Why would you work for "them"?

[killbilly]

It's all well and good to have your opinion evolve and change. However, what is NOT ok (and I'm not saying this is what happened here) is to point fingers at those that work at "those" places. And by those I mean the places that while they might not be great AREN'T actively brining the industry down like Skybus, Virgin, GoJets and Gulfstream. Just because Mesa treats their employees like crap does not give anybody else the right to question a person for going there. Sure, bash the company all you want, but as long as that person is making it work for them, it really doesn't matter. SO many people are so quick to defend their regional (err... company) against any negatives and yet are just as quick to question somebody's choice for going somewhere else. Again, as much as it may sound it, I'm not directly referring to Merit's post here. Just in general.

I need a disclaimer first: I'm not a 121 pilot, and I'm purely on the outside looking in, because I'm interested in the discussion, and I have a legitimate, non-flippant question to ask:

I hear what you're saying, BobdDuck, but doesn't some of the responsibility fall on those who enable the practices?

An analogy (which may be flawed, but hear me out): Guy gets drunk in a bar, leaves in his car, wipes out a family of six. Under the law in most states, the bar who over-served him can be found liable (civilly, criminally or both, not sure) because they enabled the action.

If a group of pilots is being exploited by the company they work for, then oughtn't some of that responsibility fall on them to either a) leave, or b) work to improve the situation through various means?

Thanks in advance. I find these discussion particularly enlightening.

EDIT - I just re-read your post Bob, and somehow missed the part of about 'actively working to improve things' referring to Mesa. So I guess we agree on that part. But it doesn't excuse the apathetic ones. And they are there, aren't they?

 

[Kristie]

They called me.

that's how it usually goes....

Why did I attend? Was encouraged by a certain XJT pilot to go get the interview experience.

Did I interview and accept it on the spot? Yes. Would've rather accepted it and thought about it than said no.
...
Is it relevant to this conversation? I personally dont think so. An interview doesn't mean squat. Putting on the uniform and supporting "their" cause is something different.

i think it's relevant....you were ready and willing to go (even "accepted" the job) and yet now, your pointing up your nose that those that are doing the same thing and actually going through with it....

as a matter of fact, i think i saw a thread where you might have said you didn't care if it lowered the bar, it was what you wanted to do... and then changed your mind.

So i kinda agree with Bobdduck here....

It's all well and good to have your opinion evolve and change. However, what is NOT ok (and I'm not saying this is what happened here) is to point fingers at those that work at "those" places.

after all, you yourself was going to do the same thing...

however, i do agree that those who continue past the interview stage into actually working for the airline have more of the blame..BUT... if people didn't go to their interviews (like you did, even for ####s and giggles), the bar would have to be raised in order to just get people in the door for a simple interview....

i figure if you want to help raise the bar, do yourself a favor, start at the beginning and don't even go for the interview....

 

[meritflyer]

Dont go to the interview? Right.. You're off here. Usually if they cant fill the interview classes the bar is lowered more and more. Maybe you haven't seen what's happened to mins at nearly every regional over the last two years.

Last time I checked, interviewing didn't lower the bar. Typically, it raises it with the right kind of applicant.

Working at a place that "works for me" but brings the industry down as a whole does.

 

[ComplexHiAv8r]

Was I ever employed by Mesa? No.

Did I attend class? No.

Did I apply? No. A friend of mine who was in class gave them my number. They called me.

Why did I attend? Was encouraged by a certain XJT pilot to go get the interview experience.

Did I interview and accept it on the spot? Yes. Would've rather accepted it and thought about it than said no.

Was it a learning experience? Yes. The interview at Mesa was much harder than XJT.

Do I support Mesa? Not one bit. I hope they're gone sooner than later.

Is it relevant to this conversation? I personally dont think so. An interview doesn't mean squat. Putting on the uniform and supporting "their" cause is something different.

I think it is relevant, but a learning experience that you did and realized what you wanted to do. It's this learning experience that needs to be done by all as they progress in their career's, not just in aviation.

 

[tonyw]

The difference between you (this sort of applies to me, but I'm not as far along in changing careers with a whopping 3.7 logged) and some of "them" is that you've had a job, career which afforded a certain standard of living and raised your personal bar, so to speak, on what you're willing to do and not do.

:yeahthat:

Once you get used to a certain standard of living it's really hard to go back. When you just can't make the numbers work on the income that you'd be getting, it shuts the profession out to you unless you've got a sugar momma.

I had this conversation with a friend of mine who works for ALPA. In order for us to get into aviation full time, we'd have to take a pay cut to a level we last saw when we were fresh out of college back in 1990.

We just can't do it. Well, he could, since he's got a wife who's practicing corporate law. But I can't since I'm single.

 

[meritflyer]

as a matter of fact, i think i saw a thread where you might have said you didn't care if it lowered the bar, it was what you wanted to do... and then changed your mind.

First you say "as a matter of fact" then followed by "I think I saw".

Which is it?

 

[H46Bubba]

:yeahthat:

Once you get used to a certain standard of living it's really hard to go back. When you just can't make the numbers work on the income that you'd be getting, it shuts the profession out to you unless you've got a sugar momma.

I had this conversation with a friend of mine who works for ALPA. In order for us to get into aviation full time, we'd have to take a pay cut to a level we last saw when we were fresh out of college back in 1990.

We just can't do it. Well, he could, since he's got a wife who's practicing corporate law. But I can't since I'm single.

Well then you need to go out and get a sugar momma as well! I mean you already have a ring!

 

[BobDDuck]

I am serious as a heart attack. The training schedule will allow me to stay in Phoenix with my family. It seems to work right now. I dont expect any special congrats since Mesa seems to be the red headed stepchild but its a step forward for me. I am excited to learn a new airplane as I was offered the CRJ.

If I recall the reason you dumped Mesa and decided to stick it out was that your old (non flying) job offered you a huge bonus if you came back for a while.

By the way, I'm actually not hating here... I'm jut bored out of my mind in a hotel room.

 

[meritflyer]

*yawn*

I paid back my bonus in full to go to XJT. MAG didn't sit right with me.

You are bored aren't you?

 

[H46Bubba]

Just to play devil's advocate. Mesa can raise the bar, but it takes dedicated pilots to get things changed. I really don't think there is enough pilots left that are dedicated enought to put the hurt on JO and raise the bar. JO is lovin it right now because he's got a revolving door of pilots. With no one willing to stick it out and fight for a new decent contract, all he's doing is sitting back and waiting for the MEC to take what he's offering. Yeah the work rules suck, but they had to take those rules in order to get rid of Freedom#1 and get their flying back. The MEC contract negotiating commitee can't even be released from flying to negotiate due to short staffing.

 

[E_Dawg]

Ah, who cares. The bottom line is merit decided NOT to work for one of the worst COMPANIES in the US, at least when it comes to it's employees' first year.

And I really don't believe the JO management style works in this industry climate. Mesa's turnover is way too high, they can't keep the pilots they have to the point that they're having to give up flying. Sure more of their pilots are on first year pay, but that doesn't mean much when they're throwing tens of thousands on training these pilots. And from what I've heard their training is inefficient. I know a guy who was technically employed at Freedom, but in 9 months never had his IOE scheduled. He quit before he ever flew the airplane, and in the meantime he enjoyed paid time off. Throw in the mess they created in Hawaii with the 80m fine... The guy is just too aggressive for his own good.

 

[zmiller4]

Merit, I think you made a excellent choice in not going to Mesa, but you ought to be able to answer your original question because you basically made and dedended the very decision you're criticizing people for making.

I interviewed with Mesa a few years ago too (btw, are you sure Xjet's is easier than that?!?) for basically the same reason as you--at the time they were one of the few western-based regionals that were hiring. I never accepted a class date and I'm glad I didn't, but I definitely understand how it could be an attractive option.

"Disclaimer: The above doesn't apply to pseudo-scab operations such as GoJet and Skybus."

...and Gulfstream. Right PCL?

Wow....does that mean what I think it does?

 

[killbilly]

...we'd have to take a pay cut to a level we last saw when we were fresh out of college back in 1990.

We just can't do it. Well, he could, since he's got a wife who's practicing corporate law. But I can't since I'm single.

You just made my point perfectly, even without the "Yeah That." Thanks!

You could do it, if you wanted to, but it would likely involve giving up a lot of things, including the swanky chick-magnet condo, that would change your standard of living considerably. And that's the rub for guys like us.

That's part of the reason I'm keeping the blinders on (PPL, PPL, PPL!!) because I don't even want to think about the changes I'd have to make were I to go far enough and decide to go Pro, be it CFI or 135-freight or something else.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

"Disclaimer: The above doesn't apply to pseudo-scab operations such as GoJet and Skybus."

...and Gulfstream. Right PCL?

I don't consider Gulfstream to be a pseudo-scab operation. Many pilots at Gulfstream nowadays are hired off of the street without ever paying for training, even newhire FOs. Gulfstream is also a union airline represented by the IBT Local 747 with a very good turboprop contract.

zmiller4, not sure what you "think it means," but I did go to GIA a long time ago, and I did pay for part of the PFT program (part of it was discounted because I worked as an instructor for the academy). It was a dumb decision I made when I was a newbie and didn't know any better. That's the case for most of the PFT'ers that work at GIA, unfortunately. In any case, I don't support the GIA PFT program now, but I do support the pilot group and hope that they can continue to improve their contract just like any other unionized group.

 

[jtrain609]

I don't consider Gulfstream to be a pseudo-scab operation. Many pilots at Gulfstream nowadays are hired off of the street without ever paying for training, even newhire FOs. Gulfstream is also a union airline represented by the IBT Local 747 with a very good turboprop contract.

zmiller4, not sure what you "think it means," but I did go to GIA a long time ago, and I did pay for part of the PFT program (part of it was discounted because I worked as an instructor for the academy). It was a dumb decision I made when I was a newbie and didn't know any better. That's the case for most of the PFT'ers that work at GIA, unfortunately. In any case, I don't support the GIA PFT program now, but I do support the pilot group and hope that they can continue to improve their contract just like any other unionized group.

So then shouldn't you support the Teamsters over at GoJets, then? I mean, it's really no different. Sure the company was started to get around scope (just like Gulfsteam seems to have been invented to steal as much money as they possibly could from pilots pockets), but now they're union and the guys there *must* be trying to make things better right?

Or said another way, do you understand the hypocrisy that you just wrote out up there?

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

So then shouldn't you support the Teamsters over at GoJets, then? I mean, it's really no different. Sure the company was started to get around scope (just like Gulfsteam seems to have been invented to steal as much money as they possibly could from pilots pockets), but now they're union and the guys there *must* be trying to make things better right?

Or said another way, do you understand the hypocrisy that you just wrote out up there?

There's another thread somewhere on here where I explained the difference between the Teamster's Local 747 which represents GIA and other pilot groups, and the Local 618 which represents the GoJet pilots. The short version is that the normal airline local (Local 747) refused to represent the GoJet pilots for obvious reasons, so the GoJet management pilots went to another IBT local that usually represents unskilled workers in St. Louis to represent them so that ALPA or another union couldn't come in later. It's a sham union that was installed by the management pilots from Trans States that started GoJet in order to keep a real union from getting on the property.

 

[Cruise]

So then shouldn't you support the Teamsters over at GoJets, then? I mean, it's really no different. Sure the company was started to get around scope (just like Gulfsteam seems to have been invented to steal as much money as they possibly could from pilots pockets), but now they're union and the guys there *must* be trying to make things better right?

Or said another way, do you understand the hypocrisy that you just wrote out up there?

By all means, correct me if I'm wrong. But isn't the local that represents HoJets! different from the other airline teamsters. This was because the 'airline teamsters' knew the HoJets! was an abomination and didn't want any part of representing them.

So, I'd say there was no hypocrisy in his statement.....but, I could be wrong.

 

[tonyw]

You just made my point perfectly, even without the "Yeah That." Thanks!

You could do it, if you wanted to, but it would likely involve giving up a lot of things, including the swanky chick-magnet condo, that would change your standard of living considerably. And that's the rub for guys like us.

That's part of the reason I'm keeping the blinders on (PPL, PPL, PPL!!) because I don't even want to think about the changes I'd have to make were I to go far enough and decide to go Pro, be it CFI or 135-freight or something else.

Okay, you're right. Is it possible to do?

Yes.

Am I willing to make the sacrifices required to do it?

No.

In some ways, I am extremely jealous of the folks who are getting into this field right after college. They're going from deciding whether to use their quarters to do their laundry or to go out for quarter beers into their first paying job. So for them, it's all good -- they're getting a paycheck to fly and they're used to having virtually no income.

Folks like you and me, we're in a different situation. We are used to a certain lifestyle that our careers have allowed us to live and to give it up and go back to the lifestyle we lived 15 years ago is something we don't want to do.

Now, if I were miserable in my job like I was a few years ago, it wouldn't matter, I'd still do it.

But I like my job, I like the people I work with and I work for a company that takes care of its employees.

So that means I'm not willing to make those sacrifices.

Things happen for a reason. I'll find out why sooner or later.

 

[meritflyer]

but you ought to be able to answer your original question because you basically made and defended the very decision you're criticizing people for making.

First off, I have zip to defend about attending an interview. Nothing, zilch, nada. There were a few aspects that made MAG appealing such as training in Phoenix. However, when it came down to going it didn't make any sense whatsoever. I interviewed on a Thursday. They wanted me to start Monday. They received an email within days of my decision not to attend.

Secondly, yes the Mesa interview was much more difficult/technical that XJT's. No question about that.

Lastly, if people are going to point fingers for someone attending a F'ing interview than they got nothing. There are some airlines that drag the industry into the crap hole that we'd all love to get out of.

Oh, and GIA is a pseudo-scab operation without question in my eyes. You pay someone to sit in the right seat and gain "experience". Right.. Who cares about some BS contract they have? It obviously is a poor contract if it allows some poor sucker to pay to be a required crewmember. It takes away jobs that real pilots should have.

 

[Mariano]

First off, I have zip to defend about attending an interview. Nothing, zilch, nada. There were a few aspects that made MAG appealing such as training in Phoenix. However, when it came down to going it didn't make any sense whatsoever. I interviewed on a Thursday. They wanted me to start Monday. They received an email within days of my decision not to attend.

Secondly, yes the Mesa interview was much more difficult/technical that XJT's. No question about that.

Lastly, if people are going to point fingers for someone attending a F'ing interview than they got nothing. There are some airlines that drag the industry into the crap hole that we'd all love to get out of.

I always thought you were a *edited out*......was I right.

Sorry, someone had to say it.


Alea jacta est.