AAI to SWA Training Schedule

[PCL_128]

It paid better with better benefits because the hull of the aircraft was wider and longer. Over time, individual airline contracts swing from good to bad. But major airline pay is always better than regional airline pay. Again, arbitrators integrate by category and status for a reason. I know you want to run away from that reality, because it shows just how much we got screwed and you reaped a windfall, but it is still reality.

 

[redflyer65]

And we've come full circle.

How did I 'reap a windfall'? That's laughable.

 

[carl p]

Man this same old crap is tiring...

Back on track. I go in Apr, are they still training 6 days a week?

 

[madjack]

What a bunch of crap

 

[Candide]

PCL 128, I truly think you're dedicated to the pilot profession and convinced of the need for organized labor to counterbalance greedy managements abetted by an RLA tipped in their favor. In other words, we're quite like-minded. You'll never get me to agree that SWA and Airtran were equivalent careers on Sept 26, 2010, and I'll never get you to agree that they weren't. And that's OK.

But I'd like you to consider the following: This idea of "category" as the primary qualifier of a pilot job has served as the lynch pin of the regional whipsaw that has devastated the pilot profession over the last couple of decades.

The majority of domestic flights in this country are safely and expertly operated by pilots making F-ING RIDICULOUSLY low wages and benefits. The majority. Think about that for a minute. Most domestic airline pilots work under onerous work rules and terrible pay because they fly advanced, swept wing jets that are not considered the right CATEGORY to make a decent wage. All because airline managements gladly leveraged mainline pilots' Freudian reluctance to fly smaller airplanes into a whipsaw that transferred a sh!t-ton of money from us to them.

You're probably right about an arbitrator focusing more on category and status than pay, QOL, and job security. But that standard isn't always fair, and has come at great cost.

 

[PCL_128]

Candide, you're talking about two completely different issues. Category is a completely different thing when it comes to SLI as compared to whipsaw problems. The whipsaw is a result of mainline pilot lack of foresight in allowing regional feed to be outsourced, beginning over 20 years ago. And I agree with you wholeheartedly that it is a huge problem. My major beef with ALPA right now is that too much focus is being placed on international issues while the regionals are being whipsawed to death, in fact.

But let's say that that problem never surfaced. Let's say that the mainline carriers never allowed regional feed to be outsourced, and all flying stayed "in house." The result for seniority integrations would not be any different. A CRJ would still fall into a different category than a 737 which would fall into a different category than a 767. It's simply a matter of fact in this business that the bigger airframes produce more revenue for the corporation, and pilots get paid more when they produce more revenue. Again, the individual carrier that is on top of the pay heap varies from year to year, but in the aggregate, a 737 will always pay more than a CRJ, and a 747 will always pay more than a 737. That is why arbitrators largely ignore contracts and focus on category and status. They aren't idiots. They know that your CBA will not be industry leading in 10 years, just like it was industry trailing 10 years ago. And 20 years from now it may be industry leading again. It's all cyclical. But seniority, once set, doesn't change. Someone placed junior to you will always be junior to you, no matter what happens to the CBA. That is why CBAs can not be used to determine seniority integrations.

 

[madjack]

What a bunch of crap...

 

[Candide]

PCL,

I'm sorry to say, but you're playing into management's hands. Pilots should be paid for safely and efficiently operating an aircraft through a take off and landing. More than we're paid now. The size of the airplane should matter some (because of the economics), but MUCH less than it does now. UPS pilots have one rate--it's not a completely radical idea.

You're embracing a detrimental element (category) of the pilot profession because it may have benefitted you in an arbitration that never happened. But let the whipsaw continue...

 

[PCL_128]

PCL,



I'm sorry to say, but you're playing into management's hands. Pilots should be paid for safely and efficiently operating an aircraft through a take off and landing. More than we're paid now. The size of the airplane should matter some (because of the economics), but MUCH less than it does now. UPS pilots have one rate--it's not a completely radical idea.



You're embracing a detrimental element (category) of the pilot profession because it may have benefitted you in an arbitration that never happened. But let the whipsaw continue...

Actually, I've supported waveflyer's suggestion here on numerous occasions that pilots should be paid based upon seat and longevity, rather than basing it on aircraft size. But that's simply not the reality in the industry today. We deal with the way things are, not the way we want things to be. And by the way, in those threads that waveflyer suggested such a system, it wasn't exactly well received. Most pilots have an ego problem with the idea that they aren't getting paid more to fly a bigger plane. That's your road block on that issue. As always, pilots are their own worst enemies.

 

[Candide]

As always, pilots are their own worst enemies.

On this, we can agree completely.