"Remember 3407" Airline Labor Reform Act

Qgar said:
Ummm, I watched the 2nd link and I couldn't believe it. Kyre Phillips (sp?) clicked on both Colgan and Delta on the APC payscale page and guess what she reported? 1st year Colgan Air FO's make $21,000 and 1st year Delta DC-9 FOs make $53,000. NEVER MIND THAT THE PAGE LISTS THE HOURLY SALARY NOT THE ANNUAL ONE...

Honestly, sometimes I don't know if I want to laugh or cry at the ineptitude of the media. :rolleyes: :panic:
Click to expand...

A common benchmark is to go with 1000 hours annually- ie, she just added three zeros to the first year pay.

What really would have boggled the mind is that the rate of change from first year and the years thereafter climbs immensely.
 
TheShortOne said:
hey Charlie - http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/story?id=7585208 ABC news want your stories - "Pilots and Flight Crew: Have you worked for a Regional or Commuter Airline?" There's space there to give them your name/phone number etc.
Click to expand...


Thank you, Emily. Outstanding find!

I've sent them my information.

I really have to face that unless I'm willing to risk a good deal in order to make a change, nothing will change.

I believe the equivalent term in poker is 'all in'.

braveheart.jpg
 
Kestrel452 said:
Any updates on what congress is doing? anyone send that letter i helped write?
Click to expand...


Congress is stewing. I understand a Rep from Ohio is all steamed up about things at Colgan.

Things are evolving slowly. They'll roll out a little faster once I get some time off work. Oy.
 
FINAL VERSION:

Dear Sir,

I am writing to your because I am deeply concerned about the state of airline labor. I am sure you are aware of the recent wave of incidents that have plagued commercial flights for the past year. No matter the major cause of the crashes, one undeniable fact is that airlines are putting less experienced pilots in the cockpit.

Airlines experienced a mild pilot shortage before this recession and subsequently hired pilots who had very little experience. This was due to decreased hiring minimums, which made these jobs flying passenger planes available to less experienced individuals. This trend the airlines had is one of self-destruction, and also eroded the safety that the flying public once took for granted.

Due to the recession which has taken place, thousands of pilots have been furloughed. The pilots who are still working have had their salary cut repeatedly, sometimes by more than half. These pilots are getting wages that do not suit the skill or responsibility the job requires. A First Officer makes anywhere from $16,000 - $30,000 for their first few years. Along with decreasing pay, the cost for flight training has gone up exponentially. A 4 year flight education from a university can now cost over $200,000. Because of this, there is a shortage of well qualified individuals. Instead of raising wages to attract these types of pilots, the airlines have lowered their standards for hiring and training events. This in turn leads to an inexperienced crew which can spell disaster if faced with an emergency situation. These pilots have 50 to 100 plus lives in their hands and they need to be experienced and well trained.

We need to help reform airline labor so that pilots can do their job without overbearing financial worries. The job set forth to pilots is worth way more than what they are currently paid, and I think we will start to see this take a toll on the quality of people obtaining pilots licenses. Captain Sullenberger said it best when he stated that the only reason we have such competent people now is because being a pilot recently meant outstanding pay, job security, and positive public recognition. All of these perks have left the airline pilot industry, and current pilots are just trying to survive let alone save money for personal needs such as long vacations.

The reform absolutely needs to take place within the next year. And the following should be included: higher pay across the board, better job security, regulating the management that airlines have so pilots do not become ATM machines for revolving door CEOs and board members, and also we need to set a government enforced hiring standard for pilots that will reflect the amount of experience necessary to do such a high risk job.

Unless we fix these things, we will see many negative effects on the flying public and their safety. Also, less qualified individuals will be at the hands of a yoke with hundreds of lives dependent on their skill. We need to make the piloting profession viable for people economically again. I think the mild shortage before the recession is a warning sign of things to come. How low will the hiring standards go when the next hiring wave the pilot industry experiences after this recession goes away and the airlines are scrambling for enough pilots to fill the seats dealing with the fact that a lot less pilots have graduated due to the poor working standards to look forward to?

Thank you for taking the time to read my letter and I hope you will help the cause in any way that you can.
 
Well said, sir.

I'm going to recommend anyone who doesn't feel up to writing their own personal letter send something like that to their elected officials.

It's a good idea of what we need and will definitely get things going in the right direction.
 
I just sent it to congressman Mark Kirk from IL. Come on guys, all you have to do is copy/paste that final version i just posted. GET THAT LETTER OUT THERE!!!!!!!!!!
 
While I'm completely on board with the cause, I'm not sure that letter is the right angle.

One concern is the point about pilot training at "aviation universities". Sure a person might spend up to $200K, but they aren't necessarily coming out of it with more than +/- 200hrs. Point being, the relationship with attracting the "well qualified individuals" and "lowering standards of training" is completely lost. Pretty much sounds like it's written by someone who is as clueless about the industry as the "experts" the networks find to commentate when there's a major incident. (That's not a dig on you, Kestral, just an outside observation.:))

I would suggest something a little more short, succinct and to the point.

JMHO.
 
ladder360 said:
While I'm completely on board with the cause, I'm not sure that letter is the right angle.

One concern is the point about pilot training at "aviation universities". Sure a person might spend up to $200K, but they aren't necessarily coming out of it with more than +/- 200hrs. Point being, the relationship with attracting the "well qualified individuals" and "lowering standards of training" is completely lost. Pretty much sounds like it's written by someone who is as clueless about the industry as the "experts" the networks find to commentate when there's a major incident. (That's not a dig on you, Kestral, just an outside observation.:))

I would suggest something a little more short, succinct and to the point.

JMHO.
Click to expand...

Honest opinions always welcome, here.

Personally I think there were lots of well qualified pilots in the industry that could have come to work for the regionals, but nobody wanted to because of the low pay and long hours. There are plenty of examples of people who went freight or corporate right here on JC.

I agree perhaps the point could have been demonstrated more clearly, but it'll do, for now.

The point is to get the word out, really.

Remember3407's primary aim is to write a bill to amend a few things in the industry. Not to change the whole ballgame- just tweak a few rules that will likely balance things out a little.

Once we get something written and proposed, the next step is to continue the swell of popular support to keep Congress interested.
 
Let's not forget International Freight Dogs. The domestic flying hours / duty limitations do not apply to them. Before I was furloughed, I was on the road 17 days in a row, every month. 18 hour duty days were the norm with a basic crew, 24 hours with one extra pilot, 30 hours on duty with two extra pilots, flying tired as hell at night in old run down classics on the back side of the body clock. Since we didn't carry people, we're obviously not as important in the eyes of the government, but there are plenty of people on the ground who depend on our ability to operate safely.
 
germb747 said:
Let's not forget International Freight Dogs. The domestic flying hours / duty limitations do not apply to them. Before I was furloughed, I was on the road 17 days in a row, every month. 18 hour duty days were the norm with a basic crew, 24 hours with one extra pilot, 30 hours on duty with two extra pilots, flying tired as hell at night in old run down classics on the back side of the body clock. Since we didn't carry people, we're obviously not as important in the eyes of the government, but there are plenty of people on the ground who depend on our ability to operate safely.
Click to expand...

That is absolutely despicable. I know you get much better job security with a major shipping courier but these hours just KILL almost every incentive to work for them (with me at least).
 
Kestrel452 said:
That is absolutely despicable. I know you get much better job security with a major shipping courier but these hours just KILL almost every incentive to work for them (with me at least).
Click to expand...

Hey now, don't be broadbrushing all cargo ops with that statement there, junior.
 
MikeD said:
Hey now, don't be broadbrushing all cargo ops with that statement there, junior.
Click to expand...

I don't see how I "broadbrushed" anything. I said "major shipping couriers" and that the bad working hours kill most of the incentive FOR ME to work for them.
 
Just a random thought after reading the letter,dont know if it helps...

Those "50 to 100 plus" people that the pilots care for on a flight, is just that.. ONE flight. If part of the problem is the number of flights per day being flown... we could easily say that these pilots care for like 500 plus people a DAY.

# of ppl x number of flights = lots of human lives.
 
Kestrel452 said:
I don't see how I "broadbrushed" anything. I said "major shipping couriers" and that the bad working hours kill most of the incentive FOR ME to work for them.
Click to expand...

"Major Shipping Couriers" is a broadbrush......as they don't all operate that way.
 
Come on, this is america, you know how the feds will respond. They will work on the symptom, and ignore the cause (It's the american way.) In other words - more regulation in the wrong areas that will make the job less enjoyable, more tedious, and probably less safe. They won't addess the issue with common sense... (Increased rest period hours, lowered maxiumum "duty" time, livable non-insulting salaries - heck maybe even the salary of an entry level professional.)

No more talking unless plane is parked and engines shut down, no getting up to go to the bathroom, befriending of co-workers is not alowed. It is YOUR responsibility to get to work on time and rested, I don't care if you worked 14 hours the day before and got 4 hours of sleep after finally getting to your hotel for the night.:sarcasm:
(But probably not too far from the truth)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top