Carl Spackler

You are correct Shiz. That is a very astute analysis, and one that I've not considered.

Excellent points!

Carl

Carl Spackler

This is an excellent idea.

Carl

Carl Spackler

You have not heard that out of THEIR mouths. I'm very concerned that the chairman has no concerns about our current Section 1 at all. That's due to what he's actually said. If you've heard anything from the FO rep, that's more than I've heard.

You may have heard something good from our sec/treas ... as I have. But he doesn't have a vote.

Carl

DAL 88 Driver

I don't see how you can make the case for C2K being an "aberration" and yet not make the same case (even more so) for the massive, unprecedented cuts we took just prior to and in bankruptcy. C2K represented a return to a previous norm. Yes, that norm put us above the slow downward trend line from PG's graph, but it was a return to a previously accepted value for airline pilots. The BK cuts put the value of our profession far below any previously accepted value for airline pilots. Are you really an airline pilot? Because it just doesn't sound like you're "rooting for the home team" so to speak.

Wow! Again... all I can say is, "who's side are you on?" Do you really have so little regard for the profession you have chosen? (If this is indeed your profession.)

shiznit

Oh no.....twice in a week we agree on something!!

.....How cold does it get in hell?

satchip

Just look at the graph. It is a clear linear regression trend line. If you were able to plot every airline pilot pay rate as a data point on that graph instead of just MD88 you would see the same thing. Every data point would be clustered close to the line, that's how you get the line. Now put C2K and it is at least one maybe two standard deviations away from that line. See how that is an aberration? The post BR data points are corrections below the line to get the average back to the line. Markets seek equilibrium.

As for your second statement, I'm on my side, just like you. I just don't have a Pollyannish view of my worth or skill set value. We are still valuable as our skill set is not easily duplicated and requires experience and judgment to apply. That value, however, is undeniably less than it was in 1978 and before. I'll give you two for instances.

According to the AOPA, there were 15,840 ATPs in 1958. In 1978 there were 55,881. In 2008 there were 146,838. The crew of a Boeing 377 was 5. A 747 in 1978 had a crew of 3. A 777 in 2008 has a crew of 2. Supply and demand.
http://www.aopa.org/newsroom/statistics/pilots.html

Disclaimer: I don't have a degree in statistics, so my use of mathematical terms may be off, but the gist of what I'm saying is true. I do have a degree in history and am qualified to recognize historical trends. So math wizzes, don't hate me because I'm beautiful.

DAL 88 Driver

That's pure BS. There is no need to have a massive decrease "below the line" in order for the market to "seek equilibrium." The massive decrease was just as much of an aberration as you say C2K was. And I still can't believe you're okay with a continually declining value for our profession. You do realize that at some point, following your continually declining line theory, we will make less than the guy that picks up your trash, right? And I'm guessing that guy doesn't have a history or math degree!

Again... could not disagree with you more. The value and importance to safety of a highly competent, well trained, and motivated pilot is no less today than it was in the past. If anything, using your example, that value should be MORE because the airlines have gained a HUGE efficiency by going from a crew of 5 pilots to a crew of 2 pilots.

It is very troubling that we have some folks like yourself in this profession who have so little regard for what we do. Twenty years ago, you would have been laughed out of the room saying the stuff you're saying. Sadly, now there is a percentage (a very small percentage in my experience) who agree with you.

satchip

First of all, take out the emotion from this argument. Look at it from an objective, analytical point of view and we can discuss this.

Eventually, the trash guy may make more than me. In fact in NYC I bet the trash guy does make more than me. But as time and technology advance, our skill set becomes less relevant. For example, how much do stage coach drivers make? Buggy whip makers? Navigators? Flight engineers? There will come a time when pilots won't be in airplanes any more. Then our skills will be worth zero, or close too it.

Personally, I think we have reached a floor on that graph and it will go up for a period of time. Someone posted that management has learned how to operate in a deregulated environment. I think that is true to an extent and industry consolidation will enable some pricing power that will shore up industry bottom lines. That will enable us to see some wage increases. But be assured, the trend line is still there.

Your second paragraph shows a complete misunderstanding of the laws of economics. ( I apologize in advance if took that as a personal insult, it's not meant to be.) How can more of us, supply; and fewer required, demand; equal more value? Don't equate an employer's ability to pay more, your efficiency argument, with labor value.

You are right about one thing. Twenty years ago I would have been laughed out of a crew room. I doubt many would have foreseen the advance of technology, the rise of outsourcing, and the other misfortunes that have befuddled our profession. They may have laughed at me, but they also laughed at the guy who warned that "those little jets" would be the bane of our existence.

Carl Spackler

I agree that the percentage is small, but I've come to understand this thinking. It's based on an extreme level of selfishness. The motivation is simple: Keep the profession steady at current levels or even slightly declining, and that will allow airlines to have a higher profit margin. They believe this higher profit margin is the best chance they have to not ever be furloughed or experience any kind of pay interruption. One of them even said: "I don't want to be paid the best, I want to be paid the longest."

This thinking is of course misguided, but the motivation is clear.

Carl

tsquare

I'll let ya know on the 16th. I have recurrent in MSP.