I'm intrigued by your statement that standardisation leads to low-pay. Surely the only way a system is ever going to lead to low-pay is if it becomes easier to pass, thus attracting, and retaining, low quality candidates.
...
The military flying training system (UK) is standardised beyond belief, but that does not make it any easier to pass.
I hear you and Scroggs on this. The way I see it is that the Military is not standardised because they do things differently from everyone else! I am talking about the standardisation of an industry. The JAA, will IMHO, see to it that there is only one way to run an airline. That means standard computer systems in ops and on the deck. Standard forms. Standard SOPs. Standardised instrumentation. All to a greater or lesser degree. This must surely lead to a much greater level of automation and 'hands-off' procedures.
I concur, I think I have made a bit of leap in saying that this will erode the status of the job; but I think that, in time, this broad brush effect will open the flight deck to a greater number of people - as traditional flying skills become more and more irrelevant.
May I add that, as I previously stated, I still know sod all about aviation but that I am only drawing on my experience of a similar effect taking place in the IT industry. The need for software developers to know how things work as nearly disappeared. With the advent of decent standards in the industry nearly everybody is expected to one of two standards: a) .NET b) J2EE. This allows employers to pick and choose more readily rather that having to search for someone with knowledge of their specific needs. Now employers can choose to ask for very specific skills rather than having it foisted upon them?
I am finding it difficult to put my precise thoughts into words on this. Probably a clue that I am confusing myself now
