SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
No.
1500hr Rule Must Comply by 2019
- Thread starter snOOp
- Start date
No.
Autothrust Blue
"Well, on the Brasilia..."
It's pretty silly to say to someone who's passed an ATP ride (at both of the carriers I've worked at) that they can't go to work anymore.
It's going to be interesting to see how this pans out, really. But I for one do not think that the FAA's new rule is much better than the old one in terms of actually improving safety. (And that's another conversation.)
SpiceWeasel
Tre Kronor
Not many 9E FOs have passed an ATP ride yet. I'm still waiting...
HVYMETALDRVR
Well-Known Member
That's okay, it's going to force regional carriers to pay more. An I intended consequence? Sure, I call it karma for mngement!
Autothrust Blue
"Well, on the Brasilia..."
jmc4
Well-Known Member
even if it did it would probably hurt the pilots in the end, they'd pass the cost on to someone, maybe the customer, price goes up, the customer then decides to drive or fly another airline.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Regionals don't set the rates for their flying, they're paid a specified amount for every departure they do for their mainline carrier.
What WILL happen is that the mainline carriers won't pay the additional rates necessary to keep regionals afloat, the regionals will go bankrupt, and then mainline will take the flying back in house.
cmhumphr
Well-Known Member
Lights on, brakes off, heading 219 verified...confirmed..aaaaaaaaaaaaaand autofeather ar.....wait. abort.
FlyinIllini
Well-Known Member
This is something I still can't understand...Think about economics here. How will a company, who can barely pay their employees as it is because their profit margins are so small, end up paying their employees more after this is in effect? A lot of these flights are only being done due to govt funding as it is. I understand what your are thinking as well with supply and demand for pilots but unless the company receives more govt funding or jacks up the airfare prices - i do not see a traumatic increase in pay for the regional pilots. Any thoughts? I, for one, am very interested in what the end result will be as I debate whether to even bother applying to the regional airlines over the increasingly more competitive freight/charter jobs in the next year
Autothrust Blue
"Well, on the Brasilia..."
We have a winner.
DING DING DING, TAKEOFF AUTOFEATHER!
(this is why you make a static takeoff if the EECs are inoperative: can't abort a takeoff you haven't yet started.)
jmc4
Well-Known Member
Kinda the same point, your trickle down effect started a bit higher than mine
mastermags
Well-Known Member *giggity*
And by "in-house" we mean shift the flying to our new "wholly owned" regional that we set the rates for. Now hiring street captains! Everyone back to yr. 1 pay, but QUICK UPGRADES!
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
You're acting as if this has happened before (coughCompasscough).
HVYMETALDRVR
Well-Known Member
That's what management wants you to think my friend. Here at RAH management using every stall tactic available so they don't have to give a new contract and pay us more. They blabber on about how expensive we are, how the 145s aren't profitable and they went from 65 mil in liquid assets down to 6 million. Yet our CEO alone walked away with 8 million in bonuses last yr and we are barely profitable.
Don't get me wrong, if you fly for a mom and pop 135 op, it might be tighter, but for a company with 2800 pilots and thousands of flights each week a small pay bump for pilots can easily be covered. If every paying passenger in the US paid an extra $4 per ticket toward labor (think pilots, mechanics, tampers, gate agents, etc), most of our labor drama would be solved. Don't drink the management look aid, as Doud said there ain't nuthin cheap that burns JetA)
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Umm, so your logic is that it's easier for a company with 2,800 pilots to give every pilot a pay raise than it is for a small company with only 5 pilots to give their pilots a pay raise? I'm not following you there. Pilot pay raises are very big money. I'm not saying that we shouldn't get them (far from it), but I'm just trying to follow the logic and look at things realistically.
HVYMETALDRVR
Well-Known Member
A re
My wording wasnt the best, what Im trying to say is: A mom and pop charter op with 7 pilots, 3 planes, and 10 customers; the pilots want a 10% increase management can't afford to increase costs without losing customers that will walk across the street or the next airport. At a regional with thousands of pilots it costs more sure, but the flying is on contract and even if ticket fees go up in the long term, it will be spread out over millions of customers. 10 million divided 20 million is less than 20,000 divided by ten...
Jpax
Well-Known Member
Literally LOL'ing. Hahahahahaa. Hasn't happened to me yet, but I've got a four day starting tomorrow, huurrrwegooo!
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Understood. The problem, though, is that there aren't millions of customers. There is only one customer: the mainline partner. Remember, the passengers aren't your customer. They're Delta's customer. Republic's customer (or pick your regional of choice), is Delta. They can't spread the cost to around to a bunch of customers. When their costs go up say 5%, but they only have a 2% operating margin, the money has to come from somewhere. Delta probably isn't going to pony up the extra 3%. After all, they'll just outsource to Compass or someone else who doesn't need the extra 3%.
This is where the conundrum is in express carrier (regional, commuter, FFD, whatever you want to call them) bargaining right now. In the old days, mainline partners were willing to pony up 10% guaranteed cost-plus margins without a second thought. After all, whatever it was was cheaper than paying their own pilots $330/hr. Now things are different. Oil prices have skyrocketed, so those EMB-170s are only marginally profitable as it is, and the smaller RJs aren't profitable at all. The cost advantage has also shrunk, as those $330/hr mainline pay rates no longer exist. So there's a lot less incentive to pay a sizable margin to an outsourced lift provider. In order to make it worth their while, they have to pit carrier against carrier in RFP bidding wars. Whoever can accept the lowest fee per departure while still operating the flights in a somewhat reliable manner will get the flying. If a given partner's costs go up and they can no longer do it for as cheap a price as the next competitor, then the mainline carrier just dumps them and gives it to the cheaper partner.
It's a big problem. We shouldn't characterize it as being as simple as raising ticket prices, because that won't solve the issue. The issue is the RFP war.
Nice summation - that overview really fits what I see as an outsider looking in, I must say.
block30
Well-Known Member
Your post might actually have relevancy if I hadn't been advocating against PFT for a decade now, having long since admitted the mistake.
I can see what other people are saying in reference to Pay For Job companies, but even an elitist
like myself can appreciate that it takes a strong person to admit their mistakes and own up to them publicly. Hopefully the forums are one method of conveying to a new generation of pilots the mistakes we have made, so they don't make the same ones. Some folks get all fired up about the complaining on the forums, but honestly, I have learned a lot from other peoples' gripes.
Similar threads
- Locked