SkyWest, Not Paid in Training, et al

[realitycheck]

Yes, SkyWest is not paying their new-hires during training. And Yes, double-occupancy is required unless the new-hire wants to pay the balance.

But to call it "ridiculous" or "appalling" is a tad over-reactive.

The sharing of a hotel room is non-consequential in terms of money. Hopefully I'll get a sharp pilot who can carry me through groundschool, and not the guy who gets 37 calls from his girlfriend at all hours of the day.

But let's talk about payroll. I expect to be in training, if I make it all the way, a total of 7 weeks; that's 1.75 months @ 65 hours @ $19.02 per hour @ 20% tax bracket equating to an out-of-pocket deficit of $1730.82.

Being a chief pilot for a freight carrier who hired about 30 pilots per year, I saw A FREAKIN' TON of applications (25 for every open slot) come across my desk. I wonder how many of these people would be willing to pay $1730.82 to have a job in today's market?

Let's talk about that newer car you bought a while back... how quickly did it lose $1730.82 in value?

How many US Air, Midway, United, etc. pilots would trade their last paycheck for a slot in groundschool, any groundschool?

How lucky are pilots slated for groundschools right now? I know a few pilots who completed SkyWest's simplified application (name and hours, that's it) about the same time I did. I got the call, and they didn't even though our hours were similar.

Yes, they told me during the interview I'd be paid during training. And Yes, they could have deferred their new policy until the next hiring pool and it would have only mattered a few thousand to SkyWest; yet I'm still not bitter, upset or bitchy.

 

[Mookie]

Reality...
Good attitude on all accounts. Welcome to SkyWest and hope to see you on line soon. All of the pilots are bummed right now about the lack of new-hire pay, but with several carriers underbidding us, we need to get as lean as possible, and unfortunately have bigger fish to fry. It is still a great place to be!!! As an aside...if anyone comes to SkyWest right now with 2,500tt and 1000 Part 121/135 crew time, Brasilia upgrade is almost immediate. Makes that $1,700 look alot less.

Lastly, to anyone who wants to know how bright our future looks at SkyWest check out what "Uncle Jerry" has to say...http://customer.nvglb.com/RaymondJames/Airline/ It looks pretty stellar.


Mookie

 

[rjcap]

Lastly, to anyone who wants to know how bright our future looks at SkyWest

If the future is so bright then whats with not paying new hires during ground school ???

 

[sleepy]

I thought Skywest had $600 million in the bank. And they can't afford to pay a new hire $1700 bucks to go through training. It seems like they are just taking advantage of the current state of the airline industry to prey upon helpless pilots.

Go to an airline that pays you for a days work, pays for your hotel (your own room), and pays per diem. Go ASA or Comair!

 

[realitycheck]

I can appreciate that $1700 compared to $600 million in marketable securities and cash seems like a drop in the bucket. But enough drops will eventually add up. At least the management team at SkyWest appears to be pre-emptive rather than re-active like United or Delta.

With regards to ASA- a former co-worker left for ASA; the rumor mill is abuzz with plans to defer groundschools until summer or early fall. He's already quit; he's already moved to Atlanta (his wife got a job there too). I bet he'd pay $1700 to have ASA give him a February class date.

Everyone gets up in arms about having to pay to advance your career. Breaking it down simply- we all paid, probabaly too much, for our flight training. How about those people that went to UND or ER? Good education aside, those programs are expensive!!

Those pilots, on the whole, that paid big bucks a few years ago to bridge into a Part 121 carrier while skipping the whole CFI thing are doing pretty well. They essentially advanced their careers by two years, which equates to $400,000 in today's terms. Pay $20,000 to get $400,000- pretty good risk v. reward scenario.

How about fitness workers, message therapists, accountants, etc.? Some of those professionals don't make a lot of money, yet they are required to pay for additional education and training to keep their licenses and/or certifications.

I'm chaulking the $1700 up to additional training for advancing my career; it certainly is an easier pill to swallow in that context, and quite possibly tax-deductible.

 

[Bluto]

Comair?

Sleepy, you may want to check the facts before you post. From what I hear, Comair doesn't even provide a hotel room after the first week of training.

Many regionals don't pay at all during training. While I don't necessarily agree with SkyWest's decision, I don't think they'll lose any sleep if some newhires leave or don't show up on principle. Giving up a job at SkW because of something as petty as pay during training is a very foolish move, IMO. But hey, if you feel you have to, go for it. SkyWest is a great company.

 

[WhiteCloud]

Yes, SkyWest is not paying their new-hires during training. And Yes, double-occupancy is required unless the new-hire wants Yes, they told me during the interview I'd be paid during training. And Yes, they could have deferred their new policy until the next hiring pool and it would have only mattered a few thousand to SkyWest; yet I'm still not bitter, upset or bitchy.

Is there a trend here? It's good you're dealing with deception and broken promises with a good attitude and not getting bitter, upset and bitchy. What other cuts are next on Skywest's horizon? Captain's pay, FO pay, per diem, work rules, scheduled hours, airport reserve, days off, health or dental benefits (do you get those anyway?). Lets see how you feel in a few months. Nice of them to let you fly their airplanes though. Ziggy1

 

[sleepy]

Re: Comair?

Sleepy, you may want to check the facts before you post. From what I hear, Comair doesn't even provide a hotel room after the first week of training.

Many regionals don't pay at all during training. While I don't necessarily agree with SkyWest's decision, I don't think they'll lose any sleep if some newhires leave or don't show up on principle. Giving up a job at SkW because of something as petty as pay during training is a very foolish move, IMO. But hey, if you feel you have to, go for it. SkyWest is a great company.

Ok, forget Comair (I just assumed they get the same things we get at ASA), come to ASA. I know we will pay you, pay for your own hotel room and pay you $36 a day in per diem.

If you want to go to Skywest, then go. I can't wait to see how it shapes-up when the United pilots get their J4J going with all of their code share partners.

 

[PCL_128]

Re: Re: SkyWest, Not Paid in Training, e

Is there a trend here? It's good you're dealing with deception and broken promises with a good attitude and not getting bitter, upset and bitchy. What other cuts are next on Skywest's horizon? Captain's pay, FO pay, per diem, work rules, scheduled hours, airport reserve, days off, health or dental benefits (do you get those anyway?). Lets see how you feel in a few months. Nice of them to let you fly their airplanes though. Ziggy1

And the worst thing is, they are non-union so the company can just impose new work-rules and salaries without even consulting with the pilot group. I'm not saying that this will happen, but these sorts of things are a slippery slope. They start by screwing over the new hires and eventually they work their way up to wage and benefits cuts.

If they had told you from the beginning that you would not be paid during training, then this wouldn't bother me so much. But promising you pay during training and then changing their mind is just playing dirty.

 

[rjcap]

realitycheck,

I commend you for your exceptional attitude. Looking at the big picture is more important at this point.

However,

It still sucks.

Good luck and enjoy the view in Salt Lake !!!

 

[Theflyingtito]

For the outsiders,
I realize that this my sway some on the decision on SkyWest or not. Honestly, it would have been hard to swallow if that was the case for me when I started a little over a year ago. But...now after being here, you can bet your life I would do whatever it took. There isn't one day where I would rather be anywhere else. No, it's not perfect. But knowing what I know now...every piece of me is glad I'm here and no where else. Yes, they may not pay the newhires in training(still pay for the hotel), exective level management also took a 20% cut in pay and that's so they don't have to cut the crew pay in order to stay competitive with lesser quality airlines.

BIG PICTURE...

Questions, email me
[email protected]

 

[Kmedchill]

But let's talk about payroll. I expect to be in training, if I make it all the way, a total of 7 weeks; that's 1.75 months @ 65 hours @ $19.02 per hour @ 20% tax bracket equating to an out-of-pocket deficit of $1730.82.

The thing that sucks is i just went through the December 2nd class and im STILL not out of training. Im waiting at home for IOE to get scheduled! They are telling us that they are so backed up it may not be until mid feb or so. Not trying to bring you guys down, still a great company, but this is the reality of things. It just may be a bit more than the $1730.

 

[realitycheck]

kmedchill,

SkyWest will start paying me immediately after my flight check. So, if IOE is backed up 4 weeks, which I understand it is, then that's fine by me... since I'll be getting 65 hours sitting on the couch (while I keep up with my flows, profiles and procedures).

Good luck with IOE; God's speed.

 

[Beechnut]

Why only 65 hours?

S.

 

[WhiteCloud]

<SkyWest will start paying me immediately after my flight check>

Is that what they are saying today? How about tomorrow.? ziggy1

 

[Kmedchill]

realitycheck,

That makes me feel better. 4 week paid vacations after you get hired are nice. Good luck in training...

K

 

[p.b.]

"They essentially advanced their careers by two years, which equates to $400,000 in today's terms. Pay $20,000 to get $400,000- pretty good risk v. reward scenario."

How does two years at a regional equal $400,000? Have I been working for the wrong regionals?

 

[greg20]

NPV

p.b. said:

How does two years at a regional equal $400,000? Have I been working for the wrong regionals?

I believe what "realitycheck" meant (and please, correct me if I'm wrong) was that those investing $20,000 today may effectively "skip" 2 years of "low wage" flying and therefore may have 2 "extra" years at the end of their career at an assumed $200,000/year (in today's dollars). This assumes that everyone is on a level playing field, the # of years to a $200,000 job is known, etc etc.

If the salary in 2050 was $200,000 in real, "2050" dollars, (just an example), it would have to be discounted back to today using a net present value (NPV) equation and a given discount rate to find out how much that amount of money is worth today. It would be something less than $400,000 (and possibly even less than $20,000) depending on the discount rate assumed and the # of years left before the individual reaches mandatory retirement. If you knew your final salary, and what age (what year) you would be working to at that salary, you could discount that back to today's dollars using an accepted discount rate and use the result to determine whether or not two extra years at that salary is worth investing $20,000 today.

 

[realitycheck]

NPV, Other

Kmedchill- Thanks. I need all the help I can get!

Beechnut- Why only 65 hours? That's what SkyWest considers the gaurantee when you're on reserves (I believe); 80 hour gaurantee for line holders. BTW, my daughter loves your food

p.b.- greg20 is correct, and I have exact numbers and more explanation below.

ziggy1- Everything in life is face value. You have to bank on what someone says today; if I went through life thinking everything is a preface to a series of precipitous deceptions, I'd never leave my room.

When I said $20,000 versus $400,000, greg20 was right on. If a pilot can advance his/her career by two years by writing a check for $20,000 he/she should be able to enjoy an additional two years at an average max pay of $200,000 per year in today's terms.

I didn't necessarily want to complicate the issue, but greg20 is again correct stating you must discount the future annuity to get the net present value (NPV). Basic finance suggests a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow for two simple reasons- first, you can invest the dollar at x% and earn a dividend; second, the cost of living increases each year making your future dollar worth less.

So, applying the NPV function for 30 years at 8% and 10% (assuming 3% cost of living to maintain apples to apples comparison) results in $99,608 and $58,193 respectively. In other words, investing $20,000 today at 8% results in $300,392 thirty years from now- but you'll be earning $400,000 ($200,000 x 2) thirty years from now, resulting in a gain of $99,608. This also assumes you can earn 8% on your money for the next 30 years, which is do-able. 10% may be more of a stretch.

To conclude, greg20 is correct- but the comparison of $20,000 to $99,608 @ 8%, or $20,000 to $58,193 @ 10%, still makes writing a check for $20,000 to get a 2 year jump on your colleagues(competitors) a wise investment. There are also intangibles- getting more valued experience (e.g., Part 121, turbine) earlier may suggest more job protection, easier job-hopping, etc. (remember, I say *MAY*).

Hope this helps-

 

[greg20]

Realitycheck,

Thanks for solidifying what I said with some real numbers. I wasn't sure how detailed you wanted to get!

Just as an aside, all of this assumes that you won't have a medical issue, you will in fact make it to retirement age (a bit morbid, but true). Working out the numbers is a valuable exercise, and I agree with everything you said.

The intangible"what ifs" still have to be considered, and one has to shop around and see if a higher return can't be earned elsewhere on that $20,000 for the same (or lower) perceived risk. I don't believe you'll find anything projected to earn +10% over the majority of a lifetime that is "safer" than investing in yourself. At least I haven't found it yet.