I'm simply asking for an explanation as to why this system would be better than the status quo.
Here's what *is* the status quo: For the most part, in the airline industry if you have been with a company for any significant period of time, there is a *huge* financial penalty tied to leaving your current employer, unless of course you are fortunate enough to get hired at a company where the
starting pay is similar to the pay rate you left, but that is uncommon. So, if your employer is treating you like $hit, you have a tough choice: Suck it up and be treated like $hit, or leave and take a really big hit in the pocketbook. Now, this concept is not lost on the employer. They *know* that pilots are reluctant to leave because they would start over at maybe 1/3 of what they are making now. That knowledge gives them a tremendous amount of power over the pilots. Not so in most other fields. Let's say you're an engineer with your PE certificate and XX years of experience in say structural design. Now, if you don't like what your company is doing to you, you can leave for a similar position. If you play your cards right, you can leave for a position that pays better. You sure as hell do not start over as a entry level CAD operator at your next company if you have been the engineer responsible for putting your stamp and signature on the final design of highway bridges for 10 years at your previous job.
Now the folks who support the seniority system all have bought into the same myth. The myth is that flying is some how very different that other jobs, that we need the seniority system because flying is not like any other job. You can see a classic example of all the reasons in ackattacler's post. Now, his post has legitimate concerns. Certainly. Nothing to argue there. The myth is that other fields don't have these same exact same factors. Bull$hit. Ther is nothing special about flying airplanes in this regards. All other industries and field have the same factors.
You think a Doctor at a cost conscious HMO isn't pressured by his management to cut down the number of lab tests he orders on a patient, against his professional judgment? You think that the Doctor who does cut his labwork to the bare minimum might be looked on as more of a company man? You think that the bridge engineer doesn't get pressure from above to accept a questionable finite element analysis of the strength of a new type of attachment bracket, rather then to do more expensive actual laboratory strength testing? You think that a nurse in a hospital doesn't face the same sort of personality conflicts with supervisors? That a supervisor might give her (or him) a bad review, merely because that supervisor doesn't like the nurse? You think that the evaluation isn't based on some pretty subjective, hard to quantify factors, things that are certainly hard to disprove? You think that nursing supervisors never lie about subordinates they don't like in order to sabotage thier careers? You think that plumbers and electricians don't occasionally encounter pressure to cut corners, to ignore some of the code requirements, when it's expensive to comply and an inspector isn't likely to catch it?
Let's say that the previously mentioned Nurse has a problem with her supervisor, the nurse is a good nurse with years of experience in neonatal intensive care. For some reason, the supervisor has it in for her, makes her life hell, for purely personal reasons. That nurse can apply to work at the hospital across town, or in the next city. And she's going to be assigned to the Neonatal Intensive care unit, at a salary commensurate to her training, skills and experience. She's
not going to start out folding bedsheets (or whatever it is that new nurses with no experience do) Contrast that with a long time captain, experienced, skilled and wise, who finds himself the subject of a personality conflict with the chief pilot, though no fault of his own. He either puts up with the $hit from the chief pilot, or he leaves and starts out at the bottom rung elsewhere, making a small fraction of what he was making before.
Sure, we can all read ackattacker's post and nod our heads sagely, like he's said something really meaningful, but anyone who thinks those things are somehow unique to aviation is just hopelessly ignorant. These things are universal to
every field of employment, since the first caveman paid another caveman three polished stones to dig a fire pit for him. All other fields and industries have the same or very similar problems, and many involve human life and public safety, yet most are able to navigate those hazards without relying on the crutch of a seniority system. The idea that these are somehow unique to aviation is at the same time naive and arrogant.
There are only three groups who are benefited by a seniority system:
1) The company. The fact that there is a strong financial disadvantage to "voting with your feet" gives airline management the upper hand in employer-employee relations.
2) Unions. Because the seniority system gives management the upper hand, the unions become more attractive to pilots who have to deal with a management at a company who has the upper hand because the pilots can’t "vote with their feet". So the makes unions necessary where they would otherwise be necessary.
3) Pilots with poor skills or a lack of experience. If you know your skills or experience won’t allow you to be competitive for advancement, the seniority system will benefit you.
People who are do not benefit from the seniority system:
Pilots who have average skills and average experience (whatever average means for your corner of aviation) If your qualifications are average, on the average, your advancement will be average in a competitive system. So seniority doesn’t enhance your advancement, but it certainly does weaken your position in employer-employee relations by removing the option to "vote with your feet" (or at least make that option unattractive)
People who are impaired by the seniority system:
Pilots of above average skills or experience. In a competitive environment those pilots will advance above others, in a seniority system, they are held back.
So, which group do you think you fall into?
