Bigmouth-the situation at United might have included those factors (possibly among many others?), but United's pilots' MEC only spoke for United's pilots. Their situation and style back then has nothing to do with those who bargained for at least average pay and benefits. Delta was also in a very unique situation-they had received almost no cost of living increases for many years. Therefore, United and Delta pilots had significant pay raises, but not so at the other US majors.
ALPA does not operate like the powerful IG-Metall in Germany, which bargains for much of the country's industrial workers (not pilots). As for their "Vereinigung C0ckp1t", I know not. But over here, each company had, in the old days, and still has a unique situation. You might not believe that the ALPA regional JET pay for First Officers, is little above US minimum wage. You might research this well-kept secret among laymen.
As the most successful US airline, Southwest has been heavily unionized for many years. As has ben stated often on this august forum, Southwest's pilots are about the highest-paid 737 aviators in the world. But the airline was one of the few to have created mostly highly-productive crew duty days, from the first day. The pilots don't have ALPA (SWAPA), but nevertheless, many of the staff are unionized, and for a long time. Without some sort of valid union, history seems to indicate that no labor group will ever earn enough respect from an airline management, allowing a job to become a true career, without both sides having the power to negotiate. Handshakes are not effective with most companies. And it is very doubtful that the airline can become successful, in the mid to long term, without flightcrews' ability to point to a written contract and have something to look forward to-in writing. What if your wife, son or daughter develops a serious medical condition and your company, having no contract for your pilots, decides to "let" you now pay a large fraction of the now-exploding insurance premiums? There must be an agreement signed by both parties (in good faith) for certain mis-interpretations to go to arbitration. Otherwise, their (your?) management will never be able to do anything except make promises and half-truths. Many companies will pay you about the salary of a large truck/lorry driver to fly a large jet, but can you count on it as a career?
And safety will probably never be a priority, unless your company is committed to spending the necessary money, canceling any flight if need be. Safety is from the top down, with support for a Captain's decisions on whether to accept an aircraft or require repairs to be made (or MELs applied: if any Pprune reader does not understand what an MEL is, then he/she knows nothing about airline flight operations). US airline history is being written at this moment, and it would be quite a turnaround if my comments can all one day be contradicted.
Aviator: Interesting observation you made about other pilots enjoying the turmoil, and even some of them see no reason why ethics, implied by contracts, which were ALL accomplished by US managements' (oft-vigorously denied) "pattern bargaining", should compel them to honor their signed, legally-binding agreements
Some of those who sneer at any negative changes for the US industry either have never worked in the US industry (other than at the Bolivar, Cotton Belt, UND or Vero Beach schools etc), or are pilots from the United States who spent most of their careers flying under contracts in other lands, enjoying the benefits and apparently competitive pay (let's not name nicknames...
). But NOW, 'they' somehow have no sympathy that US pilots, who are still active and struggling through the industry's "flak-filled skies" ("so thick you could walk on it!"), should be able to plan on anything in our contracts, which unfortunately require mangement integrity, even though we hold up our side of the bargain under circumstances which threaten unpredictable fractions of our pay (not to mention family medical/dental benefits) and careers. Many on "Rumours and News" are not even pilots, but foreign mgmt. types who were probably denied their so-called US green (white) cards or work visas years ago. Such types are only self-centered, due to short-term professional goals (stock share price and profit-sharing gains, at others' painful expense), or see themselves as simply above the unlettered serfs and other yokels who train intensely (often must also focus intensely on the job) in order to prevent their multi-million dollar machines from having major pieces (or passengers) pulverized.
For those who are pilots here but not with a major, any glee (Schadenfreude) in their views about all this is quite ironic, because the US industry's major disruptions will have both a direct and many indirect influences on where their careers can go, due to furloughed pilots who bounce over to former corporate, charter companies (even jobs with the FAA), or already after 9/11 filled up flying slots with ANG, Air Force Reserve etc, even active duty military slots. Some are hired directly into F-27 Captain jobs and many others, allowing the companies to hold back their own experienced FOs from upgrading, due to their cost-saving ability to hire a Captain at first-year pay rates. Some of the overseas types are always angry that the US will not let them work here, but there is nothing that anybody here, outside of the govt., can do about it. Personally, I wish them all good luck, wherever they find a decent flying job, or possible career opportunity.
Our industry, along with certain British airlines, should also consider outsourcing both upper and middle managements (except for very good marketing people). Not the meek, but CPAs and lawyers seem to have 'inherited the earth'.
. Cost is the mantra. Are such types 'over there' often like the condescending, sniveling, yuppie Director on the English show, "Waiting for God"?
Imagine how much overhead expense they will save via outsourcing!