Ajax
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Planning means nothing, a lot of people stuck at the regionals now certainly didn't plan on being there as long as the have, and no one planned to be a regional FO for seven years. Capping fo pay at four is disgusting.
AAG to Transfer Envoy ERJ-145s to TSA and Piedmont
- Thread starter J Cole
- Start date
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
It doesn't matter what you think is "disgusting." It matters what the financial reality is. And that reality is that longevity is the big problem for your airline. You can't compete because of it. Either level the playing field and be competitive, or disappear.
adk
Steals Hotel Toilet Paper
Maybe Delta should just hire all of the Regional captains in seniority order!
Trip7
Well-Known Member
Don't stare at the stop sign. Look down the road. That's where the whole long term vision thing comes in. 4 year FO cap is fine when you'll never see it. Especially when it is traded for guaranteed attrition to mainline carriers hiring in historic numbers.
But if you're enjoying sitting in the right seat of a mega regional with 300+ senior Captains not going anywhere, yeah 4 year caps are bad!
Trip7
Well-Known Member
With all the opportunity out there right now why are you talking about getting stuck? Things went South at other carriers for many JC members. They improvised, took advantage of an opportunity and are making posts on JC Member Announcements.
Opportunities like TSA expanding from 29 aircraft to 100+. $44 starting pay for experienced FOs with immediate TPIC opportunity. There is no getting stuck in this environment, unless you are a regional Captain with no desire to move on.
tbstanto
Well-Known Member
Not to be argumentative, but a 4 year FO makes MUCH more than what is defined as a "livable wage". At 4 year pay at Piedmont and PSA, with 85 hours a month, the pay is about $40,000 (plus another +$5k in per diem). This is about the equivalent of a "normal" job that pays $20/hr. Is it great? Absolutely not. But I knew when I got in this industry that the pay at the regionals was terrible, and chose to work in it anyway. Did anyone not know? Was it kept as a secret from anyone somehow?
Ajax
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Because it will happen, by the time you hear of a quick upgrade you're too late. I know of plenty of "two year upgrades" stuck in the right seat or in the left about to be downgraded to the right again.
It happened before why won't it happen again? What is different with this round?
It happened before why won't it happen again? What is different with this round?
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
While you're busy worrying about a hypothetical, reality is kicking your ass.
CFIscare
Well-Known Member
That certainly sounds like a b-scale to me.
ClarkGriswold
Non Nutritive Cereal Varnish Engineer
Not even close but keep telling yourself that. That coping mechanism doesn't work in todays world. O and I took a pay cut from being a senior FO on 3rd year pay and working the system to upgrading to RSV Capt and paying for a crashpad. FO pay can certainly be liveable but I upgraded first chance because I know TPIC is still where it's at and legacies want it. Why not give yourself the best shot to move on.
Last edited:
meyers9163
Well-Known Member
Then you don't understand what a b scale is.
tbstanto
Well-Known Member
I guess the real question is: Did the Envoy "NO" vote make the industry better in any way? Lots of guys will lose their jobs and have to move elsewhere, starting on the bottom of the list again. Other companies got airplanes, some of which recently signed "concession" contracts and some that have had terrible contracts for years. In the end, I think that the industry is worse off now than before. I am not blaming the Envoy guys - not at all. Just think the whole thing didn't work out as planned. "Holding the line" was a romantic idea, but not realistic.
The reason - the Envoy pilots have been made an example of. The companies know that they can offer even worse contracts now because pilots will be scared to be shut down like Envoy. They can offer lower pay and less benefits, and pilots will take them to keep their jobs.
Only an actual shortage will change this. People not entering this industry and the companies not being able to fill the seats will bring change. Once people have spent $100k+ on flight training, they will do what they have to in order to stay in the industry. A few will leave, but most will stay and work to get to a major.
The reason - the Envoy pilots have been made an example of. The companies know that they can offer even worse contracts now because pilots will be scared to be shut down like Envoy. They can offer lower pay and less benefits, and pilots will take them to keep their jobs.
Only an actual shortage will change this. People not entering this industry and the companies not being able to fill the seats will bring change. Once people have spent $100k+ on flight training, they will do what they have to in order to stay in the industry. A few will leave, but most will stay and work to get to a major.
CFIscare
Well-Known Member
"4 year FO cap is fine when you'll never see it"
I may never see it, but someone behind me will certainly see it. That sounds awfully like a back door b-scale.
meyers9163
Well-Known Member
Back door b scale? Huh? And who says someone behind you actually see's it? That's an assumption?
ClarkGriswold
Non Nutritive Cereal Varnish Engineer
No it doesn't. It may suck but it's not a B scale. Do you think the PSA or Gojet pilots are scabs?
CFIscare
Well-Known Member
Oh please. Someone will see it eventually.
CFIscare
Well-Known Member
Especially when you look at the Envoy proposal, it was a b-scale.
J Cole
Well-Known Member
While I'm sure there were no voters who voted knowing that their decision would likely create the consequences we have already seen, nearly everyone I spoke to during contract negotiations back in February/March gave two reasons they were voting no: they didn't trust management (and felt that any language would simply be ignored), and they felt that staffing at every regional carrier would be so bad that management would eventually cave and provide the career advancement (through refleeting and flow through) that they promised anyway. In other words: management was untrustworthy and bluffing. Eight months have now passed: the award of 20 ERJ-175s to Compass, the announcement of all 47 CRJs being moved to PSA, the MIA base closure, and now the announcement that at least 50 ERJs are moving to three different carriers all present a significant stack of evidence to the contrary.
However, for the benefit of the doubt, let's consider the second argument (the one that most no voters have since retreated to), that they voted no with a full understanding consequences, yet did so "for the good of the industry." Can anyone give an example of how Envoy's "no" vote in the past eight months has improved the regional industry? Has the industry as a whole been buoyed to maintain higher pay/work rule standards? Has management somehow been cowed into not asking for concessions from other regionals? Would the potential for thousands of pilots starting at first year pay at carriers with worse pay/work rules be good for the industry? The fact is that the no vote has produced no net positive for the industry and it might be argued that the opposite has occurred with flying being transferred to carriers generally considered to be worse than Envoy (even an Envoy laden with concessions).
While it is unfortunate that management asked for the concessions that they did, it is equally unfortunate that so many pilots voted based on emotions and misinformation instead of looking at the facts.
However, for the benefit of the doubt, let's consider the second argument (the one that most no voters have since retreated to), that they voted no with a full understanding consequences, yet did so "for the good of the industry." Can anyone give an example of how Envoy's "no" vote in the past eight months has improved the regional industry? Has the industry as a whole been buoyed to maintain higher pay/work rule standards? Has management somehow been cowed into not asking for concessions from other regionals? Would the potential for thousands of pilots starting at first year pay at carriers with worse pay/work rules be good for the industry? The fact is that the no vote has produced no net positive for the industry and it might be argued that the opposite has occurred with flying being transferred to carriers generally considered to be worse than Envoy (even an Envoy laden with concessions).
While it is unfortunate that management asked for the concessions that they did, it is equally unfortunate that so many pilots voted based on emotions and misinformation instead of looking at the facts.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
You really need to read "Flying the Line: Volume 2." This isn't even remotely like a B scale. You're embarrassing yourself.
