Lack of professionalism

[JAFI]

Plumbers also have much more stringent requirements in terms of training and work requirements in order to be a plumber. In order to drastically increase airline pay the barrier to entry has to be raised substantially. ALPA would be better served lobbying Congress to increase requirements for aviators then lobbying airlines for pay raises. Shrink the supply and the pay will come.

My 2 cents anyways.

Agreed. Look at all the pilot wannabes who look for the cheapest and quickest way to get a rating (not the best, or the way to the most knowledge and skill). I would rich if I got a nickel for every certificate/type rating I administered when the applicant informed me that this certificate was "only to get a job, not to act as PIC". I always got a weird look when I said "I do not have a - Just getting a job exam". "I only have the (going to be PIC) PTS".

I wonder if this is what happened to "Buggy Whip" makers and Whale Ship Captains.......

JAFI

 

[A Squared]

Not to stray away from the topic here, but ASquared, what do kind of flying do you do with the -6? Always thought it was a cool rig.

I fly for a 121 cargo outfit in Alaska. mostly scheduled runs, with some charter work into gold mines and such. I also occasionally fly bulk fuel under our Part 125 operation. Some days the '6 is a cool rig, other days it's a pain in the ass.

 

[727C47]

This is a profession, an art, a craft , that has produced voices like St.Ex,and Ernie Gann, it has inspired art and prose, we leap continents,and oceans, pierce the clouds,and weather,touch the very heart of the sky itself ,I don't know maybe a freightdog looks at it as just another job,but I flew a DC3 for 10 years, round this planet, and I never felt about the profession the way you do A squared. This thing of ours is a sacred trust, I'm not dissing tradesmen,God knows ,all labor is worthy of respect,but what we do is different, and it is special,and it is worthy of respect,and professional compensation,certainly at the white collar level, but I do confess there was many an exhausted hard days night flying the 3 ,when I looked at my collar and felt a twinge of blue,that was some hard work, pax flying is cake by comparison, Cheers brothers,peace out.

 

[svcta]

A squared, regarding the *airline* pilots and the rest of us: The whole industry beyond entry-level jobs has always looked to the airlines to begin to map out its own pay scales and work rules. Historically the airlines' pilot groups have had the organization to clearly spell out work rules, pay rates based on weight/speed, etc., which we have been able to sort of 'piggy back' on to. Here in the corporate world it's no secret that the flight departments have to remain competitive in terms of pay relative to the airline operators, or in later years offer other elevated benefits in terms of quality of life.......especially when the major carriers begin to hire. Otherwise they continually lose pilots to the airlines.

As far as getting paid what the market will bear, well that's what the airline pilots have been getting paid. I think we can all concede that they're probably making more than you and I, even in these times of 'concessionary contracts' and management cop outs.

I have never hauled cargo outside of a light-twin operator so I can't say how it works with the heavier cargo operators, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that even they look to the more noteworthy carriers(UPS, FedEx, DHL, etc) to find a benchmark.

Major airline operators have traditionally been the last stop for pilots in their flying careers. Granted you may switch carriers at some point due to the volatile nature of the industry, but most airline pilots will switch jobs much less than the rest of us in the course of their lives. So, while I completely agree that the fatality stats that I quoted absolutely cover the WHOLE flying biz, not just airline pilots, it sort of helps make the argument that the airlines may still be the best bet for long-term employment in this industry.

The point of all of this is that we generally look to the airlines to find out just what the market will bear in terms of what we're worth. Anyone who burns kerosene for a living(or very large amounts of Avgas) will benefit from a strong payscale at the airline level.

As far as your "working class hero" attitude is concerned. I'm not any more impressed with the grease under your fingernails than you were with the cleanliness of Airmack's attitude. I still work for an operator that expects me to be well dressed, clean shaven and to maintain my skillset to the best of my ability because aviation is a very unforgiving task. I've worked for outfits in the past where there was more oil on my airplane than paint, and I can see how being around that for years and years might cause one to forget that. However the other side of the coin has people like myself on it. Proficiency checks every six months(failure of which could mean losing your job), maintaining a professional appearance, the fear of waking up one morning and losing your medical, blah blah blah. 67% percent of my short little list of examples there are things that no other job subjects you to, except maybe a surgeon that has to pass boards once in a while. I'm not comparing my job to that of a surgeon, but just pointing out that there are threats to our career all over the place both regulatory and performance-based in nature.

I do agree with you about the Gulfstreamers and people who will pay for their jobs. You are 100% correct that they are a tremendous drain on the profession and make it resemble more of a hobby.
We all need to recognize the things that make our job unique and appreciate each other's work environments enough to recognize that we do have a little more on the line that the average plumber or electrician.

 

[The_Russian]

I do agree with you about the Gulfstreamers and people who will pay for their jobs. You are 100% correct that they are a tremendous drain on the profession and make it resemble more of a hobby.

Why do you insist on singling out "Gulfstreamers" as being people who are willing to "pay for jobs" and drain the profession to a hobby. There are plenty of "non-Gulfstreamers" who have entered the industry through more typical routes seeking to feed their "hobby". Not once, in my five years with GIA and GAA, have a met a person who believes or even considers that they are "paying" for their job to undercut others and cheapen the industry. In fact, most don't even know the difference because they are kids, or they just returned from serving their country.

Reconsider your statement while including all the other fast-track schools, ERAU, 141 Academies, ALPA carrier pay cuts, the vast majority of Legacy pilots who PFT'd, anyone who flys a 50-70 seat RJ for 20 bucks an hour, scabs, and your own career.

Really, take a close look at it before you start pointing fingers.

 

[GVFlyer]

I think the same market forces that determine the value of everything in capitalist free market economies serve to determine our salaries. That is to say, relative scarcity determines value.

There are lots of Boeing pilots available in the market, so their value is depressed.

G550 pilots, because there are fewer of them, get paid more. This is in part because of training costs, G550 initial is $55k and change, recurrent is $37K.

Subsequently, average nationwide G550 captain pay is $130K. Regionally, it can be much higher.

In my region the average salary is better than $150K. I used that as a starting point. In salary negotiations I pointed out that I was managing a $50 million dollar asset for the company and I wanted to be compensated in the same manner as any other executive that was managing a $50 million business segment.

I believe that responsibility for profit or potential loss can also affect compensation.

Thus, in salary talks I also pointed out that the risk exposure I was managing was greater than that of most similarly compensated executives. I supported this statement by showing that while we only had $50 million in hull insurance on each aircraft, our liability coverage was $300 million each.

GV







~

 

[A Squared]

I think the same market forces that determine the value of everything in capitalist free market economies serve to determine our salaries. That is to say, relative scarcity determines value.

There are lots of Boeing pilots available in the market, so their value is depressed.

G550 pilots, because there are fewer of them, get paid more. This is in part because of training costs, G550 initial is $55k and change, recurrent is $37K.

Subsequently, average nationwide G550 captain pay is $130K. Regionally, it can be much higher.

In my region the average salary is better than $150K. I used that as a starting point. In salary negotiations I pointed out that I was managing a $50 million dollar asset for the company and I wanted to be compensated in the same manner as any other executive that was managing a $50 million business segment.

I believe that responsibility for profit or potential loss can also affect compensation.

Thus, in salary talks I also pointed out that the risk exposure I was managing was greater than that of most similarly compensated executives. I supported this statement by showing that while we only had $50 million in hull insurance on each aircraft, our liability coverage was $300 million each. GV

No disagreement here. If you can convince your "market" of a higher worth, more power to you. One way is to differentiate your "product" so to speak, from others, show that you are not a "widget" but a superior asset.

That, apparently, is what you and "say again" have done in negotiating your compensation. I think that you'll agree that this doesn't negate the concept of worth being determined by the market, but shows that you've used market forces to your advantage.

 

[svcta]

Why do you insist on singling out "Gulfstreamers" as being people who are willing to "pay for jobs" and drain the profession to a hobby. There are plenty of "non-Gulfstreamers" who have entered the industry through more typical routes seeking to feed their "hobby". Not once, in my five years with GIA and GAA, have a met a person who believes or even considers that they are "paying" for their job to undercut others and cheapen the industry. In fact, most don't even know the difference because they are kids, or they just returned from serving their country.

Reconsider your statement while including all the other fast-track schools, ERAU, 141 Academies, ALPA carrier pay cuts, the vast majority of Legacy pilots who PFT'd, anyone who flys a 50-70 seat RJ for 20 bucks an hour, scabs, and your own career.

Really, take a close look at it before you start pointing fingers.

Gulfstream was an example that was used earlier in this thread, so I was answering a statement made before this post. Though I do place more at their feet than 141 college programs and certainly myself, since you asked.

I did things the old-fashioned way, so no blame here. And I don't fly for an airline anymore...I got out of that business because after I got there I couldn't stand it. I felt like a joke; constantly like all my friends would think I was nuts to do what I had to do to make such a sh!tty living. I may go back one day...but to a mainline carrier.

By the way, are you claiming that the "vast majority of Legacy pilots" somehow paid for their jobs? Funny, I don't know a single one that did.

As far as you having never met anyone at GIA or GAA that thought they were undercutting, or brining anything down or whatever.....well I'm sure your typical suicide bomber thinks he's doing things the right way, too.

 

[A Squared]

A squared, regarding the *airline* pilots and the rest of us: The whole industry beyond entry-level jobs has always looked to the airlines to begin to map out its own pay scales and work rules. Historically the airlines' pilot groups have had the organization to clearly spell out work rules, pay rates based on weight/speed, etc., which we have been able to sort of 'piggy back' on to. Here in the corporate world it's no secret that the flight departments have to remain competitive in terms of pay relative to the airline operators, or in later years offer other elevated benefits in terms of quality of life.......especially when the major carriers begin to hire. Otherwise they continually lose pilots to the airlines.

As far as getting paid what the market will bear, well that's what the airline pilots have been getting paid. I think we can all concede that they're probably making more than you and I, even in these times of 'concessionary contracts' and management cop outs.

I have never hauled cargo outside of a light-twin operator so I can't say how it works with the heavier cargo operators, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that even they look to the more noteworthy carriers(UPS, FedEx, DHL, etc) to find a benchmark.

Major airline operators have traditionally been the last stop for pilots in their flying careers. Granted you may switch carriers at some point due to the volatile nature of the industry, but most airline pilots will switch jobs much less than the rest of us in the course of their lives...........

snip

..............The point of all of this is that we generally look to the airlines to find out just what the market will bear in terms of what we're worth. Anyone who burns kerosene for a living(or very large amounts of Avgas) will benefit from a strong payscale at the airline level.

I don't disagree with any of this. If you think that my position is contrary to this, you may have misunderstood me. I'm not arguing for lower pay, anywhere. I understand the concept that higher pay at other airlines may indirectly have an upward effect on my compensation. I don't object to anyone being compensated comfortably, nor do I object to anyone wishing to increase that compensation.

What I do object to is Flymack's staggering sense of superiority and entitlement. to wit:

"I'm a "professional" (No you're not, not by any rational, commonly accepted definition of professional) therefore I *deserve* to get paid like a doctor."

Umm no, you *deserve* exactly what the market gives you. If, like GVflyer and Sayagain you are able to apply those market forces to your benefit, good for you.

So, while I completely agree that the fatality stats that I quoted absolutely cover the WHOLE flying biz, not just airline pilots, it sort of helps make the argument that the airlines may still be the best bet for long-term employment in this industry.

Right, I don't disagree with your conclusion there, but the point of the fatality statistics was whether or not airline flying was a dangerous occupation. It is foolish in the extreme to suggest that it is. Flymack made the claim that he deserved more pay because "he risked his life on a daily basis", which is an absurd, fallacious statement.

It's fallacious on two levels: First, flying passengers in an airbus is an incredibly safe occupation, probably safer than being a postal clerk. Second, risk has very little to do with how much one is paid. I don’t know if you took a look at the links I provided, but very briefly, the 2005 version of the statistics you mentioned claimed 17 occupational fatalities for "airline pilots copilots and flight engineers" In a year when there were exactly 2 crew fatalities in airline accidents, both in the Chalks Ocean Airways crash. Even if we were to accept the 17 fatalities as accurate that would make a fatality rate of about 21/100,000 which would make airline flying safer than any of the top 10 dangerous occupations. Anyone want to argue that construction laborers should make more money than airline pilots because they are in a riskier occupation? If we use the more realistic number of 2 fatalities for Airline pilots in 2005, then we have a fatality rate of 2.5 fatalities per 100,000, which makes the fatality rate for airline pilots less than office managers (2.7/100,000)

As far as your "working class hero" attitude is concerned. I'm not any more impressed with the grease under your fingernails than you were with the cleanliness of Airmack's attitude. I still work for an operator that expects me to be well dressed, clean shaven and to maintain my skillset to the best of my ability because aviation is a very unforgiving task. I've worked for outfits in the past where there was more oil on my airplane than paint, and I can see how being around that for years and years might cause one to forget that. However the other side of the coin has people like myself on it. Proficiency checks every six months(failure of which could mean losing your job), maintaining a professional appearance, the fear of waking up one morning and losing your medical, blah blah blah. 67% percent of my short little list of examples there are things that no other job subjects you to, except maybe a surgeon that has to pass boards once in a while. I'm not comparing my job to that of a surgeon, but just pointing out that there are threats to our career all over the place both regulatory and performance-based in nature.

Again, you misunderstand my position, rather badly. I don’t claim some moral high ground because I have grease under my fingernails. I do however object to Flymack’s (and seemingly yours, although I hesitate to read too much into your words) attitude that he exists on a higher level, merely because his particular employer has higher grooming standards, that somehow, because his clothes are clean, that elevates him to the level of "professional". Rather than establish a distinction and claim superiority for that side of the line upon which I exist, my intent was to do exactly the opposite; to point out that except for the completely irrelevant factor of grooming standards, there is little functional difference between the nature of his job and mine. We both operate equipment under the requirements of Part 121. To state more simply, I wasn’t claiming that I’m better because I’m a blue collar worker and he’s not, but that we’re both blue collar workers, despite the fact that his collar may be a little cleaner than mine.

It would appear from your words that you are of the opinion that cargo pilots don’t maintain their skillset to the best of their ability, and that we don’t have 6 month proficiency check, or that we don’t have the same concerns about losing our medical. I would urge you to point out the specific parts of 121 which you believe exempt cargo pilots from those requirements. As far as how that compares to other occupations, sure there are some things about flying which are unique to flying. However I think that if you were involved in just about any occupation, you would find things which are unique to that occupation, things which cause stress and keep you up at night. None of this is relevant to the difference between an occupation and a profession.

 

[svcta]

I think that we agree more than we might realize, I just get irked when someone who I assume does operate under the same pressures as myself and the rest of the bulk of the pilot group at large claims that we shouldn't expect any more of a wage than a plumber because his job has the same demands as ours. Which, I think, is essentially what you said at one point. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The fact remains that there are certain silver bullets that would end a potentially profitable flying career that don't exist for any other job.

I was once a cargo hauler myself, as I pointed out, and I completely understand that you lads have the same P.C. requirements that the 121 guys do. This is why my statement ended with the bit about respecting each other's work environments.

As I said, I get my hackles up when a fellow pilot plays the 'overpaid bus driver' card. We get than enough from other sources, we don't need it from within.

That's all I've got on that. Thanks for taking the time to help us understand each other's point. I guess I'll stay here with my toys for a little longer.