$100,000 Minimum Regional First Officer
08-17-2015, 08:39 PM
#151
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,137
I was literally thinking about this earlier today, its as if you stole the thoughts from my head. The 50 seater jets will be going away eventually, and replaced with these 76 seater "regional" jets. Now 4 legs would be equal to 304 passengers carried daily, assuming a full flight each leg of course. Compare that to the previous 200 passengers carried daily. One argument for the large pay disparity has always been the smaller size of the aircraft, and the lesser amount of passengers carried. How then is it rationalized that pilots should carry more passengers in larger aircraft for the same, or less pay (see recent concessionary contracts)?
With the internet, and social media, why aren't we doing more and standing up for ourselves? How hard would it be to start some sort of grass roots movement? Teachers can shut down schools, and UNION construction workers can disrupt my commute by shutting down construction projects if they don't get their yearly raises. A guy driving a very complex vibratory asphalt compactor makes more than some new regional captains, and most work seasonally.
With the internet, and social media, why aren't we doing more and standing up for ourselves? How hard would it be to start some sort of grass roots movement? Teachers can shut down schools, and UNION construction workers can disrupt my commute by shutting down construction projects if they don't get their yearly raises. A guy driving a very complex vibratory asphalt compactor makes more than some new regional captains, and most work seasonally.
It just doesn't matter. You can fly a A380 around at Mesa and you are still only going to get 20,000 per year. You signed up for it. They know you will do it. Stop comparing yourself to others. Teachers and asphalt contractors are obviously more in demand than you are or know how to negotiate better. Alpa is begging your company to kick you in the face.
08-17-2015, 08:43 PM
#152
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Posts: 2,137
Reality is that you are brainless... Pilots have much more power than you think...The only thing holding them back in the U.S is the lack of organization...If everyone was to walk off the job for even one day- It would literally shut down America....This is what needs to happen...As far as Doctors and Lawyers, I know plenty of idiots in law and medicine so please do not even go there...
Bottom line regional pilots are too young and dumb to even know what they are talking about. Most of you guys see this as a "problem" but the truth is this has been going on for 30 years. The only thing different is a new batch of pilots to say "hey this sucks". You'll soon be through it too and there will be a new batch of pilots coming in saying "hey we should do something about this".
Bottom line, pilots like to complain and b*tch alot but when it comes time to actually do anything meaningful, thats for someone else to do.
But don't worry, you are all going to get your big raises soon. And it has nothing to do with all your complaining, the union, or what your worth. It will simply boil down the lack of pilots and airlines having to compete for your talents. So when it comes, don't think you or alpa did anything at all special.
08-17-2015, 09:29 PM
#153
On Reserve
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 15
Your point is? Not a single pilot in that picture will ever fly for a US airline company. Ever. Most of them are under 99 year contracts to their respective sponsor company. If they fail any part of training, they will return home to work off that debt to said company by doing other jobs within the company.
They will go home and sit in the jumpseat and "observe" and maybe work the radios for around a year. They also start at around $60-70k US. Most of them also had trouble flying a Seminole.
They will go home and sit in the jumpseat and "observe" and maybe work the radios for around a year. They also start at around $60-70k US. Most of them also had trouble flying a Seminole.
08-18-2015, 06:58 AM
#155
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 455
That's beside the point. See it's not about me, it's about you. Imagine if the RJ's were at mainline. If you found out you were flying the lowest paid jet, but making 94% of the profits, you would demand fair compensation. This is what the senior guys fear, and the reason that flying was given away. As a result, the senior pilots, instead of empowering the junior folks, got to deposit that money into their own accounts. Does that make sense?
What happened in the past is certainly mainline's fault, but if you read and understand UA scope, along with a number of soundbites from UA Network Planning, then you would see that indeed we are shrinking UAX and adding block hours back to mainline.
You've mentioned that split before, numerous times, and I'm sorry but it just destroys your credibility when you do so. Which is a shame, because you mostly make good arguments for many things.
I know you've quoted the (United I think? Whatever) official filings that "prove under penalty of intergalactic perjury" that 94% of their profits came from their express operation. I don't believe it, and neither does anyone else. Anyone. Not even you.
You really think an airline operation that has 800ish mainline planes and 400ish RJ's averaging about a quarter the size and carrying a quarter to less of the pax and almost none of the cargo could possibly make 94% of the profits? If so, why are all the airlines parking them and transferring block hours to their mainline? So they can make 94% less profits? You really think there is enough pilot or total labor cost differential to fuel that much of a profit differential? If so, from where? RJ's, even the big ones, are an expensive seat and labor per pax cost is actually fairly high.
You really, actually think, that these global behemoths printing billions per quarter are really just small regional powerhouse ticket agents carrying the deadweight of a massive global alliance?
I don't care what spreadsheet or filing form you think you saw, there is no way regionals are makins 94% of billion(s) per quarter per airline in profits. No way. And you don't believe that either.
Fred Reid, is that you?
I know you've quoted the (United I think? Whatever) official filings that "prove under penalty of intergalactic perjury" that 94% of their profits came from their express operation. I don't believe it, and neither does anyone else. Anyone. Not even you.
You really think an airline operation that has 800ish mainline planes and 400ish RJ's averaging about a quarter the size and carrying a quarter to less of the pax and almost none of the cargo could possibly make 94% of the profits? If so, why are all the airlines parking them and transferring block hours to their mainline? So they can make 94% less profits? You really think there is enough pilot or total labor cost differential to fuel that much of a profit differential? If so, from where? RJ's, even the big ones, are an expensive seat and labor per pax cost is actually fairly high.
You really, actually think, that these global behemoths printing billions per quarter are really just small regional powerhouse ticket agents carrying the deadweight of a massive global alliance?
I don't care what spreadsheet or filing form you think you saw, there is no way regionals are makins 94% of billion(s) per quarter per airline in profits. No way. And you don't believe that either.
Fred Reid, is that you?
The person who wrote those financial reports sure believes it. Look I don't know why you are mad at me, I'm simply showing what the data presents. Do I believe it? Well, I know that the airline pricing model is so convoluted that it doesn't surprise if this was the case.
To explain why mainline is getting rid of regional jets is very simple, they aren't, they are dumping unprofitable routes. Where demand is strong, they are switching to mainline planes. On the surface it appears that mainline is recapturing flying. However, they are simply consolidating flying so they can better utilize the aircraft they have in the profitable routes.
The pilot shortage is not yet an issue, but will be in a year or two(this is a direct quote from management at my last recurrent).
It may be hard for some to believe, but legacy's don't make money in the routes they compete with LCC's in. You have to have pricing power in a market to make money, that is business 101. If you look at the legacy network as a whole, the places they have pricing power, is where the RJ's are.
It may be hard for some to believe, but legacy's don't make money in the routes they compete with LCC's in. You have to have pricing power in a market to make money, that is business 101. If you look at the legacy network as a whole, the places they have pricing power, is where the RJ's are.
You're business 101 lesson is laughable. We compete very well in markets served by LCC's, and we are finally starting to move RJ's where they belong...serving smaller markets or additional capacity in medium to large markets.
It defies logic, and I know what you are saying, but here is maybe a video that describes what I'm talking about. Fast forward in this CNBC video http://www.hulu.com/watch/46550 to around 1:27 min, where he says the 767 transcon only makes $200. Just for reference, almost every RJ flight makes tens of thousands of dollars. Is it still so hard to believe?
I think the best way to sum this up, is Southwest has destroyed the Legacy model. It's now just a large operation that holds market share to feed the regionals.
I think the best way to sum this up, is Southwest has destroyed the Legacy model. It's now just a large operation that holds market share to feed the regionals.
Your last paragraph about WN, how many regional partners does WN use to hold up their profits?
Last edited by 24/48; 08-18-2015 at 07:11 AM.
08-18-2015, 08:31 AM
#156
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
No, it was exactly your point. You were attempting to say that UAX was responsible for 94% of the profit on 19% of the revenue. It was an attempt to point out that we need you to make this operation work. Sorry, but that dog don't hunt.
What happened in the past is certainly mainline's fault, but if you read and understand UA scope, along with a number of soundbites from UA Network Planning, then you would see that indeed we are shrinking UAX and adding block hours back to mainline.
Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner!!! Could not have said it better myself, thanks gloopy!
The person? Try the people, as in several at Willis Tower who put those numbers together, and they do so without any emotional input i.e.. "what they believe". Sure, the regionals add to the bottom line, but you are myopic to think that a multi-billion dollar airline teeters on profitability based on it's regional product.
For someone who posted the financials for UAL, I would think you would also have a good idea of the UAL fleet plan and order book. UAX will continue to shed aircraft while mainline will continue to accept deliveries. Every month we see additional city pairs that were once UAX put back on mainline. Cities like MSN, BNA, ORF, MEM, MDT.... We aren't shedding routes, we are adding capacity to many existing routes.
And you trust your management on that statement? The industry is feeling the affects of a pilot shortage right now, it'll be worse next year and the year after.
You're business 101 lesson is laughable. We compete very well in markets served by LCC's, and we are finally starting to move RJ's where they belong...serving smaller markets or additional capacity in medium to large markets.
First off, and I can only speak for UA, we don't do many, if any, 767's doing transcons these days. We are converting some 777's to a domestic configuration for some transcon work, and I can assure you that, having flown both the 767 and the 777, the 777 is much more efficient and with it's domestic configuration will be able to operate a lower CASM. Your "RJ makes tens of thousands of dollars" theory is, again, myopic in that you guys operate in a fixed cost system, a vacuum if you will. Outside that vacuum, a'la Indy Air and XJT, the RJ is best suited for one way flights to Victorville.
Your last paragraph about WN, how many regional partners does WN use to hold up their profits?
What happened in the past is certainly mainline's fault, but if you read and understand UA scope, along with a number of soundbites from UA Network Planning, then you would see that indeed we are shrinking UAX and adding block hours back to mainline.
Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner!!! Could not have said it better myself, thanks gloopy!
The person? Try the people, as in several at Willis Tower who put those numbers together, and they do so without any emotional input i.e.. "what they believe". Sure, the regionals add to the bottom line, but you are myopic to think that a multi-billion dollar airline teeters on profitability based on it's regional product.
For someone who posted the financials for UAL, I would think you would also have a good idea of the UAL fleet plan and order book. UAX will continue to shed aircraft while mainline will continue to accept deliveries. Every month we see additional city pairs that were once UAX put back on mainline. Cities like MSN, BNA, ORF, MEM, MDT.... We aren't shedding routes, we are adding capacity to many existing routes.
And you trust your management on that statement? The industry is feeling the affects of a pilot shortage right now, it'll be worse next year and the year after.
You're business 101 lesson is laughable. We compete very well in markets served by LCC's, and we are finally starting to move RJ's where they belong...serving smaller markets or additional capacity in medium to large markets.
First off, and I can only speak for UA, we don't do many, if any, 767's doing transcons these days. We are converting some 777's to a domestic configuration for some transcon work, and I can assure you that, having flown both the 767 and the 777, the 777 is much more efficient and with it's domestic configuration will be able to operate a lower CASM. Your "RJ makes tens of thousands of dollars" theory is, again, myopic in that you guys operate in a fixed cost system, a vacuum if you will. Outside that vacuum, a'la Indy Air and XJT, the RJ is best suited for one way flights to Victorville.
Your last paragraph about WN, how many regional partners does WN use to hold up their profits?
08-18-2015, 01:23 PM
#157
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 455
If you parked all of UAX tomorrow, without replacing it, you would lose 94% of your operating profit. That is a fact. If it is not, then post the hard proof, because so far it is only you who is offering opinion. I never said you needed us to make it work, that is you putting words in my mouth. What I actually said is that the profits from small jet flying has been shifted to a place where pilots can't get at it.
What you fail to acknowledge is that in reality UAL would never "park" UAX. We need the lift plain and simple. Could we do it at mainline with the same profit? No, you have me there. Could we do it profitably? With out a doubt, and most likely we'll continue to see a shift from UAX back to UAL. Can you dispute my claims that UAX block hours have been cut and that mainline block hours have increased? I have to warn you though, I deal with the UAL block hours first hand every month.
At the end of the day my contract controls UA scope. When it comes to survival it is you that needs us (or whatever carrier you guys contract for) and not the other way around. Throw out all the economics you want, but you're not fooling anyone in to believing you're the most valuable part of the operation while contributing 19% of the revenue.
Have a nice day!
08-18-2015, 01:25 PM
#158
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 471
If you parked all of UAX tomorrow, without replacing it, you would lose 94% of your operating profit. That is a fact. If it is not, then post the hard proof, because so far it is only you who is offering opinion. I never said you needed us to make it work, that is you putting words in my mouth. What I actually said is that the profits from small jet flying has been shifted to a place where pilots can't get at it.
08-18-2015, 01:50 PM
#159
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Posts: 122
If you parked all of UAX tomorrow, without replacing it, you would lose 94% of your operating profit. That is a fact. If it is not, then post the hard proof, because so far it is only you who is offering opinion. I never said you needed us to make it work, that is you putting words in my mouth. What I actually said is that the profits from small jet flying has been shifted to a place where pilots can't get at it.
Which orfice are you pulling this "fact" from? 10k's don't break down the operating income. Just looking at the the regional operating revenue vs total operating income, I doubt the 25-30% of the regional revenue is going to translate into 94% of mainline operating income. Now I'm sure mainline extracts a pretty penny from their regional partners but 94% is EXTREMELY far fetched.
08-18-2015, 04:26 PM
#160
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Oh, I'm sorry, for a minute there I thought we were talking about the reality of the situation rather than a cut-out of reality that, when put in the context that best fits your position, is indeed true. The phrase "perception being reality" comes to mind.
What you fail to acknowledge is that in reality UAL would never "park" UAX. We need the lift plain and simple. Could we do it at mainline with the same profit? No, you have me there. Could we do it profitably? With out a doubt, and most likely we'll continue to see a shift from UAX back to UAL. Can you dispute my claims that UAX block hours have been cut and that mainline block hours have increased? I have to warn you though, I deal with the UAL block hours first hand every month.
At the end of the day my contract controls UA scope. When it comes to survival it is you that needs us (or whatever carrier you guys contract for) and not the other way around. Throw out all the economics you want, but you're not fooling anyone in to believing you're the most valuable part of the operation while contributing 19% of the revenue.
Have a nice day!
What you fail to acknowledge is that in reality UAL would never "park" UAX. We need the lift plain and simple. Could we do it at mainline with the same profit? No, you have me there. Could we do it profitably? With out a doubt, and most likely we'll continue to see a shift from UAX back to UAL. Can you dispute my claims that UAX block hours have been cut and that mainline block hours have increased? I have to warn you though, I deal with the UAL block hours first hand every month.
At the end of the day my contract controls UA scope. When it comes to survival it is you that needs us (or whatever carrier you guys contract for) and not the other way around. Throw out all the economics you want, but you're not fooling anyone in to believing you're the most valuable part of the operation while contributing 19% of the revenue.
Have a nice day!
Also, it makes sense to replace 0% profit 50 seaters, with 0% profit mainline jets. SO yes, mainline block hours would increase. Yet, they added multi-billion dollar cash cow 76 seat jets.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
