I don't see many/any of the FTO's mentioning the down side of working for the LCCs, they are too busy plastering pictures of sunglass wearing "graduates" across their websites to mention all the realities....so despite the bickering maybe this thread is doing some good.
Looking at the Three car brochures I have on the desk in front of me, none of them have pictures of a harassed driver, running late for an appointment, and stuck in snail pace queue of traffic on the local motorway/freeway, with torrential rain pouring down outside. Whilst I do not doubt Mr Mercedes product is broadly as described in the brochure, I doubt selling it, is enhanced by portraying the reality of the likely customers experience within minutes of driving one out of the showroom. Indeed if I was paying for "glossy brochures," before a single penny changed hands I would want my product to reflect a message that portrays success on every page. Welcome to the commercial world of capitalism!
I agree with many of the commentators here and particularly those that understand how the market has evolved. It isn't necessary to hate or applaud that evolution in order to understand it. Parts of it are indeed vulgar, but of course "vulgar" sells, which is often why those exemplar companies have done very well out of it. As with most walks of life, the revolution in communication, and particularly mass market accessible communication, has stripped away the mystery, glamour and aura, that once shrouded the occupation called "airline pilot" from the masses. The romance of the job crucially depended on the shroud that those factors were an intrinsic part of. Today you can flick through your 250 channel TV subscription and watch any number of "Airline" type shows edited to show the
glamour of tired, fed up, mishandled, abusive, passengers and crew doing a
day-in day-out job that is routine. The characters change but the scripts are almost identical from one programme to the next.
You can log on to any number of websites and social media and find out how much your neighbours house is worth or how much he or she earns. If something happens at an airport or on a flight it will be transferred from someone's (anyone's) camera equipped phone to hundreds of thousands of people before the paperwork has even been started. "lo-cost" a term that is representative of the global airline scene in the new Millennium, yet some would labour under the illusion that the term should be "lo-Cost except my salary and T&C's." Over the last 30 years flying got safer. Flying got cheaper. Flying got easier. There have been huge improvements in many aspects of the job. Technology introduced its own set of problems, but without doubt it brought radical improvements in safety, cost, and efficiency.
The 4 crew flight deck of the Fifties and Sixties became the Three crew flight deck of the Sixties and Seventies. Then the Two crew flight deck of the Eighties and Nineties. Then regulation stopped any advancement on that score, so the attention turned to reducing the input costs of the incumbents of those flight decks. Potential new First Officers were queuing around the block for the opportunity to sit in that seat. They were prepared and willing to assume the entire risk element of training themselves at the best schools for the chance of a shot at the major league. Where once "self improvers" needed at least 700 hours for a "non-approved" CPL/IR to start their journey over the commercial stepping stone jobs to the big league, so licencing changes meant that anybody with "250 hours and a dream" could think they were in with a chance. As a result tens if not hundreds of thousands decided that this was the career for them. The supply massively outstripped the demand (or even the most optimistic projection of demand), and still continues to this day.
In the days when flying was expensive, there were far less opportunities available and far fewer people as a proportion chasing those opportunities. The "glamour" jobs where you spent a week in a four/five star hotel with a team of crewmembers twice a month, are a rarity these days. Airlines want maximum"
bang for their buck" and if they have to assume this sort of cost they will do so for the minimum level of time and price point.
Lo-Co's would choke on their breakfast if their operations didn't maximize every potentially productive hour they could squeeze from any cost clawed out of their vice like grip. This is their lifeblood, their very
raison d'être.
In 1974 there were a few really good jobs, a lot of mediocre ones, and some very poor ones. That was true in 1984, 1994, 2004, and today! The names have changed (in some cases) and the T&C's have changed. The better ones attract what they see as the best people. With so many people clamouring at the door that is a bar they can set at whatever level suits them. Nothing new, this has always been the case.
The clever and the wise research the market they are proposing entering. They take the time to understand the history and the evolution of what they intend to participate in (or not.) They may agree, disagree, accept or reject the advice given or sought, but they would be wise to listen. Despite that, there are no guarantees, and luck will always be a significant ingredient of success. Of course the option is to simply rail against the world and highlight how unfair your life is. If I were to invent an adjective for the latter, it would be ......to
truckflyer oneself.