Enough!

[aircombat]

I actually like the idea of national longevity list, instead of a national seniority list. That way, you don't bounce someone out of their seat or base, and start at the bottom of the list. However, you should be compensated for your past experience, as people are in just about every other profession. No reason a 20 year Aloha guy should have to start over at 44/hr at VX or 38.50/hr at NK.

Worse idea ever!! It's a good way to never get hired anywhere when Delta furloughs you. Why would another airline hire you at year 20 pay when they can hire someone right out of school at year 1?

What would be best is get rid of longevity pay all together. It's an antiquated system that has plagued senior airlines, has major financial downfalls for paying student loans and investment compound interest. If you do have to start over at least it wouldn't hurt so much.

Pilot shortage is legacy's carrot as a national seniority list is ALPA's carrot. neither is going to happen

 

[livin'thesim]

Agreed. Longevity pay, not seniority is the real culprit that keeps pilots trapped in bad companies.

Why should a guy who has loyally served your COMPETITOR for 20 years come over and get higher pay than you, when you have served your own company for ten years?

Stupid.

One wage per aircraft type, regardless of longevity. A captain is a captain is a captain. Seniority does not make a pilot more efficient or more safe.

A junior captain is just as likely to be a safer pilot than a senior one.

 

[big shacks]

Blame CANADair

 

[jetstream]

A captain is a captain is a captain. Seniority does not make a pilot more efficient or more safe.

A junior captain is just as likely to be a safer pilot than a senior one.

I disagree.
Have they both been trained to the same standard? Yes.

Do both have the same level of knowledge that can't be gained in training but only learned through experience? Absolutely not.

How do I know this? I routinely ride the jump seat conducting line checks and crew observations. Experience does make a difference.

 

[flyboyike]

Worse idea ever!! It's a good way to never get hired anywhere when Delta furloughs you. Why would another airline hire you at year 20 pay when they can hire someone right out of school at year 1?

Ostensibly the number of flight school kids is decreasing.

 

[titans10]

I disagree.
Have they both been trained to the same standard? Yes.

Do both have the same level of knowledge that can't be gained in training but only learned through experience? Absolutely not.

How do I know this? I routinely ride the jump seat conducting line checks and crew observations. Experience does make a difference.

How do you know the experience of a junior capt? That junior capt could be more experience then you. When I decide to upgrade I will be junior. Are you telling me. I will be inexperience even though I have been a captain on an F-27, dc-9 and dc-10. So, you have a lot more experience then I do.

 

[jetstream]

How do you know the experience of a junior capt? That junior capt could be more experience then you. When I decide to upgrade I will be junior. Are you telling me. I will be inexperience even though I have been a captain on an F-27, dc-9 and dc-10. So, you have a lot more experience then I do.

Nope. Don't mean that at all. Just mean that if two Captain's are one the same seniority list (one list is what we are talking about here) that the more senior one will usually have more experience.

Was just trying to respond to the guy who thinks a captain, is a captain, is a captain and that time as a captain is irrelevent. Not so in my opinion.

 

[livin'thesim]

Given the tumult in the industry, it is just as likely to find a highly experienced FO with a lower time captain.

When it comes to pay, a captain is a captain is a captain.

Experience in type does not automatically correlate to skill, nor diligence at the job, nor in knowledge.

"Experience" is a very crude yardstick.

How often do we see the complacent rule-bending senior captain juxtaposed against the much more diligent mid-seniority captain?

I've been in this game long enough to know that competence and professionalism is fairly evenly distributed throughout the seniority list at most airlines.

Therefore, when it comes to pay,

a captain,

is a captain,

is a captain.

Unless you are pulling a junior captain off a trip and calling up a senior one to take the flight in the interests of safety, there is no logical argument why the senior captain should be making far more than the junior one.

NOW:::::: if it is about rewarding years in service, or loyalty to the airline, then that is up to the individual parties to the CBA to decide that.

Let me explain something to you:

In law firms, medicine, engineering, and many other professions, larger and more complex jobs are often handed to the most experienced practitioners.

This implies that the more experienced person can tackle work that the newer guy should not yet take on.

When the snow is coming down and the runways are glare ice, do we send the junior captains home and call up all the senior guys?

Ummm, no.

Therefore, captains are interchangeable in terms of their overall economic utility to the airline.

You either CAN cut it, or you CAN'T.

I can see small annual increases to reward years in service, but to pretend that there is a true justification to base pay on years in service as a proxy for skill level is at best, an emotionally-derived position.

 

[ex j-41]

Given the tumult in the industry, it is just as likely to find a highly experienced FO with a lower time captain.

When it comes to pay, a captain is a captain is a captain.

Experience in type does not automatically correlate to skill, nor diligence at the job, nor in knowledge.

"Experience" is a very crude yardstick.

How often do we see the complacent rule-bending senior captain juxtaposed against the much more diligent mid-seniority captain?

I've been in this game long enough to know that competence and professionalism is fairly evenly distributed throughout the seniority list at most airlines.

Therefore, when it comes to pay,

a captain,

is a captain,

is a captain.

Unless you are pulling a junior captain off a trip and calling up a senior one to take the flight in the interests of safety, there is no logical argument why the senior captain should be making far more than the junior one.

NOW:::::: if it is about rewarding years in service, or loyalty to the airline, then that is up to the individual parties to the CBA to decide that.

Let me explain something to you:

In law firms, medicine, engineering, and many other professions, larger and more complex jobs are often handed to the most experienced practitioners.

This implies that the more experienced person can tackle work that the newer guy should not yet take on.

When the snow is coming down and the runways are glare ice, do we send the junior captains home and call up all the senior guys?

Ummm, no.

Therefore, captains are interchangeable in terms of their overall economic utility to the airline.

You either CAN cut it, or you CAN'T.

I can see small annual increases to reward years in service, but to pretend that there is a true justification to base pay on years in service as a proxy for skill level is at best, an emotionally-derived position.

+1

We wouldn't be in this mess if we just had a 5 year pay scale. The 20 year guy making $50k more than a junior Captain does nothing but make a regional airline too expensive.

 

[Twisted Mind]

Ok so what about first officers? What is the economic justification for paying a senior FO at Skywest 2.2 times a junior FO? Delta pays 2.6 more per hour. What does a FO do that make them twice as valuable to the company?