PDA

View Full Version : Pilot wages per hour, per passenger (Blue Singlets II)


Bendo
26th Aug 2003, 17:01
With reference to the discussion started by Kaptin M in the "Blue Singlets" thread.

Kaptin M, when working out wage costs for any business you have to add the "hidden" costs of employing; Super, holidays, Long Service Leave, training etc.

In the industry I am currently employed in, the average markup is 100% of the worker's wage. I would suggest that in Airlines the mark-up would be something similar (if not greater).

In GA you might use 125-150% of the employee's wage as an indicator of the total cost of employment given the lower standards of in-house training, facilities, leave allowances and other entitlements.

These factors make you worth twice as much per hour to the punter ;)

On a wider industrial note, people who watched Compass on the ABC as suggested by NG would have come accross the notion that we as a society have been drawn to the filthy lucre, the spoils and riches, the gadgets and trinkets made for us by the corporations of the world.

Most people out there are happy to get ahead by whatever means available and that ain't limited to pilots. There are many people in my workplace not members of the Union simply to save themselves $26 per week.

Reith, Howard, Abbot and Costello have the workers of this nation by the short and curleys and this situation has its genesis in 89 and the Patricks dispute. Either the workforce works it out and re-organises the labour force or we will find ourselves paid wages "competitive" with those in Indonesia.

There was once (30+ years ago) high regard for pilots AND a high level of unionisation amongst the pilot body. Might that be related to the fact that much of the airline middle management was ex- or current aircrew? (I dont know - any thoughts).

Have a good weekend...

:sad:

amos2
26th Aug 2003, 19:41
I see the Poms have no interest in this subject!...

but then again, why are we not surprised...?

permFO
26th Aug 2003, 20:06
As always Amos "What the....."

bitter balance
26th Aug 2003, 21:51
Bendo, there is little doubt that the Patrick's dispute changed the industrial landscape in Oz. However outside of aviation (well, mostly PPrune) I can't recall seeing 89 cited as a seminal moment in Australian IR.

Bendo
27th Aug 2003, 14:57
Love your work, keep it up.

1. Abbot & Costello. There's a joke there. :rolleyes:

2. Pretty rich you correcting my spelling considering the last PM you sent me. Yes you spelt "liable" correctly but the word you were looking for was "libel". Spell Checker cannot make up for basic ignorance. :8

3. "Verbal Dribble". I didn't say a thing. Again, check the dictionary before you shoot your keyboard off.

Looking forward to your next PM.

[edited for basic ignorance]

robair
27th Aug 2003, 19:14
Cruze power - your are a nasty BITCH

Ralph the Bong
27th Aug 2003, 21:56
A Zebra walks backward through a market place. A zoo keepeper and an elephant exchange smiles and peanuts..

Kaptin M
28th Aug 2003, 10:32
Your attempt to stimulate some intelligent debate unfortunately didn't go too far, Bendo.

"when working out wage costs for any business you have to add the "hidden" costs of employing; Super, holidays, Long Service Leave, training etc."

I believe that by working it out in the manner in which I did (Gross salary divided by actual hours flown in 12 months, and that hourly rate then divided by the average load factor - in pax numbers - based on a one hour flight), all of the above would be taken into account over a 12 month period...wouldn't it?

In Wiley's "Blue singlets" topic, Winstun (probably inadvertently) highlighted one the points I would like to open up for further discussion, when he posted "Using Kaptins equation I get $666 per hour per pax". At an hourly pax rate, the company for which Winstun works either considers the (apparently) very few pax sufficiently important to qualify the cost of employing a pilot at that high rate, OR the company is in need of (a)smaller aircraft, (b) more pax.

I'd like to get more input from other pilots, to try to see whether (pilot) crew costs form a similar percentage (3-4%) of ticket price/charter prices.


On another (similar) note, I saw a brief comment on CNN a couple of days back stating that CEO's who retrenched the MOST staff were the highest rewarded in terms of their bonus payment., in spite of actual share price performance!

Winstun
28th Aug 2003, 11:44
The reason for the "high rate" is the employer:
1. values the pilots qualifications and experience
2. does not fly many hours per year (200-300)
3. does not want a smaller aircraft or more pax (except invited)
BTW Kaptin, admitting you watch CNN is not flattering to your intelligence? :p

RYAN TCAD
28th Aug 2003, 14:04
Agree - that story should have been on CNNNN !

Kaptin M
29th Aug 2003, 21:37
BTW Kaptin, admitting you watch CNN is not flattering to your intelligence?

Actually, I have never made any claims in that area! :sad:

On your other points - in the main - agreed, Winstun. But today's employer "generally" doesn't recognise #1 (the pilots qualifications and experience), which is a fairly intrinsic definition...however, you do highlight some important points.
Additionally - if you want to play with the "Big Boys", you're going to have to fly more hours!!

So now, assuming we have decided that BOTH pilots of a 2 crew operation account for 2-3% of the ticket price, is it now possible to quantify the %age cost of other staff, eg. check-in, loaders, scedulers, etc?
Does anyone have a rational formula for calculating staff other than flight & cabin crew?