UAL hiring soon?

[IronCityBlue]

blame game II

Man I hope Surplus1 doesn't come after me for copyright infringement for this annoyingly long multipage post! :erm:

We stopped it during our last "negotiation" when Judge Wedoff had a loaded gun to our heads and our management wanted to split the airline in half AND have >70 seat RJ's flown by our regionals. They got neither. Expect more in '09.

If the situation was as precarious as you say, why didn't management simply do it? What stopped them? The pay cuts? The pension dump? Those were happening anyway were they not? So how exactly was further outsourcing stopped? While the answer to that question may serve as a nice history lesson, it in no way will refute my original contention. The loosening of scope is a one way check valve. On any given day it will either be loosened or it will remain the same. It will never, EVER be reversed, even in the best of times, because no legacy pilot group will pay to fight that fight. 2009 will come and go and, best case, you will be right where you are now with scope. You will never see an E170/175/RJ700/705 and many others at mainline.

ALPA does a lot of good. ALPA has done some bad. I chalk the whole RJ scope thing in the latter category. Now it's just damage control.

Agree to outsource the narrowbody baby-9's and Fokkers to the lowest bidding ACMI lift provider/subcontractors in existance then blame start up LCC's narrowbody pay scales for destroying the profession. Yes, I agree, we can chalk that up in the latter category.

I'd agree with it too. Maybe you JetBlue guys ought to lead the charge on that one? You can serve as an example for the rest of the non-union carriers.

There is talk of a union at JB, both ALPA and in house. ALPA was even gaining some monentum until the Airways integration fiasco. Again, another 20 page thread all by itself, but bottom line is I'd put the over/under on it happening this year now at around 35-40% ALPA, 49-60% in house. Just my swag though. Either way we did make improvements this year, and we will have a review of the industry towards the end of the year for another comparison. We are not where we need to be yet, but we are light years ahead of where we were when we started, and where VA and SB are now.

That's because they had to [match/undercut start up/LCC rates] or they wouldn't have been able to compete with the JetBlue, Airtran's, and Frontier's of the world with their discount airline pilot rates.

Again, what's different now? There have ALWAYS been start up/LCC's of the world, including the now pilot pay saviors Southwest, who for decades worked longer and harder for less. Why is it now all the sudden, every legacy is capped by the pay of every new start up? I mean, I can see why its in the management playbook to preach that, but why are so many pilots all the sudden believeing it?

So if ALPA hadn't "signed off on every single concessionary deal" to bring our hourly rates DOWN TO YOURS, we'd be out of business because we'd be slowly bleeding to death to the tune of about 1B a year. Get it?

Got it. Its JB rates. And to think for a moment I though that billion dollar swing had to do with fuel prices almost trippling, the dot com 90's going "poof", the last minute business traveller willing to pay anything anytime out of his unlimited travel expense account going away and a recession, a war and a new security paradigm burden the likes of which our nation had never seen. I now see it is primarily our fault. It is we who set the pay ceiling, and you who set the floor.

In any case, good discussion. Its nice when we can hash out issues, and even point a few fingers when appropriate, while still keeping it civil even as we both sit here scratchig our heads wondering what's the best way to restore and secure our segment of this insane industry.

 

[Frank Lorenzo]

I don't know the mins, but I'm going to guess that it'll be 250 hrs w/commercial & instrument.

Having some breasts and a really dark tan will also increase your chances significantly.

 

[MarineGrunt]

How many of you regional CA's are thinking of making the jump? By taking a quick look at airlinepilotcentral payscales, it seems like it would take quite a while to make up the pay difference, not to mention the QOL.

 

[Andy]

Having some breasts and a really dark tan will also increase your chances significantly.

Frank, do you think that's limited to UAL? News flash, bubba. The female and minority pilots that I know have been HEAVILY recruited by all majors. I know plenty of female and minority pilots who have gone to AMR, DAL, NWA, CAL, etc. A few of them told me that they were contacted by their HR department asking them to recruit their friends. This isn't a UAL issue.

 

[Ottersphere]

United Hiring

I spoke to a couple United pilots last week who seemed to think they'd be hiring, or at least interviewing, by the end of the summer. That coincides with what I have observed and been told by my United connections in recent months. UAL has a lot of appeal for me too, primarily because of their bases and my disdain for commuting. However I am nervous about how pro-merger the management seems to be. They don't seem to really care about the employees or the customers. Guess only time will tell.

jr

 

[stillflyn]

I appreciate the info, do you have any word on what they will be looking for in newhire quals? Will any United Express carrier pilots have preference? PIC turbine requirements? Thanks

I don't care one way or the other but why would UAL give preference to a pilot from a United Express carrier?

 

[ewrord]

Probably for the same reason CAL gives preference to Continental Express pilots and DAL gives preference to Delta Connection Pilots.

 

[ualdriver]

This is a long post, and Iron as much as I enjoy a good debate, I don’t have the time to respond to such lengthy posts frequently, and I imagine you don’t either. But to summarize, I just find it hypocritical for you as a JetBlue pilot to say that you’re concerned about Virgin and SkyBus pay rates as you stated in a previous post. You’re probably concerned about SB and Virgin because these airlines could grow, reach critical mass, and ultimately drag all of our rates down. That is why I assume you are concerned about them. That’s what concerns me, too. But then below, you spend a couple of pages debating me, point by point, as to why JB/LCC pay rates are NOT the proximate cause of the decline of all narrowbody pay rates in the U.S. at airlines such as mine at UAL. If you really believe that the JB’s and the LCC’s were not responsible for the spiral of airline pilot pay, work rules, and retirement that has occurred in the past few years, then why are you concerned about Virgin and Skybus as you wrote? Why are you spending so much time trying to convince me that the LCC’s had nothing to do with the current pathetic state of industry narrowbody pay rates? SB and Virgin are only doing what JetBlue and the LCC’s did in the late 90’s and early 2000’s and neither JB nor the LCC’s have done harm, correct?



So you're of the opinion that your massive worldwide network airline is limited to less than a 3% premium over a relatively miniscule, mostly regional LCC? Wow, OK.

What does that have to do with anything? The question was do you think if JetBlue came up with an industry leading rate for ANYTHING that the union/ALPA carriers would undercut it in order to obtain some sort of economic advantage? The answer is more than likely a resounding NO!.


I love a good statistical challenge. Let's see, that puts you as a 10 year narrowbody captain with the pay rate you quoted covering all 737's and A320 family aircraft…………………….. You're right, I don't go to your union meetings, so maybe you are. But good friends of mine who do go to your union meetings agree more with my pessimisim than your optimisim on this issue. I honestly hope I am wrong and you are right though.

We don’t outsource 76 seat jets, Iron. 70 seats is the scope limit. Iron, you guys are flying a 100 seat jet for pathetic wages. Period. You can argue and make points about RJ’s and outsourcing and whether or not UAL will fly them for 737 rates, etc., etc., but the point is that it isn’t an RJ, the rates are pathetic, and your group will do NOTHING to fix the problem. And if UAL had any hope of flying an E190 for 737 wages, they’re gone now. Partially thanks to you guys who single-handedly reset the rate for a 100 seat jet. Your arguments above are some convoluted attempt to rationalize the E190 rates at your airline. Sorry, I don’t buy it. I don’t think anyone else does, either. Ask them.


So exactly which new start up LCC’s would you say set the roof on narrowbody compensation? You're limited to within a few percent of the cheapest LCC/start up out there? Really? Then the ONLY answer is re-regulation, with a twist. It will be the government's job to prohibit all new entrants and force all flying to the seniority lists of the legacies. All pilots can then get in line to get hired at them. Any airlines that are allowed to start up must match the highest pilot compensation package out there (and pay 12th year pay too, otherwise that would be an unfair advantage). Now the trick is, how do you propose we accomplish that?

Disagree. There should be zero regulation. It would just be really, really nice to see the JetBlue pilots actually take some control of their situation AND STOP DRAGGING THE BAR DOWN. Is it too much to ask for maybe the JetBlue pilot group to actually raise A320 rates, for example? Just a little? How about a lousy 3%/per year adjustment to your A320 pay scale since the latest one was introduced? This convoluted argument about regulation is again another attempt to rationalize what you guys are doing. Which is nothing.


The transcon turn issue again? Seriously? That's a 20 page thread by itself so I will simply say that whatever miniscule economic advantage JB would get if that were to be approved would be matched by pretty much every airline in the country in a matter of months………. But in the end it doesn't really matter because we end up bowing down to Europe and Canada with these types of things eventually anyway. But yeah, JB=transcon turns. Right.

Great. Another JetBlue guy who thinks these transcon turns would be good for the industry. Yup, no potential for abuse with that idea. I’ll agree to let the 20 page thread speak for itself.

 

[ualdriver]

OK, so let's say ALPA is able to recruit VA, SB and other start ups. We both know they are not going to do a wildcat strike unless and until they get "United plus" or even UAL book. They WILL be significantly less, and ALPA will sign off on it. Now what?

Actually, if they got ALPA on the property they would then be in contract negotiations. I would bet the pilot group will want something resembling industry standard rates, and would negotiate accordingly. Wanna bet that if Skybus got ALPA (or anyone!) that their rates wouldn’t be 65K for an Airbus Captain anymore?


Now you're scaring me because I've heard that rant before, only every other time its come from the mouths of airline management.

Maybe because it’s true? It’s not wrong just because you heard it from an airline manager. As pilots, we’re businessmen, too, whether we like it or not. We have to make sure that what we ask for is obtainable and sustainable from a business standpoint as well. So sometimes the “rant” needs to be taken into consideration when considering the future direction of both the profession and one’s company. IMO, EVERY pilot should be familiar with their company’s financials, and those of their competitors. I am, and that’s why it concerns me when I see any pilot group lowering the bar. It’s extremely difficult for carriers with lower paid pilots, mechanics, flight attendants, etc., to compete with another with higher labor costs. There just isn’t the pad in most airline’s bottom lines (weak net margins are common, even in good years) to sustain that type of inequity.

If someone starts an airline today flying between Gary and Sanford with 2 planes, you mean to tell me they dam better match your rates/rules/retirement or they'll be dragging down the profession? The VAST majority of start up airlines don't make it and never have. They have NEVER paid top established carrier rates. They don't have the revenue generating ability to do so. You can fly anyone from anywhere to everywhere, first class if they choose. To say that's not worth a significant pay premium is rediculous.

How about not a significant pay premium, but just simply something resembling the going rate? If this new airline’s product is so good that it needs to come into business, why should the company’s bottom line be subsidized by pilot rates that are 50% below the going rate? Why does an airline’s success have to be dependant upon how little they pay their pilots vs. the overall quality of their product? If JetBlue had such a revolutionary product back in the early 2000’s, why did/does it need its pilots to subsidize its bottom line? Same holds true with SB and Virgin.

If UAL is making billions per quarter in 2009, you can bet that exact reason will be the fuel the pilot group uses to shore up their demands for contractual improvements. If, on the other hand, UAL pulls out of a couple hundred cities, stops doing international, gets rid of first class and goes down to a quarter their current fleet, I suppose you would argue ALPA would be demanding the same pay as if they were a phenominaly profitable global legacy who just flew the world to the Olymics?

Absolutely. It should not matter what type of flying you’re doing. If we’re flying a 737 at UAL, I expect to be paid something resembling a 737 industry pay rate. I don’t care what size UAL becomes or how many seats they stuff in the back or remove. If my company cannot afford to do that, then it should not be in business.

 

[ualdriver]

Its not easy either because since we were the world launch customer, we came out with low initial rates with the promise that they would rise as the plane prooved itself. The legacy/regional airlines out there in many cases couldn't ink long term pay rates fast enough, based on and blaming JB's initial rates, well before they ever had even the theoretical ability to operate the plane on their respective properties. That was partially our fault, I will be the first to admit. We should have paid more all along, and you should NEVER have allowed the 170/175/RJ700/705/900, etc to be outsourced. That one little oversight has done and will do far more harm to the profession than any start up narrowbody domestic LCC pay scale ever will.

No. You as a pilot group are not raising them. You are doing nothing. Your management gave its compliant pilot group a pay raise because they wanted to. Please don’t try to pass it off as some sort of “demand” from your pilot group that your management gave in to. My understanding is that you had guys leaving in droves, and it was cheaper to pay the raise and try to stem the flow vs. keeping the pay low and losing more pilots since movement to the Airbus left seat has significantly slowed.


Blaming JB for cabotage? Nice. I actually think ALPAPAC does some good work on the Hill for our profession, but this is to big for them to fend off. Most ALPA pilots don't support ALPAPAC though, and ALPA dues can't go to defending against that, so again I'm not completely seeing your point.

Nope. Not blaming them at all. I am blaming them, however, for doing NOTHING to help fight it. Can you argue otherwise? I wish you could. It’s just another example of how JetBlue guys, IMO, are doing nothing to help raise the bar in the industry, either pay-wise or politically.

ALPA dues cannot be used for certain direct contributions, true. But do you think Prater has anyone’s ear on Capitol Hill? I know he does. Do you think he has influence as the leader of ALPA? Yup. Again, what are the JB guys doing or even planning to do?



If the situation was as precarious as you say, why didn't management simply do it? What stopped them? The pay cuts? The pension dump? Those were happening anyway were they not? So how exactly was further outsourcing stopped?

Because they couldn’t. You see, we have a union and a voice. I don’t expect you to understand that, but that’s exactly what stopped them on some of the most egregious things like outsourcing the narrowbodies or giving the regionals anything larger than 70 seats. When you have several thousand pilots on the creditor’s committee with one voice through the union, you can kill some things. Not all, but some.

Economics prevented the pension dump from being stopped. Besides, having a pension would put us at a competitive disadvantage to airlines like yours who have little or no retirement with no hope of realistically obtaining one in the future, either.

While the answer to that question may serve as a nice history lesson, it in no way will refute my original contention. The loosening of scope is a one way check valve. On any given day it will either be loosened or it will remain the same. It will never, EVER be reversed, even in the best of times, because no legacy pilot group will pay to fight that fight. 2009 will come and go and, best case, you will be right where you are now with scope. You will never see an E170/175/RJ700/705 and many others at mainline.

Probably true.

Agree to outsource the narrowbody baby-9's and Fokkers to the lowest bidding ACMI lift provider/subcontractors in existance then blame start up LCC's narrowbody pay scales for destroying the profession. Yes, I agree, we can chalk that up in the latter category.

LCC pay rates did help destroy pilot wages in the industry. Are you arguing that those JetBlue pay rates had a beneficial effect on the industry? The outsourcing of lift to the regionals didn’t drag my A320 rates down. They may have reduced the number of those aircraft needed on my property, but they didn’t drag the rate down. However, I know that my management slid Airtran, JetBlue, and Frontier pay rates across the table when we were in bankruptcy and that DEFINITELY dragged our narrowbody wages down. Sorry, there’s no doubt in my mind.


There is talk of a union at JB, both ALPA and in house. ALPA was even gaining some monentum until the Airways integration fiasco. Again, another 20 page thread all by itself, but bottom line is I'd put the over/under on it happening this year now at around 35-40% ALPA, 49-60% in house. Just my swag though. Either way we did make improvements this year, and we will have a review of the industry towards the end of the year for another comparison. We are not where we need to be yet, but we are light years ahead of where we were when we started, and where VA and SB are now.

The industry is anxiously awaiting the arrival of ANY organization at your airline and hopefully any contract that would raise the bar just a little bit to get started. We’re also anxiously awaiting pressure being applied on Capitol Hill for U.S. by JB pilots concerning airline pilot issues. Why don’t you get you guys to contribute to ALPA-PAC while we wait? What a message that would send to all the other union pilots out there if JB guys were the largest contributors.


Again, what's different now? There have ALWAYS been start up/LCC's of the world, including the now pilot pay saviors Southwest, who for decades worked longer and harder for less. Why is it now all the sudden, every legacy is capped by the pay of every new start up? I mean, I can see why its in the management playbook to preach that, but why are so many pilots all the sudden believeing it?

See above. The start-ups are different now. They fly modern equipment. They got BIG, unlike the Western Pacifics and Vanguards of the world that never reached critical mass. That’s the BIG difference. It’s just like the fare increases you hear rumblings about every once in a while lately. Either everyone matches it, or you’re at a competitive disadvantage and ALL the fares come down to the old level. No airline can afford for their pilot rates to be significantly “out of line” or they’re at too great a cost disadvantage. I don’t think most pilots understand that. That’s why I think many should spend more time reading their company’s 10Q’s and annual reports and visiting sites like bts.gov in order to learn about what effect labor rates can have on the bottom line and the competition.

 

[ualdriver]

Got it. Its JB rates. And to think for a moment I though that billion dollar swing had to do with fuel prices almost trippling, the dot com 90's going "poof", the last minute business traveller willing to pay anything anytime out of his unlimited travel expense account going away and a recession, a war and a new security paradigm burden the likes of which our nation had never seen. I now see it is primarily our fault. It is we who set the pay ceiling, and you who set the floor.

Not just JB rates, as I have posted REPEATEDLY. I’m talking JB and UA because I’m UA and you’re JB.

Fuel has nothing to do with pilot rates. We all pay for fuel so it’s a constant among all airlines. It would be ridiculous for any airline’s management to say, “our fuel costs are high so therefore your pay has to come down.” I don’t think anyone has, either. All the things you mentioned did not make UA, for example, have to pay its Airbus pilots JB pay rates. If everyone is paying the same for their pilots, it doesn’t matter if oil goes to 100 bucks a barrel or the economy slips into recession. It may affect the AMOUNT of flying that we all do, but it should not affect pay rates if everyone is paid the same. What does affect narrowbody pay rates, however, is when we have many competitors paying rates that are significantly below industry norm and using those rates to subsidize their company’s bottom line. That’s what happened in the early 2000’s when the economy took a dump, and that’s what I fear will happen when Skybus, Virgin, and the inevitable copy cats come along and reach critical mass themselves.

 

[ualdriver]

I spoke to a couple United pilots last week who seemed to think they'd be hiring, or at least interviewing, by the end of the summer. That coincides with what I have observed and been told by my United connections in recent months. UAL has a lot of appeal for me too, primarily because of their bases and my disdain for commuting. However I am nervous about how pro-merger the management seems to be. They don't seem to really care about the employees or the customers. Guess only time will tell.

jr

The chance of UAL merging with another is something one applying to UAL might want to consider. I guess I really don't have to tell anyone how the bottom of either airline's seniority list can be hurt if a merger were to occur.

 

[a319stud]

did anyone read all that? or did they skip to this post? college essays ended long ago.

 

[IronCityBlue]

Thank God for CLiff's notes

did anyone read all that? or did they skip to this post? college essays ended long ago.

Yeah, basically he was all like "my airline can beat up your airline" and I was like "I know you are but what am I?" Then he was all like "your momma so fat she jumped up in the air and got stuck!" And I was all like "Oh, no you didn't!"

 

[ualdriver]

Yeah, basically he was all like "my airline can beat up your airline" and I was like "I know you are but what am I?" Then he was all like "your momma so fat she jumped up in the air and got stuck!" And I was all like "Oh, no you didn't!"

All you have to do, Iron, is read the first paragraph. In Post 18, second paragraph, third sentence you wrote (and I summarize) that you were "alarmed" about pilot pay rates at Skybus and Virgin. Why did you spend PAGES trying to convince me that the LCC airlines, like JetBlue, were not responsible for the downward spiral of airline pilot wages in the U.S., yet say that you are alarmed about the pay rates at Skybus and Virgin? Why be alarmed, Iron? Surely JetBlue (and others with their pathetic pay early 2000 rates and retirments) had nothing to do with the industry having to come down to wages that "coincidentally" ended up looking a lot like JetBlue, Frontier's, and AirTran's. (+/- a few %'s)

In closing, don't be alarmed, Iron. Skybus and Virgin and Allegiant and their future copycats will do NOTHING to harm your pay rates or ours. Just as JetBlue's (and the other LCC's) did nothing to harm the rates at AMR, CAL, UAL, etc., etc. Don't worry when Virgin starts ops out of SFO in direct competition with your transcon flights. Don't worry that your JetBlue Captain ALONE will be making more than the entire flight crew on that Virgin Airplane. If JetBlue can't compete against that huge cost disadvantage, you can blame it on such things as "poor JetBlue management decisions" and such, like the LCC guys blame the legacy managements in the post 9/11 world.

I sincerely wish you guys good luck as I have friends over there who have had rough careers and don't need what I suspect will start to happen this summer when Virgin and Skybus start ops. Virgin, in particular, is going to undercut you guys on every transcon market they compete against you in, and you're going to need help. We are too.

 

[Jonny Sacko]

Well I won't! I fly the RJ.




Just kiddin, I could'n't resist.

 

[HA25]

There are a few factors weighing down on wages at the legacies, and the legacies themselves.

in order:

-Oil prices
-LCC that pay less of if not pay less, get a lot more productivity (AirTran, Spirit, Frontier, VA, JB, SkyBus, et al)
-LCC's that are well managed like WN with one type, and lower costs due to economies of scale and lower training costs for all employees.
-anti-union sentiments in our country and with in our profession.. people just don't get it, unions ARE NEEDED.. in this profession where there are 3 top shelf applications for ever job!

 

[IronCityBlue]

Page 2, paragraph 18, line 3, etc.

In consideration for all those with ADD who don't usually bring themselves to read any post over one page (myself included most of the time) I will limit my response to the specific charge of hyppocracy for which you called me out on.

Yes, I am alarmed by SB and VA pay rates. There are many carriers, recent start up and well established, who pay on par with VA/SB though, and although disturbing, I am not alarmed about. Here's why: From the dawn of the airline industry til now, without a time period of exception, almost every start up and LCC model has falied. Some right out of the box, others years or decades later. But they almost all fail. Always have, always will, regardless of their pay rates (or lack thereof).

That being said, 100% of all start up/LCC's had relatively low pay, yet the vast majority still wound up not making it. In many cases being absolutely crushed by legacy airlines with dramaticaly higher pay. If pilot pay is the single, most overwhelmingly dominant variable (more so than oil, terror and all the other variables) then start up/LCC's should have a much higher success rate.

Many airline today have very low pay. Although worthy of noting, the rates of Allegiant, MaxJet, SunCountry, Champion, Chautauqua/SkyWest/Mesa (for their 86-100 certified seat turbojet rates) and many others, do not alarm me nearly as much as the similar rates for SB/VA. The reasons are similar, but differ enough I will state them seperately.

Virgin America really worries me, not simply because of their 95/hr pay rates for A319/320's but because they have unlimited deep pockets, a foreign owner/controller 100% in charge (despite the fake charade of holding companies that's set up) and its schoolyard playground mission in life to be a permanant player in our domestic system. Not to mention, they are a legacy right out of the box. That has never happened before. Start ups always pay less because they have to in order to survive. As noble as it may seem to you or I, no start up is going to pay "UAL/JBU plus" at 12 year pay out of principal. On day one, VA will have brand recognition equal to or greater, all over the nation, than almost any other airline. Then, probably later this year, their unlimited Virgin Atlantic codeshare will be rubberstamped by our govt. and they will be an instant, out of the box, global legacy/high yield first class, brand powerhouse. So Allegiant paying a junior Captain 60-80/hr bothers me far, far less than VA, even if VA were paying legacy rates right off the bat, and of course they are not.

SkyBus worries me because they are on the abosute floor for pilot pay in the nation for what they will be flying, AND (much more importantly) they are incredibly well funded and are attempting to change the landscape of the domestic travel industry here. I do not know if they will be successful or not, but the Ryanair model, if it works here, will cause an implosion of our domestic travel system. All the rest of us will be caught with our pants down with no way to compete without radically re-engineering our products and business models, something no airline is too terribly good at doing.

SB can be stopped. Not by denying the J/S to their pilots, but by some good old fashioned, unofficial, off the books, gentelmans agreement hard core collusion. Each airline pick just a handful of their routes, eat the loss by undercutting them, hide the true cost via connections to places SB doesn't fly, and bury them. If we do not do this, and their Ryannair brand takes off, we're screwed, no matter how much they pay their pilots, but you are right, 65K/yr will definately accelerate the inevitable.

VA can not be stopped. Branson will bleed billions through his money to make this work, laundering money though fake companys and rubber stamping yes men "citizens" to make sure his will be done, in the US as it is in the UK, amen. So I have no solution for VA, but SB is something we can nip in the bud right now. But in typical airline management fashion, no one will really try until they get too big/self sustaining, and then it will be too late.

 

[HA25]

The problem will lie in the future when we see what kind of returns these new "Start ups" are making on the backs of their lower cost labor.. IF, they're not making money, we really can't say much to the pilots who are there hoping for a ground floor opportunity.. if on the other hand, VA, and Skybus start setting record quarterly profits on the backs of that cheap labor, then it will be time for a reckoning! In the end, what matters is how much your company makes and how much of that YOU get paid.. not what you fly, otherwise I should get paid $128/hr next year instead of $64!

 

[IronCityBlue]

The problem will lie in the future when we see what kind of returns these new "Start ups" are making on the backs of their lower cost labor.. IF, they're not making money, we really can't say much to the pilots who are there hoping for a ground floor opportunity.. if on the other hand, VA, and Skybus start setting record quarterly profits on the backs of that cheap labor, then it will be time for a reckoning! In the end, what matters is how much your company makes and how much of that YOU get paid.. not what you fly, otherwise I should get paid $128/hr next year instead of $64!

You are absolutely right V7, and in the interest of brevity I neglected to mention that extremely important variable. While ualpiot makes some compelling arguements, he/she is absolutely wrong with the assertion that as an individual or as a pilot group in general, the same rates would be demanded in pay negotiations regardless of the profitability or unprofitability of a company in question. Part of how hard you choke the golden goose depends on how many eggs you think it is able to give you. If UAL is losing money in 2009, or breaking even, or enjoying massive profits, you will see a different bargaining approach by their NC and it WILL effect what is denanded by labor, guaranteed. Same is true of every other airline out there.

To say that if your airline is making billions per quarter, or about to liquidate doesn't matter and you will insist on the same pay rates in either case as a matter of principal is clearly false.

Also to say that pilot/labor pay is the only swing variable, and that fuel, security fees, etc. are universal therefor the only thing effecting the success of an airline is labor pay is equally false. If fuel dropped to 20/barrel tomorrow, the profits of the airlines would soar, and every pilot group in negotiations would point to those profits as justification for higher pay. I know I would.