Reality Check for NetJets Pilots

[gunfyter]

You might not like the 7 on 7 off but it seems to me that is a deal that would be great for family time. The rest of us get 5.5 10 to 11 hour days and 1.5 days off. I go straight from work to baseball most nights and so get home at 10pm.

The computer and home deal sounded good to me. No trip to Columbus and time away would be plenty to stay up to snuff. In the end, it is my license, my life in the plane, my carrer I am investing in.

A man who likes baseball can't be all bad. Baseball be very very good to me.... Baseball put food on the table for us when I was growing up. You know it makes it hard to be a coach or manager when you are gone away from home so many days. I am missing way too much little league baseball and HS football.

7/7 Hell I will work 6 and 4... Ferry me home every night thats all. The computer is NOT a good deal. Much rather go to Columbus. This adds another tour of flying and I enjoy the break from the road in the classroom. However I gladly do the computer at home as long as they strike one of my 7 day tours off my schedule.... Just add another 7 days vacation to my account.

 

[gunfyter]

F16 time doesn't mean much in the civilian world. In professional civilian aviation we fly in the weather on a schedule and we fly as a crew.

Much different flying than yanking and banking in an F16 all by your lonesome. And oh yeah..... passenger ride is important out here.... no yanking and banking in a corporate jet with pax in the back.

YGBSM! I will take the F-16 pilot. BTW Airplanes were invented to carry ordnance not pax.

I was at an AIRINC job fair 7 years ago... in line to talk to the EJA rep. With me a friend who flew the Harrier and another who flew the F-16. EJA told those guys they did not have enough multi-time. Don't feel bad for the Harrier guy though... he was hired at American, Delta, Northwest, United, and Southwest... now flying at SWA. I am pretty sure we could have taught him to fly a Citation or Hawker.

You want to hire the best but turn away F-16 and Harrier pilots! That is a JOKE!

 

[FLYLOW22]

FLYLOW

United was profitable before the Contract......... not after. End of story!

Right. For a number of reasons. I'm not defending anything other than management agreed to too much (Rick Dubinsky has agreed to this) thinking that the combined revenues of the two airlines would support the increased labor costs. Ok. I'm done.

 

[GVFlyer]

Gunfyter -

Interesting subject. At the Big G test pilots usually fly with a scribe in the right seat and do everything themselves, so when it comes time to go to sim, test pilots are scheduled to go with a demo guy to renew crew coordination skills. But everyone seems to function pretty well in the system when released from the Warning Area.

GV






.

 

[stlflyguy]

Just remember....

"You want to hire the best but turn away F-16 and Harrier pilots! That is a JOKE!"

....half the doctors out there graduated in the bottom 50% of their class. If flying wasn't "pass or fail" I believe you'd see the same thing.

stlflyguy

 

[njwingman]

As to United, you were both right. It was profitable before the contract,, however, there business was in a period of steep decline as high yield business traffic was departing in droves over the slow down and poor service.

And I guess that "high yield business traffic" that departed would now be what is known as the fractional business?

I believe UA's labor costs after the contract were somewhere in the area of 49% of total operating expenses. After concessions, their labor costs are now in the area of 42%, JetBlue's labor costs as a percentage of total operating expenses are 29%. SWA's labor costs are now in the area of 41% for 2004, up from 35% in 2000, so it will be interesting to see if SW continues to prosper. If it does, I guess that will lend some credence to the argument that management has the monkey on their back as to the success of the company and shouldn't always go looking to labor to fix their problems.

 

[stlflyguy]

I believe UA's labor costs after the contract were somewhere in the area of 49% of total operating expenses. After concessions, their labor costs are now in the area of 42%, JetBlue's labor costs as a percentage of total operating expenses are 29%. SWA's labor costs are now in the area of 41% for 2004, up from 35% in 2000, so it will be interesting to see if SW continues to prosper. If it does, I guess that will lend some credence to the argument that management has the monkey on their back as to the success of the company and shouldn't always go looking to labor to fix their problems.

JetBlue's costs are simply due to the fact that nobody has topped out on the labor scale and that they are still growing. As the senior most employees incur raises due to longevity, the airline offsets that with newhire employees at the bottom of the payscale.

Southwest has been a classic model of this. If SWA ever stagnates, I would expect the employee costs to rise exponentially. But SWA never has, from what I can see, stagnated in the past and they certainly don't make any overtures of doing it in the future. I think the Boyd group pointed out that SWA may be picking up more aircraft; perhaps used 737s from other carriers or a desert here or there.

 

[rajflyboy]

Netjetwife...

Your husband did what most people don't do. He gave for his country. He risked life in a dangerous job "Flying an F16". Thats very honorable.