of theory to accomplish tasks, making decisions based on said theory, making decisions that affect many people, sedentary labor requiring extensive training and multiple certifications). Now what do you think happens? Or wait, it already is happening...

 

[JHines]

Let's use an example here. Imagine if corporations that employed lawyers attempted to slash their wages so much so that a new lawyer at said corporations was making around $18k a year. We're talking professional labor here. What do you think would happen? Now substitute pilot, another labor group that meets the sociological definition of a professional (requiring use of theory to accomplish tasks, making decisions based on said theory, making decisions that affect many people, sedentary labor requiring extensive training and multiple certifications). Now what do you think happens? Or wait, it already is happening...

A key difference, though, is that there isn't such a ready potential "oversupply" of lawyers that would allow such wage-slashing. Union efforts are great but they're fighting uphill against the economics. What would really keep pilots' wages up in the long term would be create a politically acceptable barrier to entry, something along the lines of requiring ATP minimums for ANY 121 flying.

 

[scramjet]

A key difference, though, is that there isn't such a ready potential "oversupply" of lawyers that would allow such wage-slashing. Union efforts are great but they're fighting uphill against the economics. What would really keep pilots' wages up in the long term would be create a politically acceptable barrier to entry, something along the lines of requiring ATP minimums for ANY 121 flying.

True, but there really aren't that many pilots that are able to be commercially employed either. I can't remember the exact figure, but its well under 300,000. But yeah, I've always been a supporter of requiring the ATP for all 121 flying. Not only would it help limit the supply of pilots, but it would make the air transport system even safer.

 

[kellwolf]

A key difference, though, is that there isn't such a ready potential "oversupply" of lawyers that would allow such wage-slashing. Union efforts are great but they're fighting uphill against the economics. What would really keep pilots' wages up in the long term would be create a politically acceptable barrier to entry, something along the lines of requiring ATP minimums for ANY 121 flying.

Slash the requirements, and there might be. This time two years ago, 300-500 hour guys weren't getting hired at airlines on a regular basis, either. Toss in some fly by night "zero to litigation in 90 days!" advertising, and you've just created a supply of lawyers, especially if they toss in how much a top lawyer MAY earn like the glossy pilot ads I read in Flying magazine yesterday......right next to the article on how CAPT is doing such a great job at educating the 250 hour guys for the 121 environment.

 

[JHines]

Slash the requirements, and there might be. This time two years ago, 300-500 hour guys weren't getting hired at airlines on a regular basis, either. <SNIP>.

Yes, that's just my point. Currently, a FO only has to have a comm/inst as far as the FAA is concerned, correct? So that gives the airlines the "minimums slashing" power. It takes a state legislature to do that for attys.