UAL hiring soon?

[ualdriver]

Got it. Its JB rates. And to think for a moment I though that billion dollar swing had to do with fuel prices almost trippling, the dot com 90's going "poof", the last minute business traveller willing to pay anything anytime out of his unlimited travel expense account going away and a recession, a war and a new security paradigm burden the likes of which our nation had never seen. I now see it is primarily our fault. It is we who set the pay ceiling, and you who set the floor.

Not just JB rates, as I have posted REPEATEDLY. I’m talking JB and UA because I’m UA and you’re JB.

Fuel has nothing to do with pilot rates. We all pay for fuel so it’s a constant among all airlines. It would be ridiculous for any airline’s management to say, “our fuel costs are high so therefore your pay has to come down.” I don’t think anyone has, either. All the things you mentioned did not make UA, for example, have to pay its Airbus pilots JB pay rates. If everyone is paying the same for their pilots, it doesn’t matter if oil goes to 100 bucks a barrel or the economy slips into recession. It may affect the AMOUNT of flying that we all do, but it should not affect pay rates if everyone is paid the same. What does affect narrowbody pay rates, however, is when we have many competitors paying rates that are significantly below industry norm and using those rates to subsidize their company’s bottom line. That’s what happened in the early 2000’s when the economy took a dump, and that’s what I fear will happen when Skybus, Virgin, and the inevitable copy cats come along and reach critical mass themselves.

 

[ualdriver]

I spoke to a couple United pilots last week who seemed to think they'd be hiring, or at least interviewing, by the end of the summer. That coincides with what I have observed and been told by my United connections in recent months. UAL has a lot of appeal for me too, primarily because of their bases and my disdain for commuting. However I am nervous about how pro-merger the management seems to be. They don't seem to really care about the employees or the customers. Guess only time will tell.

jr

The chance of UAL merging with another is something one applying to UAL might want to consider. I guess I really don't have to tell anyone how the bottom of either airline's seniority list can be hurt if a merger were to occur.

 

[a319stud]

did anyone read all that? or did they skip to this post? college essays ended long ago.

 

[IronCityBlue]

Thank God for CLiff's notes

did anyone read all that? or did they skip to this post? college essays ended long ago.

Yeah, basically he was all like "my airline can beat up your airline" and I was like "I know you are but what am I?" Then he was all like "your momma so fat she jumped up in the air and got stuck!" And I was all like "Oh, no you didn't!"

 

[ualdriver]

Yeah, basically he was all like "my airline can beat up your airline" and I was like "I know you are but what am I?" Then he was all like "your momma so fat she jumped up in the air and got stuck!" And I was all like "Oh, no you didn't!"

All you have to do, Iron, is read the first paragraph. In Post 18, second paragraph, third sentence you wrote (and I summarize) that you were "alarmed" about pilot pay rates at Skybus and Virgin. Why did you spend PAGES trying to convince me that the LCC airlines, like JetBlue, were not responsible for the downward spiral of airline pilot wages in the U.S., yet say that you are alarmed about the pay rates at Skybus and Virgin? Why be alarmed, Iron? Surely JetBlue (and others with their pathetic pay early 2000 rates and retirments) had nothing to do with the industry having to come down to wages that "coincidentally" ended up looking a lot like JetBlue, Frontier's, and AirTran's. (+/- a few %'s)

In closing, don't be alarmed, Iron. Skybus and Virgin and Allegiant and their future copycats will do NOTHING to harm your pay rates or ours. Just as JetBlue's (and the other LCC's) did nothing to harm the rates at AMR, CAL, UAL, etc., etc. Don't worry when Virgin starts ops out of SFO in direct competition with your transcon flights. Don't worry that your JetBlue Captain ALONE will be making more than the entire flight crew on that Virgin Airplane. If JetBlue can't compete against that huge cost disadvantage, you can blame it on such things as "poor JetBlue management decisions" and such, like the LCC guys blame the legacy managements in the post 9/11 world.

I sincerely wish you guys good luck as I have friends over there who have had rough careers and don't need what I suspect will start to happen this summer when Virgin and Skybus start ops. Virgin, in particular, is going to undercut you guys on every transcon market they compete against you in, and you're going to need help. We are too.

 

[Jonny Sacko]

Well I won't! I fly the RJ.




Just kiddin, I could'n't resist.

 

[HA25]

There are a few factors weighing down on wages at the legacies, and the legacies themselves.

in order:

-Oil prices
-LCC that pay less of if not pay less, get a lot more productivity (AirTran, Spirit, Frontier, VA, JB, SkyBus, et al)
-LCC's that are well managed like WN with one type, and lower costs due to economies of scale and lower training costs for all employees.
-anti-union sentiments in our country and with in our profession.. people just don't get it, unions ARE NEEDED.. in this profession where there are 3 top shelf applications for ever job!

 

[IronCityBlue]

Page 2, paragraph 18, line 3, etc.

In consideration for all those with ADD who don't usually bring themselves to read any post over one page (myself included most of the time) I will limit my response to the specific charge of hyppocracy for which you called me out on.

Yes, I am alarmed by SB and VA pay rates. There are many carriers, recent start up and well established, who pay on par with VA/SB though, and although disturbing, I am not alarmed about. Here's why: From the dawn of the airline industry til now, without a time period of exception, almost every start up and LCC model has falied. Some right out of the box, others years or decades later. But they almost all fail. Always have, always will, regardless of their pay rates (or lack thereof).

That being said, 100% of all start up/LCC's had relatively low pay, yet the vast majority still wound up not making it. In many cases being absolutely crushed by legacy airlines with dramaticaly higher pay. If pilot pay is the single, most overwhelmingly dominant variable (more so than oil, terror and all the other variables) then start up/LCC's should have a much higher success rate.

Many airline today have very low pay. Although worthy of noting, the rates of Allegiant, MaxJet, SunCountry, Champion, Chautauqua/SkyWest/Mesa (for their 86-100 certified seat turbojet rates) and many others, do not alarm me nearly as much as the similar rates for SB/VA. The reasons are similar, but differ enough I will state them seperately.

Virgin America really worries me, not simply because of their 95/hr pay rates for A319/320's but because they have unlimited deep pockets, a foreign owner/controller 100% in charge (despite the fake charade of holding companies that's set up) and its schoolyard playground mission in life to be a permanant player in our domestic system. Not to mention, they are a legacy right out of the box. That has never happened before. Start ups always pay less because they have to in order to survive. As noble as it may seem to you or I, no start up is going to pay "UAL/JBU plus" at 12 year pay out of principal. On day one, VA will have brand recognition equal to or greater, all over the nation, than almost any other airline. Then, probably later this year, their unlimited Virgin Atlantic codeshare will be rubberstamped by our govt. and they will be an instant, out of the box, global legacy/high yield first class, brand powerhouse. So Allegiant paying a junior Captain 60-80/hr bothers me far, far less than VA, even if VA were paying legacy rates right off the bat, and of course they are not.

SkyBus worries me because they are on the abosute floor for pilot pay in the nation for what they will be flying, AND (much more importantly) they are incredibly well funded and are attempting to change the landscape of the domestic travel industry here. I do not know if they will be successful or not, but the Ryanair model, if it works here, will cause an implosion of our domestic travel system. All the rest of us will be caught with our pants down with no way to compete without radically re-engineering our products and business models, something no airline is too terribly good at doing.

SB can be stopped. Not by denying the J/S to their pilots, but by some good old fashioned, unofficial, off the books, gentelmans agreement hard core collusion. Each airline pick just a handful of their routes, eat the loss by undercutting them, hide the true cost via connections to places SB doesn't fly, and bury them. If we do not do this, and their Ryannair brand takes off, we're screwed, no matter how much they pay their pilots, but you are right, 65K/yr will definately accelerate the inevitable.

VA can not be stopped. Branson will bleed billions through his money to make this work, laundering money though fake companys and rubber stamping yes men "citizens" to make sure his will be done, in the US as it is in the UK, amen. So I have no solution for VA, but SB is something we can nip in the bud right now. But in typical airline management fashion, no one will really try until they get too big/self sustaining, and then it will be too late.

 

[HA25]

The problem will lie in the future when we see what kind of returns these new "Start ups" are making on the backs of their lower cost labor.. IF, they're not making money, we really can't say much to the pilots who are there hoping for a ground floor opportunity.. if on the other hand, VA, and Skybus start setting record quarterly profits on the backs of that cheap labor, then it will be time for a reckoning! In the end, what matters is how much your company makes and how much of that YOU get paid.. not what you fly, otherwise I should get paid $128/hr next year instead of $64!

 

[IronCityBlue]

The problem will lie in the future when we see what kind of returns these new "Start ups" are making on the backs of their lower cost labor.. IF, they're not making money, we really can't say much to the pilots who are there hoping for a ground floor opportunity.. if on the other hand, VA, and Skybus start setting record quarterly profits on the backs of that cheap labor, then it will be time for a reckoning! In the end, what matters is how much your company makes and how much of that YOU get paid.. not what you fly, otherwise I should get paid $128/hr next year instead of $64!

You are absolutely right V7, and in the interest of brevity I neglected to mention that extremely important variable. While ualpiot makes some compelling arguements, he/she is absolutely wrong with the assertion that as an individual or as a pilot group in general, the same rates would be demanded in pay negotiations regardless of the profitability or unprofitability of a company in question. Part of how hard you choke the golden goose depends on how many eggs you think it is able to give you. If UAL is losing money in 2009, or breaking even, or enjoying massive profits, you will see a different bargaining approach by their NC and it WILL effect what is denanded by labor, guaranteed. Same is true of every other airline out there.

To say that if your airline is making billions per quarter, or about to liquidate doesn't matter and you will insist on the same pay rates in either case as a matter of principal is clearly false.

Also to say that pilot/labor pay is the only swing variable, and that fuel, security fees, etc. are universal therefor the only thing effecting the success of an airline is labor pay is equally false. If fuel dropped to 20/barrel tomorrow, the profits of the airlines would soar, and every pilot group in negotiations would point to those profits as justification for higher pay. I know I would.

 

[HA25]

More over... the current state of the NMB, who REALLY hold the power of our negotiation in their hands (as a result of the GW presidency) is strongly of that view... what you fly matters not! what your airline earns on that flight is what rules your paycheck! thus how WN pays more than UAL etc..

 

[IronCityBlue]

Nmb/rla

More over... the current state of the NMB, who REALLY hold the power of our negotiation in their hands (as a result of the GW presidency) is strongly of that view... what you fly matters not! what your airline earns on that flight is what rules your paycheck! thus how WN pays more than UAL etc..

You're right about the NMB. Sometimes getting released (or the imminant threat of being released) to a 30 day cooling off period is the only thing that forces management to negotiate. But the NMB holds ALL the cards on that one. Many people don't realize that if you ask for what the mediator personally thinks is "too much" you will not be released. As for the GW comment, I honestly don't see that much of a difference in mediators appointed by either party. Ones appointed by dems tend to hold you in your status quo for 3-4 years, while ones appointed by reps hold you out for 3-5 years. Its the RLA itself that needs reforming, and not via some management skewed "baseball" arbitration.

It should be if you contract is up, you can strike in 30 days, period. I'd even add a law saying travel agents/company web sites, etc must inform all pax at time of ticket purchase of any and every labor group who'se contract will be expired by more than 30 days anytime during the range of the customer's reservation, notifying the customer that a strike may occur at any time, and do they still want to purchase the ticket? They would have to say or click yes to proceed.

That actually would provide better protection and travel predictability for the traveling public than the existing system that only gives customers 30 days notice of a potential strike, oftentimes after they already bought their tickets. In addition to protecting the customer, it would give management a powerful reason to want to get contracts done instead of abusing the system that's unfairly in their favor.

 

[UAL-GSO]

I spoke to a couple United pilots last week who seemed to think they'd be hiring, or at least interviewing, by the end of the summer. That coincides with what I have observed and been told by my United connections in recent months. UAL has a lot of appeal for me too, primarily because of their bases and my disdain for commuting. However I am nervous about how pro-merger the management seems to be. They don't seem to really care about the employees or the customers. Guess only time will tell.

jr

Just a hunch, but if a merger with UAL and _________ goes through, it probably won't be long before every other major tries to follow suit. I wouldn't waste too much time trying to predict the future - pick your favorite and take your shot! Management not withstanding, we have a good airline with a lot of great people. With any luck, it is only going to get better. Best of luck to you!

 

[ualdriver]

Iron, your posts just reinforce my point. You're concerned about low pilot pay at entry level airlines, but you spend 2 pages trying to convince me and anyone else reading that LCC pay had nothing to do with the hurt that was put on legacy pay, work rules, and retirement. Sorry man. You can't argue both ways. You're either concerned or you're not. I suggest that you be concerned. Very concerned.

Here's why you and I could be potentially be screwed in 5 to 10 years, cabotage aside. I fear airlines like Skybus and Virgin because they have learned lessons from the past. They're now well capitalized, they operate modern aircraft that can operate in any domestic market we fly, and they can use discount airline labor to subsidize their bottom line and amplify their staying power in any market. That's why the Western Pacifics and Vanguards of the world failed in the past at high rates, and they learned. With labor costs approximately 20% of an airline's total cost and the largest controllable cost, it will become impossible for JetBlue, for example, to compete with Skybus or Virgin (or the copycats coming) long term.

So, as these airlines grow and gain a few hundred airplanes, JetBlue is going to have to do one of two things. One, pull out of direct competition with these airlines and try to find markets where they can "hide" or compete on points other than cost (good luck). Or two, come to the employees and say, "Look, we aren't competitive with these new, nimble, LCC carriers and we have to face reality. We have to change our business, remodel our wage structure, or ultimately perish." Sound familiar? It does to me.

Good luck Iron. No ill will here as I enjoy a good debate, but I suspect longterm downward pressure on all of our wages. Again.

 

[TAWS]

SB can be stopped. Not by denying the J/S to their pilots, but by some good old fashioned, unofficial, off the books, gentelmans agreement hard core collusion. Each airline pick just a handful of their routes, eat the loss by undercutting them, hide the true cost via connections to places SB doesn't fly, and bury them. If we do not do this, and their Ryannair brand takes off, we're screwed, no matter how much they pay their pilots, but you are right, 65K/yr will definately accelerate the inevitable.

Why would UAL mngt, or anyone else do this??

SB flies to all the sh!tty, out of the way places in the country. Keeping them around gives all the mngt types out there an excuse to say "these rates are the new industry standard".