I can't understand the low pay

[A Squared]

>>>>>Maybe by calling it a "cash discount" as opposed to a "credit card surcharge", they get around any clause in their contract?

could be, I don't know all the ins and outs of the issue. Maybe by wording it that way they're getting around the agreement, or maybe the credit card companies just don't know. After all there's far too many businesses which use credit cards to be able to monitor them all. Something (or someone) would have to bring it to their attention.

 

[dmspilot00]

How about Part 141 flight school associated with a CC that charges $81+ for 20-year-old poorly maintained trainers, $22 for instruction, always adds a .5 hour ground instruction fee to every lesson regardless of whether ground briefings occurred or not, pays CFIs a starting wage of $7/hour, does not allow private pilots to fly solo, and the owner uses the profit to spend 85% of his time 1000 miles away in a vacation home in Florida? Yes, this is an actual school.

 

[jarhead]

To dmspilot00

Where's the problem?

First, it's the owners money (the profit) It's his to do with as he wants. He can spend it all at a casino, or give it all to a medical charity for the poor, or anything in between. It aint your money, its his! You spend your money as you see fit, do you not? And it seems you spend it at a place I never would, if you describe it accurately, and use the FBO, or are employed by it. That was your choice also, wasn't it? If the guy did not have any takers, the operation would fail, would it not? Vote with your feet if you find it so onerous. No one is holding a gun to your head, or any of the customers, or any of the employees. They all make a concious decision to work and play there of their own free will.

 

[dmspilot00]

I don't patronize it nor am I employed there, and I never said that I did.

I did say it is associated with a college, and so the students majoring in flight really do have no choice. They can't possibly know the things about the operation before they sign on. They either fly there or they don't get a degree, in either case they have poured money down the drain.

You don't see a problem with paying $7 to CFIs and charging $80 for illegally malmaintained airplanes? The owner is friends with a higher-up at the local FSDO, and is able to get away with things that he shouldn't.

I just thought I would share a story contrasting to the previous one, there is no need to cop an attitude with me.

 

[jarhead]

Illeagally maintained aircraft or aircraft that are not flightworthy, have no business being in the air. Period. We agree there. Get him shut down if that's the case.

As to your statement that college students have to use the aircraft or they won't graduate, I would simply say they should have checked it out with a little more scrutiny before they signed up and put their money down. Caveat Emptor......Buyer beware.
People get screwed in life all the time by simply not getting good references, checking into it, etc. I repeat, no one was forced to use any part of this operation. It was all done by free will.

If those aircraft do not have a valid airworthiness certificate, get 'em shut down. Then ALL the students will be forced to make a better decision.

Maybe they could band together, start an operation with all brand new airplanes, pay their instuctors $50.00 an hour, and charge $20.00 an hour for the aircraft (tic) You see the problem in economics here, right?

 

[Checks]

Bobby,

I think you have spent way too much time around lawyers. This guy flys without a license and you say it is the companys fault.

He is the only one responsible. Come back to aviation before you tell me that MickeDies was responsible for burning that ladys leg with hot coffee and that she deserved the 6.1 million dollars.

Additionally, what the h%ll was this thread about in the beginning?

 

[DarnNearaJet]

Re: Re: Re: mean spirited post?

"the pilot shortage pimps"


Enigma: That is true wit! Succinct, yet precise.

 

[DarnNearaJet]

Here is another possible solution. Completely abolish unions.

In any other job, someone with the necessary skills could walk out of one job and into another one if there was an open position. Why can't the same be true for pilots?

The answer? Unions.

Why are your skills not portable? Because your union locks you into a seniority situaiton.

Why do regional pilots make less than mainline pilots? Unions.

Why do the newest pilots always get furloughed regardless pilot qualifications? Unions.

If I were y'all, I wouldn't be looking to unions as an answer, I would recognize them as them problem.

I honestly don't know where to begin with this. I can only hope you are new to this industry and its inner workings. More likely you are simply a rabidly anti-union right-wing Reagan-worshipper who was indoctrinated at an early age by a Social Darwinist. Judging from your other posts it's apparent that you are under the impression that the incredible advances in aviation safety have been the result of some sort of corporate boardroom cathartic benevolence rather that the blood, sweat and tears of union activists since the early days of flying the mail. Management attaches a dollar value to everything, including safety. Risk analysis is their tool.
This would be illuminated by Valuejet's corporate emphasis on safety, or perhaps Pan Am III's attempt to fire a fatigued pilot for refusing to fly beyong 16 hours of duty. Or the Airline Transport Association's attempts to squash many of the safety advances put forth not only by ALPA, but by the NTSB and FAA as well.
As far as regional pilot wages, they are what they are because of the market, and management's recognition of it. They are as high as they are because of collective bargaining.
With the notable exceptions of Skywest and Jetblue, I doubt you can name one non-union airline that treats their pilots as well as the most worse-off union carrier (category of airline/equipment respected.)
If unions never existed in the industry, the lifestyle and pay of an airline pilot would be more similar to a corporate pilot, with upgrades, schedules and pay being determined by who best plays "the game" and kisses best, rather than who has the most invested in a company.

 

[bobbysamd]

Responsibility

I think you have spent way too much time around lawyers. This guy flys without a license and you say it is the companys fault.

The pilot in question is responsible for what happened to the airplane. However, the FBO should have checked his credentials before renting the airplane to him. Not doing so made the FBO assume part of the risk. In that regard, the FBO was irresponsible and probably did not live up to terms of its insurance policy. There comes a time where one must take responsibility for his/her actions. Screwing Avbug for flying with the guy would have been utterly wrong.

In case anyone's interested, I currently work in plaintiffs' PI and claimants' workers comp practice. We fight insurance companies every day we work. But right is right, no matter what side you're on.

Come back to aviation before you tell me that MickeDies was responsible for burning that ladys leg with hot coffee and that she deserved the 6.1 million dollars.

I don't know all the facts of that case beyond what I heard and read and I don't know all the law behind it, but if you're saying that was an absurd judgment, I agree. There might have been some assumption-of-risk issues in that case.

Anyone want to start a discussion on the tobacco lawsuits?

 

[CFI'er]

The bottom line is that consumers pay more for the credit card use whether they know it or not. It is not free and the store charges(hidden) for the use of the cards by charging higher prices for all. Each card company charges a different rate for use of the card and it is deducted from the card statement that the store/service owner send in each day. Some cards chage 2% or more or less depending on the volume of sales. Example: a store sends in the sales receit credits of $1000 for XYZ card but deducts 2% for the use of that card. The store only gets paid $980 from the credit card company. As a former retail store manager, I know that our store would not accept certain credit cards because of the higher rates they charged. Now, who do you think pays the lost $200 to the store, the consumer does in paying higher prices to make up for the convenience of a credit card. We all pay it whether we like it or not. I don't know if the credit card companies can require a store/service to forbid it from giving a cash discount. Any one out there know if this is the case?

Getting back to my original point of charging $30 dual and only paying the CFI $12. Most consumers do not understand the low pay the CFI gets, and what the comsumer actually is paying for. In jobs where I was paid a commission, the company did not deduct $$ from my commission for administration. The cost of the product reflected the total cost of the product including the commission. Why can't FBO's and schools do the same. Look at what you pay when you have your car fixed. The hourly labor rate is much higher than what the mechanic is paid per hour/job. I have a car tech friend who is paid on average, 12 to 15 hours per day, but he only works an 8 hour shift. He is a seasoned tech and can finish a job in less time than the book list/hour rate for the job. In this case, who is screwed? The comsumer naturally. The consumer is charged for an hour, because the book said it would take that long, however, my tech friend can finish the job in 30 minutes and still is paid for that one hour rate. The shop rate might be $60 per hour, and the tech gets only $18 of that hour. My point is that the FBO's and Schools should charge more per hour dual and give the CFI's more per hour in return. I don't know of any other career/job where it cost a person as much as it does to become a CFI and only get paid a measly $10 to $15 per hour.

 

[A Squared]

>>>>The bottom line is that consumers pay more for the credit card use whether they know it or not. It is not free and the store charges(hidden) for the use of the cards by charging higher prices for all.

I agree, but the thing is, *all* customers pay for the credit card use equally, even the cash customers. The credit card comapanies want it that way, rather that the fees being passed on only to the credit card using customers.


I'm not sure what point you're trying to make about selling on commission. They're two totally different situations. If you're selling on commision (or even on a salary) your servicies aren't being sold, you have become part of the administrative costs, just like the book keeper and the electricity bill. The price of whatever you sell will reflect the cost of that product to the dealer plus administrative costs of purchasing, storing, and selling (including your commission), and presumably, a profit also (or your employer goes out of business soon)

If you are a flight instructor, you aren't selling a product, you *are* the product, and no business is going to stay in business if it sells its product for the same or less than it costs the business, except in limited promotional deals or loss leaders.

As for the mechanic working on standard book rates, yeah, if he's fast he can work the system to his advantage. I think that you're going to have a hard time applying that to flight instruction though. I can just see it:

Student: Hey, why am I being charged for 1.5 hours of instruction when the instructor was only with me for .9 hours, including preflight and post flight?

Counter person: You did stall prevention and stall recovery today right?

Student: yes..

Counter Person: Well, the standard book rate for stall prevention and stall recovery is 1.5 hours.

Student: But I only got less than an hour of instruction.

Counter person: You had a very efficient instructor who was able to accomplish 1.5 hours of instruction in less than an hour, you should be grateful.

Student: (goes shopping for another flight school)

 

[CFI'er]

Can't go shop for another car repair place because they all use the same system of hourly charges. It is even harder to shop Flight Schools or FBO's, limited supply and geography.