I Want to Throw Up...

[stillaboo]

What is the public preception of a programer and the public preception of an airline pilot?

One of these guys is a total stud who makes huge $ and is the subject of movies, the other is a pimple-faced geek who wears coke-bottle glasses and has the social skills of a fly.

Deny it all you want, but there is a sexy mistique to flying that isn't part of programing, and it is part (not the only, but certainly part) of the reason all of us love to fly and are our own worst enemies when we try to hold-out for higher pay.

Bill Gates is the quintesential programer.'Maverick' is the quintisential pilot. You'll never see a movie like 'Catch Me If You Can' based on the real-life tale of a programmer.

The above post is RIGHT ON. All this talk about pathetic wages come from the moths of guys who accept these wages. If you're gonna' talk the talk, then walk the walk.

By the way, Bill Gates is the richest man in the world too. See the paralell here?

-Boo!

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

ECON 101 REVISITED

SUPPLY and DEMAND

 

[tarp]

The good news - it will change - it will just take time.

As more and more people "opt" out or just don't bother - supply and demand will work in the other direction. I just won't be able to enjoy that and neither will most of you.

The luster is rubbing right off this stuff. The news is getting out. Working for a regional is like working at McDonalds. Not much fun, low wages, tons of management BS.

Flying a jet just ain't that much fun.

 

[smellthejeta]

I look at this business and say "For what?" This thread, Terry, is rather amusing. You see, I'm just about to complete a BS in Computer Science. For no experience, competitive starting pay is around $35k-$40k per year. I guy I knew a couple of years ago started off at about $50k fresh out of school. Get this -- they ASK me how much I want to make and we have a negotiation. They don't sit there and point at a payscale that only depends on the seat you sit in and the length of time you work for the company.

Terry, I love to fly. I don't love to program. I know lots of people who love to fly. I don't know lots of people who love to program. In fact, I wouldn't have chosen that path in college had the money not been as good as it is. I've looked at airline programming jobs, which would be really cool given my background. Their requirements are something along the lines of 5 years of experience and some archaic skillsets that aren't taught in college anymore.

The trouble with loving to fly is that I don't love to fly for $20k per year. That's what I make now. At ACA, I had the privilege of eating, breathing, and sleeping Part 121. Ya know what? It's cool, but not $20k/yr cool. I can't finish my flight training on that pay, and the computer job market sucks so that's kind of out, too.

So I sat down and looked at my career options. I want to stay in aviation, have a secure job, make some good money, and have a pension. If I go fly in the military, I start out making $3600/month and they pay for my training. Only 2/3 of that is taxable. Of course, the pay scale doesn't have the drastic increases that your contract has as you acure longetivity. But you know what? It's stable, my job ain't going anywhere, and they won't come to me for concessions 'cause Canada can fly F16's cheaper than we can.

When I get to an interview board (if that is my choice, that is) they may ask me what my career goals are. I will tell them I wish to be a career military pilot or maybe go work for UPS or FedEx. I will tell them that flying for the majors is somewhat apealing, but there may not be many jobs when my time is up. And even then, you don't know when they're going after you for concessions, cutting your pension plan (US), furloughing you with 13 years of seniority (US), or going out of business. The possiblity of having to start junior at a new airline after having accrued seniority just isn't all that appealing. Why leave the military when I have a good paycheck and retirement benefits and a secure job?

Oh, they'll ask me if I want to fly for a regional. I will look them straight in the eye and say "What for?" At that point, I'll make $60k/yr, only 2/3 of that is taxed. I'll start over at a regional, and if I don't pay for training, I'll make $800/mo while I'm in training, sit reserve for awhile making $20/hr on a 75 guarantee. It ain't worth it.

If I don't do that (yeah, I'm looking at the ANG/AFRES as well) I'll go be an air traffic controller. I'll make $130,000 at the larger facilities and that's before overtime. It doesn't take all that long to make that kind of money, either. With that kind of money, I can buy my own airplane and fly it where I want and when I want.

I'm just happy that I figured this out before I got too old, because ATC and USAF have cutoffs at about the age of 30.

 

[upncoming]

But I'm not complaining, it pays for the flying, and for college. Most of my coworkers want to make this a career, but not me - I'm just counting the days until I graduate so I can flight instruct for $12K a year.

You go bigD (do you live in Dallas?)!! I did the software engineering thing for 10 years before I made the switch, which was about 10 years longer than it should have been, but I digress...If you make $12K as a CFI, you're doing pretty good, BTW, so I'd suggest having a plan, and I'm sure you do. As others have stated, don't listen to much on this forum in terms of its negativity. Most of the folk I work with (including 10+ year captains - REGIONAL captains) are grateful to be where they are. Even the crusty ones, but they seem to need to b!tch a while first. Don't know what's up with that. From my perspective, I left, went to a regional, was furloughed 9/21/01, spent a year going through savings and waiting tables while CFI'ing, kept moving forward, got hired by another regional and am still flying for them; I am as happy and as grateful as they come. When you make it bigD, it will be worth it, hands down. Heck, I was happier as a waiter than as an engineer!

Which leads me to the point that others have touched on, doing software (don't call it "programming" please, that's something that high schoolers do) is like a job at McDonald's, not the other way around. It just pays better. Requires only a little more skill, but a lot more dedication and attention to detail. The supply and demand model works in this scenario because software simply isn't a very "attractive" or interesting job. Like in a pack, if you ain't the lead dog the view never changes (i.e. from your cube) and if you're the type of person to slave though and get an engineering degree, then there's no WAY IN HELL you are gonna go the management route, so you're kinda stuck. Noone would want that job, which is why companies have to pay to fill it. The airline pilot thing however is a different animal, tons of people want that, and for different reasons. So the pay issue isn't really an issue - and please don't go on and on and on and ON about how it "should be". The point is that it ISN'T and won't be, especially with a weak economy. So you then have a choice: live with it or walk. Whatever you do, if you stick with it but complain, well that speaks for itself...

One last thing: someone compared "programmers" (shudder) to pilots and used the stereotypical nerd-vs.-stud comparison. Though I'm sure you were just kidding, I'd like to point out that the two professions are more similiar than you might think. And given some of the captains I've flown with, engineers are actually LESS anal. Oh and just because you were a geek doesn't mean that you can't make it to the airline pilot world. My captain last month was a M.D. - wanna tell him that?

Later!

 

[JBcrjca]

While reading these posts I can't help but recall the scenes from 'Office Space'. Peter Gibbons and his buds slaving away over those TPS reports...is that anything like programming or doing software? I know one thing for sure...no matter how much it pays, I could never live in a cubicle staring at a screen, working for a boss like Lumbergh. I'd rather be back in the right seat of a C-152 eating Ramen noodles twice a day. But hey, that's just me.

And don't forget, now we're putting cover sheets on those TPS reports...in case you didn't get the memo.

 

[upncoming]

While reading these posts I can't help but recall the scenes from 'Office Space'. Peter Gibbons and his buds slaving away over those TPS reports...is that anything like programming or doing software?

Though dramatized a bit, that movie depicts the relationship between engineers, those who interface with engineers and management surprisngly well, which is why it's in my movie collection. It's also why I screamed, yelled, and "whoop-whoop"ed all the way through it, involuntarily I might add. The frustration the major characters portrayed is very, very real. Notice how little of the ACTUAL WORK was discussed in that film, basically something about checking code for the Y2K bug? There's a reason for that: it's reality. Heck, I can't remember HOW many times I told management that the Y2K issue was completely EXAGGERATED and how it wouldn't affect the vast majority of computing systems in use today, including ours, only to be told "Yep, well uhhh...why don't we just go ahead and get to work on that. Okay? Good." Then on 01/28/00 I basically pulled a Peter Gibbons in a tech meeting and showed just how much money we wasted on that effort. 'Thought for sure I'd gone overboard with that show (a phrase engineers sometimes use for technical presentations to management) only to be patted on the back with the ol' "attaboy" and given time off. (No $$$, you do the math)

I know one thing for sure...no matter how much it pays, I could never live in a cubicle staring at a screen, working for a boss like Lumbergh. I'd rather be back in the right seat of a C-152 eating Ramen noodles twice a day. But hey, that's just me.

No that's anyone with a brain in their head and anything resembling a backbone and personality. It's also a large part of the reason I left. So all of you out there who b!itch and moan about how you're underpaid, I just hope to heck you've read this thread. You don't know HOW GOOD you have it, even at the regional level. I don't know that I've ever been as happy professionally as I am flying for a lowly, crap-paying, work-rules-sucking, evily-ran, mismanaged REGIONAL airline.

Sheesh.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Supply and demand.

You can probably turn most programmers into a fairly competent pilot.

I'm not so sure you can do the reverse in any sort of quantity.

 

[Ralph]

The poster above had it right... I can train most of the computer programmers I know to fly an airplane. I don't think there are too many pilots that are willing and/or able to learn how to write complex computer applications. Flying is more fun, requires less discipline to learn and is a trade that can be learned by most anyone with enough money.

Programming complex C++ applications for a Unix system is not really very fun, requires a ton of discipline to learn (as you pour through 100 times the boring technical reading) and no amount of money can really give someone with poor problem solving skills the ability to perform the task. Thus there are fewep people who can take the job and it pays more.

That said, I do believe in the universal "you get what you pay for concept” Flight instructing pays crap and as a result the few good instructors I had already had one foot out the door so to speak. Of course there are always exceptions and generalizations are terrifically easy to shoot down, but I'll still say that when you offer a salary of 19K a year you will get A) A bozo that is as helpful as a mini-mart clerk B) someone who will do the job for a short period of time and then quit C) some rich kid who doesn’t care anyway.

Now to make myself really unpopular.....

Suppose that B1900 that crashed up north a while back was piloted by two very bright 100K a year employees. Is it possible they would have solved the problem a bit quicker and not ended the flight with a fatal crash?

 

[Snakum]

They are not in shortage.

We were up until 2002 ... roughly.

Their screw-ups will not kill people.

There's a small group of developers who worked on calibration software for radiation machines in Canada who would disagree. As would many developers in the aerospace and heavy equipment industries.

They did not work their way up at SUB-poverty level wages for YEARS to get to their job.

Supply and demand ... as has been stated already.

Personally, I'd trade with any working CFI tomorrow. Where can we meet to work out the details?

Oh ... I forgot to mention that most of my co-workers are also now 'furloughed' and I've also endured three rounds of 'concessions' since Sept. 2001.

Minh

 

[bigD]

You go bigD (do you live in Dallas?)!!

Nope - I'm down in Austin. Thanks for the words of encouragement!

 

[Salty Dog]

Part of the pay question is the ability to work in the field of your passion.

You would have to pay me more than 80 grand a year to die slowly in front of a computer, slaving away in front of a box that will drive me blind in 30 years. Of course, I would have to get at least that much to support my flying habit!

I would gladly take 30k less in a flying job because I wouldn't have to pay to feed the monkey on the side. It's priorities. MY priorities. Disparage my sentiments if you must, but that's the way I see it. And yes, part of that low rate is directly due to the lure of bigger jets and bigger bucks later on down the road. I could never afford that on the side unless I was Bill Gates.

Guess what? Although many will insist that those jobs are dwindling permanently, there's still going to be thousands of 777 pilots 20 years from now, and still only one Bill Gates. Figure the odds. I did.

 

[stillaboo]

Now to make myself really unpopular.....

Suppose that B1900 that crashed up north a while back was piloted by two very bright 100K a year employees. Is it possible they would have solved the problem a bit quicker and not ended the flight with a fatal crash?

Yeah, that statement doesn't go over well with me at all. It is not possible, and that's all I'm gonna' say.

-Boo!

 

[stillaboo]

I would gladly take 30k less in a flying job because I wouldn't have to pay to feed the monkey on the side. And yes, part of that low rate is directly due to the lure of bigger jets and bigger bucks later on down the road.

Just so you're aware, the reason there is better pay for the bigger jets isn't b/c people like you will fly jets for peanuts. "If you'll fly jets for less pay, then why does the size really matter?" is what managment would say to your opinion.

Not disparaging you, but when you use logic like that, I don't think you're seeing the forrest for the trees.

-Boo!

 

[acaTerry]

... I can train most of the computer programmers I know to fly an airplane. I don't think there are too many pilots that are willing and/or able to learn how to write complex computer applications. Flying is more fun, requires less discipline to learn and is a trade that can be learned by most anyone with enough money.

Oh yeah, enlighten us more, Mr. 700 hours....

Lima Oscar Sierra Echo Romeo....

 

[JimNtexas]

... I can train most of the computer programmers I know to fly an airplane. I don't think there are too many pilots that are willing and/or able to learn how to write complex computer applications. Flying is more fun, requires less discipline to learn and is a trade that can be learned by most anyone with enough money.

Oh yeah, enlighten us more, Mr. 700 hours....

Lima Oscar Sierra Echo Romeo....

I bet Ralph knows a lot more about airplanes than you know about computers, Terry.

 

[Ralph]

Ok Mr 4500 hours

I have ten+ years of experience managing applications development. This includes C++, Visual Basic, Perl, Cold Fusion, Java, and Object Oriented C++. Of course this included managing Unix servers (AIX, Solaris, etc...) as well as good old Microsoft products.

I spent a great deal of time teaching technology as well. In fact I worked full time as an instructor at a community college teaching programming.

Now I work as a CFI.

It is possible to take a 0 time pilot and teach them how to fly a relatively complex aircraft in six months or less. I think we can all find places that do this. In fact I would say a person with a 12th grade education and a fat wallet could definitely accomplish this.

It is impossible to take someone with little to no computer experience and have them programming at a competent level in six months. No amount of cash will fix that. Perhaps if we started with someone who is highly logical, bright and well educated we could do it. But that same guy would zip through the flying curriculum in a lot less time.

Responsibility aside, flying is a lot less complicated but a while lot more fun.

 

[bigD]

It is impossible to take someone with little to no computer experience and have them programming at a competent level in six months.

I disagree with this. Give me 6 solid months with anyone that truly wants to learn, and I can give him/her a pretty solid foundation in programming. At that point he/she would be ready to focus their training to whatever specific programming field they wanted to go into.

Now, if by competent you mean that they can write code in 5 different languages and perform all sorts of programming tasks, from back end internet programming to 3D games, it'll take more time. But we're just talking a foundation here, and that's no different than a 250 hour CFI that just laid the groundwork for more specific training later.

 

[Snakum]

It is impossible to take someone with little to no computer experience and have them programming at a competent level in six months.

While I generally agree with what you're trying to say (programming is more difficult than GA flying) I must respectfully disagree with this statement. Six months is actually PLENTY of time to become a junior-level ASP or VB (desktop) developer. You ain't gonna be able to do much with advanced tools like the myriad database connectivity protocols, but you can code competently.

I don't think, however, this would be true of Java, JSP, C/C++, at least in my personal experience.

Minh
(ASP, VB, JSP, SQL geek)

 

[acaTerry]

I have ten+ years of experience managing applications development. This includes C++, Visual Basic, Perl, Cold Fusion, Java, and Object Oriented C++. Of course this included managing Unix servers (AIX, Solaris, etc...) as well as good old Microsoft products.

...and 700 hours. So what would a low-time CFI know about a complex airliner? Nada. Tell me about ACARS, AFIS, EFIS EICAS. Lets, discuss why the auto feature on a CRJ will not bring on B pumps until flaps are lowered and which will not come on with cross-side IDG not operating.
Let's take a CRJ off at ROA with a deferred APU in icing conditions and set up the bleeds correctly so that we neither crash into a mountain or blow the passengers eardrums.


What am I talking about? Oh, sorry, I forgot you are a LOW TIME CFI talking about piloting skills and equipment he KNOWS NOTHING about. So why do you see fit to display us as a lower species than yourself?
Now I am not Mr. Computer, but I have a working knowledge of C, C++ and C#. And it was easier and followed logic better than advanced flying does. Programming requires little or no decision making, "big picture thinking" or risk of life. And if a problem arises, there is time to fix it. Piloting an advanced aircraft while defying gravity and in weather that is trying its darndest to forcefully eject you from its element is a little more demanding. Does anyone EXPECT a programmer to work for 18,000 bucks? No. But pilots are EXPECTED to do it. If we say or do anything, we get the old "supply and demand" speech from everyone who took Economics 101. Well, show me the shortage of doctors. They don't make 18,000 bucks. Show me the shortage of lawyers, they don't make 18,000 bucks.
BTW, there is no shortage of programmers, yet you guys make much better money.
Gimme a break. In the meantime, just keep dispensing those pearls of wisdom from your 152.