baseball

Does SWA hire low time CFI’s? Any special programs like that?

CousinEddie

Take an SWA hire in the late 90s vs. a UAL hire at the same time. Which one is more likely to have the option to say “that’s enough” at age 60? Guess hard work can pay off.

Roper92

Weak sauce. That had nothing to do with pilot productivity.

pilotgolfer

If CFI means cocky fighter idiot, then yes. 🤠

CousinEddie

Oh really? Guess you weren’t around for the contract “adjustments” in Chapter 11 to make us more productive, like SWA. All for much less pay, backward movement, crummy work rules and so on. It went on for over 10 years. Find me a single SWA pilot hired in the 90s that would have rather had a taste of that sauce.

terminal

Fortunately the trends are different
look at a SWA guy hired in the early 90s versus one hired in 2009

SWA gave stock, had insane growth due to the legacies shrinking/bankruptcy, 2-4 year upgrades...while there is still a lot of room for growth, it won't be as insane as it was, and a 2009 hire won't see the same benefits that an early 90s hire had...no stock (other than the discounted purchase option), 10-12 year upgrades...it just is not the same...nor is it a fair comparison.

Same with UAL...guys hired in 91 had a much better career than guys hired in 97...just like a 2013-14 hire at United will probably have a better career than a 99 hire (Inshallah)

And the further you get removed from Herb, the more bean counter-esque mentality you will see...who who knows what will happen 2-3 CEOs from now. 10 billion more in buybacks? 5 more years for a new contract? (just pointing out that airline management is airline management is airline management)

SWA management still acts like the little engine that could, reaps billions off the backs of their employees, and still has them make sacrifices to keep costs down. Pilots will only take that for so long...we saw a little bit of that in 2016.


The bottom line is it doesn't effing matter. Guys take this crap so personally. At the end of the day it is just a paycheck. I enjoy how I earn mine, like the folks I work with, and I prepare and save for the future.

Roper92

That’s nice, but again it was not United’s lack of pilot productivity that sent them into bankruptcy.

cal73

It’s entirely not my call to make but as far as deciding between UAL Vs. SWA, I would go to the one with fewer braggarts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

terminal

I have never flown with a UA pilot who has felt compelled to show me their W-2 or tell me how many TFPs they’re earning on this trip.

SUX4U

Christ sakes! Didn’t someone already say something along the lines of past performance is not an indicator for future outcomes? The industry is very different vs late 90’s/early 2000’s. United is not the same as it was then as well.

When times are tough in the future we won’t be shoveling money into the fireplace with empty gas guzzling 747’s plying the skies or inefficient 737’s, 727’s or DC-10’s breaking down every other leg.

We don’t fly routes year round anymore for prestige either. If it’s not working we axe it completely. Poor performance during a certain season and down it goes for the slow months. 777-200/300 looking to be too much lift? 787 to fill the revenue gap.

Sure we still have a revenue issue that needs to be corrected. Maybe we can finally get that resolved, maybe we can’t. Either way, United looks to be far better of as a viable company vs days of the past. I think it’s reasonable to recognize that things can go south very fast in this industry and nobody can be sure that airline A is going to be better over a 20-30 year career than airline B, regardless of past performance from a given point in time.