I am an Army of One (merged)

[AAL_Silverbird]

Click Here (http://www.calforums.com/calboard/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2543&pagenumber=1)

I am an Army of One (or 2, or 300, ...)

I am an army of One - A Captain in the Continental Airlines army.
For years I was a loyal soldier in Gordon's army. Now I fight my own war.
I used to feel valued and respected. Now I know I am mere fodder.
They (CAL) used to exhibit labor leadership. Now they exploit legal loopholes.
They used to enjoy my maximum. Now they will suffer my minimum.
I am an army of One.

I used to save CAL a thousand pounds of fuel per leg; finding the best FL, getting direct routing, throttling back when on-time was made, skimping during ground ops, adjusting for winds, being smart and giving the company every effort I could conjure. Now, it's "burn baby, burn".
I used to call maintenance while airborne, so the part would be ready at the gate. Now, they'll find the write-up when they look in the book.
I used to try to fix problems in the system, now I sit and watch as the miscues pile up.
I used to fly sick. Now I use my sick days, on short notice, on the worst day of the month.
I am an army of One.

I used to start the APU at the last possible moment. Now my customers enjoy extreme comfort.
I used to let the price of fuel at out-stations affect my fuel orders. I still do.
I used to cover mistakes by operations. Now I watch them unfold.
I used to hustle to ensure an on-time arrival, to make us the best. Now I do it for the rampers and agents who need the bonus money….but this too may change.
I used to call dispatch for rerouting, to head off ground delays for bad weather. Now I collect overs, number 35 in line for takeoff.

I am on a new mission - to demonstrate that misguided leadership of indifference and disrespect has a cost. It's about character, not contracts. It's about leading by taking care of your people instead of leadership by bean counters (an oxymoron). With acts of omission, not commission, I am a one-man wrecking crew - an army of One. My mission used to be to make CAL rich. Now it's to make CAL pay.

When they furlough more pilots than the rest, pilots that cost them 60 cents on the dollar - I will make them pay.
When they under-staff bases and over-work reserves to keep pilots downgraded, down-flowed, or downtrodden - I will make them pay.
When over-booked customers are denied boarding system wide, while jets are parked in the desert - I will make them pay.
When they force pilots, who have waited 12 years to become captains, to be FOs again - I will make them pay.
When they ask CAL pilots to show leadership at Express, and then deny them longevity - I will make them pay.
When they recall F/As for the summer, just to furlough them again in the fall like migrant workers - I will make them pay.
When they constantly violate the letter and spirit of our contract - a contract that's a bargain by any measure, and force us to fight lengthy grievances - I will make them pay.

My negotiating committee speaks for me, but I act on my own. I am a walking nightmare to the bean counters that made me. Are you listening? This mercenary has a lot of years left with this company; how long can you afford to keep me bitter? I'm not looking for clauses in a contract, I'm looking for a culture of commitment and caring. When I see it, I'll be a soldier for CAL again. Until then, I am an Army of One…And I'm not alone!

[OllyBeak]

Brilliant stuff mate. Death to the bean counters.

Ol.

[Soddit]

Does anyone know to which Intensive Care Unit 411A has been taken?

[alapt]

Go for it! Now that's clear logical thinking. You will probably lead a battallion by this week-end. The W.W.P.U. is born

"WORLD WIDE PILOT UNION"

MANY SOLDIERS ARE IN THE DARK AND WAITING FOR THE CHANCE TO JOIN FORCES AND FINALLY BE FREED FROM THE BEAN-COUNTERS!

[Ignition Override]

What a very interesting and creative list. I still had the impression that Bethune was the saviour over there, the airline "Jean d'Arc" (Joan of Arc-please excuse my terrible French). Maybe anybody is, compared to the airline cannibals, Lorenzo and Icahn.

Did Continental lay-off a much higher percentage of pilots than the other majors? Were many able to go to Express?

Did the Board of Dirctors increase management pay or stock options after Sept 11?

Good luck to your new Special Force commandos.

[Apollo 1]

This Guy has got his priorities damn straight.:eek:

[one four sick]

AAL_Silverbird

You're not alone. I've been thinking like this for a very long time too. My colleagues know that. I hope/know there's more of us out there.

[Doctor Cruces]

Was gonna try and join. I like small, friendly outfits. Looks like this one is going to be huge but I'll probably risk it anyway.

Good luck.

Doc C.

[MR WIBBLE]

Hello Boys and Girls and fellow citizens of Wibble,

AAL_Silverbird

Well said, Well written and a big WELL DONE. I only hope that the majority of people agree with you.

lets look forward to a long and successful era with the ONE MAN ARMY at the helm.

[Groundhog Night]

A bit extreme? What else has any effect - nothing!

Soddit - excellent.

[411A]

Not in intensive care, Soddit----just watching with bemusement.
Recall that CX had incentives for their pilots in the 70's-80's to operate efficiently. Really smart aircarriers will adopt these practices today...notice that US Air has reached an agreement with their pilots already.

[Pontius]

Well, apart from the furloughs, this smacks of BA.

Anyone for joining me in a BA regiment?

[Flight Detent]

Absolutely excellent work,
How did he know that's exactly what's happening here,
I thought we in our company were all alone with this,
The penny still hasn't dropped upstairs.
Great stuff,
Cheers:mad:

[Idunno]

As an Aer Lingus pilot who has just gone through the same epiphany as you Silverbird, I say.....RIGHT ON!

As one who gave the company my best at all times, out of habit as much as out of intent , I say....I'M RIGHT WITH YOU BRO'!

As one who has been spat on and shat on in return, I say...NEVERMORE! NEVERMORE! NEVERMORE!

My allegiance now lies SOLELY with my brother officers. WORLDWIDE!

And I want to especially thank the pilots of the US who gave more than lip service to our cause in our time of need.

IT WILL NEVER BE FORGOTTEN BY ME OR MY COLLEAGUES.

!HOLD THE LINE!

[Smokie]

A man on a mission, I like it. Perhaps this is the sort of stand we should take in our company, and the sooner the better !:eek: :eek:

[Mac the Knife]

Far OUT! Solid! And Right ON!

[wonderbusdriver]

The beancounters are just not able to quantify the effects of the attitude they have induced in so many ex-dedicated colleagues, thus they are unable to effectively deal with the "problem" - us!.

If only they new, that the attitude of so many less senior colleagues was even less - if at all - loyal to "the company".
But maybe the whole concept of loyalty and accountability is outdated?..

People flying desks will - unfortunately - only learn the hard way.

[Covenant]

Do you know what's scary? This is being acted out in just about every industry across the world at the moment. Don't think that the airlines are alone in being afflicted by beancounters.

The pendulum will swing. The beancounters can't keep on treating people like just so many numbers in an accounting column. The worm(s) will turn. I just hope I'm around to witness it.

Good luck to all one-man armies across the world!!

[West Coast]

Sorry, can't seem to find the same enthusiasm for sticking it to the company. In the long run, your only hurting yourself. As long as you remain an army of one, no worries. If you enlist some help well, you may just slay the dragon that provides you with a good living. Find another path.

[AAL_Silverbird]

Sorry mates but I should have made it more clear, I'm not the author just saw it on the web and brought it over here. Click on the "Click Here" and it will take you to the orginial URL. Right attitude, wrong carrier!

[wonderbusdriver]

It´s not my personal attitude either, but...

the point is: more and more senior pilots who have been extremely loyal in the past are showing this change of attitude, whereas many younger colleagues have been showing it even sooner.

It´s not about "right" or "wrong" - this sort of attitude will not do a company any good.
Management has a problem here! - They do not seem to have a solution yet, and even if, are unable to communicate it in a way for most of us to embrace.

As another colleague summarized recent contract talks:

Their immovable dogma is infinite "flexibility" on our part.

[Kaptin M]

Well written by whomever. Thanks for the link, Silverbird .

In fact I (and most other "soldiers" in this company) have made it POLICY to follow the Ops Manual to the letter eg. maximum taxi speeds (3 knots on slippery taxiways :D ), ALWAYS use the longest runway for take-off (regardless of take-off weight), select "gear down and landing flap on glide slope alive (those delayed gear/flap landings cost ME an extra minute or two in salary), start the APU after landing - even on the last sector of the day when you know that a GPU is waiting (in spite of advising the beanies that this is unnecessary).

Can anyone else remember those good old days, when ALL the employees worked TOGETHER to make their Company the BEST?
And it WAS!!
People actually ENJOYED going to work then, and the Company revelled in their annual balance sheet.

As somebody else on this forum wrote several weeks ago, an unhappy pilot is an expensive pilot.


Yep, the "New World management" has certainly turned THIS industry around!!

[CaptainSquelch]

The saddest part of the story is that the beancounters think, no worse -they know- that they are doing good.

One real important thing must be missing in their training manuals. It is the chapter that teaches them how humans work. Humans as an individual and humans as a group. They work with humans but don't have a clue how to treat with them.

Isn't this a bit like putting me in a new type of aircraft without a course and without a manual? I think I'd get it airborne and I might even squeeze out a landing. It won't be safe, it won't be comfortable and it certainly won't be efficient.

The average management thinks all they are dealing with is the money of the shareholders and that is what they are trained for. Their most important asset however is the workforce. And they don't know how to deal with it!

I wished there would be a cheaper way to teach the management how wrong they are but I'm afraid .....

Sq

[prim2]

Brilliant! If you could get everyone in the company to follow your example, you could put the bastards out of business and...

(On second thought, never mind.);)

[Nogbad the Bad]

Army of One...........

If it's any consolation, there are hundereds who feel EXACTLY the same as you, working for NATS (UK)......a completely fed up work force (to say the least !!!)

[AA717driver]

At TWA, we busted our butts to save a penny--in order to save the company. Now, at AA, everything the CAL pilot is doing to hurt the company--is in the manual!

You can run the APU from touchdown to takeoff, you can alter your cruise speed, you can configure as early as you want, you can wait to write up items till the last minute, call in sick late...etc.

It seems AA is set up to operate in the least effecient manner possible. But at least the Harvard MBA's know how to mistreat the employees. It is amazing that examples of good employee relations go unnoticed while they spend every waking moment trying to figure out how to screw the employees out of a penny.

"The floggings will continue until morale improves."TC

[GlueBall]

My union dues are automatically taken out of my pay. We have elected pilots on committees who engage the bean counters on work issues. There is no glamor or company loyalty involved. We don't get what we think we deserve, we only get what we negotiate. And that's it. We live and work by our contract.

I fly from point A to point B, one day at a time, for a negotiated, contractual fee. We operate by FAA rules and by negotiated company rules and according to negotiated company policy. That's it. I'm not busy getting a living, I am living. I think that there is room for lots of improvement in our pay and in our working conditions. No doubt, we deserve a better contract, but I'm not going to taxi at 4 Kts nor run the APU needlessly, nor fly with extended flaps longer, nor fly at less than LRC. Just because we have idiot bean counters does not cause me to be less professional or less dignified. Besides, it's extra work and more stressful trying to operate a jet outside the prescribed operating envelope.

In order to be happy one has to eliminate wants. Because people die in this endless pursuit of getting and wanting more.:(

[West Coast]

Well said glueball.

['%MAC']

A well written piece, I have a renewed admiration for the rank and file at COA. Apparently we have no ex-Eastern pilots on this board, as I posted Sweet Sixteen and it was promptly censured. In the U.S. a flight is considered on time if it departs within 15 minutes of its scheduled time. Sweet Sixteen is a union activity (not necessarily endorsed) of delaying the flight one minute beyond, with the implication that on-time departures are published quarterly by the FAA. It may be that we can expect such gamesmanship in the near future from our brothers at COA. Sorry if the previous deleted post was a bit recondite, but if you ever hear ‘sweet sixteen’ that’s the meaning, guess you don’t have it over there.

[6feetunder]

Glueball = w.anker.

I'd hate to be in the middle of a fight with you on my wing. This isn't a gentlemen's game, and it isn't the pilots that made it that way.

[Carruthers]

Amazing, just read this thread as an outsider, deliberately sabotaging your company, throwing your toys out of the cot! Grow up do, how do you expect anyone to view this profession with any respect. Why do pilots think that the world revolves around them, that everyone is out to get them and that airlines exist for their benefit? The day of three dimensional sat nav and fully automatic aeroplanes is not far off boys and girls, then the 'beancounters' will fly them from the ground, perhaps not literally but the writing is on the wall.

[Config]

Carruthers - You seem very confused. Go away and come back when you have given it a little thought. You are not qualified to make any comments on this thread!

'...how do you expect anyone to view this profession with any respect.'

You can make that comment, but expect us to respect our management?

Nobody is sabotaging any company. We are paid to take aeroplanes from A to B. That is what we are doing. Most of the company's money/time saving tricks are done by the pilots. You can go out of your way to do it, but what is the point. We are paid not a lot more than a while a go, but expected to do a lot more...

[411A]

"... most of the company's money/time saving tricks are done by the pilots..."
Well yes, some are, but most "money/time saving tricks" are, in actual fact, accomplished by astute financial management...fuel price hedging is but one good example.

Gosh, some pilots here sure do seem to have an exhaulted opinion of themselves. As Cathay Pacific has recently demonstrated...crowing cockerals today, feather dusters tomorrow, as in 49+ bye bye.

[ZFT]

Interesting work ethics here. Surely if you accept your salary, you are duty bound to do your best for your company.
If you don’t agree with company polices, you can vote with your feet.
(There are many, many directives within my company that I disagree with, but to deliberately compromise the company – no, that’s really quite unethical).

[sojourn]

>>>Interesting work ethics here.<<<

the job gets done, but the problems that one encounters aren't proactively solved? ever had an insurance claim denied repeatedly?

>>>Surely if you accept your salary<<<

don't call me shirley!

ever had your company violate your contract repeated?

>>>but to deliberately compromise the company – no, that’s really quite unethical<<<

you didn't read very well, did you. nobody is compromising anything, no ethics are being violated, just watching ironies unfold, without leading to a better way, it gets quite interesting at times!

[Ignition Override]

ZFT: Welcome to the US airline environment. I'm not with Continental and have no idea what is happening there. Anybody who quits an airline job (it is the case with FAs, mechanics, ramp personnel...) gives up their salary and seniority, unless they are brand new. Many, if not most pilots, could easily lose between 20 and 80& of their salaries or more if they impulsively or not, went to another company as a new hire who always has no seniority, until many more (maybe hundreds) pilots are hired after you. There must be states in the US, near all major airline crewbases, where a home mortgage or a child's education can be reduced on a whim by these percentages and with no questions asked? Interesting concept and quite new to me. And I also did not know that major airlines are always hiring.

Seniority determines where you are based, what aircraft and seat you can hold, can you fly on stndby/reserve or know your monthly schedule in advance, whether you are gone on your family members' birthdays, Christimas etc, home for any full weekends. Is this not how seniority determines one's private life (some are thinking "well, you guys all knew this when you got hired-blah, blah, blah..."). Not to mention vacations also unavailable from spring through fall, sometimes for years when the economy has slowed for a while.

Our salaries never go with us, as might happen with some management or consulting jobs.

Pprune certainly seems to attract many laymen "experts" on the airline profession, whose opinions are based only on theoretical knowledge (Microsoft aviation with a "Force Feedback" control stick and machine gun/.3o mm cannon buttons?) or hearsay, who have never flown for an airline, and therefore have no comprehension of what the working pilots' lives or careers consist of. Even those who are/were military pilots (government service at an artificially low salary) have no understanding of a civilian pilot lifestyle or the airline environment, unless their airline went under or he/she gets laid off and can rejoin the military for a tour.

Those who have the required experience can always apply and try the profession out for a while.

[loaded1]

Well 411a now we all know where you are coming from. What a dirty little yob remark "49+ bye bye" is. You are just another greedy airline manager happily stuffing the troops as usual and if you aren't then you are a sad lurker with a sick envy of airline pilots. I don't think I've ever seen a more repugnant post on this reporting point board.

Dont think you can creep off and enjoy the satisfaction of having wound me or other airline pilots up, for in reality you have not: you have just revealed your true colours for all to see: yellow.

Good luck to all at Cathay, Aer Lingus and shortly, our own little corner of OneWorld.

[PPRuNe Hound]

Censored again eh?

Fine, I can play that game.

Censor me again if you please, and side with anarchism PPRuNe, but I will keep this up, and I will continue to respond.

Here then is an attempt at a finer prose, and as damning a response as I can manage in the 5 minutes available to me.

Do remember to check for typos readers, and pass on the corrigendums forthwith.

We musn't have the supposed lower classes getting away with making fine points, albeit with unrestrained anger, without advice on spelling and/or anger management courses that really should be presented to the unprincipled respondents such as Captain N (oh dear should I have said that?) who wilfully undo what their contracts otherwise state is a requirement of employment - simply that of diligence and representation towards the employers commercial goals, commonly known these days as a mission statement.

To wit then, my observation is this:

The originator of this thread was obviously heartfelt, but it is not immediately obvious that he/she/it was serious.

Do let us know dear chap.

The respondents, such as Captain N, have a dangerously anarchistic perspective that borders on disbelief.

I am a Captain of a national carrier, have been for 6 years, so it is with interest that I note the second reposte to this 3rd page attempting to discredit the initial page 3 writer by saying he's not qualified to comment, supposedly because the guy is not aviation oriented - hell, I don't know?

Well I am, and I say to you buddy, loud and clear, that I am amazed that there are blokes out there who actually support this Army of One perspective, this openly divisive, anarchistic, poorly timed, egocentric and damning position.

Get out of that cockpit as you have, by a legally binding agreement you made when signing on, no right to be there if you wish to corrupt, wilfully, the commercial enterprise that employs you in good faith.

And you damn well better make sure you are never, ever found out as being the poster of such tripe, such dangerous, legally untenuous, tripe.

Be warned.

[Charlie32]

I have no love of bean counters, however I am concerned that any pilot should fly when sick, cover up for ops errors or make the passengers unconfortable in order to maximise profit for the share holders.

This was apparently perfectly acceptable when you were being treated as you felt you deserved, but now you seem to have been driven to act properly by the bean counters. Well at least the passengers should be more comfortable and safer under you new policy.

And I thought it was the bean counters who caused all the trouble!

[PercyDragon]

Interesting thread.

You know, before going into what I do now I was in commercial aviation for over fifteen years. Now I'm an IFA (Independent Financial Adviser). During the course of my work I speak to a very wide variety of individuals on a quite intimate basis. And the one thing that comes out, on every occasion, is that no-one I talk to 'feels appreciated'. Every occupation...you name it. Surgeons, Teachers, Pilots, Businessmen........... they all say the same thing "of course the problem with this job is that we're just not appreciated". In fact I haven't found one single occupation that actually feels appreciated.

It stikes me that that is the reason that Adolf Hitler did so well (for a few years at least). He made everyone if Germany feel appreciated. Good God, if you were a woman who had had more than two kids you would get a certifcate with an eagle on it saying that you were a 'mother of the Fatherland' or whatever.

The labourers who built the roads regaularly took part in parades, with silver shovels over their shoulders, martching to a brass band.

The problem nowadays is that it all just comes down to money. And our lives are run by the most appalling little sh*** who's only claim to fame is that they can screw the maximum of work out of the rest of us for the minimum amount of money.

Come back Adolf, all is forgiven.

[Kaptin M]

Unfortunately, Charlie32, comments such as yours are inevitable when NON professional pilots decide to pass comment on subjects of which they have ZERO experience, nor comprehension.
Quite frankly, postings that display gross misunderstandings take up valuable space and time (both of your's in posting, and others' in wading through it!)

Loaded1, don't encourage 441A - he's NOT an airline manager, just a wannabe one who thinks if he bashes pilots publically he might get some sucker to offer financial support for his "Low cost Indonesian museum operation". Years in the desert of Saudi Arabia have turned this soon-to-be octagenarian into a bitter and twisted retired pilot.
I reckon you summed him up pretty well with your comment, "you are a sad lurker with a sick envy of airline pilots."

Back to the subject. The present beanos seem to think a war of deceit and deception is perfectly acceptable on their part, wrt THEIR interpretation of agreements and contracts - and it was THEY who laid these new "ground rules".
Instead of honesty and past, traditional practices, there has suddenly evolved a culture of lies - often blatant - to which any objection is met with more lies, and or threats of disciplinary action.

Quite simply, pilots expect to receive ONLY that which has been agreed upon at the time of signing up.
Obviously that was NOT the intention of many in "upper management", although they were signatories.

The rewards being reaped (or NOT) are from the seeds sown and watered!

[Carruthers]

I feel a bit miffed that you have left me out of your tirade Capt M. I wonder why all you pilots think that everyone else is in awe of you and are jealous. Really we think the flash belt buckles, sun glasses, cars and molls a bit pathetic. Soon of course we won't need you, just someone who can taxi the thing to the runway and engage the auto systems.

[Number6]

Nice CEO PAY !! (http://www.flyforums.com/calboard/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2267&highlight=stock+options)

[AA717driver]

Why is it that, when that anonymous bean counters find a way to circumvent the contract, they are helping the company? When pilots adhere strictly to the contract and FAR's, we are villians.

If we agreed to take 50% pay cuts, the beanies would find a way to lose those savings and we would be under pressure to give more.

I didn't receive my pilot certificates in a box of Wheaties. I paid big bucks for them. I bust my a** to be the best pilot I can be. The best lawyers can set their fees. The best surgeons get paid the most. Why should highly qualified(in terms of ratings and experience) be required to constantly cover for the failings of management and 'take one for the team'?

The CAL pilot in question and the others here who see his point were not born slackers--they were created. Having seen the fruits of MY efforts to save money flushed down the toiled by inept management is infuriating. We can't leave and we can't fire the managers(usually mid-level, invisible types) but we don't have to continue supporting the people who are endangering our careers.TC

[rupetime]

I for one wouldnt get on an aircraft if i knew it was flown by someone with such a poor view of the company......silverbird could be a silly question but why dont you leave ?


:)

[6feetunder]

You had better start taking the train then pal because airline management has been screwing around too long. Now it's our turn.

[411A]

Yes indeed...like 'ole Bud Maytag at National Airlines said many years ago....let 'em pound sand....and so ALPA did...for many years.
Nothing changes...except the folks involved.
With a stack of applications eight feet high....pilots today are on the short end, make no mistake.
Tough beans.:p

[Kaptin M]

Same ol' same ol' from SOG (411A)..."With a stack of applications eight feet high....pilots today are on the short end, make no mistake.

In fact, the FEWER pilots employed at the present time allows for easier organisation and fewer differences of opinion within the ranks.
Perhaps that's why the MAJORITY of responses to this topic have been in agreement with the opening post.
Tough beans that old 411A is well and truly on the outer! :D

And just to keep YOU happy, Carruthers, the word I believe you meant to use was ENVIOUS - not JEALOUS - and your post reeks of it. I'll admit to the sunglasses :cool: (Ray Ban, in fact), but the "flash belt buckles, cars and molls" are more the domain of the private pilot, and the comic books.

Roll on auto systems (can't WAIT to see how a rapid depressurisation is handled :D )!
I think you'll know we're getting close when we see driverless tugs to tow the aircraft out for take-off, and a passenger cabin fitted out with self-serve food and drink vending machines. Naturally ALL aircraft will fly SID's and STARS at predetermined levels along RNAV routes - weather and turbulence avoidance is NOT an option! :(

[DoctorA300]

KaptainM,
Most problems you lot encounter during your operational CARREER, we engineers could automate a solution for. The mentioned rapid decompress, could be solved with an input to the A/P.
We are ALL indispencible, Loaders, Redcaps, ATC, F/A's, Engineers, Fuelers ETC, ETC, if any group was expendible, it would not exist in todays aviation industry.
So stop whining, and support your local baggage handler.
Best regards and fly safely,
Doc

[Raw Data]

Anyone who thinks pax will get onto an aircraft with complete automation and no pilots is living in cuckoo land. Anyone who thinks that pax are stupid enough to get onto an aircraft with complete automation and an office boy to turn it on resides in the same place.

Anyone who thinks 411A represents current airline management thinking is similarly deluded- professionals understand that the cyclical nature of the aviation employment market is not as clear-cut as he proposes. The manager declining applications now will probably be tearing his hair out trying to find enough crews in a year or two- and pilots remember.

Anyone who thinks airline pilots are egotists per se has no understanding of the profession.

Anyone who thinks that creating a pool of unhappy, de-motivated staff is good for the bottom line has no understanding of business.

Anyone who thinks that pilots- unhappy and de-motivated as they may be- are anything other than professional and safe in the cockpit, has no understanding of what it takes to become a pilot.

Anyone who thinks that pilots cannot, by commission or omission, save their companies an enormous amount of money should they choose to do so, knows nothing of airline flying.

And finally... hands up all those that find the pilot-bashing coming from uninformed spectators a little tiresome on the Professional Pilots Rumour Network. Some people, it seems, need to get out more...

[TowerDog]

Raw Data and Captain M: Agree 100%. Well spoken.

[411A]

The only "real" problem Raw Data has...is the number of applications that he does NOT see crossing his desk....every day. And these guys are willing (and have the experience) to sell their colleagues down the river.
And suspect they will, given the chance.
Management is in the drivers seat....for now, and in the immediate future. Could change of course....perhaps not in our lifetimes....time will indeed, tell.

[GeofJ]

I think the discussion has gotten off track a bit but as a non-pilot let me put my two cents in. Regardless of all the concerns in the posts above there is one fact that remains undisputable - the airlines (at least US comm'l) are one of the few customer service industries that 1. Do not care about how they treat the customers 2. Have identified their best customers - those of us biz slf who pay the freight for most everyone else - and systematically single us out for outrageous treatment in the form of unreasonable fares +2400 USD no notice coast to coast 3. Systematically squander the resources they are given 4. Treat the crews flying the planes as bad as if not worse than the pax This leads to one thing every time - dissatisfaction by all involved, p*ss poor service in general and pax voting with their feet for autos, trains etc where they can be reasonably substituted for airlines. It is a sad state of affairs which needs immediate change!

[411A]

GeofJ--
Could not agree more...especially the high yield pax...get it in the neck, nearly every time.
No wonder asian airlines are rated best in service...and yes, even in available fares.
Wonder when managements in Europe and North America will wake up?

[Chimbu chuckles]

Geofj

That about somes up the situation admirably.

411A

1 year ago there was a worldwide shortage of experienced pilots. Retirements are continuing apace but the downturn post 911 is hiding the real situation.

The real situation is not enough young people see aviation as a viable career...they can make as much, if not more money and be home everynight. And without dipping into their own(or parents) pockets to the tune of 30 to 100K depending on what country you're talking about.

The military hasn't been a fruitful hunting ground for airlines for decades...all the Vietnam era pilots are approaching retirement in a huge rush as we speak. If that idiot Bush keeps **** going for another few years you'll see even fewer mil pilots coming out to airlines...because they will be flying enough and doing what they love...killing people and breaking their stuff, in the defence of us all...and more power to them.

Better face facts 411A...the rest of the world is getting on with the business, Asia is leading the charge out of the 911 morase, while the US discovers new and 'better' ways to turn pax(particularly premium pax) away.

Nothing has changed, essentially, outside the contigous 48 states...it doesn't take 2 hours to board your aircraft in most countries of the world...and aircraft are full...despite what you hear from cynical management trying to hide their own incompetence.

The reason is simple IMHO...despite the political rhetoric the rest of the world does NOT view the 911 attack as an attack on the west or on democracy...it was an attack on the good ol' USA period.

In the next year or so there will be just as much of a shortage of experienced jet crew as there was a year ago....probably worse!

Then the worm will have turned back from the current attacks on aircrew to a more reasonable situation...and you can sit at your computer and rail against all of us out there doing it while you wallow in what is clearly unhappy retirement...unless of course you grace us all with a coronary :p

Chuck.

[Number6]

Always with the negative waves, 411A, always with the negative waves . . .

Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here?

Woof, woof.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Number6

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/cheers.gif


Chuck.

[411A]

Well Chuck, you could be right....but then again, maybe not.
Just today received a call from a Continental furloughed pilot, and he mentioned that it looked like it would be a very long time before recall....and he was looking for a job. When I asked him if he would be willing to resign his CO seniority number for a RHS in a wide-body aeroplane, his response was..."in a heartbeat".
Just about sums up the current situation, I would say.

[Kaptin M]

Well some common ground, 411A........"Just about sums up the current situation, I would say." - or was that a mis-print?

Re-read Chimbu Chuck's post - he is re-iterating FACTS as stated by Boeing (ever heard of them??) - wrt a SEVERE pilot shortage WITHIN the next 3 1/2 to 4 years - published pre-911.

A big part of the problem with beanies and management is their non-accountability for their decisions. I present Cathay Pacific and Aer Lingus managements as glaring examples of this in recent times.
That airlines are a milking cow for greedy, over-indulgent "suits" is evidenced by the outrageous packages, add-ons and bonuses with which they reward THEMSELVES, whilst at the same time attacking the very average conditions of the REVENUE PRODUCTIVE staff, and trying to degrade them further.
The "tactics" are simple - requiring no education, training, or skill - tell staff they must work longer, for the same (or less), reduce entitlements to a level below that which a non-employee would receive, and say "NO" to any and all submissions presented.
And for this, they reward themselves with a 6 or 7 figure salary!

[411A]

They do, Kaptin M, because they can (as in...."they is the bosses").
OTOH, they report to the shareholders, who demand profits (what a novel idea), and if management does not deliver, all those bonuses that you so dispise....go away.
However, would agree that generally happy employees are more productive. The problem arises however...when they become as greedy and the managers....a downward spiral usually follows.
Which is...good, at least for new enterants to the marketplace...as in us.

[Kaptin M]

"They do, Kaptin M, because they can (as in...."they is the bosses"). ".
That's fine 411 (mind if i call you by your first number - after all, 2 areas of common ground within the ONE topic must be a record for YOU!).

And similarly, "An Army of One is likewise saying that PILOTS can do what is spelt out therein, BECAUSE THEY CAN!
There is nothing illegal nor immoral about working within the framework, and to the letter, of the agreed and signed conditions - and after all, it MUST be these fundamental principles upon which the airline operation has been financially budgeted.

It's also pretty obvious that any EXTRA money-saving techniques a pilot may incorporate into his operation are only adding the extra pennies into the MANAGEMENT'S pockets!!

"An Army of One" might perhaps be precised to "You'll get what you pay for!", put another way,"Pay for monkeys and get peanuts in return!

[Young Paul]

Companies exist for the benefit of three groups of people:
: the shareholders
: the employees
: the customers

We all know about the shareholders - thanks to Margaret Thatcher and an enterprise culture. Furthermore, if we have pensions or investments, we know all the more, because the shareholders in plc's are also providing the returns that will pay us when we retire. Hence the amazing promise of 10% profit from revenue from BA - Eddington had to promise something spectacular to hold onto institutional shareholders.

Private companies don't have that excuse - although it's certainly the case that they don't get much of a return from investment.

The origins of companies were also in the interests of employees. These were the "worshipful companies" in the middle ages. For modern companies, look at organisations such as Cadbury's, Lever Brothers etc etc. All were seeking a return from investment - but all also recognised the needs of their employees for welfare. Curiously, a lot of these were run by people with a Christian ethos. Bet they didn't tell you that in O-level history.

Employees rights were eroded to further benefit shareholders under Margaret Thatcher. Because, of course, there is no society, there are only individuals.:rolleyes:

As for the customers, if you don't make them happy, the company doesn't keep going. So hopefully it offers a product that people want.

[Airwaves]

Does it take a beanie to point out the obvious?

If airlines hadn't furloughed/reduced capacity many would have gone under post 9/11.
If everyone pulls together the company recovers more quickly, those furloughed return and we all start getting pay rises again.

Guess what, it doesn't feel any better if you are a beanie that gets furloughed or gets twice as much work to do for the same (or less) salary.

[Raw Data]

"An Army of One" might perhaps be precised to "You'll get what you pay for!", put another way,"Pay for monkeys and get peanuts in return!

...or, possibly, "Pilots work for money, if you want loyalty, get a dog."

411A , you make the standard American error of thinking that the world begins and ends at your shores. It doesn't, and there are already some extremely encouraging signs of wholesale employment resuming- we have taken about ten new pilots ourselves, and airlines such as Easyjet, Ryanair and Go have been hiring steadily since 9/11. Others have signalled their intention to recruit shortly (and we are talking heavy jet operators, not Regionals). All the predictions on this side of the pond point to a shortage in the near future.

The "furlough" system is a feature of US operators, doesn't happen much anywhere else in the world- and it is the uncertainty of the US pilot employment market that drives the number of CV's crossing your desk- most, I should think, from very inexperienced pilots.

Interestingly, few, if any, pilot recruitment agencies seeem to have gone broke recently.

[Carruthers]

No not envious Capt M just sick and tired of clowns like you demeaning our profession. There always runs this hope for a pilot shortage to bring the ‘suits’ to heel. Why don’t we pilots take their place and run super efficient airlines for the benefit of our fellow drivers? Could it be that we haven’t got the balls, or if we do try it realise that it is much easier to wine on the flight deck than produce the results. As quoted before on these pages ‘why recruit professional managers when all you have to do is visit the nearest flight deck to get all the expertise in the world’ Also where pray do we get 22 yr olds earning $50,000 a year without a degree?

[Chimbu chuckles]

Currathers,

Boeing and Airbus are the ones shouting pilot shortages...ohh and there was that actual situation that existed pre 911.

Wine? I think you mean whine!

IT, Stockmarket, Real Estate......ummm I could go on but cant be bothered! I've got a 20s something cousin who makes AUD$200,000/annum in the money market... she just bought a AUD$400000 home.

Chuck.

[411A]

Oddly enough, Raw Data, you have made my point for me exactly, in a 'round about sort of way.
If there is/was a shortage of new pilots, then FR certainly would not be able to charge the fees they do for applications, etc.
All any aircarrier need do is slightly lower their entry requirements, and....presto, "shortage" gone.

The CV's that cross my desk are, on average, the following:
Captains; age 50, 12,000 hours+
F/O's: age 38, 5,200 hours
F/E's: age 55, 17,000 hours

All F/E's have lots of prior experience on the equipment.
All Captains and F/O's have either experience on the equipment or at least 1000 hours in wide-body jet aircraft.
All of our guys will be sent to GS/sim at company expense, on full pay and allowances, from day one.
That is how you attract dedicated aircrew.
Oh yes, forgot to mention, all salaries are tax free (60 hour guarantee), 42 days on, 14 days off (days off away from domicle) with business class airfare paid.

[Carruthers]

But haven't you got to be clever Chimbu to earn money like that in IT, the stock market, real estate? or do you need enterprise rather than the you make it we'll take it mentality.

[Raw Data]

Actually, 411A, I'm not.

Why do you think it is that, of all the UK low-cost operations only FR charge as they do for applications? FR of course not being a UK operator.

Could it be, perhaps, that they recruit heavily in the non-UK market, for example Eastern Europe? That they cynically exploit the desperation of some people, with the carrot of an Irish licence?

Could it also be, perchance, that this policy will rapidly disappear once the current surplus of pilots dries up?

This is nothing more than 1995 all over again. Remember those days in the UK? Well, you won't being an American. Let me enlighten you.

Many operators had gone to the wall- the likes of Air Europe, Dan Air, Paramount, BIA, many, many others as well. Experienced 757 skippers were talking jobs flying Jetstreams, just to keep flying. There were over 500 experienced jet pilots registered with the BALPA job service (BEST Aircrew), and opportunist operators such as BMI were selling type ratings with the tenuous carrot of a possible (but very unlikely) job at the end of it. Many gullible (or desperate) people parted with their money- and yet, 18 months later, virtually nobody could sell a type rating, and many airlines were offering substantial incentives to change employers, paying off training bonds, etc.

My, how things change! From profiting from pilots to the tune of £18K, airlines were giving away similar amounts to pay off the training bonds of its new employees.

All the above is fact, it is, in fact, my personal experience.

You may have plenty of CV's, but outside your borders, the situation is somewhat different. As there is more aviation happening outside the US than within it, that is a significant distinction.

So what is this airline that you claim to run?

[Idunno]

Carruthers, you silly billy. What on earth are you on about.

The day of three dimensional sat nav and fully automatic aeroplanes is not far off boys and girls, then the 'beancounters' will fly them from the ground, perhaps not literally but the writing is on the wall.

Oh dear Mr.Carruthers. You seem to live in a dreamworld.

Yes, perhaps some day in the future your wet dream will come true, but only after Bill Gates, Dell, Intel and a lot of other providers get together and produce an affordable home based desktop PC which switches on and off like a television set, needs no maintenance, never locks up, never crashes, never displays the 'blue screen of death', is invulnerable to viruses.

When they've been doing that reliably for oh...let's say, ten years, and doing it cost effectively, and every home in the land has such a 'computer' in daily use....then, and ONLY THEN will Mr. Smith or Mrs.Jones allow themselves or their little Judy and Jimmy to be transported across continents in the middle of the night by pilotless, computer controlled aircraft.

Care to wager on a date?

PS. Actually I read somewhere that computer controlled ATC was already feasible, but no company would build such a system because of the potential public liability claims if it went tits up and an accident resulted. Another example of beancounters triumphing over aspiration.

[747FOCAL]

This is getting old. :rolleyes:

[411A]

Raw Data

As I mentioned on the FD forum a while back, all details will be revealed in due time, sooner rather than later. And, yes, nearly all crew have been selected already.

Fish

I have the time (but this will change shortly) because...I have talented folks in charge of day to day business.
And as for EK, they seem to have NO shortage of applicants if the MidEast forum is any indication.
Oh yes, that carrier...SQ. You see, I can say something "nice".
Of course, this opinion will not be shared by all, especially those that have had "problems" there.

[Dries]

Bravo Silverline, you earn my respect!

[Raw Data]

411A

Ah, I see.

If you have already recruited all your key staff, and, more importantly, have an Operators Certificate, it is hardly a secret. Pray do enlighten us.

Unless, of course, we are talking pipe dreams in the tradition of the late, not-so-great guvnor- which seems a distinct possibility!

[Max Continuous]

Going back to the one-man wrecking crew and the "army of one" , it's clear that you find alienated workers in all organisations, not just aviation. Negative about every initiative, these workers adopt a "work-to-rule" mentality and have long since jettisoned their emotional investment in their company and their enthusiasm, dedication and commitment have disappeared forever. They have torn up their psychological contracts ( but not their legal contracts) and they do the absolute minimum required to stay in their jobs. But they don't leave.

Question is, what should companies do about their alienated workers? Clearly a pissed-off pilot can wreak havoc with an airline's profitability. One way or another these employees have to learn to deal with the new conditions as they are, recognise the world the way it is and not necessarily the way they'd like it to be, or leave the workplace. So if it was my airline, I'd buy them out, expensive in the short term but cost-effective in the long run. Everyone has their price. And a good management will have its finger on the pulse and know exactly who these cynical "wreckers" are.

[Carruthers]

The point is Mr Idunno (aptly named) we already land aircraft in conditions beyond the ability of your average pilot i.e. LVP. The automatics are the first thing you engage when the going gets tough, for mere mortals that is. Simple fact is that the majority of accidents are caused by the crew. When we have systems that can fly fully automated approaches to cat3 accuracy anywhere then we won’t need Biggles up front will we? A competent Capt Kirk will be much safer.

[West Coast]

The only thing that crosses 411's desk is his lunch and hallucination pills.
As many here have figured, not all of 411s dogs are barking, a few sandwiches short of a picnic, however you want to put it. He lives a Walter Mitty existance. Readers should ask themselves, based on the merits of his posts, are his actions, words and deeds those of any Captains you know, or is it the rantings of a retiree with lots of imaginition?

Deny him the thing he craves most, credability.

[6feetunder]

Max Continuous, you're so smart! I here UA is looking for a new boss, why don't you apply? I mean such innovation shouldn't be wasted here on a rumours forum.

[HugMonster]

Carruthers, I think you have the emphasis round the wrong way.

100% of safe flights are caused by the crew.

When the loadmaster screws up, the pilots have to find the error and sort it out.

When the fuel upload was incorrect, the pilots have to find the error and correct it.

When the aircraft goes tech. in the middle of the flight, the pilots have to sort it out.

When lightning takes out all Nav Aids, the pilots have to sort it out.

When the engineers have signed a fault off with "NFF" and it reoccurs, the pilots have to handle the situation.

When the caterers have screwed up and not supplied enough of this, that or the other, it is the pilots who call ahead to the handlers to provide more.

etc.

Your logic is about the same as saying that 30% of all road accidents are caused by drunk drivers. In that case, let's get the sober drivers who cause 70% of them off the roads and make them far safer.

You understand nothing about aviation, and are fast making yourself a laughing stock throughout the pilot community. Now run away and play with MSFltSim again - it seems to be all that you understand.

[411A]

Raw Data

Not only an AOC....but more important, traffic rights, that all very necessary commodity that enables flights on a daily (or weekly) basis.

Unlike others on the forum before, the financing is nearly complete, and details on service will be forthcoming (and, not in the USA). Watch the FD forum.

Why do you ask...need a position perhaps?:confused:

WestCoast

Ah, poor baby...are you feeling left behind perhaps? Bored with that mundane USA job?

[Capt Pit Bull]

Carruthers,

Perhaps you'd care to enlighten us and tell us what the crew actually do during an automatic approach.

Perhaps you'd care to enlighten us as to the content of initial and recurrent training for automatic landings.

Once you've done that, you'll be able to explain to us how autolanding systems remove the need for flight crew.

Thanks in advance.

CPB

[brain fade]

411A
if you actually do fly for a living it's plain you have far too much time off. I suggest that the (obvious) truth is that you are one of those long in the tooth ex. dudes who remember how it used to be in the days when real men flew DC-3's over the rockies and so on. Why not take a leaf outa these guys books and spend a little more time flying and a bit less annoying people on pprune?
We know its hot in AZ at this time of year; lie down:)

[411A]

Actually, brain fade..
Did fly DC-3's, but not over the rockies (ah...too cold) but down the Caribbean way. Puerto Rico to be exact, a very long time ago.
As I read thru the postings on PPRuNe, I find that many actually take themselves FAR to seriously, as in...no sense of humor.
I simply try to add a little (humor) to the discussion...and especially "balance". It seems that nearly all pilots are VERY anti-management. In actual fact, nearly all the companies that I have worked for over the years have been quite fair with their employees, but hey, maybe I was just lucky.
But, some of these guys are really easy to (dare I say it?) wind up...even a little bit, all in good fun of course.:rolleyes:

[Kaptin M]

More than likely, Max Cont., you'll find that it is one or two MANAGERS who have CREATED the alienation of the majority of the workforce loyalties from MANAGEMENT.

It is not the Company, per se, with which pilots and other employees have a problem, but the occasional meglomaniac who feels a NEED to justify his overblown salary, and/or to try to gain further recognition or advancement, because of what he perceives will be seen as a "value-added" change.
Certainly, in the short term (and the modern world is one where instant gratification, or immediate results, are expected) there may well be a cost-saving - however, the P-off Factor which makes human nature respond, as is indicated by the text of "An Army of One (or 1,000, or 2,000, or 3,000)", is FAR MORE costly and destructive in the medium and long term.

Unfortunately it is the Company's revenue that is affected - but the ROOT CAUSE and REASON is the Management that did NOT think these affects through.

It IS possible to have a Company wherein Management and the workforce are synergistic, and the Company PROSPERS. Where sometimes tough Management decisions HAVE to be made - but sympathetic endorse and assist with their implementation.

The change in management "style" is obvious to almost ALL, M.C. - thus necessitating a change in the type of response from those being attacked by them, their own staff!

[Raw Data]

OK then 411A , the very best of luck to you. I'll look forward to reading more.

As it happens, I am not in need of a job. I have a very good one which involves not just flying, but training and (gasp!) management. I get the best (and worst) of three worlds.

Strangely, despite somehow getting involved in this thread, and taking a clear position (more for the sake of a decent discussion than anything else), I find myself unable to knowingly cost my company money. Some might suspect that comes from wearing a management hat, but the reason is simply that going out of your way to waste money (or not save it) ultimately has only one result- a reduction in pay and conditions.

In my company, the senior management team are motivated, clever people who know better than to upset ANY group of employees, within the constraints they operate under. Their management style is fairly transparent and a spade is called a spade. This would appear to be an increasingly rare situation, so perhaps I had better stay!

[411A]

A rare company indeed, Raw Data.

We are trying very hard to organise our group to be the most efficient yet generous to ALL employees...and shareholders, not an easy task. My forte is base and line training, and we will be doing a lot.
A very dedicated group of folks have been selected and have been very patient during the initial stage, which has stretched to nearly two years.
I certainly can understand however, with the problems that many pilots have with their often sometimes very shortsighted management. However, there are always two sides to every story, and i'm sure most management types would consider pilots in the "them vs us" catagory, likewise most flight crews' opinion of management.
Don't think this will change anytime soon, unfortunately.

[Wino]

411

Which operator on PR and how long ago did you fly DC-3s as I also long ago and far away flew DC-3s down there...

Come to think of it, one of my mates dissappeared into Arizona from there. You didn't happen to run a side business delivering newspapers did you? News2you? Had a few planes on the side?

If you recognize those words, you will figure out where my name here came from...

Cheers
Wino

[411A]

Wino

The company was North Cay Airways, circa 1974 or thereabouts.
They had (I think) 16 DC-3's. I left when the cash started to dry up.
News2you does not ring a bell.

[flt_lt_w_mitty]

Any chance we can get this topic back to real issues and not use it as a forum for the Walter Mitty (hey - that's SPOOKY!:eek: ) dreams of a 'Wannabee Guvnor'?

PS Where do I enlist in the army? (Jus' ignore the signature below!!)

[Paterbrat]

Reading through this lot and I thought I had strayed into Jet Blast. The poeticaly put 'P**s me off and I will cost you' is a fact of life we all live with.

Economys fluctuate and the best intentioned companies will find themselves in a situation where their policies will impinge on percieved personal limits.

F Gump summed it up with sh*t happens. If companies persue that course as a matter of policy the laws of supply and demand will eventualy kick in and the company suffers. The army of one becomes many.

Companies that look after their people tend to do better. But then life is not fair and a bit of a crap shoot at the best of times.

So whats the answer? If I knew I certainly wouldn't be here deciding if I agreed with " Army of One"!

( thinks...how many full stops have I put?):)

[Carruthers]

Well Capt Pit Bull they put the flaps out and the gear down and taxi it. During recurrent training they usually screw it up. I'm not saying that there will be no crew only that they needn't be 'pilots'.

[HugMonster]

Stupid Boy. :rolleyes:

[tHUDddd]

I was going to say that! :D ;) :p :cool:

[Kaptin M]

Well, if you are correct, Carruthers there'll be no need for:

i) Crew schedulers;
ii) Met and and briefing ground staff;
iii) Far less LAME's;
iv) Check-in staff (ticketing and seat allocation will be fully automated);
v) Loaders - automated loading will be one of the FIRST innovations to be implemented;
vi) An HRD department!! Hooray!!;
vii) Tug drivers - as mentioned earlier;
viii) Cabin crew - I buy my Coke and hamburgers from machines now, and can read emergency instructions from a card or watch a video! ;
ix) Sky Marshalls;
x) sim instructors or checkers!! ;
xi) and far fewer beanos, because of far less staff;

I'm getting writer's cramp!!
But I somehow think that pilots will be quite a ways down the (partial) list above.

In fact you're RIGHT though, Cruthers - flying's such an EASY job that ANY mug can do it!
That's why there are soooo many experts here on PPRuNe - isn't it!?!

[slj]

Carruthers

The real thing is a little different from playing on Microsoft Flight Simulator.

[747FOCAL]

I am going to take heat for this one, but......

Flying is tough, but not something that only a few PPRUNERs can do. It's a learned skill and anybody can learn if they want. I would think the tough part is having the patience to sit in the same spot for 10 hours and not fall asleep or go crazy. So what if Carruthers knows nothing and wants to argue everything. Are we getting bored or something? :D

[Capt Pit Bull]

Oh dear, Caruthers.

Seems you don't know very much about autolanding concepts.

The crew are part of the system. Organic, rather than silicon, but part of the system non-the-less.

The primary role of the crew is to monitor the approach and abort it if the automatic part of the system either fails or screws it up.

i.e. - and listen very carefully - autolands are only certifiable because of the presence of the pilots, not inspite of them.

Because if you think things get hairy when pilots screw up, you should see what failed automatics can do.

CPB

[BenThere]

I think it'll happen like this:
1. The US builds hundreds, then thousands of Global Hawks and derivatives to fight its air wars without risking aircrew. The technology grows.
2. Unmanned cargo carriage gets approval and widebody unmanned aircraft are developed for cargo applications.
3. The technology improves to the point where unmanned flight clearly becomes safer than piloted aircraft. The public is ultimately convinced.

How long will it take? I'd say 50 years or so. Pilots will be as obsolete as navigating by the stars. I don't like it. I don't want to see it happen. But the only way around it is if al-Qaida is successful in returning us to the 7th century.

[Orca strait]

http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/mica/STARWyoda.gif
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.--Carl Sagan"

[Idunno]

747FOCAL;
It's a learned skill and anybody can learn if they want.

My guess is that you've never tried to teach someone to fly a modern jet.

Yes its a learned skill, and yes you can probably train anyone to fly...if you have enough time and money (and patience).

In my training experience you find the vast majority of individuals can hack it within the allotted time span of a conversion course.
Some of them...the 'naturals'....seem to be gifted with 'an inate skill' that allows them to do it in half that time or even less (thery make me sick).

But its equally true that you occasionally find the odd sad individual who just cannot do it. No matter how hard you try, no matter how long they spend in the box...they'll just never get it.

And remember, these are usually people who've been carefully selected to have what are perceived to be 'the right skills'.

That says a lot to me about how the other 99.9% of the general populace might perform if given a try out.

[Carruthers]

This is fun, got you all going a treat! For pilots in the future read navigators, radio operators, flight engineers !! We will need systems analysts and operators not steely eyed hero's who usually screw up anyway. Obviously one must work towards eliminating the chief cause of accidents - pilots.

[bugg smasher]

Carruthers, have you checked the chemical content of your breakfast serial lately?

[Kaptin M]

Well Cruthers[ this "steely-eyed hero" :) is about to don his "flashy belt buckle and sunglasses" :cool: , decide WHICH "car and molls" are going to look best seated next to me on the way to teaming up with a "22 (in fact he's 23) year old F/O, with no degree, earning (way in excess of) $50k" :eek: and engage the automatics as we "wine" (sic) our way from one "automated approach" to another.
Leaving YOU to sit in your dingy office :( to operate and anal-yse your systems, and wonder why YOU couldn't cut it :confused:

After all, Cruthers, it's such an easy job, any mug can do it :D - except YOU. :(

[Techman]

Ahh, the old (and stale) you didn't make it and you are just jealous anyway rebuttal.

[Carruthers]

So why do you assume that I am not one of you but with a little vision folks? In my experience pilots are rarely selected but can achieve the goal by ammassing the required number of hours in light aeroplanes and sitting a few simple multi question test papers! Whats the big deal, I reckon at least 75% of the population could do it if they wished not .01 as earlier stated.

[Seriph]

I reckon Carruthers knows what he is talking about but is winding you lot up and you are taking the bait, hook, line and sinker. Sure sign of immaturity / insecurity.

[Zico]

Never has so little bait been taken by so many.
Guys, ignore him!

[nosefirsteverytime]

Ladies and gentlemen, the new Guvnor! (sorry mate, only in the windy-uppiness, nothing else!) ;)

[TowerDog]

Well, if flying was that easy, then the F/As would be doing it, and the airlines would be saving a lot of money in pilot salaries and the pax would be getting a safe and comfy ride at a cheaper price.

So, why not Carruthers?:D

[Gyros'toppled]

OHMIGAWD'HE CANNOT BE SERIOUS,

Carruthers - The first rule of shovels - stop digging.

If you cant successfully automate a lawnmower, then pax airliners should be a doddle. Go back to Mars :cool:

[Loony_Pilot]

Carruthers,

I've heard rumours (probably malicious).. that you are far more likely to die in a plane crash if you're actually flying on one.
So my suggestion is to ban all forms of flying, thus removing this terrible risk.

Furthermore, to follow it up, i will be removing the stairs in my house, to remove the risk of me falling down them.

We could spend our whole lives quoting statistics.. in the good old days of piston engined airliners. accidents were much more likely due to mechanical causes... the fact that we have made our engines and airframes more reliable hasnt made pilots any less safe.....in fact IMHO opinion, pilots are probably better trained and safer than ever, there is a general culture of safety and teamwork (CRM and the like) and though of course there is the occasional bad egg your idea of removing pilots from aircraft is akin to removing engines to stop an engine failure ever happening....cause as we all know.. no glider has ever crashed due to engine failure.

I will also point out that every single aircrash that ever happened was caused by human error.. whether it be pilot error, bad design by the manufacturer, a missed fault by an engineer, bad programming on an automated flight system, incorrect training given to any of the above, poor ATC.. the list is endless. do you plan to automate everything?

how would your automatics have coped with the Sioux City DC10.. where over a hundred lives were saved by the pilots in a situation that was bordering on the impossible... or the pilot that managed to glide a heavy twinjet after a fuel miscalculation on the ground.....

LP

[411A]

Gear down at 500 agl?
This was tried at LHR many years ago by TWA with a 747...and the crew was suspended for ....one year. All except the Captain...he was "retired".
Definately NOT recommended.
Yes, pilots can do a lot for the company, but they (as a collective group) are certainly not the nirvana of aviation. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Final 3 Greens]

Hi Tower Dog

Be a bit careful with your comments about reducing costs by getting the FAs to fly - or you'll have enraged pilots from a certain Big Airline queuing up to tell you that the opposite might be true :D :D :D :D

[Carruthers]

Tower Dog - CA's do fly aeroplanes, they have to go for the full frontal labotomy first of course. Loony, good point on the Souix City, unfortunately more aircraft are lost through CFIT and cockups on re-fuelling etc. The simple fact is that you are not making a case for a pilot up front but a manager, the automatics will look after the three dimensional guidance. It will not be possible to fly future generation aircraft as the Souix City DC10 was flown i.e. manually, and pilots are not more professional these days, quite the opposite, the aircraft and systems are just making it much easier by doing it for them.

[Capt. Crosswind]

Carruthers lad, try changing your medication

[411A]

TCS
Don't "hate" pilots at all....only have a mild dislike for those that I perceive are way too greedy.

[Ignition Override]

As for the company "Aircraft Operating Manuals, Parts 1 and 2", the 'Flight Ops Manual" and the "Cockpit Operating Manual" (with limitations, abnormals and supplemental procedures), not to mention the FARs and published STARs/SIDS, enroute and approach charts/taxiway diagrams (10-9... pages), guess where the airline or FAA lawyers etc start digging, with much time on their hands (and no fuel gauges to watch), after a pilot makes a major unintentional mistake, in order to keep any and all liability away from the company's back? The FOM clearly states that we must enter any known discrepency into the aircraft or cabin logbook, and either repair the item or defer it, with much of this accomplished by a certified aircraft mechanic. If the company really wants us to do take a major maintenance delay for an intermittant red flag on a radar altimeter in good weather...(you get my drift?) in Lansing, Michigan or Bozeman, Montana on a Saturday night, while passengers are boarding with an already delayed departure...even the phrase inoperative can be open to interpretation, or our dispatch reliability could fall overnight by a serious percentage.

This is not a statement as to whether pilots should always fly according to the tightest legal interpretation of those manuals, or not, but if numerous procedures and guidelines are not exactly met, it can help us all to depart and arrive on schedule, so that we always help our employer, other than plunging through unsafe weather etc?

[Getafix]

I haven't posted for a long time but this is the finest pice of writing I have seen on this board for years.

Our Proffesion if you can call it that anymore has been run into the ground by bean counters its high time we as Pilots all unite against this tide.

Having worked out side the majors for all my career I have seen it go down hill its now so bad that I wouldn't recomend this career to anyone as I think it would be most irrsponsiable of me.

At this we will be paying them for flying (that has arived already just ask Ryan Air).

Lets unite and brings these people to there knees its them or us.

Well done

[Carruthers]

Bet you keep taking their money though.

[Capt Pit Bull]

Caruthers,

All jobs mutate over time, if you feel that means a pilot is no longer a pilot, fair enough. I'd just call it semantics myself.

Even Wilbur and Orville didn't actually flap their arms in order to fly!

As far as automatics making it easier, well - that is true - but only if you know how to use them, when to use them, and most critically when not to use them.

Can I foresee a future where the technology is robust enough that no human monitoring is required? Maybe.

But the technology that achieves it will also do away with pretty much every other job as well, at that point (if I'm still around) I'll quite happily sit back and let our AI servants take care of things whilst I indulge in a mixture of personal development and hedonism.

Assuming they don't get too smart, figure out that they're being exploited, and then get fed up and rebel.....

Say, that sounds familiar.....

CPB

[Capt. Crosswind]

I suspect the first & last flight will go like this -

" Good morning persons*, this is your computer speaking , welcome aboard the inaugural fully automated airline flight ,
a milestone in aviation development and a great leap forward in technology & reliability. We are climbing through 30,000 feet
and our estimated arrival Heathrow is -click click - arrival Heathrow is -click click -arrival Heathrow is -click click - arrival Heathrow - click click ---- click click --- click click--- "

* By this time the politically corrrect will have taken over completely and the Manual of Newspeak will have banned the expression "Ladies & Gentlemen", as it is -
i) Sexist
ii) Homophobic
iii) discriminates against those of the lower socio-economic group who may not aspire to be ladies or gentlemen.

[Ignition Override]

As for whether most US airline pilots are anti-mgmt or not, I have no idea. As for trust, how about this bit of airline history? Most pilots with any memory of the subject are probably retired.

Some of the older US pilots have heard of the "Mutual Aid Pact", which existed many years ago. The Pact was an emergency cash fund which an airline could draw from in order to reduce financial losses during a stike. Stay tuned. A certain US airline enjoyed provoking its unions into striking, and became know as the "cobra airline": they would strike at anything. Was there possibly more to this unfriendly atmosphere?

The CEO found (or calculated in advance?) that he could make more of a profit during a strike than from normal airline revenue, by grabbing large chunks of cash from the Mutual Aid Pact. Therefore, US major airlines dissolved the Mutual Aid Pact because of the cynical acts of Mr. xxxxxx xxxxx and his management team. His team also removed the doors from the stalls in the mens' restroom at company headquarters, in order to prevent extra long coffee breaks. They also published each pilot's name and annual salary in a large ad in the local newspaper, in order for friends and neighbors to read, possibly creating resentment towards the pilots.

This former CEO might have had the required skills to have quickly climbed a career ladder in the former East German Politburo or Stasi. What a loss for the Deutsche Demokratische Republik-maybe the Wall would have stayed intact, and more two-cylinder Trabis would still be farting their stinky unfiltered Auspuff into the air. Another management person there later allegedly lost his 'golden parachute' when new owners discovered that he allegedly had improper business dealings with a foreign aircraft manufacturer, in order to allow a brand-new aircraft technology to first penetrate a huge market... These dealings are not allowed under US law. Wie schade...non?

Did other large corporations in that location operate in such a cynical manner, no matter how good or bad their debt/equity ratio? How ironic for a company with an excellent ratio to enjoy turning its employee groups against each other, as a corporate culture.

After reading Captain Pprune's advice to everyone, I realized that it is best to avoid using personal names in most remarks, even when addressing events which were reported in "The Wall Street Journal" years ago.

[Diesel8]

Well 411A,

42 on and 14 off, did I read that correctly?? Auch!!!

Let me see, I fly approx 85 hrs a month, with an average of 15 days off. Last year I had over 900 hrs of actual flying! So that means I spend 180 days a year at work, your pilots would be looking at 270 days plus. Should do wonders for morale long term.

So all I can say, is your pilot force will be rather underutilized. But having seen the Guvenor come and go, I would imagine no less from you.

[Carruthers]

Dream on boys, pretty soon there will be a dog and a man up front, the man to feed the dog, the dog to bite the man should he touch anything. The only time that one has to worry about control of speed, profile, smoothness, accuracy, safety etc, is when some bono wants to play Chuck Yeager and takes the autopilot out.

[Zico]

Guys, don´t take the bait again. Carruthers is having a ball at your expense now:D

[Capt. Crosswind]

Zico , we should encourage the lad to pour his vitriol on this thread where it can do no harm. Otherwise he may use his idle time becoming a hazard to the community.
The idle mind is the devil's workshop.

[Zico]

Maybe so Crosswind. In that case Carruthers, keep making a fool out of yourself:D

[Capt Veeclean]

Sorry, late into this thread.

AAL_Silverbird,

Two wrongs don't make a right, I was always told.

To act against the interests of your company, to damage its prospects and those of your colleagues is wrong and it's unprofessional. To act in this way demeans the reputation of your employer, yourself and, more importantly, the whole of our profession. Act with integrity - it's one of those things pilots tend to have and beancounters tend not to have.

If you don't like it, you know what to do. Leave it to the professionals!

[wes_wall]

Capt. V

I may be wrong, but I believe AAL_Silverbird only relayed the topic, and was not the author. I too certainly concur with your position. When I was flying, I was more incline to be company supportive, rather than blindly following the vectors of ALPA.

I doubt you will see any of these army members leave their respective carriers.

[AeroBoero]

I thought this may be very interesting reading for some of you here.
Maybe it would be better in another topic or forum but some things were raised on this topic so I think it's worth a look. Anyway, click here (http://www.avweb.com/articles/ceo/ceo0007.html) if you want to read it.

[AAL_Silverbird]

Once again sorry mates but don't shoot the messenger! I'm not "Army" but I do understand where he is coming from.

Every pilot hired by one of the majors comes on board excited as a kid at Christmas with his/her new job. It doesn't take long before the wind is let out of their sail. Some of it is by the unions but most of it is by the employer. Pilots working their up the corporate ladder via the "Peter Principle" make terrible managers. Managers who have never pushed throttles for a living don’t do any better. This current situation that has been dropped in everyone’s lap since 9/11 has turned into a circular firing squad. It always happens when times are bad only this time it’s the worst I’ve seen. Money leaving the corporate coffers by the train load! Where it will end who knows but the landscape will be changed forever as certain operators will not be here in the next five years. Management’s fault, or labors fault? Enough blame to go around for everyone. Most of it can be blamed on alack of communication and trust between the two combatants. At my carrier we used to have a big sign painted facing the ramp connecting A terminal to C terminal at DFW it said, “Cooperation, Communication, Mutual Respect and Trust”. It’s now been painted over.

[Joyce Tick]

Over the years of Pprune threads, this has to be the saddest I've seen. It's the story of how one man thinks the world should do everything to accommodate him, even in difficult times, and how he owes the world nothing other than to enjoy his flying.

His horizon begins and ends with himself and he cannot conceive that anyone in his company wants for the common good, even if that means painful decisions.

What a self-centred, small individual.

[Ignition Override]

I've always wondered why so many Pprune members offer no information about themselves under the "profile" button, not that it will always be honest, even when nobody could figure out who they are, or what continent they live on, nor planet or origin.

Hiding behind a monitor requires no sincerity about, or knowledge of a topic.

['%MAC']

Anonymity often provides a refuge and shield, for not only the uninformed but also the concerned, who do not wish for reprisal. It is our duty to weed the chaff from the wheat, to read these posts with an eye for discernment. Prior to the Internet it was fairly easy, publishers and editors were responsible (or not) for the information they presented under their logo. Now any old duff can disseminate (dis-) information under a panoply of guises.

There are obviously some genuine airline pilots and union members who are posting under their legitimate auspices, but there are also a number of imposters. It is often difficult to determine from just one or two postings. No I don't keep a list. Those that are flying for a living, I respect and value their input and judgments, whether in accordance with my own or not.

Now blatant scabs I can do without. Whether Eastern, Ansett, or others.

[Edited to protect anonymity :)]

[Carruthers]

Well said Joyce, absolutely right. You will struggle to find a more self centred, selfish and arrogant bunch of people. Oh and I am a professional pilot but I am not proud to be associated with the unfortunately large number within my trade who think as the author of ‘I am an army of one’

[Kaptin M]

Carruthers, "Oh and I am a professional pilot"

LOL - in your dreams perhaps.

Your posts would indicate that you are (psychologically) SICK with envy, Cruthers - go back and read your diatribe, on almost every page, inspired by a disease that's driving you (farther) round the bend.

Joyce"s words, "It's the story of how one man thinks the world should do everything to accommodate him, even in difficult times, and how he owes the world nothing other than to enjoy his flying." hold some truth - it IS how ONE man thinks, however there are thousands of these individuals who are employed WORLDWIDE in MANY companies.
Companies being run by managements(?) that believe because MOST pilots enjoy their work, they can be taken advantage of.
Yet these are doubtless the same managers who would pay ridiculous prices to watch professional sportsmen and women use their natural talents, to earn an income FAR in excess of any individual employed in technical work.

Tell us all, Carruthers and Joyce, do you both sit in front of your television sets hurling verbal abuse at each and every professional sports event you watch?

Actually it would NOT surprise me if Carruthers answered "Yes".

[Carruthers]

Bet you've got a leather helmet, fur lined jacket, boots and a real flash belt buckle Capt M. Or are you kidding us all and are really in junior school, looks like it. The fact that there are thousands who think as you do is the problem. Why don't you do us all a favour and run the universe, it would doubtless be perfect.

[OneWorld22]

Kaptin M, I'll just correct you on that one. Under no circumstances do airline Management think that Pilots enjoy their work. If you'd spent a lifetime like them having to deal with the constant grief that pilots give them some of you might see it from their point of view. Remember, there are two sides to every story.

[Joyce Tick]

Further to Oneworld22's comments - we find that 90% of the grief that he talks about comes from 10% of the pilots. The vast majority go about their trade and give a loyal and dedicated service to their airline.

The 10% are never happy about anything and spend the whole time whingeing - both on the flight deck and here. It's generally agreed they are in the wrong job but it damned hard to get rid of them these days.

[6feetunder]

Managers, ya gotta love 'em! Seems they always have this if you don't like it, leave thing to throw at a pilot if he isn't tickled pink about the way his career is being screwed around.

Funny thing is though, managers know just as well as pilots do, it's hard to leave an airline. There are no lateral moves, it's back to the bottom of the list, unless the contract biz is more to your liking. When it comes to career airlines pilots can't move about without seriously altering their career.

It's different for managers though. Did Eddington go back to the bottom of the list after leaving CX (in quite a mess by the way, still sorting that one!!), or joining BA after Ansett? He didn't even do a good job and managed to keep his position in three different companies. It's the same for the middle management types as well. You see ads all the time, CX has regularly taken on expat managers from other airlines. Then the pr!cks show up and tell us, IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT LEAVE! Knowing full well what that does to ones career.

So while all you management types spout off about 'harming the company' and 'behave with integrity' and 'have some dignity', we'll just keep doing the job. Remember this, the performance of your employees is a direct reflection of your effectiveness as a manager. So don't give us that crap anymore. Maybe you should just try and do your job a little better. We are the ones here for the long haul. We are the ones who have the long term interest of the company in mind. We are the ones who have to live with your screw ups.

[flapsforty]

Contacted, you clearly ;) have not taken the time to read this thread properly or you would have known that the initial post was not written by AA_Silverbird.

Now if you can't be bothered to read other people's contributions, why should anyone bother reading yours? :confused:

[scanscanscan]

Mr Carruthers is hardly likely to want to be the first passenger on a fully automatic flight if he has seen the film and the recorded results of the 707 flight that the Faa attempted fully automatic.

The ground operator appears to lose control of the 707 on approach in perfect weather conditions, missed the landing target test equipment point ( fuel tank rupture into pylons was the test) the aircraft was a write off as planned but the test basically an expensive failure because they could not control it and land it where they wanted.

You will observe they could not/ did not do a goaround off of this unstable and inacurrate approach either.
However you will recall the Faa does insist and require pilots to do a go around in such circumstances on a flight or sim check.

They did not do themselves what they require of the regular pilots they licence.

To my knowledge the Faa never attempted fully automatic passenger jet flight testing in an empty test aircraft ( in perfect weather) again.

Having attempted to demonstrate flight without a crew they returned to their trade of approved crew training, exam and flight testing, licence issue, airline monitoring, and then....the prosecution/ disiplinery action and licence removal of the same. They appear able to handle this role but not a no crew 707.

Having crashed the plane, wasted lots of time and money for no result other than finding fully automatic flight was difficult, they all actually all kept their jobs!

Years later the president of Airbus alluded to imminent no crew fully automatic flight.
Haveing just returned from Alicante on an Air 2000 Airbus flight 641D some of the toilets did not flush and this is a fault I observed on the Gulf Air Airbus 320 fleet many times 5 years ago!
If airbus cannot work a fix to stop nappies going down its toilet system in 5 years, Mr Carruthers no crew flight is a while away.

IMHO pilots can relax regarding fully auto passenger flights terminating their declining career status.

[Chimbu chuckles]

I see carruthers on dunnunder having a dig about how he enjoyed flying in Oz in 89.....union buster are we curruthers?

Clearly he lives with a firm grip on both ankles.....BOHICA!!!


Chuck.

[Joyce Tick]

Many of us have happy memories of '89 - best detachment I ever had. We got such a welcome from the hoteliers, restauranteurs, taxi drivers, engineers and cabin crew who got a chance to fly again and earn some money (in some cases for their pilot husbands). Not a strike or union busting as I recall - they all handed in their resignation.

Big mistake.

[Nano 763]

PLEASE ........ This is ridiculous.

Have you tried approaching management with a list of your fears, insecurities and complaints. I bet you, they are much more welcoming of your input than you think.

Grow up men ............

Sorry ...... I expected more from Ppruners.

I have always found that a rotten apple in the crew can make the working environment unpleasant.

Try thinking about the good things about flying. Good money, good benefits, damn easy ............. What more can you want?

If you are really that unhappy, get another job ......... Heck ......... Change career.

There are literally thousands of wannabes that would take your place very happily, and approach flying with the right attitude for success.

[Carruthers]

Yeh Oz in 89 was great fun, nice place. Didn't have to cross any picket lines as I recall and yes the locals were very happy to see us. No sympathy as far as I could see for the over paid, over privileged Lemmings of the union. Scanscanscan I’d stay in the back if were you and worry about the toilets.

[Willit Run]

WOW,
Sitting in my hotel room, I was told of this thread by a friend and decided to take a look. This has totally degenerated to a new low!

I have been involved in the non-sched sector for 16 years now, both PAX and cargo,so that is my root thinking.

Most Pilots are fairly intelligent folks, some with a formal education and some with a blue collar background of baggage handleing,fueling, maintenence and so forth. Now, when we have the knowledge and background and basic skills of the management in our various companies, we tend to be able to see many problems and have solutions some of the time. Now, lets take a short side step for a sec and and ask what we do as pilots when we have a problem in the cockpit? We use our intelligence and knowledge to solve these problems, try to keep the ego's out of the equation,and hopefullycome to a conclusion with some CRM thrown in. Back to the main line now! If management and the FAA/CAA mandate we use CRM in the cockpit, why is it not employed in their day to day problem solving and attitudes towards employees. When we as crewmembers see blatent waste of money, and I mean a LOT of money, and then the management folks have the gall to tell us they can't afford to pay us more, frustration just does not quite describe the feelings that run through all of us.
Unfortuneatley, I have never been on the gravy train anywhere,(but would like to find one just for a month or two) and when we see the thousands of dollars that are wasted every month, we sit and say " gee, I'd like to have some of that"
There are some very well paid pilots out there who wouldn't necessarily appreciate a few extra hundred bucks a month, but us non schedders sure would like to have it and when we see the amount of waste that prevails, it just drives us crazy!!!
We all work for ourselves when you get down to the bottom line, and if you work for a company, cooperation with everyone sure would help the bottom line and the bean counters to the floor sweepers would enjoy the benefits.

Maybe I should go back to the pool and get some more sun?,, maybe thats what started this rant in the first place! HELP!!!

[EasternEuropean]

To my mind employees are the most valuable INTANGIBLE CAPITAL ASSET of a company simply called the GOODWILL.

Now, the bean's manual says…. "The GOODWILL represents the potential of a business to earn above a normal rate of return. GOODWILL arises from such factors as customer confidence, reputation for dependability efficiency and internal competencies, quality of goods"

Unfortunately in practice whenever the fire bursts trough the roof, this asset is the first one to be disposed by a caring and thoughtful management. Why? Because it's the effortless and easy way out of solving the problem whenever "the unthinkable" strikes.

But I would say to those managers… "While it may be easy and comfortable to fire people, I would challenge you to publicly justify - if you can - your salaries, options, incentives, benefits, perks, etc, etc, etc …" And at the end of the day try to ask your selves how much of a goodwill have you brought to the company's table.

[Hung Like A Horse]

Caruthers and like-posters are pilot-haters.

Either they are pilots who just haven't cut the mustard and are bitter in a dead-end job, watching others reap in the bigger coin, or they just aren't pilots, and are sick with jealousy.

Bit like old Bob Hawke, a card carrying failed pilot who went on to Uni, thought he meant something and joined politics, that paragon of virtuous employment.

So I guess the tried and true method of child psychology applies here whereby we just ignore the anti-pilot and he/she eventually goes away.

Having said that, it is disappointing to note the attempt at making fools of the enthusiasts who either wear or own flying paraphernalia.

So what if the dude wears a flying jacket, Ray Baun's or whatever else?

[Sir Kitt Braker]

Hung like a Seahorse - I don't see Caruthers and co as "pilot haters" just because they are anti- work to rule behaviour by aircrew.

And do try to come up with something better than " he disagrees with my opinion, so he must be a failed pilot or jealous of the profession". You may have a problem grasping this, but there are pilots who enjoy their career, don't think they're underpaid, and don't like the whingeing image they get tarred with by some of the contributors here.

[6feetunder]

The passage that started this thread was accredited to a CO pilot and was originally on their forum. Carruthers, Sir Kitt et al I'm sure are fine professionals and might even be good guys. Judging others because of their feelings on industrial realtions as it pertains to them is a bit presumptuous.

Like a wise man once said; "Don't judge me until you have walked a mile in my shoes". Or something like that.

I am not a CO pilot and I suspect noone else here is either. They have their problems over there and it looks like one of the happiest pilot groups in the world isn't so happy anymore. It begs the question, why? If they are so unhappy as to want to withdraw the goodwill that helped take CO "From Worst to First" then I would imagine they have a legitimate beef. These guys have worked very hard over the last few years making Gordon Bethune look very good. I guess times have changed.

[Charlie32]

After reading Kaptin M's diatribes against anyone who dissents, I would have to accept that if his attitude is "professional" then I am not.

[Sir Kitt Braker]

Well - I'd say he (Kaptin M) was just part of the 10% that Joyce Tick mentions....

[Pirate]

It's quite illuminating to go to Mr Carruthers's first post on this thread. There he says he is viewing the thread "as an outsider". Perhaps he would care to clarify this statement?

[Seriph]

Surely Pirate, Carruthers is inviting the reader to view the thread as an outsider would?

[411A]

Yes indeed, frankg, but suspect that the HKAOA has poisoned the atmosphere to such an extent that further diatribe between them and CX management is a waste of time.
But I would urge the two sides to get on with the show...because traffic is to pick-up BIG time this fall, cargo as well as pax. We have an all-out effort to be operational in short order, and the future for Asia is bright indeed.

[Smokie]

Well it didn't take long before a version of AAL Silverbirds post to reach our crew room. Especially now that our Ops Director has back tracked on a previous agreement to our Terms and Conditions "Not to let crewing bring forward your rostered duty start time unless you agree, otherwise you can politely decline the offer."
If this is the way our "Mis-management"are going to play it then they can expect more than "An Army of One" from Flight Crew and Cabin Crew.

[Cruncher]

pro·fes·sion·al - A skilled practitioner; an expert.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language,
Fourth Edition

Next time your deliberately under performing ask yourself if the above definition still applies?

[virgin]

I guess you meant the post to sound very clever Cruncher.
But what does it mean?
Are you saying you can't be a 'skilled practitioner' as a pilot and an 'expert' if you work to the company's rules but don't stick your neck out more than the book says? :confused:

[Cruncher]

I am saying, in my opinion, you are being unprofessional if you dont use your skills to legally achieve the best outcome for your employer.

[Kaptin M]

I am the one who has the power of veto over decisions made by my captains, lieutenants, sergeants and corporals;
I have the power to employ or terminate employment of ANY and MANY at my disposal;
I have the authority to approve - or reject - contractual revisions and renewals, as I see fit;
The success (or otherwise) of the company is seen as a direct reflection of MY strategies.

"Enron disclosed that senior executives awarded themselves USD745 million in payments and stock awards, in the year prior to the company's bankruptcy-law filing. Enron disclosed that it had paid USD310 million to 144 senior executives in salaries, bonuses, long-term incentives, and other cash payments. In addition these executives exercised stock options and received restricted stock valued at USD435 million.
"It's more evidence that people at the top knew that they should get while the getting was good, while the employees lost as much as USD1 BILLION", said one of the lawyers representing Enron employees." *source, Asian Wall Street Journal

Sound familiar?

Another interesting subject was raised on CNN during the past week - that of senior executives' salaries. Salaries that were considered "acceptable" (by themselves, no doubt) were $3.5 million...........................10 years ago!
Today, the "acceptable" level is considered to be $6 million to $7 million.

It would seem apparent that methods of increasing revenue - increasing passenger numbers by decreasing pitch, reducing passenger inflight amenities and refreshements (to nothing in many airlines), reducing frequency so that those services that DO operate do so at maximum capacity, substituting smaller aircraft for the same reason, etc. - are all in current practice.
To therefore show a "return to profitabilty", or an increase thereof - hence justifying senior managements' multi-million dollar salaries - the revenue-producing worker is being told that the company can no longer afford HIM!

In a nutshell, organised labour is seen as a threat to the EXCESSIVE SALARIES of a few - people who would willingly make hundreds, and often thousands, redundant, to allow them their greedy grab.

THIS is the true "Army of One" that companies are facing in their fight for survival.

[lomapaseo]

edited to remove foot from mouth

[Kaptin M]

It is only as "political" as the original "I am an Army of One" thread, lomapaseo.

The fact is many employees in the airlines worldwide have been/are/will be affected by decisions that are now being shown to be Dollar-driven in the interest of a small, elite minority.

That (some) pilots might consider themselves capable of making some difference to the bottom line figure by taking actions as suggested in the "I am an Army of One initial post, pales in significance to the often devastating "strikes" made by one or two "upper management", IMHO.
Yet it is now being shown - as evidenced, for example, by ENRON - that these management types often do NOT have the interest of the company at heart, but ONLY their OWN PERSONAL wealth.

And this, I feel sure, is news to many who see organised labour (unions) as the aggressive, greedy ones.
The truth in many instances - particularly wrt pilots' unions - is that it is these very unions that are trying to hold the ENRON-type mis-managers in check!

[R308R]

Fact

99% of the worlds wealth is owned by less than 1% of its population. :mad:

[Carruthers]

So Capt M what's your solution? Marxism? of course there is greed in the world, in every society and sytem. Ever heard of the teamsters. Organised labour is as corrupt as any other and just as greedy. How much of your grossly inflarted salary are you donating to the third world? like all organised labour supporters your motivated by envy and malice not by altruism.

[Ignition Override]

Most jobs would pay less without negotiation.

No true negotiation is possible for a large group of employees without representation.

No matter what was has been said about the Teamsters' actions, past or present, such reports can not be realistically used to tar all unions, to repeat, except to fool the Iceman "Oetzi', who was frozen in the Alps for about five thousand years.

As for certain, thinly-disguised, intentionally goofy statements in some previous remarks, let's hear what organization can better represent pilots than a union. I've never received any answer to this question on previous threads. Am still waiting.

It is interesting how many flight attendants or other non-pilots on Pprune Reporting Points (probably lots of "ex's" ) really don't like their jobs and just try anything they can to use Pprune as their I'll-get-even-with-them tool, at least in the eyes of the ignorant laymen.

Shakespeare created so many good expressions. One of his interesting ones is "misery loves company".

[viking737]

Down South,
what kind of old twin turbine cockpit are you flying?:cool:

[Seriph]

Try this Ign Overide:-




Why being in a union can be bad for your salary



TRADE unions have lost the power to win bigger pay increases for their members but they still kill off jobs, an influential research group said yesterday.

Firms without them often give bigger rises than those where they have kept their grip, it found. But while unions can no longer promise their members better pay, they do offer a better chance of the sack, the study from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation said.

During the 1990s, it found, firms with high union membership lost jobs while those without unions saw employment grow.
The findings cast a harsh light on the Government's plans to bring in more European﷓inspired laws to help unions gain members and rights. Employers are concerned about EU directives that will require British firms to set up works councils with a say in business decisions.


'Unionised plants more likely to shut'

The report said: The tendency of 20 years ago for union representation to inhibit job growth remains. 'The evidence on annual pay settlements and underlying pay levels suggests the ability of unions to enhance wages and salaries is in long﷓term decline.'

The report was based on the Workplace Employee Relations Survey, which included more than 2,000 managers and 28,000 workers; and on a second survey which checked on personnel managers and more than 800 workers in 1990 and 1998. It concluded that joining a union made nobody better off but was more likely to lose them their job.

'In the economy as a whole, non﷓union workplaces grew on average by 1.4 per cent per annum between 1990 and 1998, whereas unionised workplaces shrank on average by 1.8 per cent, it said.

The researchers, Neil Millward, John Forth and Alex Bryson, added, 'Union recognition restricted the growth of workplaces in the private sector over the 1990s. This negative effect of unions on employment growth was slightly larger in service industries than in manufacturing.'

But in manufacturing, 'unionised plants were on average 15 per cent more likely to close than non﷓union plants'.

On pay, they found that in 1998, in contrast to 20 years ago, 'trade unions did not, on average, negotiate higher pay for the employees they represented, when other factors affecting wage levels were allowed for.

'Pay increases were lower where union negotiations covered most employees, suggesting a long term decline in the ability of unions to enhance pay'.

'If anything, union settlements were smaller than increases given to employees acting on their own.'

However, the researchers said job losses in unionised firms were lower in the service sector where unions were negotiating over both wages
and employment levels.

'Although many of the findings show trade unions in an unfavourable light ﷓ especially in relation to loss of jobs ﷓ these situations are avoidable,' they said.

They claim that involving unions in hiring and firing and decisions on factory closures could prevent job losses and shutdowns.

But Ruth Lea of the Institute of Directors said: 'If the law and union power make it hard to close a factory a company will keep it open. But that won't stop it losing money. And if a factory is not viable, what is the point in keeping it open ?'

[126.9]

IFALPA lookout!

We'll all be voting this guy in next time around!!!!

Go mate. Know where you're coming from! :D

[Kaptin M]

Seriph has been very 'selective" in his publishing his "facts" - as a matter of FACT the findings are quite FAVOURABLE wrt to unions and their representation of members in private sector businesses such as aviation.

Follow this link for the full story:
http://www.jrf.org.uk/knowledge/findings/socialpolicy/681.asp

[HugMonster]

Seriph, I'm not sure where you found that article, but the journalist seems to have put a nice anti-union slant on it. The original press release by JRF reads slightly differently.Researchers at the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) and the Policy Studies Institute assessed the unions’ role in pay and employment using data from a 1998 nationally-representative survey of managers and staff in nearly 2,200 workplaces with more than ten employees. They found that: Unions appeared to affect the process of pay determination more than the outcome. Pay increases in the private sector during 1997/8 were no greater where trade unions were involved, once other relevant factors were taken into account. The underlying pay levels in companies with multi-union representation, or where pay-setting arrangements covered more than 70 per cent of the workforce, were typically 9 per cent higher than for similar employees in non-union workplaces. However, these were also the workplaces where recently negotiated pay increases had tended to be lower. As in the 1980s, unions did not generally increase the likelihood of workplace closure in the 1990s. But unionised plants in manufacturing were, on average, 15 per cent more likely to close between 1990 and 1998 than non-union workplaces. This tendency was particularly apparent where unions represented manual workers only, and where unions were excluded from negotiations about recruitment and staffing levels.
Neil Millward, Senior Research Fellow at NIESR and co-author of the report, said: "The evidence on annual pay settlements and on underlying pay levels suggests that the ability of unions to enhance wages and salaries is in long-term decline. However, it does also seem that the negative effects of unions on job losses are generally avoidable where management allow them a role in determining employment matters as well as pay."So the increased closure rate is very far indeed from applicable in all cases, in all industries. It is interesting that it is the presence of the union that is blamed in the article Seriph quotes. Can I suggest a different slant? In many manufacturing plants where there is enlightened, imaginative, go-ahead management with good staff relations, there is less likelihood that people will feel the need for a union. In another plant, with poor management and bad employee relations, the staff want to join a union. Poor management, however, causes the plant to close. Is this a possible scenario? This would appear to be borne out by the quote that I have emboldened from Neil Millward. Not always easy to identify cause and effect!

[Seriph]

So what are you saying? that if you have a good business you don't need unions but a bad business does! Presumably to send it down the drain quicker. Look at the sclerotic state of European business, especially German, effective management is becoming impossible. Beware the Asian economies, they don't take thier eye of the ball to squable over how little they can do.

[peepsmover]

All unions are different and even more different depending on the respective country, since labor laws differ in each country. American unions have historically been at the forefront of change to not only raise the standard of living and improve working conditions for union labor, but labor as a whole, that is simply the truth. Also it simply depends on your labor skills, in short, the more highly skilled your group is, the more power you have to collectively bargain.

[Ignition Override]

Seriph: that report was informative, and Peepsmover echoed my basic impressions.

I certainly agree that unions must try to limit militancy and must comprehend their present economic climate and company financial/political situations (Who is on your Board of Directors? Does another very abrasive 'tail wag their dog'?) when they first consider any drastic actions. How about the fact that, for example, American Airlines is based in a very anti-labor state? We can't overload the golden goose so much that it drowns in red ink, and the situation at each airline is different. But even though we are not 'white-collar' employees by some definitions, the pilot profession has very little similarity to driving a truck, repairing electrical cables, building a car or ship.

Over here in the US, the steel companies were supposedly up against imported steel which could be 'dumped' at a loss, sort of like Airbus producing civilian airframes with govt subsidies (versus Boeing's civilian sector, since the early 60's or so, receiving no government money) and its alleged strategy to gain market share in some places. Industries in Britain are quite different than those here, and it is hard to imagine that mgmt-union relations are also not different, not to mention the tax laws, socialized medicine and other factors in many countries, along with different cultural attitudes about work and leisure. How much of one's pension comes from the govt? Canadians' retirements are supposedly very different than in the US.

Heck, until the early 90's, US airline pensions could be partly stolen by the "corporate cannibals" maybe evaporate completely after secured creditors etc got the first huge bites from airline assets, until laws were tightened against this predatory behavior. The US has no 'unemployment insurance' that I'm aware of, as some European countries have, i.e. 'Arbeitslosigkeit Versicherung' in West Germany years ago.

Do most of these differences not exist anymore?

[Seriph]

In Europe the big / powerful unions are represented typically by people who hate :- entrepenuers, 'fat cats', profits, beancounters etc. They are instinctively anti capitalist believing in government control and nationalisation. Their belief in these things means that inevitably in a capitalist system thay will frequently clash with the system.

[6feetunder]

Seriph, if you read any of the information from many of the pilot unions around the world you will see that they are committed to the long term success and profitability of the airlines. Many airlines have profit sharing/bonus schemes designed to give incentive to the employees.

Maybe the EU unions are lost in a time warp but at UA for example the pilots are actually part owners (read capitalists) of the company. Hardly the type you speak of.

Many of the problems beign created by airline managements these days is due to the new guy trying to make his mark. They do this by cutting this, slashing that and generally creating unrest. Then they move on, leaving the entire staff, pilots included to live with their screw ups. The company in the long run is usually no better off and it can take years to undo what turns out to be a waste of time and money.

[HugMonster]

I think you will find that it is Seriph who is stuck in a timewarp. He has had to twist a pro-union press release to try to make a point which was not valid in the first place and is now throwing around the must astounding generalisations that may have been true of some unionists 30 years ago but could not in a million years apply to BALPA.

The trouble is that he is so prejudiced, in order to validate his own position he cannot afford to take into account any of the facts. So don't try to confuse him with facts - his mind is made up.

[Seriph]

BALPA enlightened! do me a favour. Those of us with some experience of this industry would'nt trust BALPA for anything. Ask the ex Dan guys amongst many others. It's they who are stuck in the time warp, all of the old prejudices are still there.

['%MAC']

6feetunder, I just can’t let that one go. UAL ALPA does not have a clear conscience; their treatment of the original Air Wisconsin pilots was deplorable and remains a disgrace on their offices. I am unaware of any apology emanating from them to those whose careers they destroyed, not impressed at all with UAL ALPAs past performance.

Sweet Sixteen. :)

[rupetime]

13 pages and 99% of it ramblings of mad men.

rt