livin'thesim
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2005
- Posts
- 926
Pilots don't "manage" the asset from a business standpoint. They operate a machine. Comparing a CEO to a pilot is not really credible. This is not an argument for or against any particular pay rate, just pointing out the difference.
If the captain 'managed' the airplane like a CEO, that CA would also be making business decisions about the routes it flies and how much to charge for a ticket. I think the argument about managing the asset is not going to get any traction, and is best abandoned.
Look at it this way, is the Captain of a beat-up old 727 worth less than the captain of a brand-new A320? Those two aircraft have very different price tags, but the number of souls aboard is comparable. Should a NWA DC-9 captain make substantially less than an A320 captain, adjusting for the seat count? As they aircraft depreciates, should pay scale down accordingly?
The safety and experience argument is the way to go IMO.
If the captain 'managed' the airplane like a CEO, that CA would also be making business decisions about the routes it flies and how much to charge for a ticket. I think the argument about managing the asset is not going to get any traction, and is best abandoned.
Look at it this way, is the Captain of a beat-up old 727 worth less than the captain of a brand-new A320? Those two aircraft have very different price tags, but the number of souls aboard is comparable. Should a NWA DC-9 captain make substantially less than an A320 captain, adjusting for the seat count? As they aircraft depreciates, should pay scale down accordingly?
The safety and experience argument is the way to go IMO.
Last edited: