Do Some Pilots Earn Too Much?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sir, your point reminds me a bit of my high school PT teacher.
He was a rather well known field player, for many years too(rather enjoyable,no doubt).
Suddenly, he does a back-flip and is "saved"!
He then proceeds to try and instruct us as to the folly of our ways in wanting to be just a bit as desirable to the girls as what he was/practiced.After he had enjoyed so many years.......
Do certainly correct me if I'm out of line, but, please first read the gentelemans account of "getting there" first.
He was a rather well known field player, for many years too(rather enjoyable,no doubt).
Suddenly, he does a back-flip and is "saved"!
He then proceeds to try and instruct us as to the folly of our ways in wanting to be just a bit as desirable to the girls as what he was/practiced.After he had enjoyed so many years.......
Do certainly correct me if I'm out of line, but, please first read the gentelemans account of "getting there" first.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Icahn-omics
definition: Any party, individual or group, that uses a company to either rob, steal, cheat, lie, manipulate, or any other means determined deceitful to receive a profit or for their own personal gain at the corporations expense. Furthermore they have total disregard for all parties in their way and show no remorse even though they tell you they do.
example in a sentence:
To achieve a better standard of living, DALPA decided to employ a strategy of Icahn-omics to achieve their means.
Thanks to EVA744 on Airliners.net for this!
definition: Any party, individual or group, that uses a company to either rob, steal, cheat, lie, manipulate, or any other means determined deceitful to receive a profit or for their own personal gain at the corporations expense. Furthermore they have total disregard for all parties in their way and show no remorse even though they tell you they do.
example in a sentence:
To achieve a better standard of living, DALPA decided to employ a strategy of Icahn-omics to achieve their means.
Thanks to EVA744 on Airliners.net for this!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Guvnor, your quote sums up every single manager (lower case purposely used) in nearly every Major Airline. The feathering of nests with total disregard for the workforce has reached epidemic proportions. managers use to be concerned with RPK's etc, they are now only interested in KPI's (Key Performance Indicators). For the uninitiated this is the formula used to calculate their bonuses.
[This message has been edited by Guido Hatzis (edited 18 January 2001).]
[This message has been edited by Guido Hatzis (edited 18 January 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Guvnor, I'm sure we are all, eagerly awaiting your defence to the point made by Guido about KPI's. Are KPI's present in your (total annual) income as a factor?
Would any other senior managers in airlines(non professional-pilots)care to elaborate on how their KPI's(or similar) affect their total incomes?
Would any other senior managers in airlines(non professional-pilots)care to elaborate on how their KPI's(or similar) affect their total incomes?
Guest
Posts: n/a
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">If I was to gaze into my crystal ball, I'd see hard times ahead for UAL and any carrier (such as DL and AA) that emulates their insane pay scales. I see major layoffs - and probably industrial action - which will devastate once fine carriers</font>
My bet is UAL will be the first to ask for them next time around and everyone else will follow. It's management's way of "pattern bargaining". Come on, I know you're familiar with these tactics!!! If not, can I recommend you read the fine book entitled "Tactics of a Union buster"!
Cheers
Doctor Bob
AirlineRumor.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
Joining late, but as a libertarian who can't stand forced unionization I couldn't resist 
But what kills companies even faster are managers who nickel-and-dime to save costs when they really ought to look at ways to boost revenue. During the last recession many firms swung the axe wildly and left themselves worse off, while those that engaged in aggressive marketing, price-cutting and product/service improvements actually grew during that time. In the case of pilots, let's say we have a 767 captain making $200k and an FO making $100k (probably on the high side, but bear with me). That's $300,000 per year. Now suppose they make 10 round-trip flights per month. $300,000 a year for 120 flights works out to $2500 per flight. Now suppose we get 200 pax per flight- that means the captain and FO cost $12.50 of that return fare. Therefore even if the pilots work for free the airline is only going to save $12.50 per round-trip passenger, while the plane is flying with about 30 empty seats. Instead of trying to save a few pennies by cutting the crew's pay the airline would be far better off doing whatever it takes to fill those empty seats.
Do you seriously believe hours flown equals hours worked? Personally, I wouldn't want to be anywhere near an airliner whose crew simply punched a clock, started the engines and flew away.
Not my profession- maybe the local sweatshop or McD's expects employees to train for free but certainly not any employer that values its workforce. Most training happens on company time and any that doesn't is usually accompanied by some fairly generous perks.
Why is that a problem? There's a similar pay gap for every other profession as well; I could double my take-home tomorrow. Know why? Because America is richer. Period. The UK and Europe could be just as rich by cutting taxes and deregulating, but it's easier to whine about the other guy who's better off than it is to solve your own problems.
And how does this differ from the behaviour of other trade unions?
If you're asking whether they're being paid what they're worth, well they're worth exactly what somebody is willing to pay. The drivers carry enough fare-paying pax to cover their salaries many times over so obviously the airlines think they are.
The obvious reasons are (1) bigger investment in training = higher pay to keep them around (AKA "golden handcuffs") and (2) bigger plane = more pax = higher revenue.
Flame away on this one, gang
The unions will never agree to such a scheme. Union dues are based on the employee's hourly pay, so any bonuses, company stock or profit sharing go directly to the worker. That's why unions have always opposed such schemes- becouse the bosses don't get any cash for it.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">From a corporate standpoint, this is a fast-track to bankruptcy, especially in a recession which it is widely acknowledged we're entering at the moment. Salaries are part of overhead - and high overhead kills off companies when revenues are down.</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Not only this, but their agreements limit the number of hours they have to work to ridiculously low levels - the equivalent of just over a working week for an average person per month.</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">They expect to be paid for training time - regardless of the fact that most professions require training/seminars/conferences for which there is no additional pay.</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">The pay gap between US crews (and these three carriers in particular) and crews in the rest of the world is vast and seemingly growing out of control.</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">It's very much to ALPA's benefit if other US majors (such as Continental, US Airways, TWA, Northwest, Southwest etc) join them - and ensures for those carriers that are paying their crews high salaries that come the recession, their competitors are in the same boat.</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">But can these pay levels be justified?</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Is there any justification for retaining the old system of paying higher salaries for larger aircraft?</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size="2">Surely a far better way of doing things would be to have a 'normal' level of base pay - and then profit share (perhaps in conjunction with an ESOP) so that if the company's doing well - then the employees do likewise. If it isn't - then they don't get any extra. The benefit to the company is that they can control their overhead by keeping pay at a reasonable level - and employees share in the good times.</font>
The unions will never agree to such a scheme. Union dues are based on the employee's hourly pay, so any bonuses, company stock or profit sharing go directly to the worker. That's why unions have always opposed such schemes- becouse the bosses don't get any cash for it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Guvnor,
A friend of mine at Delta once said to me, "you're only worth what you negotiate."
He's right. He's also worth $385,000 last year as a senior 737-800 captain with some overtime flying... ALPA has negotiated very, very well for Delta pilots.
Cheers
A friend of mine at Delta once said to me, "you're only worth what you negotiate."
He's right. He's also worth $385,000 last year as a senior 737-800 captain with some overtime flying... ALPA has negotiated very, very well for Delta pilots.
Cheers
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hi everyone
Still throusands of airmiles away from even getting my atpl but just wondering whats at the end of the tunnel?
Could you please advise me what the average F/O (self sponsored) earns in the UK for the likes of Easyjet and co ????
Thanks from me and Jane my bank manager !
Still throusands of airmiles away from even getting my atpl but just wondering whats at the end of the tunnel?
Could you please advise me what the average F/O (self sponsored) earns in the UK for the likes of Easyjet and co ????
Thanks from me and Jane my bank manager !
Guest
Posts: n/a
Guvnor,
All parties involved operate under the free enterprise system. You get what you can when you can get it.
Your communist attitudes died when the wall came down more than ten years ago.
Why do you begrudge these salaries so much?
Could it be that you were never invited to the dance?
All parties involved operate under the free enterprise system. You get what you can when you can get it.
Your communist attitudes died when the wall came down more than ten years ago.
Why do you begrudge these salaries so much?
Could it be that you were never invited to the dance?
Guest
Posts: n/a
It is totally meaningless to compare salaries as their are many more factors like hours conditions etc to bring into the whole picture. It is foolish. Why? Read on...
I dont care what the cleaner gets, its none of my business what the company chooses to pay a cleaner or tug driver or bagage handler, or for any other thing they pay for. Let the managers do the managing.
My salary and conditions are very important to me and my fellow pilots and we have every right in the open market to negotiate whatever the company and our reps can agree on. Putting pressure on the achieve it is normal business practice so dont scream about it. It is what the managers are doing and just what they should do. So why not the pilots too?
Guvnor, your figures are very wrong. Flight crews salaries are not 40 or 50% or even 30% of the total salary costs to the airline let alone total operating costs. Someone is pulling your leg I think. 5% of total operating would be nearer to the mark.
If Airbus or Boeing or Shell, BP or Exon can negotiate what they chanrge and get an increase when possible why cannot flight crew. Either we can use the market we are supposed to be subject to, or we cannot?
I dont care what the cleaner gets, its none of my business what the company chooses to pay a cleaner or tug driver or bagage handler, or for any other thing they pay for. Let the managers do the managing.
My salary and conditions are very important to me and my fellow pilots and we have every right in the open market to negotiate whatever the company and our reps can agree on. Putting pressure on the achieve it is normal business practice so dont scream about it. It is what the managers are doing and just what they should do. So why not the pilots too?
Guvnor, your figures are very wrong. Flight crews salaries are not 40 or 50% or even 30% of the total salary costs to the airline let alone total operating costs. Someone is pulling your leg I think. 5% of total operating would be nearer to the mark.
If Airbus or Boeing or Shell, BP or Exon can negotiate what they chanrge and get an increase when possible why cannot flight crew. Either we can use the market we are supposed to be subject to, or we cannot?
