Article: Regionals thrive while Majors cut back!

[Cptnchia]

What if they said they would raise your pay, near to where it used to be before 9-11, in exchange for 100 seaters?

Personally? I made $50/hour prior to 9/11 so that would be a pay cut for me!

OK, so I was on newhire pay in 2001, but no, I would never vote to give up 100 seaters for a payraise. You can always work on a payraise the next go around. Once you give up an airframe, it's gone forever.

 

[A-300F4-622R]

Personally? I made $50/hour prior to 9/11 so that would be a pay cut for me!

OK, so I was on newhire pay in 2001, but no, I would never vote to give up 100 seaters for a payraise. You can always work on a payraise the next go around. Once you give up an airframe, it's gone forever.

What if it's an airframe that you have no desire to fly? Would you still give up a raise? I think that guys will still go for the quick money if your management dangles it in front of them.

 

[Nick]

What if it's an airframe that you have no desire to fly? Would you still give up a raise? I think that guys will still go for the quick money if your management dangles it in front of them.

It still effects everyone.

NWA pilots on the DC-9 and A-320 would be a few spots higher in base because there would have been a few pilots in their seat and their base that would have bid, say, the E175 or CR9 if it were available to them.

 

[Patrick]

Maybe take a look at some of this. Wheelsup made some very valid points that it is more than thousands of guys trying to get a regional job. There are 10's of thousands trying to get into SWA and their pay isn't going anywhere.

The difference is SWA is a GOOD COMPANY. This is also why they make money. SWA could easily cut their wages in half and have no problem crewing their aircraft, but they don't do this, as the company works as a team and the company does well as that team.

The problem at virtually every 121 operator outside of SWA, UPS, and Fed EX is that management doesn't see things this way, and will do anything possible to cut labor costs. I fear that nothing will improve, especially at the regionals, since there will always be pimple faced kids willing to fly a jet practically for free, regardless of flight times and qualifications. Heck, look at how many 2500+ hour guys are applying at Colgan currently. They haven't raised their pay scale, have they? Nope.

 

[jynxyjoe]

The difference is SWA is a GOOD COMPANY. This is also why they make money. SWA could easily cut their wages in half and have no problem crewing their aircraft, but they don't do this, as the company works as a team and the company does well as that team.

The problem at virtually every 121 operator outside of SWA, UPS, and Fed EX is that management doesn't see things this way, and will do anything possible to cut labor costs. I fear that nothing will improve, especially at the regionals, since there will always be pimple faced kids willing to fly a jet practically for free, regardless of flight times and qualifications. Heck, look at how many 2500+ hour guys are applying at Colgan currently. They haven't raised their pay scale, have they? Nope.

Other than you own question, is this answer above in reference to any question? It seems you are agreeing and offering further proof that wages in the regionals are stagnate from factors outside the "free market". Furthermore your example, Colgan, is a group subject to RFP's and are a whipsaw.

Other than a unneeded bashes at regional pilots, I just don't see any real information here or furthering of the conversation.

 

[Patrick]

Other than you own question, is this answer above in reference to any question? It seems you are agreeing and offering further proof that wages in the regionals are stagnate from factors outside the "free market". Furthermore your example, Colgan, is a group subject to RFP's and are a whipsaw.

Other than a unneeded bashes at regional pilots, I just don't see any real information here or furthering of the conversation.

My apologies. Was not meant as a bash to anyone, just an observation of facts.

 

[Cptnchia]

What if it's an airframe that you have no desire to fly?

I fly a Luscombe Silveraire for fun and a 767ER for work. There isn't an airframe between them I wouldn't fly for fun, but more importantly, there isn't an airframe I wouldn't fly for pay if it was part of the job, and I do know how to differentiate between the two.

Would you still give up a raise? I think that guys will still go for the quick money if your management dangles it in front of them.

Wages go up and down, they can be recaptured. Once you give up an airframe, it's gone forever. While there are certainly guys who will take the carrot every time, hopefully, once we add the more militant Delta North (fNWA types) to the mix, they will be in the extreme minority.

 

[jynxyjoe]

My apologies. Was not meant as a bash to anyone, just an observation of facts.

No prob, Bob.

 

[deek]

Absolutely. But IMHO, the fact that practically every regional has excess pilots while pay sucks, QOL sucks, career prospects sucks says something... Why should compensation rise if there will be bodies in the cockpit seats (and piles of pilot job applications) regardless of the wage rate? So, in a purely economic sense, the wage rate is right where it needs to be. I'm sure I'm beating a long dead horse here, but if somebody takes the job at a crappy wage rate, the airline has done its job. Airline XYZ has pilots to fly the planes that carry the revenue producing passengers, and pilots stay with the job because they choose/want to and lateral moves would be career suicide. The free market and capitalism just doin' its thing.

Isn't NOT allowing pilots to move between airlines without taking a hit anti-free market? Not many industries have that kind of death grip on it's employees ( and i bet one the public has no clue about), and that's why pilots suffer, cause you can't leave. When you don't have an out in negotiations, you're opponent will exploit that fact.

 

[wheelsup]

Isn't NOT allowing pilots to move between airlines without taking a hit anti-free market? Not many industries have that kind of death grip on it's employees ( and i bet one the public has no clue about), and that's why pilots suffer, cause you can't leave. When you don't have an out in negotiations, you're opponent will exploit that fact.

Well you can blame the UNION for negotiating that type of pay structure, not airline management.

 

[deek]

granted, the Union allows that to happen but I'm sure they didn't get any push back from airline management on that one. It's a dream come true, you're employees can't leave even after they have amassed experience, or else they will take a pay cut to do the same job for another company?