AA toxic culture

[xrated]

Are there any 30 year Great Lakes CAs? So this example is ridiculous on its face.



Here's how it would be valuable: In the case of a merger, SLIs would be straight DoH. Additionally, if an airline went belly up, there could be a central pool of available pilots ranked by NSL DoH where employers could go for interviewees.

However, if you voluntarily leave your employer for greener pastures, you would go to the bottom of the new seniority list while maintaining your NSL DoH number for future reference.

Was just using GL as an example..but that seems difficult for you. So lets say instead FedEx decides to buy and run Empire. So with this rediculous idea of a National seniority list, a 20 year Empire Caravan pilot can now leap ahead of a 19 year Fedex pilot and become a FedEx MD-11 captain overnight?

 

[flythere]

Are there any 30 year Great Lakes CAs? So this example is ridiculous on its face.



Here's how it would be valuable: In the case of a merger, SLIs would be straight DoH. Additionally, if an airline went belly up, there could be a central pool of available pilots ranked by NSL DoH where employers could go for interviewees.

However, if you voluntarily leave your employer for greener pastures, you would go to the bottom of the new seniority list while maintaining your NSL DoH number for future reference.

Using that thought process, lets just do away with the airlines as we know them, and just have a national airline, a state run airline and the pilots can be called to fly from this national list!

We could all be government employees, kinda like the big TSA machine, all collecting govt pensions and health care and never worry about job security again!!!

No thanks, I'll take my chances with the free market system!!!

 

[HA25]

Was just using GL as an example..but that seems difficult for you. So lets say instead FedEx decides to buy and run Empire. So with this rediculous idea of a National seniority list, a 20 year Empire Caravan pilot can now leap ahead of a 19 year Fedex pilot and become a FedEx MD-11 captain overnight?

your example didn't go over my head old friend..... go back and read my answer... it'll make more sense... and quit trolling me on Facebook!

 

[waveflyer]

Flythere- nice rants- do they have anything at all to do w: the topic? Im stretching here, bc if anyone thinks wall street doesn't need more oversight and a leveling of the playing field so everyday investors can't be looted, has a very limited intellect. But I'll try. Maybe better just to re-ask the questions-
1- what is so free-market about our seniority system? Name any other profession where individuals are so dependent on their company lasting forever? Capitalistic?? Wrong- it's socialism inside of cut-throat capitalism.
If you're so free-market, why not just open it up to individual contracts? Scared of competition from me??
2- answer my question w/o a patronizing, assumptive rant, - mgmt industry wide (save WN) has used our seniority against us- what's the solution for that

 

[HA25]

No thanks, I'll take my chances with the free market system!!!

and your idea of the "Free Market" is a seniority list system that makes it so you can't leave a job and not start over at the bottom of the next job?

If that's the case, what do you call it when an engineer or marketing guy moves to a new company and gets a pay raise for being good at what they do and in demand? Communism?

 

[livin'thesim]

The real problem is seniority based pay.

I think that most 20-year pilots might be willing to bail from a bad airline if they could start over as an FO at top-of-scale.

The huge pay differentiation between a 12-year FO and a 2nd year FO is the real problem. Pay should be averaged and only small raises given over time.

A 12-year FO contributes no tangible value over a 3-year FO. The pay gap is illogical; the only reason it exists is to favor the senior at the expense of the junior.

I'll bet you could get a 10-year pilot to switch airlines if they only experienced a 10% pay cut.

Besides, the idiotic system we have in place means that all your earning power occurs later in life, and that owning a nicer house or saving for retirement is postponed until much later in life than most professionals in other industries.

Instead of mandating a common scale, ALPA should mandate a maximum pay difference between bottom and top.

That gives each airline the ability to pay what it can afford, each pilot group can negotiate for higher pay, and it ensures portability of earning power because EVERYONE will be making the equivalent of a mid-scale.


CAUTION:

Many pilots are financially illiterate and will think that such a system would be "screwing" them out of high pay later in life. These people are unfamiliar with a concept called "the time value of money".

The more that pay is front-loaded, the more of your total career pay is in your own hands and control earlier for investing, paying off student loans, whatever.

And if your company goes bankrupt, you are better off since you earned more of your career long-term earnings before the bankruptcy.

The huge scale difference between bottom and top is stupid and irrational.

 

[Mamma]

The real problem is seniority based pay.

I think that most 20-year pilots might be willing to bail from a bad airline if they could start over as an FO at top-of-scale.

The huge pay differentiation between a 12-year FO and a 2nd year FO is the real problem. Pay should be averaged and only small raises given over time.

A 12-year FO contributes no tangible value over a 3-year FO. The pay gap is illogical; the only reason it exists is to favor the senior at the expense of the junior.

I'll bet you could get a 10-year pilot to switch airlines if they only experienced a 10% pay cut.

Besides, the idiotic system we have in place means that all your earning power occurs later in life, and that owning a nicer house or saving for retirement is postponed until much later in life than most professionals in other industries.

Instead of mandating a common scale, ALPA should mandate a maximum pay difference between bottom and top.

That gives each airline the ability to pay what it can afford, each pilot group can negotiate for higher pay, and it ensures portability of earning power because EVERYONE will be making the equivalent of a mid-scale.


CAUTION:

Many pilots are financially illiterate and will think that such a system would be "screwing" them out of high pay later in life. These people are unfamiliar with a concept called "the time value of money".

The more that pay is front-loaded, the more of your total career pay is in your own hands and control earlier for investing, paying off student loans, whatever.

And if your company goes bankrupt, you are better off since you earned more of your career long-term earnings before the bankruptcy.

The huge scale difference between bottom and top is stupid and irrational.

This could be realized in an industry standard equipment pay rate vs pilot pay rate.

 

[waveflyer]

The real problem is seniority based pay.

I think that most 20-year pilots might be willing to bail from a bad airline if they could start over as an FO at top-of-scale.

The huge pay differentiation between a 12-year FO and a 2nd year FO is the real problem. Pay should be averaged and only small raises given over time.

A 12-year FO contributes no tangible value over a 3-year FO. The pay gap is illogical; the only reason it exists is to favor the senior at the expense of the junior.

I'll bet you could get a 10-year pilot to switch airlines if they only experienced a 10% pay cut.

Besides, the idiotic system we have in place means that all your earning power occurs later in life, and that owning a nicer house or saving for retirement is postponed until much later in life than most professionals in other industries.

Instead of mandating a common scale, ALPA should mandate a maximum pay difference between bottom and top.

That gives each airline the ability to pay what it can afford, each pilot group can negotiate for higher pay, and it ensures portability of earning power because EVERYONE will be making the equivalent of a mid-scale

CAUTION:

Many pilots are financially illiterate and will think that such a system would be "screwing" them out of high pay later in life. These people are unfamiliar with a concept called "the time value of money".

The more that pay is front-loaded, the more of your total career pay is in your own hands and control earlier for investing, paying off student loans, whatever.

And if your company goes bankrupt, you are better off since you earned more of your career long-term earnings before the bankruptcy.

The huge scale difference between bottom and top is stupid and irrational.

My man.
+1
the easiest and best solution to implement. Seniority loss for bidding sucks- but what really hampers us is the pay difference.

 

[say again]

The real problem is seniority based pay.

I think that most 20-year pilots might be willing to bail from a bad airline if they could start over as an FO at top-of-scale.

The huge pay differentiation between a 12-year FO and a 2nd year FO is the real problem. Pay should be averaged and only small raises given over time.

A 12-year FO contributes no tangible value over a 3-year FO. The pay gap is illogical; the only reason it exists is to favor the senior at the expense of the junior.

I'll bet you could get a 10-year pilot to switch airlines if they only experienced a 10% pay cut.

Besides, the idiotic system we have in place means that all your earning power occurs later in life, and that owning a nicer house or saving for retirement is postponed until much later in life than most professionals in other industries.

Instead of mandating a common scale, ALPA should mandate a maximum pay difference between bottom and top.

That gives each airline the ability to pay what it can afford, each pilot group can negotiate for higher pay, and it ensures portability of earning power because EVERYONE will be making the equivalent of a mid-scale.


CAUTION:

Many pilots are financially illiterate and will think that such a system would be "screwing" them out of high pay later in life. These people are unfamiliar with a concept called "the time value of money".

The more that pay is front-loaded, the more of your total career pay is in your own hands and control earlier for investing, paying off student loans, whatever.

And if your company goes bankrupt, you are better off since you earned more of your career long-term earnings before the bankruptcy.

The huge scale difference between bottom and top is stupid and irrational.

:beer:

 

[HalinTexas]

The real problem is seniority based pay.

I think that most 20-year pilots might be willing to bail from a bad airline if they could start over as an FO at top-of-scale.

The huge pay differentiation between a 12-year FO and a 2nd year FO is the real problem. Pay should be averaged and only small raises given over time.

A 12-year FO contributes no tangible value over a 3-year FO. The pay gap is illogical; the only reason it exists is to favor the senior at the expense of the junior.

I'll bet you could get a 10-year pilot to switch airlines if they only experienced a 10% pay cut.

Besides, the idiotic system we have in place means that all your earning power occurs later in life, and that owning a nicer house or saving for retirement is postponed until much later in life than most professionals in other industries.

Instead of mandating a common scale, ALPA should mandate a maximum pay difference between bottom and top.

That gives each airline the ability to pay what it can afford, each pilot group can negotiate for higher pay, and it ensures portability of earning power because EVERYONE will be making the equivalent of a mid-scale.


CAUTION:

Many pilots are financially illiterate and will think that such a system would be "screwing" them out of high pay later in life. These people are unfamiliar with a concept called "the time value of money".

The more that pay is front-loaded, the more of your total career pay is in your own hands and control earlier for investing, paying off student loans, whatever.

And if your company goes bankrupt, you are better off since you earned more of your career long-term earnings before the bankruptcy.

The huge scale difference between bottom and top is stupid and irrational.

I agree with this except for one caveat, and it's not really a problem for the industry. It may be a problem for pilots because it falls back to supply and demand.

With the oversupply of pilots, why would an airline hire a "topped out" CA from any given carrier to fly as an FO on the same equipment, when they can get a pilot from a Regional carrier to work for less? If there is no incentive to hire experience, they won't. That's what's happening now. Current/qualified applicants can't even get called for an interview while current, but unqualified, marginally experienced candidates can (are).

HR departments hire people not pilots. They figure they have to train them anyway, so why worry what their qualifications are?

I like your line of thinking, however.