Fractional flying dropped 10.6 percent in April

[jonjuan]

It matters little that 11% if workers nationwide are unionized. The fact that over 90% of professional pilots are unionized is what matters.

In the US, worldwide? What are your qualifiers of "professional pilots?"

 

[gret]

And here we have if folks, the union-buster plying his trade. His objective is to apply doubt, fear and obfuscation.

It matters little that 11% if workers nationwide are unionized. The fact that over 90% of professional pilots are unionized is what matters.

It appears you're off your med again. Talk to your mom and get control of yourself.

 

[gret]

Here is an educational piece about how Gret and his buds run things. Does any of this sound familiar?

http://inthesetimes.com/article/3326/unionbusting_confidential/

It took forever to load the link and it was frightfully dull.

Try Porntube.com and Directporntube.com in the future to at least make it interesting.

 

[pilotyip]

In the US, worldwide? What are your qualifiers of "professional pilots?"

In his mind you can't be professional if you are not union and work for a living driving airplanes. Those Fortune 500 pilots, those 135, and all sort of other pilots whose union companies went out of business, are not professional.

You will notice at FI, if you are not 100% pro-union urging on a strike vote, screaming injustice and demanding everyone wall in line with that thinking, well then you are 100% anti-union.

 

[imacdog]

What about nonunion companies that lose their flying, Yip? You should be pretty familiar with those.

 

[pilotyip]

What about nonunion companies that lose their flying, Yip? You should be pretty familiar with those.

and union companies that lose their flying also, but back to the question if you are not working fora unuion company are youy still a professional pilot? How about former NJ pilots, like the ones at JUS the best job they could find, are they professional pilots

 

[Praetorian]

It appears you're off your med again. Talk to your mom and get control of yourself.

Right out of the union-busters toolbox. An ad hominem attack.

 

[Praetorian]

In his mind you can't be professional if you are not union and work for a living driving airplanes. Those Fortune 500 pilots, those 135, and all sort of other pilots whose union companies went out of business, are not professional.

You will notice at FI, if you are not 100% pro-union urging on a strike vote, screaming injustice and demanding everyone wall in line with that thinking, well then you are 100% anti-union.

Nope I think if you get paid to fly you are a professional. Don't put words in my mouth chump.

But there are many many more airline pilots than all other types of pilots. How many non union airlines can you think of?

 

[Praetorian]

It took forever to load the link and it was frightfully dull.

Try Porntube.com and Directporntube.com in the future to at least make it interesting.

Do you frequent those web sites, when your not plying your trade on here?

 

[Praetorian]

In the US, worldwide? What are your qualifiers of "professional pilots?"

Not sure, pulled the number out of my ass. But I think the number is probably on the conservative side, given the overall percentage of pilots who fly for airlines and Fracs. Both segments are overwhelmingly unionized.

I think if you fly for a living you are a professional pilot. Didn't think that one would be controversial.

 

[imacdog]

and union companies that lose their flying also, but back to the question if you are not working fora unuion company are youy still a professional pilot? How about former NJ pilots, like the ones at JUS the best job they could find, are they professional pilots

Yes they are professionals. Show me where I said otherwise.

 

[gret]

Not sure, pulled the number out of my ass. But I think the number is probably on the conservative side, given the overall percentage of pilots who fly for airlines and Fracs. Both segments are overwhelmingly unionized.

I think if you fly for a living you are a professional pilot. Didn't think that one would be controversial.

Let me help you as I know numbers are a challenge-

..."While the US market is fragile, signs of recovery are beginning to emerge. Flightglobal's Ascend Online database reveals the USA's inventory of jets and turboprops climbed by more than 300 during the census period to 17,438 turbine business aircraft."...

I know there are variables, but if you assume 2 pilots for each aircraft, you end up with 34,000 pilots. How many work for the fractionals? Not very many in the whole scheme of things.

"Overwhelming" it is not.​

 

[Pervis]

"Overwhelming" it is not.

He specifies Airlines and Fractionals. Those two segments, from the first paragraph you quoted, are overwhelmingly unionized. The second simply affirms what most would agree on-pilots paid to fly are professional.

 

[gret]

Pervis...I think you have to go to post #31 to get the gist of the issue. It stated that over 90% of professional pilots are unionized.

No question that most frac and airline pilots belong to a union, but in the business jet industry, less than 12% of the pilots belong to the union. Probably less than 10% as my assumption of 2 pilots per aircraft is conservative. Three pilots is more likely and that would put the business jet pilot population around 50,000.

Given the number of airline pilots, nobody would question that a majority of "commercial" pilots belong to a union, but certainly not 90%. The US airline fleet, including cargo, is only around 7,200 aircraft. The most recent US Bureau of Labor statistics show a total airline pilot census of around 100K.

The inference taken from the observation was that if you don't belong to a union, you're not a professional...disrespecting 99% of mgmt/charter shops, private/corporate flight departments, etc.

The poster admitted his figures were pulled from his 7th planet from the sun. Hopefully in the future, more accurate and precise data will be provided from alternative sources and words will be used in a more responsible manner so that feelings won't be hurt needlessly...

 

[Pervis]

Point taken gret. A better comparison might be how many companies that employ X number of pilots or more are unionized. A flight department with 3 or 4 pilots would most likely be non-union, but the larger outfits with hundreds or more from frac to cargo to airline are most likely union. All are professional-no argument.

While I don't always agree with the direction a union may want to take me, the real issue is large outfits are not the place for individually negotiated compensation packages. The time alone spent by any company would be far greater than that spent negotiating a CBA that present a fair and equitable package for all, eliminating the majority of favoritism.

It is unfortunate that unions do indeed protect the weakest link, but so do management teams through their own 'good ole boyz club' and nepotism. How else can one explain how people like Ichan, Lorenzo, Boisture, Scheeringa, etc continue to find new frontiers after destroying the lives of so many employees through no fault of the union?

Who takes from the company more? Look at the CEO for AA. While the courts turned down his $20 million dollar bonus package, he'll still milk it somehow. All for "only" losing how much money?

At Netjets, we are enjoying record profits while sales remain flat. If we can do that on operations alone, the sky is the limit. The employees on the pointy end simply want a better share-not enough to break the comany, and certainly not a $20 million bonus. The CEO wants a higher profit margine off of our backs so he can get his multimillion bonus. Who's the real greedy one here? At least we recognize the human element. To him we're simply a liability.

 

[gret]

..."How else can one explain how people like Ichan, Lorenzo, Boisture, Scheeringa, etc continue to find new frontiers after destroying the lives of so many employees through no fault of the union?"...

There can be no explanation...the first two are really bad guys, to the core, and their flaws go way beyond dealing with unions. I can't even watch the first one on CNBC.

I knew and did business with Bill when he was at Gulfstream and while I don't know what went on when he was with NetJets...I didn't have a problem with him. Dealt with Scheeringa and he is not a dumb guy, but he really needs to go back to charm school for his leadership and interpersonal skills. He just comes off all wrong and I'm sure that came thru in his dealings with the employees.

 

[Pervis]

None of them are dumb. Bill did exactly as he was told at NJ. He negotiated in bad faith and dragged out the negotiations for 5 years giving RTS the opening to ride in on his white horse and shining armor. A well orchestrated move, and our fault for allowing 5 incompetent Teamster boobs lead us to near ruin. Then came Beechcraft and bankrupcy, where he has lost the business jet market and may well lose a lucrative TP light attack/trainer contract. Will his other military contracts keep them afloat? Will we see the demise of the venerable Bonanza, Baron, and King Air types?

Then there's $hitfinger (not my term). So beloved by his fellow employees at US Air he was beaten in the company parking lot (admittedly not cool). So beloved at FLOPS he required security escort to and from his office, and he nearly destroyed the company. Now he is losing market share through questionable dealings in long term markets like MIA and others. Quietly ask Signature employees their opinion. Who will be his next victim?

They and others like them are skilled at padding their pockets on the backs of the working slugs and at the same time, sell the "big bad union" mantra. It's the unsrupulous bosses that are far more dangerous to a company and whole geographical regions than those bad unions. And what's worse is all unions have been succesfully tied together, including public unions. A totally different animal with one perpetrating the biggest conflict of interest in history and the other simply trying to earn a share of the profit directly related to their skills and efforts.

The vast majority of us in unions simply want a share of the pie we bake. Any one of those leaders in the aviation industry could carry on if they were hit by a train and lost three limbs, while pilots face termination every six months. I bet many of us could do their job, but how many could do ours? Who is the true face of the company in this industry? Not the guy on the other end of the phone, that's for sure.

I don't have a problem with the big guy getting top dollar. I have a problem with the caretaker type CEOs though. Guys like Buffett, Gates, etc founded an empire and have a personal interest in their "baby". Those I listed and others like them are caretaker types that don't give a hoot about the company or its employees. Yet they move on to their next parachute leaving thousands in the dust. They are the reason unions exist and bring out the dark side from the union element.

 

[gret]

You have good info on Scheeringa...I know a little about the MIA situation and the competing bidder has quite a few warts also. Typical Miami-Dade nonsense.

Too bad about Hawker...they didn't have anyone with deep pockets who would step to the table and help during the downturn. The Canadian outfit and Goldman bought high and just took their losses and ran. Kinda liked the 850XP for some odd reason. Bill was a gruff old Air Force guy (I believe) and as indicated, don't know much about his time at NJ.

Your perception about pilots being able to do mgmt jobs is interesting...historically a lot of senior mgmt has come from the aviator ranks. The fact is mgmt isn't as easy as it appears, nor is being the captain of an aircraft. The skills sets are completely different and rarely does an individual have both...Gordon Bethune is the only example that comes to mind quickly.

The industry has failed to groom/attract talent with solid financial, marketing, and strategic skills. The money, stability, and opportunities for advancement are much better in other industries and the really good managers gravitate elsewhere. We're left with average retreads that move from one company to another not really improving any of them in the process.

Who are the individuals in business aviation that can take the industry to the next level? I don't see anyone and the company who can find the right person with charisma to lead and deal with clients, vendors, employees, and establish/maintain a brand will be the winner in the end. What I see today is a bunch of boring companies that are simply dead in the water.

 

[imacdog]

NJA had a potentially great thing in the making with pilot-turned management, right up until the ego of the inside trader couldn't handle the truth.

 

[gret]

Forgot about that guy...he should have been added to the list above.

What was he thinking?...a lousy $3 million was nothing to this guy and he had Warren' ear.

Never will understand people like this...it is like the rich woman getting caught shoplifting st Saks because she thought it was thrilling...

 

[Praetorian]

Pervis...I think you have to go to post #31 to get the gist of the issue. It stated that over 90% of professional pilots are unionized.

No question that most frac and airline pilots belong to a union, but in the business jet industry, less than 12% of the pilots belong to the union. Probably less than 10% as my assumption of 2 pilots per aircraft is conservative. Three pilots is more likely and that would put the business jet pilot population around 50,000.

Given the number of airline pilots, nobody would question that a majority of "commercial" pilots belong to a union, but certainly not 90%. The US airline fleet, including cargo, is only around 7,200 aircraft. The most recent US Bureau of Labor statistics show a total airline pilot census of around 100K.

The inference taken from the observation was that if you don't belong to a union, you're not a professional...disrespecting 99% of mgmt/charter shops, private/corporate flight departments, etc.

The poster admitted his figures were pulled from his 7th planet from the sun. Hopefully in the future, more accurate and precise data will be provided from alternative sources and words will be used in a more responsible manner so that feelings won't be hurt needlessly...

Ok Pythagoras, let's take a closer look at the numbers. As of the end of 2011 there were 142,511 ATP rated pilots. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_certification_in_the_United_States 103,500 of those pilots are airline pilots http://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/airline-and-commercial-pilots.htm

I'll let everyone draw from this information what you will. Because I believe in the axiom, "figures lie and liars figure". The Bureau of Labor statistics does not break out "pilots" specifically when listing the number of union members, instead they use the catchall "transportation workers".

 

[gret]

I guess you got me! What did you say?

Didn't I estimate there was around 100K of airline pilots and 34K to 50K of business jet pilots?

How many are you saying?

 

[Praetorian]

I guess you got me! What did you say?

Didn't I estimate there was around 100K of airline pilots and 34K to 50K of business jet pilots?

How many are you saying?

After spending some time today looking into the available but incomplete info, think the number is probably somewhere between 70 and 80 percent, for all professional pilots. However, as has been pointed out, almost every pilot group with more than 200 pilots on the property is unionized. I can only think of two, off the top of my head which aren't, Jet Blue and Flex.

But the original point I was trying to make, before you so cleverly changed the subject, was that its far more than the 11% you mentioned/lamented.

 

[gret]

I think you are saying that you believe between 70% and 80% of all commercial pilots are unionized. If so, I agree. I think it is a stretch to add airline pilots into the equation as they would distort any analysis of the business jet market. The industries are considered vastly different by most.

The percentage of business jet pilots that are unionized would be in the 8% to 12% range. I arrive at this estimate by assuming they're approximately 4K (guessing) frac pilots out of 34K to 50K pilots working in business aviation.

I'm not certain where you came up 11% that you're attributing to me.

It really doesn't matter at the end of the day. The fact is indisputable that the vast majority of pilots applying their professional skills in the business jet industry do not belong to unions.

On to bigger and better topics now we have this cleared up.

 

[pilotyip]

It really doesn't matter at the end of the day. The fact is indisputable that the vast majority of pilots applying their professional skills in the business jet industry do not belong to unions.

Thank you Gret for a voice of moderation in a rabid "If you don't vote for a strike at NJ, you are the scum of the earth" union activist thread"

 

[gret]

Ahhhhh...everyone is OK if you don't take it personally.

I know it has been said before, but it's the extremes (both sides of the issue) that make it interesting.

Have to be careful with percentages, but the vast majority of people just want to be left alone to do their jobs and enjoy their careers and families. The noise just makes it tougher.

 

[CaveoFalco]

...... The fact is indisputable that the vast majority of pilots applying their professional skills in the business jet industry do not belong to unions.....

Unions in this country were started in part to ensure safer working conditions. Then take your anti-union stance to the next step. Compare fatal accident rates of unionized and non-unionized business jet professionals in the US and worldwide.

Thanks, but I will take the safer worker conditions my union ensures without fear of company retribution for calling fatigues or writing up broken airplanes. Once upon a time RTS publicly stated he was happy to have a unionized pilot group for just that reason.

 

[gret]

"Compare fatal accident rates of unionized and non-unionized business jet professionals in the US and worldwide."

I can't because I don't have the stats. Do you have them to review?

Thanks.

 

[pilotyip]

Unions in this country were started in part to ensure safer working conditions. Then take your anti-union stance to the next step. Compare fatal accident rates of unionized and non-unionized business jet professionals in the US and worldwide.

Thanks, but I will take the safer worker conditions my union ensures without fear of company retribution for calling fatigues or writing up broken airplanes. Once upon a time RTS publicly stated he was happy to have a unionized pilot group for just that reason.

Yes unions have been a drivign force for increased safety, and when as company gets big enough they most likely need a union so that the pilot force speaks with one voice.

But that is not the point of this thread. This board is very pro-union. I don't think that I am that rabidly anti-union, but more middle of the road, some places need a union. The rabid union supporters stand on a platform that unions can do no harm. I just happen to not agree with that stance and it is my duty to point out the other side. Unions have the ability to destroy.

NJ is a great job, a job 90% of the pilot in this country looking for a would jump at if given a chance. But for the union activist nothing is ever good enough, an adversarial relationship must be maintained, and a public scolding of those who do not toe the line. From I have seen here calling for a strike vote, and berating those who do not jump on the strike vote bandwagon is comical.

 

[CaveoFalco]

Who put you in charge of the thread direction police? In fact you diverted it from its original direction with this question which is really just a preposterous statement. You blew right through the academic discussion of "changes and adaptations of the business model(s)" to the point of blaming the pilots. or at least a few pilots on FI with an opinion different from yours.

Could it be customers are affair of a possible strike by the pilots in the fractional business and are taking their business elsewhere?

you shifted the tone of the thread from Union - Bad and Management -Good, not me. I just stepped in a played in your debate game.

But for the union activist nothing is ever good enough, an adversarial relationship must be maintained, and a public scolding of those who do not toe the line. From I have seen here calling for a strike vote, and berating those who do not jump on the strike vote bandwagon is comical.

What is the definition of a union activist? Pro-union people on this board? Unless they are a volunteer/leader acting on behalf of their association, then they are pilots with opinions.

A strike vote? No union leader at NJASAP is calling for that yet but so what if they were. It is part of the dance that has played over and over again in the country. Bargaining has not even started so how will it play out is TBD. There was no strike vote to get the 2007 CBA. Do you not understand how difficult it is to get released by the NMB for an actual strike? From what I have seen, some pilots here state they are willing to strike over their contract, nothing more - nothing less.

A union is the group not the leaders. The leaders are only the "business agents" of their membership. Late breaking news, union leaders are hired (elected by the membership) to get more and managers are hired to give less. There will always be conflict. I would hope no one is surprised by that.

Union leaders have two primary roles; contract administration and representation. Contract administration is crucial - the union leadership is in constant defense of the CBA. Management's job is to get more for less by constantly attacking , prodding, reinterpreting their own intent. The battle will always rage on.

Spend some time looking at the representation side of NJASAP or other unions. Little attention gets paid there but much gets done. Read section 17 of the CBA, which begs a question, have you ever read the NJA-NJASAP CBA?