fosters

Great post.

BoilerUP

Give it a few years and you'll see a push to give RPA operators an ATP based on their "flight experience".

Packrat

Breezy,

If it isn't about supply and demand how come some of the regionals are starting to cancel flights due to lack of pilots (or so they say!)?

If that happens enough, they may decide to pay higher entry level wages. Until then, why would you go to a poorly paid Regional when you could start at $45 an hour at a cargo carrier? That's what one is currently paying that is hiring now.

BoilerUP

In one since it is, in another it is not.

It is supply and demand because the supply of pilots willing to work for current regional compensation is now lagging demand for those pilots.

It isn't supply and demand because fee-for-departure CPAs were negotiated with a certain calculated labor cost, which provides expenses plus a certain profit margin...which is generally less than we expect to see as return from our 401k. Those contracts have fixed fees without a mechanism allowing for increased payments if the partner's costs go up. As such, increases in costs eat into the margin, and a substantial increase in labor costs (due to the aforementioned supply and demand issue) could easily lead to zero profit or losses...neither of which are sustainable.

Put another way: some regionals can absorb the increased costs...others cannot. Those that cannot will eventually cease as a going concern, resulting in 1. some or all of flying allocated to surviving regionals which would strengthen their pricing ability, or 2. some or all of that flying simply going away in favor of larger mainline planes flying less frequency.

fosters

Oooo oooo is it Amerijet? Please tell me you are talking about Amerijet! I have some great stories about taking a dump in the back on cargo because they don't have lavs on board. And that is just round one.

NineGturn

You don't "own" anything...you are a "socialist." I don't mean to insult you but you have summed up the entire point of my argument against structured labor...I just wasn't going to say it myself so I'm glad you did, even if you intended to be sarcastic. I do like the the term "rugged individualist" though you're the first person ever to call me that. (i'm not a big fan of President Hoover's philosophy on social darwinism but I'm not a socialist either).

Your argument for seniority lists is much the same an argument for socialism by political leaders..."it's for the good of the people so shut up and deal with it" ...as you sit there in your palace. I will give you credit for offering the option to take it or leave it, however, as it shows you aren't a communist at least. OK...this is getting political so....

Ha! :-) I have worked both sides of the fence and obviously I'm trying to stir the pot...somebody has to...but my intentions are for the benefit of pilots. I want to "stir the pot" and see what flies out, that's how things change.

Yes, some subjective test. And yes, there will be favoritism although this is why most companies have anti-nepotism rules. Don't tell me such favoritism doesn't already exist in the industry. The managements nephew is ten years younger than you and gets hired years ahead of you and now will be senior to you for the rest of your life despite that he sucks in the cockpit, has half your flight time when he upgrades, and is a huge PITA to work with...the seniority list now serves to protect him and his mediocre skills after his uncle has long retired.

Favoritism is a fact of life and if you don't have it, you have to compete a bit harder to succeed...seniority lists or not.

This just deserves a ***??

I see a lot of other pilots here who's entire argument is that "you suck because you're only flying an RJ" which is something I see a lot from my colleagues and it disgusts me. I put in a few years at the "regionals" in my day but they didn't have jets back then and only made up about 10-15% of the pilot work force so the numbers worked out OK...not to mention the fact that we got paid more flying turboprops than jet pilots are getting today (adjusted for years at company and inflation). I actually bought my first house while flying as a captain in a 19 seater. A nice house too.

Back then it was accepted that you worked for lower pay in a turboprop, built a bit of PC time and then moved to a major. It usually only took a few years but I left just about the same time as guys like Bryan Bedford came on the scene and started to turn the process into what it is today. The problem is they exploited the process and trapped pilots in these jobs and are now flying large jets with experienced crews and using the same business model as the old turboprop operators.

Guys like Bedford took full advantage of the structured seniority list system that had been copied from the larger carriers and fully exploited it. Blaming the pilots is exactly what he wants you to do and they actually say it in public. The last thing they want you to blame is the seniority system because that's what made them rich and made you poor.

These guys at the top of a major airline that advocate the seniority system really are just sticking their heads in the sand and have no idea what life would be like without it. I've said that chances are very good they'd be making even more money than they do today...but to them it's just relative...they make more than you so screw you.

Actually "supply and demand" will absolutely solve the problem... this is America. If the regionals can't fill cockpits they can't fly and fulfill their contracts so either the majors will fly the routes and planes themselves (and hire the pilots they need to do it) or they will renegotiate the contracts to allow the regionals to operate. They will basically do whichever is more economically viable...that's how free market works. Pilot pay is only a small part of how the "regionals" keep their costs down so it may still be cheaper to outsource the flying rather than do it themselves, even if the pilots are paid more. Ultimately they will pass the cost on to the flying public. The airlines exist to make money, not to screw over pilots

Exactly!

But...all that aside...The airlines could actually lower their costs and pay pilots more at the same time if they stopped wasting so much on training through these entitlement upgrades based solely on seniority. Pilots who cross bid equipment every couple years cost the company more money than they're worth...that would have to change.

My intention with this thread wasn't really to start a discussion about who is to blame for low pay at entry level positions but rather what is to blame and why we need to see past what we take for granted. It's amazing how quickly pilots forget that they can lose their jobs at the top and when they do...they are just another FNG starting at the bottom.

GogglesPisano

Keep fighting the good fight, 9G. Hope it works out for you someday.

Jay5150

I've read alot of ignorant posts. Many motivated by this or that. The above is by far....the MOST ignorant, misinformed, bassakward, stupid, uneducated thing I've ever read on these forums. The Industry bounced back within months????? Really?

OK.

Maybe I'm wrong " I fly a CRJ"

Break down for me how the industry "bounced back within months".

I'll write you a book on how it didn't.....and why....

FYI.....you wouldn't like this book.

Flying Boxes

Bounced back within months? Really? Did you just say that?

Who were you flying for on 9/11?

AtlCSIP

If the entry level pay went up significantly, the end result would eventually be an INCREASE of the number of pilots in to the profession which would, due to the laws of supply and demand, bring top wages down. You would end up with far more pilots willing to work for far less at the top end. In the long run, it would be cheaper for the company to dump the union and dump the seniority list, and raise first year pay to something sustainable.