Is this profession in peril?

[CitationUltra]

That doesn't say a whole lot. Pro athletes are employees too and in the labor catagory.

Well, not really. They are independent professional contractors. They are not labor. They individually negotiate their contract fee with the athletic club.

Pilots, on the other hand, are collectively and individually subject to the arbitrary pay scale established by the companies, or, in the event of their being represented by a collective bargaining unit, they are thereby subject to the more-or-less arbitrary pay scale established by the company and agreed to by their bargaining unit.

 

[PCL_128]

If we've always been apathetic- but haven't always had bottom barrell wages- what's different now?

Well, for one thing, deregulation. Deregulation began three decades of wage slashing and work rule destruction. Another thing is the rabidly anti-labor government that Bush has installed. The NMB is as anti-labor as it's ever been, and the courts are littered with far-right, anti-labor judges. These things have created an environment that has virtually destroyed our leverage. The damage can be minimized with a strong union, but the repairs can really only happen when we get a more labor-friendly government. Pilots refuse to accept this reality and instead blame the national Association for their troubles.

 

[Lear70]

If we've always been apathetic- but haven't always had bottom barrell wages- what's different now?

We haven't *always* been apathetic. PCL is painting a broader picture than was really applicable in the first decade post-deregulation.

There are several good examples of large-scale major airline strikes at that time, more than one of which resulted in the wholesale closure of an airline,,, but,,, reduced capacity allowed higher ticket prices, thus holding up the professional bottom line for pilots (and other labor) for longer than it otherwise might have.

PCL is right in that regard: deregulation has been the biggest contributor to the demise of our pay and QOL, it's just taken a (relatively) long time for the effect to be realized.

Additionally, pilots have, by and large, become a casualty of their own successes or, rather, the successes of our predecessors. Our founding fathers post-deregulation obtained work rules, duty limits, minimum rest periods, hotel standards, etc, that made the next generation of pilots expect more without having to struggle to obtain those gains.

Then the management folk came in and, instead of managing the money for the long term, started raiding the kitty to take money and run (corporate raiders). The managers who came in AFTER the coffers were empty then came to the biggest single expense they had at the time, pilot labor (fuel wasn't nearly as high on the list at the time), and found a pilot group who didn't know what it was to have fought for those hard gains.

They took advantage, and it all snowballed downhill from there, as each subsequent generation of pilot complains loudly, but doesn't have the cajones to risk their career and airline to get what they want.

Indeed, ask any ex-Eastern pilot who struck, didn't return, and ended up without a job if they would do it again, or take the cuts and keep their job... I bet you'd get a lot who'd have given up the cuts to not have a career of uncertainty.

It's a lot to ask, but nothing good comes without risk. Pilots understand this, and would rather keep a halfway-good thing than risk starting over again or, possibly, having a GREAT career.

I never said it was a terrible job, I love my work, I just know an airline career will NEVER again be what it once was. Too many people not willing to make the hard sacrifices.

 

[BOOZENEWS]

Well, for one thing, deregulation. Deregulation began three decades of wage slashing and work rule destruction. Another thing is the rabidly anti-labor government that Bush has installed. The NMB is as anti-labor as it's ever been, and the courts are littered with far-right, anti-labor judges. These things have created an environment that has virtually destroyed our leverage. The damage can be minimized with a strong union, but the repairs can really only happen when we get a more labor-friendly government. Pilots refuse to accept this reality and instead blame the national Association for their troubles.

All of this is absolutely true. However, even with the anti labor administration, there are effective ways to put enormous pressure on management during negotiations. Refusing to fly more than your line plus flying very safely seem to do wonders. This is how UAL got what they wanted in 2000.


Even though we all like to think a strike is the ultimate weapon, remember that when we all fly safe that we are still getting paid 100%. In terms of bang for the buck I'd have to believe that all pilots flying very safe is best way, overall, to put pressure on mgmt since they still having to pay us the normal rate.

A strike can only accomplish one of these.

 

[PCL_128]

We haven't *always* been apathetic. PCL is painting a broader picture than was really applicable in the first decade post-deregulation.

In terms of participation, we have always been this apathetic. ALPA's records going back to the early days show that voting and meeting attendance participation has held at steady levels throughout ALPA's history. After the ALPA pioneers got things started, the very next generation of pilots got too comfortable and started taking things for granted. It's continued to the present day. Pilots get pissed off about pay and working conditions, but not enough to actually participate and do anything about it. They'd rather spend their days golfing and fishing rather than taking just one day to attend a meeting, or go to a rally in DC, or volunteer for a committee, etc...

 

[PCL_128]

All of this is absolutely true. However, even with the anti labor administration, there are effective ways to put enormous pressure on management during negotiations. Refusing to fly more than your line plus flying very safely seem to do wonders. This is how UAL got what they wanted in 2000.


Even though we all like to think a strike is the ultimate weapon, remember that when we all fly safe that we are still getting paid 100%. In terms of bang for the buck I'd have to believe that all pilots flying very safe is best way, overall, to put pressure on mgmt since they still having to pay us the normal rate.

A strike can only accomplish one of these.

All of that is true, but all of it is also illegal. Because of that, the union isn't able to officially advocate it. It has to start with grass roots movements. Again, this requires the involvement of the rank-and-file. The UAL pilots did it in 2000. The ASA pilots just did it last year. And none of it required leadership from the big wigs in Herndon. It all comes down to participation and involvement from the membership.

 

[JoeMerchant]

It most certainly does. The overwhelming majority of Pinnacle pilots desire to work for a major airline. They don't want to work at Pinnacle. They have to work at Pinnacle just to be able to move on to a career carrier at some point. With stronger scope at NWA, these pilots move on quicker to that job that they really want.ALPA doesn't push for looser scope restrictions at Pinnacle. PCL ALPA has no negotiations whatsoever with NWA over scope or anything else. The PCL MEC negotiates only with Pinnacle management.

....so the conflict of interest is with those pilots who choose to make a career out of their regional jobs....many of whom are/were the ones who brought ALPA onto these regional properties in the first place....Way to reward loyalty.....For those who want to make the regionals a career....there is a huge conflict of interest....

 

[JoeMerchant]

In terms of participation, we have always been this apathetic. ALPA's records going back to the early days show that voting and meeting attendance participation has held at steady levels throughout ALPA's history. After the ALPA pioneers got things started, the very next generation of pilots got too comfortable and started taking things for granted. It's continued to the present day. Pilots get pissed off about pay and working conditions, but not enough to actually participate and do anything about it. They'd rather spend their days golfing and fishing rather than taking just one day to attend a meeting, or go to a rally in DC, or volunteer for a committee, etc...

Yet according to you and Rez....this is the root of ALPA's problem....a problem that ALPA has always had....

 

[pilotyip]

Did wonders

The UAL pilots did it in 2000. The ASA pilots just did it last year. And none of it required leadership from the big wigs in Herndon. It all comes down to participation and involvement from the membership.

And all the UAL pilots are better off now than before the 2000 action, because the union made everything better.

 

[PCL_128]

....so the conflict of interest is with those pilots who choose to make a career out of their regional jobs....many of whom are/were the ones who brought ALPA onto these regional properties in the first place....Way to reward loyalty.....For those who want to make the regionals a career....there is a huge conflict of interest....

No there isn't. You have made a decision to stay at the regionals. That means that you've accepted the fact that you'll always be flying smaller airplanes. Nothing wrong with that. It's your choice. If you want to fly bigger planes, then you always have the choice of moving on to an airline that flies bigger planes. But there's no conflict of interest in any of this. The only conflict of interest would be if ALPA attempted to scope you out of flying that you're already doing. That isn't happening, so there's no conflict.

 

[PCL_128]

Yet according to you and Rez....this is the root of ALPA's problem....a problem that ALPA has always had....

Correct. This has always held us back. It wasn't as much of an issue during the days of regulation and friendly administrations, because we weren't going up against as much resistance. Airlines had the ability to pass their rising costs off to the consumers and receive subsidies from the CAB. After that ended, and especially after 9/11 and with the anti-labor Bush administration, the negative effects of an extremely apathetic membership are clearer. We could still muddle along and make decent advancements in the old days, but in this new environment, an apathetic membership is a death sentence. People are correct to say that we need to adapt to the deregulated world, but it's not ALPA the organization that needs to adapt, it's the ALPA members that need to adapt. Continuing in the lackadaisical ways of the past will no longer work. The members need to be actively involved.

 

[JoeMerchant]

No there isn't. You have made a decision to stay at the regionals. That means that you've accepted the fact that you'll always be flying smaller airplanes. Nothing wrong with that. It's your choice. If you want to fly bigger planes, then you always have the choice of moving on to an airline that flies bigger planes. But there's no conflict of interest in any of this. The only conflict of interest would be if ALPA attempted to scope you out of flying that you're already doing. That isn't happening, so there's no conflict.

That is your opinion....but that doesn't mean there isn't a conflict of interest...There is a conflict to those of us who are making a career here....I don't care how big an airplane I fly....but I have every right to demand that my union doesn't limit my career at my current employer....The very fact that we are arguing about this shows that there is a conflict of interest....Your interest and my interest conflict.....

ALPA has attempted...and probably will again attempt to scope us out flying we are already doing.....

 

[PCL_128]

And all the UAL pilots are better off now than before the 2000 action, because the union made everything better.

The UAL pilots took massive paycuts and suffered furloughs because of 9/11, an anti-labor administration that wouldn't even give an ATSB loan to an airline that lost two airplanes and numerous crew members because of a terrorist action that the administration failed to stop, and an inept management. Contract '00 had nothing to do with these problems. But I should have expected such nonsense from someone that sits behind a desk at YIP and issues memos for a living.

 

[CitationUltra]

We haven't *always* been apathetic. PCL is painting a broader picture than was really applicable in the first decade post-deregulation.

There are several good examples of large-scale major airline strikes at that time, more than one of which resulted in the wholesale closure of an airline,,, but,,, reduced capacity allowed higher ticket prices, thus holding up the professional bottom line for pilots (and other labor) for longer than it otherwise might have.

PCL is right in that regard: deregulation has been the biggest contributor to the demise of our pay and QOL, it's just taken a (relatively) long time for the effect to be realized.

Additionally, pilots have, by and large, become a casualty of their own successes or, rather, the successes of our predecessors. Our founding fathers post-deregulation obtained work rules, duty limits, minimum rest periods, hotel standards, etc, that made the next generation of pilots expect more without having to struggle to obtain those gains.

Then the management folk came in and, instead of managing the money for the long term, started raiding the kitty to take money and run (corporate raiders). The managers who came in AFTER the coffers were empty then came to the biggest single expense they had at the time, pilot labor (fuel wasn't nearly as high on the list at the time), and found a pilot group who didn't know what it was to have fought for those hard gains.

They took advantage, and it all snowballed downhill from there, as each subsequent generation of pilot complains loudly, but doesn't have the cajones to risk their career and airline to get what they want.

Indeed, ask any ex-Eastern pilot who struck, didn't return, and ended up without a job if they would do it again, or take the cuts and keep their job... I bet you'd get a lot who'd have given up the cuts to not have a career of uncertainty.

It's a lot to ask, but nothing good comes without risk. Pilots understand this, and would rather keep a halfway-good thing than risk starting over again or, possibly, having a GREAT career.

I never said it was a terrible job, I love my work, I just know an airline career will NEVER again be what it once was. Too many people not willing to make the hard sacrifices.

Well put, and historically accurate.

 

[curtis46]

Pilots have always been apathetic;during good times our leaders were able to negotiate w/o much pilots involvement.With the state of the industry,pilots involvement is crucial.
A way to fight the apathy would be to do like my kids charter school does.parents must volunteer a number of hours every year in diffferent school activities,if not parents got billed.some parents don't like to get involve and gladly send their checks;personnally,to avoid beeing charged,i volunteer my time.now i know all the teachers,the school rules,the PTA members,the school programs,the financial aids available,the kids can't fool me anymore on their assignements!!
I would bet pilots participation would be significant.now,can the union impliment such policy,not sure.

 

[JoeMerchant]

The UAL pilots took massive paycuts and suffered furloughs because of 9/11, an anti-labor administration that wouldn't even give an ATSB loan to an airline that lost two airplanes and numerous crew members because of a terrorist action that the administration failed to stop, and an inept management. Contract '00 had nothing to do with these problems. But I should have expected such nonsense from someone that sits behind a desk at YIP and issues memos for a living.

Are you now blaiming 911 on Bush? You have really lost it now....Let me guess....it would never have happened with your man Obama....

 

[PCL_128]

Are you now blaiming 911 on Bush? You have really lost it now....Let me guess....it would never have happened with your man Obama....

I'm not blaming him for anything, but the fact remains that UAL and AMR lost airplanes and crew members because of a terrorist act on this country, and the administration blocked ATSB loans that they obviously deserved.

 

[Lear70]

Pilots have always been apathetic;during good times our leaders were able to negotiate w/o much pilots involvement.With the state of the industry,pilots involvement is crucial.
A way to fight the apathy would be to do like my kids charter school does.parents must volunteer a number of hours every year in diffferent school activities,if not parents got billed.some parents don't like to get involve and gladly send their checks;personnally,to avoid beeing charged,i volunteer my time.now i know all the teachers,the school rules,the PTA members,the school programs,the financial aids available,the kids can't fool me anymore on their assignements!!
I would bet pilots participation would be significant.now,can the union impliment such policy,not sure.

That's actually not a bad thought.

Change the bylaws to REQUIRE personal involvement in your association at so many functions per year.

A hefty assessment for failure to comply, taken directly from your paycheck the same way your dues are taken.

Hmmmm... might have to think about that when I've had less beer.

 

[PCL_128]

That's actually not a bad thought.

Change the bylaws to REQUIRE personal involvement in your association at so many functions per year.

A hefty assessment for failure to comply, taken directly from your paycheck the same way your dues are taken.

Hmmmm... might have to think about that when I've had less beer.

I pity the union rep who tries to bring that to a vote. It is an idea with merit, though.

 

[waveflyer]

i agree-that is an interesting idea- and that's my point- if apathy is the problem- let's come up with the solution. It's not that your wrong PCL, it's that it's wrong to be railing on it instead of tweaking the system to address it.

It's the same thing w/ my seniority "problem"- Every bit of the last 3 pages of posts comes down to 'we don't have leverage b/c we have to keep our current company in it's current form or we start over'. That is a problem in this dynamic of an industry. Almost all of the infighting is, again, over seniority. Can we solve it?

UAL not receiving an NTSB guarantee is a huge scam perpetrated on the taxpayers- albeit not even close to the largest squandering of funds under this administration. If you are fiscally conservative- it should bother you that appointees of the president decided to let the taxpayers pay the PGC $5billion for reduced benefits to UAL employees- instead of a worst case scenario $1.9billion IF UAL defaulted- which they had already determined to be unlikely. I don't get how an airline pilot can justify being a republican at all- but that's me- But how you justify Bush.... that's your issues...

There is no conflict of interest. But I'll give you your turn. Tell me Joe- how do major airline PILOTS not benefit from increased wages and better work rules at "regionals"?

So unless your argument is that ALPA should be pressuring management for decreased wages to keep your regional more competitive and more alluring for increased outsourcing... then i don't get what you are saying.

There are those who took Logic in college, and those who didn't, I guess...