Looks Like 1500 Hours May Become the New Hiring Minimum Among Other Things:

[Lear70]

From ATW, total airline employee compensation 26% to 45% of gross profit, depending upon the airline. Pilot make up the largest single segmentof total payrol. did not have the numbers, but it is most likely in the 15% to 20% of gross profit. If the pilot get a raise do all the other employees go without rasies. If all employees get raises, what happens to profits?

This just goes to show that you really don't understand how the PASSENGER airline cost structure works.

Pilots are not anywhere CLOSE to 15-20% of an airlines GROSS profit. Try about 10% of THAT number, between 1.5-2.0% of an airlines' COST per available seat mile. If a company is charging, on average, 5-7% above cost overall throughout the system, i.e. turning a profit, which only a few airlines are doing right now, you could double a pilot's TOTAL COMPENSATION package, including insurance, retirement, etc, and the airline would still make a profit with those margins.

This data, by the way, comes directly from 3rd party outside financial consultants who are paid to give unbiased data.

This is what you don't understand in your preaching about pilots somehow risking a company's liquidity over a REASONABLE pay raise which is at LEAST 3% PER YEAR. Otherwise, I work for less and less every year, while the company still gets to raise prices to cover their OTHER costs, i.e. fuel, parts, leases, insurance. I'm sorry, but that just doesn't work, and if a company can't cover the increased pilot costs as well, then they don't deserve to be in business, goodbye, sayonara, arrivederci, ciao, hasta la vista, kaput. I am sick to DEATH of employers getting away with that crap. Management can kiss my A$$ if they don't like it, and more pilots need to think that way and grow a pair.

 

[Kalifornia]

Nice to see some are figuring it out

And your not one of them as you are a complete management tool with the full time task of trying to abolish expectations on here of any improvement in pilot compensation and work rules in the industry.

 

[pilotyip]

Don't figure

Lets look at SWA one of the few profitable airlines, 5900 pilots, average annual salary, (guessing low, since many F/O's make that much) , = $100,000, total pilot annual payroll before benefits, $590,000,000, now use an industry standard of 1.35% for benfits, ='s $769,500,000. Profit last year $178,000,000. What percent is $769M of $178M on an annual basis? 430%. Pilot compensation is four times the amount of profit. Pilot compensation is also about 7% of gross revenue at SWA
SWA 2008 Financial Statistics:

• 
  [*]Net income: $178 million
  [*]Net income, excluding special items: $294 million
  [*]Total passengers carried: 101.9 million
  [*]Total RPMs: 73.5 billion
  [*]Average passenger load factor: 71.2 percent
  [*]Total operating revenue: $11.0 billion
  

 

[Nevets]

My guess would be pilot error.

I guess I worded my question poorly. I meant, was the cause of accidents that were attributed to pilot error in Europe the same as those here.

I suspect that if one airline starts advertising that every one of their flights has two ATP certified pilots on board, other airlines will be falling all over themselves to follow suit.

This is EXACTLY what NetJets does. They advertise that both pilots have at least 2500 TT and type ratings. Seems to work for them.

Lets look at SWA one of the few profitable airlines, 5900 pilots, average annual salary, guessing low , = $100,000, total pilot annual payroll before benefits, $590,000,000, now use an industry standard of 1.35% for benfits, ='s $769,500,000. Profit last quarter $57,000,000. What percent is $769M of $57M on an annual basis? 337%. Pilot compensation is four times the amount of profit.

How do those numbers work out when you compare it to total expenses and total income/revenue?

 

[waveflyer]

pilotyip's argument is exactly what the ATA does all day long with expensive lawyers- and frankly our own lobbyists have not kept up.

Does his argument make sense-- with that logic- SWA pilots should take a 75% paycut to even out the profit to pay ratio-- ?? And that's just to break even! ( never mind that he compared annual salaries with one quarter. ) Sorry yip- but on a average southwest flight- a capt will make $250 and the Fo $175- That same flight will burn 6000#'s of gas which at $3/ gal is $3000 -how much is the time value of money on that $40+ million jet for that flight? Now on the flipside- how much revenue did that same flight take in? Let's say the average ticket was a $100- and we had 37 extra seats unsold- $10,000 in revenue from passengers alone- now Cargo? How about monster drinks and alcohol? Heavy bags? - how much of a percentage is pilot pay again?
Is it challenging to run an airline? Absolutely- but these slewed numbered arguments have been tired for a long time yip. We're just not falling for them anymore. How about we just set up our compensation like real estate agents and get 3% of the revenue? That's a simple number that would double pilot pay overnight and everyone would know that it wasn't OUR pay that sank the ship.

If you honestly think the ship sinks or swims based on pilot pay - even on the old contracts circa 2000- you're an idiot. Never even close. The numbers just don't back that up.

 

[waveflyer]

We should advertise the resumes of our pilots- that's one of the problems is that public doesn't know how experienced their pilots are. Almost every passenger i talk to makes huge assumptions as to the experience and qualifications of their pilots. They trust that the regulators have handled it- Those colgan passengers had no idea their captain came from the most corrupt pilot farm in the country. There's no mechanism in this outsourced world of domestic flying, to know whether or not your pilot has 3000 hours total between the two pilots or 30,000 hours total. Therefore- how can the customer make an informed decision?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Nice to see some are figuring it out

Unfortunately, management, who controls the airlines, doesn't see it that way. Labor is their liability....

 

[ualdriver]

From ATW, total airline employee compensation 26% to 45% of gross profit, depending upon the airline. Pilot make up the largest single segmentof total payrol. did not have the numbers, but it is most likely in the 15% to 20% of gross profit. If the pilot get a raise do all the other employees go without rasies. If all employees get raises, what happens to profits?

Who cares yip? Every raise every employee working at every company on the planet eats into company profits. Should employees not expect raises because of that? What happens to profits if all employees get raises? Profits go down......or......a company can raise the price of their product to reflect those higher costs. How they choose to pass along their higher costs is what the CEO gets paid the big bucks for. Since it's going to be an industry wide cost increase if this legislation stands, I'm not terribly concerned.

I thought the point you were trying to make was that if we try to protect the general population from inexperienced regional airline pilots that less people will fly because costs will go up. I already told you I agree. I also believe that this cost will be so small that it will be negligible and is certainly an acceptable risk to me, and I'm working at a financially fragile airline. We're talking about a small percentage of a small percentage of an airline's total costs going up. If this costs a regional airline more than a percentage point or two of total operational costs (1 or 2 bucks on $100), I'd be surprised.

 

[AC560]

Unfortunately, management, who controls the airlines, doesn't see it that way. Labor is their liability....

Labor is its own liability and frankly the results of the last 20yrs support that. Scope, pay, benefits, job security, the wholesale elimination of 10,000's of non-pilot union jobs at the airlines, etc.

Bang the management sucks and lets dig our heels in boys mantra all you want. Fact remains it isn't working. Management has nothing to lose, labor has everything to lose.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Labor is its own liability and frankly the results of the last 20yrs support that. Scope, pay, benefits, job security, the wholesale elimination of 10,000's of non-pilot union jobs at the airlines, etc.

Bang the management sucks and lets dig our heels in boys mantra all you want. Fact remains it isn't working. Management has nothing to lose, labor has everything to lose.

Agreed.... and this is an acceptable paradigm?