In the long run, a profession will get paid "what they are worth," with said worth determined by Supply & Demand, as well as what value they provide to their employer. Teachers do incredibly valuable work, but the supply is pretty high. Star quarterbacks may not contribute much to "society," but turning a team into a playoff regular is worth big bucks to the guys who pay the salaries -- and star QB's are hard to find.
There is only so much that negotiations can accomplish. If every pilot in the world banded together & said, "we either get paid $1M / year, or we don't fly," then some few pilots would get that wage (seem to remember a stat that a certain trans-Pacific FedEx flight produced $1M in revenue each flight), and a whole bunch wouldn't fly. Of course, nobody would honor such a pact for very long, and supply & demand would start to run its course, and the wages won by hard bargaining sooner or later would start to come back down.
Some times airline management makes stupid decisions (not that this is big news). It seems to me that UAL's management put themselves in a position where they couldn't say "no" to some of the union demands, even if the proposals were more than United could realistically pay over the long term. So UAL pilots got an "industry leading" contract. But the fact that the pilots (and other groups there) could GET such a contract does NOT mean that those pay rates were *sustainable*. Your employer may have to pay you whatever you negotiate, but the free market doesn't have to pay that much if it is more than the economic value of your work!
Recent history seems to show that very little of UAL's cost structure from the last few years is sustainable. Pilot pay, while only a part of the problem, IS part of the problem. Do I blame the pilots? Nope. They'd suffered from some awful conditions & givebacks, wanted to be compensated, asked for the moon, and by golly they got it. It isn't their job to run the airline or know what is affordable; management had given away so much & put themselves in such a position that they had no ability to negotiate for less. Bad on management. They created a situation that could not continue beyond the best of economic times.
Some places follow a more even-keel approach without the cycles of boom & bust, industry leading contracts followed by industry-leading furloughs & an industry-leading bankruptcy. "Slow but steady wins the race." Pay rates at SWA (generally acknowledged as the best airline management in the US today) aren't the highest, although total compensation (by the time you include total hours flown each year, profit sharing, 401k matching, stock appreciation, etc) is not that far off. There is a LOT more to compensation than $/hour, even if hourly wage is the easiest number to compare. Some people cry (or scream) about an "industry average wage," but what exact population one should find the average *of*, tends to be a rather moving target. How does one average in the salary for second year F/O's at UAL, DAL, AMR, etc right now?
The bitterness of a recent post is really a tragic thing to behold, but I just don't subscribe to the whole "holding down the profession's wages" theory. UAL's wages in their last contract didn't appear to be held down by anything... they went up to levels that are, in hindsight, unsustainable.
> The jobs at United that are being lost are quality airline jobs with reasonable work rules and good benefits.
I'd love to get paid $1M each year for flying jets, but the sad truth of the matter is that I don't bring that much value to the table. Not many pilots do. Even if some union could negotiate such a wage, if the pilots don't bring that much value to the job, then it won't be sustainable. Which is what we're seeing unfolding right now, with a great deal of pain & misery for those affected by it.
While there is room for improvement in the compensation, contract, work rules, & plenty of other issues at SWA, it is of tremendous value to know that it's a job at a stable, profitable airline; that continued growth will mean that there aren't any 10-year F/O's waiting to upgrade, and that retirement $, while less than I'd *like* to have (just like the $1M/year I'd like to make), is not subject to evaporating away to nothing if the company should go bankrupt, or have dishonest bookkeepers (ENRON).
If I had REALLY wanted to make a million dollars every year, I could have tried to become a corporate attorney or a brain surgeon or a venture capitalist. But I didn't. I became a pilot, and I enjoy my job. The money is nice, and while "more would always be better," I don't really want to pursue an "industry leading contract" if industry leading layoffs, instability, & turmoil are the accompanying price.
To those who think I should be dissatisfied with my situation because I don't make more than I do, I can only say that I'm sorry for your situation.
There is only so much that negotiations can accomplish. If every pilot in the world banded together & said, "we either get paid $1M / year, or we don't fly," then some few pilots would get that wage (seem to remember a stat that a certain trans-Pacific FedEx flight produced $1M in revenue each flight), and a whole bunch wouldn't fly. Of course, nobody would honor such a pact for very long, and supply & demand would start to run its course, and the wages won by hard bargaining sooner or later would start to come back down.
Some times airline management makes stupid decisions (not that this is big news). It seems to me that UAL's management put themselves in a position where they couldn't say "no" to some of the union demands, even if the proposals were more than United could realistically pay over the long term. So UAL pilots got an "industry leading" contract. But the fact that the pilots (and other groups there) could GET such a contract does NOT mean that those pay rates were *sustainable*. Your employer may have to pay you whatever you negotiate, but the free market doesn't have to pay that much if it is more than the economic value of your work!
Recent history seems to show that very little of UAL's cost structure from the last few years is sustainable. Pilot pay, while only a part of the problem, IS part of the problem. Do I blame the pilots? Nope. They'd suffered from some awful conditions & givebacks, wanted to be compensated, asked for the moon, and by golly they got it. It isn't their job to run the airline or know what is affordable; management had given away so much & put themselves in such a position that they had no ability to negotiate for less. Bad on management. They created a situation that could not continue beyond the best of economic times.
Some places follow a more even-keel approach without the cycles of boom & bust, industry leading contracts followed by industry-leading furloughs & an industry-leading bankruptcy. "Slow but steady wins the race." Pay rates at SWA (generally acknowledged as the best airline management in the US today) aren't the highest, although total compensation (by the time you include total hours flown each year, profit sharing, 401k matching, stock appreciation, etc) is not that far off. There is a LOT more to compensation than $/hour, even if hourly wage is the easiest number to compare. Some people cry (or scream) about an "industry average wage," but what exact population one should find the average *of*, tends to be a rather moving target. How does one average in the salary for second year F/O's at UAL, DAL, AMR, etc right now?
The bitterness of a recent post is really a tragic thing to behold, but I just don't subscribe to the whole "holding down the profession's wages" theory. UAL's wages in their last contract didn't appear to be held down by anything... they went up to levels that are, in hindsight, unsustainable.
> The jobs at United that are being lost are quality airline jobs with reasonable work rules and good benefits.
I'd love to get paid $1M each year for flying jets, but the sad truth of the matter is that I don't bring that much value to the table. Not many pilots do. Even if some union could negotiate such a wage, if the pilots don't bring that much value to the job, then it won't be sustainable. Which is what we're seeing unfolding right now, with a great deal of pain & misery for those affected by it.
While there is room for improvement in the compensation, contract, work rules, & plenty of other issues at SWA, it is of tremendous value to know that it's a job at a stable, profitable airline; that continued growth will mean that there aren't any 10-year F/O's waiting to upgrade, and that retirement $, while less than I'd *like* to have (just like the $1M/year I'd like to make), is not subject to evaporating away to nothing if the company should go bankrupt, or have dishonest bookkeepers (ENRON).
If I had REALLY wanted to make a million dollars every year, I could have tried to become a corporate attorney or a brain surgeon or a venture capitalist. But I didn't. I became a pilot, and I enjoy my job. The money is nice, and while "more would always be better," I don't really want to pursue an "industry leading contract" if industry leading layoffs, instability, & turmoil are the accompanying price.
To those who think I should be dissatisfied with my situation because I don't make more than I do, I can only say that I'm sorry for your situation.
