Skywest CEO meets with ASA "leaders" Q&A

[SkyWestCRJPilot]

I am only arguing the concept of difference pay.

So if SkyWest were to have 777s would you argue the pay for them should be at the same rate?


If one route is making money and another isn't then that's management's fault, not the pilots. They should be compensated fairly based on the amount of revenue that aircraft makes for the company. If it's a 30 seat Brasilia it's a certain amount. If it's a 777 it's another and variations for everything in between.

 

[Bluto]

I am having a hard time understanding what the big deal is in having a different pay scale for different size airplanes. I know some of you are passionate about it...and that's definately your right. It's just don't get it. To me, it is the same amount of work to fly a 40 and a 50 seat...I can't see the 70 or 90 being that much more work????

Where do you draw the line? How arbitrary is our current 50-seat rate? Should it be used as a universal rate for all aircraft? The Brasilia is more work to fly than the CRJ. Shouldn't they be paid more? School teachers work harder than NBA basketball players. Shouldn't they all earn $20 million a year? WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE????

 

[Bluto]

90 seaters for 50 seat pay...thats just not going to happen. They know that...

I think you're being very optimistic. I think they have every intention of having us fly 90-seaters and beyond for our current 50-seat rates.

We have to be realistic...again, we will get improvements but don't expect some huge pay raise...ITS NOT GONNA HAPPEN!!

Nodoby's asking for DAL +1%. It'd be really nice to industry average 90-seat rates. If we vote yes on the current agreement we will be setting a new low for 90-seat compensation. Kind of silly for one of the most profitable airlines in the U.S.

 

[viper548]

I think you're being very optimistic. I think they have every intention of having us fly 90-seaters and beyond for our current 50-seat rates.
Nodoby's asking for DAL +1%. It'd be really nice to industry average 90-seat rates. If we vote yes on the current agreement we will be setting a new low for 90-seat compensation. Kind of silly for one of the most profitable airlines in the U.S.

I agree, it's more like MESA +1%

 

[No Delay]

They should be compensated fairly based on the amount of revenue that aircraft makes for the company.

This just doesn't make sense to me! If I fly my 50 seater full and you fly your 70 seater with 40 people...then I should make more than you? What if it is a ferry flight? Hasn't generated any revenue...are you working for free?

There are certainly routes that are more profitable than others...should I be paid more if I fly a more profitable route.

I think you are assuming more seats = more revenue...and in most cases that should be true BUT that is not always the case. Let's say I agree with you and get more pay per hour for a bigger airplane because it generates more money. Are you willing to have money deducted from your pay if that airplane is not full?

I just think a pilot should be paid for being a pilot (fair amount based on experience / seniority)...but also have a FAIR profit sharing / performance bonuses so that we all can share when the company makes money.

I do agree there is a big difference between a RJ and 777. But who operates RJs and 777 with nothing in between? Most times they use a range of aircraft. Senior guys (who would make more because of longevity) fly the bigger a/c.

I do agree there should be more than $5 or $6 / hour pay between a 3 yr. captain and a 10 yr. captain. I think this is what should be addressed more than a/c difference pay.

BTW, all of this is just my opinion...doesn't mean I am right and you are wrong. Just sharing my 2 cents. Good discussion, though!

 

[viper548]

Should the CEO of a very large company make more than the CEO of a very small company?

 

[Sinca3]

Delay,
Where the a/c are flown and how many people fly on them is not our job. Our job is to fly the a/c where and when mgmnt tells us to. Therefore the only thing we can control, or negotiate, is the $$ amount we are compensated. It is not our job to fill the seats or decide what a/c is suitable for what city pair, just to fly. Therfore the pay for a/c size makes sense if you look at it that way.
I am not saying this is the right way just the way ALPA and airline pilots looked at it in the past. I agree a profit sharing plan is a good idea for most places, but ASA is a different beast. No matter what you offer rampers, gate agents, mechanics etc. they aren't as motivated to get a plane out on time as the flight crews. The manpower in ATL is the worst in the industry and i have been to many airports in the country. I don't see how a profit sharing plan would work for us (the pilot group) at ASA. If there was a plan placed in front of me that made sense I likely would vote for it.
Cheers

 

[SkyWestCRJPilot]

This just doesn't make sense to me! If I fly my 50 seater full and you fly your 70 seater with 40 people...then I should make more than you? What if it is a ferry flight? Hasn't generated any revenue...are you working for free?

If my 100 seat aircraft is empty and your 50 seater is full then that's not my problem. That's management's problem for not selling the seats. I want to be compensated fairly based on the amount of revenue an airplane generates. Or let me rephrase that. I want to be compensated fairly on the amount of revenue an airplane CAN generate. If management screws up how much it actually makes that's their fault, not mine. Labor costs are constant. My pay should be a constant part of the cost per seat mile (csm), not variable based on each and every flight. If I fly a 50 seat airliner that can make $1000 profit per flight then I should be compensate accordingly. If I fly a 100 seat airliner that can make $1500 per flight then I should be compensated accordingly. If I fly a 500 seat airliner that can make $10,000 profit then I should be paid accordingly. I don't understand why you don't think it should be so. If you think everyone should be paid the same because we're all pilots then that's management's argument. If you take that stand then you've destroyed 80 years worth of pilot labor precedent.

 

[No Delay]

Baby Face (SkywestCRJ)


Valid points! Very valid points! And in one sense I agree.

And I didn't say all pilots should make the same...I said more focus should be placed on experience than equipment. I know my system would not work across the board...and there are obviously differences between a CRJ and a 777.

But I also don't believe it is realistic to think every that every airplane will be full of passengers paying the highest price on every route. If a manager could do that...he would be like...God!

All I am hearing is a 90 seat airplane can make this much money so I should be paid this amount...and I think their are just too many other factors that influence how much money an airplane generates.

If you say this airplane can make X amount of money so I want to be paid Y amount per hour...what happens if doesn't make that much? Or what happens when Airtran moves in? Just too many variables.



I do agree with you on the concept of profit sharing and ASA in Atlanta. We have some of the worst employees! I don't know how that would work either.


Again, I will be the first to tell you some of this stuff is way over my head and there are people a lot smarter than me working on it....It just aggrivates me when all someone wants to say is "It's a 90 seater so we have to have more money!" It is almost like they are saying it just because that is what a pilot should say. I am not saying they are wrong...I just want hear the logic behind their statements.

Again....good points!

 

[Dave Benjamin]

I agree, it's more like MESA +1%

The 900 rates will be less than Mesa rates.