GREAT CE-750 Job!!!!

[bvt1151]

Neither charter companies nor part 91 flight departments are non-profit organizations. The company is out to maximize profits, and that means minimizing costs. The argument that pilots should be paid to even those out does not apply. They will pay the minimum amount for the type of pilot they want. That's how business works. If you turn down a job because the company is making too much money, the next guy won't, and you'll have taken a "stand" for absolutely nothing.

The "rules" of capitalism are much like the rules of physics. They can be bent, but never changed. Eventually, if pilot supply exceeds pilot demand, capitalism will find a way to lower wages. Instead of trying to force wages up artificially, the much better long term solution is to give a reason for your wages to increase. Instead of providing internet job boards, which give the employer the advantage of finding the lowest cost pilot, start a survey of pilot qualifications that lets the owners of these outfits know exactly how qualified or unqualified their pilots are compared to the industry. Put the focus back on the pilots' ability, rather than just the cost. That's how you increase wages. Make them WANT to pay you more.

 

[sleepy]

Neither charter companies nor part 91 flight departments are non-profit organizations. The company is out to maximize profits, and that means minimizing costs. The argument that pilots should be paid to even those out does not apply. They will pay the minimum amount for the type of pilot they want. That's how business works. If you turn down a job because the company is making too much money, the next guy won't, and you'll have taken a "stand" for absolutely nothing.

The "rules" of capitalism are much like the rules of physics. They can be bent, but never changed. Eventually, if pilot supply exceeds pilot demand, capitalism will find a way to lower wages. Instead of trying to force wages up artificially, the much better long term solution is to give a reason for your wages to increase. Instead of providing internet job boards, which give the employer the advantage of finding the lowest cost pilot, start a survey of pilot qualifications that lets the owners of these outfits know exactly how qualified or unqualified their pilots are compared to the industry. Put the focus back on the pilots' ability, rather than just the cost. That's how you increase wages. Make them WANT to pay you more.

Very good post.

 

[BlueCanoe]

I'm a CRJ-70 FO, and I was making fun of airline pay compared to what you won't touch a much smaller aircraft for.

If you can't laugh at yourself...

Trust me, I'm about to lose my job because a whole slew of guys with SJS will do it for less. Read a bit about it on the Regional's forum. You're preaching to the choir.

Another GJ pilot outed...

 

[bvt1151]

Another GJ pilot outed...

Do a bit of research, and you'll understand how rediculous you sound.

 

[surplus1]

I don’t have a dog in the fight but your discussion is interesting and I do have a couple of questions and comments based on what you said.

Pilots should not compete with each other based on pay. They should compete based on merit. The last thing that I want is to fly with some dork because he CONvinced my boss that he was the boy for the job because he would work for less than industry standard wage.

That’s interesting. Since you don’t want to compete based on pay = cost, but want to compete based on “merit”, my question is this: How and who determines what “merit” is? Isn’t “merit” an arbitrary determination made by your boss? If he “likes” you, you have “merit”. If he doesn’t “like” you, you have less merit.

You say you don’t want to fly with the lowest bidder (understandable – to me) but you also say you would rather fly with the biggest a$$ kisser (not understandable – to me).

“Merit” is totally subjective and has nothing to do with “qualifications” or worth. It may or may not have something to do with performance. Bottom line, it depends on the whims of your boss.

So does the pay for the job so, what’s the real difference?

.

They will pay the minimum amount for the type of pilot they want. That's how business works.

Probably true.

The "rules" of capitalism are much like the rules of physics. They can be bent, but never changed. Eventually, if pilot supply exceeds pilot demand, capitalism will find a way to lower wages.

That’s probably true too, although I would say it a bit differently. Capitalism has only one “rule” and that’s the golden rule, i.e., “the man with the gold makes the rules.” That’s not very different from the “merit system” where the man with the power makes the merit.

Instead of providing internet job boards, which give the employer the advantage of finding the lowest cost pilot, start a survey of pilot qualifications that lets the owners of these outfits know exactly how qualified or unqualified their pilots are compared to the industry. Put the focus back on the pilots' ability, rather than just the cost.

Hmmm, and just how does one determine a pilot’s “qualifications”. If two pilots each have the same education and the same licenses and ratings, how do you decide which one is more “qualified” that the other? Isn’t that subjective as well?

Are “qualifications” based on flight hours? If so, isn’t that arbitrary as well? If you have two pilots, each with 10,000 hours, are they equally qualified? Is a pilot with 10,000 hours all in a Piper something more “qualified” than a pilot with 3,000 hours in say a King Air or 500 hours in an F-15? Can a pilot have 3,000 hours of “experience” and another pilot have 1 hour of “experience” – repeated 3,000 times?

It seems to me you are both saying essentially the same thing but using different words. It’s all subjective.

In contrast, in your airline system based on seniority, everyone is assumed to be “qualified” as long as he/she meets the legal requirements. Likewise, everyone is assumed to have the same “merit” as long as you do your job and stay out of trouble. The system is fairly objective because the same criteria is applied to everyone. Additionally, if you’re unionized, you have a collective voice in determining the value of your service and your working conditions. You are more, though not much more, than an “at will” employee.

That brings us back to square one, compensation. No matter how it’s arrived at, compensation is also subjective and has nothing to do with “merit” or “qualifications”. Unless your in the airline environment, you can take it or leave but you have no voice in the matter.

Company A has a vacancy and offers to pay $50 K. Company B has the same vacancy but offers to pay $30 K. The applicant must decide, regardless of his “merit” or his “qualifications”, which of the two jobs he prefers and will take and which he will not. It doesn’t seem to me to make much difference as long as the pilot is personally satisfied with the job and the terms. He might accept either offer or turn down both.

The employer is free to offer whatever he wants and the pilot is free to take it or leave it. What the employer “gets” for his money may or may not be determined by the amount of money in the corporate world. What the employer “gets” in the airline world is someone who is legally “qualified” to fill the vacant seat. What the pilot “gets” in either case may be a great job for only 30K or a lousy job for 50K, or a mediocre job for either sum.

Moral 1: The man with the gold makes the rules.

Moral 2: All that glitters is not gold.

Both of you could be right, and then again both of you could be wrong. It’s all a crap shoot and it’s always been that way.

In the corporate world you’re basically a chauffer whose “car” (limo) has wings; a sort of glorified servant. In the airline world you work a lot harder but there is little if any “servitude” involved. You’re closer to being a bus driver than a limo chauffer.

“Different strokes for different folks.”

 

[Brett Hull]

In the corporate world you’re basically a chauffer whose “car” (limo) has wings; a sort of glorified servant.

That's kinda like saying every RJ pilot has no basic understanding of high-altitude aerodynamics, switches seats on the way up while chanting "4-1-0 it dude". It may fit for a few, but you shouldn't paint with such a broad brush.

 

[Tgaug6300]

Aren't all of us pilots some type of "glorified servants"?

Corp. pilots = (according to Surplus1: Chauffers)
Airline pilots = Bus drivers
Cargo haulers = mailmen
EMS pilots = Amublance drivers
Flight Instructors = Teachers

But as pilots, we all have certain skills and knowledge that not everyone has or can do. Therefore we should be paid as such. I have to agree that if a company can afford a 16mil aircraft, then they should be able to pay at least industry standard. Just my .02

 

[Tgaug6300]

I guess we are all flying for "THE MAN"! (LOL)

 

[dime line]

The average Nanny makes 60-80,000, Personal cooks 120,000, 120ft + Yacht Captains 150,000 +

We are not paid what were worth, were paid what we negotiate.

 

[750driver]

We are not paid what were worth, were paid what we negotiate.

That's a fact. Well said.

 

[TurboJetCpt]

Right seat pay not going to start out at much more than $45k. If you don't want to do it, there are plenty who will.

Therein lies the problem Einstein.

 

[j41driver]

You forget I already have a job, pushing a 75,000 pound jet around for $10k to $15K less than that job offers working twice as much...and I'm the 2nd highest paid in the right seat for this airframe!

Not exactly something I'd brag about.

 

[Corona]

Neither charter companies nor part 91 flight departments are non-profit organizations. The company is out to maximize profits, and that means minimizing costs.

Actually, I think all Pt. 91 flight departments are less than non-profit. They all lose money. Until you look at the big picture as in what the airplane does for the corporation.

Charter companies are non-profit, in that they don't make money.

Your remark about "maximizing profits" is Wall Street hooey that has unfortunately become part of our normal, everyday language. Salaries are cut in order to make stock go up another $0.01. There is no other reason. Of course, a private company with a Pt. 91 airplane can't very well make that argument, can they?

And, as a couple others pointed out; pilot salaries are a tiny fraction of operating a private airplane.

The "rules" of capitalism are much like the rules of physics. They can be bent, but never changed. Eventually, if pilot supply exceeds pilot demand, capitalism will find a way to lower wages. Instead of trying to force wages up artificially, the much better long term solution is to give a reason for your wages to increase. Instead of providing internet job boards, which give the employer the advantage of finding the lowest cost pilot, start a survey of pilot qualifications that lets the owners of these outfits know exactly how qualified or unqualified their pilots are compared to the industry. Put the focus back on the pilots' ability, rather than just the cost. That's how you increase wages. Make them WANT to pay you more.

Now this paragraph makes a lot more sense, but I think you're preaching to the choir here. I don't think you can teach a pilot a sense of self-worth and dignity any more than you can teach them good judgement in their flying skills.

C

 

[bvt1151]

Surplus,

I really don't disagree with anything you said. I agree entirely with your take on "qualifications" and especially the airline seniority fiasco. Regardless, I think its important to take one step at a time. If we need to bring qualifications back into public view and flight hours flown is the only measure we have, we'd better use it. I have a lot of problems with it as well as you, however if its all we have, lets use it, plant the seed, and then work on how to solve the "qualification" problem.

j41,

I most definitely was not bragging. I was making light of a pathetic situation.

Corona,

Even though flight departments may be cost intensive, the mother company still wants to earn as much as they can (or more specifically, increase the stock price as much as they can). Two ways to do this: increase revenues, or decrease costs. Flight departments bring in no revenues, so that leaves only one thing to do, minimize costs.


My point, that some seem to miss through their selective quoting, is that you can't force capitalism. This is a huge problem with pilots, and especially pilot unions, which is outside the scope of this thread. We all complain that we're not paid what we're worth, and all we ever do about it is try to raise salaries by intimidating pilots from taking lower paying jobs. It simply does not work. We're all bunched into one group..."pilot." Neither the public, nor the corporate world, sees any real difference between a good pilot and a bad pilot. Why pay more for a good pilot if they're twice as expensive and there's no difference from a bad pilot? We have to find a way to make them want to pay us more. "Quality" is a word long since left the airlines, but we've lost the ability to sell quality as pilots as well. We have to find a way to reaquire our own pricing power.

Its a buyers market, and we're selling. Lets fix that.

 

[surplus1]

The average Nanny makes 60-80,000, That's a lot of money for a baby sitter. Personal cooks 120,000, Whoever paid that got taken to the cleaners. My wife was a fantastic "personal cook" but never made a 120K; neither did my mom and she was better. By the way, they also doubled as "Nannys" when they weren't cooking and could actually bake a pie (as opposed to buying it at the local food store).

On the other hand if your lady is a current generation "hottie" I guess you'd have to pay the 120 or risk starvation; most of them can't boil an egg, can barely open a can, and have no idea what a souffle is. They're great to look at but otherwise dysfunctional; hardly worth the cost of the divorce.

120ft + Yacht Captains 150,000 + Now that's my kind of gig. I guess the supply of [bigger] Yacht Captains doesn't exceed the number of large yachts. How about Cruise Liner's - what do those Captains make?

We are not paid what were worth, were paid what we negotiate.

I wish that was still true. Nowadays it seems we spend most of our time negotiating how to give back the pay we thought we negotiated to receive.

I think flying an airplane for a living has changed from being a profession to being a commodity. Thinking of it as an avocation rather than an occupation has ever-increasing merit.