Airline pilots deserve to be paid more

[Oakape]

So here is an airline pilot who considers himself a technician, not a pilot. My belief that a lot of those coming through the industry can't really fly just keeps being reinforced. The fear for the future intensifies. Never mind, they will continue to design the pilot out of the cockpit. With technology these days, nothing can go wrong go wrong go wrong.

Now, how are they going on the redesign of the 'flawed' Boeing autothrottle system?

When I retire I'll be going by train or ship thanks. Better yet, I'll just stay home.

[Centaurus]

Airline pilots have huge responsibility, we always have. Problem is we have forgotten how much and "downplayed" our true worth. I'm not sure why?

I tell you what concerns me about some of the pilots nowadays in the airlines. True examples,
Very experienced 737 co-pilot going into Sydney 34 with 15 knot crosswind says to captain "I am not very good at crosswind landings - I'd rather you do it".

Another 737 co-pilot given a leg into Sydney in CAVOK asks the captain for his permission to hand fly the ILS. The captain said "no - stick to the automatics - it's safer that way."

Co-pilot asks if she can switch off the flight director during a climb to keep in raw data practice. Captain refuses - saying "its safer to keep the FD on."

Co-pilot given a leg into Hobart on CAVOK day involving right hand visual downwind for 30. Goes heads down to programme waypoints around the circuit. Captain says its a visual approach - forget programming circuit waypoints - just look outside and fly a normal circuit. Copilot not happy and says he had never done a visual into Hobart as most captains he flies with prefer to do the leg into Hobart themselves. He tells the captain he prefers if the captain flies it.

Copilot given leg into Melbourne 34 with 20 knot headwind. Selects autobrake 3. Captain says autobrake not needed just use normal reverse and manual braking with this headwind. Copilot says "I'd rather use autobrakes as I'm out of practice at manual braking.

And the OP claims pilots have "downplayed" their true worth?

[framer]

And all of that is the result of what Centaurus?
And all of that will result in what?

[Pastor of Muppets]

Centaurus, I usually have the utmost respect for you, your writings and your example.

However, for the few extremely rare stories, that have no doubt been exaggerated by countless relays, that you regurgitate; I bet I could give you hundreds of examples of very competent and confident FOs that do a great job and would make fine captains if it were not for the "airline numbers game"

We have lawyers, accountants and every other "good 'ole Aussie poppy chopper" working against us; the last thing we need is one of our own slagging us too. Particularly one of us that is so well regarded. You can do better Sir.

[ACMS]

Well this is going well

Oh and for those that think I'm paid too much, what's stopping you getting my qualifications and experience? Then you too could try to have a job like mine.

Until then........

[Hempy]

If I own a $400,000,000 aircraft, and that aircraft costs around $60,000/hour to fly, I'm pretty sure I am not going to pay a monkey to fly it...


Unless it has the appropriate ratings and endorsements

[Judd]

I bet I could give you hundreds of examples of very competent and confident FOs that do a great job and would make fine captains if it were not for the "airline numbers game"

Obviously writing with constraints on word limit it is not possible to cover all angles on a topic. But from reading the comments by Centaurus all he did was to offer a few examples from the airline industry where some of the pilots concerned who are flying jet transports are clearly nervous of the aircraft they are second in command on. That is not a good look for the airlines concerned. Are these the pilots where the OP suggests they should be paid more money for doing such a responsible job as second in command if the captain becomes incapacitated?

If a PPL or CPL candidate told an ATO that he would rather not demonstrate a crosswind landing because he isn't very good at them or he would rather not do a visual approach during an instrument rating test, then the ATO would have no choice but to fail the candidate and tell him to buy himself more hands-on training before presenting for another flight test. Yet the airline training system ticks the boxes and lets them loose in the RH seat. Eventually they become captains. No doubt the majority of captains and first officers do a wonderful job and deserve a reasonable dollar but it is the weak link among some flight crew that should concern us all.

[Oakape]

Hit the nail on the head Judd, although there was reference to Captains as well, which is possibly the greatest concern.

Pastor of Muppets, perhaps if you took a little time to carefully read & comprehend the post by Centaurus and then consider it in the context of the overall thread, you might just understand his point, rather than getting your back up needlessly.

[Pastor of Muppets]

Fair enough.
I shall keep my opinion to myself and I shall endeavour to bring my own craft into disrepute for all to read.
Who needs enemies when we have one another?
Incidentally, I think air transport in Australia is wonderfully safe. There are many responsible for such a fine record, including Australia's pilots which, excluding the negativity of the few twisted old souls apparent, appear to have the confidence of Traveling Australians

[Oakape]

Oh, for crying out loud! We are not bagging the good ones, of which there are still many in the ranks. We are voicing concern over the increasing numbers of those that leave a lot to be desired.

And as for the "negativity of the few twisted old souls apparent" comment, you should try sitting in my seat when the other guy tries to kill you & all those behind you, in a 20kt crosswind with no gusts & no turbulence. He prides himself on his crosswind landings you know.

What do they say? That's right - 'Ignorance is bliss'.

[Pastor of Muppets]

Sir, again, with respect. I have been sitting in your coveted seat for the past 12 years. Though hardly a full innings, I feel somewhat qualified to comment on the current state of affairs. I hate to disagree but from what I have seen, the picture is great! Sorry if that's a little too positive for you but that's my opinion.

[Greenlights]

FRamers, yes, sorry, I do consider it as technician.
Pilot was a a correct term in the 60's... Now we are lucky being helped by FMGS, screens everywhere, colors, and so on. If you can not admit that, it' s because you influenced by your emotions and passion.
Even if we can still do some handsflying, it's not the main part of the job and you know it as I know it.
What's the problem to call a pilot by a general term technician ? There is nothing pejorative guys.
Many of you seem to have a little an ego no (which we can find in cockpits mroe and more) ? Please, relax and try to be a bit objective, avoid to let your passion emotion filling you.

A technician is a worker in a field of technology who is proficient in the relevant skills and techniques, with a relatively practical understanding of the theoretical principles. Wikipedia source.

An engineer is a professional practitioner of engineering, concerned with applying scientific knowledge, mathematics, and ingenuity to develop solutions for technical, societal and commercial problems. Engineers design materials, structures, and systems while considering the limitations imposed by practicality, regulation, safety, and cost.

Do we create things ? I don't think so.

so, Framers, 2 years ago, guess what, people change and grow up . Yes I see the job as a job who requires technician relevant skills but no more.

[deadcut]

Greenlights,

What are you even talking about? Engineers and technicians? Who here has said anything about engineers? Except for you.

Pilots are just that. Pilots. There is no other way to describe it. The aircraft that I hand fly for up to 7 hours a day have no autopilot. Am I still a pilot or am I a technician? Or an engineer? (wat)

No, we do not create things. Who said pilots do? What are you even talking about?

[jas24zzk]

Pappa Smurf

Seeing most jobs are around 2,000 hours a year,i think they are well paid.

Seriously?

You are basing that on the 900 hrs per year limit (or whatever it got changed to in the interest of 'safety') ????

What about all the hours spent studying, keeping up with the regulation changes, learning new routes, procedural changes, A/C operational changes, company operational changes?

All of this expected to be known and recitable rote when you roll up for a sim or line check. How many hours out the 2000 you quote does the company allocate and pay for to achieve these required goals??

I'm not an airline pilot, so I can't actually answer that myself, but I reckon I have a pretty fair idea.

Of note...your 2000 hours per year....under the most basic of Oz awards, i.e 38 hours per week with 4 weeks off per year mathed out very roughly is 1824 hours....factor in standby time etc...........

I think pilots are paid the barest minimum for what is an extremely high skill set

[Wally Mk2]

Tradie

I've always looked at a pilot career as a Trade. I mean like any other trade you learn it as it's just a skill handing machinery etc with regulations in which to operate that machine in & then you work at it the rest of yr life (working life), I don't see all the fanfare about it all.
I apply my trade around 55 hrs a month (stick hrs, actual tools in hand) suits me perfectly:-)
There's always gunna be different levels of skills in any trade, no diff to pilots.

Sure the responsibility is higher due the numbers involved but that's all IMHO.

Wmk2

[framer]

FRamers, yes, sorry, I do consider it as technician.

Fair enough, I respect your opinion.

Pilot was a a correct term in the 60's... Now we are lucky being helped by FMGS, screens everywhere, colors, and so on.

Herein lies the difference in our opinions Greenlights, when my FMC goes dark (FMGS on your ship) and my screens go blank, and there are no longer any fancy colours, I will still 'pilot ' my aircraft , just like I used to.
I hadn't really thought about it before but maybe that's why there are differences of opinion on this, some of us used to 'pilot' the aircraft and expect that we will have to again at some stage due to malfunctions, while others assume that the automation won't let them down. Does that sound plausible?

What's the problem to call a pilot by a general term technician ?

no real problem, I just don't think it's accurate as I used to be an 'aircraft technician' and the two jobs are very different. One is about timely and judicious decision making while the other is about pulling out the manual and reading it over a coffee while half way through the job.
I do like the way your position has got me thinking though. Do you think your current role is more about decision making or automation management and monitoring?
Cheers,
Framer

[gileraguy]

All "professions" are restricted...

Medicos limit the number of graduates to regulate the market and hence keep up demand. Hey, they're the highest scorers on the Tertiary Examination and they're NOT stupid!

There are approximately 700 applicants for every advertised Legal Professional Position (in my state at least) and there are three institutions churning out graduates...(Low cost instructional infrastructure...)

Everyone loves a Fireman because of the physical fitness requirements.
Restriction via fitness?

The difference between Cops and Screws is that all prison guards want to be Policemen, but Policemen don't want to be prison guards. The State here psychometrically examines applicants to the force in order to reduce their exposure to stress claims.

There's huge demand for Chefs across Australia, and there's 457 incentives for them to come into the country as well, but the job has crap hours and the pay is ****.

If I'd got into banking I'd be right up there waiting for my manager to retire or die so I could have my time at the top.

life's not what it's cracked up to be.

This world is dog eat dog...

[InSoMnIaC]

I do like the way your position has got me thinking though. Do you think your current role is more about decision making or automation management and monitoring?

Took the words out of my mouth framer.

I consider my Job as a pilot much more than a technician. If a machine breaks down, a technician goes for a coffee break until someone fixes it. we don't have that luxury.

Even without any automation failures. Even with the autopilot engaged from 200' to an autoland, piloting an aircraft is more than just manipulating the controls. even a monkey can be trained to do that.

We get paid to manage every flight safely, economically and within the confines of the law. stick and rudder skills play a very small part of that.

If the sh!t hits the fan, our every time critical decision and action will be meticulously scrutinised by many people from their comfortably air conditioned offices who have all the time in the world to come up with a better way we should have handled the situation.

Our cock is truly on the block every single time we go to work. For this I think we should be compensated well.

It seems that Greenlights has a very FO way of thinking about flying. Ie just fly and leave the responsibility to someone else.

[minimum_wage]

Technology doesn't change the one thing that I believe sets apart from a technician and that is airmanship.

I agree the jets these days require less hands on skill, but it's the big picture that is still relevant and that requires someone with more than just technical proficiency. Just look how your sim checks are graded.

Guess it depends on your background and what you have flown previously to appreciate the technology we now have. But also that you trust it only to the point where you recognise when it's trying to kill you and you go back to basics learnt on less fancy machines.

Back to the original thread, I think everyone wants to get paid more.
If you take a job and know the pay then deal with it or vote with your feet. Seems to me your pay is proportional to your lifestyle, in that higher paid jobs overseas are that for a reason. The lifestyle isn't what you would get at home.

[Centaurus]

But also that you trust it only to the point where you recognise when it's trying to kill you and you go back to basics learnt on less fancy machines.

There are hundreds of recently graduated cadet pilots flying in many Asian and Middle Eastern airlines who are legally second in command of a Boeing 777 or A330. Add to that 90% of their jet transport simulator type rating would be monitoring the automatic pilot and automatic navigation systems. I very much doubt they would recognise when a jet transport is trying to kill you. Even if they did, going back to basics learned on a Cessna 172, Piper Warrior and a Piper Seminole will not help them if their jet transport is in a loss of control situation. After all, on graduation from their sponsored flying school they would have maybe 150 hours in a Warrior/ Cessna and 50 hours dual in a Seminole and a total of 75 hours VFR solo if they are lucky. Not much to fall back on is there?