More Soon-To-Be Unemployed Pilots

gliderboy

Well-Known Member
Just heard that Jalways will be laying off all its non-Japanese pilots at the end of this month. Fewer flights and more trained Japanese pilots being the reasons given. The number I heard was about 120 pilots losing their jobs.

As if things weren't gloomy enough already....
 
Not so good for some guys these days:

- 150 foreign contract pilots with JALways reported to have been terminated effective the end of this month (March);

- 65 Virgin Blue pilots to go from Brisbane;

- 50 Brisbane-based Singapore Airlines Captains chopped.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  • Singapore Airlines to abolish all expat contracts
SINGAPORE - The latest unconfirmed rumour to come from the Lion City, is that Singapore Airlines will do away with all expatriate contracts., in the face of a rapidly diminishing market in both cargo and passengers.

Singapore, the state, has announced it will retrench the majority of its non-Singaporean workers this year, although this was interpreted as meaning the thousands of cheap, unskilled labourers from countries such as Sri Lanka, who are used on building construction sites.

SIA has a long history of employing foreign pilots, having been established first as Malayan Airways by British and Australian pilots in 1947, and later MSA (Malaysia Singapore Airlines) in 1966, before SQ and MAS became separate entities in 1972, with both still using expatriate pilots to supplement the lack of local pilots.

If SIA does go ahead with its plan to renew only those non-Singaporean pilots they choose, on local terms, it could mean flooding the market with many well-trained, and well qualified pilots.

As a side effect, the property market in Singapore is almost certainly going to once again fall dramatically with the departure of so many expatriates, the majority of whom rent their accommodation.
 
The better new is that all Virgin America pilots are soon to be unemployed.

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

I got mine so screw you and your family.:sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm:

Explain to me how putting more pilots on the street is a good thing right now? or ever for that matter? Unless the statement above is spot on.
 
:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

I got mine so screw you and your family.:sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm:

Not even close.

Has nothing to do with "I got mine" or "screw you and your family."

It has to do with another group of pilots themselves out for well below industry average wages and work rules.

But, don't let that stop you.
 
I know a lot of us don't see eye to eye on issues but you have to agree with me that more qualified pilots on the street is not a good thing. Not at all. I don't care if you loathe another pilot group it is absolutely disgusting that you are happy that fellow aviators just got their job cut. It is really pathetic.
 
Same arguement coming, different title. Seriously guys. How many times a week do we have to have a thread like this on JC.
 
:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

I got mine so screw you and your family.:sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm::sarcasm:

Explain to me how putting more pilots on the street is a good thing right now? or ever for that matter? Unless the statement above is spot on.

Actually I don't see it that way. I also don't see it Velo's way. I see it as VA started an airline and the ownership group was made up the way it was simply to skirt the laws of foreign ownership. They made a business decision to do this and "good for them". If the American ownership group decides to sell and leave VA as foreign owned and they can't do business I say "good for them". They paid their nickle and took their chances - good riddance if it doesn't work for them. Kind of amazing in this day of bailouts that a company would actually be allowed to fail due to a systemic weakness in their planning.

Now, I understand where Velo is coming from on his wages and stuff, and am even sympathetic to that view in a way. My primary source of difference with him lies in Allegiant - I think they have their poop in a group and have shown remarkable discipline in carrying out their business model where others have failed. I do think at some point Allegiant will bring their pay up because they are following the SWA model to a T. I would fly for Allegiant tomorrow, even at the cost of Velo's JS.
 
Actually, the difference between AGT and LUV is casino subsidies. Its the same trip National had, except when the subsidies ran out, National flamed out.
 
Actually I don't see it that way. I also don't see it Velo's way. I see it as VA started an airline and the ownership group was made up the way it was simply to skirt the laws of foreign ownership. They made a business decision to do this and "good for them". If the American ownership group decides to sell and leave VA as foreign owned and they can't do business I say "good for them". They paid their nickle and took their chances - good riddance if it doesn't work for them. Kind of amazing in this day of bailouts that a company would actually be allowed to fail due to a systemic weakness in their planning.

Now, I understand where Velo is coming from on his wages and stuff, and am even sympathetic to that view in a way. My primary source of difference with him lies in Allegiant - I think they have their poop in a group and have shown remarkable discipline in carrying out their business model where others have failed. I do think at some point Allegiant will bring their pay up because they are following the SWA model to a T. I would fly for Allegiant tomorrow, even at the cost of Velo's JS.
'



Dude...





I love your new avatar! :laff:
 
Actually, the difference between AGT and LUV is casino subsidies. Its the same trip National had, except when the subsidies ran out, National flamed out.

What are the future of the casino subsidies? What is your hunch? If they go away does AGT fall to earth with the rest?

In your view (taking out your feelings of the pilot contract), do you feel AGT has been run soundly as a business?
 
Allegient has numerous contracts with a lot of the casinos and convention authority.However, Vegas is drying up very quickly as far as gamblers heading to town from those small places Allegient has service in. Next quarter will most likely be a loss for them.
 
Allegient has numerous contracts with a lot of the casinos and convention authority.However, Vegas is drying up very quickly as far as gamblers heading to town from those small places Allegient has service in. Next quarter will most likely be a loss for them.

True, but I think Tunica is still going strong....or as strong as it can in this part of the country. AGT's got a pilot base there, but they don't even sell tickets to the destination. Not 100% sure, but I THINK they basically run charter for casinos outta there.
 
The better new is that all Virgin America pilots are soon to be unemployed.

I guess you refer to this...From the WSJ today

By PAULO PRADA

The U.S.-based investors in Virgin America, the discount airline founded by Sir Richard Branson, recently cashed in their stakes in the startup carrier, according to people familiar with the situation -- raising new questions about whether the airline can continue to comply with U.S. airline "citizenship" rules.

Under federal law, a U.S.-based air carrier must be at least 75% owned and controlled by American investors. Since privately held Virgin America's inception, hedge funds Cyrus Capital Partners LP and Black Canyon Capital LLC owned almost 77% of the airline's capital, along with a few other undisclosed U.S. investors. An investment vehicle of London-based Virgin Group Ltd. controls the rest. Under the terms of the British group's agreement with the U.S. investors, the shareholders after a period of time could choose to sell their stakes back to Virgin Group, recouping their full investment plus an 8% return.

After weeks of negotiations, the U.S. investors last week exercised their option to sell, and Virgin Group has already paid them, according to people familiar with the situation. No new investors have committed to buying stakes, according to people familiar with the situation.

Luring new shareholders amid the ongoing recession appears increasingly difficult. Not only are fewer potential investors available because of the continuing credit crunch, but the financial prospects for airlines are growing worse because of weakening demand for travel.

The deteriorating situation for U.S. carriers was a key element in the two hedge funds' decision to sell their stakes. "Everybody prefers cash right now and this is an opportunity to get it," said the person.

Virgin America, known for stylish interiors, leather seats, and high-tech in-flight entertainment system, flies to four cities along the West Coast and to Las Vegas, New York, Washington D.C., and Boston. The airline, which began flying in late 2007 and has thus far received more than $400 million in financing, posted a net loss of $175 million on revenue of $259 million in the first nine months of 2008, according to its most recent financial data as filed with the DOT.

To ensure the airline remains controlled by U.S. investors in the short term, representatives of the departing shareholders will remain on Virgin America's board until new shareholders are found, according to people familiar with the situation. But because those directors will no longer have a financial stake in the airline's performance, competitors fear Virgin America, based in Burlingame, Calif., would be under de-facto control of Virgin Group.

Already, Alaska Airlines, owned by Seattle-based Alaska Air Group Inc., in February asked the Department of Transportation to review whether Virgin America was running afoul of U.S. ownership rules. Alaska, which competes with Virgin America on West Coast routes, filed its petition after word emerged earlier this year that Virgin Group had hired investment bank Lazard Ltd. to look for new investors.

A DOT spokesman said the Alaska petition remains under review.

Alaska said Monday that the sale of the U.S. investors' stakes raises serious questions about "Virgin's true ownership." "This reaffirms the immediate necessity of a rigorous, public review of Virgin's compliance with foreign ownership restrictions," said Caroline Boren, a company spokeswoman.

Virgin America, in a statement, declined to comment on any changes in its ownership structure and said that it continues to comply with U.S. law. "If there is a transaction between the U.S. investors and the Virgin Group," the airline said, "it will remain a private one, within the construct that was approved by the Department of Transportation… We are and will remain in compliance with the DOT foreign ownership rules."
—Susan Carey contributed to this report.
 
Well, they're making money. However, if they lose their casino subsidies, you can bet they'd die pretty quickly. LAS is a good market, but its a LOW YIELD market. The MD is kind of a gas hog.

I guess you can't argue with the bottom line, but you've got to look at how the dollars got there.

AGT has low labor costs, those subsidies and an extremely narrow niche market.
 
The better new is that all Virgin America pilots are soon to be unemployed.

Why, since you tried to screw me and mine by undercutting my contract? Good riddance, Redwood.

Not even close.

Has nothing to do with "I got mine" or "screw you and your family."

It has to do with another group of pilots themselves out for well below industry average wages and work rules.

But, don't let that stop you.


A highsupply will result in a low price for labor. Low supply is good, the more pilots on the street the lower our pay will be.
 
True, but I think Tunica is still going strong....or as strong as it can in this part of the country. AGT's got a pilot base there, but they don't even sell tickets to the destination. Not 100% sure, but I THINK they basically run charter for casinos outta there.

Yeah, they do run some charters. Im not sure what focus cities. Tunica may be one. I heard a rumor from someone at AGT they were exploring the Hawaii market. Im not sure if there is too much truth to that. The Hawaiins call Las Vegas the 9th island for some reason.
 
Well, they're making money. However, if they lose their casino subsidies, you can bet they'd die pretty quickly. LAS is a good market, but its a LOW YIELD market. The MD is kind of a gas hog.

I guess you can't argue with the bottom line, but you've got to look at how the dollars got there.

AGT has low labor costs, those subsidies and an extremely narrow niche market.

OK, but here is where I have always had the rub. I understand about "lowering the bar" as well - I believe it in fact.

That said, PCL made a post to answer a question I had about CASM. He stated that his airline could double pilot pay and the CASM would go up seven cents or some ridiculous amount like that. Taking those numbers - and the fact that pilot wages are not a driver in the profitibility figures, then you can't say that AGT/JB/VA or any of the others are gaining great advantage and market share because of their low pilot wages can you? I mean, if you use CASM to your advantage on one side of the negotiation then it should have to cut both ways.

I do believe that those companies "lower the bar", but it would seem to be for no great purpose if PCL's figures equate to the entire industry. If the pilot compensation plays that small a part in the CASM, then it would appear that management is simply paying no more than they have to (which makes enormous sense - would you pay your lawn guy twice as much at no prompting? How about your dry cleaners?). For this I blame Frank Lorenzo and the CAL scabs of 1983 - that is where the blame clearly lies. Lorenzo had a theory that pilots would work for much less and the CAL scabs proved it. Those are the ones that need to be memorialized as the killers of the airline pilot career.
 
Low supply is good, the more pilots on the street the lower our pay will be.

pprag,

That's kinda what came to my mind too. Plus, the more people on the street, the more competition job seekers have.

I could never see an advantage, to anyone, in higher numbers of unemployed pilots.
 
Back
Top