vi vil ha mer penger... [Archive]

PropsAreForBoats

21st Apr 2001, 03:29

victim....well it was meant as a joke, but there is some truth to it. it is a fact that of the pilots employed by SAS/SC after 1997, those selected for employment with SC must work more (5/3 versus 5/4) for a lot less money for quite a few years; four at the minimum. after four years employment the difference in FO yearly pay SAS-SC is roughly 200.000 NOK! not to mention the pension problem, where u are based, etc.
and besides the fact that generally (but not exclusively) ab-initio pilots are routed to SC, there seems to be a random selection of who goes where. which i find a bit unfair since the conditions are as different as they are.
that said, i am very happy where i am, building what i think is valuable experience for my future career in an excellent environment with great co-workers. even though i am not flying "that sleek sexy one" (yet), and, lets face it, props are for boats.... :)

------------------
oxygen masks and supply........psssssscheckedja!

Flathatter

21st Apr 2001, 11:09

Give it up, Props... you´re not going to get sympathy or support.
HS gained from that deal, got himself a nice cushion at the bottom of the list, all at your expense. So he couldn´t care less about you post 96/97 hired guys. Just like the rest of the old bunch.

[This message has been edited by Flathatter (edited 22 April 2001).]

Hung start

21st Apr 2001, 14:01

Jeeez Flathatter. There you go again. Get a life will ya´??

I don´t think that PAFB was looking for sympathy or support, he said that in all, he´s happy..

Now, the "victim" part was meant as a kind of: "who´s a victim for getting a job that he applied for, signed up for fully knowing the conditions, and that many that I know would give their right arm to have"
In that, I think that PAFB agrees with me. As would most, except of course you, the personification of bitterness.... :rolleyes:

Flathatter, get this into your head, once and for all: If I´m ahead of anybody on the combined senioritylist, it´s because I was hired before them. (Or hired the same year and older)...I was here long before any deal was made on the combined list.
Don´t put your own words in my mouth..you have all days been the one, that hated seeing SC pilots get their place on the combined list, so stop your BS about "Hung start" not giving a damn about PAFB´s and others in SC´s situation...

PAFB; there you go. Don´t expect Flathatters "apparent" sympathy either..
To some extent, you´ll get mine..
Working at SC is, yes, more work!! For less money. I´ve never contradicted that.. `Cause I´ve been there myself.........!

I don´t know, how the people at SAS chooses who goes to SAS, and who goes to SC.. I was told, that they would be sending the lowest hour guys and gals to SC for some experience building first, but I don´t know if that holds true for all...If that selection is unfair, then they should change it. Period.
But when you´re initially hired at any company, it is the right of the company to send you to whereever they need you.. Thats how it is everywhere... You are free to say "no thanks" at any time.
Before this list was made, SC pilots were SC pilots, and had to apply for SAS as outsiders, bringing NO seniority with them (And incidentally, SAS rejected many since SAS didn´t want to empty SC of pilots, and many were born in the (for SAS) "wrong year".) I know people who flew for SC from 1990 to 1997, then transferred to SAS and brought nothing with regards to seniority with them.

This is why I opiniated a little to the "I´m a victim" thing.. Now I don´t expect Flathatter to ever understand this, but somebody please explain how this could have been done smarter and fairer.!!

Hung start

21st Apr 2001, 14:07

Flathatter,

Please explain why you think that Hung start got himself a nice cussion at the bottom of the list, all at your expense.

I was hired way before PAFB!! Would you like to change that principle???

PiperChauffeur

21st Apr 2001, 14:48

PropsAreForBoats: Bah, kun hvis du ikke kan finde ud af at sejle for sejl (altså sejle i RIGTIGE både)
PC (vred!)

Vmu

21st Apr 2001, 15:02

On the application form, SC is not even mentioned. When you apply for a job in SAS that is what you should get. As long as SAS and SC are separate companies, the recruiting should be separate. Then you would at least know which company you are applying to.

------------------
"Recovery was marginal..."

PropsAreForBoats

21st Apr 2001, 18:12

Funny how we end up discussing something entirely else than what i was asking about...but i find the topic interesting, so -
No - i am not looking for neither sympathy nor support; again, i am very happy where i am.
However, it is true as Vmu says. I have never applied to SC, my application went to SAS, and SC was not mentioned until the interview. Nothing was mentioned about the difference in working conditions, only that u could bid SAS after 4 years. I didnt even consider not accepting when i got the offer from SC. And i dont regret that today. But that is because i am fairly young and ab-initio trained, and i feel that this is a more natural way to go. I know that economically i would be much better off in SAS, but i also know that eventually, i will get there. And then i will have my years of seniority from the beginning in SC, so i am not "losing" money anymore. But consider someone a bit older, maybe in his thirties. Starting in SC, for each year in SC he will lose one year of pension in SAS, since the pensions are not yet coordinated. That means that at the end of his career, not only has he worked at least 4 years for less pay, but he is also at least 4 years short in pension pay compared to his friend who started at the same time, but started with SAS. You can say that he knew this when he accepted employment at SC. Well, i didnt, and from what i understand guys/girls hired today are not told either. I am not recommending people to say no to SC employment, you will probably lose quite some time on the seniority list waiting for a course at SAS, and again, we have a great time at SC. All i am saying is that i see basic unfairness in this more or less random selection for quite different working conditions. And it will remain thus as long as SAS/SC recruitment is joint.
Hung Start, you said: "Before this list was made, SC pilots were SC pilots, and had to apply for SAS as outsiders, bringing NO seniority with them"
Thats true, the combined list is absolutely an improvement for SC pilots hired before 97. But these pilots applied for SC, and has a completely different viewpoint, and thats not the case i am discussing.
I cant think of a way to do this fairly as long as the recruiting is joined. Of course you could explain the differences and give people an open choice, but who would choose SC then? Another thought is some way of harmonising SAS/SC pay the first 4 years, but i think we all know that will never happen. It will help if the pensions are coordinated, which the unions are currently working with.
Another way is to route all new pilots through SC, so that all SAS new hires have at least 4 years in SC behind them.
In the end, i must agree with Vmu: as long as SAS/SC are two different companies, the recruiting should be separate.

PiperChauffeur: I know, but i found out that calling myself PropsAreForMotorBoats would be a bit much... ;)

[This message has been edited by PropsAreForBoats (edited 21 April 2001).]

Hung start

21st Apr 2001, 18:48

PAFB, your example here:

But consider someone a bit older, maybe in his thirties. Starting in SC, for each year in SC he will lose one year of pension in SAS, since the pensions are not yet coordinated. That means that at the end of his career, not only has he worked at least 4 years for less pay, but he is also at least 4 years short in pension pay compared to his friend who started at the same time, but started with SAS.
is exactly where I agreed with you. I said something along the lines of; If the selection is random, and you´re NOT told which company you´re going to work for, then that is unacceptable, and should be changed.. Period...!!
I would too, get pissed if I was applying for SAS, and ended up at SC. Yes, you were told at the interviews, but that is too late, as most people won´t turn down a job in that situation...So, I´m not disagreeing with you and Vmu there!!

Next one:

Hung Start, you said: "Before this list was made, SC pilots were SC pilots, and had to apply for SAS as outsiders, bringing NO seniority with them"
Thats true, the combined list is absolutely an improvement for SC pilots hired before 97. But these pilots applied for SC, and has a completely different viewpoint, and thats not the case i am discussing
Same argument, isn´t it.. i.e. the pilots hired before ´97 knew that they were applying for SC, and in that case can´t bitch.. Again, you should be told where they are sending you!!!

Just one more thing, you say that the combilist is an improvement for the pilots hired at SC before ´97..It is, but you neglect to say that it is also an improvement for pilots hired after ´97: Before the list came about, you were "stuck" in SC, now at least, you have the opportunity of moving to SAS, with all of your seniority intact. I see the problem on pension, and am glad to hear that they are working on the problem!!
But it is still hard for me to see SC pilots as victims of the combilist..

My opinion is; If SAS wants to direct all ab-initio pilots through SC for 4 years, so be it. They´ll still get their place on the list... It is however disgraceful if those applicants are not told about it beforehand..
Other than that, I believe that the combined list is good for pilots at both places, new or old.

Just one last question, do you get FTT (Flyvetidstillæg) in SC with less than 1500 hours?? Just for info, the ab-initio newhires in SAS don´t get this until they accumulate those 1500 hours, and as such, it is difficult for me to see a salary split of NOK 200.000/year.
But no matter what, I know there are large diffences in pay and conditions at the two companies, everybody know this.. It has always been like that, will probably always be like that.. In fact, SC would never have been started up, if it had not been for those differences!

dick badcock

22nd Apr 2001, 17:19

Props, har du og jeg tatt noen oel i messa noen gang? Kanskje var det sist i Tromsoe naa i mars?

Bra post forresten.

Hung start, (hello again :)!)

The problem with ab-inito students being placed in SC wouldn't be a very big issue if it wasn't for the fact that they differentiate within the classes. I know a class for instance, where 3 went to SC (F50) and two went to SAS (B737). In terms of a lifetime salary, the difference can be quite large!
In my airline, we have a commuter division. However, an FO with 6 years senority on the F50 earns as much as an FO on the A330, and therefore the same pension. In both cases, you are only frozen for two years on type initially, then you can switch freely to any other type.

[This message has been edited by dick badcock (edited 22 April 2001).]

Hung start

22nd Apr 2001, 19:26

Hei Dick again,

Agree completely. I would too be p***** or envious or both, if the selection of who goes where is this random. If I really stretch my imagination...I could accept some kind of seniority here as well, (hey, it decides everything else in this outfit), such as: If two ab-initio pilots (or others with same experience level) are needed in SAS, and three in SC, then the oldest go where they choose first.!! But still, this deal that you´ve heard about doesn´t sound good..

Still, what I think most disgraceful is, if people think that they are applying for SAS and then gets shipped to SC...!

I follow you guys completely..

Now, would anybody here on this site be willing to look over these "procedures" once again.. I ask this, because I know that at least one "member" of SAF has been involved in selections at SAS. (prefer not to mention his name, sorry.).. But what do you say sir??? Is this fair?

Rgds, Hung

PropsAreForBoats

22nd Apr 2001, 19:28

dick badcock: (interessant nickname..) tror nok det ja, tror jeg var vertskap for to av dine kolleger, kanskje?

Hung Start, about your comment:

"...you neglect to say that it is also an improvement for pilots hired after ´97: Before the list came about, you were "stuck" in SC, now at least, you have the opportunity of moving to SAS, with all of your seniority intact."

True enough, provided that the pilots we talk about want to work for SC initially, and not SAS. Before 97, if you applied for SAS and was accepted, you started working for SAS. I must say that is a better deal than having the opportunity to move to SAS after 4 years. Unless of course you apply SAS with the intention to work for SC.
About the FTT - SC does not have FTT at all, and they provide full pay from day 1. Thats better than SAS, where you also receive reduced pay during the initial course. But SC pay is still lower than equivalent SAS pay without the FTT...
The example after 4 years is included the FTT (you have at least 1500 hrs after 4 years) and the "leap" in SAS payscale the 4th year.
Another thing about the combi-list is that it's creating a major problem for SC; recruiting captains. This is particularly a problem at the TOS-base. Since new hires at SC are ab-inito low-timers, and SC has a minumum requirement of 3000 hrs for captains, we have at the present very few FO's who qualify for captains. Presently, NONE of the FO's at the TOS-base have 3000hrs, and most are ab-initio trained. And we have captains with full (11 yrs) seniority with SC who are transferring to SAS where they will lose up to 8 yrs of seniority, and fly as FO's. At the moment, there are rumours about SC having to recruit direct entry captains to fill those positions.
I think that the combi-list has created a range of problems (more than mentioned here), which was not foreseen by the unions when the agreement was made. If SC was a commuter division within SAS like Dick B.'s company, it would be a different story, making terms like Dick described in his post possible. But then again, that would collide with the SAS policy of equal pay for all sizes of aircraft, now wouldn't it...or is that policy compromised already?

Nite_Flite

22nd Apr 2001, 22:52

SC is digging its own grave these days..

By accepting all there ab-initio into their ranks and the open door to SAS, will mean that all the experienced F/O's and 26 Commanders so fare are comming to Airline, leaving only some old and odd captains, some very young (and unupgradable) F/O's and therefore relying on captains to come from Airline. They can not sustain operations relying on guyes bidding over. It's no secret that our guyes have been failed in the simulator for no apparent reasons. What was it last time, 8 out of 9 were failed!
I give them 2-3 years and Skyways will be flying their routes. We need their pilots and CA's overhere.

Hung start

22nd Apr 2001, 23:32

PAFB,

I rest my case. I was just flappergasted, the the difference could be the amount you mentioned.. But then again, I hope everybody that wants to, will be able to jump to SAS after the 4 years. If they can do that, pay shouldn´t be that much different.. But thats hard to say, when they´ve put that 14% limit on transfers...!

Anyway to both of you, PAFB and Nite Flite, I see what you mean, you guys have said enough, that even I understand. I hope that somebody will change the bad stuff that you pointed out..

If things continue the way they are, I´m afraid that Nite Flite´s "suggestion" may come through..

Incidentally, I´ve always thought that SC could be run from a rather small corner at the SAS administrations building (compare no. of aircraft, and look at how big the administration at SC has grown to be). They could then use some of the extra money spent on all the admin. people at SC, and use it to incorporate all SC pilots (and CA) in SAS on equal pay... Just my 5 cents worth!!!

Nick Figaretto

23rd Apr 2001, 00:03

Joining in!:

An other one of those "little white lies" that are presented by the Pilot Selection Board is, that you can go to SAS freely after 4 years. True, but you still have 200 - 250 "old" SC pilots ahead of you on the combined seniority list.

An educated guess is that we will be looking at an average of 6-7 years of duty in SC for each FO before he has seniority to go to SAS. And time is a hell of a lot of money in this context...

Personally - throwing in a torch here - i think that pilots recruited after may 97 (those who never applied for a job in SC) should go to SAS first. Then there should be a limit of, say, 4-5% of the "old" SC pilots who could go to SAS each year. They have, after all, gotten a job in a company that they applied for, and it wouldn't hurt them too much to stay there a couple of more years.

And most of them are captains anyway, and urgently needed in SC.

------------------
"Pitching down the nose to take maximum advantage of the shape of this highly sophisticated airfoil..."

Hung start

23rd Apr 2001, 01:16

Nick,

Another one of those "little white lies" that are presented by the Pilot Selection Board is, that you can go to SAS freely after 4 years. True, but you still have 200 - 250 "old" SC pilots ahead of you on the combined seniority list.

I´m afraid I have to disagree, ever so slightly :) :
White lies? I agreed already, that the notion that people could be going to SC, should be mentioned on the application form, and not as late as the interview!! BUT, nobody are, as far as I know, being blindfolded only to see the light of the day again, the moment they sit inside a F50. Yes, they might have 250 pilots ahead of them, but seniority is the ruling principle in all(most)all that goes on at work.. Would you just throw that principle out the window??.

Personally - throwing in a torch here - i think that pilots recruited after may 97 (those who never applied for a job in SC) should go to SAS first. Then there should be a limit of, say, 4-5% of the "old" SC pilots who could go to SAS each year. They have, after all, gotten a job in a company that they applied for, and it wouldn't hurt them too much to stay there a couple of more years.

Hmmmm. Those "old" (before may 97) SC pilots that you now want to bypass going to SAS, were the ones (together with the union, which IS the pilots) that worked for 3 years to make this deal come true!!

Your last sentence, that it won´t hurt them....Tell that to the "old" pilots at SC, some of whom have done 10-12 years on the Fokker, and really could do with some "fresh air"..
Really, does it hurt an ab-initio guy that much. Yes, I know about the difference in income, and yes, the "old" pilots applied for a job at SC, but does that now mean, that they can not use the same deal that you want to use, a deal that was made before you were hired???? http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/confused.gif

The last one : And most of them are captains anyway, and urgently needed in SC has to me no relevance...Capt. or FO, so what, and if Captains are urgently needed at SC, then SC and SAS screwed up somewhere.. Thats not the pilots problem!!!

PropsAreForBoats

23rd Apr 2001, 02:58

Nick, I must agree with Hung Starts reply to your post, giving the "old guys" our problem in their hands is not the way to go. (Think about how the very man who has provided your signature would feel). And most of the guys bidding SAS now, are hired after 97 anyway. I'm guessing not more than 4-5% of the guys transferring this year are hired before 97.
Another question is if the 14%limit should be increased, or even lifted. The day I started at SC, i asked the CEO if he didnt see a problem with the fact that all new SC pilots would probably go to SAS after 4 years. He answered: "That's the way we want it, to keep costs down". He meant that hiring and training new pilots would be more cost-efficient than letting experienced pilots climb the payscale at SC. Now that's his statement, so dont't ask me...I can't understand it either. But it indicates that there is perhaps a possibility to lift this 14% restriction. This will not eliminate the unfair structure of SAS/SC pilot recruiting, but at least appease the effects, since it is after 4 years that the real big difference in pay comes to effect.

[This message has been edited by PropsAreForBoats (edited 22 April 2001).]

Hung start

23rd Apr 2001, 13:21

PROPS;

. I'm guessing not more than 4-5% of the guys transferring this year are hired before 97.

Correct. Actually "relatively" few of "the oldies" have transferred since the deal was made. But a large class that was hired at SC summer/fall ´97 has just started at SAS. PROPS, you know their names!

Wouldn´t the easiest solution just be: Tell, and be sure that everybody know upfront, even before they apply, that SAS reserves the right to place them at SC if the company sees the need?? Then everybody can make up their mind in advance, and decide if they can live with working at SC for some years...(wish I even hadthat choice when I had 250 hours)

[This message has been edited by Hung start (edited 23 April 2001).]

Flathatter

23rd Apr 2001, 13:42

Finally some insightfull posts about this subject.

HS, you´re wrong:
¨I could accept some kind of seniority here as well, (hey, it decides everything else in this outfit)¨
True seniority only exists for those hired prior to the combilist.

Props, according to head of pilot recruitment 100% of SAS newhires last fall and 50% this spring were to come from SC. Don´t know if this actually turned out to be the case, but if so, it´s certainly a heck of a lot more than a few percent.

KADS

23rd Apr 2001, 14:20

Very interesting thread, this is. But as an outsider, (yet for some time) I'm stuck at the "14% limit". That's too much insider lingo for me. Anyone care to enlighten me on that one....?

Hung start

23rd Apr 2001, 15:05

Flathatter,

HS, you´re wrong:
¨I could accept some kind of seniority here as well, (hey, it decides everything else in this outfit)¨
True seniority only exists for those hired prior to the combilist

Show me where true seniority doesn´t exist!!!
For the good or bad!

Oh, and how about a rebuttal on my last answer (21-4 10:04), to your ridicoulus post about your perception of me!!

[This message has been edited by Hung start (edited 23 April 2001).]

PropsAreForBoats

23rd Apr 2001, 19:48

Flathatter and KADS:

The "14%-rule" states that a maximum of 14% of the total amount of SC pilots may transfer to SAS Airline each year.
This is the main reason why new SAS-applicants who are routed to SC must wait more than 4 years for their transfer to SAS, since 99-100% of all pilots hired after 97 bid SAS, and quite a few of the pilots hired before 97 do so also.

[This message has been edited by PropsAreForBoats (edited 23 April 2001).]

Unable

24th Apr 2001, 11:20

The only ones who benefit from the combilist are those employed in SC before'97, most of whom have been rejected from SAS. Their "no" from SAS is now a "yes". For all others; SAS-pilots, "young" SC-pilots, the companies, the list is just a piece of sh%#.

[This message has been edited by Unable (edited 24 April 2001).]

Nick Figaretto

24th Apr 2001, 16:56

Fingertrouble. Posted this next post three times...

[This message has been edited by Nick Figaretto (edited 24 April 2001).]

Nick Figaretto

24th Apr 2001, 17:05

Same again...

[This message has been edited by Nick Figaretto (edited 24 April 2001).]

Nick Figaretto

24th Apr 2001, 17:11

Exactly my point, Unable. (Just different wrapping.)

Hung Start:

The combilist deal is a deal between the pilots employed in SC before '97 and the pilots employed in SAS before '97. The deal is mostly a win/win deal for the two groups, although there are always people who wish the deal was better. (More seniority accepted for the old SC pilots, etc, etc.)

But the the pilots who are most affected by this deal, are the pilots who have been to the SAS interview after may '97. Who have passed the interview like everybody else that have been through the interviews the last 50 years, who have gotten a job in SAS, but then have been sent to SC.

These pilots are SAS pilots like any other SAS pilot!!!

One way that this deal could have been more fair: All new pilots should have been employed directly to SAS, and then been "on loan" to SC, similarly to the model that SAS/SC currently uses for SAS FCs "on loan" to SC. Then they should be stuck in SC for 4 years, and be free to go back to SAS at any time.

If you're a low-timer it would be natural to go back to SAS after four years. If you had more experience when you started and are qualified for FC course by that time (if not already an FC!), you could choose to stay.

Then there should have been a separate deal regarding the "old" SC pilots and their right to bid an aircraft type in SAS.

I fully understand that these SC pilots are eager to get "their share". They have, after all, worked in the same company (SAS konsernet) and flown the same passengers that SAS pilots have, for more than 10 years.

What I meant by "They are captains anyway," is that if all the other factors were straightened out (pensions, LOL, etc.) I know that if I was an FC in SC, I wouldn't be in such a hurry to go over to SAS. I'd get my seniority according to the combi-list anyway. And a captain in SC that bids SAS, will be an FO in SAS. Then we are looking at a wage that is 250-400 000,- LOWER than if he had stayed in SC, depending on what base he has, if he's a FCS or FCI etc. Bidding SAS would be more a matter of wanting to fly bigger aircraft, than anything else.

I'll take back one thing, though (quote): "...and urgently needed in SC." You're right, that is not our problem!

And just to get that clear: I really love my job in SC. I couldn't imagine a better way to start a carreer in the SAS system, having only 250 hrs, than to start out as an FO on F50 in Tromsoe. I really have learned and I still learn, a lot from flying in North-Norway.

The first time I'll fly the circling procedure in Alta in piss poor weather with an MD80, I will be very glad that I have done it a few times earlier in a F50.

I also know that in 25 years, when I'm a captain on A380 :) , I will look upon my time in SAS Commuter "back in the old days" as one of the most memorable period of my life.

If I had a choice, and I was to choose again, I'd still choose to start in SC, for above mentioned reasons. -Even with the "problems" we currently have with the combi-list. But this doesn't disqualify me or any of us to speak up and point out the unfair aspects of the combilist deal.

------------------
"Pitching down the nose to take maximum advantage of the shape of this highly sophisticated airfoil..."

[This message has been edited by Nick Figaretto (edited 24 April 2001).]

dick badcock

24th Apr 2001, 19:47

Nick, tror jeg kjenner deg ogsaa... takk for sist!

This combilist reminds a lot of the practice in the US, where in some cases if you make command on one of the smaller types, you have to go back to the right seat on a longhaul jet. Seems a bit odd to me, if nothing more than old fashioned (my car is faster than your car etc.)

The drive among todays pilots are for more money and better lifestyle. Heck, not even the long haul operation is as lucrative as it was 20 years ago. The cabin crew are so underpaid, they refuse to come out and have a few jars, and you're only away from base 24 hours anyways. Therefore, I believe more and more people prefer the lifestyle of a 'commuter' style airline. I prefer not to even differentiate between commuter and non-commuter, we are all flying people from A to B. Why whouldn't everyone get paid the same? Only that way can you choose a base or fleet based upon the lifestyle that you want!

PropsAreForBoats

24th Apr 2001, 20:29

Hei Dick - takk for sist (du må forklare meg bakgrunnen til ditt UserName en gang...)

I agree with your post, Nick (the third one) :)
Now the problem is that this is not an issue with the unions. The topics we have raised here are not considered problematic by the people currently in union positions, as few/none of these pilots are hired after 1997. Also a lot of pilots, especially with SAS, have not thought about the issue, or doesn't care, as it does not apply to them.
But I will be most surprised if this does not became a major issue within the SAS/SC pilot community in time, since the number of pilots affected is ever increasing. And the conditions for new hires are as much a responsibility for the pilot unions as crew bunks in the A330...

------------------
oxygen masks and supply........psssssscheckedja!

[This message has been edited by PropsAreForBoats (edited 24 April 2001).]

Mr moto

25th Apr 2001, 01:17

But I think we're all agreed then. There's something if not wrong then just odd higher up in the company.

PropsAreForBoats

25th Apr 2001, 04:01

Mr moto - i am not sure what you mean. The combi-list deal was made by the pilot unions.

Hung start

26th Apr 2001, 19:32

Nick,

I follow you for the best part of your post, but:
One way that this deal could have been more fair: All new pilots should have been employed directly to SAS, and then been "on loan" to SC, similarly to the model that SAS/SC currently uses for SAS FCs "on loan" to SC. Then they should be stuck in SC for 4 years, and be free to go back to SAS at any time.

If you're a low-timer it would be natural to go back to SAS after four years. If you had more experience when you started and are qualified for FC course by that time (if not already an FC!), you could choose to stay.

Isn´t that pretty much the way it really is today.

You are SAS pilots in so far, that you have passed the tests. You have been told (although obviously very late judging from peoples experiences) that SAS needs you in SC where, as it has always been, the salary is lower and the aircraft make more noice. You are counting seniority in SAS from day one, at SC. You are free to leave SC after 4 years (yes I know, according to seniority, exactly as it happens in SAS). Etc. etc.

For those saying that this deal is s%&/, ( and please, this is not meant in an arrogant way): But 5 years ago, you had 5000 hour co-pilots at SC. They had not, as somebody said, all failed the SAS tests.. Gentlemen, before 1995-6 SAS hired nobody. Nobody. SC likewise. Last hiring before that, was 1990-1991. Those 5000 hour co-pilots were yearning for the same shot at the bigger airplanes/salaries, that some of you now (thanks to the combilist!!!!) can take for granted (albeit 4 years down the road)! Had the combilist not been made, some of you 250 hr. guys would maybe have been at SC now, with NO chance of going to SAS in the future!! No way you say....well, right now half of all newhires go to SC, that means that SAS is only using half of all those passing the tests. Had we had no combilist, SAS would have said "NO we don´t need you right now, but try SC, they need pilots" to many of you.. Or they would have said; "Yes, you´re OK, but our next available slot for a class is 2003, go find another job in the meantime" (happened recently to a many thousand hour friend).
You were given a (maybe late) choice, and accepted before signing the contract. Nobody is going to take your place on the SAS sen. list away from you.(and your future on the A380 :) )
Please do not take this as being meant in an arrogant way.

The way to go in my opinion, is merely: For SAS to be ABSOLUTELY SURE that it says on the application form that: We need pilots at SC and SAS, and there´s a big chance/risk... that you (if you´re a lowtimer) may have to go to SC for 4 years. And be ABSOLUTELY SURE that the pilot has ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTOOD this, when showing up for the interview.

Before the list was made, there was (almost) no way getting into SAS for a SC pilot (SAS was not hiring, and there were other reasons mentioned in earlier posts). There is a way now, and don´t be so sure that you would have had a better chance of getting into SAS without the list. Without the list, SAS would still have needed the same amount of pilots, that they are putting on jets today, but the rest (many lowtimers, now in SC) would be stuck there.In SC. More so, than you feel you are today!!!!!

PropsAreForBoats

26th Apr 2001, 22:35

Hung Start:

Your post summarizes a lot of the misunderstandings going around here. Some statements are outright wrong.
You keep saying that thanks to the combilist we would not have this chance to go to SAS after 4 years. The fact is, without the combilist, we would have been hired in SAS from day one!!!
Your answer to that is that SAS might not need us if SC wasnt a part of the hiring. Well, follow my reasoning:
(The numbers are just to illustrate, i am not saying they are accurate, but i think they are not far from the truth.)

Let's say SAS together with SC hire 250 new pilots a year. How many of these go to SC? Maybe 50. In your opinion, that means that if the combilist hadnt been there, those 50 pilots would have had to wait. Wrong! Because: How many pilots transfer from SC to SAS this year? At least 50-60. That means that maximum 200 of the 250 hires are "new" hires anyway! The vast majority of new hires at SC today are hired to compensate for transfers to SAS, transfers MADE POSSIBLE by the combilist! I think only 2 pilots have retired from SC to this day. So with or without the combilist, the number of new hires to the system would be approx. the same! And before the combilist, SC didnt hire ab-initio pilots at all! Ab-initio graduates who were accepted by SAS, were hired by SAS.

You also bring up examples from the past, when there was no hiring at all. I know about all that, but that has nothing to do with this discussion. Yes, I know I was extremely lucky with my timing, being hired as an ab-intio with only 200 hrs. If you want i can write a book about how happy I am about that, and how much i love my current job. But that is another discussion entirely.
The point we are trying to get across is that after the combilist came, new SAS hires are not equally treated, and the differences in days off, pension and pay are large. If you are sent to SC, you are not an SAS employee! There is no guarantee that you will be either. Yes, you are accepted, and you have your place on the seniority list. But it can take a lot more than 4 years before you are working under the same conditions as other people hired at the same time, by the same people, under the same requirements. What if SAS quits hiring? And when it's finally your turn, you need a new extended medical examination if you are hired in Norway before 1998 (and yes, it is possible to fail this). And during your first year as an FO in SAS, you are employed on probation again...

I am sure a lot of guys who had to wait a long time before being hired by an airline, will probably think that this is arrogant, and that "those low-timers don't know how lucky they are, the b***ards".
But again. We do. I am in no way dissatisfied with my job at SC. Even though I have never applied for the company, i know that I am a lot better off than a million of other guys who are trying to enter this profession.
Please try to see through all that, because that is not the point in this discussion. Remember the same conditions apply for your friend with 5000 hrs bush in Alaska, if he is sent to SC.

------------------
"what's it doing now...?"

[This message has been edited by PropsAreForBoats (edited 26 April 2001).]

Vmu

26th Apr 2001, 22:47

Most, if not all, of the "old" SC-guys that I know did get a no from SAS. Thus, if the combilist did not exist, there would have been little recruiting from SC (into SAS). As it is now, about 60 pilots go from SC to SAS each year. Up until a couple of years ago SC had never employed low time pilots. SAS, on the other hand have employed lowtimers for quite a few years.

As far as I know the majority of newhires end up in SAS. Of those who end up in SC, I would guess that about 20-30/year are lowtimers. Therefore: no combilist => little recruiting from SC => plenty of room for all lowtimers in SAS.

Of course, it's not only to lowtimers that the list is bad news. It is even worse for older guys who get the pension problem on top of it. To those who are willing to work in TOS the low salary is not so much of a problem, as they will be captains in less than a year.

Possible solutions? I have to think about that.

------------------
"Recovery was marginal..."

Vmu

26th Apr 2001, 22:55

PAFB, You are faster than me.

PropsAreForBoats

26th Apr 2001, 23:05

As always... :)

Hung start

27th Apr 2001, 00:04

Vmu, No they did not. I don´t know your friends, but they are not the majority. SAS did not hire anybody between 1990-1 to 1995-6!!As such, nobody failed the tests, at least during those years. Now, I´d tell you some stories, but that would have to be via mail.

PROPS.

I bow to most of your arguments. Well, at least I´m running out :)

This one though:

The vast majority of new hires at SC today are hired to compensate for transfers to SAS, transfers MADE POSSIBLE by the combilist!
Will never get my thumbs up. You seem to insinuate, that "old" SC people only go to SAS thanks to the combilist. Wrong. And a little arrogant, I might add. When the hiring frenzy started in 1996, well before the lowtimers got in, many SC pilots would have applied for and gotten a job in SAS. Believe me, with 5000+ hours in the F50, they were, to SAS, mightily more attractive than most. Now, the combilist came along, and one of the arguments for the list was, that "now SC pilots did not need to hurry into SAS, since they would have their place on the senioritylist from this date". I know quite a few, who choose to stay, just because of that fact, and NOT because they couldn´t pass the SAS tests....
Now they might want some fresh air, and you want to exclude them from that, because you passed what is now the SAS test (been changed quite often).
The pilots at SAS and SC worked on this deal from 94-97, and they deserve the seat in SAS. NOTHING to do with "lowtimers must pay their dues", but everything to do with fairness and seniority as your colleagues have choosen it to be, many years ago.

As I said, your other points are well taken.

Oh, and my friend newer flew the bush. Not enough paved real estate for his 747.

[This message has been edited by Hung start (edited 26 April 2001).]

Mr moto

27th Apr 2001, 00:26

PAFB.
I meant the hypocracy of the back door entry.

Hung start

27th Apr 2001, 02:02

Hypocracy, I´ll give it to you, that was the case in the Linjeflyg deal (hard hat deployed), but never in this one.

Flathatter

27th Apr 2001, 12:55

The only ones who like the combilist are those that were hired before it was implemented. I think it´s a piece of c***, the newhires think it´s a piece of c***, and so does the rest of the world. Evidence the complete lack of one anywhere else. (and no, a flow thru agreement is not the same).
Now if SAS and the unions wanted one anyway, that´s their business. But to implement it retroactively one year like they did, and not inform newhires about it until after they started and are actually handed the list - `Oh by the way, we know you put in years at other airlines, commuters, etc. But since it didn´t have our logo on the tail, you basically wasted all that time and now in effect have to start from the bottom of the SC list, even though you went to work for mainline.´- that is unfair, unethical, and unprecedented.
And now they wonder why they´re having a recruiting problem!

And let´s clear up a misunderstanding: The 14% rule is not a maximum. On the contrary it´s a minimum transfer rate at the option of SAS and SC.
I know from my trusty sources that this is not what you all are being told, but it is what is printed in the agreement.

Just goes to prove my point...

Hung start

27th Apr 2001, 13:36

Flathatter,

As much as I´ve agreed with the other guys on a lot of the things that they are unhappy about, I´ll agree with you too, since you agree with them on much of what they say. People ending up in a place that they didn´t apply for, if that´s what they say, is utterly unfair. And if they think that the deal is that bad, it should be changed. I´m only for everybody being content, and if a large percentage of unionbrothers are not, things need to be improved. Period.

But again, no matter how many times you say it, it won´t become true: deal was not made retroactive....

And this one:
And let´s clear up a misunderstanding: The 14% rule is not a maximum. On the contrary it´s a minimum transfer rate at the option of SAS and SC.
I know from my trusty sources that this is not what you all are being told, but it is what is printed in the agreement.

Just goes to prove my point...

Well, your trusty source should get his facts straight.
I have in front of me, the deal on paper.
Point number 6. goes : Transfer from SC to SAS is limited to 14% of the pilot corps at SC pr. 31 dec. the preceeding year.

Please Flathatter!!!

Tor

27th Apr 2001, 14:09

I for one think the combilist is a good idea. Where else in the world can a 200 hrs pilot earn seniority in a major airline?

The best way around would of course be equal pay. That way perhaps some would actually choose SC because they prefered that kind of lifestyle rather than wanting to go to SAS for the extra money. But what do I know..

And by the way, it's clearly stated in the letter that follows the application form that it covers SAS as well as SC.

[This message has been edited by Tor (edited 27 April 2001).]

Hung start

27th Apr 2001, 14:15

Hey Tor, any news??

Tor

27th Apr 2001, 14:20

Hej Hung jeg sender dig en e-mail senere i dag.

Vmu

27th Apr 2001, 15:41

Tor,

Where else in the world?

1. In SAS
2. In most other major airlines around the world(except in the States)

------------------
"Recovery was marginal..."

Nick Figaretto

27th Apr 2001, 17:16

Wow, this really became a good thread!

I think most of the things that should be said, have been said here.

Our largest frustration when discussing the combilist with any SAS pilot is that very few know the slightest thing about the pre-history and the outcome of the combilist, and thus it takes a lot of time and tideous explanation to bring out our views on the matter in the correct way.

The only thing we can hope for, is that MANY other SAS pilots will read this thread, and, like Hung Start, really try to understand the issue. Without any prejudice.

What one have to understand is that the combilist will have a major impact on all SAS recruiting in the years to come. That is why the unions - and the management of the two companies - have to work all they can to make the deal as straight and fair as possible.

The old times when there were "we in SAS" and "those in SAS Commuter" is slowly fading out. In only a few years, practically all SC pilots will be SAS' own pilots. Thus the unions should act accordingly.

To do so, they need to see the whole picture. I think they are failing in doing so right now.

This thread should be mandatory for all SAS and SC pilots to read. Especially the union guys.

Happy flying!

Nick.

Tor

27th Apr 2001, 17:43

Wmu, as far as I know there are no other companies except those that sponsor their pilots from the very beginning, which in my opinion is a whole other ballgame and such is the military as well.

Vmu

28th Apr 2001, 14:24

Until just a few months ago, SAS did sponsor their pilots from the very beginning. They actually own 60% of the school they are using. I don't see how it can be a different ballgame.

------------------
"Recovery was marginal..."

Flathatter

28th Apr 2001, 14:33

¨Please Flathatter!!!¨

I aim to, Hung. My piece of paper says: SAS and SC own the right to limit transfers from SC to SAS to 14%....
Now what exactly does your piece of paper say? Off course mine is in swedish, wouldn´t surprise me one bit if the three unions managed to get their wording all different.
And how do you explain the overabundance of SC transfers this past hiring year with your 14% rule? I´m just curious, you know, enquiring minds want to know. SAS, DPF, NSF, SPF and you all tell us different stories. So which one is it?

As for retroactive: The deal was signed and went into effect may 23, 1997. All SC guys were merged into the 96/97 hiring year which I believe started july 1, 1996. Sounds pretty retroactive to me. So... a 30 year old who got hired by SAS in august 96 ended up behind a 31 year old hired by SC in march 97, even though at the time of their hiring there was no combilist!
When is it going to sink in, Hung? Or are you just having so much fun sparring with me that you´re turning a blind eye to facts both left and right. That´d be perfectly allright with me, all in good jest. But stick a smiley face on your posts then, so the new guys know not to take you seriously.

That oughta get a rise out of him:-)...

Hung start

28th Apr 2001, 16:25

Well here´s your smilie. Looked for smilies in your posts, but found none. Found a lot in my posts. :rolleyes:

The paper that I have in front of me, is from DPF, dated 25 may 1997. And it was translated exactly to the word. Check with your union to find out.
"Overabundance" is not for me to explain. Again, ask your union. I can only argue from what I have on paper.

"Retroactive". Were you born yesterday? People have always been shuffled around inside the same schoolyear. If thats what you mean by retroactive then go ahead, but please. You must be the only one in the company that regards that as retroactive.

Go ahead, make a poll if you want. And see which one of us, is taken more seriously on these pages. For people who haven´t seen right through Flathatter yet, write Flathatter in the search page, and you will see, that he has never ever contributed any constructive posts here.
Always bitching, never putting your feet where your mouth is, and never offering any solutions to your perceived problems. I do think that you need help.

I do enjoy reading and learning other writer´s posts. They can be very interesting and informative. You have never accomplished that feat!
I don´t therefore enjoy "sparring" with you, really I ought to just ignore you, since you "give" me nothing. But I hope that by calling your foul shots when I see them, that others will find it easier to see through your smokescreens of hate and bitterness.
Please everybody, read his posts, and you will see what I mean.

Have a great weekend Flathatter.

Tor

28th Apr 2001, 20:06

Wmu

Until just a few months ago, SAS did sponsor their pilots from the very beginning. They actually own 60% of the school they are using. I don't see how it can be a different ballgame.

As far as I know, that is not entirely correct. It's true that SAS only hire from certain schools. But they didn't sponsor their pilots like e.g. BA.

SAS did for a short periode contributed to some of the education at NAC. But the educations was, comparably to the other schools, quite a bit more expensive so in the end the students paid almost the same as students at other schools.

Also, again as far as I know, it's SASFA that owns a part of NAC and not SAS. And I'm not even sure that they do that anymore.

[This message has been edited by Tor (edited 28 April 2001).]

PropsAreForBoats

28th Apr 2001, 23:20

Sorry, Tor

Vmu is right. First, students at NAC were not sponsored at all. (I am one of those). Then SAS sponsored some classes partly, with the students paying half; NOK 350.000, and SAS paying the rest. These students were approved by SAS before starting at NAC. The first class with this arrangement started in 1998, and a total of 7 flight classes have trained during this sponsorship. Not long ago, SAS quit sponsoring, and it was back to the old deal with the SAS interview conducted after completed education. And students paying 100% of the fee themselves; which by now is in excess of NOK 700.000, all expenses paid.
It is rumoured that SAS will soon again start sponsorships at NAC. Time will show.

And another thing. "Where else can you start with a major airline with 200hrs."
Come on. You mention BA yourself in another post! And the list goes on; KLM, Lufthansa, Swissair, etc......mention one major airline that DOESN'T have an ab-initio program. It's the way of the future guys, so just get used to it. :)

------------------
"what's it doing now...?"

Hung start

29th Apr 2001, 00:08

Just for the hell of it PROPS, here goes : "The future guys, you say!". It certainly is "the present". Ab initio´s are hired as never before. But when the downturn comes, and everybody who´s been in this business for a while knows that it will, what happens to the ab-initio´s.
This is not a provocation, please. All channels say, that the ab-initio´s (at least where I´m at) are nothing less than excellent compared to the amount of hours in their logbook.
But there has been several threads here, on "ab-initio vs. selfimprover" or "lowtimer vs hightimer" (not trying to start a new round of those war-threads, and what do you guys think will happen with the ab-initio concept when times get tough again, and airlines hire a fraction of pilots available.?????

Tor

29th Apr 2001, 00:45

Props

Then SAS sponsored some classes partly, with the students paying half; NOK 350.000, and SAS paying the rest.

I wrote But the educations was, comparably to the other schools, quite a bit more expensive. Ok, it shouldn't have been quite, but rather a lot more expensive. In 1998 I paid 385.000 kr for an ab-inition education, only 35.000 more. I wonder why there was such a price difference in the first place.

It still doesn't change the fact that SAS hasn't sponsored the education completely, like BA, KLM etc.

Furthermore after having read your posts I still can't see what's wrong with the SC, SAS way of recruting. If you don't won't to work for SC just turn down the offer, no one puts a gun to your head (I guess http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif)

[This message has been edited by Tor (edited 28 April 2001).]

Temp Hi

29th Apr 2001, 01:42

Tor and Hung - I have to agree with you. 6-700.000 kr. (swedish, norwegian or danish) for a pilot education is way to much - I guess we`ll have to thank JAR-OPS for that.
The times have changed and there is a lack of pilots - starting your adult-life with great debts to get a job where the reward is less than what you get when completing a state-sponsored IT-education just isn`t that attractive anymore. If SAS, and any other airline, wants young people to go ahead with a pilot education these days - I think, they`ll have to sponsor them.
On the other hand: when I got my RH seat, I had approx. 2000 hrs, including 1500 hrs turboprop, I`d done sightseing flights for a couple of years and even handled luggage to get my first FO position !
Now, you might think: "what an old ¤#"¤" - but this is not more than 3-4 years ago. I really find it difficult to understand how a 250 hrs student-pilot can bitch about being placed in SC instead of SAS (especially when gaining seniority from day one in SAS). Sorry guys, I just don`t get it...
Mr.Flathatter, I`m afraid Hung start is right, havin` scrolled your posts so far, I think too, you are indeed a very bitter man...or woman ;)

PropsAreForBoats

29th Apr 2001, 06:19

Hung Start: I agree - it will be most interesting to see what happens when airlines stop the current "hiring frenzy". Hopefully, history will not repeat itself, and the few ab-intio schools that have developed into something really good will prevail. Because it takes a long time to build them up again. But I can't see any danger on the horizon yet, as industry demand for pilots increase still, while fewer and fewer youths choose our line of career. And I understand them well; for reasons mentioned by Temp Hi among others.
But Temp Hi:

quote:

"I really find it difficult to understand how a 250 hrs student-pilot can bitch about being placed in SC instead of SAS (especially when gaining seniority from day one in SAS). Sorry guys, I just don`t get it..."

I've spent a lot of words on this thread trying to make this point clear; obviously it failed, so I try again.
I am not "bitching about" being placed in SC. AGAIN, I am very happy where I am, and given the choice again, I would still start in SC. Call me an idiot, but I value the experience in this operation and the social life in SC more than the money I lose during the first years.(Hey SAS guys; Yes, it´s nice to know the people you fly with, yes we have a lot of fun at night stops, yes Tromsoe is the best party town in Norway, and yes the women are great... :) )
But it must be allowed even for a 250hr "student pilot" (I wonder how long I am going to be that - my whole career probably :) ) to critizise unfair arrangements.
You´re practically saying that we should shut up and be grateful for getting a job at all. Very well. Then lets stop the discussions about payrise. Pilots earn more than most other employees, don't they? Shut up and be grateful. You're working 3 weekends out of 4? Haven't shared a vacation with your family in 7 years? Shut up and be grateful...
My point is: there are always someone who had to work harder, and are in a worse position than yourself. Please try to look past the different backgrounds people have, and concentrate on the issue instead.

Good night and a nice weekend from Tromsoe - the Paris of the north... (well, ok, that´s a bit of an exaggeration...i admit it ;) )

------------------
"what's it doing now...?"

Temp Hi

29th Apr 2001, 13:58

Hey PAFB - hope you had a nice saturday evening upthere in the far North. Shut up and be grateful was never my point, I didn`t write that as far as I remember (even though I had a pretty bad rendez-vous with a bottle of Laphroig).
I actually agree with you on most - the application should be crystle-clear that it goes for SC as well as SAS - and I certainly do appreciate that people coming from BU,NB,DM (or any other) with 3000 hrs jettime are not too interested in going to Tromsø on a Fokker 50 !
PAFP, I think your points are indeed very valid ones - the world was just a lot different when I had 200 hrs, :)
I`m also sure, as you (or one of your "co-victims" of the combilist) write, that in 30 years when you retire from the spaceshuttle, looking back, those memories of the early days in Tromsø, will be among your favourites...
Brgds, Temp Hi

Flathatter

29th Apr 2001, 15:43

""Retroactive". Were you born yesterday? People have always been shuffled around inside the same schoolyear.´´
The combilist has nothing to do with the hiring year. That´s an entirely different issue. (you´ve tried this one before)
Besides, Hung, how many SC guys were shuffled onto, into or around the seniority list when you were hired?
Keep blowing smokescreens.

For all you other guys:
Don´t listen to me. Get your own copy of the combilist, check the hiring dates, SAS and SC if you can get them, then compare them to the seniority number.
Then get your copy of the combilist agreement and check the dates and see if it fits your definition of retroactive.
And then see how many guys were hired from SC last year and compare that to the total for the 14%.

"never putting your feet where your mouth is´´
That´s right, I try not to.

Hung start

5th May 2001, 00:22

For all you other guys:
Don´t listen to me. Get your own copy of the combilist, check the hiring dates, SAS and SC if you can get them, then compare them to the seniority number.
Then get your copy of the combilist agreement and check the dates and see if it fits your definition of retroactive.
Think they already looked, and none seem to agree with you Flat. :rolleyes:

The combilist has nothing to do with the hiring year. That´s an entirely different issue. (you´ve tried this one before)
Keep blowing smokescreens.

For the, I don´t know which time, YES it has a lot to do with hiring year Flathatter. I know I´ve "tried" it before, because it´s the fact....
Pilots employed by SC on the 23 may, are "shuffled" in on the SAS seniority list of that schoolyear, i.e. Schoolyear jun.96-jun97.....You´re beginning to bore me Flathatter. Tell me, and everybody else in SAS who lives with this system of "hiring year", why it should not be so?? No, that´s right, we never get answers from you, only bashing.

Besides, Hung, how many SC guys were shuffled onto, into or around the seniority list when you were hired?
Well, had it been anyone else than you, who had asked, I´d have been happy to tell. But no one has as you, constantly, and in every discussion, flatly refused to ever disclose why you say what you do, and with what background. Now, if people here have read your earlier postings, they´ll know what I mean. I have asked you, what the company has really done to you, for you to feel so much anger and resentment towards SAS;
You refuse to answer.
I have asked you in many discussions; "Rejected take-offs", "Seniority list mucking" and in this very thread: what would you do differently Flathatter???
You refuse to answer

Come on Flat. Please do better. And please start to Argue: meaning supplying arguments instead of just complaining, and answer other peoples questions and arguments, instead of just ignoring them, when you feel your arguments are not up to par.

[This message has been edited by Hung start (edited 04 May 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Hung start (edited 04 May 2001).]

Nick Figaretto

6th May 2001, 18:08

Temp Hi:

It looks like you have been taking your time to read the whole thread here, which is great. I would still like to point out that the discussion regarding the new-hires of the combilist is NOT an "abinitio/non-abinitio" type of problem. Nor is it a matter of what company you choose to work for.

The recruiting process is as follows:

Let's say that SAS needs 100 pilots in one given year. The combilist deal states that SAS has to take all new pilots from SC, since these pilots have higher seniority than a pilot who has not yet been employed (naturally).

However, to make sure that SC is not losing all their pilots in too short a time, the number of pilots that SAS can "take" from SC is limited to 14 per cent of the total amount of pilots in SC.

14% is about 56 SC pilots. SAS will therefore FIRST recruit 56 pilots from SC, and then, being limited by the 14%-rule, go out on the "open market" to get their 44 other pilots.

SC, losing 56 pilots to SAS, will now need 56 new pilots. Since SC and SAS has the same recruiting organisation, this organisation will find 100 qualified SAS pilots through the regualr SAS interviews. 44 of these will be offered a job in SAS, and 56 will be offered a job in SC.

Of these 100 pilots, most of the "low timers" end up in SC, and most of the "high timers" end up in SAS, as it works now.

But if we look a few years into the future, to a year that SAS needs 50 pilots, we get an interesting scenario.

SAS will take ALL these 50 pilots from SC. SC will need 50 new pilots, and then ALL pilots who pass the SAS interview, WILL END UP IN SC. Regardless of wether he has 200 hrs from an abinitio school, 4000 hrs from a major US airliner or 10 000 hrs on various military aircraft.

They will be looking at a few years as an FO on a Fokker 50 in Tromso. Or on a Q-tip in CPH, STO or OSL. And if the need for pilots just stops, like it did around '91, these pilots will look at quite a few years in SC.

In other words, SAS is looking at a major recruiting problem in the future. Why would a 4000 hrs 737 FO apply for a job in SAS? After all, he's looking at a job where he will work 5/3 on a turbo-prop, for a wage that is up to 180 000 NOK less than his fellow pilot in SAS (with the same seniority), and when he finally gets to go over to SAS, his pension is worth jack **** .

We - the abinitios - are fairly happy with these conditions (although, like PAFB, I wonder for how long we will be regarded as "ab-initios" http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif). Yes - they are much better than what we could expect if we flew parachuters during the day and drove taxi at night. But still the differences are too big between being offered a job in SAS and being offered one in SC.

We would't dream of turning the offer down. A 4000 hr 737 FO might just do that.

This is why the unions have to have a clear policy on how large differences they will accept between pilots who end up in SAS and pilots who end up in SC.

Nick

Hung start

6th May 2001, 23:00

Nick, very good post.
This is why the unions have to have a clear policy on how large differences they will accept between pilots who end up in SAS and pilots who end up in SC.
Or change the recruiting process as we´ve agreed, or better yet: drop SC as a sistercompany, transfer all administration to a few desks at SAS, and incorporate all pilots and cabincrew into SAS. Now, if lower pay still is an absolute must on the routes that the props fly, then set that salary lower (as they do in so many other places eks. US where pay differs between 737 and 747).

[This message has been edited by Hung start (edited 06 May 2001).]

Nick Figaretto

6th May 2001, 23:26

Ave¸ Hung¸ morituri te salutamus. :)

Nick.

Tor

7th May 2001, 02:16

Despite what the media says about pilot shortage, it's my impression that new pilots are educated like never before.

Perhaps SAS won't "need" the 4000 hrs B737 F/O if the can get ab-initios that are willing (or even eager) to work under SC conditions while gaining experience for SAS?

PropsAreForBoats

7th May 2001, 10:40

Good post Nick, and I agree with Hung Start.

Tor, the rumour is that SAS' own prognosis say that after 2002 there will not be enough pilot candidates applying SAS, even if all ab-initios are approved.
So there is a major problem for SAS here, in light of the planned expansion until 2005.
It seems action is being taken to some degree, as there are strong rumours that sponsorships at NAC will resume shortly.
But i think SAS will still need high-time applicants (if only to supply SC with captains), and Nick's valid points must be seen in that context.

------------------
"what's it doing now...?"

Fokker-Jock

3rd Jun 2001, 18:03

Hung start: Quote "Or drop SC as a sister company.............."

Hi everyone,, my first message along this thread, in fact at all.

Dropping SC as a sistercompany would do a number of things. Being an SC employee I would of course say this is a great idea because new pilots wouldn't go through the "penalty" (with regard to salary and pension) in being put at SC instead of SAS. But if you say that since there has to be a diffrence in pay then we could set the salary in accordance with aircraft type. I think this would be a mistake because you would then get a new recruiting problem. The reason being that it would be pretty unfair with todays agreements that you are stuck on an aircraft type for a certain period of time before you can bid another. And if aircraft type = salary, it would be obvious that you would have a majority of pilots applying (bidding) for the big birds. Consequence: All new reqreuitment to SAS would be through the smaller aircraft type and if the bidding result indicated that there in a certain period was vacancies on a medium type A/C then we would have the same problem again with two pilots hired at the same time ending up on diffrent A/C thus, diffrent pay.

This being said I will agree with PAFB that the combilist was a blunder when the unions agreed on it. That is, for us hired after 1997. Because, as already said, if you then wanted to fly bigger birds, with bigger pay you would have to apply for the airline that could offer these pays and pension-plans.

You also mentioned earlier that you didn,t know PFAB's friends that was not qualified for SAS, and that this is not possible since SAS didn,t recruit pilots in the period 91-95. Perhaps I didn,t understand what you wrote, but the fact is that quite a few pilots applied for a job in SAS before 1989 when SC was started, and recieved a letter stating "Not qualified". These pilots then saw their opportunity in SC in 1989. They applied and was accepted. This relates to the point of PFAB that the combilist is wrong again because they had already recieved "NO". Please everyone take that last part with a pinch of salt, I know this shouldn't be said out loud,, but it is a fact, isn't it...

__________________________________________

..Blårock gutta.....

-Fokker Jock-

Ramrise

4th Jun 2001, 01:55

Allright, enough of that. Lets talk about what reaaaaallllyy matters, money!!! It does seem like pilots are getting their ducks in order and demanding higher pay. Delta, Lufthansa, Comair(oops!), Cathay, and whats going to happen in our own little hen house? The danes started this, the norwegians came along and now we are waiting for the swedes. Whats it going to be in the vote(strejkemandat) called by SPF?? I for one think it is very interesting but I dont feel all that confident that our swedish collegues will come through.

Any thoughts on this???

[This message has been edited by Ramrise (edited 03 June 2001).]

Hung start

4th Jun 2001, 13:43

Fokker Jock,

You´re probably right, that there are some "older" SC pilots today, that received a "No" from SAS prior to 1989. I don´t know all pilots, and their testresults..
What I´m saying is, that we have to look ahead, this was 12 + years ago. Those that may have failed SAS tests before SC was started, have now been flying F50´s as Captains, painted in SAS colours, on SAS SOP´s, with SAS pax, on SAS routes....for 12 years without incidents, well you get it....

Just as with the Linjeflyg pilots case, we are not gaining nothing from looking back, and using past occurences to step on eachother.
The only fair, and only possible solution without a mutiny :) , is to look at ALL SC pilots, as what they in MY eyes are, SAS pilots like the rest of us.

About incorporating SC into SAS; then lets forget about differentiated pay on F50/DH8 versus the jets. I see what you´re saying.

But the money saved on less (double) administration and all that, would easily cover for increased costs if paying crews the same, no matter what type they fly.

In these days of buying the likes of Air Bothnia, Braathens etc. etc. and even talking about incorporating BU´s pilots into SAS,......I find it very strange that this has not been done with SC already.

Rgds, og god pinse. Hung start

[This message has been edited by Hung start (edited 04 June 2001).]

PropsAreForBoats

5th Jun 2001, 19:34

Hung Start, I think thats the best suggestion I have heard so far. The number of administrative employees within SC has soared the last years, and there is no doubt that it would reduce administration costs significantly if SC operation was incorporated into SAS. Yes, the costs of pilot and cabin crew pay would rise, but i think the bottom line would show a positive result. (Would be interesting to see some calculations about this).
This would also make recruiting easier, and SAS employment would be more attractive. (And I think we are going to need that, if SAS is to get the number of pilots needed in the future.) Also it would be a solution to the captain shortage in SC, which is really turning into a major headache for the company.

But alas, probably another pilot Utopia :-)

Fokker-Jock

5th Jun 2001, 23:18

It's a brilliant idea, but let's face it. If we look at this from a management point of view, who would be interessted in firing the administration in SC so that the pilots would get more paid. (i would...) another thing is that every route has a mathematical equation behind it weighing cost vs income including crew, catering etc. etc. SC is in constant "fights" with other operators to compete for flying routes SAS put out for bid. If widerøe, cimber and skyways could do it for lesser cost thus giving greater income to SAS what would be the point of operating these A/C at all. Isn't that the hole filosofi behind SAS, buying up companies in scandinavia ? to have them operate routes at lower costs than SAS could do themselves?? i'm not a pessimist, and the idea is from our standpoint brilliant, but if we take into account a bit more than just our own salary, it's obvious that maybe the idea isn't possible to carry out.

______________________
Stor Motorhead m/ost og bacon u/potet

Hung start

5th Jun 2001, 23:46

Fokker Jock,

...) another thing is that every route has a mathematical equation behind it weighing cost vs income including crew, catering etc. etc. SC is in constant "fights" with other operators to compete for flying routes SAS put out for bid.
Thats exactly my point. But if you add to your "crew,catering etc.etc." equation, the cost of the now very large administration at SC, there you have one mighty good reason that SC might not be competitive......I mean; when the beancounters try to find out, who they want to fly a new route, they look at all the costs, and that price also includes administration.
Now, if you cut the administration and all that follows out of the equation,.... and let cost of mechanics, catering etc. be equal to what it always has, and allways will be, and then put pilots and cabin crew on SAS pay, i.e. incorporate them into SAS, then I´m sure that PAFB is right. The bottomline might very well turn out to be in the positive, and we would not have all these other present (transfer) or future (recruiting) problems, that PAFB talked about.

Fokker-Jock

6th Jun 2001, 00:12

Finding solutions to problems isn't really a great challenge if you in advance know what the real problem is.

The reason I'm saying this is because the problem we are discussing is not really the sallary. I think we can all agree that it would be unnatural for a big airline like SAS not to have a commuter company. And as we know, the hole idea of a commuter company is to operate smaller birds at a lower cost bringing passengers into the bigger route network of a bigger airline. But lately I grow more and more tired of watching SAS giving away more and more production to other companies, just because they can do this cheaper than SC it is of course logical of SAS management to do so. but for us working in SAS/SC I have still to find a logical answer to what the long term strategy of these descitions are. i would imagine a passenger buying a ticket for an SAS flight does this because he wants to fly SAS with whatever that implies. and not just because he wants to buy that specific ticket from SAS and then fly to his destination with cimber, widerøe etc..... I would think that since SAS does this it is for making money, with a minimum of effort (Outsourcing). great. I would also make the assumption that this is the alternative to have a commuter company. Speaking to my point again: why does SC exist. if this really is the strategy of SAS, how could this be done with the best of benefits to all the pilots in SC. the solution would have to be a slow transition for all the pilots in SC into SAS and thereby outsource more and more of SC's operation to other companies as SC becomes smaller, and finally sease to exsist. Then we would not run into the problems we have now until widerøe or any company's pilots, owned partially or fully by SAS, demand to get on the combilist. as a conclusion i would still agree with PAFB that the combilist did more harm than good when it came.

Since we now already have the combilist between SAS and SC, I think what i just wrote would be a good solution. But it will of course never happen obviously, as SC is expanding with new AC and new routes. Removing SC is obviously not SAS's strategy. Damn... :)

____________________________
A coke and a marlboro gets me fit in the morning

Flathatter

7th Jun 2001, 15:13

Good reasoning there, FJ. But you´re making one mistake: What you say makes sense. It might even be politically incorrect. And that will get you nowhere at this airline (and even with some contributors to this forum).

Fokker-Jock

7th Jun 2001, 16:30

Ok, Flat. Care to enhance that critisism ?

i believe this is a forum for exchanging thought and ideas. Perhaps management is even reading it, but the idea is not for this to be a gateway into the minds of the executives. Please if you have any thought share them, instead of critisising the opinions of others without giving a clue to what your opinion of the issues are.

You may however be right, I'm not saying you're not. but please write something more to why you think the ideas are obsolete. If writing in this forum will get me nowhere, please tell me what will.

_______________________________

"i had fell off a horse that day and broken a few ribs, fortunately i also broke the soundbarrier" C.E Yeager