My suggestion to ALPA and the pilots

[XJohXJ]

100LL: Your objections are well reasoned and make sense. However, our industry is in a very real crisis right now. How about brainstorming for solutions with us instead of finding fault with others' attempts to do so. You are smart, how do you think things could be made better?

 

[pilotyip]

ATR I am sure the rank and file UAW members felt the same way about auto management that you feel about airline management. But someone somewhere in the management/union interface looked beyond the posturing and name calling to step forward into a new operating plan that benefited both the bottom line and the employee. This is resented as caving in by many of the long time UAW members who want to force the good ole days back on the companies. There is no going back in the auto industry or the airlines. Adopt or die.

 

[atrdriver]

ATR I am sure the rank and file UAW members felt the same way about auto management that you feel about airline management. But someone somewhere in the management/union interface looked beyond the posturing and name calling to step forward into a new operating plan that benefited both the bottom line and the employee. This is resented as caving in by many of the long time UAW members who want to force the good ole days back on the companies. There is no going back in the auto industry or the airlines. Adopt or die.

No, There is no going back to the "good old days", and I I don't advocate that. Yet, at most airlines, it is the front line employees who make things work, not because of management, but in spite of management. It is actually a very small reach for a manager to put in place an enviroment that values it's people, and recognizes their efforts and accomplishments. All it takes is ONE GUY AT THE TOP who says it's time to turn this place around. The CEO sets the tone for the entire company. It's really an easy thing to decide it's time to value your people, and treat them right, instead of treating them as the companies biggest liability.

 

[pilotyip]

so ATR it is not managment that bugs you it is leadership?

 

[atrdriver]

so ATR it is not managment that bugs you it is leadership?

Management at a company is defined by leadership, or lack of it. And a leader is someone who can walk the walk AND talk the talk. It's obviously not enough to say "team member" over and over when you don't treat people like part of a team. A true leader is someone who people will gladly follow, not someone who sits at a desk and issues idiotic directives. A leader is someone who won't ask someone to do something that they either can't do, or aren't willing to try to do. And lets look at our airline "leaders". They ask for pay cuts from all their employees, and then take huge bonuses. In a true crises, a leader would say we need cuts, and I'm the first one to take them.

But, it's not just the "CEO". A ramp supervisor can be a leader, as can a CP, a VP, or a line pilot. Leadership is an attitude, not a position.

 

[100LL... Again!]

100LL: Your objections are well reasoned and make sense. However, our industry is in a very real crisis right now. How about brainstorming for solutions with us instead of finding fault with others' attempts to do so. You are smart, how do you think things could be made better?

I didn't think anyone actually read my posts anymore...

I am not 'finding fault' for it's own sake. I'm trying to show that the path suggested would (in my opinion) be a waste of that person's time and lead to false hopes. I hate to see anyone waste their time, only to have to backtrack and find another solution.

Let me give you my perspective. Until Pearl Harbor, most Americans were fairly isolationist. Afterward, we were ready to rumble.

Have we reached the stage where we ALL as an PROFESSION are ready to do something?

I don't think we are there yet. That is why I said that ATR's solution sounds good but is more of a band-aid.

Let me set one thing straight - I am a pilot and my sympathies are with those who share the trials and pains of this job. That said, I am wholeheartedly disgusted with the mentality of many pilots.

We have become obsessed with 'getting what we deserve' without spending time pondering what those deserts might be.

As a profession we are too often inclined to assess ourselves through our emotional filter rather than our rational one.

Let me take you back in time: Once upon a time there were men who operated elevators for a living. It took a reasonable amount of skill and timing, and you needed to be good with people. Over time, they were replaced by automated systems, and even if you were the best elevator operator in the US, your worth was severely diminished.

I AM NOT saying that our job is that simple, just illustrating how times change.

So what happens to us in an era where you haev very low time pilots flying regional aircraft around while experienced pilots work at Wal-Mart?

The outside world is not blind to such inequities.

Such conditions diminish our importance in the air transportation system, and begin to make us looko like commodoties, which we are rapidly becoming.

If we DON'T want to become commodities, we must HONESTLY ask ourselves what WE must do to stop the slide.

Contracts will not be enough. Scope (even brand scope) is not enough. It is too late for those solutions.

Study the law and medical fields and see how those professionals regulate their industry. They tightly control admission into the field to the (supposed) best and brightest.

What do think would happen if some community college tried to start a program that made you a fully qualified lawyer in two years?

The legal profession would go into full battle mode to extinguish any such efforts.

You asked me what we can do.

We can try these solutions as they are proposed, but it is my sincere belief that until we reach bottom, we won't have the unity that will be necessary to achieve change.

We need to accept the lumps we are being dealt to us. Are they deserved? I say yes, but NOT because we are somehow bad people.

We deserve them for being neglectful of our responsibility to police ourselves.

I find myself rooting against the profession in the short term in hopes that we can save ourselves in the long term.

We must bear the consequences of our actions if we are to truly learn from them and prevent their recurrence.

If someone saves us now we are likely to repeat the mistakes again.

 

[D'Angelo]

Creating an artificially low supply of pilots does nothing to help the situation. The fact is that its easier to become a pilot than it is to become a doctor or lawyer. If somehow it did become easier to be a lawyer and after only two years someone was fully qualified to do the job there is nothing you can do. If all the requirements set forth are met then tough luck, you going to have to deal with competition. Artificially setting the demand low goes against all the principles of this country. Short of hiring the mafia you will never succeed in trying to force people away from the career of their choice. If there are more qualified doctors and lawyers coming through the pipleline tough, thats just life. You will have to be competitive and yes your wage may have to go down a bit. The same thing has happened with the pilots. At first there was a large demand for pilots therefore they got paid a lot. Now there is an abundance of pilots and not nearly enough jobs to be had. Therefore it goes to whoever feels they can do it for the least amount. Artificial demand is not the answer. The true key is people saying nope I won't do it for less than xxx. That is the only way to fix things. Thats why doctors still get paid a lot. They are in high demand and unless they get the salary they want they simply won't provide their services or go start their own practice.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Creating an artificially low supply of pilots does nothing to help the situation.

If by any means supply is reduced, it will have an effect. You have not properly identified what you mean by "artificial". Perhaps requiring a pilot certificate is an artificial barrier? Perhaps only a private cert should be required? What about minimum numbers of flight hours? All of these could be considerd artificial depending on your viewpoint. You will argue that I am using an unrealistic argument, but that is just the point. Who is appointed to judge what is artificial and what is not?

The fact is that its easier to become a pilot than it is to become a doctor or lawyer.

This is obvious. However, it is not so easy to become a really good pilot. Standards could be instituted to riase the bar of skill and knowledge, or is that too artificial for you?

If somehow it did become easier to be a lawyer and after only two years someone was fully qualified to do the job there is nothing you can do. If all the requirements set forth are met then tough luck, you going to have to deal with competition.

Incorrect. The professional organizations in law and medecine have a large part to play in allowing someone into the field. These organizations will ensure that the it will NEVER "somehow become easier". They will keep the professional bar right where it is.

Artificially setting the demand low goes against all the principles of this country. Short of hiring the mafia you will never succeed in trying to force people away from the career of their choice.

Incorrect. Require a 90% pass on writtens. Demand an ATP prior to being an airline FO. Require annual retesting. Require a "Captains Board" before being assigned a CA slot. Require airline wanna-be's to pass stringent entry barriers.

None of this is the mafia, you see. It is not about FORCING people, it is about discouraging marginally motivated/skilled individuals.

Buying your way in through GIA seems easy enough for some. If such a method was eliminated, SOME pilots might not enter the field.

If they could only advance due through traditional means, they might find the lack of instant gratification a barrier to their interest.

If there are more qualified doctors and lawyers coming through the pipleline tough, thats just life. You will have to be competitive and yes your wage may have to go down a bit. The same thing has happened with the pilots. At first there was a large demand for pilots therefore they got paid a lot. Now there is an abundance of pilots and not nearly enough jobs to be had. Therefore it goes to whoever feels they can do it for the least amount. Artificial demand is not the answer. The true key is people saying nope I won't do it for less than xxx. That is the only way to fix things. Thats why doctors still get paid a lot. They are in high demand and unless they get the salary they want they simply won't provide their services or go start their own practice.

You just invalidated your own argument. Doctors are in short supply relative to their demand, therefore their wages are high. This would be true for pilots.

You are in no position to competently define "artificial", apparently.

If you are a lawyer in California you can't automatically practice law in another state. You must jump through that state's hoops before doing so. Is that not artificial? Some states have much more stringent requirements than others. Artificial, right? Or not?

Raising the bar for skills and knowledge is in no way artificial.
An example of an artifical barrier would be requiring that your dad had to be ALPA, or that you be able to recite important historical dates in aviation.

We need to make this profession tougher to get into. We need to improve the REAL and PERCEIVED value of our services. It is not enought that WE are convinced of our worth. We must convince those who decisions affect out careers.

 

[pilotyip]

Anyone who wants to, with a certain level of skill and a desire can become a pilot. It is still a great career where else can a high school grad have shot at making $100K by his mid 30's. Fly because you like to, etc.

 

[XJohXJ]

Now that's some good discussion. Thank you. Wish I had more to say now...

 

[D'Angelo]

Is there a compelling reason to create all these stringent new demands? According to the FAA the system we have in place is more than adequate. We have had a pretty good safety record for most of this decade. Are you saying safety is a problem 100LL? Are all airline pilots all of a sudden unsafe? What justifys your outrageous demands to raise the standards so high. Why should everyone else from the past be allowed in under the old standards yet everyone new has to adhere to the more stringent standards?

You yourself got into the profession with things the way they are. Now you want to change them so you can set artificial demands in your thirst for outrageous wages. Sorry sounds like thats being a bit childish if you ask me. Tell me what safety problems have you noticed due to the current system. Are you saying all airline pilots are now unsafe because we are all in under the old system. Do we all need to be retested? The doctor/ lawyer standards have been there for a long time. The FAAs have as well. Lets face it we just aren't quite at the level of doctors. BTW do you know how much a year docs spend in malpractice insurance. No thanks id rather do my job having much more days off, freedom, and much less stress. If you like though feel free to goto medical school. They are always looking for a few good men. Just don't expect a lot of days off for the next decade or so. Like it or not all those puppy farm pay to play programs are perfectly legal. Every company has every right to set the minimums they want. The FAA and insurance companies sign off on it. If safety was an issue the FAA would change the standards. Obviously the industry is one of the safest ever right now. The odds are lower than ever for dying on a commercial flight. This is in spite of the fact that airlines hire as low as 300 hours. Like it or not thats just the way it is. What you are proposing is to raise the minimums to create an artificial shortage of pilots just so you can try and hold your company hostage for that fat payday. Typcical senior pilot attitude. Ive got mine so screw everyone else. Sorry you can't just change the rules just to try and get yourself higher pay. Your gonna have to get higher pay the old fashioned way. You can either upgrade if you havent yet, change careers or goto an airline where you think you can move up faster. The doctors and lawyers havent tried to up their standards to get into the profession. Its simply harder to get into than being a pilot. Thats just the way it is. Being a pilot is much easier than a doctor or a lawyer. Thats just life. Life isnt fair and you can't always throw tantrums and try to change the rules just because you don't like it.

 

[80for80]

The fact is that flying todays airliner is not hard. We will never make the big bucks like our predecessors did when planes were "hard" to fly. I fly with low time guys and gals everyday. They are just happy to be flying a jet and don't plan on staying here long enough to fight for better pay. I try and set them straight on the not staying here long part, but they don't seem to listen and the supply of them is seemingly endless. I don't know what the answer is.

 

[100LL... Again!]

The point you miss D'Angelo is that these standards would apply to me and all other existing pilots not just new entrants. Fair is fair.

Such stringent requirements do not bother me in the least. Apparently they bother you? What are you hiding??

Your attempt to cast my post as a tantrum is quite juvenile of you.

I am simply stating that is people want the price of a good or service to be increased, the supply must be decreased. That is simple economics.

And yes, I feel that the pilot quality is significantly lower than it used to be.
That will not necessarily result in more accidents right away, but I really think that the more stringent requirements I propose would have easily filtered out the crew of the CRJ crash.

I think that a lot of pilots would get very nervous about a higher performance standard and rightfully so.

Why not ensure that the best and brightest are in the cockpit? Keep raising the standards until the substandard are filtered out.

If no one wants to take this sort of action, that is fine with me too. People with talent will always find a way to make a good living.

My point is that the union drum-beaters can cry all they like but we are not going to have any unity anytime soon.

The current system allows simple date of hire to determine you professional advancement. My idea at least has elements of merit tied to it.

Lots of union folk are afraid of merit systems though, because it means that they might have to step up to the plate and be productive, instead of relying on the fatty tissue of seniority to protect them.

 

[100LL... Again!]

...the supply of them is seemingly endless. I don't know what the answer is.

Find a way to curb the supply.

Here's an idea:

Make your number of years as an ALPA pilot a factor in hiring decisions.
Pilots could negotiate this if they wanted.

Why should an Eagle FO who has been stuck in the right seat for years be less hireable than someone who PFT'd into a quick job at PCL?

Essentially, the current system rewards line-cutters and shortcut-takers.

Change the reward structure or quit whining.

It amazes me the number of pilots who expect other people to sacrifice their own self-intererst for the sake of a profession that could care less about them.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

We need to make this profession tougher to get into. We need to improve the REAL and PERCEIVED value of our services. It is not enought that WE are convinced of our worth. We must convince those who decisions affect out careers.

Agreed. Time to start acting like a professional instead of demanding others treat us so.

A total paradigm shift? Maybe. 75 years of trade labor precedence makes it difficult to redefine the Air Line Pilot Profession.

When/if the good times return the complaining and grumbling will be almost silient. And apathy will creep regain its title. But it will be ok, as discretionary income is be back. I got mine!

 

[D'Angelo]

Qualifications to enter a profession is something we as pilots have ZERO control over. Your certainly not going to be able to make the FAA change the entire rulebook just so you can creat an artificial shortage of pilots so you can get rich. Any rule change requires extensive study and just wanting to get rich isn't a good reason to change the rules. Management has every right to set what criteria employees must meet. Remember we all got to where we are using the rules the way they are. Now you want to change the rules so you can get rich. Thats what we call throwing a temper tantrum. If you want to change the standards start your own airline. Only hire 5000 hour pilots. Pay them only top dollar. See how long you stay in buisness. My question is since we are in no position to set regulations or minimums how do you propose to do this mr. 100LL?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Find a way to curb the supply..

How?

Make your number of years as an ALPA pilot a factor in hiring decisions.
Pilots could negotiate this if they wanted..

ok..maybe... how?

Why should an Eagle FO who has been stuck in the right seat for years be less hireable than someone who PFT'd into a quick job at PCL?.

Because we live in a free market system.

Essentially, the current system rewards line-cutters and shortcut-takers..

[edit] Essentially, the current free market system rewards line-cutters and shortcut-takers...

Isn't that what the free market system is all about? Isn't that what we Americans are all about? Can you really blame guys for being free market Americans?

Change the reward structure or quit whining.

It amazes me the number of pilots who expect other people to sacrifice their own self-intererst for the sake of a profession that could care less about them.

Agreed! Everyone wants some one else to fall on thier swords...

 

[100LL... Again!]

First of all, I am completely a free-markets guy.

My posts are not intended to represent what I think SHOULD happen as much as what I think would need to happen for the whiners to have their desired outcome.

If I needed a job, I'd probably fly for GJ. I'd never cross a picket line, but otherwise it's my job to look out for me.

It's simple economics, people:

All the blathering about when pilots used to 'respect' the profession and that's what led to large salaries is bunk.

The large salaries of the past were the result of the initial and follow-on growth booms in the airline industry, plus the more limited suppply of qualified pilots, plus the economic environment that used to be more favorable toward unions. Unions have had their day and they abused their power, so they are on the decline. They blew it.

THAT is why the pay used to be so high.

I mean this when I say it:

I would rather fly with most 'modern' pilots than a lot of those old 'salty dogs'. Remember, it was that generation of pilots that served as the bad example that modern CRM was created to correct.

The 'captain is always right' attitude killed a lot of people.


If you want a relatively high level of pay, you need to distinguish yourself in the labor market. There used to be fewer pilot jobs in the US.

If you want to raise the value of a product or service, you must make it more scarce. That is basic econ.

In the short term there are ways to violate this law, but they will not last.

Union contracts are a great example. We used to think that contracts were rock solid. We are now learning that they are often not worth the paper they are printed on.

More contracts and more cleverly written contracts are not the answer. They are part of the answer, but they can no longer be the whole answer.

There is only one other way to outsmart the law of supply and demand, and that is total industry-wide unity. Like the longshoremen.

We had our chances at that, and they have passed. ALPA, as it is so often stated, is not a union, but an association.

IF you want to return to the glory days (I really don't care myself), you will need a national union and/or some type of national seniority system.

Or some other method that prevents people from circumventing the process.

Many pilots will vilify others for taking an opportunity that they think 'harms' the profession, without offering any alternative.

Why should I sit in the right seat at Eagle for 8 years when GJ is hiring?
If any of you seriously think that working for Freedom or GJ is going to seriously affect someone's career, you are sadly mistaken.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 100LL... Again!
Find a way to curb the supply..


How?



Not my problem, I suggested a few ways. That is for policy makers to decide. The point is that when there as many pilots looking for work as there are today, you can bet that many of them are willing to work for less.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 100LL... Again!
Make your number of years as an ALPA pilot a factor in hiring decisions.
Pilots could negotiate this if they wanted..


ok..maybe... how?


Again, my point is that there is no reward or incentive for 'trying to hold the bar up'. The profession in NO WAY rewards anyone who tries to 'do the right thing' (i.e.: not work for GJ, etc). Everyone tells you how noble you are but that won't pay the bills.




Quote:
Originally Posted by 100LL... Again!
Why should an Eagle FO who has been stuck in the right seat for years be less hireable than someone who PFT'd into a quick job at PCL?.


Because we live in a free market system.



Exactly. Pilots expect others to make the sacrifice. Again, the line cutters are rewarded.

If you want people to do the right thing, you must reward those who do and penalize those who do not. The system currently works in reverse.

The 8-yr Eagle FO is doing the 'right thing', but will wait an eternity to advance, but the PFT line-cutter will get his time quicker and move on.

PCL128 likes to pretend that he has 'seen the light' about PFT, but he is more than happy to enjoy the fruit of his ill-gotten gains.

When I see a man living in a stolen house preaching on the evils of theft, I call BS. You should at least give the house back before climbing into the pulpit.





Quote:
Originally Posted by 100LL... Again!
Essentially, the current system rewards line-cutters and shortcut-takers..


Essentially, the current free market system rewards line-cutters and shortcut-takers...

Isn't that what the free market system is all about? Isn't that what we Americans are all about? Can you really blame guys for being free market Americans?


I don't, but the whiners do. If they stop rewarding the behavior they deplore, they will see less of it.



If you want unity, then you must institutionalize it.
Bashing people on the internet and denying jumpseats might make some little men feel powerful, but it will accomplish nothing.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Qualifications to enter a profession is something we as pilots have ZERO control over.

ALPA could require an ATP before you could be an ALPA member. That would create a change in the supply chain. Totally sidesteps the FAA nicely, doesn't it?

You don't think these things through far enough.

Management has every right to set what criteria employees must meet. Remember we all got to where we are using the rules the way they are. Now you want to change the rules so you can get rich. Thats what we call throwing a temper tantrum. If you want to change the standards start your own airline. Only hire 5000 hour pilots. Pay them only top dollar. See how long you stay in buisness. My question is since we are in no position to set regulations or minimums how do you propose to do this mr. 100LL?

Management has every right to set what criteria employees must meet.

And the pilots group has every right to negotiate changes to it in collective bargaining.

Now you want to change the rules so you can get rich. Thats what we call throwing a temper tantrum.

Let me clear somehing up for you D'Angelo. First of all, I agree with most of your posts on the free market issue.

You accusation that I am throwing a temper tantrum is entirely unjustified. I am PROPOSING a change that could theoretically be made to change the pilot supply. That is not a temper tantrum. It is just that type of adolescent response that proves to me that you can't be trusted with good-faith debate. It seem that most people on this board think that you're wrong, and an idiot. I think you're right, and that you're an idiot savant.

If you want to change the standards start your own airline. Only hire 5000 hour pilots. Pay them only top dollar. See how long you stay in buisness. My question is since we are in no position to set regulations or minimums how do you propose to do this mr. 100LL?

Not my problem. I am discussing theory, not practice. If you want to raise the price, you must limit supply. I could care less if pilot salaries go up or down, myself, since I have other income avenues.

IF the pilot profession as a WHOLE wants to make a change, then they will need much more unity than they have now. They can lobby congress, they can lobby the FAA, they can make it an ALPA criteria. All it requires is unity.
Which we will never have, I should point out.

Also:
Please try to brush up on your critical thinking skills before responding to any more of my posts. It pains me to have to ratchet down to this level to respond to you.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Agreed. Time to start acting like a professional instead of demanding others treat us so.

A total paradigm shift? Maybe. 75 years of trade labor precedence makes it difficult to redefine the Air Line Pilot Profession.

When/if the good times return the complaining and grumbling will be almost silient. And apathy will creep regain its title. But it will be ok, as discretionary income is be back. I got mine!

Also, isn't it interesting that when most of the people talk about how the old timers 'respected' themselves and the profession, they only refer to what they expected for pay?

They never talk about how these old timers did or did not feel about professional skills or knowledge.

Many young people of today are a shell of the older generation. They focus only on what they expect to get, not what they expect to deliver.

"I want it now, tell me what I have to do".

If the profession is collapsing, perhaps it is a just outcome, since there is no honor in the system anymore. Honor - there's an a concept that seems downright antiquated in this modern world.

As a pilot, I define myself by the level of effort and dedication that I bring to my chosen profession. Not by the trappings of success that some forunate generations have experienced. I honor the profession, and sometimes that is all you will have - but it's enough.

Would you rather have a little more than you deserve, or deserve a little more than you have?

I'll take the second one, every day of the week.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

100LL..

I agree mostly with your post.

Not sure about creating artifical barriers like an ATP to be a union member. When this is done, it creates divisivness. Everyone is welcome into union membership, women, blacks, commercial pilots/Non ATPs, latinos and white boys from Vermont. ALPA used to be a Capts Club, but that has since changed.

Think about what the traveling public thinks when they see two pilots walking thru the terminal? Is it a positive image? Is it a repsected image? Does the public even care? Could they be conditioned to care? Imagine if Air Line Pilots, today, had a high level of repsect. When passengers see Air Line Pilots they feel good. They feel safe and secure....... and they feel good about paying for that feeling. Passengers feel they are getting value. The artifical barriers you may be talking about is the perception that safe Air Line Pilots cost money. (one thing against us, is our great safety record, a double edged sword.)

When we talk about the Golden Days and how those pilots of yesteryear were paid well we seem to forget how they behaved. I recall a legacy capt a few weeks ago at the gate 25 mins prior to push. No blazer, no hat (the pilots of yesteryear wore hats) on the cell phone (social call), eating a pizza slice all while reviewing the release. How can we point to Golden Age Pilots when management and the public can point to this guy, who is all of us!

While I realize that this Capt was responding to his environment, as professionals, when do we take the high road? As professional pilots if we want more pay should we not exercise leadership outside of the cockpit? The arguement of when they pay me better I'll act like a professional is counterproductive and immature.

100LL, you are right, pilots expect to be paid well, but they have no clue how to make it happen. Oh, they want to take action all right, like a suspension of service (SOS) but that is a instant gratification tactic that is like the poor rioting thier own town. Sure it feels good then, but the next day, they are living in tents. Our effectiveness is like long term investing (Warren Buffett) small deposits with a good rate over a long period of time. Pilots simply want a lotto win!

It was already said, by you I think, that not much will happen, till we hit rock bottom. People will only change when the pain of the status quo is greater than change.

 

[100LL... Again!]

100LL..

I agree mostly with your post.

Not sure about creating artifical barriers like an ATP to be a union member. When this is done, it creates divisivness. Everyone is welcome into union membership, women, blacks, commercial pilots/Non ATPs, latinos and white boys from Vermont. ALPA used to be a Capts Club, but that has since changed.

Not to be a smart aleck, but you have to be a pilot to be ALPA, right?

You have to work for an airline, right?

The rule should be that you have to have an ATP to be ALPA, and you have to be ALPA to work for the airline.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Not to be a smart aleck, but you have to be a pilot to be ALPA, right?

You have to work for an airline, right?

The rule should be that you have to have an ATP to be ALPA, and you have to be ALPA to work for the airline.

I see your point, however, what happens when the company hires Commercial pilots and they are excluded from ALPA membership? Do they operate under the contract? Work at a lower rate?

What are you trying to gain?

 

[pilotyip]

FE's are members of ALPA

 

[D'Angelo]

Not to be a smart aleck, but you have to be a pilot to be ALPA, right?

You have to work for an airline, right?

The rule should be that you have to have an ATP to be ALPA, and you have to be ALPA to work for the airline.

So how exactly are you going to accomplish this. No one is under any obligation whatsoever to even join the union. Closed shops are illegal in the US. In a right to work state any union not under the RLA can't even force non-members to pay mx. fees. Your solutions are idealistic and over simplistic. Nice try though. Even under the RLA no one has to join the union that doesn't want to and you can't force an airline to hire only people in the union. Closed shops thankfully have gone the way of the dinosaur in this country which is where they belong. The next step is eliminating the force mx. fees for non members at ALPA. When this happens I will glady resign my membership and never say another word about those corrupt SOBs.

 

[CopilotDoug]

Atrdriver, they have already set the minimum price on a city pair that guarantees a profit. It has been regulated by market forces. It is called SWA. Lowest prices in a market, profitable forever, pays their pilots well, has a long list of pilots trying to get hired. The model is already out there.

Actually, YIP, USAir has them beat on a few routes. SWA just gets the most productivity out of its labor.

 

[hoover]

There doesn't appear to be any easy solutions... no quick fix or silver bullet.

The only way to make it better is education, understanding and pragmatic application of resources.....

The problem with this discussion is the assumption that the "system" is broken. I don't think that is the case. I think the system is working just as it should. It just isn't working the way you want it to work. To sit there and say "It should be this way or that way" is futile, and quite frankly a bit childish.

If there is a problem, it is this: too many eager young space cadets,having seen the fat lifestyle that the old school major employees lived, now want the same for themselves. Except that they are comparing apples to oranges. Today's airline industry has nothing to do with the airline industry of 30 years ago. Unfortunately the flight training schools, who have a vested interest in maintaining the illusion, are leaving that out of their advertising brochures.

Today I read an advertisement for the local police department, hiring police officers. A lot of the same working conditions (shifts, holidays, etc), and definately a higher risk work environment. Starting pay was over $51000, in a small town of about 35000.
If police offers, who really do put their lives on the line every day, are getting paid only 51K, why should airline pilots make more?

 

[100LL... Again!]

So how exactly are you going to accomplish this. No one is under any obligation whatsoever to even join the union. Closed shops are illegal in the US. In a right to work state any union not under the RLA can't even force non-members to pay mx. fees. Your solutions are idealistic and over simplistic. Nice try though. Even under the RLA no one has to join the union that doesn't want to and you can't force an airline to hire only people in the union. Closed shops thankfully have gone the way of the dinosaur in this country which is where they belong. The next step is eliminating the force mx. fees for non members at ALPA. When this happens I will glady resign my membership and never say another word about those corrupt SOBs.

IF the union did a good job for it's members, most people would want to be in it. Therefore this idea could work. IF the unions continue to be corrupt, then this idea would fail. My supposition depends entirely on the unlikely idea that pilot unions would wake up and smell the coffee and realize that they must change.

And what's up with your juvenile attitude? Did you get picked on a lot as a child? Or are you just hyper-sensitive to all the pounding you're taking on flightinfo? I think that I've really gotten under your skin, somehow, which explains your eighth-grade level retorts.

Please don't respond to my posts anymore. You don't read them through fully anyway and end up arguing from ignorance, partially informed. You remind me of jarhead, one of two others on my ignore list because of their insistance on skimming posts then replying without thinking first.

 

[CFIse]

I don't think there's any industry in the world that would stand for such a single compensation structure. Certainly no business in the United States. If you don't like working in a world where companies pay what the labor market will sustain go somewhere else.

The only way a union can have leverage is with the threat of a credible strike. The RLA pretty much killed that baby for the airline industry. Even if ALPA was united behind a single concept (let's make it simple, the same color tie for all pilots) what can they do to enforce it if a company says "well we prefer pink". Nothing.

ALPA no longer has any teeth, I don't know what the alternative is, but companies whipsawing pilot groups against each other until the lowest cost provider is found will continue. It's happened in all sorts of once proud industries and now it's happening to this one. Get over it or get out.