Unions and Pay

[WacoFan]

Another point on using anything besides a seniority based system is that you open the door for favoritism to show its ugly face.

"You're only a captain because the you get the chief pilot his coffee every morning!"

I view it as a safety of flight issue. You want every pilot to have a minimum aptitude with the floor being extremely high. How, if you are in an enviornment that is pass/fail with high standards should one stand out? If I am a Chief Pilot I would want numbers 1-100 to be interchangeable.

 

[fly8slep]

Well, after reading how quickly the Go-Jet thread turned into a troll fest, I wanted to try to have a civilized discussion about the merits of unions in aviation. First, let it be known that I'm pro-union. I wish my company had a union, but we'd have to be a lot bigger for it to really matter.

There is one thing, despite the myriad good reasons for unions, which really really bothers me, and if someone with more experience in the matter (PCL here's your que) could enlighten me a little I'd be much obliged. Why is it that FOs at even good union companies get paid so little? I was looking at the TransStates page on APC, and you only make $25/hr after your off probation pay. What's with that? I know apprentice electricians in IBEW who are making $35/hr their first year, and getting a lot more hours, and they're not responsible for other people's lives. This just doesn't make sense to me.

Even Horizon, which is really good pay in a regional sense, only pays $32/hr for an FO after a year in the Dash (Though CRJ700 guys do pretty well, they make $42/hr). Irregardless, this is equates to about $40k per year or so at the guarantee at CRJ700 pay. For most companies however, there is straight up poverty pay for the first couple of years, and your QoL sucks.

Balance this with the fact that if you wait 7-8 more months (if you're a 500TT guy instructing or something and need to get to 1200) you can go to work for a non-union company like Flight Express, or AirNet (before they stopped hiring) and make good wages and fly PIC. Further, there are companies out there like Martinaire, and a few others that will put you right into the left seat of a Caravan or something turbine at 1200TT. Down the road (3000-5000TT) if you want to go into something bigger you have 2 choices, you can take a pretty hard pay cut by going to a union company, or you can go to a place like Virgin America (non union) or some other and make decent money in the right seat and still have pretty decent benes.

If a guy working freight or charter or something, decided he wanted to go airline, chances are the guy would have to take a $20,000 pay cut or so to do it. If someone wanted to go fly the eskimo jet (Alaska Airlines) and assuming he was qualified and making $55/hr at a mom and pop 135 flying 1000hrs per year he would take a $20/hr pay cut to do so. Why is this the case?

I don't think anybody has the answer. Airlines choose what kind of pilot group they want. Some consider us assets, most others consider us liabilities. A union can't change that, all they can do is offer support. All I know is that pay and QOL has to dramatically improve. 20K per year was fine back in the day where you were a freak if you spent more than 2 or 3 years at a regional. They didn't even fly jets and had same pay. Now post 911 when regionals represent a lot of the U.S flying, considering more of us will spend a long time here trying to find that higher paying job our current pay scales and qol will not cut it.

 

[jtrain609]

Simply put, pilots eat their young.

This thread is proof.

Good luck out there, guys.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Something needs to change and ALPA IN MY OPINION will not be the one's to do it.

Where the hell do these kids come from that think it's appropriate for them to lecture a bunch of professional air line pilots about their own union? Get your first flying job at the airlines before you start lecturing me, Mr. CFI.

I know plenty of people who I consider to be much less skilled at being a pilot than I am.

I remember being at a conference in Herndon when ALPA Aeromedical gave a presentation. One interesting fact that was presented from a psychological study of air line pilots was that about 80% of them considered themselves to be "above average." Simple math dictates this to be absurd, of course, but you seem to have fallen into the same trap. You're no better than the rest of us. In fact, in my experience, those that brag the most about their flying abilities are some of the worst pilots. Overcompensating much?

 

[Seggy]

In fact, in my experience, those that brag the most about their flying abilities are some of the worst pilots.

In my experience I have found this to be true as well. Excellent point.

 

[ppragman]

Well we don't load bags, order catering, or empty lavs. So maybe there is a way of measuring "hard work" in a 135 op if you're responsible for those kids of things. If you ever go 121 let me know how much harder you are able to work than the next guy though.

(but you still haven't provided even a single metric by which you would measure how hard an airline pilot works).

Metric? How about efficient operation of the aircraft. How about, if you're on time, burn less fuel, and get there faster than other people you get paid more. PenAir has a "safety bonus" program where they give you a couple hundred extra bucks a month if you're a safe captain, and have no incidents/accidents/company discipline stuff. Further, if you go the extra mile, interact with customers, be that irritating model of the company they want us to be, we should be paid more.

That being said, 121 isn't the most difficult, and is probably significantly easier than 135. Hell, you can't even fly over a 1000hrs/year part 121. 135 I can fly 1400 hours per year, every year, legally. As for "emptying lavs, loading bags, and ordering catering," every company is different, and its wrong to assume that this is below a pilot. At my company for example, if I wanted to sit inside with my thumb up my butt I could, but that's not the way to be a company man, and to get the job done.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

How about, if you're on time

This would be a detriment to safety. Pilots would be rushed and ignore things like write-ups, accurate W & B, etc... in order to get their extra compensation for an on-time departure.

burn less fuel

Again, safety issues could result. I can foresee pilots taking part in unstable approaches to save that extra 100 lbs of fuel by staying high and fast. And then there's the element of rushing the FO by trying to wait on starting the second engine on the taxi-out until the very last minute. I wonder how many things might get missed if the FO is rushing too fast to get everything done before taking the runway?

and get there faster than other

Again, safety problem. Pilots will taxi at unsafe speeds, some will probably be tempted to break the 250/10k speed limit, etc... Anytime you try to pressure pilots about on-time performance or block times, you risk corners getting cut.

...they give you a couple hundred extra bucks a month if you're a safe captain, and have no.........company discipline stuff.

Oooh, big problem. Many companies issue minor disciplinary infractions for attendance issues. Pinnacle was an excellent example. They issued verbal and written warnings for sick calls, even if you had a doctor's note. Under your system, this would preclude them from getting that extra couple hundred bucks. How many pilots that are unfit for duty do you think would show up for work if it meant them getting an extra couple hundred bucks? A hell of a lot of them.

Further, if you go the extra mile, interact with customers, be that irritating model of the company they want us to be, we should be paid more.

Too subjective. Any manager could come up with any ridiculous criteria for this bonus. It would basically become the ass-kissing bonus. Anyone who cut corners and kissed the CP's ass would get some extra money. No way.

 

[ppragman]

This would be a detriment to safety. Pilots would be rushed and ignore things like write-ups, accurate W & B, etc... in order to get their extra compensation for an on-time departure.



Again, safety issues could result. I can foresee pilots taking part in unstable approaches to save that extra 100 lbs of fuel by staying high and fast. And then there's the element of rushing the FO by trying to wait on starting the second engine on the taxi-out until the very last minute. I wonder how many things might get missed if the FO is rushing too fast to get everything done before taking the runway?



Again, safety problem. Pilots will taxi at unsafe speeds, some will probably be tempted to break the 250/10k speed limit, etc... Anytime you try to pressure pilots about on-time performance or block times, you risk corners getting cut.



Oooh, big problem. Many companies issue minor disciplinary infractions for attendance issues. Pinnacle was an excellent example. They issued verbal and written warnings for sick calls, even if you had a doctor's note. Under your system, this would preclude them from getting that extra couple hundred bucks. How many pilots that are unfit for duty do you think would show up for work if it meant them getting an extra couple hundred bucks? A hell of a lot of them.



Too subjective. Any manager could come up with any ridiculous criteria for this bonus. It would basically become the ass-kissing bonus. Anyone who cut corners and kissed the CP's ass would get some extra money. No way.

I see where you're coming from, but look, all other fields are highly subjective in how they promote and pay employees. I'm not saying that I want to be held back because some j-off that cozies up to the CP every morning around the coffee pot, but there are other ways to be more efficient that don't compromise safety. For example, those guys carrying ridiculous quantities of extra fuel, remember the 7ps (prior proper planning prevents piss poor performance) if they'd have been tracking the wx early and diverted early, or not launched problem solved. There are other things as well, I know Alaska Airlines allows some of their crews to VFR from Wrangell to Petersburg because it turns a 30min flight into a 7 min flight and burns waaaaaaaaaay less fuel, though some guys opt not to because they think vfr is too dangerous (which is a whole other can of worms). What I'm saying is that Unions are good, and I wish I had one, but the way we pay pilots doesn't seem to be the best method. I dunno, good input though, and I'll take that into consideration.

As for the SafetyBonus program at PenAir, I've actually heard nothing by good things.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

but look, all other fields are highly subjective in how they promote and pay employees

And I don't think that's right either. But let's remember, other fields are very different than aviation. When I make a mistake, 122 people die. When a cubicle-jockey makes a mistake, the software won't be ready for another day. Big difference. We can't allow ourselves to be put into a situation where we are being pressured to cut corners or kiss ass to advance or even get paid fairly. A pilot is a pilot is a pilot. We expect every pilot to operate identically, hence standardization. This is necessary for safety. When we start opening the door for pilot pushing for better compensation and career advancement, then all of that standardization and safety consciousness will go out the window for a lot of pilots. There's just too much risk.

Think about this: would you want a surgeon operating on you that got a bonus if he was able to do more operations in a day than average surgeons?

 

[ppragman]

And I don't think that's right either. But let's remember, other fields are very different than aviation. When I make a mistake, 122 people die. When a cubicle-jockey makes a mistake, the software won't be ready for another day. Big difference. We can't allow ourselves to be put into a situation where we are being pressured to cut corners or kiss ass to advance or even get paid fairly. A pilot is a pilot is a pilot. We expect every pilot to operate identically, hence standardization. This is necessary for safety. When we start opening the door for pilot pushing for better compensation and career advancement, then all of that standardization and safety consciousness will go out the window for a lot of pilots. There's just too much risk.

Think about this: would you want a surgeon operating on you that got a bonus if he was able to do more operations in a day than average surgeons?

When we make minor mistakes they don't. This job is no different than a powerplant/industrial operator (if they make mistakes 100s could die as well) or a barge captain, who could pollute the hell out of the water if his crowley marine fuel barge overturned, or train engineer (we've seen what happens when they screw up lately- stop texting at the wheel), the only difference is that these jobs pay much much better, and have different standards for how they pay.

As for pilots should all be the same and that that is necessary for safety. I'll agree to a certain extent, that standardization is necessary for some things, however, thinking for yourself, and being something other than a meat computer is the most important part about flying. You can follow all the FARs and company procedures and still auger in. A meat computer won't deviate from those guidelines in the GOM/FOM or the FARs even if it is unsafe to continue legally. Think for yourself or die.

 

[Screaming_Emu]

Think about this: would you want a surgeon operating on you that got a bonus if he was able to do more operations in a day than average surgeons?

Is she hot?

 

[deek]

Not to add much here, since I'm just now starting my commercial training, I think the biggest thing would be a national seniority list. No way one should be stuck to one airline for their entire career and hope for the best from management. It's the career equivalent of russian roulette. And I'll bet 99% of the public doesn't know about this little nugget. Pilots need a PR campaign, plain and simple.

 

[ppragman]

Not to add much here, since I'm just now starting my commercial training, I think the biggest thing would be a national seniority list. No way one should be stuck to one airline for their entire career and hope for the best from management. It's the career equivalent of russian roulette. And I'll bet 99% of the public doesn't know about this little nugget. Pilots need a PR campaign, plain and simple.

If seniority lists are about fairness, then a national seniority list would be unfair to anyone outside of 121 who comes enters for a change of scenery. Bad idea I think.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

When we make minor mistakes they don't.

A simple math error on a W & B can certainly lead to disaster.

This job is no different than a powerplant/industrial operator (if they make mistakes 100s could die as well) or a barge captain, who could pollute the hell out of the water if his crowley marine fuel barge overturned, or train engineer (we've seen what happens when they screw up lately- stop texting at the wheel), the only difference is that these jobs pay much much better, and have different standards for how they pay.

As far as I know, these jobs are paid very similarly to how ours is. These are typically union jobs that have standardized pay systems that don't allow for subjectivity. In safety-sensitive functions, that's essential.

being something other than a meat computer is the most important part about flying. You can follow all the FARs and company procedures and still auger in. A meat computer won't deviate from those guidelines in the GOM/FOM or the FARs even if it is unsafe to continue legally. Think for yourself or die.

Agreed, but these things aren't quantifiable for determining merit-based pay. Judgement isn't something that can be codified in a pay system. The only way to develop metrics in this field would be the metrics that you listed earlier, and those are detrimental to safety when linked to pay.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I think the biggest thing would be a national seniority list. No way one should be stuck to one airline for their entire career and hope for the best from management. It's the career equivalent of russian roulette.

ALPA will be dealing with a national seniority list proposal at this month's BOD meeting. The Executive Board has suggested the creation of a committee to start working on a viable solution.

If seniority lists are about fairness, then a national seniority list would be unfair to anyone outside of 121 who comes enters for a change of scenery. Bad idea I think.

How would it be any different than now when a non-121 pilot enters the 121 world at the bottom of that carrier's seniority list? Seems the same to me. In any case, the original UAL proposal suggested "career benchmarks" that would give some sort of credit for aviation experience outside of the airline environment. Whether that suggestion is adopted into any final NSL proposal remains to be seen.

 

[ppragman]

ALPA will be dealing with a national seniority list proposal at this month's BOD meeting. The Executive Board has suggested the creation of a committee to start working on a viable solution.



How would it be any different than now when a non-121 pilot enters the 121 world at the bottom of that carrier's seniority list? Seems the same to me. In any case, the original UAL proposal suggested "career benchmarks" that would give some sort of credit for aviation experience outside of the airline environment. Whether that suggestion is adopted into any final NSL proposal remains to be seen.

I do like that idea, however, whether or not it will work is another thing entirely.

 

[deek]

I just imagine when the day comes where I'm looking at which 121 to go to that I have to do my homework to see what airline I think will still be needing my services 5-10 years down the road, not that it would matter anyway cause who knows what management is up to at any given moment. I just think that if for example I'm a captain at a regional with 7 years in and tons of TT and PIC time that my skills/experience are now extremely devalued just cause I want to change carriers and go back to year 1 pay. I'm not sure a national seniority list is THE answer, but seems like a way to keep unions happy/pilots happy and things fair (since the merit pay thing I agree is a hard thing to swallow given the standardized training and operations)

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

A simple math error on a W & B can certainly lead to disaster.

That would make it a major error, rather than a minor one.

 

[SpiraMirabilis]

That would make it a major error, rather than a minor one.

Not true. Even a small error in the W&B could be a very strong link in the accident chain. For example the Air Midwest Flight 5481 - they even did the W&B correctly. The incorrect balance of the aircraft combined with the incorrect setting of the turnbuckles for the tension of the elevator cables combined cause the crash and death of 21 people. Neither the balance issue or the cable tension issue would have caused the crash by itself, however. So you can see how a minor error in the W&B could combined with other factors cause people to die.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

Not true. Even a small error in the W&B could be a very strong link in the accident chain. For example the Air Midwest Flight 5481 - they even did the W&B correctly. The incorrect balance of the aircraft combined with the incorrect setting of the turnbuckles for the tension of the elevator cables combined cause the crash and death of 21 people. Neither the balance issue or the cable tension issue would have caused the crash by itself, however. So you can see how a minor error in the W&B could combined with other factors cause people to die.

If an error causes multiple people to die, I would venture to say it is not minor.