CNN piece "Airline's Dirty Little Secret"

[azfsi60]

:yeahthat: Only recently when the pool of applicants started dwindling did the regionals start providing hotel and pay during training...There is no doubt they can afford to start every new hire at 2nd yr pay. In face, in a couple months there will be nobody at any regional on 1st yr pay. I don't think any regional is going to fall by the wayside as soon as that happens...

Renslow was making 3rd year pay..and it still did not prevent this accident. You can pay a guy ARod's salary and he can still screw things up guys.
There is no linkage between getting paid to fly and flying safely.
When you were a private pilot and PAYING to fly did you ever stall the airplane and fly into the ground?? of course not.

Dont get me wrong.. I cant stand airline management as much as the next guy and I certainly cant stand that from the Regional Airline association. I doubt he makes 18000 a year.

But once again, you cannot link how much money you are making to operate an airplane for someone with the ability to operate it safely.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

There are definite links from pay to safety:

1. Would Mrs. Shaw have lived all the way on the West Coast with her parents if she had been able to afford a place of her own closer to work? That cross-country commute is one hell of a fatigue-inducing schedule.

2. Mrs. Shaw comments several times in the transcript about her ears hurting. Would she be flying sick if she wasn't scared of the airline not paying her if she called in sick? Even worse, she probably feared that discipline would result from calling in sick. That was a very common problem at Pinnacle, which owns Colgan.

3. Would such inexperienced pilots be flying these airplanes if the pilots were paid a fair wage? If wages at the regionals were significantly higher, then the benefit of the majors outsourcing jobs would disappear, and its likely that flying would be brought back in house where an experienced Captain with many thousands of hours would have been at the controls.

4. Would both pilots have slept in the crew lounge, probably getting horrible sleep, if any, if they had been fairly compensated and been able to afford a crash pad? I certainly don't know any pilots at AirTran that spend the night in the crew lounge instead of getting a hotel or crash pad, unless they're just there for a few hours to catch a commute home on the 5am flight. This is a serious problem.

See, all of these things connect. Money doesn't create safety, but it mitigates other factors that are a detriment to safety.

 

[E_Dawg]

I give it another week.



Yes.

Remember swine flu? What?

 

[JoelT]

Bingo.

 

[Qgar]

Swine Flu IS back on the front page here in NY. Some more public schools in Queens have been shut down and the Principal of one is in very bad shape in the hospital with it.

 

[granlistillo]

There are definite links from pay to safety:

1. Would Mrs. Shaw have lived all the way on the West Coast with her parents if she had been able to afford a place of her own closer to work? That cross-country commute is one hell of a fatigue-inducing schedule.

2. Mrs. Shaw comments several times in the transcript about her ears hurting. Would she be flying sick if she wasn't scared of the airline not paying her if she called in sick? Even worse, she probably feared that discipline would result from calling in sick. That was a very common problem at Pinnacle, which owns Colgan.

3. Would such inexperienced pilots be flying these airplanes if the pilots were paid a fair wage? If wages at the regionals were significantly higher, then the benefit of the majors outsourcing jobs would disappear, and its likely that flying would be brought back in house where an experienced Captain with many thousands of hours would have been at the controls.

4. Would both pilots have slept in the crew lounge, probably getting horrible sleep, if any, if they had been fairly compensated and been able to afford a crash pad? I certainly don't know any pilots at AirTran that spend the night in the crew lounge instead of getting a hotel or crash pad, unless they're just there for a few hours to catch a commute home on the 5am flight. This is a serious problem.

See, all of these things connect. Money doesn't create safety, but it mitigates other factors that are a detriment to safety.

Excellent post. Don't forget FO Shaw's 2nd job at a coffee shop. At our airline, our management wants us to fill out a fatigue survey and report any second jobs...
As much as I dislike ambulance chasers, I think the Colgan attorneys might make an issue about this, and rightfully so.

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

Wasn't there a huge billboard with 1st year pay on it somewhere? And the 'if you see me I'm not getting paid' sticker for your flight kit.

 

[azfsi60]

There are definite links from pay to safety:



See, all of these things connect. Money doesn't create safety, but it mitigates other factors that are a detriment to safety.

Im sorry..with all due respect...not necessarily the case..

Pilots who work at major airlines where the salaries are good and the work rules are relatively favorable still commute across country. Sully is one high profile example. The guy lives in California and is based in Charlotte.

Five of my closest friends commute or have commuted across at least two time zones for years in this business. one of them is at a major making six figures.

And just because someone works for a decent salary and has great work rules doesn't prevent them from doing stupid and/or unsafe things in an airplane.

The Major airline that up until a couple of years ago had THE best paid pilots with THE best contract in the business has still had two fatal accidents due to negligence on the part of the pilots in the last 15 years.

Once again, it comes down to professionalism. We ALL wish we made more money and I'm all for pilots making what they are really worth.
But once you accept the job and/or are in the cockpit it is your professional responsibilty to conduct yourself accordingly.

If a pilot cant handle the commute or it is too much to bear, then dont take the job.

When I was looking for my first regional job, I turned down an offer at Eagle because they told me the new hire base was San Juan. I live in Arizona. I decided that that was an unacceptable deal for me.

When I got to Mesa, I had a chance to upgrade to captain after about a year and a half, but didnt because I found out that I would be based in either Plattsburg, NY or Panama City, Florida with only eight days off a month. That was unacceptable to me so I declined the upgrade.

Its about choices. She chose to take a job at Colgan and chose to make a 3000 mile commute. That's not the company's fault.
Im telling you guys, if you start getting the government involved in legislating what people make, its going to backfire and more jobs will be lost because they will go out of business or cut back operations.


Thoughts????

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Pilots who work at major airlines where the salaries are good and the work rules are relatively favorable still commute across country.

Yes, but I don't know of any who try to get a good night sleep in the crew lounge after their commute because they can't afford a hotel room or crash pad. We have tons of pilots who commute from the west coast to Atlanta, but they get a hotel room when they get here the night before. Junior regional FOs that are only taking home $1,200 a month can't afford to drop $200/mo on a crash pad, or $300/mo on hotels. Junior AirTran FOs taking home $4,000/mo can.

The Major airline that up until a couple of years ago had THE best paid pilots with THE best contract in the business has still had two fatal accidents due to negligence on the part of the pilots in the last 15 years.

Which airline are you referring to? I can't think of two Delta accidents related to negligence in that time period, but they were the highest paid until a few years ago. You thinking of some other airline?

But once you accept the job and/or are in the cockpit it is your professional responsibilty to conduct yourself accordingly.

That may be true, but regulators need to take human nature into account. Newbie pilots aren't going to think like that when trying to get a job and start their careers. They're just looking for the chance to build 121 time and move on to a career airline. The ideas of commuting, bad schedules, fatigue, etc... don't occur to them. Do you think Mrs. Shaw was thinking about how horrible her schedule would be when she was offered the job at Colgan? No, I'm sure she was thinking about flying a Q400 and building turbine time so she could get hired at Alaska and have a great career at a major airline. You can read that much from the transcript. Again, it's just human nature.

Im telling you guys, if you start getting the government involved in legislating what people make, its going to backfire and more jobs will be lost because they will go out of business or cut back operations.

Needless alarmism. Re-regulation of the airlines is the only answer to our numerous problems in this industry. You can fight it and eventually give in after a few more accidents and bankruptcy cycles, or you can accept it now and go back to the system that worked for over 50 years. Your choice. (or rather, the lawmakers' choice)

 

[azfsi60]

Yes, but I don't know of any who try to get a good night sleep in the crew lounge after their commute because they can't afford a hotel room or crash pad. We have tons of pilots who commute from the west coast to Atlanta, but they get a hotel room when they get here the night before. Junior regional FOs that are only taking home $1,200 a month can't afford to drop $200/mo on a crash pad, or $300/mo on hotels. Junior AirTran FOs taking home $4,000/mo can.



Which airline are you referring to? I can't think of two Delta accidents related to negligence in that time period, but they were the highest paid until a few years ago. You thinking of some other airline?



That may be true, but regulators need to take human nature into account. Newbie pilots aren't going to think like that when trying to get a job and start their careers. They're just looking for the chance to build 121 time and move on to a career airline. The ideas of commuting, bad schedules, fatigue, etc... don't occur to them. Do you think Mrs. Shaw was thinking about how horrible her schedule would be when she was offered the job at Colgan? No, I'm sure she was thinking about flying a Q400 and building turbine time so she could get hired at Alaska and have a great career at a major airline. You can read that much from the transcript. Again, it's just human nature.



Needless alarmism. Re-regulation of the airlines is the only answer to our numerous problems in this industry. You can fight it and eventually give in after a few more accidents and bankruptcy cycles, or you can accept it now and go back to the system that worked for over 50 years. Your choice. (or rather, the lawmakers' choice)

I was thinking of American...

Cali, Columbia and Little Rock..

The aviation business is completely over regulated already.
When we jump in these airplanes to go fly, we should have a damn lawyer with us to keep us straight on all the regulations and the interpretations of them.

The public Will never accept going back to full regulation of the airline business because they are so used to cheap fares . That has been the most pronounced outcome of the whole deregulation fiasco.
Cheap aircraft, cheaper labor, and MOST importantly...cheap fares.

I dont know if Shaw did or didnt think those issues.........I did.

If you just blindly jump into a pool without looking where you are jumping...

Maybe the answer to this underpaid mess is to educate newbie pilots on the "reality" of this business..
Long days, crappy pay, no glamour and, in this environment, very little if any chance of ever making it to the major airlines and flying large aircraft for big money.

 

[aloft]

Pilots who work at major airlines where the salaries are good and the work rules are relatively favorable still commute across country. Sully is one high profile example. The guy lives in California and is based in Charlotte.

Five of my closest friends commute or have commuted across at least two time zones for years in this business. one of them is at a major making six figures.

And I bet that guy isn't burning both ends of the candle working a second job at a coffee shop, either.

In this business, a "living wage" means the crew and passengers get to live after the flight. Colgan 3407 was a perfect example of what a non-"living wage" can result in.

 

[Orange Anchor]

There are definite links from pay to safety:

Then why do we have wide body crashes at the majors?

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I was thinking of American...

FYI, American pilots haven't been the highest paid in a very, very long time, if ever.

The aviation business is completely over regulated already.

No, they regulate the flying, but not the actual business. Big difference.

Maybe the answer to this underpaid mess is to educate newbie pilots on the "reality" of this business..

ALPA's working on it. The last report I read from the National Education Committee said that there are now 50 pilots volunteering their time to visit schools and educate wannabe pilots on how the industry actually works.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Then why do we have wide body crashes at the majors?

I didn't say that it was the only factor, merely one factor.

 

[azfsi60]

And I bet that guy isn't burning both ends of the candle working a second job at a coffee shop, either.

In this business, a "living wage" means the crew and passengers get to live after the flight. Colgan 3407 was a perfect example of what a non-"living wage" can result in.

No. I will just respectfully disagree.

3407 is an example of what happens when you put marginally qualifed pilots in cockpits.

make up your minds with the excuse making guys.

Was it the low pay or the "work rules" that put this airplane into a stall that night????

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

[/B]

No. I will just respectfully disagree.

3407 is an example of what happens when you put marginally qualifed pilots in cockpits.

make up your minds with the excuse making guys.

Was it the low pay or the "work rules" that put this airplane into a stall that night????

Overly simplistic thinking will get you nowhere. Accidents result from many dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of links in a chain. Both low pay and horrible work rules were links in this accident chain. Poor training was another link. Intimidation about sick calls was another. And the list goes on and on...

You want to just point to one thing and say "that's what caused it!" Sorry, but that's not how accidents happen in airplanes. There's a reason that NTSB reports aren't one sentence, but many, many pages of probable causes and contributing factors.

 

[MikeD]

Overly simplistic thinking will get you nowhere. Accidents result from many dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of links in a chain. Both low pay and horrible work rules were links in this accident chain. Poor training was another link. Intimidation about sick calls was another. And the list goes on and on...

You want to just point to one thing and say "that's what caused it!" Sorry, but that's not how accidents happen in airplanes. There's a reason that NTSB reports aren't one sentence, but many, many pages of probable causes and contributing factors.

But, we have to separate the primary factors from those that are secondary and even tertiary; and make sure we're discussing them in the correct vein. Work rules, pay, training are NEVER primary factors in an accident. Primary factors are what physically put the plane into the dirt. Generally it falls into pilot/crew error or other times an aircraft or system malfuntion, or WX event possibly. Factors such as the aforementioned are often secondary, but usually tertiary factors in an aircraft accident, and rear themselves as the proverbial onion is peeled further and further.

As an aside, "accident chain" is somewhat misleading, as it implies single-point failure; which 99% of aircraft accidents aren't. Reason's Swiss Cheese Model more accurately illustrates how the "layering effect" can prevent or allow an accident to eventually occur.

The BL is, the crew put a perfectly good aircraft into the dirt. Peel back from there.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

[/B]

No. I will just respectfully disagree.

3407 is an example of what happens when you put marginally qualifed pilots in cockpits.

make up your minds with the excuse making guys.

Was it the low pay or the "work rules" that put this airplane into a stall that night????

Link in accident chain to wages and work rules? Marginally qualified pilots wouldn't be hired if there were more qualified applicants knocking on Colgan's door. Why aren't there? Why would a qualified pilot want to stomach even ONE year at $16,000, considering they've probably gone through it at least once.

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

I think this accident was a lot more of a lack of situational awareness than poor training, but I'm not any kind of accident investigator.

How many ever saw that video where the C-5 crashed short of the runway? Where they had to shut an engine down, then on approach left a good engine at idle and pushed the dead engine up? (I think they now push all the thrust levers up, even if one is shutdown now.) Then went flaps 90'?

Edit: Actually, think it may have been a C-17.

 

[MikeD]

I think this accident was a lot more of a lack of situational awareness than poor training, but I'm not any kind of accident investigator.

I'd venture to say one is a definite factor, and the other could potentially be (I'm not intimately familar with Colgan's training polices/practices/procedures, so I can't opine). Along with loss of SA there could potentially be task saturation, fixation, etc which could explain the power not brought up. Next would be airspeed loss, subsequent stall and how that was reacted to by the crew, and why that portion happened as it did. Both situations would be evident in the CVR, though what's been released from the FDR reveals some of these too.

How many ever saw that video where the C-5 crashed short of the runway? Where they had to shut an engine down, then on approach left a good engine at idle and pushed the dead engine up? (I think they now push all the thrust levers up, even if one is shutdown now.) Then went flaps 90'?

You're right, it was C-5. And that was a very senior, Reserve crew, consisting of evaluator pilots as well as an evaluator FE. It happens.