MMTO

The action itself isn't what I'm addressing. The mentality that leads to that action is.

Do you think ALPA at the majors should shoot for how Lufthansa (I've only heard, once again I don't actually KNOW) and UPS pay their pilots? What equipment you're on doesn't matter. Only longevity and seat.
 
Do you think ALPA at the majors should shoot for how Lufthansa (I've only heard, once again I don't actually KNOW) and UPS pay their pilots? What equipment you're on doesn't matter. Only longevity and seat.

Yes, I've always been a fan of UPS's pay system, but my opinion is in the minority on that. Chasing bigger airplanes for money is a silly system, and leads to people bidding flying that they don't necessarily want to do just so they can get the best compensation package, and also costs the company a lot of extra money in training costs. But most pilots are wed to the idea that a bigger airplane should equal a bigger pay check, so I don't see it changing.
 
I was thinking more this

NP5_L.jpg

He isnt wearing a hat in that picture
 
Here's some food for thought. @Trip7 is going to earn more than his captain on a FO-to-FO lateral move than his captains that were afraid to go from (regional)captain-to-(major)FO in 12 months.

And I flew with a ton of those guys at XJT. For their sake, hopefully the rumors I'm hearing on Campus about XJT aren't true. Sounds like there is a plan to make Endeavor's upgrade time get much quicker.

Also, at mainline, Narrowbody Captains downgrade to Widebody FOs all the time.
 
Do you think ALPA at the majors should shoot for how Lufthansa...UPS pay their pilots? What equipment you're on doesn't matter. Only longevity and seat.

WOW!! That's actually a germane question...in a very remote sorta way. How'd THAT happen on an av website ? You should be immediately banned as a dangerous thought radical.

Must be that thing about monkeys, typewriters and Shakespeare ?

IIRC, ALPA opposed the concept. I recall it being raised at Widget Wonderland some decades ago and getting smacked down in its infancy. Something about pay and productivity ?

Looked for a link to ALPA's position on the matter...couldn't immediately find one...got bored...

Jerry Springer is on...
 
Technically, people will downgrade from narrowbody captain to wide body FO in the downtimes, but we still ask "Dude, what are you getting divorced or something? WTF!"
 
Looked for a link to ALPA's position on the matter...couldn't immediately find one...got bored...

Jerry Springer is on...

Technically, ALPA has no official policy on it. What ALPA does have a policy on, though, is that contracts should be consistent with what is known as "Decision 83." Decision 83 is a ruling from the old National Labor Board, I believe back in the '30s, that required pilots to be paid by productivity, which at the time used a formula based on aircraft speed, and which was later updated to include aircraft weight and other factors. The idea being that a pilot who flew a B707 was far more productive for the airline than a pilot who flew a DC-3, because he generated a hell of a lot more available seat miles. Decision 83 came into existence a long time before jets came on the scene, so when jets started showing up at the airlines, it was a huge windfall for the pilots, because their productivity (and therefore their pay) skyrocketed. That windfall that was the end result of an NLB ruling that Captain Behnke pushed for so many years earlier helped propel airline pilot compensation during the regulation era to incredible levels that we've never seen since, and probably never will again.

Section 40 of the ALPA Administrative Manual, which is where Association policy on collective bargaining is located, contains the requirement for contracts to be consistent with Decision 83. It's not more specific than that, though, so you can interpret it any number of ways. Besides, negotiating committees ignore large portions of Section 40 on a regular basis, and no one ever enforces it. If a pilot group wanted to negotiate pay rates that were the same across fleet types, no one at ALPA would stop them. But you may see an MEC or NC that doesn't want to do it use ALPA policy as an excuse, which is really just their interpretation of a pretty flimsy rule.
 
Technically, ALPA has no official policy on it. What ALPA does have a policy on, though, is that contracts should be consistent with what is known as "Decision 83." Decision 83 is a ruling from the old National Labor Board, I believe back in the '30s, that required pilots to be paid by productivity, which at the time used a formula based on aircraft speed, and which was later updated to include aircraft weight and other factors. The idea being that a pilot who flew a B707 was far more productive for the airline than a pilot who flew a DC-3, because he generated a hell of a lot more available seat miles. Decision 83 came into existence a long time before jets came on the scene, so when jets started showing up at the airlines, it was a huge windfall for the pilots, because their productivity (and therefore their pay) skyrocketed. That windfall that was the end result of an NLB ruling that Captain Behnke pushed for so many years earlier helped propel airline pilot compensation during the regulation era to incredible levels that we've never seen since, and probably never will again.

Section 40 of the ALPA Administrative Manual, which is where Association policy on collective bargaining is located, contains the requirement for contracts to be consistent with Decision 83. It's not more specific than that, though, so you can interpret it any number of ways. Besides, negotiating committees ignore large portions of Section 40 on a regular basis, and no one ever enforces it. If a pilot group wanted to negotiate pay rates that were the same across fleet types, no one at ALPA would stop them. But you may see an MEC or NC that doesn't want to do it use ALPA policy as an excuse, which is really just their interpretation of a pretty flimsy rule.

You're gonna miss all ^this^ man, don't do it. Don't quit!
 
Nope.

As one of the few peeps on the board here that has done it both ways, I preferred the old way. Minimum hassle, low drag.

That said, there's no point in pissing and moaning about it. It's been 5 years already. I fly the jet the way the people who sign the check want it flown.

Richman
I'm going to miss it when I move on. Genius before it's time!
 
Nope.

As one of the few peeps on the board here that has done it both ways, I preferred the old way. Minimum hassle, low drag.

That said, there's no point in pissing and moaning about it. It's been 5 years already. I fly the jet the way the people who sign the check want it flown.

Richman
I'm going to miss it when I move on. Genius before it's time!
 
I sincerely hope your internet persona is not a true reflection of you as a person. You consistently come across as an arrogant, entitled, closed minded ass and it would suck to go through life that way. Hollow, so hollow.

Here's the angle I take. @ATN_Pilot already knows. And even though you may not like his opinion, I think it provides a perspective which brings some light to the issue. Airplanes are cool, worth downgrading to fly? Not too sure but I also don't know the guy's situation.

It's largely a 'fluff' article. You know, like in "Good Morning Vietnam" where "Grunt does good for village kid" news story that the producer was after. But none of us can really extrapolate the person in question's situation much more than what you or I would do.

If and when (giggle) those Airbus 350 XWB's show up at the jet base at KATL, the idea of downgrading from 320 captain to 350 FO sounds like something at which I would scream "Ain't nobody got time for dat!"
 
@Mad Doggy Dog and I will save some tasty snacks from "In Command" and make sure you get something to eat, mm'kay? :)

Thats ok, we get fed on international flights, twice per flight usually...no running thru terminals or eating "tasty snacks" out of the first class tray. Oh, and enjoy staying awake for the entire leg, all of them, and enjoy 3 or 4 legs a day and repeated trips in and out of hooterville. Or deicing 7 times in one rotation.

I am off to Hong Kong, for a nice relaxing 40 hour layover

And I have 20 hours jet PIC this month, not in my lifetime.
 
And I have 20 hours jet PIC this month, not in my lifetime.

How you holding up? That sounds like an awful lot of work.....



.......for you! ;)

(I much preferred living vicariously through you with the "I've done 2 trips this YEAR" posts.)
 
How you holding up? That sounds like an awful lot of work.....



.......for you! ;)

(I much preferred living vicariously through you with the "I've done 2 trips this YEAR" posts.)

the two trips this year are for Southern jets. I kind of screwed up and am now up to 3 for the year.
 
Back
Top