the pro's and cons of unions in the fractional aviation and airline industry

[fischman]

How many retired airline guys are sitting in the right seat now where you are that can fly circles around the guys in the left seat based on career experience alone? For those retired guys, they should be able to take all that experience directly into the left seat of an airplane with a simular type rating. Instead, they wind up in the right seat and the experience is not used to the best advantage of the carrier. In fractionals, having this flight and leadership experience in the left seat is even more crucial due to the nature of diverse flying. Upgrades by strictly seniority and not merit does not best serve the owner. This experience translates directly to a safer operation. I'll support merit upgrades anytime over seniority upgrades based on safety alone. You can add this to my growing list of reasons why unions are a bad idea in today's aviation environment.

I need to start with a disclaimer. I have nothing but respect for the pilots of Delta Airlines.

Having said that. Many of them have trouble flying the airplanes at NJA. Partially because flying a bizjet and flying a 767 are incredibly different animals. They look like 1st year cadets sometimes. (again. no disrespect intended)

Also, many of them have been in the 767 for 12 to 15 years. It's been that long since they had to learn a new plane! Sometimes it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks. (I'll admit. A bit of a jab here!:beer: )

Many of them have been flying that 767 from the left seat for all that time. Now they are in the right seat. Time to teach the muscles new memory.

Now, EVERY single former Delta pilot I have flown with is EXCELLENT in decision making, judgment, and customer service. Their talents and experience are certainly not wasted.

EVERY single one of them has respected my PIC authority.

To be honest, I usually find it a 2 way street of learning. They learn the plane from me, and I learn how to be a better PIC from them.

 

[Iam3rd]

Not exactly. Furloughs aren't the only thing you have to worry about. When management of a non-union pilot force runs into trouble, they can cut pay, cut benefits, cut days off, screw with schedules, close domiciles with no recourse, displace pilots out of seniority order, and much more.

I experienced all of the above at my last operator, in addition to a furlough of half the workforce before 9/11, while our competitors were making tons of money. Why? Simple mismanagement. Right after they announced they were closing bases and furloughing pilots, they were filling up the president's toy jet from the company fuel truck right in front of me. I'll never forget that morning.

With a union contract in place, management is forced to find other ways to save a buck other than simply changing work rules and compensation to make their bottom line work out. I'm glad your company is treating you well at the moment. I hope for your sake that it stays that way. I've seen first-hand what happens when it doesn't.

I'll take my "greedy" union--whose contract paid my whole year's union dues in this week's paycheck just in overtime--over a greedy management team any day of the week.

If I recall correctly, the USAirways pilots and many other airlines had all of those things done to them after 9/11 and they had a union. So whats the difference between union and non-union except the fact that they had to pay dues for their shaft. Granted, with a non-union company those things might happen a bit faster, but union or non-union, no company is immune from those things as we saw after 9/11.

 

[B19 Flyer]

It's fun

To be honest, I post for two reasons. The first, it is fun. There are some very bright people that post on these threads and I enjoy the oppsoing view points. Second, I like speaking from personal experience and have been around to see the beast from the inside. I have seen unions from a different light than most people posting on this page. Nobody has ever written a book from the inside of the carrier out on what it is like to deal with a radical union. It's not an easy thing. I honestly believe that if anybody that is a staunch union supporter was to try and manage a pilot group from the inside, they would quickly change their tune. One must remember, that the same pilots that manage these large flight departments were once union members also. Unions will complain about "poor management", but they well never say that the same people they now complain about were also career pilots and former union members themselves. You need to ask yourself, why did they suddenly change? Why were these people that were once loyal union members now fighting against the union? Could it be that they now were living inside of the beast and saw the reality for the first time? I've worked in four large flight departments, and I've never worked with any senior management pilot that supported the union once they had to deal with it from the inside. I know that I can't be alone in this world on this subject, but I'm no longer handcuffed with my opinions because I don't hold the title of "Manager" any longer and I'm not in a union carrier. So, I enjoy the banter.

 

[B19 Flyer]

If I recall correctly, the USAirways pilots and many other airlines had all of those things done to them after 9/11 and they had a union. So whats the difference between union and non-union except the fact that they had to pay dues for their shaft. Granted, with a non-union company those things might happen a bit faster, but union or non-union, no company is immune from those things as we saw after 9/11.

This is very true. The carriers that were least unionized had the most opportunity to quickly react and hold off the inevitable for the longest period of time though. Those early salary cuts allowed troubled carriers to keep their non union workers on the property longer rather than use layoffs. This saved many jobs of those non-unionized and support employees giving them greater opportunities. Those that were heavily unionized were the first to take the deep cuts and furloughs because there was no other way to work around the contracts except through bankrupcty.

 

[Mr. Pebbles]

Grump, the only thing that makes it easier is that you can treat your employees a lot better without a contract than you can with. Talented pilots will get upgraded on skills rather than seniority, weak pilots will stay safely in the right seat longer to get more experience.

If what you're saying is true, why do you treat your employees so crappy? Why do you fire them over any little differerence of opinion?

And no system for upgrades other than " this guy is talented??" That doesnt work. I've seen some of the best pilots I've known in the right seat of airplanes just because the chief pilot didn't like them, or there was a personality conflict of some type.

Go away, or admit who you are. You don't seem to understand than many of us know, and it's makes your rambling even more embarrassing.

 

[Mooneymite]

I hesitate to post....

To be honest, I post for two reasons. The first, it is fun. There are some very bright people that post on these threads and I enjoy the oppsoing view points. Second, I like speaking from personal experience and have been around to see the beast from the inside. I have seen unions from a different light than most people posting on this page. Nobody has ever written a book from the inside of the carrier out on what it is like to deal with a radical union. It's not an easy thing. I honestly believe that if anybody that is a staunch union supporter was to try and manage a pilot group from the inside, they would quickly change their tune. One must remember, that the same pilots that manage these large flight departments were once union members also. Unions will complain about "poor management", but they well never say that the same people they now complain about were also career pilots and former union members themselves. You need to ask yourself, why did they suddenly change? Why were these people that were once loyal union members now fighting against the union? Could it be that they now were living inside of the beast and saw the reality for the first time? I've worked in four large flight departments, and I've never worked with any senior management pilot that supported the union once they had to deal with it from the inside. I know that I can't be alone in this world on this subject, but I'm no longer handcuffed with my opinions because I don't hold the title of "Manager" any longer and I'm not in a union carrier. So, I enjoy the banter.

This union/non-union thread has all the earmarks of a Ford/Chevrolet argument...99% emotion.

I hesitate to even post, but B 19 has skewed certain facts in the above post and shouldn't go unchallenged. Just for the record, I am not a neophyte...I've been around the airline industry for more than 35 years and now work for a frac.

B19 maintains that union pilots who move up in management don't support unions. This may be partly true, but the larger truth is that pilots that get into management positions won't be permitted to move up if they support a union. Upper management would be stupid to pick anyone who doesn't sing from their songbook. Management looks for pilots who are willing to defecate on their fellow pilots. Once a pilot gets beyond LCA status, he isn't going to move up by being a pilot advocate. If B19 has the experience he claims he does, he got there by turning his back on his fellow pilots.

I had my fill of these management wanna-bees who would say or do anything in support of what they perceived as management goals. No morals, just unfettered ambition. It was fun to watch these guys fall on their swords when management pulled the rug out from under them!

I will tell you the truth. I don't like unions. I wish we could all work for enlightened management. However, industries where workers are paired with machines (assembly lines, mines, railroads, airlines, etc.) foster managements which treat the humans like they treat the machines.

Unions do not spring up because people naturally like to defy their employers. Unions spring up to counteract mis-treatment. Unions spring up because people like B19 are willing to do management's bidding without regard to what is "right".

Isn't it interesting to watch people who come from other professions...people who are initially anti-union, eventually come to recognize the need for unions and support their union after a short time at the airline?

Is it something in the cockpit air?

No, it is a sense of self-worth and self-preservation.

 

[Iam3rd]

This is very true. The carriers that were least unionized had the most opportunity to quickly react and hold off the inevitable for the longest period of time though. Those early salary cuts allowed troubled carriers to keep their non union workers on the property longer rather than use layoffs. This saved many jobs of those non-unionized and support employees giving them greater opportunities. Those that were heavily unionized were the first to take the deep cuts and furloughs because there was no other way to work around the contracts except through bankrupcty.

Yep....it was all the non-union carriers that seemed to weather the down turn and keep their jobs, same pay or slightly reduced pay, keep pensions, etc. While all the union carriers were laying off their pilots, reducing pay, taking away their pensions etc.. And not only that, but they had to pay thier union dues to have all that stuff taken away. Does not seem to be a very good return on your money. Seems to be a no brainer to me.

 

[Diesel]

Iam3rd gotta love you spewing statements with no facts to back them up. Evil unions. Pretty funny stuff.

The difference is that there pretty much aren't any non union carriers in aviation. When mgmt took away stuff they had they couldn't do much about it. Union pilots were the ones who gave concessions only to have the company throw it back in their faces by taking away their retirement too.

 

[gunfyter]

Yep....it was all the non-union carriers that seemed to weather the down turn and keep their jobs, same pay or slightly reduced pay, keep pensions, etc. While all the union carriers were laying off their pilots, reducing pay, taking away their pensions etc.. And not only that, but they had to pay thier union dues to have all that stuff taken away. Does not seem to be a very good return on your money. Seems to be a no brainer to me.

I didn't know Southwest was non union?

 

[Iam3rd]

Iam3rd gotta love you spewing statements with no facts to back them up. Evil unions. Pretty funny stuff.

The difference is that there pretty much aren't any non union carriers in aviation. When mgmt took away stuff they had they couldn't do much about it. Union pilots were the ones who gave concessions only to have the company throw it back in their faces by taking away their retirement too.

ok Diesel.....I will go so far as to say you are correct in your statement "The difference is that there pretty much aren't any non union carriers in aviation". But there is a difference in the carriers that had to furlough, reduce pay, take away pensions, ect. That is they had a formal union. The carriers that did not have to furlough, reduce pay, take away pensions etc. did not have a formal union. You can say all that you want, but that is the common thread!!! Not having the formal union allowed the company to make quick decisions that was better for the whole company, which in turn allowed pilots to keep their jobs. As apose to being bound by a contract and having to go into negotiations that took forever. Mean while the company was sinking faster and faster into a black hole. Only for pilots to start getting furloughed.....loosing pensions....etc.

Its hard enough for a carrier to weather a bad economic turn. But a carrier that is also bound by union contracts will have a much harder time coming out of it. And its empoyees will pay more dearly by loosing jobs, pensions, pay, etc. than a non-union carrier.......say all that you want, but the facts, history books and numbers speak for themselves.