Airlines and Unions

[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

 

[A Squared]

"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'm not claiming that you are on call 24/7, but I would be willing to bet large sums of money that some months you do less flying than others ... am I right? and I'm going to go out further on the limb and say that your salary remains the same even for the months when you don't fly much...right? Unless the answer to both these questions is no, and you are paid strictly on a flight hour basis, no fly, no pay, than your terms of compensation are in part based on you being available, even if you don't fly.

Here's an exercise for you. Pull out your flight records for last year. Find the month where you flew the most hours. Find the month where you flew the least hours.

Compute: 1-(most hours in a month/least hours in a month)

Take that number and multiply it by your monthly salary.

Write a check for that amount and give it to your employer.

Repeat this process for the remaining 10 months of last year.

When you have done this, and only after the checks have cleared, then you can come back and speak with some credibility on the subject of reserve. Until then, you haven't a shred of credibility on the subject.

Here's the deal on reserve:

Airlines need to maintain a certain level of reserve capacity in terms of equipment, personnel and other assets to meet contingencies. That is just the way it is. It must be that way to maintain a schedule. If all assets are at 100% utilization in a normal schedule, there is no reserve capacity. In such an operation, when contingencies occur ( Wx, Mechanical, Illness, etc.) , and they do occur with greater frequency than you probably realize, the schedule will necessarily be disrupted. A company which is unable to maintain a schedule most of the time will soon find themselves without customers.

Your operation by it's nature can function with a lower level of contingency reserve. You mention that you have external pilots available, I suspect that there is some cost associated with having the external pilots available. Ultimately, if everything falls apart, the goal of transporting the executive(s) can be accomplished with an airline ticket or two. Perhaps not the most convenient or desirable alternative, but it's a back up that is almost always there. An airline doesn't have that luxury.

Bottom line, an airline can't exist without crews on reserve.

It is a service that the airline needs, even if it doesn't utilize it. Should pilots provide that service for free? Your comments seem to suggest that you believe this. You appear to have the view of reserve as some extended holiday at the employers expense. Yes, at the end of the month, you can look back and see a fair amount of time where the pilot wasn't flying. That is not quite the same as being free. What isn't apparent is the obligation to report to the airport within a short time after a phone call, the inability to plan, the requirement to drop everything an go to work, even if it is in the evening of a full day. In some cases sitting reserve means being present at the airport, suited up and ready to go. That is what you're being paid for, the airline owning options on your time, not the actual flying you do. A company doesn't give away stock options for free, why should they expect options on an employee's time for free?

My employer doesn't typically have reserve only lines, but a combination of unusual circumstances and a tragic bidding accident has resulted in me holding a reserve only line for the past month. I haven't flown much this month, in fact with 3 days left in this "month" (our schedule periods don't match calendar months) The numbers aren't too terribly different that your "flying 30 hours and getting paid for 75" (actually a bit more than 30 and quite a bit less than 75 but I digress) The rest of my money is pay for remaining within a certain distance of the airport, pay for carrying my cell phone around and answering it even when I don't want to, pay for not having a beer with my pizza in the evening, pay for telling my significant other, sorry hon, looks like we can't go out for dinner tonight like we planned (more than once ... still haven't been able to work that night out into the schedule), pay dragging my ass out to the airport at 1900 on an hour's notice for a flight which will last till the wee hours of the next morning after being awake since 0700, pay for completely rearranging the next day because my tentative plans didn't include sleeping in till 10:30 just to get adequate rest after the late flight, nor had I planned for the inevitable disrupted circadian rhythms.

Have I had a fair amount of time this month when I wasn't flying? Yeah. Did I suffer inhumane treatment? no, but; would I voluntarily do this again? No, not as long as I can avoid it. I don't like it one bit. If I'm only going to get paid my minimum guarantee for the month, I would much rather fly up to my minimum guarantee in consecutive 6 day blocks of scheduled flights and then have the rest of the time off... as in: actually *off *, free to do as I wish, no obligation to drop everything I'm doing and go off and fly.

OK, getting back to the central theme: There is no question that Airlines need pilots on reserve, of that there is absolutely no question, without that service, the airline will fail. And pilots provide that service. Initially, it seemed that you were suggesting that pilots should not be paid for that service, now reading one of your later posts I see that you agree that reserve is worthy of pay, you just have issue with the amount it pays.

First, off the amount of pilot/hours of reserve an airline has in a month is set by management. Whether it is too many or too few is completely irrelevant. That is how many management planned for when they put together that schedule. It they planned incorrectly, it is in no way shape or form the fault of the pilots. Management gets exactly what they asked for. An airline just doesn't wind up with a bunch of reserve pilots because all the pilots bid reserve. The system doesn't work that way.

So, how much is a month of reserve *worth*? Well, let's take a look at that traditional determiner of value, the marketplace.....specifically the pilot labor marketplace for a given company. I think that you will find that at all airlines, reserve lines tend to be junior lines. To put that differently, the pilots who have the seniority to choose their lines do not choose (as a general rule) reserve lines...even at the 75 or 80 hour guarantees, a reserve line is not an attractive line and winds up being assigned to pilots who are too low in the pecking order to avoid them. Sure, there are exceptions, some few pilots may like the reserve lifestyle, or it may fit their personal needs for a particular month, and they may chose reserve lines. But in the long run, it's the junior pilots who wind up with the reserve lines, and they are usually not happy about it. If sitting reserve for 75 hours of pay is really such a screaming, smoking, fabulous deal for indolent pilots, then explain why the reserve lines aren't all held by the most senior pilots at each airline? Why aren't the pilots who get reserve lines ecstatic?

The reality is that the majority of pilots don't think all that *free* money for sitting reserve is a good deal compared to *working* for your salary that month. Now, here's the situation. You, who have never sat a month of reserve think that 75 hours is way too much pay for sitting reserve. On the other hand, pilots who have actually done it, don't think that sitting reserve for 75 hours of pay is a good deal, and would chose the alternatives if able. You think that the pilots who have actually done it might know something you don't?

Well, I hadn't intended to rant on quite so much about reserve, but I'm finishing up a month on reserve which hasn't been terribly pleasant, and I'm not particularly interested in listening to someone who hasn't walked in these shoes insinuate that I should send half my paycheck back the company.

 

[Astra Guy]

Enigma,

I guess it is just you and me now. I think the first unanswered question is about what is the status quo. My belief on the status quo in 121 operations is that seniority rules the roost. This is partially true because if you pass your semi-annual ride every time then you keep moving up the ladder. Passing the semi-annual ride has to be a given. You may have flown with pilots who are junior in seniority but superior in ability. I have. If there is a deterioration in ability as you move up the seniority chain and your are compensated more then I personally believe it is wrong.

I have the impression, from personal experience, that some who have been in the business the longest are heavy on experience but not as sharp as they could be. Hey, I am approaching a number of years flying myself and have to work at staying ahead of the folks I fly with.

We are a 91 operation. However, it is a very regimented 91 operation for safety reasons.

My initial post asked the questions about unions. Naturally subsequent to that was the seniority question simply because the unions created the system years ago.

I can understand why you would trust Surplus1 with your seniority vs my attitude. Simply put ability, dedication and being a team member goes much farther with me than seniority.

Business flying is still being part of a team (company) and being a contributor in whatever way you can. There was a day when there was pride in being a team player because flying was good and most viewed they were getting what they were due. Those days are disappearing and my contention is that it is partially managements' fault and partially the unions and workers' fault. Pick a poor performing airline and you can see who the villain is if you are objective. In some cases it is both.

 

[enigma]

Enigma,

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

No problem, it is a little too easy to get overly enthusiastic with my words when typing. I'm sure that we all tend to do that when facing nothing more intimidating than a keyboard. Let me be perfectly clear on this, my words have been in response to this: "It does seem odd to me that this guaranteed pay for 75 hours/month for those on reserve when they only fly 30 or so is detrimental. The problem is that some of these folks would love to stay on reserve forever simply because they can make ends meet while putting forth little effort." I guess that I wasn't clear as to what part of your question I found to be objectionable.

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.

What are those problems, and how were they created?

How is the system of benefits/rewards ineffective?

Why do you characterize a 121 reserve pilot as "putting forth little effort"?

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

Now, back to the battle.

I was serious about your need to go back to the beginning and look at your own tone. You come here, tell us our system is screwed up by asking a biased question, confuse union worth with senioritys worth, insinuate that the airline industrys problems are caused by unions, etc. I truly do not understand your motive for starting the thread to begin with.

Another couple of points. JetBlue, the most successful startup airline in the last few years uses a seniority system for its pilots.
Southwest, arguably the most successful airline in the last decade, is the MOST unionized in the business. Southwests pilots work according to seniority.

In short, attitude comes from the top. This is not a chicken/egg question. Clearly, good management is required to set the tone for the employees. Like someone elses signature reads, Poor managers eventually gain the unions they deserve. Mr. Kelleher gets productivity, Mr.'s Lorenzo/Cord/Borman/Wolf/Icahn/Crandall/Ornstein/etc get hate. I wonder why?

In closing, my chosen profession is Professional Pilot. I'm glad that you don't disrespect it. I am a pilot. I work for an airline. I belong to a union because it was there when I got there. I pay dues because I have to. I stay there because I have a much better life as a LCC Captain than I did as a Part91 corporate pilot. If I could find a corporate operation that allowed me a guaranteed 13 days off per month, and a guaranteed 16 hour maximum duty day, and allowed me to live in a low cost of living area, I'd take it. Like I said, I've been both places. I've spent the same days sittinng in the FBO that you have, I've talked to the same corporate pukes that were on their tenth straight day that you have. The next time you decide to tilt at windmills, why not address the life of a corporate pilot. I want to know why retired pilots from other areas of aviation tend to flock to corporate and then ruin it for the rest of the pilots. Nothing personal, I don't recall reading whether or not you are retired. They come ready to work twenty days straight because their kids are all grown, their wife would really rather have them out of the house, and they need a hobby. How about commenting on how that catagory of pilot sets the bar so low?

Sorry, I was getting into a rant.

enigma

 

[Astra Guy]

A Squared,

I am sorry that you had to take the time to explain in more detail your situation. I said I wanted to be educated. Thanks for that. I admit I haven't walk the line and won't. I just have some personal knowledge of someone who has used this reserve business to suit his needs and doesn't mind having the min pay for the min work. There is no doubt that if you are on call that you should be reimbursed. I do question the method.

It has to be a pain to be on such a short noose, but that is my opinion as is everything I have said here. I am not saying that you should be paid less in any way...what might be a better idea would be to be on a salary to a point and then paid hourly above a certain level of activity above that min. That could, if your union went to bat for you, reimburse you more for the inconvenience.

I come from simple beginnings in the midwest where I was taught "a fair day's wage for a fair day's work." I guess it depends upon your perspective as to what the wage/day is.

I am not an airline management supporter. I think they have done more to screw up what used to be a great deal into something much below moral and ethical standards. I also believe that the union concept can be counter productive in terms of achieving this fair wage for a day's work.

As I have stated earlier our company pays non-union workers more than the union can negotiate for their members in other locations. Does the company have the option of shutting down a plant of striking workers? You bet. Can they shift that work to other locations? You bet. Why? Because it is a business and sometimes, not always, but sometimes workers believe so much of the union party line that they jeopardize their jobs, permanentaly. Illegal? Nope. Unfortunate...of course.

Everyone has to make choices in what they do. And they should not keep a closed mind to ideas that may in fact lead to a better quality of life and a better chance of working for a profitable company.

I hope you get your line back and get things back to normal. I also hope that your airline is profitable. Keep in mind it is all about customer service for your pax...the one's who pay the bills.

 

[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?

Absolutely. That is what seniority is all about. I did it this month. Now that does not mean anyone who wants a reserve line will get one. Bidding at most airlines consist of choosing between several printed schedules of the following month. Lets say airline XYZ has a crew base in PHX. Lets say there are 50 captains and 50 first officers. The airline will make up 50 schedules for the captains and 50 for the first officers (100 total). About 80-85% of those lines of flying will be with scheduled trips and scheduled days off. The rest will be reseve lines with scheduled reserve days and scheduled days off. Each pilot puts in their bid. In this case there will be approximately 9 reserve lines. They go through those 50 lines (41 regular lines and 9 reserve lines) and pick in order the lines they desire. Now the number one captain and FO only have to bid one line because they will get what they bid because their bids are the first bid the crew planner will look at because their seniority dictates this. The number two guy will only have to bid two lines because he will at worst get his second choice and so on until the 50th FO and captain, they both have to bid 50 lines. If the number one guy wants to bid one of those reserve line he will get it. Nothing wrong with that. There are going to be nine pilots who sit reseve that month regardless of who does it. The more junior pilots love it when this happens because it is one less reserve line that is there when the crew planner gets to their bid so they may actually wind up with a regular line.

Now most people that are senior enough do not bid reserve because for the most part it sucks as has been mentioned before. You are on a 90 minute chain (at my company, some are longer and some are shorter). I did it this month (even though I can hold a regular line of flying) because I needed a long stretch of days off during the second weekend of the month. I am not senior enough to bid a regular line of flying with weekends off (although I am senior enough to hold a regular line without the weekends off). So in my bid I bid all the regular lines with that weekend off (I knew I wouldn't get it but what the hey maybe someone would forget to bid) and then I put the reseve lines that had that weekend off and that is what I wound up with. I have spent half of those reserve days at the airport sitting ready reserve. That is where you suit up and head to the airport for the day to log "couch time" waiting for a last minute contingency problem. After this month of doing reserve I will not do it for a long time it is really not as fun of a lifestyle as you make it out to be. I hope this answers your question on how airline schedules work. Later.

 

[Astra Guy]

Enigma,

You may think I am full of hooey and maybe I am. My wife might agree with you. I have no dog in this race just ideas that might lead to a better life for some.

For your first response see my response to A Squared.

The problems I was referring to are bottom line problems in lean economic times. You know the cycle...every ten years or so the economy takes a dump...airlines furlough people...things turn around in time and hiring begins another cycle.

The rewards/benefits deal is that in what has been known as a classic airline career is that the lower you are on the seniority list you are the more pay you get for less days of work. I am talking about guys near retirement and not with 15 years in the business. You know as well as I that most, not all, 59 year olds are not as sharp as a 40 year old physically or mentally. Keep in mind that I am 56. I argue this only because I don't think a 40 year old with 15 years in should be overlooked for upgrades or other career enhancements because he was born later. I have to assume that 15 years of airline experience would breed a pretty sharp pilot and thereby keep everyone safe in most circumstances.

I think Jet Blue, SWA and Airtran will change the entire landscape. I also think that they seem to be happy campers. They sure express it to their passengers, for the most part, which will reap them even more business.

I am retired military. I am also the one that developed the Ops Manual that restricts flying activity to no more than 5 out of 7. No more than 14 hours, block to block and going to a hotel when this limit will be in question. Our pax in the back don't want fatigued crews. The first pilot I hired from a civilian background was spring loaded to doing whatever it takes, even working 18 hours/day. I had to educate him a little...actually more than a little. Believe me when it comes to people abuse I try my best to keep everyone's interests/needs in mind. We don't break the rules. We bring in outside qualified and trained pilots to supplement our internal crews when something won't fit into the policy.

I am in this for the long haul..probably not many more years but have been leading this group for 13 years, accident and incident free. I am not the holier or better than thou type. I just hired someone who might step into my shoes in a few years and he is not a buddy of mine. I will feel better when I ride off into the sunset knowing I have left things in good hands. But that is just me.

As an old Dustoff type I am just glad to wake up alive each morning...I have been living on borrowed time for many years but I will borrow as much as I can.

Good luck to you and yours'. Fly Safely!

PS Nice yakking at ya.

 

[Astra Guy]

UALexpress,

Thanks for taking the time to educate me further. I am a curious sort and help is always appreciated.

Fly Safely!

 

[enigma]

Enigma,

I guess it is just you and me now. I think the first unanswered question is about what is the status quo. My belief on the status quo in 121 operations is that seniority rules the roost. This is partially true because if you pass your semi-annual ride every time then you keep moving up the ladder. Passing the semi-annual ride has to be a given. You may have flown with pilots who are junior in seniority but superior in ability. I have. If there is a deterioration in ability as you move up the seniority chain and your are compensated more then I personally believe it is wrong.

Passing the six month check a given? Please. My carrier has fired at least five pilots in the last couple of years for failing their checkrides. Even after multiple chances, they failed, they're gone.

I think that we are arguing apples and oranges. Are you against seniority controlling my relationship to other pilots, or are you against seniority allowing a weak pilot to remain employed?

I have the impression, from personal experience, that some who have been in the business the longest are heavy on experience but not as sharp as they could be. Hey, I am approaching a number of years flying myself and have to work at staying ahead of the folks I fly with.

So what? If they can pass a six month check with a Fed hanging over the checkairmans shoulder, they are good enough.

Once again, I'm not sure why seniority has created, "problems in your industry, not mine, that have been created by an ineffective system of rewards and benefits.", and why you are so opposed to seniority rule. Seniority isn't tenure, it doesn't give carte blanc.

We are a 91 operation. However, it is a very regimented 91 operation for safety reasons.

Not to be a jerk, but if you are Part91, you are not a Chief Pilot. See Part119.

Self disclosure: one of my pet peeves is "business card" chief pilots.

My initial post asked the questions about unions. Naturally subsequent to that was the seniority question simply because the unions created the system years ago.

I can understand why you would trust Surplus1 with your seniority vs my attitude. Simply put ability, dedication and being a team member goes much farther with me than seniority.

Why do you keep placing seniority opposite of teamwork and dedication? It is this tone/attitude that makes me say that you are biased against workers. Some of my most dedicated co-workers are also the most senior. They are the senior Captains who use their own cell phones to call dispatch because the company is too cheap to put phones in the jetways, etc. They are the employees who acted as gate agent, cleaner, etc. when the blizzard of 2001 shut down LGA. It just isn't intellectually honest to inversely link seniority to dedication.

Business flying is still being part of a team (company) and being a contributor in whatever way you can. There was a day when there was pride in being a team player because flying was good and most viewed they were getting what they were due. Those days are disappearing and my contention is that it is partially managements' fault and partially the unions and workers' fault. Pick a poor performing airline and you can see who the villain is if you are objective. In some cases it is both.

Yea, but as I wrote earlier, the most successful airlines of our day both use seniority and one is almost completely unionized.

After two pages, maybe more, you admit that the problems may come from management.(you could have earlier, maybe I missed it) If so, then why didn't you originally ask a simple question. Something like, why are all the airlines in trouble?

regards,
enigma

 

[Astra Guy]

Enigma,

It is getting late but I will respond to the Chief Pilot part. So what does Part whatever have to do with my title? Do part 91 operators have to call ourselves Aviation Managers? or Director of Operations? It is a silly thing to argue about. The position is the same but some of us just do it differently than others. Hopefully I do it well...if I don't then I will pay the professional price.

Good Night!

 

[enigma]

The problems I was referring to are bottom line problems in lean economic times. You know the cycle...every ten years or so the economy takes a dump...airlines furlough people...things turn around in time and hiring begins another cycle.

The rewards/benefits deal is that in what has been known as a classic airline career is that the lower you are on the seniority list you are the more pay you get for less days of work. I am talking about guys near retirement and not with 15 years in the business. You know as well as I that most, not all, 59 year olds are not as sharp as a 40 year old physically or mentally. Keep in mind that I am 56. I argue this only because I don't think a 40 year old with 15 years in should be overlooked for upgrades or other career enhancements because he was born later. I have to assume that 15 years of airline experience would breed a pretty sharp pilot and thereby keep everyone safe in most circumstances.

Does this mean that your plan is to give tougher checkrides so as to eliminate the senior pilots? I'm sure Captain Al Haynes would appreciate that very much. Seriously, how does seniority and how do unions force management to keep substandard pilots? As I wrote, my carrier has fired numerous pilots. ALPA steps in to ensure that they were being fired for cause, and if they were, those pilots are gone. ALPA can't force a company to keep a substandard pilot.

I think Jet Blue, SWA and Airtran will change the entire landscape. I also think that they seem to be happy campers. They sure express it to their passengers, for the most part, which will reap them even more business.

OK, now I'm pulling out what hair I have left. SWA and AirTran are unionized. SWA heavily. All three use seniority to manage their pilots. These facts would seem to be in my favor, yet you state them. What's your point?

I am retired military. I am also the one that developed the Ops Manual that restricts flying activity to no more than 5 out of 7. No more than 14 hours, block to block and going to a hotel when this limit will be in question. Our pax in the back don't want fatigued crews. The first pilot I hired from a civilian background was spring loaded to doing whatever it takes, even working 18 hours/day. I had to educate him a little...actually more than a little. Believe me when it comes to people abuse I try my best to keep everyone's interests/needs in mind. We don't break the rules. We bring in outside qualified and trained pilots to supplement our internal crews when something won't fit into the policy.

I am in this for the long haul..probably not many more years but have been leading this group for 13 years, accident and incident free. I am not the holier or better than thou type. I just hired someone who might step into my shoes in a few years and he is not a buddy of mine. I will feel better when I ride off into the sunset knowing I have left things in good hands. But that is just me.

As an old Dustoff type I am just glad to wake up alive each morning...I have been living on borrowed time for many years but I will borrow as much as I can.

Good luck to you and yours'. Fly Safely!

PS Nice yakking at ya.

I love a good argument/discussion/debate. If I get too personal, please accept my apologies. The point/counter point is fun.

later,
enigma

 

[enigma]

Enigma,

It is getting late but I will respond to the Chief Pilot part. So what does Part whatever have to do with my title? Do part 91 operators have to call ourselves Aviation Managers? or Director of Operations? It is a silly thing to argue about. The position is the same but some of us just do it differently than others. Hopefully I do it well...if I don't then I will pay the professional price.

Good Night!

I do have time for just this

Chief Pilot is a specific designation bestowed upon Pilots who perform certain functions and have certain responsibilities working for carriers who operate under Parts121, 135, and 125 (125 if I remember correctly)

You seem like someone who would most likely qualify for the title, after the requisite experience under those Parts, unfortunately, way too many Part91 "chief pilots" do not have any qualification other than having been the only person who couldn't get a better job. No offense meant to you. Like I said, "business card" chief pilots are one of my pet peeves.

As to the proper title, the best corporate operator I was ever associated with called their aviation department manager, the Aviation Department Manager. He had no problem with the title.
BTW, I was contract. Had I been able to go full time, I'd still be there. It was a premier operation.

Later,
enigma

 

[Astra Guy]

Enigma,

Well, I understand your source for the title of Chief Pilot. Personally I don't care what my title is....it could be Joe Sheet the Ragman for all I care. As long as the title does not affect the authority/responsibility relationship and my compensation then I would be a happy camper. You are talking to a guy that while still in the service had goofy name tags made up for flight suits. One of which had wings, name, rank and "Just Average Pilot" included.

NBAA has guidelines that for job descriptions and titles. One of those is Chief Pilot, which is a notch below department manager, and they are not referring to just 121, 125, 129 operations. It is widely accepted as a bona fide title for 91 and 135 Ops as well. But as I said call me what you want, it won't hurt my feelings.

Glad to hear that you thought atleast one 91 operation was premier. There are some of us out there. And we are continually raising the bar for safety as well as compensation and QOL.

You seem to misunderstand my point about protecting pilots during lean times. I would not be motivated to whack pilots through some subjective method. I guess one of my points here is to not hire the optimum for peak times and then put a group on furlough during less good economic times. This would take more employee involvement in the decision making of running the company. If you are unionized then I would think the pilot group should press the union to pay furloughed pilots a base for whatever time they are offline. Get them to do something for the dues you are paying. If your dues won't cover it currently then dues should be increased to cover the costs.

As for the semi annual ride being a given what I meant there is that regardless of what side of the 91/121/135 fence you are on everyone has to pass those rides to be retained. Actually in my environment if we had someone who did not pass we would work with him/her to get up to speed, probably in a reasonable period of time. Day to day performance is ultimately the real deal. That can and should be evaluated as well, along the way.

This "it's us vs them" mentality between management and employees and visa versa is really counter-productive and ultimately costly. I don't know...did you read that? I don't know how to fix that. But I do believe that companies that value more employee involvement have the best chance for steady growth albeit not pie in the sky type mentality. It all depends upon the corporate culture. In our company everyone is encouraged to provide ideas on how to increase efficiency because we know that the more efficient we are as a company the more profitable we become and stability on the work side is enhanced. Most of the best ideas come from those working in the environment day in and day out.

You and I have a difference of opinion of the value that the unions provide as well as the value of the seniority system being the end all savior for workers. I have admitted throughout our conversation that I don't know the 121 system but am interested in learning. My ignorance in your system is mirrored by yours in our system. At the end of the day this is all about keeping the safety bar high and reducing risks, both operationally and economically. We do, after all, share the same airspace.

I enjoy a good discussion as much as the next guy. I think that condescension during that discussion degenerates the point of the conversation to begin with. "What we have here is a failure to communicate" comes to mind. The most important part of any exchange is what the receiver perceives one is saying. One thing for sure, the more viewpoints there are on a topic the better the result. If one is not willing to listen then they only have their mentality to go on and sometimes that is just not enough.

I wish you and your brethren good luck in your company and safe flying, always.

 

[CFI'er]

Good Old Boys Club

The airline’s compensation for pilots is a carry-over of the military form of hierarchy. Ensigns do all the dirty work while the Captains play golf. Where there are too many Captains for the staff, the unions figured out a way to increase compensation based on equipment instead of time in position. There in lies the problem. A Captain is a Captain and has the same responsibilities regardless of what equipment he/she pilots. The only compensation difference should be the time served with that airline. Seniority and the unions are a form of the “good old boys club” “I’ll protect your six if you protect mine.”

 

[Astra Guy]

Good point, CFIer,

Even coming from the military I hadn't thought of that. It is true that the pilots doing the vast majority of the flying hold the lowest rank. They are also the most proficient, i.e., productive.

 

[LAXSaabdude]

Simply put ability, dedication and being a team member goes much farther with me than seniority.

Business flying is still being part of a team (company) and being a contributor in whatever way you can.

Bingo. I have worked for this operation before. My former employer used words like "team player", "ability", and "dedication", as well.

Actually they were code words.

They meant, show your "dedication" by not calling in sick when you needed to. Be a "team player" by not writing up airplane until you got back to a maintenance base. Show your "ability" by flying an approach below minimums, or navigating through thunderstorms without radar, or flying through icing conditions with inop equipment, or landing in a 50 kt. crosswind.

Sure, pilots can be LOTS more productive if management forces them to be, under the threat of losing their jobs.

Sorry, I've done my time with that operation, and I'm not going back.

LAXSaabdude.

 

[Astra Guy]

You guys crack me up! Actually I would terminate anyone for performing illegally. Below min approaches? Give me a break...automatic way to get put out the door. Navigating around tstms without radar? That's another way to get the boot!
Operating in icing conditions with inop anti/deice equipment? Ditto! 50 kt xwind, same result.

Oddly you bring up one remark about not calling in sick. Now that is a good one. Actually the only pilot I had to terminate had an interesting twist on this one. He became ill...went to the emergency room in the middle of the night. He called the next morning and I told him to get himself well before he came back. He took the antibiotics and pain pills and returned earlier than he should of. He didn't have enough time to get the drugs out of his system when he declared he was flyable. Didn't go to an AME in this process at all. He flew a trip and the first day he was a dead weight in the seat. Second day out, a non flying day, he was better and when he returned on the third day he was pretty much normal. I heard about this after the trip was over from the other pilot. I confronted the man and asked him if this was true. He said yep and even though he wasn't quite up to speed on the first day's flight it was no big deal. Long story short he had some other performance problems in the cockpit and this flying sick and under the influence was the straw.

I don't know you and whether you are worth your salt or not. Conversely you surely don't know me and whether I am either. Your remarks are 180 out of the reality in my world,k for the record.

BTW thanks for assuming the worst and going on the attack...LOL

 

[LAXSaabdude]

Day to day performance is ultimately the real deal. That can and should be evaluated as well, along the way.

Who is going to be doing the evaluating? One of the best parts of my job is that when I get out of the crew lounge, get away from all of the political B.S., climb into the cockpit and take off, it is just me and my FO. We are just two peers doing our jobs without anyone breathing down our neck. There is an atmosphere of trust and respect.

If I was faced with a system where I could be "ratted out" by an FO who wanted to get rid of me to further his/her career goals, how enjoyable do you think it would be? How safe do you think the operation would be?

This "it's us vs them" mentality between management and employees and visa versa is really counter-productive and ultimately costly.

So how is it better to create an "us vs. them" mentality between all of the pilots on the property?

LAXSaabdude.

 

[Astra Guy]

LAX,

I surely wouldn't suggest that crews rat on each other. I would suggest unannounced monitors in the jump seat to do evaluations of crew coordination and complying with SOPs. This would not cause crews to distrust each other. It might help in keeping the performance level high. In most cases I would imagine the monitor/evaluator might be able to provide some tips during the debrief. It would not be a tool used to terminate anyone but ultimately keep the safety bar high.

Again, you missed where I am coming from....maybe it is me.

Fly safely!

 

[blueridge71]

I'm currently a reserve pilot and I can see that some people don't understand the concept.

If the airlines did not have reserves, there would be a great many flights canceled, a great many customers angered, and a great many customers lost. We are used to cover many things. Sometimes it's a sick call, sometimes a crew exceeds their duty limits due to weather or maintenance, and sometimes the original crew is stuck at an outstation for some reason. Sometimes reserve crews are used to get a flight out on time that would otherwise go out late due to a late inbound crew. Additionally we are frequently called upon to do reposition or ferry flights for which there are no scheduled crews.

Frankly, most reserves are not "greedy and lazy." Reserve goes to junior pilots for a reason. We don't make much money because we don't get as much flying or perdiem. We don't have a regular schedule. I was working 14 hour days last week with only a minimal 9 hours off between. We get used and abused by schedulers within (and sometimes outside) the bounds of the contract. If you don't live at your base, you also have the added expense of paying for a crashpad or a hotel room from which to sit reserve.

===
I agree that the seniority system is not the best, but I don't know what we would replace it with. A national seniority list might help matters. It just isn't right that a 10,000 hour captain who gets furloughed and goes to another airline has to start over as an FO making poverty level wages.

===

ALPA definitely has a conflict of interest in representing both regionals and majors. In negotiating major airline scope, they limit their regional members. I think ALPA's heart is where the dues are.

I started my job as an anti-union conservative. Since then, I've seen that there is still a need for unions. In the bad times of furloughs and pay cuts, the union does help keep management's feet to the fire. If a pilot gets in trouble, the union can also help salvage his job (although I've heard that this largely depends on the defense not interfering with negotiations or what-have-you).

I'd say unions are a necessary evil.

 

[Astra Guy]

blueridge 71,

If I eluded to not having any reserve pilots then I mispoke. That was not and is not my view. I understand everything you said and I appreciate your input. You make some good points.