"6000 airline jobs...created in 2002"

[enigma]

Here's a good example of AirInc's deceptiveness. I acquired the current issue of FLYING magazine and found this paragraph in the "datalink" section.

"AIR, Inc. says that airline hiring, hit hard by the flying
slowdown following the attacks of September 11th, is
regaining strength. A recent job fair sponsored by AIR, Inc.
attracted 16 airlines, including 5 majors. AIR, Inc, forecasts
that 6000 airline jobs will be created in 2002."

Please notice that Air, Inc did not mention pilot jobs even though this paragraph was found in FLYING magazine. Nor did it mention a pilot shortage.

It seems that my friend the publisher is correct when he says that Kit Darby doesn' t mention the words "pilot shortage" anymore. However, I consider these types of press releases misleading and damaging to our profession even though they could be truthful.

Out of curiosity, does anyone know what percentage of AIR, Inc. clients are pilots? I suspect that over 90% of AIR, Inc.'s subscribers are pilots.; In other words, AIR, Inc. makes its living off of pilot wannabees, not off of other job seekers in the industry. I would also guess that AIR, Inc. would not exist if it were only intended to offer info. on "airline jobs". Therefore, I would suggest that any information that AIR, Inc. disseminates IS intended for the consumption of potential PILOTS, (as opposed to "airline" workers like rampers, cleaners, caterers, etc)

My personal conclusion is that AIR,Inc. is intentionally mis-applying the facts and is therefore guilty of no less than fraud. I'm neither lawyer, judge, nor jury and have no legal expertise, so I could be using the wrong legal term (fraud) to express my beliefs; but whatever the correct term is, AIR, Inc. is scr-w-ng a lot of people.

That's my 2 pennies.
8N

 

[FL000]

Every American has the inalienable right to be duped. Buyer beware!

 

[na265]

Kit Darby is using peoples ignorance about the industry against them. People don't understand that to become a profesional pilot takes more than going to school and getting your ratings. It has to become yor lifestyle and a bull headed drive to make it. He should be hung out to dry! If you want another fine example, it has been discussed many times here before, the new FLYING has an article about those dirt bags running TAB Express. What a joke!

 

[publisher]

As said

While I debated with Enigma over Kit ever saying that there were pilot shortages, I do not like the way he puts together job fairs and what he charges for them.

The above quote regarding his job fair was and is in my personal opinion misleading. He does not charge airlines to go there. United goes because he is a captain for them and it costs them nothing even though none of these except Southwest was actually hiring./

AEPS job fairs are different in that the companies pay to be there. As a result, if they are not really serious, usually they will not be there. In addition, he charges a ludicrous amount to go when you can get into AEPS and meet the same Comair people for $20.

If these airlines were really hiring, OK maybe, just maybe it is worth it but that is not the case. As Southwest said they were creating 4000 jobs, he is probably technically correct, just not being honest with his members or outsiders.

 

[pilotyip]

Support of Kit Darby

Kit Darby provides a valuable resource to any pilot looking to find a job or change jobs, I wish they had been around when I was between jobs years ago, the information the show gives out is timely accurate and it is from the employers them selves. I would ruffly 30% of our pilots are from Air Inc contacts, and as an employer I get to see the guy up front before I give them an application, they get to talk to me to find out if they really fit the requirements of flying boxes. Saying Kit is ripping pilots off is in the same category as saying interview prep courses or ATP/FE prep courses are ripping off pilots. It is not up to the people on this board to pass judgment on what someone does in pursuit of their career.

 

[Guest]

To Enigma,

While you're considering your lack of legal knowledge, go find yourself a dictionary and look up the word SLANDER

 

[Data]

6000 Jobs...

Screwing a lot of people? For charging a measly few hundred bucks for information useful for interviewing? The newsletter is pretty nice, shows who is hiring, who isn't. The stuff they send you in the membership packet has all of the airline information you need to send resumes and contact the appropriate HR people. The magazine has articles on airlines that are hiring, who to contact, what the interview is like etc. The career counseling is useful, it's staffed by a bunch of ASA guys that can generally answer your questions. The technical guide to airline interviewing book it useful, math for mental pilots is good...rather mental math for pilots. Hell, I don't see where I got screwed. Nobody there has promised me a job, I haven't been duped into thinking there is this big shortage and I'm set. I realize that it's going to be up to me. I went to a job fair last year in Atlanta and thought that it was going to be a great way to start getting my resume out, you can stand in line and speak with every rep that is there, sure things have changed because the market's bad but would I rather send in 20 resumes or stand in 20 lines and hand over a resume? I think my odds are better standing in line. While I'm not quite to the level to be competitive I think I'm a little further down the road that before I got all of the air inc propaganda. I haven't seen where I got jipped.

 

[publisher]

original post

Let's go back to the original post here and not get off on the tangent of the other things that Kit provides.

What I am saying is that the statistics quoted are probably accurate but not necessarily in good faith.

At his recent Los Angeles show, he indicated on his web site that United was going to be there for pilots and mechanics. That American Eagle was there for pilots. That Alaska was there for pilots. All of these have indicated no hiring plans for balance of year.

To count companies like United as being there implies recruiting and that is not what was happening. I believe in the merit of job fairs and the personal contact. Not the point. Kit publishes a good many stats like 70% of all pilots hired last year were Air Inc members. And where do we get that number.

I think we owe it to those that come to these things to tell them what is going to be there. That means if we have some companies that are going to be there just to answer questions and provide info, let's call it that. If they are actually hiring people, let;s call it that. If Aeroservice or TAB are there to sell type programs, let's indicate that.

Kit has some good stuff and frankly there is no reason to not be up front about who is there and what for. For $175 or whatever, you should know.

 

[enigma]

apology offered if required

Good Point.
Perhaps I should have left out the part about screwing a lot of people.

I really don't know what the legal definition of slander is, but I imagine that it would hinge upon my presenting something false about someone else and representing said falsehood as fact in a manner designed to damage that someone else. I have not offered any lies about AIR, Inc., only an opinion.

Another point I should make is that the purpose of my post was to point out the misleading information that AIR,Inc generates.. and I stand by my assesment. I only mentioned AIR, Inc.'s owner because another poster who goes by the handle "publisher" had previously defended Mr. Darby, and I wanted to give the publisher credit for correctly quoting Mr. Darby. In essence, the information I offered exhonorated Mr. Darby from previous allegatations of lying. It was my way of saying I, and others, was wrong.

If you know what I said to be slander, I will publicly apologize.
regards,
8N

PS. I took your advice and looked in the dictionary. It seems that you didn't look up slander either. Slander refers to ORAL statements. Libel on the other hand is: a published statement, which without due cause has the result, or is intended to have the result, of bringing its subject into disrepute. Using that definition, it would have to be proven that my statements were made "without due cause". Still, If it was legally libel, I'll apologize.

To Enigma,

While you're considering your lack of legal knowledge, go find yourself a dictionary and look up the word SLANDER

 

[enigma]

DATA

Hey DATA,
My reference to screwing a lot of people was my opinion about the effect AIR, Inc. has on our wages by continually encouraging new entrants into the industry when there are already too many pilots. You and I and most everyone else who is not a senior pilot at AA, DAL, UAL, NWA, CAL and SWA(ok everyone at SWA) has been affected by the oversupply of pilots. If there were no oversupply, you wouldn't have to stand in line.

I agree with you that the information supplied by AIR, Inc. concerning contact names, etc has value. I'm just campaigning against the misleading news releases they put out that encourage wannabees. Then those wannabees enter the business only to find out that they have to raise their kids on food stamps.
Thanks for your input.
8N

 

[kilomike]

Enigma,
Well said. Agreed, there was some good information such as addresses to send resumes, etc.

What I am fed up with is the feeding of more wannabes into the industry and flooding the market with too many pilots. These press releases and things like Be a Pilot.com advertising in Parade magazine about a pilot shortage has got to stop.

kilomike

 

[may]

darby

Great posts and reply's from Enigma and especialy publisher

the rest of you will soon learn after a thousand or more hours. live and learn.

 

[bobbysamd]

Slander, fraud and Kit Darby

According to my Black's Law Dictionary (Abridged 6th Edition), slander is defined as "[t]he speaking of base and defamatory words tending to prejudice another in his reputation, community standing, office, trade, business, or means of livelihood . . . [T]he essential elements of slander are: (a) a false and defamatory statement concerning another; (b) an unprivileged communication to a third party; (c) fault amounting at least to negligence on the part of the publisher (not you, Pub ); and (d) either actionability of the statement irrespective of harm or the existence of special harm caused by the publication." Restatement, second, Torts § 558.

The Restatement is a treatise. A treatise is a written work that espouses on a specific area of law and is designed to clarify and persuade.

Basically, slander is an intentional tort and the person who was slandered has to prove that he/she was damaged. The truth is a complete defense to fraud. Slander is spoken and libel is written (published).

Fraud, according to my Black's, is "an intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another in reliance upon it to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to surrender a legal right . . . ."

I indeed realize this is not the Torts Message Board, but I wanted to jump in because I had the legal dictionary handy.

As much as I dislike Kit stemming from the pilot shortage sophistries he spread during his FAPA days, and, again, while I am not a lawyer licensed to practice law, Kit's research that appears to support a pilot shortage is not fraud in the legal sense. You have to satisfy each element to make a case for fraud. For one thing, we don't know that his distortions about hiring have been intentional.

You bet your a$$ that Kit's claims are misleading. Kit, back then as Mr. FAPA, and now, does a dynamite job of selling dreams. Everyone has dreams. I sure did. A reality check now and then helps balance those dreams and aids objectivity. My experience has been that a good dose of objectivity and reality are keys to deciding to pursue a professional flying career. Of course, anyone can always learn to fly and enjoy it for it's own sake.

I appreciate Enigma's opinion that the oversupply of pilots has kept wages down. But, consider this passage from page 248 of Flying the Line: "In the face of an almost constant oversupply of pilots, ALPA has somehow managed to protect the minority of pilots from the 'iron law of wages.'" (emphasis added). This book was written in 1982. Food for thought. Since then, airlines have demanded and received givebacks from pilots, and pay has been affected. The author does not provide statistics to prove a pilot oversupply, but his observations recognize that historically there has not been a pilot shortage.

In all fairness, Kit provided useful contact information as Mr. FAPA, and apparently still does as AIR, Inc. The books he sold me while he was FAPA helped me. I was a big FAPA consumer thirteen years ago. But, even though Kit has apparently backed off saying there is, or will be, a "pilot shortage," people should be careful about what they discern from reading between the lines. There is NO pilot shortage!

Maybe what I should say is we should all wish there was a pilot shortage. Then, everyone could realize their dreams.

 

[publisher]

Wade in

I really do not think frankly that Kit or any of the others pronouncements are influential enough to get people who are on the side lines to get into flying for a living.

The fact is that number one, we all liked, loved, or found flying an aircraft to be really cool (sic).

Two, the people at the top of that profession make a good deal of money.

Because this board is very airline oriented, we tend to look at everything in that context. The fact is that there are a ton of flying jobs that you can make a respectable living at that are way short of food stamps.

As I have stated before, I believe that the natural process of union influence lead to the top senior positions paying out of context wages with the whole and genereally sacrifice the wages of the new people to pay the wages of the senior. Hence when you have a bunch of people seeking the golden egg, heh, there are a bunch at the lower scale looking up and wanting to be there.

This is not truely a supply demand thing. Look at the lotto. For $7.0m we have X number of people play. Now who would not think that would be a fair return on a $1. Yet, we have $300m and the number of players triples.

While I certainly do not make a habit of defending Kit Darby, he did not make the game or the rules. When a UAL captain at the very top can make $345,000 and the guy on the bottom make $34,500 for doing the same job for a company, things are out of whack.

 

[Caveman]

"I really do not think frankly that Kit or any of the others pronouncements are influential enough to get people who are on the side lines to get into flying for a living."

Publisher,

I'm not sure that I agree with you on this point. A ton of flight schools quote Darby and Air, Inc regarding hiring predictions. I'm not too far removed from flight instructing and one of the biggest concerns from parents (i.e. those who really fund flight training) was whether or not junior was actually going to be able to make a living flying airplanes. The rosy future predicted by 'experts' like Darby helped make more than one sale I assure you.

The other problem I have with Air, Inc predicting hiring numbers is that it's selfserving and IMHO a conflict of interest. His profits are directly linked to the number of folks using his service. If he doesn't predict a rosy picture no one will pony up the $175 to get his assistance. On the other hand a case could be made that if he predicted doom and gloom you would now really need his services to give you that competitive edge. At least the latter scenario is more indicative of the short term future.

Personally, I think his services and product are way over-rated and way overpriced. Probably the best thing he produces is the magazine. I have gotten more useful info from there than anything esle of his I've seen. Hey, caveat emptor. I think he has done a wonderful job of selling refridgerators to eskimos. He's not dishonest, just a slick salesman and like most salesman just slightly misleading. I'm sure he'll tell you the truth if you know which questions to ask. For example, "O.K. UAL will be at the job fair but will they actually be hiring in the near future?"

I also think that the explosion of the internet and all the info availble either directly from the companies themselves or from boards like this one have rendered his service impotent. There isn't anything he provides that you can't get eslewhere. Is it worth $175 for someone else to do the research for you? To each his own.

 

[bobbysamd]

Kit the Pied Piper

I disagree. I feel that Kit's seductive publications and misleading, distorted statistics wield more influence than one might think.

Once again, Kit sells dreams. In all honesty, I haven't read his AIR, Inc. pubs, but I was a Kit (FAPA) devotee for years before and through 1994. He ran a real scheme to save FAPA from ruin in the late '80s. Cry "pilot shortage" and contrive statistics that back it up. Get the media to swallow, unchallanged. Then advertise FAPA in pilot mags airmed at the masses. Voila! People who are private pilots and who had just wanted to be private pilots now think career, and Kit is their Pied Piper. FAPA membership revenues skyrocket and he saves his (Lou Smith's) "company." His magazine, Career Pilot, delivered what was previously esoteric information to the unwashed pilot masses. He made it sound so EASY! And his advertisers. Flight schools. Type schools. They must have made a mint. In a way, I am grateful because it created a job for me in aviation as an instructor. But, the reality of it all, that there was no pilot shortage, probably stopped me from advancing. Kit was, and may still be, irresponsible for not disclosing both sides of aviation career building.

I do second Pub that there are good flying jobs outside of airlines. People don't think along those lines enough. Although a lot of us look askance when a fed comes to you and says he's here to help, the FAA does offer some great flying jobs, with full government benies. I use the FAA only as an example. Once again, blame Kit. He sells airline dreams all too well.

I'll get off my soapbox.

 

[mar]

Bravo!

I don't have anything to offer to the discussion I just wanted to offer my congratulations on one of the most intelligent, criticial, substantive debates I've ever read on this board.

Great job everyone! Of course the whole thing is missing one person to make it perfectly balanced: Mr. Darby.

 

[publisher]

soap box

Now Bobby I am smart enough to know that you are going to stay on your soap box as long as there is a board here.

For the most part, the stats that Kit puts out are probably near right. I think he says something about tracking 268 airlines and here are the numbers. Well, there are only 5 majors and a few others like AirTran and Jetblue, so the rest all count too except in the minds of some.

Perhaps he has more clout than I am giving him credit for. In the big scheme of things, I don't think so. Think of professional sports. A good many kids want to be one and then the process begins and they get weeded out. We all know that very few make it but many try.

People ask me all the time why we do not put more of the negatives and more of the issues in my magazine. The answer is not I want more pilots so we can get more members, it is the simple belief that this is a great industry that is tarnished enough by others.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Air, Inc. product useful? you bet!
overpriced? Perhaps, but it's the best info available out there consolidated in one place (that I have been able to find, anyway). I take a little issue with the price of the books, but otherwise it's about the best 99 bucks I've invested in my future thus far. The message I took away from the Dallas convention is that there AREN"T that many jobs out there and that I have to work that much harder to be marketable (and of course, buy all the air inc products). I was called for an interview and subsequently hired directly by a company that attended the Dallas fair. I attribute the initial call to me meeting with the HR rep at the convention, so, I figure that was time and money well-spent too. It's a free country, free market, Kit has a product and a market for that product. Naturally, he is going to market that product in such a way as to attract more business. I think anyone spending the coin on that product is under no false illusions. Nobody is twisting your arm to join Air, inc. I'm just happy I don't see Kit on here plugging his product in this forum daily.

 

[publisher]

last point

Let me make one last point:

There is nothing more important than meeting face to face the recruiters, chief pilots, humman resouce people, etc., at a job fair. That is true whether it is at Kit's job fair, AEPS job fair, or at the college job fairs held at the major aviation universities.

Let me repeat that. NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT.

If the company you are interested in is going to be at one of these, go there! My other point is that if Comair is that company, you could have met them at AS3 with AEPS for $20 versus $175 for Kit in LA.

In the end, it is not Kit's prodiucts, not Kit's interview prep, it is that face to face one on one time for you to present yourself.

 

[enigma]

Re: Slander, fraud and Kit Darby

I appreciate Enigma's opinion that the oversupply of pilots has kept wages down. But, consider this passage from page 248 of Flying the Line: "In the face of an almost constant oversupply of pilots, ALPA has somehow managed to protect the minority of pilots from the 'iron law of wages.'" (emphasis added). This book was written in 1982. Food for thought. Since then, airlines have demanded and received givebacks from pilots, and pay has been affected. The author does not provide statistics to prove a pilot oversupply, but his observations recognize that historically there has not been a pilot shortage.

Thanks for the proper definitions of slander, fraud, etc.

Now to your phrasing in the paragrah I quoted above, you said you appreciate, But. ..... As if one fact overruled the other. I don't see any conflict in my statement and that of "flying the line". The oversupply of pilots has kept average wages down and ALPA has managed to protect a minority of pilots from that market pressure. That fact supports one of my personal favorite theorys, that being that unions don't really protect us from management, they protect us from those who would work for less. The corollary to that theory is that management is not the enemy, the enemy is those who would work for less, or free, or even pay for a job. The only flaw to that theory is that management attempts to prove it wrong on a daily basis, so I conceed that we need protection from management as well.

One of the points that I was aiming at in my Union Mindset string was that the unions have lost the economic protection that regulation afforded, but continue to act/negotiate just like pre 1979. Before deregulation, the unions held an iron fist on jobs. A new airline couldn't use the available cheap labor because they couldn't get permission to fly a route and the established airlines were willing to give what the unions demanded because in the absence of competition, they could just raise faires to make up the increase. After deregulation, we have seen the business cycle at its worst. Soaring highs and depressing lows, with very little stability.

As for a pilot shortage, I've used this before, so for those of you that have heard it already, I apologize; but Charles Lindberg wrote in his first book that it was hard to make a living as a professional pilot in the twentys because of all of the pilots who were willing to work for nothing. I'm paraphrasing, but you get the drift.

regards
8N

 

[enigma]

It's a free country, free market, Kit has a product and a market for that product. Naturally, he is going to market that product in such a way as to attract more business. I think anyone spending the coin on that product is under no false illusions. Nobody is twisting your arm to join Air, inc. I'm just happy I don't see Kit on here plugging his product in this forum daily.

Hugh, I agree with your point about Air,Inc.s product. I'm not down on Air,Inc.'s product, and if I needed such information, I wouldn't hesitate to send in my dollars.
Where I differ with you is your contention that people that spend coin on the product are not under false illusions. I keep up the industry enough to know that many new entrants were enticed by the rosy predictions published by the job help industry. I conceed that most wannabees don't need AIR, Inc. to get them interested in flying for a living, (there's one for ya Publisher), but I do believe that they only actually decide to enter the profession after hearing all of those misleading stats. I started this string after I found a AIR, Inc. news release in FLYING magazine that implied there would be 6000 pilot jobs created by the airline industry in 2002. You can bet that there are student pilots out there who were getting discourage after 9/11, who read that and thought "well maybe I'd better stay in the career. After all, FLYING just printed a statistic saying there would be 6000 new jobs this year".
I remember what it was to be a student pilot with stars in my eyes, except I had glasses on those eyes, so I didn't start my career thinking that I would ever be an MD80 Captain. I just wanted a good job that included flying an airplane. However, the highlight of the month for my fellow students was the arrival of the FAPA magazine/newsletter, etc. They would pass one around all day while they counted the money they would make once they got out of college.
regards

 

[bobbysamd]

Flying the Line

No, Enigma, I wasn't implying that the passage in the book trumps your comment. I was just adding the quote to try to give a sense of history and perspective to Kit's supposed pilot shortage. Even twenty years ago, Flying the Line's author, George Hopkins, was pointing out by inference that there was no pilot shortage, and there had not been a pilot shortage.

There's no conflict at all in your statement and the book's. It's true. Consider the pitiful wages paid to commuter pilots. $12K for a new FO? Consider the responsibility. I have no idea how much regional equipment costs, but that FO is responsible, at least in part, for that airplane and for the safety of its passengers. Think about it. It's an awesome responsibility - and first-year pay is $12K. And, the commuters get away with it, because of the oversupply of pilots and management having noooo problem finding people to fill those seats.

I appreciate your logic. Management is still the enemy, though. Given management's druthers, it would still prefer to pay squat and work pilots to the bone (and grave). It can, because there are so many pilots available. Consider the likes of Frank Lorenzo and Carl Icahn. Go back into history. E.L. Cord.

Actually, I, too, looked forward to receiving my monthly copy of Career Pilot. I looked forward to reading about career help and to receive some job app and interview gouge. Also, to learn about companies. I never went into to flying for the money, but because I loved aviation. I was telling my wife and mother tonight at dinner that people should go into aviation for that reason only, and not because Kit proclaims the beginning of another pilot "shortage."

I guess Pub is right. I'll get off the soapbox, again.

 

[pilotyip]

Management view

Your view of management is too narrow, true there company's management that fits your profile, but there are many companies that value there employees, Jet Blue seems to be one, Fed Ex, SWA may be others. There has never been a shortage of pilots wanting flying jobs, but as I have said before the experience level of the new hire had dropped to all time lows last year. We were hiring pilots who made Captain in 3 months, who two years before we would not have even interviewed because they did not met our minimums. Kit does a good job with his shows and it his job to promote his product.

 

[publisher]

one more

Let me throw one more element into the equation that does not get enough recognitrion on here.

That is passengers pay for this whole thing and they are willing to pay so much. In the end, that drives the system.

To greatly simplify for the point, there is a pool of money that is available for crewing aircraft. What the complaint on the one hand is that the guys on the bottom of the rung do not get paid enough. Obviously the guys on the top like the deal and the guys on the bottom want to be like the guys on the top. Trouble is that there is just so much available.

This is not a supply demand problem, this is a distribution problem as the public will only pay so much.

To change this systemic problem is very difficult. This is especially true as the business traveler is getting tired of paying proportionately more than every one else.

As that travelor says no more, I am going over here to SWA or Comair or somewhere else, the situation will continue to deteriorate. It needs to be addressed.

 

[enigma]

Re: one more

Publisher, This IS a supply and demand problem. Especially in a deregulated industry. Before 1979 it wasn't specifically affected by s & d, but now it most surely is. You confuse me, you are from a business background, yet you don't see the plain reality of s & d. While the MEC's at the major airlines can limit the effect of s & d at their specific airlines with their LEGAL contracts, they can't affect the overall business environment. For instance, the DALMEC can prevent DAL from hiring pilots at market wages, but they can't prevent AirTran from hiring pilots at market prices. The effect of this is clearly seen by anyone who flys into ATL. AirTran has made significant inroads into the market.

An oversupply of cheap labor and the lack of an entrenched "high cost" business structure has enabled AirTran, JetBlue, etc to offer a service to the traveler and those companies have grown. In the pre1979 airline economy, new entrants were effectively barred from the industry, a condition that allowed wages to rachet up with the concurence of both management and labor.

The solution to the problem is not really that difficult to see; it is manifesting itself right now at USAir, DAL,etc. Those carriers are doing whatever possible to access a pool of cheaper labor. Ignoring scope, making deals with their mainline MEC to "allow " their regionals to make less, spinning off their regionals so as to avoid any seniority list staple, etc.

As for your argument that there is only so much money available to pay for labor because the public will only pay so much; I must say that SWA refutes that argument. SWA has made a ton of money off of making low fares available to the masses. When SWA enters a market, the entire market grows. I'm sure they do take some pax from the established carriers, they also bring new entrants into the economy. I should say that I jumpseat on SWA quite often and just in case there is a perception that SWA is only carrying trailer park trash, that is not the case. I would guess that SWA carries at least the industry average in business travelers, if not above average. In Texas, I would guess that well over 40% of their pax are on business, maybe 50%.

It is unfortunate that our unions choose to bury their heads in the sand. They've had opportunities to get all of us together and they choose to continue a system that you have properly identified; they want to keep all of the money for the senior guys at the majors. That is a honorable goal, but it ignores the fact that their airline employers must operate in a competitive environment; and it seems as if it might just bite them in the behind.

My basic argument is this: the deregulated environment allows new entrants into the airline market (JetBlue, Spirit, AirTran, etc. ) to access the available oversuppy of labor and then use that cheaper labor to make inroads into the market. If these new entrants compete directly with the established carriers (JetBlue, AirTran, and to a smaller extent Spirit) and gain market share at the expense of the more established carrier; then the over supply of available pilots has affected the pilots at the established carriers. Supply and demand.

A corollary to my basic argument is that the oversupply of pilots encourages management to treat pilots with disdain. Why should a manager treat a pilot well when there are 50 more standing in line to take his place. I am not a management basher, but I do see way too many examples of this type of management style to ignore it. To reiterate my credentials as a supply side guy, I don't blame management for the poor treatment as much as I blame the pilots who stand for it. We continue to be our own worst enemys. Now if Air, Inc. etc, would just quite encouraging newbees to enter a saturated field, we might have a chance to let the true demand speak.



regards
8N

BTW, I'm not advocating that we artificially limit the supply as happens in medicine. I only want to stop creating an oversupply, A situation I see as being somewhat the result of the efforts of the pilot hiring industry.

Let me throw one more element into the equation that does not get enough recognitrion on here.

That is passengers pay for this whole thing and they are willing to pay so much. In the end, that drives the system.

To greatly simplify for the point, there is a pool of money that is available for crewing aircraft. What the complaint on the one hand is that the guys on the bottom of the rung do not get paid enough. Obviously the guys on the top like the deal and the guys on the bottom want to be like the guys on the top. Trouble is that there is just so much available.
This is not a supply demand problem, this is a distribution problem as the public will only pay so much.

To change this systemic problem is very difficult. This is especially true as the business traveler is getting tired of paying proportionately more than every one else.

As that travelor says no more, I am going over here to SWA or Comair or somewhere else, the situation will continue to deteriorate. It needs to be addressed.

 

[publisher]

sorry

Sorry, I do not think you are on track here.

One of the differences between the Japanese philosophy of business and American is that they figure our what the market is , what share they want, figure at what price point they have to be at to get that share, and then and only then figure out how to produce the product at the cost.

Southwest is a perfect example not the contradiction you seem to see. They are not cheap labor at all. They priced their product at what the pubic would bare and produce it at a cost they can profit while paying reasonable wages.

Frankly, at the wages they pay, there would always be the supply you are taking about.

There is no question that deregulation had a tremendous impact. What you are failing to see is that had that not happened, there would not have been the growth at the carriers in the first place. Sooner rather than later there would have been a passenger revolt.

This is why one list and these other artificial constraints are sure to fail in the long run. There will always be carriers that are not playing by the rules of the game everyone seems to think are required.

This is not a supply demand argument. There will always be sufficient supply for the average wages in this industry. supply will meet demand.

I will give you my standard example--- it is worth so much money to a bank to have their checks flown to the Federal Reserve. Airnet does a great job of that. When they have to pay $345,000 for a pilot to do it, it is not going to happen. No more Airnet.

The thing is that if I am willing to pay $40,000 for that job and it makes sense at that number, I will have pilots to do it. The supply will fill the demand because it is a good job at reasonable return for effort. End of story