The pilot shortage is over:
04-23-2024, 12:20 AM
#482
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,595
In hindsight, what "part of implementation" did ALPA do? Pretty sure it ended up being a in-the-shorts event for everyone.
04-23-2024, 04:43 AM
#484
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,764
Everyone is wrong to some extent. I'd like to list my winners and losers from a theoretical increase to age 67.
Winner: Age 60+ pilots. They not only get two additional years, but they get the two addtional years at the top of scale and, often times, making WB CA pay. Pretty obvious.
Mild losers: Current airline pilots under 60 years old. Current "junior" guys will actually make more money over their careers if age 67 passes. They will net two years multiplied by whatever their curent annual pay is more than what their current career earnings project. The downside is these pilots will have to spend more time with lesser QOL, will have to work longer to achieve their career goals, and are at risk of furlough for a longer period of time (new hires). Current regional pilots have to wait two years longer, on average, to get to their destination airlines.
Big losers: Future airline pilots. People currently in the pipeline have to spend an additional two years as instructors, if the're lucky enough to be at that point. The CFI market would become completely saturated and current flight school graduates would get their certs with essentially zero prospects until people start retiring again.
I was tempted to add the general public as because ticket prices would surely go up as airlines' costs would go up, but I will avoid going into detail on that. The point is, this really isn't as much of "the old guys" vs "the new guys" as everyone is making it out to be.
Winner: Age 60+ pilots. They not only get two additional years, but they get the two addtional years at the top of scale and, often times, making WB CA pay. Pretty obvious.
Mild losers: Current airline pilots under 60 years old. Current "junior" guys will actually make more money over their careers if age 67 passes. They will net two years multiplied by whatever their curent annual pay is more than what their current career earnings project. The downside is these pilots will have to spend more time with lesser QOL, will have to work longer to achieve their career goals, and are at risk of furlough for a longer period of time (new hires). Current regional pilots have to wait two years longer, on average, to get to their destination airlines.
Big losers: Future airline pilots. People currently in the pipeline have to spend an additional two years as instructors, if the're lucky enough to be at that point. The CFI market would become completely saturated and current flight school graduates would get their certs with essentially zero prospects until people start retiring again.
I was tempted to add the general public as because ticket prices would surely go up as airlines' costs would go up, but I will avoid going into detail on that. The point is, this really isn't as much of "the old guys" vs "the new guys" as everyone is making it out to be.
Also, back then, we had thousands of furloughed pilots throughout the industry, unlike today.
You know what you omitted in your self-serving analysis? You omitted late starters... second career folks who start in the industry and pick a snapshot where they may be in the industry? Run into any of those? How about mil guys who are retiring or recently retired and are new hires? Poll them? Ironically, back in 2007 they were a surprising pro-change demographic even if they were junior. Or how about 1 in 3 pilots who don't make it to Age 65 because of an illness or loss of medical who actually manage to collect disability payments and not touching their retirement until mandatory retirement age?
I'm right around half way up our master seniority list and I have many years to go to retirement. I don't see old fogies having 2 more years as a threat to my career nearly as much as seeing disappearing of 2 pilot cockpits and going to single pilot, or elimination of manned flight altogether in my career-span due to AI or other factors. I'll probably see that fight in my active career and you as well. Yes, I have that many years left, and that's part of the reason why I'm financially preparing for an early exit.
I love how so many of you talk about "preserving the status quo." No, that was changed in 2007 and the status quo since inception was moved proving it can be artificially moved for no apparent reason, and even supported by the pilots union despite the wishes of the majority. And no, this isn't some ancient history - this happened in many of our career spans. Just own your side of the argument... don't be afraid to say why.
And yes, to the guy that talked about me selling water 4x at World Trade Center... if that was my business, hell yeah. You don't like the expensive bottled water, there's always the restroom faucet option or going thirsty... enjoy!
Last edited by RJSAviator76; 04-23-2024 at 05:22 AM.
04-23-2024, 05:39 AM
#485
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2023
Posts: 502
You know what you omitted in your self-serving analysis? You omitted late starters... second career folks who start in the industry and pick a snapshot where they may be in the industry? Run into any of those? How about mil guys who are retiring or recently retired and are new hires? Poll them? Ironically, back in 2007 they were a surprising pro-change demographic even if they were junior. Or how about 1 in 3 pilots who don't make it to Age 65 because of an illness or loss of medical who actually manage to collect disability payments and not touching their retirement until mandatory retirement age?
04-23-2024, 05:49 AM
#486
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,764
Dude, there's nothing wrong with owning your stand whether it's "get out of my seat, gummer!" or "Screw you, I want 2 more years at this..."
04-23-2024, 05:55 AM
#487
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2022
Position: 787 FO
Posts: 634
And you have admitted that you have held both positions based on your self interests. I don't think anyone is unclear on your motives.
04-23-2024, 06:05 AM
#488
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2023
Posts: 502
You're sticking your head in the sand if you think there aren't winners and losers. Stating that doesn't mean that means anything relating to the outcome or even that it should be considered at all. You still glossed over my entire point.
04-23-2024, 06:23 AM
#489
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Window seat
Posts: 5,482
Well, let's see... 1 in 3 pilots don't make it to retirement. Medical. How long do LTD benefits last them? Mandatory retirement age. In light of pensions being lost and needing to make up the lost time, or how about far too many years flying RJ's for peanuts, perhaps having a few extra years might benefit a few on the bottom of the seniority list too... it certainly isn't limited to the very top end of the seniority list. Just an observation from various conversations.
<snip>
Personally, I'm on track to leave this industry well before any mandatory retirement age, and I still have plenty of years left, so I really couldn't give a damn one way or another. But it sure is funny watching the hypocrisy on both sides.
Roughly 7% on LTD. At most carriers it goes unitl retirement. The biggest downside is not inflation indexed.
"I'm ready to leave early." Man, if I had a dollar for every time someone says that but doesn't leave early... The fiscal reality and the best bidding seniority at the end of one's carrier makes the overwhelming majority of guys keep working. Who leaves? Often guys who've busted their asses on their days off doing another job. It's not the airline job that makes them quit, it's the grind of doing 2 jobs.
04-23-2024, 07:11 AM
#490
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,764
One third of pilots don't fall off the list. A lot of that is guys using up sick time. Buddy retired 'early' on medical....with cashing out it was his best year ever.
Roughly 7% on LTD. At most carriers it goes unitl retirement. The biggest downside is not inflation indexed.
"I'm ready to leave early." Man, if I had a dollar for every time someone says that but doesn't leave early... The fiscal reality and the best bidding seniority at the end of one's carrier makes the overwhelming majority of guys keep working. Who leaves? Often guys who've busted their asses on their days off doing another job. It's not the airline job that makes them quit, it's the grind of doing 2 jobs.
Roughly 7% on LTD. At most carriers it goes unitl retirement. The biggest downside is not inflation indexed.
"I'm ready to leave early." Man, if I had a dollar for every time someone says that but doesn't leave early... The fiscal reality and the best bidding seniority at the end of one's carrier makes the overwhelming majority of guys keep working. Who leaves? Often guys who've busted their asses on their days off doing another job. It's not the airline job that makes them quit, it's the grind of doing 2 jobs.
On the other side of the coin, I have flown with captains at Southwest who would gripe with the best of them, yet the worst thing that ever happened in their 25+ year career was...... what? A merger where they came out on top? They certainly outearned their legacy peers by leaps and bounds, and all while the rest of the industry lost half our pay, lost our pensions, saw stagnation due to age 60 getting unstatus-quoed, etc. etc. There is no such thing as cookie-cutter career that everyone feels they're entitled to, but collectively, we sure can whine with the best.
Again, I take no position on Age 67. I did have one on Age 60 and by God did I own it. I do, however, take position on exposing the hypocrisy on both sides and I acknowledge that both sides have an argument for their position, but those are based on their self-interests and their own priorities and not some virtue, safety, or well-being of the profession. It is downright comical how people have a hard time admitting their own selfishness, self-centeredness, and their own greed because somehow, that's not virtuous or "nice." But sure is hypocritical.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
