Providing for DECs in union agreements?

[170to5]

I was chatting to a skipper the other day who joined EK as a DEC. Having previously been in a heavily unionised carrier, DEC's are new (well, except for in one particularly badly handled episode in the old crowd) to me.

Were your company to recruit DEC's, what would your opinion be? Do you think , as I do, that a certain number being included in the recruitment/upgrade figures each year:

a) brings advantages to flight ops departments as long as external experience is valued and shared (and not beaten down because 'well, that's not how we do it at [insert every airline ever]')

b) gives people the chance to avoid the (predominantly) geographical handcuffs that the LHS seems to apply, if they should decide that they want or, of course, need, to move to another part of Europe, the UK etc...without changing from Manchester to, say, Guangzhou, which seems rather a large jump (depending on where you live in Manchester, of course).

c) the biggest reason I have for supporting DEC's is...me. My current employer is about as secure as you can be, but I can't imagine losing your job as a 10 year skipper and being given the choice of going back as a year 1 F/O on less than half your current salary (being unable to pay for school fees, mortgages, etc) or going to China, Turkey, the Middle East (for those who don't like it), or Pakistan. I certainly don't want to be presented with those choices as my only options should the worst happen, and therefore I can't expect that others should be restricted to them.

I've always said that I would be a supporter of allowing a certain percentage (say 20% or so) of all recruitment/upgrade requirements each year being opened up to DEC's. Yes it would affect my upgrade time, but it also gives me security (to a degree) that should the worst happen, I'm given the option of massive financial stress or going to the other side of the world and getting home once a month.

The current system is absurd...my father has been in law for 30 years. Should he get laid off, he wouldn't go back to being an article clerk and absolutely shouldn't do. It's absurd! Do you want a surgeon going back to work as a junior doctor? Who the hell came up with this?!

Is it just me?!

[flap15]

DEC would allow management to offer lower pay deals to the incoming as they know they are desperate. See Lisbon !

Easyjet opened Lisbon on lower rates than the rest of the company and offered them to the current work force and surprise surprise no one accepted. They then used this to advertise for DEC and upgrade to command for SFO's.

[Bealzebub]

Nothing new about Direct Entry Captains. In companies that have started up or are going through a period of rapid expansion (such as EK,) it often proves impractical (or impossible) to promote from within the existing pilot contingent. Where union agreements exist, there is often provision made for this scenario.

In more established operations it is customary to promote from within the existing workforce. That promotion is dependant on the candidate reaching a certain level of overall experience and most importantly reaching a demonstrated level of performance.

Seniority within an airline provides the "queuing" mechanism for consideration for these promotions. In other words you take a number and wait your turn. "Your turn" doesn't imply success, but it does provide a fair mechanism for knowing when that opportunity will likely first arise.

Loyalty is poorly rewarded by allowing those who might feel they are "entitled" to decide that queues are not for them, and they should be allowed to simply jump ahead of those already waiting by virtue of their experience somewhere else. Such people might be catered to by the opportunities afforded by new start-ups or by rapidly expanding companies.

As far as "professions" go, some would argue that being a pilot isn't a "profession" in the strictest sense of the definition. The articled clerk and the junior doctor might themselves have remained such if promotion and advancement opportunities hadn't happened at their previous employers. In any event, these professions do place a far greater emphasis on what an individuals unique skillset and past performance bring to an employer in deciding their current worth. That worth is often negotiable and different from others within the firm. Pilots are simply rewarded by rank and grade and often loyalty (seniority) within their companies.

Those that decry loyalty or seniority based employment are often the first to jump up and down when what they see as a near term advantage later works against their personal interests. For example in the OP's argument he would no doubt be vexed to discover that his hoped for move to Manchester was thwarted by his employer deciding to simply recruit somebody into that base rather than move him from Guangzhou or wherever.

Being allowed to "queue jump" is all well and good provided nobody else is allowed to jump your own personal queue. Summed up in the OP's statement that:
the biggest reason I have for supporting DEC's is...me
As for the statement that:
I think an increasing number of people are starting to wake up to the fact that seniority is archaic and only serves as a device to enable management to keep terms and conditions down. It is worth remembering that the architects of this new philosophy were the large Lo-Cost carriers that expanded with such success throughout the last two decades. Terms & Conditions are a cost, and keeping those costs to a minimum was the very raison d'être for these successful companies. You don't have to search far in this same forum to find those companies where dissatisfaction and angst is rife.

[170to5]

But that's my point, that once it's accepted that DEC's are permitted to join a company as an accepted part of the recruitment strategy down to the union/company council to implement such terms that control it - I agree that, say, MON would be damaged by for example Eastern skippers crossing over and accepting 70 grand year 5, as a massive pay rise for them.

Bealzebub, I don't know what seat you're in but if you're in the RHS would you not want some mechanism when you move into the left, that if you lost your 90k (or whatever) job you at least have a chance of getting back to 70k and being able to pay for the school fees, cars, mortgage and loans, and don't necessarily have to go back to the bottom, earning 40k and being in the queue with 250 hour cadets who have a fiesta and camp bed to pay for?

However I would also argue that while initially, airlines would doubtlessly see it as an opportunity to bring in cheap labour (although by forcing them to limit the percentage of DECs being brought in to a company you can minimise the problem), the number of captains in the industry doesn't change and the drive of TP (yes, yes, not everybody wants to drive jets, jet jockeys always blah blah...) pilots to move up into jets is unchanged and therefore over time any upset caused by a shift will settle and return to where it was.

However by playing with requirements for hours on type or minimum weight, you can protect things. In any case my major concern isn't people who are just a bit bored and want something new, I only have problems that if you lose your job through bankruptcy or financial crisis you would have to start from scratch again and have to sell your house and everything in it.

It seems grossly unfair and is absolutely not the spirit of a union to effectively look the other way, when their duty should be protection of all of its members, most of all in times of hardship. If it isn't you this time, think about when it IS your time!

Perhaps just a 'contingency' clause could be introduced whereby if a company closes down, agreements can be made with other airlines to prioritise unemployed pilots over internal upgrades?

Problem is though, I suspect as a proposal there would be a great deal of 'well I'm alright Jack, why the hell should I risk my own career progression, I don't even know that guy to feel sorry for him' from members. Sad stuff.

[Bealzebub]

Like most egalitarian concepts, they are fine when they seem to advantage you, but when you reach that point when they don't, then they suddenly "need clauses."

It is a capitalist commercial world. Nobody is going feel sorry for you (for very long.) If the company you work for fails, then you suffer as a part of that failure. Life is unfair. Your kids school fees, and your expensive house and car are not sacrosanct. If you are in this position there isn't much else you can do other than take stock and if necessary start again. Very often that is necessary. Quite why another company should feel sorry for you and slot you in above their own equally well qualified employees, is both unlikely and bizarre.

You pay your money and take your choice. If that choice turns out to be a bad one through luck or misjudgement, then you move on. Nobody says "never mind come and work for us as if that never happened." There are opportunities out there that might soften the blow, but it is up to you to compete for them. Neither unions, nor regulation, nor anything else is going to featherbed your life for you. If you have been standing in the wrong queue, then you will need to get to the back of the shortest line for the right queue, or find somewhere else to play where the queues are not so long (probably for good reason.)

[Denti]

I'm working for a company that has provisions in its CLA for DECs. However they can only be hired if there is no qualified FO available for internal promotion. It is a remnant of a time around 7 years back when we had to hire several hundred DECs to continue the exponential growth the company was going through. Currently upgrade times are between 10 to 20 years depending in which of the three original companies that merged into this new one the FO in question started.

Nothing any of us can do about it, it is just a result of extremely bad management choices, however we have to managed to at least get our T&Cs up by a very wide margin, quite unlike those airlines that do not support a seniority system like for example FR. None of our FOs would even think about being a captain for something like 90k, simply not enough renumeration for the job.

[170to5]

Bealzebub, just to be absolutely clear, I am in absolutely no need of anything of the sort, and I haven't sparked this up because I'm at the wrong side of anything like this - in fact I'd say my company is one of the most secure out there, although of course that can change in a heartbeat. In fact I would initially be disadvantaged by anything like this as I would have my command time extended - long term though it's something I'd want to have in the back pocket as a skipper.

I have always found it odd, however, that sideways movement is almost taboo in this industry. It's not a case of companies feeling sorry for you or being mollycoddled or anything of the sort, but of accepting that recruitment doesn't necessarily have to send you to the bottom of the pile - just the bottom of the captain's pile.

And I certainly don't find it bizarre that a company would employ a captain into that role as a preference over sending them back to the RHS for 10 years!

[7Q Off]

Lots of airlines that dont suport seniority and employs DEC tend to pay :mad:.

DEC are fine if the company has NO suitable FO for upgrade. Some countries does not have a flow of experienced FO so most companies need to hide DEC. Most are expat that get need to get paid well to get them. But for locals is the same.

But I dont understand what economical benefit you can get if you hire a DEC in to a legacy carrier when you have several 10000 hs fo, that you trained for 10 or 20 years ready for an upgrade. Ok, the DEC will be happy but you will wasting all your time invested training that FO.

[Exit Strategy]

Seniority is a great idea if you are living in the 60's or 70's. Today it is the biggest handbrake on our lives. Why shouldn't you be able to change company and go to a position that is suitable for your level of experience?

Just because your airline goes broke or lays you off because of economic circumstances or inept management, why should you not have the opportunity to apply for a command at another airline rather than starting all over again?

Seniority is insane and serves only to stop Pilots marketing their skills more effectively (which airlines are grateful for so wages are kept down).

[Dan Winterland]

There's plenty of opportunity for sideways movement . It's called contract work and if you register with one or some of the contract agencies as a Captain, you will get many offers each week, many of them very well paid. Whether you want to accept an offer of these jobs is up to you. Many pay well because they are not popular.

Like all business, our profession is driven by market forces. And try way our industry is changing, contract work is becoming more common.

[7Q Off]

To be honest exit strategy, most companies that pay worst as you say are the ones that accept DEC like ryanair and hate seniority. Legacy companies with unions and the seniority that you hate in general they pay a lot more. You allways have contract work overseas in places like china, india, etc.

[Exit Strategy]

7Q, I didn't say that I hate seniority. Please do not tell me what I hate, it makes you look foolish. I have worked in several seniority driven systems. All stuck to seniority rigidly until it didn't suit them. Airlines will bypass seniority when they need to and use it as an excuse for not doing something the next day.

What I said is the concept (in the modern world) is insane. In a different era with cradle to grave jobs it was a valid way to manage progression within a company. Those days are over. Even if you are at the top of the tree in a legacy carrier you would be brave to predict that you could not be the victim of another failed airline. There are many examples.

I agree that the companies that do take DEC's generally do not pay particularly well, however there has been a downward trend in conditions in the industry. A new hire at any legacy carrier that I am familiar with will not be on the same package as his colleagues that joined earlier.

Most normal industries hire a person with a skill set to perform a given job. They may have a preference to promote from within which is great, but they generally will not preclude external applicants from consideration if they have something to offer. It is also unlikely that a person with years of experience will go from a senior position to an entry level position just because they change company (unless you are a Pilot). If they are unfortunate enough to find themselves out of a job they may have to take a job that is not quite at the same level but they do not end up in a trainee or new graduate position again.

In some cases seniority does not even protect you as the ship sinks. The concept of "last on first off" no longer stands up industrially (in some countries) as companies argue successfully for targeted retrenchments on particular fleets or bases.

So is there a place for seniority in the modern airline world? Well if you work for a well managed and profitable company that will probably outlast you, well maybe but they are few and far between these days.

[170to5]

And that's one problem that I have with seniority: the system pushes people who run out of luck to extremes - how can it be right for someone who is, say, a 5 or 6 year skipper, to be laid off to find his only choices are to start from the bottom again and get in line behind the 250 hour cadet or to be told, by fellow pilots - some of who will almost doubtlessly end up in the same situation - "well there are plenty of opportunities to go into a company as a DEC...just move to China!" Of course, how simple...:ugh:

That strikes me as an absolutely absurd situation to push guys into! In fact I find it not only absurd but degrading to the profession. The implementation of a completely inflexible seniority system tells the everybody, including management, that their pilot workforce only values an experienced captain (or F/O for that matter) the same as a brand new 250 hour joiner who still gets inappropriately excited at the sight of a jet engine. Do unions worldwide share this view? Or is it simply that "as long as I'm okay Jack, I don't care if that guy gets shafted!". Can anyone think of why that might be massively shortsighted thinking??

I agree that the best paying jobs generally are at airlines that don't recruit DEC's, but that's the whole point of what I'm saying - change the mentality of the industry unions and that won't be the case. It's only so now because the most unionised carriers are generally legacy, and their policy about DEC's has been the same for 50 years!! It's not that if you hire a few DEC's a year your entire airline will go down the pan, it's that current union agreements rarely allow for them. You are then left with only rapidly expanding carriers who want DEC's, and whose business strategy is the only one that leads them to expand rapidly? BINGO! The packages of majors aren't better BECAUSE they exclude DEC's, the two points are completely independent!

From my point of view, any company be it in aviation or otherwise should aim to have a balanced recruitment policy that allows entry from multiple levels, which is what happens everywhere else!!! It allows for a fresh approach and different OP's to be considered, improving the operation and very possibly saving money. If it is properly managed by unions and managements it could actually be a good thing, imagine that!

And just to be clear, I am in the RHS at the moment. DEC's being hired would negatively affect my upgrade time directly. I am not at the wrong end of the system, and I am not (I hope) close to being laid off...but it isn't difficult to see the system we have is not appropriate.

I wonder how many guys at bmi would have been dead set against DEC's right up to the point that they were merged with BA? Perhaps their opinion has been modified now - they were lucky. I suspect there are plenty of BA pilots who would have been delighted for them to go back to the RHS.

[7Q Off]

I understand the idea but the real issue here is that most guys said that DEC should bring better pay and really is the other way. Companies with no seniority and with DEC tend to pay less than legacy carriers and no DEC. In legacy carriers a captain is better paid because that guy takes a lot of time to be became a CPT. So once he is a captain he is an expensive assett to loose. In a company with no seniority and DEC captains are cheap, just hire an other cheap DEC, 3 months of training and thats all.
If DEC benefits pilots with better pays as most sugests, then low costs or any airline with DEC should be paying better. Thats not happening. Ryan Air is paying better than British?
I am not against DEC. In most cases I am in favour. Lots of companies need them because of low time FO or due too rapid expansions. And in those cases they pay OK. But no every company is the same. Legacy carriers are not the same. DEC on legacy carriers are useless (except on a merger) and not a benefit for the pilots on general. You would just delay the upgrade a 10000 to 15000 hs FO just to make a former captain form a bankrupted company happy. No real economic benefit.

[170to5]

I would argue that in legacy carriers, the pay is generally higher because unions are strongest there! Whatever way you look at it, no airline - when left to itself - pays more than it absolutely has to for a pilot.

I would say that your point about hiring countless DEC's is moot as:

1) this is the potential situation with F/O's and does that happen in any half decent carrier, legacy or not? The majority of the time, no.

2) once any self respecting company has spent the money to interview, sim-check, employ, train and type rate a DEC they will hold onto him - they needed him in the first place.

There are of course unscrupulous companies who already do this to F/O's in particular, but you will never change that. And besides the companies I'm talking about, those with unions, will be unable to hire and fire DEC's (that they've now spent a lot of money training)...that's the point of having the union there!

I have a problem with the prevailing attitude as well when pilots spend their lives complaining about management who line their own pockets, don't care about employees, are entirely motivated by self-interest etc and then just come up with the 'well it's your bad luck, I'm okay so I don't care about you!' when pressed...how selfish can you get! What's the point of having managers when we're all quite happy to shaft each other given half the chance?!

And while there is no economic benefit to the company, what about the economic benefit to you when you find yourself in the situation? Would you see things differently then, when faced with a 50% pay cut, or, of course, being free to move to the other side of the world - where, it seems, the streets are paved with gold, desirable jobs are plentiful and your family will fit immediately into life, loving it and supporting you. How will your wife and kids react to you saying 'Surprise! we're moving to Saigon!'?

[Bealzebub]

So you make a choice and things don't work out for you. As unfortunate as that is, you then think other people who made better or luckier choices should move aside and let you slot in above them? OK, but unfortunately the most desirable employers tend to have the biggest queues at the door. You want to join, guess where your place in the queue is going to be? Demeaning, degrading, and unfair? Those already in the queue don't think so. "I am alright Jack"? Maybe. How about "Dry your eyes Princess!"

[7Q Off]

170to5: probably the same surprice your wife will get if you said sorry honney, i am not getting the upgrade slot I was waiting for my last 15 years with those extra 50k a year for a better life because some old fart is getting my slot because he is a DEC, and honney, when I get the upgrade in 5 more year those extra 50k will now be 20k because the old fart accepted worst conditions just to pay his mortage. Sorry babe but the old fart is really happy with our money in his pocket. We are good christians.

[Denti]

Well, the question is why those unions are strong in legacy carriers? In my outfit there was no union recognition until around 7 years ago. The pay was extremely bad, hiring DEC was common and using TREs to get rid of unwanted elements in the pilot work force (by "checking them out [of the company]") was normal business.

Then the union got hold in the company, mainly because two unionized companies were bought and integrated. Seniority was instated, the hiring of DECs stopped, nobody can be checked out of a position, he has to be trained up to standard again if he fails a check, and well, pay more than doubled in that time period. Entry level FO pay (type rating paid by the company of course) is now what used to be entry to mid level captains pay. Since seniority and union systems now mean that there is a viable career in that carrier, pilots want to stay with the company instead of moving on after minimum time and pressure is high to have better T&Cs.

Not one of the pilots in the company has asked its company council to negotiate rules that allow hiring of DECs in front of its 15.000k+ hour FOs, quite the opposite really. Since the CLAs still have rules where to put DECs on the payscale based on prior experience there were many demanding that those rules where to be scrapped since we do not want any DECs anyway. As the company wanted those old rules to be kept the company council decided not to press the point, especially as it was easier in return to increase the T&Cs and no DEC can be hired anyway unless there is no qualified FO left in the company.

[170to5]

Well there's no convincing some people!

[Trossie]

If pilots want to be considered to be 'professionals' then they should be ready to accept DECs as readily as doctors at an hospital would accepts a 'direct entry' specialist from another hospital rather than insisting that he has to join at the bottom as a junior doctor, or lawyers accepting a 'direct entry' solicitor into their practice without insisting that he join at the bottom as an articled clerk. If pilots are going to insist on these outdated 'list' systems where everyone has to start at the bottom, then they are not 'professionals' but simply labourers.

The best motivator for employment conditions is a flexible and potentially mobile workforce. When the boss knows that he's got his labourers trapped in some magical 'list' he doesn't need to worry about the cost of losing them.

Comparing 'legacy carriers' (who can go bust, vide Pan Am, Swissair, Sabena, Malev, etc.) with other airlines is like comparing the public sector with the private sector in business ethic.