"Pilots don't mind making $16,000 per year because it's a stepping stone."

[Browntothebone]

Why can't people just be happy to be flying the flight levels and not flying a cubicle?

 

[jmreii]

When someone posts reality, that is undercutting? Pilots fly airplanes, almost anyone with basic skills and desire can do it. Pilots elect to fly airplanes for living, some like their jobs. Some have higher expectations that the market will not support and don't like it. It is not rocket science or even require a college degree to be successful. Still living the dream.

I don't always agree with you yip but you are right on the money with this one.

 

[Kalifornia]

When someone posts reality, that is undercutting? Pilots fly airplanes, almost anyone with basic skills and desire can do it. Pilots elect to fly airplanes for living, some like their jobs. Some have higher expectations that the market will not support and don't like it. It is not rocket science or even require a college degree to be successful. Still living the dream.

You're still acting the bitter old town fool on here. Stop sending me ultra lengthy private messages giving me your full story. I didn't ask for them in the first place, didn't reply two prior back, and you still send them. Fine, sorry it didn't work out, you didn't luck out in your career like some others, but now in some pseudo bitter way, you're trying to contribute to cesspool that is uneducated shiny jet syndrome types. You pretend to be the nice old gentleman, but you desire for the new generation of pilots to make the lowest wages possible is just a$$nine. It's almost so unreal, I question if you aren't some bored junior high school kid with knowledge of aviation trying to get his kicks. Going as far as to suggest high school dropouts would alright in an airline career, wtf is your problem, over? It's not my fault that you were abused or neglected during your career, but to take that history and now play the abuser is just ridiculous. Even more appalling is that you envy Continental scabs.

 

[pianoman]

I really think I've gone insane. People defending pilot salaries at the regional level. Do any of you have any successful friends?

Let's look at some of the rationales posted here:

1. You should just live someplace in the sticks like Toledo and commute. Okay, that will work well. So now we're taking at least 8 unpaid flights per month because we don't deserve to be paid well enough to live in a metropolitan area, where (gasp) most airline hubs are. Plus, if everyone follows your rationale, this is not an option.

2. Hey it's fine for me, I'm single! Brilliant. Why have kids or a family, right? Those guys are just greedy and can't manage their money. Well, have a kid or two and watch things like good health insurance and schedules with lots of nights away change in your eyes. Don't forget, someone raised your a@@ and probably sent you to college.

3. What other profession do you have to start over like this if your company fails or you want to go to a major?

You all sound like a bunch of scared women on a Lifetime show.

 

[JustaNumber]

Who is saying we need to go back to the good ole days of pre-deregulation? To do that, we would need to pay Widebody Ca's well over $400,000
and FO's over $200,000. Sure it would be nice, but I think somewhere in between where we as pilots once had it and would currently like it, and where management wants it AND CURRENTLY HAS IT!! Whatever happened to give and take? All management has to do is threaten bankruptcy, or actually go into bankruptcy, and voila, they get what they want. The laws that allow that need to end. It is not labors responsibility to work for a wage that the company needs to swing a profit. We shouldn't be paid any more if the company is rolling in money, or any less if the company is bankrupt. Why can't we just find a dollar figure that is appropriate to the job at hand and keep it there and adjust it to maintain earning power year over year.

Wow, I can hear all the overzealous capitalists screaming now.

Why can't we have some laws that restrict new airlines from popping up? My goodness we can't have that! There would be less competition and fares might actually cover costs. We would be able to get rid of the overcapacity we have. Do we really need 35 flights a day between LGA and ORD between AA and UAL? Do we really need to go back to full regulation like we had pre 1978 for the government to step in and say 19 flights is enough, and allow AA and UA to decide which 8 of their flights they want to remove from their schedule? And if any other airline has the bright idea to fly LGA-ORD the government just say no!! I know, I know, the government will never do it because the almighty consumer will have a conniption fit because that would cause them to actually have to pay a fare that covers the cost of flying their sorry a**es back and forth. And everybody these days including our politicians seem to think that it is everybody's God given right to be offered a fare they can afford, where until up to 1978, many people just accepted the fact that they couldn't afford to fly. Oh the humanity!!

If this scenario would require a further 25% capacity cut on top of the 15% the industry cut since last year....so be it!! Yes, some of us would be out of work, but maybe then fares could be raised to a level that would accommodate paying wages somewhere between the "good ole days" and the unconscionably poor wages paid today. What's the matter with a little give and take huh? Plus we might even be able to operate a schedule on time. Well, on second thought, how foolish of me to think ATC could actually move 2 planes on time.

Every time the government steps in in any given industry to control prices or wages, all in the name of "fairness", that industry gets screwed up, it no longer grows or prospers, and its members are ultimately all harmed.

In an ideal world, the market would be truly free, and the government would only regulate to preserve a certain level of safety, to prevent companies from cutting too many corners and harming the public. So unions would be allowed to exist, to allow free negotiations between labor and management, but there would be no RLA, no "controlled bankruptcies", and certainly no bailouts; if labor is unrealistic, the company would really fail, and it would be a strong lesson to others not to overreach. If management is unrealistic, they would find a shortage of labor and would be forced to offer more.

Most of us, including pilots and passengers, would agree that not anyone is or should be qualified to operate a transport airplane. The FAA should have a moral responsibility to artificially limit the pilot supply with additional aptitude, timebuilding, and training requirements. This would ensure that there is a limited supply of pilots, wages would increase, and only the best would make it to the flight deck. Pilots and passengers alike would win, without government having to mandate certain prices or wages.

I think we all should be pushing for ATP mins for ALL airline pilots.

 

[pianoman]

I think we all should be pushing for ATP mins for ALL airline pilots.

I agree with most of what you said. I would take the above one step further and require some level of verification of flight time. We all know some less-than-scrupulous folks who've got some Pencil-In-Command flight time real fast when they need it for a job.

 

[Nindiri]

Dang, pilotyip, what did you do to get Kalifornia worked up into such a rage?

 

[CX880]

Every time the government steps in in any given industry to control prices or wages, all in the name of "fairness", that industry gets screwed up, it no longer grows or prospers, and its members are ultimately all harmed.

In an ideal world, the market would be truly free, and the government would only regulate to preserve a certain level of safety, to prevent companies from cutting too many corners and harming the public. So unions would be allowed to exist, to allow free negotiations between labor and management, but there would be no RLA, no "controlled bankruptcies", and certainly no bailouts; if labor is unrealistic, the company would really fail, and it would be a strong lesson to others not to overreach. If management is unrealistic, they would find a shortage of labor and would be forced to offer more.

Most of us, including pilots and passengers, would agree that not anyone is or should be qualified to operate a transport airplane. The FAA should have a moral responsibility to artificially limit the pilot supply with additional aptitude, timebuilding, and training requirements. This would ensure that there is a limited supply of pilots, wages would increase, and only the best would make it to the flight deck. Pilots and passengers alike would win, without government having to mandate certain prices or wages.

I think we all should be pushing for ATP mins for ALL airline pilots.

Oh please. The CA who was the cause of the crash had 3500 hours at the time of the crash. Do you want to make it 4000hrs to get into the airlines? Actually lets make it 10,000 just to be sure.....Maybe by then they would have learned how to get out of a stall....

Colgan is to blame for hiring an FO fresh out of the 120 degree desert flying in the NE in freezing weather. They also failed to see a pilot that probably should not have been flying for a living. This had nothing to do with total time, of which this crew had enough of at the time of the crash. The FAA should not punish the rest of us pilots for that. That's my view.

 

[PeanuckleCRJ]

The issue isn't the CA's flying time... it was his judgement and situational awareness. That is what needs to be checked better...

 

[pilotyip]

Thank You

I don't always agree with you yip but you are right on the money with this one.

Thank you for your kind response. I wish no one ill will, but I see a continuing frustration with the job of being a pilot. Pilots are wanting to redefine the job to fit their expectation. These expectations do not match the reality of the market. A market that is driven by the consumer. There is a number of posts here were pilot seem to enjoy their jobs. But these individuals are slammed as the very source of all the problems in the airline industry. It is still a good job, with career earning in the upper brackets of US individual income.