What SHOULD Regional Airline Pilots Make?

[pilotyip]

What ever the market will bear, lets start a regional airline where F/O's start at $100K/yr. All those ready to invest please get this project off the ground,

 

[Kalifornia]

What ever the market will bear, lets start a regional airline where F/O's start at $100K/yr. All those ready to invest please get this project off the ground,

The karma market says you got what you deserved.

 

[tomgoodman]

Moving target

The karma market says you got what you deserved.

It's true that when you make an unwise move, Karma will return fire with an unpleasant consequence. The problem is that Karma's aim is imperfect, and it may hit someone else instead.

 

[homerjdispatch]

What ever the market will bear, lets start a regional airline where F/O's start at $100K/yr. All those ready to invest please get this project off the ground,

Exactly! Markets dictate what pay is... If people arent willing to work for a certain wage, wages increase...If the comany cannot bear the finacial burden of the costs of business then they need to either lower the costs, or close the doors. From a stockholder/owner perspective, id say pay them as little as possible, while maintaining a productive and satisfied (notice i didnt say happy) work force. From an employee perspective, id say pay me in gold bricks...

Where is the happy medium?

 

[redflyer65]

Easy : $50,000 FO
$100,000 captain
Starting

That's funny, those are the exact numbers I thought about when I read the title. Spot on.

 

[pilotyip]

Exactly! Markets dictate what pay is... If people arent willing to work for a certain wage, wages increase...If the comany cannot bear the finacial burden of the costs of business then they need to either lower the costs, or close the doors. From a stockholder/owner perspective, id say pay them as little as possible, while maintaining a productive and satisfied (notice i didnt say happy) work force. From an employee perspective, id say pay me in gold bricks...

Where is the happy medium?

nice touch of reality

 

[Flyprdu]

From a stockholder/owner perspective, id say pay them as little as possible, while maintaining a productive and satisfied (notice i didnt say happy) work force.

Ugh. More free-market nihilism.

This is a cross post from another thread:

It's so disappointing that it has become morally acceptable that corporations have no social obligation to its citizens. I'm not just talking about what's good for the country. It's also good for business.

Companies should have an obligation to keep wages commensurate with the existing quality of life and cost of living in order to sustain and promote their own consumer base. By stripping their own employees of decent wages and benefits... they've eroded their own bottom lines. Short term gain in cost savings. Long term disaster in net revenue.

The financial bungling by the wealthy elites have eliminated the power of 'free-market hiring' by tanking the economy; an employment shortage is the furthest thing from reality. Meanwhile, they use the crisis as a further excuse to drive wages down.

We are in the death throws of a plutocratic revolution. And they have the low-intelligent people convinced to look into the mirror, point, and say "You're the problem!"
_________________________________________

A union worker, a member of the Tea Party, and a CEO are sitting at a table. In the middle of the table there is a plate with a dozen cookies on it. The CEO reaches across the table, takes 11 cookies, looks at the Tea Bagger and says: "Look out for that union guy, he wants a piece of your cookie."

 

[homerjdispatch]

Ugh. More free-market nihilism.

This is a cross post from another thread:

It's so disappointing that it has become morally acceptable that corporations have no social obligation to its citizens. I'm not just talking about what's good for the country. It's also good for business.

Companies should have an obligation to keep wages commensurate with the existing quality of life and cost of living in order to sustain and promote their own consumer base. By stripping their own employees of decent wages and benefits... they've eroded their own bottom lines. Short term gain in cost savings. Long term disaster in net revenue.

The financial bungling by the wealthy elites have eliminated the power of 'free-market hiring' by tanking the economy; an employment shortage is the furthest thing from reality. Meanwhile, they use the crisis as a further excuse to drive wages down.

We are in the death throws of a plutocratic revolution. And they have the low-intelligent people convinced to look into the mirror, point, and say "You're the problem!"
_________________________________________

A union worker, a member of the Tea Party, and a CEO are sitting at a table. In the middle of the table there is a plate with a dozen cookies on it. The CEO reaches across the table, takes 11 cookies, looks at the Tea Bagger and says: "Look out for that union guy, he wants a piece of your cookie."

Did you read right past the line about keeping the employee satisfied???


Typical socialistic response... of course if it were your company its how you would run it, right? If you answer yes, then obviously you have either never owned your own business with employees, or two, the business failed miserably because costs were out of hand and no one would pay the exorbitant cost of your product.

 

[Flyprdu]

Did you read right past the line about keeping the employee satisfied???


Typical socialistic response... of course if it were your company its how you would run it, right? If you answer yes, then obviously you have either never owned your own business with employees, or two, the business failed miserably because costs were out of hand and no one would pay the exorbitant cost of your product.

You contradicted yourself... you said you'd pay them as low as you could, or keep them satisfied. Which is it? Can't be both.

And here's the collective failure of no-holds barred capitalism. If a company does the socially responsible thing, and pay your employees a decent wage so they can be a consuming force in the economy, you will get destroyed by competitors who will not play by the rules and ship all the work out to the lowest bidder.

So then end result is we have lots of cheap products, but it doesn't matter. Consumers won't be making enough to buy your goods anyway.

So we all go out of business. But if you were ruthless enough to shaft your own country, you're probably unscrupulous enough to pay yourself 7 figures for your ingenuity. So who cares if the whole thing burns?

 

[homerjdispatch]

You contradicted yourself... you said you'd pay them as low as you could, or keep them satisfied. Which is it? Can't be both.

And here's the collective failure of no-holds barred capitalism. If a company does the socially responsible thing, and pay your employees a decent wage so they can be a consuming force in the economy, you will get destroyed by competitors who will not play by the rules and ship all the work out to the lowest bidder.

So then end result is we have lots of cheap products, but it doesn't matter. Consumers won't be making enough to buy your goods anyway.

So we all go out of business. But if you were ruthless enough to shaft your own country, you're probably unscrupulous enough to pay yourself 7 figures for your ingenuity. So who cares if the whole thing burns?

.

I guess reading comprehension isnt your stongest attribute... What i said was, "pay them as little as possible, while maintaining a productive and satisfied (notice i didnt say happy) work force." There is no contradiction. Let me explain it another way... Pay the employees what they need to be satisfied and productive. Nothing more, nothing less. If the employee goes above and beyond what was asked then that should be rewarded in forms of bouses or other means of compensation.

 

[Flyprdu]

.

I guess reading comprehension isnt your stongest attribute... What i said was, "pay them as little as possible, while maintaining a productive and satisfied (notice i didnt say happy) work force."

Oh I saw what you wrote. I think it's a false notion.

It's certainly not what's happening in the real world.

 

[homerjdispatch]

Oh I saw what you wrote. I think it's a false notion.

It's certainly not what's happening in the real world.

Whats false about it? That it happens or that its possible? It is possible, but i dont see it happening in many places.

 

[pilotyip]

You contradicted yourself... you said you'd pay them as low as you could, or keep them satisfied. Which is it? Can't be both.

Hey how about you tell management you want to work one day a month for $100K/mo. You say management would pay you $20K for 28 days work. You know that is not true. They could not attract talented pilots such as your self to maintain their operations. Management has to balance between the two to ensure the bottom line and employee expectations to come up with a workable number. As stated before I am a former union member whose airlines are now out of business. Unions at profitable companies like UPS can ensure the company shares fairly with the employees. It is a process to balance numbers. At marginally profitable airlines unions can do little to force a greater sharing. BTW If you have the answers to your problems you should go into management and make the company a better place to work.

 

[mrnolmts]

Interesting to see how many of you have so little self-worth...

 

[pilotyip]

Interesting to see how many of you have so little self-worth...

How does one determine self-worth, is it internal or is it external to be determined by someone else who possess the power of a supreme being? Am I unemployed and take a low paying job to feed my family, or am I making $250K/yr and have $1M in the bank. The answers will be different.

 

[Flyprdu]

How does one determine self-worth, is it internal or is it external to be determined by someone else who possess the power of a supreme being? Am I unemployed and take a low paying job to feed my family, or am I making $250K/yr and have $1M in the bank. The answers will be different.

Here's my beef, Willow. Let's say management says I'm worth 20k. But yet they pull down at least 50 times that. Is their time 50 times more valuable than mine? Really? 50 times??

 

[COOPERVANE]

Here's my beef, Willow. Let's say management says I'm worth 20k. But yet they pull down at least 50 times that. Is their time 50 times more valuable than mine? Really? 50 times??

Unfortunately the people making 50 times our wages are the very same people who decide how much they are going to compensate themselves.

In this new century, they have been successful in convincing the shareholders that they must be compensated so highly to "attract the best and the brightest" While the middle class just keeps shrinking.

I don't know what will have to happen to reverse this trend

http://i257.photobucket.com/albums/hh208/codeblue_2008/paygraphic.jpg

 

[Flyprdu]

In this new century, they have been successful in convincing the shareholders that they must be compensated so highly to "attract the best and the brightest" While the middle class just keeps shrinking.

It's easy to convince "shareholders" these days. Most investments are institutionally owned. A phone call to a couple fund managers ought to do the trick for a nice raise.

 

[BobbyBiplane]

Nothing. Clearly reional pilots are both stubipd and inept (read mainline plot opinion and press pieces. Since regional pilots are both idiots and inept pilots, they should not be paid.

After 25,000 regional, mainline, exprimental flight test and militaryhours, since I prefer regional flying, I too, must be an idiot too.

 

[pilotyip]

Here's my beef, Willow. Let's say management says I'm worth 20k. But yet they pull down at least 50 times that. Is their time 50 times more valuable than mine? Really? 50 times??

Why is every time, pilot salaries come up, they are immediately compared to top management. I saw an article in ATW in 2001 that stated at DAL there were 17 members of top management made more than the top DAL Captain. The combined top 17 salaries equaled less than 1/6 of 1% of the combined pilot salaries. If management worked for free all pilots in the company would get a 1/10 of 1% raise. (for a $100K per year pilot that would be $3/wk increase in take home) Boy that raise would really make the pilot group happy. It is obscene what some of the CEO's pay themselves, but what would fix that, a gov't reg on how much money someone can make? Now I will agree that CEO leadership in many cases leaves much to be desired. An issue of ATW in 2002 had an article about “Airline Management a dying breed”, the article basically said no one wants to do it. The good track record CEO’s are going to other industries. With tremendous, payrolls, overhead burdens, and extremely low margins, there is no tried and true path to success. Most have tried to increase market share, but this has lead to low price and ridiculous breakeven load factors in 95% range. What is management supposed to do? Eliminating management will bring the end quicker for the airplane industry, and their salaries are insignificant to the airlines operating costs. Without management you could not operate the airline, The FAA would shut it down without approved Part 119 key management. Would the pilots step up and become management for free in their spare time?