How much more $ do FO's need to make per year
#31
I find it funny that i make same as a guy flying a 66-86 seat airplane.
And now the RAH guys are nice enough to fly 100seater for regional wages
But to answer the qs....48k to start+$800/month allowance (for living in guam)
And now the RAH guys are nice enough to fly 100seater for regional wages
But to answer the qs....48k to start+$800/month allowance (for living in guam)
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 787 FO
Posts: 125
Well coming from a military background I look at it this way. A 2LT on flight status is paid by the Federal Govt $4572/mo or roughly $55000/yr while he/she is in training. 2 years later as a 1LT it becomes $5667/mo or roughly $68000/yr and after 4 yrs as a newly minted Capt they make $86000/yr. This is of course after they(the Company) have spent approx $1,000,000 in training cost. What you are paid is what your value to a company is. It is based on "your value added" to the product and your level of responsibilities. If the Feds went back to regulating the airlines the Military pay scales would be a good start. Bear in mind that 1Lt Snuffy gets paid a fair wage to be the First officer period...not the equipment he flies. F-15, C-5, B1B, sherpa, helo, or T6...it does not matter. He is an officer of that company and a pilot and is paid as such.
Just my two cents.
Just my two cents.
#33
I agree with not paying dependent on type of aircraft. A CRJ-200 flies just the same as a CRJ-900 as a 737. Perhaps T-props should be less than jets because they don't fly as high and fast? The only big difference should be a type that goes international (besides Canada and Mexico). Those flight requires very different training. Besides that, there's really no reason why one airplane should pay more than another.
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 787 FO
Posts: 125
I agree with not paying dependent on type of aircraft. A CRJ-200 flies just the same as a CRJ-900 as a 737. Perhaps T-props should be less than jets because they don't fly as high and fast? The only big difference should be a type that goes international (besides Canada and Mexico). Those flight requires very different training. Besides that, there's really no reason why one airplane should pay more than another.
#35
Well coming from a military background I look at it this way. A 2LT on flight status is paid by the Federal Govt $4572/mo or roughly $55000/yr while he/she is in training. 2 years later as a 1LT it becomes $5667/mo or roughly $68000/yr and after 4 yrs as a newly minted Capt they make $86000/yr. This is of course after they(the Company) have spent approx $1,000,000 in training cost. What you are paid is what your value to a company is. It is based on "your value added" to the product and your level of responsibilities. If the Feds went back to regulating the airlines the Military pay scales would be a good start. Bear in mind that 1Lt Snuffy gets paid a fair wage to be the First officer period...not the equipment he flies. F-15, C-5, B1B, sherpa, helo, or T6...it does not matter. He is an officer of that company and a pilot and is paid as such.
Just my two cents.
Just my two cents.
#36
Maybe I was somewhat misunderstood. I'm talking about base salaries. If the company feels that the value added to the company and level of responsibilities are greater with a 777 or 737 and want to pay more amen...but the notion of the original question..."how much more do FOs NEED to make..." is disheartening. There should be a baseline pilot salary PERIOD!
#37
We'll be back to 200 hour wonders within 5 years. And when they absolutely can't fill a now 100 seat aircraft FO job, only then may the pay go up.
My prediction; There will be "emergency" rule making for a US multi-crew license before anybody gets paid more. Less than 100 hours in the right seat. Just like in the rest of the world now.... except they get paid more than the US.
My prediction; There will be "emergency" rule making for a US multi-crew license before anybody gets paid more. Less than 100 hours in the right seat. Just like in the rest of the world now.... except they get paid more than the US.
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: retired
Posts: 992
Well coming from a military background I look at it this way. A 2LT on flight status is paid by the Federal Govt $4572/mo or roughly $55000/yr while he/she is in training. 2 years later as a 1LT it becomes $5667/mo or roughly $68000/yr and after 4 yrs as a newly minted Capt they make $86000/yr. This is of course after they(the Company) have spent approx $1,000,000 in training cost. What you are paid is what your value to a company is. It is based on "your value added" to the product and your level of responsibilities. If the Feds went back to regulating the airlines the Military pay scales would be a good start. Bear in mind that 1Lt Snuffy gets paid a fair wage to be the First officer period...not the equipment he flies. F-15, C-5, B1B, sherpa, helo, or T6...it does not matter. He is an officer of that company and a pilot and is paid as such.
Just my two cents.
Just my two cents.
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 787 FO
Posts: 125
I agree except now we have a lot of powerful senators huffing and puffing about the 'unimaginable" wages being paid 121 pilots ...they only get involved when they can make some hay out of it. for example the federal minimum wage act.
#40
I agree, you can't have one with out the other. Meaning, the FAA requires 2 crew members on 99% of 121 aircraft. And for a good reason might I add. Anyone that thinks an FO serves no purpose other than pitot heat and when do we eat, doesn't see the big picture. Most of the time we as FO and CA share duties and responsibilities. Our base training must be equal and the only training that differs between the CA and FO is most of the time company paid. Yes CA deserve a higher pay rate. But why? Because they have more seniority within the company and have about 75% more responsibility over the FO. But that last 25% could be a matter of life and death. So my argument is we are all pilots in the end so there shouldn't be a 100k difference between an FO's pay and CA pay. That was a great incentive to get your but over to the left seat ASAP but we are in kind of a five year chrisis now and people are seat locked for a long time.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post