I've met the enemy,

[pilotyip]

Spirit low paying job?

Spirit pilots make more than probably 80% of the pilots now working for a living, 5 year Capts touch 100K on a regular basis.
I would be tickled to death to make that much. I am reguarily interviewing ex-part 121 pilots with heavy time in the 1000's of hours, college degreees, all the right stuff. USA Jet is thier first interview since lay off in the fall of 2001. These guys are ex-Delta, ex-NWA, ex- Emery, ex-CAL, ex-USAirways, have all expressed a sincere interest in becoming a DA-20 F/O at 33K per year to start. Our guys would go to Spirit in a heartbeat for your pay. The majors are never coming back to their previous form, they are going to redefine along the lines of the successful airline models of low cost trend setters. American is reducing the types in its fleet to reduce the cost of seat movement, that is a redefinition of the major model. It is happening. Spirit is a good job, thank your lucky stars

 

[enigma]

Re: Correction

Enigma,

I agree with the points you're trying to make, but I wanted to clear up something you said. Mesa is not and, as far as I know, has never been PFT. For some reason I was under the impression from some of your former posts that you were a Mesa pilot before you joined Spirit; I guess I was mistaken. Anyway, thanks for sharing your thoughts and good luck to you guys with your contract negotiations.

Hud

I quit Mesa ten years ago. The San Juan College program had not provided one newhire at that time, or maybe a couple at best. I didn't call the pilot development program PFT. I called the airline PFT, as I believe that Mesa was at one point in the mid nineties. I might be wrong, If so I won't mind admitting it.

Whether or not Mesa was ever PFT is not really relevant to the point of the post. Go read it again, I think you'll agree. As for your comment insinuating that I had I been Mesa, I would not have made that comment; I worked there before Larry and Grady realized that they could take advantage of young/wet-behind-the-ears pilots. Heck, when I got hired, no one wanted to go to FMN and work for Larry. Mesa actually came to TX and recruited furloughed Conquest pilots. That's how an 1000/300 CFI gets a job with a commuter.

Thanks for your support
8N

 

[bobbysamd]

Larry Risley and Grady Reed

I worked there before Larry and Grady realized that they could take advantage of young/wet-behind-the-ears pilots . . . .

(emphasis added)

Isn't that the truth?

And, part of the appeal of MAPD. They get a pilot ready for the line who needs virtually no initial training. Part of MAPD was that pilots received an intial 135 ride. In those days, Mesa 1900s flew under 135 with 19 pax max and required no FA. Before the pilot was ever hired, though, they were making money off him/her from the course!

Not to mention the ATP pay-for-interview crapshoot scheme, in which a person went there to get an ATP. If he/she passed on the first try, he/she got an interview. There were busts . . . . .

One think about Larry, he always knew how to make money.

 

[enigma]

Re: Spirit low paying job?

Spirit pilots make more than probably 80% of the pilots now working for a living, 5 year Capts touch 100K on a regular basis.
............Spirit is a good job, thank your lucky stars

I do thank my lucky stars. Please reread the post. I did not say anything disparaging about NK, I only acknowledged that we make less per seat than do RJ pilots.

Spirit, 5th year Captain pay is $84.11 for 72 hours a month. That is $72671.04's a year. The pilots who are making over $100K are only doing so by working a lot of OT. Our contract combined with the mindset of crew scheduling tends to conserve reserves and call in senior pilots who then make time and a half OT. I think that it is a holdover on sceduling for a lot of charter work.

I have flown with numerous ex-USAJet/Kalitta/Murray/ etc pilots. Most of them make LESS here than they did flying boxes. They quit the freight business because they go tired of not having a life.

regards,
8N

 

[surplus1]

And he is I. (at least a little bit)

After many months of observing/participating in the RJ vs mainline issue. It has finally sunk in, the RJ crews are making over two times the amount of pay per seat that I make.

Hmmmm. There is hope. The light at the end of the tunnel is NOT a train after all. To copy GE "progress is our most important product".

Of note, there is disparity among regional pay and contracts just as there is disparity among mainline pay and contracts.

Some regionals have good contracts, tailored to our operation, and reasonable pay tailored to our aircraft and seniority lists. The fact that it doesn't always "copy" the favored mainline de jour, is not necessarily as bad as many have thought.

I still haven't changed my mind about PFT and those who did it, but I realize that my thinking about the RJ vs mainline issue has been clouded by the companies involved.
...... there is NO connection between PFT and the current mess.

A major improvement in your thinking. The last thought is right on target. PFT is a separate issue, has no agreed definition and, is irrelevant to the current mess.

It is so simple, mainline is shrinking because there is reduced demand for the services that old style mainline offered; and the current demand for service is not at the level that generates enough profit to pay the high wages.

Another accurate observation. I would add that current demand not only has trouble meeting the high costs and generating profits, but is directly related to the chosen aircraft type used in specific markets. The market is dictating aircraft selection at the mega carriers, not pilot wages.

..... and the RJ's are helping the mainline more than they are hurting. I wish my union would stop treating regional pilots like second class citizens.

You score again, and your average is higher than before.

Not one of us (non-PFT'rs) took any action to intentionally undermine our major airline brothers.

Take out the parenthetical and you're right again. As you said earlier, the PFT has nothing to do with the current problems, no matter what you think of it. That includes the absence of intent to undermine anything. You were correct the first time, stick to it.

So when ya'll get to slingin mud with abandon,both sides should remember that the market is in control.

Bingo! The market is in control and will always be. That market will determine the number of large aircraft as well as the number of small aircraft. It will also determine the number of pilots required to operate them and the wages they can earn from time to time.

Efforts to control the market or change the market with union contracts, Scope clauses or animosity towards each other as pilots are doomed to failure. Without regulation of the type that existed pre 1978, we cannot expect to maintain a status quo that violates market supply and demand. It may last for a while, but will ultimately fail. We are witnessing that failure today and we must adjust our thinking to coincide with market pressures.

PPS, Spirit is in contract renewal talks as I speak. Pray that we achieve the increase we are shooting for. Double would just about do it

While this is not the best time to be negotiating contractual improvements, if you make your demands reasonable and consistent with your Company's capabilities, you can and will improve your contract. If you seek "Delta plus", you will likely fail.
To paraphrase an old fashioned concept, cut your suit according to your cloth.

I wish the very best for you. We've butted heads a little in the past, but this time we are on the same page.

Regards,
Surplus1
CMR

 

[csmith]

Re: Re: I've met the enemy,

From Surplus1:


"Bingo! The market is in control and will always be. That market will determine the number of large aircraft as well as the number of small aircraft. It will also determine the number of pilots required to operate them and the wages they can earn from time to time."

After watching for some time here on this board, I think you have finally come up with a winner. This is absolutely true. Allow me to explain a bit further. I've watched you posts and how this board seems to be very biased toward the regional types--or types formerly known as regionals. How could it not be, with an obviously biased moderator and 4 or 5 people who work for Comair and ASA who are allowed to take their shots at mainline guys. When these same mainline guys shoot back, however, they get chastised, posts removed, and even banished from the boards. I have seen many regional folk on here post, yes Surplus including you, completely non-accurate information.

Your quoted paragraph above sums up the industry nicely. It also disproves the notion of your laswuit. The scope at Delta restricts none of these things. I'll say that again: SCOPE AT DELTA RESTRICTS NONE OF THESE THINGS.

So while you are going off on your omnipotent rants because you've been there and done that, which nobody has done everywhere, you can remember what I have said above. Delta has the freedom to fly any airplane on any route with any pilot from any carrier---for six months. It is then that they must merge lists if they have met criteria applying to this flying. Read this paragraph again, because it is significant and shoots an irreperable hole in the RJDC case. We are not restricting the flying of anybody, we are restricting the amount of flying which may be outsourced, and if this cannot be complied with, Delta must merge the lists. Delta is free to put all of the 30,40,50,60,70,80,90 seaters on mainline that they wish. We are NOT restricting the RJ, we are restricting the outsourcing.

We are the sole bargaining group at Delta. It is written in the language. No other group may bargain for Delta flying. While the actual outsourcing is negotiated, no other group may come in and bid, underbid, overbid for Delta flying. This is surviving language prior to any buyout. Regardless of who pulls the strings, there are affiliates set up ON PAPER for the Comair/ASA guys to negotiate with. Like it or not, those are the facts.

Emotional ploys such as the condescending tone of mainliners towards regionals are irrelevant. Pilot skills are irrelevant. College degrees are irrelevant. Pay for training is irrelevant. Realize that these guys are over here, as opposed to the ALPA boards where this actually has relevance, as the big fish in the little pond. They write nice diatribes about how the man is keeping them down, how ALPA has destroyed the world, contributes to global warming, and anything else which appeals to the locals. I agree with them that ALPA cannot and will not represent both types of groups equally. With the advent of the J4J, I seriously doubt on whether or not they can represent both groups FAIRLY--which is the F in DFR.

What you are reading, is disgruntled talk/lawsuit of a group whos existence is defined in section 1 of the Delta PWA. It always has been. They decided that since Delta bought them, and operate them as an affiliate, that this changes what restrictions can and cannot be imposed on them simply due to the fact that the same bargaining agent--read the guys who supply the money, pencils, strike funds, paper, lawyers--represents them. Local MECs provide their own negotiators who get what they can. Comair/ASA do not have the clout to do this on their own. Delta can, and does, bury them in negotiations.

The Delta pilots owe the Comair and ASA groups nothing, and vice versa. Each bargains for their own, with EQUAL access to ALPA funds, legal, supplies. Despite that, an offer to combine resources in a flow through type arrangement was proffered by the Delta MEC. As soon as the F word was mentioned, Comair walks away. Yet ole' surplus comes out with this "miracle idea" in easy steps which is essentially works out to be, yep you guessed it, a flow through. The hand has been put out, it just wasn't the hand that Comair wanted to shake.

I'd better close for now as I am getting off onto tangents. Just remember folks, some people may WRITE well, but that doesn't mean they are RIGHT.

CSmith

 

[Timebuilder]

"Bingo! The market is in control and will always be. That market will determine the number of large aircraft as well as the number of small aircraft. It will also determine the number of pilots required to operate them and the wages they can earn from time to time."

What is described here, CS, is a pure free market which has little to do with Delta or the RJDC. The purpose of ANY union is to circumvent the forces of a free market. If they did not do this, there would be no reason whatever for a union contract.

I've watched you posts and how this board seems to be very biased toward the regional types--or types formerly known as regionals. How could it not be, with an obviously biased moderator and 4 or 5 people who work for Comair and ASA who are allowed to take their shots at mainline guys. When these same mainline guys shoot back, however, they get chastised, posts removed, and even banished from the boards.

My experience here on the board goes back about 18 months. I haven't seen the bias that you describe. I have seen that this board has a great number of people who are looking for a fair shake, from the level of a private pilot on up. Many Delta guys, those with the seniority to still be flying right now, don't have a lot of motivation to come here and discuss the "fair representation" issue. They are pretty happy with where they are right now. Others are not so happy, and would like to remedy what they think is an actionable situation. Since deregulation, many pilots have considered themselves to be at the top of the flying food chain. Times are changing, and that belief may be in jeopardy.

Since I don't have a dog in this fight, other than my journalistic desire to see justice done, I have to say that drawing a line between Delta and Comair is a distiction without a difference. Delta sees a terrific advantage when the public fails to see a difference between the two carriers. That's the reason the Delta name apears on the Comair jets. By using an alter ego carrier, Delta saves the costs which would be a part of Comair operation if it had to abide by the Delta contract where Comair pilots and other employees are concerned. Delta pilots have gone along with this. You can argue that the "mecs" are the union, but that idea may not stand up in court. Since Comair and Delta union dues go to ALPA and not the mec, there is at least a firm theoretical value to the argument for DFR.

The Delta pilots owe the Comair and ASA groups nothing, and vice versa.

Really? I thought this was a symbiotic relationship that kept everybody alive.

To paraphrase George Orwell, the current relationship between pilot groups that ALPA has blessed has made "some animals more equal than others".

It will be interesting to see what comes of all this.

 

[csmith]

From Timebuilder:

"What is described here, CS, is a pure free market which has little to do with Delta or the RJDC. The purpose of ANY union is to circumvent the forces of a free market. If they did not do this, there would be no reason whatever for a union contract."

I appreciate your response and I ask you what post did you read?
As I said, the Delta pilots have done nothing to preclude Delta from operating aircraft as per the market. They just have regulated to their employer what pilots will fly these aircraft.


"I haven't seen the bias that you describe. "

Maybe not, but I have yet to see "journalistic" people be unbiased. The US definitely loves the underdog since the Rocky Balboa days. Suffice to say that we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I have talked at length with some current and former members of this organization, and I just don't see an unbiased atmosphere here.


"Many Delta guys, those with the seniority to still be flying right now, don't have a lot of motivation to come here and discuss the "fair representation" issue."

Actually, there are a lot of Delta guys, myself included who paruse here without participating, again I cite the reason as bias against the "major" pilots. I didn't even participate myself until recently after quite a while of lurking. BTW, I am not in danger of losing my job in this round of FM.


"By using an alter ego carrier, Delta saves the costs which would be a part of Comair operation if it had to abide by the Delta contract where Comair pilots and other employees are concerned. Delta pilots have gone along with this. You can argue that the "mecs" are the union, but that idea may not stand up in court. Since Comair and Delta union dues go to ALPA and not the mec, there is at least a firm theoretical value to the argument for DFR."


I absolutely agree with the above quote save the "Delta pilots have gone along with it." I was a staunch supporter of the Comair strike. I contributed with my money and my feet. Despite obvious shortcomings in their strike center preparations, they were definitely dedicated to the cause. The ONLY way to get these guys on a combined list was to remove the incentive for management to keep them seperate--take away the financial differences. I did my part, they came up short despite their rantings to the fact that they weren't coming back without a mainline contract. MECs have negotiated their contracts since as long as I can remember. ALPA is there as a figurehead, and to sign the paperwork as the bargaining agent. You are correct that it may not stand up in court, and I think they are counting on such an unknowing judge. I have also preached to them the ramifications of such a victory, and the disastrous consequences of such an outcome. Scope declared illegal. How do you feel about your Delta jet being flown by the lowest bidder??? Their motive is more than obvious, and they've ran tail from it when faced with it on the ALPA boards. $12,000,000,000. What they tried to do was hold ALPA hostage in order to get their list integration, and ALPA didn't blink. While their is some justifiability in cursing ALPA, who are we kidding--the Delta pilots, there is plenty of dirt to go around.


"Really? I thought this was a symbiotic relationship that kept everybody alive.

To paraphrase George Orwell, the current relationship between pilot groups that ALPA has blessed has made "some animals more equal than others".

It will be interesting to see what comes of all this"


That feel good thing might look good on a recruiting poster, but it's practice is not very realistic. Do all people get an equally fair trial, is the press really unbiased? ALPA hasn't "blessed" anything. It's existence is for the preservation of safety first and foremost. Lobbying and getting all on the same page of safety is where ALPA comes in. Having good doctors on staff and good legal is where ALPA accels. My contract is mine and their contract is theirs. Yes the money goes to ALPA. Are you going to tell me that somebody who pays dues of 6K a year should get the exact same protections as the newbe who pays $350/yr? Who has more to lose? Tough questions, maybe, but very realistic. Besides, DFR stands for Duty of Fair Representation NOT Duty of Equal Representation. Yes it will be interesting to see, as well as the countersuits.

Again, this has nothing to do with pilot skill, being holier than thou, the position of the planets, or anything else. Just money and contracts.

There is much more history to this than what is written here, but not enough bandwidth to type it all.

CSmith

 

[Timebuilder]

I appreciate your response and I ask you what post did you read?

Okay. I read the post from surplus1, and also yours.

The idea to which you were agreeing is an abstract, and counter to the purpose of ALPA and any union. I though it relevant since this is a discussion regarding union representation. Although the market determines much of what hapens in aviation, the purpose of a union is to PREVENT the free market from controlling ALL that happens. The point of OUR discussion is whether the representation of the national union, who recieves all of the dues money, can legally place the interests of one pilot group before another when all concerned are dues paying members in good standing.

ALPA is there as a figurehead, and to sign the paperwork as the bargaining agent. You are correct that it may not stand up in court, and I think they are counting on such an unknowing judge. I have also preached to them the ramifications of such a victory, and the disastrous consequences of such an outcome. Scope declared illegal.

Correct me if I am wrong, and believe me, I've been wrong before, but if APLA signs the contract as a bargaining agent, don't they take on a responsibility for the language of the contract, and therefore the value of the contract to the dues paying members?

The litigants might be counting on an unknowing judge, but I think the real danger to ALPA might come from well informed judge. Just my opinion.

Scope declared illegal? I don't think this will be the outcome. Scope against other members of the same union, working for the same comapany, flying planes that bear the same name? Perhaps that won't stand up.

I thought that ALPA had blessed the idea of two levels of pilot members, the so-called major and regional pilots. Isn't this why we are looking at this mess? Truthfully, I wasn't aware that ALPA members paid different dues rates. If that is so, I don't agree with the practice. As an AFTRA/SAG member, I paid the same dues as Tom Cruise or Julia Roberts, and I recceive the same benefits. Even so, a tiered dues system isn't a justification of a union providing a diferent commitment to its members based on where they work. If your dues are based on your pay, that sounds to me as though ALPA is getting a kickback from the value of your contract. Could be a conflict of interest.

I you have read my posts before, you know that I value the efforts ALPA has made in the area of safety. What I don't understand is why they weren't eager to take all of the pilots who fly Delta-owned planes under the Delta contract. If that was not possible, I don't see why they would engage in ratification of contract language that clearly pits one group of members against another, particularly when working for the same company. This seems like a missed opportunity.

Since you have a tenure with Delta, I'd appreciate your further insights into how the union got into this mess, and what solution you would propose to bring the litigants to an out of court settlement. I don't think the RJDC wants 12 billion. I think they just don't want to be treated like the bastard stepchild.

Thanks for a lively discussion.

 

[csmith]

From timebuilder:

"Although the market determines much of what hapens in aviation, the purpose of a union is to PREVENT the free market from controlling ALL that happens."

The purpose of ALPA is safety. Aside from that, I'll have to give you that we do keep the free market from reigning from the perspective of labor. As I said I doubt that you want your pilot being the lowest bidder..and yes, it would happen. In that manner, there is a safety perspective to a certain extent from controlling free market labor. On that point I digress.



"Correct me if I am wrong, and believe me, I've been wrong before, but if APLA signs the contract as a bargaining agent, don't they take on a responsibility for the language of the contract, and therefore the value of the contract to the dues paying members?"

Actually an interesting point. It has been brought up before. In this case, where the Delta PWA has--and always has had--the controlling language ALPA. Back when, Delta owned a substantial portion of both Comair and ASA, IMO controlling interest--meaning Comair and ASA did what Delta wanted them to do. These days, although complete ownership has been obtained, little else has changed in the Delta, Comair, ASA relationship. I think payroll, marketing, advertising all comes down from Delta. Taking a look at the operation, aside from the napkins and the water, and you find substantial differences. Hence we come down to the definition of operational integration which was found as insufficient for dclaring the requested PID on behalf of the Comair and ASA pilots---what you call the missed opportuntiy. From this sprang the lawsuit after the Delta PWA Section 1, SCOPE, was changed in C2K and was considered damaging, although not against the PWA of either, to the careers of Comair and ASA pilots. This brings us where we are.

By contrast, IMO, is the somewhat spoken of J4J deal which the USAirways pilots dealt to their wholly owned subsidiaries. Although much less informed of these ramifications, I understand that certain wholly owned language does have "ownership" rights which is being infringed upon. This is where ALPA needs to step in and take responsibility for the dispute.

Now is it just me, or is there a difference in the above scenarios?


"I thought that ALPA had blessed the idea of two levels of pilot members, the so-called major and regional pilots. Isn't this why we are looking at this mess?"


Blessed would not be the word I would choose. I agree that this should not have happened. I wasn't here for it. It was way before my time. I guess you could say "blessed" as they allowed it to happen. At the same time, these guys knew what they were getting into by working for a company whose existence is based on another groups working agreement. More on that later.



"Truthfully, I wasn't aware that ALPA members paid different dues rates. If that is so, I don't agree with the practice. As an AFTRA/SAG member, I paid the same dues as Tom Cruise or Julia Roberts, and I recceive the same benefits."


Actually, everybody pays roughly the same percentage of dues, but obviously the more your contract is worth, the more you have to lose. Hence, a United captain pays roughly the same percentage of his salary as the newest non-prob f/o. Some would say that this person should be able to bear more of a monetary hit, but IMO that is a non-relevant argument. The United captain doubtlessly has more to lose than his F/O counterpart. Let's face it, 18K jobs are much easier to find than 290K jobs. Like you said, if there is equal representation, than there should be equal dues. Most Delta pilots, and other pilots, I have spoken to are happy with the way it is now. They think, and I somewhat agree, that the United guy should pay more as he has more to lose. Form your own opinion. Obviously, this can lead to a proffering of deals to the more lucrative side of the house. This is what the RJDC would lead you to believe. In the case of the PID, I think a strong case was made against the cause of "operational integration". Was the descision correct? By the letter of contractual language, I think so. In theory, maybe not. It certainly wasn't a blatant disregard of ALPA merger policy as others would lead you to believe.


"Since you have a tenure with Delta, I'd appreciate your further insights into how the union got into this mess, and what solution you would propose to bring the litigants to an out of court settlement. I don't think the RJDC wants 12 billion. I think they just don't want to be treated like the bastard stepchild. "


I merely have opinions, as do the rest of the people on here--although they would have you believe theirs is the only possible side which could be right. The solution? I was ready, willing, and able to give up substantial negotiating capital in order to secure a valid, solid flow-through for these guys. They would not even talk about it. I really don't see where it is headed except for court. While the RJDC seeks solutions, there have been solutions. They just haven't been acceptable to the RJDC, MECs of Comair and ASA. In other words, the pilots whose very livlihood was created by ALPA--Delta pilots--have now decided that it is not good enough to merely survive and thrive, but now is time to attempt and overtake. They are attempting to circumvent a negotiated contract of another pilot group, against BL. IMO the solution is to let the lawsuit run its course. As far as I am concerned, they had their chance. Now it will be up to a court to decide if one list is to be. Even if it does, delta does not have to honor it. Even if they do, all of Delta flying will still not be under the Delta umbrella. ALPA provides financial resources, legal resources, medical resources, grievance resources, and emergency resources. Each MEC negotiates their contract, as long as it doesn't violate an existing contract. Fair representation? Ask the judge.

CSmith