Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Terms and Endearment
Reload this Page >

seniority lists discussion..... Again!

Terms and Endearment The forum the bean counters hoped would never happen. Your news on pay, rostering, allowances, extras and negotiations where you work - scheduled, charter or contract.

seniority lists discussion..... Again!

Old 2nd Apr 2020, 04:42
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 3rd Rock
Posts: 153
With the critical mass of the pilot community finding itself with no way to earn the same money in aviation ever again, will it still be true that seniority served its purpose?
Unfortunatly this probably will happpen and seniority will neither have served or failed in its purpose. A seniority system can rarely cater for every black swan event such as we are witnessing, and every seriority system has its own unique differences. Obviously an airline collapses entirely then that system is no longer relevant, but those in the junior ranks of surviving airlines will at least enjoy some protection and why shouldnt they.

I dont think that seniorty is a fantasic system, but its better than any alternative (especially if your airline is large and/or progession is slow).
Lapon is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 05:42
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 393
Originally Posted by srjumbo747 View Post
Nearly every pilot in the U.K. over sixty thought, twenty years ago, that theyíd be retired by now.

Iím afraid that a lot of these people Ďlove their jobsí too much and canít give up flying much to the detriment of the younger folk. Also, they just canít see how morally wrong they are.

I know loads of guys, who live abroad and have paid little or no tax, who have RAF pensions and still want to fly.

I am not saying how I feel about these people, (well I donít like the lack of morals) Iím just highlighting the fact.

Good luck to everyone.
What a pompous Post!

Twenty years ago all pilots thought they would be on much better pensions than they can expect now. Many will need to work to recover from the hammering that their pensions have had, especially with this present debacle. (Have you looked at what has happened to pension savings over the past six weeks?)

But do you care about that, or just your selfish self? (Well, I don't like your lack of morals.) I'm just highlighting the fact.
Trossie is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 06:39
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: LUX
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by Superpilot View Post
If seniority is the fairer system right now, but by the end of this world disaster over half of us have lost our jobs (I.e redundancy), what then?

With the critical mass of the pilot community finding itself with no way to earn the same money in aviation ever again, will it still be true that seniority served its purpose?

Like unabated, relentless capitalism, the perceived benefits of seniority collapse within the setting of a world wide disaster. Some will get lucky, most won't.
It will never happen. Pointless discussion
SaulGoodman is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 08:09
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 51
Originally Posted by Trossie View Post
What a pompous Post!

Twenty years ago all pilots thought they would be on much better pensions than they can expect now. Many will need to work to recover from the hammering that their pensions have had, especially with this present debacle. (Have you looked at what has happened to pension savings over the past six weeks?)

But do you care about that, or just your selfish self? (Well, I don't like your lack of morals.) I'm just highlighting the fact.
Trossie, looking at your other posts it seems that your glass is only ever half full and you enjoy a bit of a rant but thank you for your comments.
Just throwing this suggestion out there... why just not take the retirement age worldwide down to 63?
Merely a discussion point and, would it help?
srjumbo747 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 08:11
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Perth Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 276
If there is an afterlife in Aviation when we so called eradicate this virus.
Whether we have a seniority list or rampant favoritism/brown nosing it will not really matter, the employers will shaft you, your so called mates from your Company or any other one will shaft you.

Pilots are a savage greedy bunch if not contained. by a transparent system, beware all on individual contracts as history will tell you
greybeard is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 09:05
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ??-ask crewing
Posts: 122
When hiring starts again, it would seem fair to differentiate where the applicant came from before - If from a non-seniority airline, then a role commensurate with experience ... if formerly of a seniority airline, then a starter level position. Karma.
Sick is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 09:15
  #87 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,055
Just a reminder that when many of us started out on our aviation career the retirement age in the UK was 65, yes 65. The age was reduced to 60 quite arbitrarily and without any discussion between government, employers or the people most affected, the pilots. After years of campaigning we got the age lifted back to its correct place, 65, (sadly too late for me!). . For me 63 would have been enough and those extra three years would have made a lot of difference.
parabellum is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 09:46
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 3rd Rock
Posts: 153
When hiring starts again, it would seem fair to differentiate where the applicant came from before - If from a non-seniority airline, then a role commensurate with experience ..
A romantic notion for sure, but why does the next FO off the upgrade rank deserve to be penalised for it? The 'applicant' has never actually contributed a thing to the airline before by definition.

Furthermore, how does that FO ever get an upgrade to match the 'commensurate' experience. We all started somewhere remeber.
Lapon is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 09:48
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ??-ask crewing
Posts: 122
Originally Posted by Lapon View Post
A romantic notion for sure, but why does the next FO off the upgrade rank deserve to be penalised for it? The 'applicant' has never actually contributed a thing to the airline before by definition.
Yeah, for sure - I was going to add "so far as is possible/vacancies permit" but kept it short.
Sick is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 09:58
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 1,560
Seniority lists are a very real oddity in the modern world - but then so is the job TBH

very few jobs require exactly the same level of performance every day for the whole of your career. And even fewer that you perform the same tasks with a different set of workmates every day

The possibilities of promotion (in the normal business sense) are very very few and most people don't even want to manage others (outside the cockpit)

The companies don't want a work force that has a range of abilities - they want one where everyone has IDENTICAL abilities as far as possible

If people are happy with seniority I guess it's as good a way as the next to manage a weird situation
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 10:09
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: uk
Age: 70
Posts: 75
What exactly is "retirement age" anyway?

Licence privileges currently allow for commercial operations (aerial work type stuff notwithstanding) up until age 65.

Governments change state pension age to suit themsleves. When I started my career, state pension age for a man was 65. (At the time, licence privileges allowed commercial operations to age 60). For a woman it was 60. For me now though it's 66.75! My wife has seen a more drastic change.

Company pension schemes have had ages at which "full" benefit is available at some notional age anywhere between 55 and 65, and is subject to change by negotiation with the employees. Legislation passed by various UK governments over the last 10-15 years have though made the Company retirement age somewhat of a variable. An individual can take pension benefits on reaching age 55. The employer can't compel an individual to leave the Company on reaching some arbitrary age (due to Age Discrimination legislation). Only loss of licence privileges at 65 are the backstop. One thing is generally true though (subject to financial markets), the longer you pay in to your pension for, and the longer you leave it before taking benefits, the more valuable it will be.

Contracts of employment which referred to a retirement age have been trumped by more general legislation. Some folks got lucky, others maybe not so.

What individuals have to grasp is that "retirement" is now a much more fluid concept than it used to be.

Edited to add:

My company doesn't exist any more. However, over the last 10 years or so hardly anyone "retired" because they had reached their 60th birthday. It was usually some event like fleet retirement/base closure/medical issue/divorce/bereavement etc that prompted them to leave the company. Sometimes they were already over 60; usually not. Sometimes they put their company pension in to payment, sometimes not straight away. Sometimes they got another job, sometimes commercial flying, occasionally something else.

I think I can say though that no one left so that they would create a vacancy for a younger person...

Last edited by 36050100; 2nd Apr 2020 at 13:30. Reason: Additional content
36050100 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 11:28
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Far East
Posts: 80
There will be senior pilots who have led "interesting" lives , whom will need to keep filling their bank accounts for ex-wives and/or second ,third families etc etc .
They wont see why they should sacrifice their rights over their income just for a more junior crew to keep theirs do you ??
wisecaptain is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 11:48
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 393
Originally Posted by srjumbo747 View Post
...
Just throwing this suggestion out there... why just not take the retirement age worldwide down to 63?
Merely a discussion point and, would it help?
That sounds like a comment from a greedy first officer who wants older pilots out of the way so the HE can get that left seat earlier.

Not a thought at all about how those older pilots are going to cope on the very much reduced pensions that will result (please just look at what has happened to pension savings so far this year before posting comments like that) and the three to four years minimum wait that they will now have before they even get a top-up with a state pension.

I do not like the morals of anyone thinking like that. So much for 'pilots sticking together for pilots' that we have heard mentioned here.
Trossie is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 12:56
  #94 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,055
Sadly, as has been in evidence for a while now, when the going gets tough pilots will eat their own young.
parabellum is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 14:37
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 519
Originally Posted by Sick View Post
When hiring starts again, it would seem fair to differentiate where the applicant came from before - If from a non-seniority airline, then a role commensurate with experience ... if formerly of a seniority airline, then a starter level position. Karma.
Nowhere in your schadenfreude satisfaction scenario do you address the effects on pilots at the receiving airline who would end up junior to the "commensurate experience" of the guy coming in above them. I mean you did say "if vacancies permit," but that's a handwave that doesn't explain anything. Permit what?
Vessbot is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 17:51
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 81
Every airline that I have worked for (and it's been a few, see above) has taken on Direct Entry Captains. That has been airlines with seniority lists and airlines without seniority lists, When there have not been enough suitable (and that means minimum qualification and grades criteria), or willing (!!), pilots to promote then captains have been recruited from outside. Every single one of them has stopped recruiting Direct Entry Captains when there have been suitable pilots from within to promote.

So the argument that recruiting Direct Entry Captains 'deprives' the existing pilots of promotion has just not been true in every airline where I have worked. Regardless of them being 'seniority list' or 'non seniority list' airlines.

Airlines understandably want to promote from within first as those pilots are 'known quantities' and that has been the strong feeling in all those airlines. A proper process and transparency are what is needed for promotion and that has absolutely nothing to do with a "place on a list". Having a 'mate' in the sim putting you through the grades with a nudge and a wink is just as possible in a seniority list airline as it is in a non seniority list airline, just as the chance of some @rse with a grudge could block your chances in both (neither type of airline has any particular monopoly on those...).

So could those banging on about that non-starter 'issue' just look at reality and not your emotions.

And getting back to my comment about 'willing': I have know pilots in seniority list airlines, who were totally capable of promotion, not being willing to be promoted because their position on that seniority list enables them to have the sort of lifestyle that would be impossible for them if they took promotion. I haven't heard any of the seniority list proponents mention that!

However, I don't see this getting anywhere, both sides have already 'taken to the trenches' and many, many, many pilots' jobs will have to be lost before a victor emerges. (And I, personally, don't see the eventual victor as being the one using old fashioned methods in this 'battle'.)
NoelEvans is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 18:11
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: LUX
Posts: 2
Noel, totally agree. With a slight side note though. Some companies prefer to hire (type rated) DEC as they only need to train one person whereas if they promote from within they have to train two.
SaulGoodman is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 19:13
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 519
Originally Posted by NoelEvans View Post
Every airline that I have worked for (and it's been a few, see above) has taken on Direct Entry Captains. That has been airlines with seniority lists and airlines without seniority lists, When there have not been enough suitable (and that means minimum qualification and grades criteria), or willing (!!), pilots to promote then captains have been recruited from outside. Every single one of them has stopped recruiting Direct Entry Captains when there have been suitable pilots from within to promote.

So the argument that recruiting Direct Entry Captains 'deprives' the existing pilots of promotion has just not been true in every airline where I have worked. Regardless of them being 'seniority list' or 'non seniority list' airlines.

Airlines understandably want to promote from within first as those pilots are 'known quantities' and that has been the strong feeling in all those airlines. A proper process and transparency are what is needed for promotion and that has absolutely nothing to do with a "place on a list". Having a 'mate' in the sim putting you through the grades with a nudge and a wink is just as possible in a seniority list airline as it is in a non seniority list airline, just as the chance of some @rse with a grudge could block your chances in both (neither type of airline has any particular monopoly on those...).

So could those banging on about that non-starter 'issue' just look at reality and not your emotions.

And getting back to my comment about 'willing': I have know pilots in seniority list airlines, who were totally capable of promotion, not being willing to be promoted because their position on that seniority list enables them to have the sort of lifestyle that would be impossible for them if they took promotion. I haven't heard any of the seniority list proponents mention that!

However, I don't see this getting anywhere, both sides have already 'taken to the trenches' and many, many, many pilots' jobs will have to be lost before a victor emerges. (And I, personally, don't see the eventual victor as being the one using old fashioned methods in this 'battle'.)
I think youíre conflating two lines of thought that are seemingly against the seniority system, but one of them isnít, and is actually a part of it.

Itís perfectly sensible that there are minimum qualifications for upgrade, and if they are established and applied in a consistent and transparent manner (X hours total time, Y hours time in type, etc.) that is not only right, but necessary. And it may be that a junior pilot meets these quals before a senior one does, and therefore receives an upgrade slot first. Maybe even at the time of hiring, if the company training program includes that provision, in the case of DECís. However, the senior pilot who later meets the quals and takes an upgrade, would then be bidding above the junior pilot if theyíre bidding at the same base, etc. (Also, the position on the list and the bid award determine the entry into upgrade training, which can then be passed or failed based on demonstrated aptitude. Itís a red herring that the seniority system disregards aptitude.)

Thatís different from an ill-defined nebulous ďmeritocracy,Ē which would allow management to pick the winners and losers based on economy, nepotism, etc. under a fig leaf. Itís also different from someone entering at ďcommensurate experienceĒ at a seniority level above pilots who have already been paying their dues at their company under the pre-agreed terms of their contract. And this is not right.

As far as people choosing to remain in the right seat, thatís an exercise of their option to bid anything their seniority level can attain (or less) based on the multitude of factors in their life. You say that seniority system proponents fail to mention that, but here it is; and I donít see what part of our argument is undermined by it.

Also you note peopleís entrenchment in their position, and itís certainly human nature to be entrenched in argument positions, especially when theyíre self-serving, and/or confirming of their biases. Like a senior pilot favoring seniority, or an unemployed pilot being against it. But Iím not so entrenched, and as I said before Iíd be willing to honestly entertain a national seniority system vs. a company one, for example. But only if a way can be devised for the transition from one system to the other, that does not violate existing pilotsí contractual agreements!
Vessbot is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2020, 23:55
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 3rd Rock
Posts: 153
Iíd be willing to honestly entertain a national seniority system vs. a company one,
That may have worked in the days of goverment owned airlines an regulation but not anymore.

How do you treat the pilots of a carrier with international basings, or pilots of a foreign carrier with a basing in your own country?
How is one eligible for seniority in this national system? Is it having a current licence of that nation? How does that system adress people holding multiple licences who may or may not be a national of that country anyway?

Does this system actually fix any problems that exist in the system we know today, or merely create new ones?

The only argument I really hear against traditional seniority systems is that it prevents 'senior' pilots from moving from company to company without penalty.
Unfortunately it is a zero sum game and someone has to cop the penalty. I dont believe it should be the existing staff at a given airline, but those against seniority obviously disagree as I'm sure it wouldn't affect them.
Lapon is offline  
Old 3rd Apr 2020, 08:50
  #100 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,055
When I did a course at Boeing, Seattle, I was told that in Pan Am, which was still alive then, it wasn't unknown for a senior first officer, based in Hawaii, bidding continually for either Pan Am 1 or Pan Am 2, both round the world flights, (one east bound and the other west bound), turn down the opportunity of a command as that would have been on a New York based 727, which didn't appeal!
parabellum is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.