Airlines and Unions

[CFI'er]

Chicken Is Still Cheap

Even at $6.75 for a 4 lb chicken, it is cheaper than the $18.79 lb I paid for our lobster on New Years eve and I had to cook them on top of that. The $18.79 lb returned more, after the meal, than the investment if you know what I mean! The wine was superb too.

 

[Draginass]

In the long term, the corporations win very, very big. If Bush has his way, the corporate profiteers can hire Mexicans who will work for $5 an hour, no benefits, and live 10 to an apartment. Health care? The corporate executives want to shift that burden to the government and middle class taxpayers when these people claim poverty and medic-aid, or just go to the hospital and don't pay the bill. And as a bonus, the corporate types can claim that they're socially responsible for hiring minorities.

It's real simple to claim that we need increased immigration to meet the job demands. All you do is take a $20 an hour job, send it to India or China (at $20 a day), then replace it with a $5 an hour job that an American can't support a small family on . . . . but that Mexican immigration criminal can, if he's willing to live 10 to a small apartment. Hence, you need more immigration. The way Bush sees it, if you have wages that are too high for his corporate buddies, then just increase the supply of labor and PRESTO!, you have falling wages. Imagine that!

As far as prices go . . . Prices in this country are extremely low. Everything from airline fares to food. I think the American people conditioned themselves to want everything really really, really cheap . . . . until it comes to THEIR job being globally outsourced to China, Taiwan, India, etc.

I love it when Mr. Bush says we need to retrain our workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Well, those "jobs of tomorrow" are $5 an hour, no benefit jobs.

Even now, the airline industry works in a similar way. Why do the regional airlines pay dismal compensation? Because there are pilots that are willing to work for $20k a year, in hopes of making it to a major airline and doing better. Well, those days are over my friends. The major airline managements have obedience collars on their unions for a very long time. That's why so much of the flying is being transferred to regionals . . and even lower to outsourcing companies like TSA and CHQ in the form of "reverse code sharing." That major airline job is going to retire in the near future and a lot of guys are going to find that where they are now is as good as it's going to get.

What if Mr. G had won? Well, I think we'd be sending computers and internet connections to Afganistan to try and "educate" Al Quada . . . . . and they'd be laughing all the way to their bomb making factories.

It's a sad state of affairs. The Democrats can't be entrusted with foreign policy and the Republicans can't be trusted with domestic policy.

 

[Timebuilder]

That said, Bush and the corporations are doing their best to slowly choke unions. In turn, a lot of union employees and especially airline employees have abused their union protections, which make it all the easier to be attacked.

Airline unions are their own worst enemy. Look what they did when they ignored regional pilots. Like "scarface" said, "look at you now. You all F***ed up!" Sad, but true.

Perhaps the biggest union problem is the use of the seniority system, rather than one's standing and position on a list based on merit and ability. Look at SAG, the Screen Actor's Guild. No seniority at all. A regualtion of rules, rates, and benefits. The union members are chosen according to the needs of the production, and not how long you have been a member. Never associated with one particular company, SAG actors can work for any producer who agrees to follow the contract. What a concept.

Now, about overseas labor: is their an identifiable villain, or is this just a fact of life? Is this some giant conspiracy to create a "two tiered society", or a flagrant "fascist" regieme at work to undermine our way of life?

No.

We were competing on a world stage for many, many years. Technology has made it easier for many to compete with us from other countries, and they will use cheaper labor when and where they find it. If we don't like it, we don't have to use the product, and we can write and complain if we feel so motivated. In other words we can play by the changing rules, or refuse to play. That would be a mistake, to turn our backs and not play. Under that circumstance we lose our ability to affect the game at all.

But an evil plot by Bush and giant corporations? Are you kidding? First of all, we are owners of these companies. They make profit so we can retire in comfort, send our kids to college, and to provide oportunities for employment. Many of those jobs are going overseas, so we can complain or fantasize about conspiracies, or we can create new companies and invent new products ourselves. Don't like the AOL rep with a hindu accent? Go with another ISP.


But blaming this on Bush? On Haliburton? Let me remind you of something. Having people in charge of the white house who understand the discovery, aquisition, and expansion of energy is a very good thing, indeed. Energy is what moves society, and is the very foundation of our economy. Lose that, and we can lose more than just our shirts. We can lose our future as a nation.

Now, some people are content with that idea, as they are the socialist-oriented "hate America first" crowd. They would like to see our way of life deferred to the UN and a socialist reallocation of wealth policy put in place. Rather than equal opportunity, they seek an "identical outcome", enforced by Big Brother. This is what we as Americans are facing. This is what threatens our freedom, maybe more than terrorism. It's the idea that you have some kind of "right" to an identical life experience as the next person. My friend, it just isn't so.

If executive salaries are high, it isn't because they belong to a special club. It's because they have skillsets that business demands. If you want to be a part of that life then you train and work hard to allow you to run with that particular group. If that isn't what makes you happy, you do something else. It's simple.

It isn't a conspiracy to create a class of servants.

It's life in a free society.

Work. Compete. Revise your plan. Work it again. Drop back and punt. Hire a new coach. Do what you have to do.

One thing that isn't working is a per-employer unionization of pilots. Maybe there can't be a "national union." But the current way isn't working very well.

Maybe, it needs to change, too.

 

[Astra Guy]

Well, well...they did come out of the woodwork! I started this in part so I could get more educated about the situation. There have lots and lots of posts here that are not surprisingly in support of the union concept. I can't respond to each and every point right now but I will get to it.

I will say this for those of you who view corporate aviation as being on call 24/7 you are wrong. We do have a schedule and qualified external pilots to fill in when someone internally can't fly a trip due to crew rest or otherwise occupied. In fact we have a more conservative crew rest policy than most 121 ops that I am aware of. As for a 30 hour pilot being paid 75 hours worth of and has the option of doing that indefinitely I believe that is absolute craziness, but again that is my view.

I do agree that your management determines whether you really need a union or as a minimum a way to change management. I believe that we need to think out of the box a little and really look at what can be done with and without a union if our company can be reorganized. Since the pilots are such a huge workforce it appears to me that you should have more direct say in how the business is run. Do you need a union to do that? Nope. You do need strength and resolve.

As for the gentleman that commented on my military service I was one of those types that was a professional pilot for 20 years, flying as a Warrant in the Army. 20 years and 10,000 incident free flying later I retired, in some fairly high risk environments as well. And for the butt kissing business it didn't happen in the units I was in as a professional pilot....ever. I was so politically uncorrect that I had the nerve to bust two of my Commanders over the years on their annual checkrides. Did I reap the rewards of being put in my place? Well, maybe. I got better and better assignments I believe parially because I was good at what I did. People do respect that in some work environments and yes, even in the military on occasion. I don't see that happening in a seniority based system.

As for my company we probably in a rare situation. Privately held, strong family and ethical values from top down. Open door with the CEO in a company of >4,000 people. I realize that is small potatoes in comparison to your situations. Bottom line is that this same management could run any size of company with those same basics in place, unfaltering and unwavering along the way. They give us a chance to invest some of our bonus money back into the company and reap the rewards of profitability when that occurs....which is every year, by the way. A couple of the reasons for this is they are smart and realize that the most valuable asset they have is their people.

I will get off of the box now but I will try to review what each of you has said and assimilate it into my feeble little brain. I do appreciate the chance to learn and you all have volunteered to be my teachers.

I hope that whatever situation we are in as pilots or otherwise that we don't close our minds to hopefully new methods to accomplish the same thing and give each of us more of what we deserve.

 

[enigma]

Perhaps the biggest union problem is the use of the seniority system, rather than one's standing and position on a list based on merit and ability.

You know I luv ya brother, BUT you're wrong. You are looking at merit and ability as it relates to a widget production facility. I would agree that the worker who can produce 100 widgets an hour deserves more than the worker who only produces 75 widgets an hour. But a pilot isn't producing widgets, each pilot must produce the same number of landings as the next pilot. There is no room for the 75% pilot. By definition, we all produce the same product.
Now, since we all produce the same product:
how do you propose to dole out trips?
How do you decide who gets Christmas off?
How do you decide who upgrades?
How do you keep the brown-noser from upgrading because he's a brown-noser?
How do you keep management from playing favorites in all aspects of the job?

You see, seniority is our best way to keep the playing field level, it's the best way to counter the human failings that Surplus1 spoke of so elequently. I wish that I could call up SWA and tell them hire me because I can fly more hours than the next guy, but I can't. Neither can I burn less gas, or fly any faster. There are some areas in which I might be able to excell, but none of them are in the cockpit. As much as we might wish that we could be judged on merit, we all have the same merit. If you think otherwise, try and get the FAA to tell you which airline to avoid because it hires subpar pilots.

regards,
enigma

 

[SDF2BUF2MCO]

Very good points Surplus and Dragin. While the system in place may be OK, it lacks good men leading.
Astra, you mentioned you work for a company with strong ethical values. You are a "blessed" man. Think working for a smaller company (sometimes) has it advantages as well. You're at an advantage working for good people. Bottom line it comes down to character along with business sense. Unfortunately, I see the situation getting worse not better whether it be business or government. Wish I were more optimistic. Fight the good fight.

 

[mar]

Right!

Timebuilder is obviously a man who takes in a tremendous amount of infomation but unfortunately he looses credibility when every post is colored with partisan politics.

Enigma explained very well in my opinion why the seniority system is the best. It's not perfect, but it's the best for airline style operations.

As for unions, well, someone much brighter than I once noted, "A company will get the union it deserves."

 

[Astra Guy]

Enigma,

There are quantifiable and fair ways to answer each of your "How do you" questions. And they would reward the best and most dedicated folks and leave the others behind. But the system has to be changed from a strict seniority system to a mixture of seniority and performance, performance being first.

Think out of the box of the current system. Who says mgt has to have a say in any type of preferential treatment? Pilots should evaluate pilots, not the bean counters. Brown nosers? Hmmm..how about a rotating standard board of pilots to stifle this business?

All of these situations can be fairly and intelligently handled by us bright pilots brain storming to determine measurements that reward the best, etc. Mgt has no place in answering any of these questions. It could be totally turned over to the pilots to handle. Too naive for you naysayers? You guys/gals are smart...use some of that fodder and I am willing to bet a fair and equitable system can come to the surface.

As for the widget concept well there is a limit to the number of widgets or cycles or hours you can fly, right? Pay the most to those who produce the most. Leave seniority aside. I imagine that some would prefer to limit their number of widgets and enjoy more time off. If they meet whatever minimum is fair then let them do it unless you need them for a peak period.

These are just a few ideas. There can be a matrix for almost any situation. It just would not be today's status quo. And the status quo is what almost everyone is complaining about right? Well, unless you are at the top of the seniority list and know how to play the system. They would not be happy campers using a different method.

 

[Ualexpress]

O.K. I will try again. Astra I am only going to ask one question, but I would like you to answer it. If a reserve pilot, who is aviliable 20 or 21 days a month 14 hours a day, does not fly one hour during the month should he get paid?

 

[Astra Guy]

UALexpress,

I did not mean to ignore you. The answer is yes, but I don't believe at a 75 or 80 hour min. There should be a base for keeping one in the lurch, so to speak. At the same time there should be a way to control the number of reserve pilots you have. I don't have any statistical data to say whether one airline has more than they need or not. I do expect that since mgt is involved in determining the number, how and when they are used, that the system is probably not to the best specs.

Listen, I am not trying to bash 121 types. I just have a feeling that management has screwed the pooch here and I am not sure that the unions have not helped them do that.

Anything else?

 

[Astra Guy]

UALexpress,

I do have one more question. Is there a way for someone to pass over an opportunity to have a line and remain on reserve?

 

[surplus1]

Airline unions are their own worst enemy. Look what they did when they ignored regional pilots.

I see you didn't get the point. It is not the "union" that ignores the regional pilots, it is other pilots who choose to call themselves major pilots and who believe that they have more "merit" that pilots who don't work for companies with large aircraft. People to things to other people. The union is an inanimate object and does only what the people that control it dictate. It's a perfect exmple of your touted "merit system" at work. Those with the power decide who has the "merit", and of course choose themselves and their friends.

The problem in the airline pilots union is one of discrimination. A typical scenario in which those in a self-annointed superior class, attempt to take advantage of those that they consider, in their own interest, as inferiors. The union is mereley a tool that they use to control their peers.

Perhaps the biggest union problem is the use of the seniority system, rather than one's standing and position on a list based on merit and ability.

I'll admit that seniority systems sometimes result in the promotion of those less qualified. That is not the case with airline pilots. We all meet the same professional standards regardless of seniority. The seniority system merely guarantees open opportunity for better positions, without dependency on patronage.

I wish you could outline for me which "merit system" functions fairly and provides equal opportunity. When one is dependent on merit systems it almost always results in a$$ kissing. He that kisses best and most often rises one step above his level of incompetence.

A seniority system may not be good for paper shufflers, but it works fine for those whose professional qualifications are governed by an extarnal criterion, which is the case with pilots. Being "senior" doesn't make you a captain, it merely ensure that you will have the opportunity to attempt to qualify. If you fail, you will not be promoted no matter how senior you may be. You can't pass check rides by kissing the backside of your boss.

On the other hand, in the world of corporate aviation you don't become a captain because it is your turn. You get the turn if the chief pilot likes you, and you don't if he doesn't. By the same token, you become chief pilot if you identify the right passengers to suck up to and can do it with aplomb. It has little to do with "merit". And yes, I have worked for 3 different fortune 500 companies with corporate flight departments.

Look at SAG, the Screen Actor's Guild. No seniority at all. A regualtion of rules, rates, and benefits. The union members are chosen according to the needs of the production, and not how long you have been a member. Never associated with one particular company, SAG actors can work for any producer who agrees to follow the contract. What a concept.

I hope you're not trying to tell us that actors and actresses get their parts and chance at stardom based only on their talent? It's rather well known what most actors/actresses have to do before they get the chance to demonstrate their real talents, and it isn't membership in the SAG.

Now, about overseas labor: is their an identifiable villain, or is this just a fact of life? Is this some giant conspiracy to create a "two tiered society", or a flagrant "fascist" regieme at work to undermine our way of life?

No.

We were competing on a world stage for many, many years. Technology has made it easier for many to compete with us from other countries, and they will use cheaper labor when and where they find it. If we don't like it, we don't have to use the product, and we can write and complain if we feel so motivated. In other words we can play by the changing rules, or refuse to play. That would be a mistake, to turn our backs and not play. Under that circumstance we lose our ability to affect the game at all.

You make some valid points there. We are competing on a world stage. I would have no problem with that if an Indian company, using Indian developed technology, could provide a better product at a lower cost and thus gain the business of Americans. Like the Japanese have done in the automobile industry. But that is not what we are experiencing.

When an American company, exports American technology to a foreign country and then outsources the work of Americans to foreginers, making a product that is not marketed to those foreigners, but is sold to Americans, that company is sacrificing the welfare of American workers in the name of greater profits. When an American company establishes a branch in a foreign country, so that it can exploit cheap labor in that country and avoid taxes on its profits, while selling to Americans and taking jobs from Americans, I think that's wrong.

I don't think that Bush is making these things happen, but I also know that he is doing nothing to prevent it from happening. Bush is dependent for his continued political success on the big money contributed by the very coporate moguls that are doing these things. Big business is his mentor, big business is his supporter, big business is his "friend". They take care of him and he takes care of them. It is not an evil plot, it is "just business" as you all say.

As for our being "owners" of these companies, that's the biggest fabrication of all. I guess you're refering to the stock market. Well, yes, I play in the market too, but I'm not under the ilusion that I "own" the companies in which I buy stock. That system is nothing more than a sophisticated gambling scheme. Las Vegas pales beside it. Shareholders, do not call the shots, and those that think they do are wanting for gray matter. Most of the stocks are in mutual funds, and it is no longer a secret how the people that run those funds manipulate and steal from the public.

If you win big in Vegas you can retire in comfort. If you win big on Wall Street or the Chicago futures market you can do the same. However, please don't tell me that I "own" these companies. I just play on their roulette wheels, and just like in Vegas, the real owners of those wheels, seldom lose much.

Let me remind you of something. Having people in charge of the white house who understand the discovery, aquisition, and expansion of energy is a very good thing, indeed.

Boy, they really got you snookered. Tell you what, I think you'd be a good prospect for investing in a huge hen house, overseen by a fox.

Now, some people are content with that idea, as they are the socialist-oriented "hate America first" crowd. They would like to see our way of life deferred to the UN and a socialist reallocation of wealth policy put in place. Rather than equal opportunity, they seek an "identical outcome", enforced by Big Brother. This is what we as Americans are facing. This is what threatens our freedom, maybe more than terrorism.

My friend the fruitcake season is over. That rant is the biggest piece of so-called right wing crap that I've seen in a long time. "Hate Amerca first?" Where the he!! do you get the nerve to accuse fellow citizens that may disagree with your concepts of hating America? Where do you get this idea of "socialist reallocation of wealth?" Who told you that we who differ want our way of life deferred to the UN? If you have something meaningful to say, but all means do it. I don't ask you to agree with me or anybody else, but when you get off on this idea of suggestion that I may be less of an Amercan that you are because I don't like your politics, I've had it.

My patriotism is just as good as yours or that of George Bush and the rest of your minions. Tell me I'm stupid if you want to, but don't question my love for this country, my loyalty to the Republic, nor my support for the American way just because we may disagree.

The misguided "we know what's best for you" philosophy of the right wing is perhaps the greatest danger that we face.

Sorry for the rant, but that gets my goat.

If executive salaries are high, it isn't because they belong to a special club. It's because they have skillsets that business demands.

That sir is garbage, and if you don't know it you ought to. What skill sets do these people have, when the companies they manage lose billions and they continue to vote themselves extraordinary, bonuses, and perks. Those are the skillsets of a thief, not a good executive.

Some labor unions are run by people that are no different from other types of executives, i.e., crooks, and I don't excuse them. All corporate executives aren't bad or evil, and neither are all union boses.

Representation of employees is a necessity. We need unions and we need Board Rooms, to balance each other. What we don't need is the replacement of the Almighty with a new set of Gods, whose faces appear on the paper we call money.

We do need a change. A return to the humble morality of the mainstream American, the worker that built this Republic, along with the visionary type of leader found among our forefathers. The current bunch of apirants for the highest office in our land, including the incumbent, don't seem to measure up. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[Astra Guy]

Surplus1,

I have no idea who you work for and really don't care. That little nugget of info regarding Chief Pilots and Captains is absolutely bogus in my world.

The Delta guys remember the shrink that was part of their interview process. The one with two rocking chairs in his office....well before I was even interviewed beyond the HR type I was sent to the very same gentleman for a battery of tests and two one on one interviews. There were ~50 candidates for the job, which was Chief Pilot, by the way since they were just starting a flight department. Anyhoo, after the testing I was called in for the remainder of the interviews and was offered the job. I had never met any of these people except the HR type in my life. I have hired each and every pilot and no one has kissed my butt. If they had attempted to they would be eliminated from the competition. I am results oriented. You can either do the job and do it well or not. Part of my job is to keep everyone on track. I am apolitical and I encourage that with each of my folks.

If I don't stereotype your type then please don't stereotype mine.

 

[enigma]

Enigma,

There are quantifiable and fair ways to answer each of your "How do you" questions. And they would reward the best and most dedicated folks and leave the others behind. But the system has to be changed from a strict seniority system to a mixture of seniority and performance, performance being first.

Performance is already first. You perform every six months or you're out. The union demands that management can't use this as a way to can outspoken pilots, but the union can't stop the company from firing a non-performer. Seniority only dictates who gets the first opportunity to be in the box.

Think out of the box of the current system. Who says mgt has to have a say in any type of preferential treatment? Pilots should evaluate pilots, not the bean counters. Brown nosers? Hmmm..how about a rotating standard board of pilots to stifle this business?

Now you're starting to sound just a little utopian. Are you serious? Pilots evaluating pilots and managment having no input, are you kidding? Management will never give up the control. I'm afraid your experience in the real world must be fairly limited.

All of these situations can be fairly and intelligently handled by us bright pilots brain storming to determine measurements that reward the best, etc. Mgt has no place in answering any of these questions.

See above

It could be totally turned over to the pilots to handle. Too naive for you naysayers? You guys/gals are smart...use some of that fodder and I am willing to bet a fair and equitable system can come to the surface.

Now you're really sounding like a crack smoker. Get pilots to agree on something other than seniority, get real. Believe it or not, I've actually beaten my head against that wall with other pilots on a semi-related matter, and we collectively distrust everyone else so much that we are too scared to give up the best system yet devised.

As for the widget concept well there is a limit to the number of widgets or cycles or hours you can fly, right? Pay the most to those who produce the most. Leave seniority aside. I imagine that some would prefer to limit their number of widgets and enjoy more time off. If they meet whatever minimum is fair then let them do it unless you need them for a peak period.

Brother, you're showing your lack of experience. You see, seniority already allows those who produce the most to earn the most. Unless you work for a one plane airline, multiple lines of flight will be flown, seniority determines who flys what line. Some lines fly more, others fly less, the senior pilot gets his pick. Some people prefer to bid for max days off and then pick up open time on those days. Believe me, the most productive pilot will earn the most money. There are ways for pilots to beat the system, things like bidding into a end of month conflict, but those are another issue, not one of seniority.

You mention meeting a fair minimum, once again you're showing your inexperience and I'm afraid that the way you have approached the whole topic shows your bias against workers. It costs money to maintain pilot currency and proficiency. No manager worth his wage wants to keep pilots current and proficient just to let them fly a minimum schedule. Yes there are pilots, myself included, that would bid a line with fewer work days, but management will not build those lines.

These are just a few ideas. There can be a matrix for almost any situation. It just would not be today's status quo. And the status quo is what almost everyone is complaining about right? Well, unless you are at the top of the seniority list and know how to play the system. They would not be happy campers using a different method.

What do you percieve todays status quo to be? I see todays status quo as a system that allows me to know that I will not be the victim of arbitrary and capricious treatment, that will allow me my fair shot at flying/upgrade/etc, and allows me to know where I stand.

I don't mean to come over as mean spirited, but just what are you trying to achieve here? You certainly seem to dislike status quo, I just don't know that you understand what that status is.

One last point, don't forget, labor contracts are AGREEMENTS. Agreements that were negotiated and AGREED to by BOTH parties. If you don't like them remember, you management boys are 50% to blame.

regards,
enigma, a pilot who is no lover of ALPA.

edit: PS, I have more experience corporate than 121. Matter of fact, I've probably spent more time with a retired W4 than you have. And look where I am now he said as he showed his prejudice.

 

[enigma]

Surplus1,

I have no idea who you work for and really don't care. That little nugget of info regarding Chief Pilots and Captains is absolutely bogus in my world.

If I don't stereotype your type then please don't stereotype mine.

Surplus1 is a long time Comair Captain. I would encourage you to read his words with a great deal of respect. I don't agree with everything he says, but Surplus is not the typical wet behind the ears punk who spouts off with an uninformed opinion. I also believe that Surplus is ex-mil. Most likely a retired AirForce Officer. Probably a full bird colonel, judging by the way he writes.

My experience with corporate "Chief Pilots" mirrors Surplus's to the tee. If you don't fit the stereotype, I applaud you. But I have to say that this string is starting to make me believe that you are more manager than pilot.

You close with an admonishon about stereotyping. Yet this entire string is the result of your stereotyping a group of pilots you apparently know nothing about. You've taken a managers, stereotypical view of a 121 pilots situation and attempted to paint with a broad brush.

Here's a question for you. Are you a Chief Pilot?

regards,
enigma

 

[Astra Guy]

Enigma,

I never said I was smart. I think I did say I wanted to be educated on your system.

BTW we all take semi annual rides in the corporate world too. That is not the only measure of a performer...it is a baseline.

Well my experience in "the real world" as you put it must be referring to 121 operations. You are right there. However I have been flying for a living for 36 years at last count. I wasn't doing that in another world. As for mgt giving up the control how do you know? You all negotiate contracts, correct? I am not saying that the mgt doesn't suck, it apparently does in most of the Legacy types, as they are so called.

Well if you pilots can't agree on anything other than seniority then you deserve what you get and shouldn't bitch about mgt doing a piss poor job.

Drinking too much of your own Koolaid in the next response.

You call me a management boy? Hmmm...well in my operation we all fly equally. I accept the crap with the sugar and therefore have no reason to accept belly aching from my folks.

Bias against workers? That's a good one. The annual raises that we are offered are negotiated by me with my direct supervisor, a VP. Bottom line is that historically I have gone to bat and negotiated higher % in terms of annual raises for them than I have received myself. If you do a great job you get the best possible raise. If you do a mediocre job that is the raise you will get. Not all folks perform equally even in the seniority system...that is a fact.

I don't understand the point of the last statement, but then again I admitted I wanted to learn and understand.

By the way thanks so much for being so belittling in your remarks. I am no utopian, crack smoker or management boy. I am an honest and concerned pilot for not only 91 operators but even my 121 bretherens. As I have often said sometimes the folks that talk the most have the least to say.

Good Day!

 

[Astra Guy]

Enigma,

Well, if I say I am a Chief Pilot, which I do, then you can take it to the bank. I may be a rare one but I be one. Surplus1's ex rank in the military doesn't impress me. I have had many of his rank as my copilot.

I do fit a dual role in my company. I get to perform much of the admin stuff as well as fly the line like everyone else. I probably don't fit the stereotypical Chief Pilot mode simply because I am as eager to fly as any and probably give them the standard to rise to in the cockpit. I am a pilot first and manager second.

Believe me I had no intention of stereotyping any group of pilots. I just have serious questions about why a union is so necessary for a group that consider themselves "Professionals" using that term most respectfully.

I am very happy that I am a Professional and in, what I guess, a very lucky position not to need anyone else to represent me and for that matter my folks.

 

[enigma]

Part One

Astra, You come here with a condescending tone. Your post says that you are looking for info, but your words give you away. Your mind is already made up. You seem to think that seniority is bad and unions are worse. I don't like unions, but I like overbearing managers even less. I'm glad you are happy in corporate.

Sorry about the crack smoking comment. It's sort of a flightinfo insiders joke. I didn't realize you would take it literally.

Next. Here are my words, where did I call you "boy"?

"Surplus1 is a long time Comair Captain. I would encourage you to read his words with a great deal of respect. I don't agree with everything he says, but Surplus is not the typical wet behind the ears punk who spouts off with an uninformed opinion. I also believe that Surplus is ex-mil. Most likely a retired AirForce Officer. Probably a full bird colonel, judging by the way he writes.

My experience with corporate "Chief Pilots" mirrors Surplus's to the tee. If you don't fit the stereotype, I applaud you. But I have to say that this string is starting to make me believe that you are more manager than pilot.

You close with an admonishon about stereotyping. Yet this entire string is the result of your stereotyping a group of pilots you apparently know nothing about. You've taken a managers, stereotypical view of a 121 pilots situation and attempted to paint with a broad brush.

Here's a question for you. Are you a Chief Pilot?"

Quote 2: Performance is already first. You perform every six months or you're out. The union demands that management can't use this as a way to can outspoken pilots, but the union can't stop the company from firing a non-performer. Seniority only dictates who gets the first opportunity to be in the box.

Quote 3: Now you're starting to sound just a little utopian. Are you serious? Pilots evaluating pilots and managment having no input, are you kidding? Management will never give up the control. I'm afraid your experience in the real world must be fairly limited.

Quote 4: Now you're really sounding like a crack smoker. Get pilots to agree on something other than seniority, get real. Believe it or not, I've actually beaten my head against that wall with other pilots on a semi-related matter, and we collectively distrust everyone else so much that we are too scared to give up the best system yet devised.

Quote 5:Brother, you're showing your lack of experience. You see, seniority already allows those who produce the most to earn the most. Unless you work for a one plane airline, multiple lines of flight will be flown, seniority determines who flys what line. Some lines fly more, others fly less, the senior pilot gets his pick. Some people prefer to bid for max days off and then pick up open time on those days. Believe me, the most productive pilot will earn the most money. There are ways for pilots to beat the system, things like bidding into a end of month conflict, but those are another issue, not one of seniority.

You mention meeting a fair minimum, once again you're showing your inexperience and I'm afraid that the way you have approached the whole topic shows your bias against workers. It costs money to maintain pilot currency and proficiency. No manager worth his wage wants to keep pilots current and proficient just to let them fly a minimum schedule. Yes there are pilots, myself included, that would bid a line with fewer work days, but management will not build those lines.

Quote 6: What do you perceive todays status quo to be? I see todays status quo as a system that allows me to know that I will not be the victim of arbitrary and capricious treatment, that will allow me my fair shot at flying/upgrade/etc, and allows me to know where I stand.

I don't mean to come over as mean spirited, but just what are you trying to achieve here? You certainly seem to dislike status quo, I just don't know that you understand what that status is.

One last point, don't forget, labor contracts are AGREEMENTS. Agreements that were negotiated and AGREED to by BOTH parties. If you don't like them remember, you management boys are 50% to blame.

regards,
enigma, a pilot who is no lover of ALPA.

edit: PS, I have more experience corporate than 121. Matter of fact, I've probably spent more time with a retired W4 than you have. And look where I am now he said as he showed his prejudice.

End of Quotes, Now I say again, Where did I call you boy?

 

[enigma]

Part Two

You're just a little touchy aren't you?

You haven't answered the questions.

What is the status quo?
Why is the status quo bad?

Are you a chief pilot?


BTW, I've been posting on this forum a long time. I'm sure I have my detractors, but I'll stand on my reputation. I offer the best info I can and try hard to edit out anything demeaning before I click the submit button. Believe it or not, you didn't read my first response to your self-righteous words.

Well I just paged down to extract a quote and notice that you have answered the question.

So I have another. Do you operate under 135, 121, or 125?

Now, your last post includes this, "Believe me I had no intention of stereotyping any group of pilots. I just have serious questions about why a union is so necessary for a group that consider themselves "Professionals" using that term most respectfully.

I am very happy that I am a Professional and in, what I guess, a very lucky position not to need anyone else to represent me and for that matter my folks."

What's your topic? Seniority or Unions? I'm not arguing for unions, I am arguing for seniority. If I need a union to get that protection, I guess that I'll take one.

BTW, your tone about Surplus's rank betrays your true feelings. I strongly encourage you to go back and read this string with an eye toward your own attitude. I would trust Surplus with my seniority, I'm not sure about you.



enigma

 

[Astra Guy]

Enigma,

Ok, you caught me. I was mispoke. Sorry about committing an error.

I do feel badly that you think I am a management driven type. I think there are many problems in your industry, not mine, that have been created by an ineffective system of rewards and benefits. My attitude is more entrepenural (sp) I suppose.

In any event I don't disrespect your chosen profession. I am glad you all are doing that and not me, but that is my choice.

Ron