SKW CEO warns pilot shortage could lead...
03-16-2017, 12:16 PM
#281
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,556
Quite frankly, I'm trying to see how much you understand reality. The truth is that regional wages are related far more to the answers to those questions than they are to ALPA representation.
03-16-2017, 12:36 PM
#282
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 857
Fast-forward to today, ALPA seems to be pretty nonchalant regarding pilots at regional ALPA carriers receiving half the pay and benefits than those at major ALPA carriers. In fact, ALPA has made zero collective effort to undo their past mistake. Why not? Because you have to give something in order to gain something at the negotiating table. Mainline ALPA pilots don't want to lose anything for the sake of regional pilots, and that's their prerogative. Despite this, several regional carriers still pay ALPA dues and think that ALPA representation is in their best interests. Why?
After saying all this, why is it so unrealistic to suggest that non-ALPA representation would better serve regional pilots' interests?
03-16-2017, 12:44 PM
#283
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,237
Weak response. If you don't actually want to make a point, you can just say so.. I still don't know what you're getting at... Are you trying to say that ALPA should represent its carriers differently for some reason?
How many Delta passengers can fit on a Delta CRJ 900? Got a number? Now..
How many Delta passengers can fit on an Endeavor CRJ 900??
Why is ALPA ok with Endeavor CRJ 900 pilots making half as much money as a Delta CRJ 900 pilot? Why are you ok with ALPA being ok with this?
How many Delta passengers can fit on a Delta CRJ 900? Got a number? Now..
How many Delta passengers can fit on an Endeavor CRJ 900??
Why is ALPA ok with Endeavor CRJ 900 pilots making half as much money as a Delta CRJ 900 pilot? Why are you ok with ALPA being ok with this?
want to either. All parties seem ok in out sourcing those 76 seat and under
AC and Jobs. I don't think they would be profitable at their agreed to wages. I think that both parties know that.
Those jobs aren't going to mainline either unless they're flown with 100+ seat AC.
So we don't actually fly them for 1/2 price. We fly Regional AC for the going rate. Same as everyone else.
03-16-2017, 12:52 PM
#284
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 294
Delta doesn't fly CRJ900's. I don't believe that they (mgt and pilots).
want to either. All parties seem ok in out sourcing those 76 seat and under
AC and Jobs. I don't think they would be profitable at their agreed to wages. I think that both parties know that.
Those jobs aren't going to mainline either unless they're flown with 100+ seat AC.
So we don't actually fly them for 1/2 price. We fly Regional AC for the going rate. Same as everyone else.
want to either. All parties seem ok in out sourcing those 76 seat and under
AC and Jobs. I don't think they would be profitable at their agreed to wages. I think that both parties know that.
Those jobs aren't going to mainline either unless they're flown with 100+ seat AC.
So we don't actually fly them for 1/2 price. We fly Regional AC for the going rate. Same as everyone else.
03-16-2017, 01:03 PM
#286
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,237
Of course! That's what every business would do. But this isn't making plastic toys in China. Very safe and reliable doesn't run cheap as the labor pool starts to dry up.
03-16-2017, 01:05 PM
#287
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 857
Delta doesn't fly CRJ900's. I don't believe that they (mgt and pilots).
want to either. All parties seem ok in out sourcing those 76 seat and under
AC and Jobs. I don't think they would be profitable at their agreed to wages. I think that both parties know that.
Those jobs aren't going to mainline either unless they're flown with 100+ seat AC.
So we don't actually fly them for 1/2 price. We fly Regional AC for the going rate. Same as everyone else.
want to either. All parties seem ok in out sourcing those 76 seat and under
AC and Jobs. I don't think they would be profitable at their agreed to wages. I think that both parties know that.
Those jobs aren't going to mainline either unless they're flown with 100+ seat AC.
So we don't actually fly them for 1/2 price. We fly Regional AC for the going rate. Same as everyone else.
If ALPA believes that Delta CRJ900 pilots should top out at $170/hr, why isn't ALPA fighting for Endeavor pilots to get the same? Why is ALPA ok with such gross differences in contract rates? Why should Endeavor pilots want to be associated with ALPA while this is going on??
03-16-2017, 01:14 PM
#288
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: lav dumper
Posts: 707
This thread is still alive so for any newcomers...
We have to beat them at their own game. Crying on the forum only goes so far. Time to take action. Main feedback email: [email protected] and the general email is [email protected]
We have to beat them at their own game. Crying on the forum only goes so far. Time to take action. Main feedback email: [email protected] and the general email is [email protected]
03-16-2017, 01:14 PM
#289
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 294
I think that we have seen quite a few adjustments to starting pay in order to attract pilots. It has been 20k or less for decades. Now it is 50-70k. I would say that the market is reacting. As attrition and growth increase over the next few years it will be interesting to see if further action is needed and what that might entail. I don't think that most of the legacies want to commit to long contracts for higher wages because they know that we are only a terrorist attack, recession, a run on oil, or increase in retirement away from having too many pilots again. Also keep in mind that you can get all your ratings and hours in just a couple years. The word is out now that starting pay is going up and that major's pay is close to a Doctor or Lawyer salary. With this in mind I can see (and already have) a fresh wave of young, eager, and driven pilots that are looking at the big picture. Their attitudes will land them the big paying jobs over the bitter crusty "skilled" pilots.
03-16-2017, 01:16 PM
#290
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,704
If you'd like to continue the conversation, let's both agree to stop splitting up the posts. They are getting huge 
.
Did you or did you not gloat that you were being helped by the temporary FO bonuses? Something about your seniority improving, even though you get nothing tangible (money) yourself? That's a terrible position for a union supporter to take. It is also completely short-sighted. Even you say that once they get their pilots the bonuses could vanish in an instant. Then what are you left with? You need to start looking at the big picture. Contract pay increases would have needed to be negotiated away. Now, management can take the pay away without even sitting at the table! It's amazing that people in an industry where it takes so many years to develop a career could be so short-sighted.
Back to scope. I told you already that ALPA unions (and American) voted in scope because it lined their pockets. They failed to see the big picture too, and the damage that would be done to the industry and the career. And now ALPA collects dues from the same pilots whose career earnings they've essentially cut in half.
Never have I said that scope would be relaxed, and it has never been a part of anything I've said to you. So again, you put words in my mouth. Regardless, they are doing nothing to take back the scope they've already lost. So again, why should regional pilots be supporting them?
You seem to be confused about what collective bargaining is, not that I'm surprised. ALPA does not bargain collectively, otherwise every ALPA carrier would have the same contract, correct? Instead, each union (MEC) represents each of its own pilots (singular). ALPA is simply an association, and one with a history of disunity and selective representation. Why are you so opposed to multiple regional unions bargaining together?
The difference between you and I is that I can see a potential problem before it happens. I'm also not so afraid of any kind of change that I would write off the suggestion to find new, more effective representation as a "fantasy".
Oh yeah, I'll invite you once again to make your own argument. I still don't see how your 3 favorite questions should change the way that ALPA represents its pilots.
. Did you or did you not gloat that you were being helped by the temporary FO bonuses? Something about your seniority improving, even though you get nothing tangible (money) yourself? That's a terrible position for a union supporter to take. It is also completely short-sighted. Even you say that once they get their pilots the bonuses could vanish in an instant. Then what are you left with? You need to start looking at the big picture. Contract pay increases would have needed to be negotiated away. Now, management can take the pay away without even sitting at the table! It's amazing that people in an industry where it takes so many years to develop a career could be so short-sighted.
Back to scope. I told you already that ALPA unions (and American) voted in scope because it lined their pockets. They failed to see the big picture too, and the damage that would be done to the industry and the career. And now ALPA collects dues from the same pilots whose career earnings they've essentially cut in half.
Never have I said that scope would be relaxed, and it has never been a part of anything I've said to you. So again, you put words in my mouth. Regardless, they are doing nothing to take back the scope they've already lost. So again, why should regional pilots be supporting them?
You seem to be confused about what collective bargaining is, not that I'm surprised. ALPA does not bargain collectively, otherwise every ALPA carrier would have the same contract, correct? Instead, each union (MEC) represents each of its own pilots (singular). ALPA is simply an association, and one with a history of disunity and selective representation. Why are you so opposed to multiple regional unions bargaining together?
The difference between you and I is that I can see a potential problem before it happens. I'm also not so afraid of any kind of change that I would write off the suggestion to find new, more effective representation as a "fantasy".
Oh yeah, I'll invite you once again to make your own argument. I still don't see how your 3 favorite questions should change the way that ALPA represents its pilots.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
