Why "1000 hrs Turbine PIC" Is Bad For Pilots

[Cptnchia]

Originally Posted by Firebird2XC

I'm not saying my "rights were violated". If I did or did not use the term "discriminatory", I didn't mean in the bigoted or criminal sense.

I didn't think you were using it in the "normal" sense, but just wanted to make sure.

All I'm saying is that the general belief that this bullet on your resume is not all it's cracked up to be. If we dispel the myth and make it clear that "Get Up and Get Out" thinking benefits pilots very little, we're improving pilot ideology at the fundamental levels.

On this I wholeheartedly agree.

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by fly8slep

We're at a low right now, things will pick up again and go even higher. Only to go way down again 10 years from now. This industry has been a roller coaster since the beginning why would it change now? The looming pilot shortage should help though, the last few years has basically worsened the pilot profession. Any lower and it will be the same as driving a city bus. With the exception of colleges, nobody is flight training to be a comm pilot.

I've been hearing about this "looming pilot shortage" for almost 8 years now. Still haven't seen it. Even when airlines were hiring people with a CMEL and a pulse there was no shortage. They just lowered the mins, cranked up the marketing campaign at the pilot mills and viola.

I agree with Matt. I don't think the majors even have a clue or care about the financial aspect. The 1000 TPIC was just a way for SWA to thin the tide of applications. Delta, NWA and CAL never really had that requirement. In fact, I've got apps in at all three of those, and I don't even have 200 TPIC yet....

[Polar742]

Originally Posted by Firebird2XC

If McCain gets elected, we WILL have foreign pilots flying in the US for that sort of rate, at some degree.

Beyond that, if airline profitability goes up and the industry shrinks, we'll have leverage to strike for better pay eventually.

Just curious where these foreign pilots will come from.

If you look at all the contract sites, why do all these foreign carriers need qualified pilots from other countries?

You can walk in off the street and be a Captain. CA salaries are at least 10k/mo and some are up over 15k/mo- not great pay, but better than command at some lower tier airlines. And of course there's no union, blah, blah, blah, but we know that.

[Firebird2XC]

Originally Posted by Polar742

Just curious where these foreign pilots will come from.

If you look at all the contract sites, why do all these foreign carriers need qualified pilots from other countries?

You can walk in off the street and be a Captain. CA salaries are at least 10k/mo and some are up over 15k/mo- not great pay, but better than command at some lower tier airlines. And of course there's no union, blah, blah, blah, but we know that.

I'm not talking about a large pool of foreign born pilots working for US airlines. I'm talking about route structures flown entirely by foreign airlines emerging in the US. In other words- European airlines flying into NY, then flying to LA before flying back to NY then back to Europe, etc, etc.

[Polar742]

Originally Posted by Firebird2XC

I'm not talking about a large pool of foreign born pilots working for US airlines. I'm talking about route structures flown entirely by foreign airlines emerging in the US. In other words- European airlines flying into NY, then flying to LA before flying back to NY then back to Europe, etc, etc.

Oh, I guess I misunderstood what you said then.

Those airlines are STILL paying better than their US counterparts, I'm basing that off the contract Direct Entry Captain rates. Read up on the JAA rest requirements too. Something else we should aspire to....

I don't want it to happen, but foreign controlled airlines vs. foreign pilots are different issues.

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by Polar742

Oh, I guess I misunderstood what you said then.

Those airlines are STILL paying better than their US counterparts, I'm basing that off the contract Direct Entry Captain rates. Read up on the JAA rest requirements too. Something else we should aspire to....

I don't want it to happen, but foreign controlled airlines vs. foreign pilots are different issues.

Yeah, but good luck getting hired at one of the good European ones if you're not a citizen of their home country. Hence the reason cabotage is bad for US pilots. I'd fly for Lufthansa in a hearbeat if I could get EU citizenship. They hand out US citizenship like candy, but not so on the EU side of things.

[Baronman]

Originally Posted by kellwolf

They hand out US citizenship like candy, but not so on the EU side of things.

Not really.

[surreal1221]

So the EU's member states hand out citizenships like the US does?

News to me.

[jynxyjoe]

Originally Posted by surreal1221

So the EU's member states hand out citizenships like the US does?

News to me.

He might be saying the US doesn't hand out citizenships like candy. In my experience, the friends I have that went through it had nothing but lines after lines of red tape. Perhaps though compared to the EU ours is easier, I don't know.

[granlistillo]

Originally Posted by surreal1221

So the EU's member states hand out citizenships like the US does?

News to me.

pretty much! Very similar to the US. If you have a "green card" or residency permit and you live there as a legal resident for about 5 years you can apply for citizenship. Getting a green card there is about like here, if you are married to a EU citizen or your job sponsors you then you can get one. Several EU countries will give you citizenship based on a relative, like a grandparent.

Having a dual nationality marriage, I must say that the EU is less of a pain in the butt than the US.

[Baronman]

Sorry...I was referring to the US handing out papers like candy. Having through the years come across dozens and dozens of friends, family and the like who've tried to get green-cards or citizenship, it's not easy. I know it's not meant to let everyone in, but the process is prohibitive due to the level of BS one must navigate.

[ATN_Pilot]

Originally Posted by Polar742

Those airlines are STILL paying better than their US counterparts

Depends on the country. Russian pilots make so little that many of them have to work second jobs outside of aviation to make ends meet. If McCain's idea of cabotage becomes a reality, then the US will become a place where foreign airlines send their own citizens to to become pilots so they can go back to their own countries to fly for their airlines, which will be able to fly point-to-point within our own country. Imagine a Russian LCC able to fly point-to-point within America with their bargain-basement pilot wages. Just send an ab-initio Russian student to an American pilot school where learning to fly is cheap compared to the rest of the world, and then once he's certified, send him back to Russia where he'll work for this new Russian LCC to fly our old routes. This is exactly what McCain thinks is a good idea.

[wheelsup]

I don't care if I could fly on a Russian airline for free around the US, I wouldn't step foot onto one of their airplanes. I value my life more than a $200 plane ticket.

[ATN_Pilot]

Originally Posted by wheelsup

I value my life more than a $200 plane ticket.

Most Americans don't.

[granlistillo]

Originally Posted by Baronman

Sorry...I was referring to the US handing out papers like candy. Having through the years come across dozens and dozens of friends, family and the like who've tried to get green-cards or citizenship, it's not easy. I know it's not meant to let everyone in, but the process is prohibitive due to the level of BS one must navigate.

The system only screws with those who try to follow the law. If you are illegal then you get all the "rights" in the world.

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by jynxyjoe

He might be saying the US doesn't hand out citizenships like candy. In my experience, the friends I have that went through it had nothing but lines after lines of red tape. Perhaps though compared to the EU ours is easier, I don't know.

Pretty much that the EU's process is more restrictive than ours. Maybe not "like candy," but those that came here illegally that could be getting a "path to citizenship..." I'd call that candy if it happens....

[skydog]

I agree with a lot of what the OP said, but I do not blame "management." I blame pilots.

You spend years doing things that you would never consider doing in another profession: working for free, working for "low" pay, accepting lousy working conditions, all in the name of "paying your dues (so-called). You show the world exactly what you're willing to put up with to fly an airplane. Then you make it to the majors, and all of a sudden you expect all of that to change? That's not the way the world works.

[skydog]

Originally Posted by PCL_128

Most Americans don't.

You don't REALLY believe that do you? I hope not.

I just bought airline tickets last night. $850 dollars for two roundtrip tickets from Portland to Milwaukee. For travel over the New Year's Holiday. I value my life more than money. But had the tickets been much more, I simply wouldn't have bought them. I would nave instead chosen not to travel. And that is the choice that a lot of consumers are facing.

Now it may make you feel good to say "Well if you can't afford what it costs to fly, then too bad," but that doesn't do airline employees much good when their employer is grounding airplanes and laying off people does it?

But I digress, as it has nothing to do with 1000 TPIC. See my previous post.

[ATN_Pilot]

Originally Posted by skydog

You don't REALLY believe that do you?

Yep. No doubt in my mind.

[Airdale]

I am so glad I am out of this industry right now. Life is great without the drama. I get up at 7:30, start working on a customers house by 830, break for lunch at 12, go back to working at 1:00 and finish the day at 4:00pm. I don't work on Saturday, sleep in on Sunday and watch football all day while killing a 6 pack. Never thought I'd be so happy not flying an airplane.

[Stone Cold]

Originally Posted by PCL_128

Depends on the country. Russian pilots make so little that many of them have to work second jobs outside of aviation to make ends meet. If McCain's idea of cabotage becomes a reality, then the US will become a place where foreign airlines send their own citizens to to become pilots so they can go back to their own countries to fly for their airlines, which will be able to fly point-to-point within our own country. Imagine a Russian LCC able to fly point-to-point within America with their bargain-basement pilot wages. Just send an ab-initio Russian student to an American pilot school where learning to fly is cheap compared to the rest of the world, and then once he's certified, send him back to Russia where he'll work for this new Russian LCC to fly our old routes. This is exactly what McCain thinks is a good idea.

Two quick points on this, then ya'll can go back to your discussion.

1) How many US pilots have second jobs to make ends meet? Especially at the regionals, but even the majors have people with second jobs or careers...doctors, lawyers, etc.

2)How much time have you spent in Russia? Personally, I'm in the "poor" Ukraine making 8,000 Euro/month, on a 20 on/20 off schedule, with tickets provided back home during my off time, apartment included, etc. You get the picture. They are desperate for pilots over here in most parts of the world. Maybe the US should hire some and your wages would go up to what some are paid overseas.

You might say, well you fly a bizjet...the comany I'm contracting for has 10 MD-80,82, and 83's, and 3 DC-9s. Their pilots make a lot more than I do on a similar rotation, and I know for a fact one has been here for 5 years from some place in Europe.

I'm not saying I support cabotage. I just think you cannot throw out things you think are true when they might just be half-truths, or not close to the truth. For the record, I do not know how much Russia pays their domestic crews, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn they are better paid than you make it sound!!!

[ATN_Pilot]

As you've already admitted, your situation is dramatically different than that of an airline pilot in Russia. If you'd like, you can contact IFALPA and they'll provide you some information. The latest stats I have are from 2005, and they show the average Russian airline pilot making $10,368 net US dollars per year. Gee, I wonder if that would be a financial advantage for a Russian airline wanting to sell tickets on point to point routes in the US under McCain's dream scenario?

[Polar742]

Again, so I don't get another lecture, I'm not in favor of foreign carriers flying domestically in the states.

Now that I have ensured that my stance issue is very clear:

Do you think that if foreign carriers are allowed to fly in the states that they'd be exempt from compliance with all the oversight,rules and regulations that US based carriers must adhere? If so, do you think the extremely dangerous, low cost foreign carriers will be able to comply with the regulations and scrutiny?

Do you think that if the President decided that they'd allow foreign carriers to fly domestically, that congress and/or the judiciary allow it with all the public protests that will surely follow?

[Firebird2XC]

Originally Posted by Polar742

Again, so I don't get another lecture, I'm not in favor of foreign carriers flying domestically in the states.

Now that I have ensured that my stance issue is very clear:

Do you think that if foreign carriers are allowed to fly in the states that they'd be exempt from compliance with all the oversight,rules and regulations that US based carriers must adhere? If so, do you think the extremely dangerous, low cost foreign carriers will be able to comply with the regulations and scrutiny?

Do you think that if the President decided that they'd allow foreign carriers to fly domestically, that congress and/or the judiciary allow it with all the public protests that will surely follow?

Do you really think that public protest would erupt? We've seen time and time again that public interest in the 121 world is limited to achieving maximum service at bargain basement prices.

McCain and wife have extensive foreign investment interests. McCain has said openly he supports foreign competitors in US skies in order to encourage free market competition.

Given the history of unregulated, free-for-all competition in the US airline industry, giving unchecked access to foreign competitors is a questionable move when considering the welfare of US companies and employees.

With even a cursory analysis showing this sort of scenario, the reasoning and motives of ANYONE advocating foreign carriers operating domestically alongside US carriers is also highly questionable.

[Polar742]

OK, I realize I must be really poor in the communication department, becasue the points I intend to get across are getting lost. This will probably be a long post (I don't know as I don't outline the post ahead of time) so bear with me.

Just for emphasis: I am against allowing foreign carriers flying domestically in the US. I see absolutely no benefit to consumers, american workers, system safety, the environment, or any other angle I from which I can approach this issue.

This entire thread has turned into an academic arguement inside a vacuum.

First, back to the "Get my 1000 and get out mentality". There was a time, not all that many years ago, that all regionals flew were turboprops. The highest levels of these "commuter" companies flew up to 34 seats (there were the oddball ATR/Dash 7s that seated more). The upper end of the vast majority of these airlines paid as much as $50,000/yr cash-money. New captains on 19 seat aircraft could make as much as $30,000 year. This was after a 3-4+ year upgrade, and paying for an "evaluation" course or somesort just to get the job. So even first year at a "major" airline was big money compared to the vast majority of regional pilot pay. Then the "RJ" (tm) [I use (tm) as Regional Jet is a brand name invented by the socialists in Montreal for their extended Bill Lear-designed tube. Somehow like "Kleenex" it became a generic moniker for the 50 seat jets not built by The Boeing Company or Airbus. Kleenex, BTW, is a brand name owned by Kimberly-Clark. Kimberly-Clark's flight department started Midwest Express, which became Midwest....). So obviously the idea to get your time and get out was the main goal, so airline captains could get off foodstamps. That is where that culture came from. As we all know, the industry transformed, and NO CBAs have caught up.

Moving along the story arc, there are lots of holes in the reasoning against foreign carriage in the US that I've seen on here.

First, in my opinion, the arguements should encompass the following:

1) National Security (I'm not one to wave this flag on any occasion). The airlines and airways inside the US are a vital part of the infrastructure. Some of you may know about the CRAF program. Some may not. CRAF is the Civil Reserve Airforce, which uses civilian airliners to supplement military lift. As an example, Polar flew on 9/11 after the attacks. The DoD brought a Falcon to JFK to pick up a crew, and flew them to Dover to an awaiting Polar 747. That airplane was loaded with 110 tons of ordinance to deliver to our troops. If we lose the ability to provide this critical airlift during the (hopefully) incredibly rare time that we'd need it, one can clearly see the negative impact in our ability to defend our nation.

2) Protect American Consumers - From my point of view, and by all known metrics, we have the safest air system in the world. Introduction of carriers that are governed by rules and are based in less successful systems is asking for nothing but trouble.

3) Protecting American jobs - Not only front-line employees, but companies that support airline operations such as Bornemann, SABRE, various MRO organizations, and the actual airports themselves rely on our system as it is. Sure, a foreign carrier would use some of the services, but how much can't be said.

To say that the general public is never involved in 121 operations beyond demanding maximum service for bargin basement price is not true. While that garners the most attention, if you look back to the post-9/11 ATSB issues or even the United/USAir proposed merger, you'll find that statement to be false. Members of congress got a lot of airtime defending the loans to the airlines and working to defeat the merger. The main issue brought up: lost jobs, to the point of devistation, in their districts.

I further believe it's a false argument to think that even if the President requested, and Congress approved, and the judiciary didn't over turn a change to the DOT rules, that VodkaBurner LCC would show up in Wilkes-Barre.

Why? First any half-assed operator would have a bunch of issues, the most obvious is money. Moving a fleet of airplanes to the US isn't cheap, especially with cheap metal sitting in the desert. But you ask, why wouldn't they just get MD-80s out of the desert? Well, if they are a 3rd tier, 3rd world carrier, they've probably never seen one.

Either way, flying airplanes out of the desert, or stuff they brought out of the back fields of the Urals they have to get their fleet up to US standards, comply with the applicable parts of Parts 25, 119, 121, convert all their pilots to US licenses (depending on the nation could be a bigger or smaller challenge), go through CSET certification (been there, done that, that's enough). Of course, if they somehow could magically waive the requirements that US Aircarriers operate under, then we're screwed no matter what. However, it is shown that if they operate under the crappy regs where they were falling out of the sky in their home country, then they'll fall out of the sky here.

More on my point about contract pilot rates and why they're significant. This is actually real quick. If they are staffing their current capacity with contract pilots from foreign nations, how are they going to increase capacity to fly within the US if they can't staff their current operations?

In summation of the above, if they are a third tier airline in a third world country that can't staff their own fleet in a far-away land, they will not be able to run a remote operation here.

Now, if you want to get serious about what constitutes a threat to our airlines we can talk. I can point to countries on coasts opposite to ours across the Atlantic and Pacific that would drive our airlines to the ground. Names like Ryanair, Easyjet, JAL, ANA, Lufthansa, AirFrance/KLM, LTU, British Airways, Cathay (That's for you rjmoore) Etihad, and Emirates should keep our airline excecutives awake at night. If you've ever flown on one of them, you'll know why. These airlines have superior service, they have reasonable prices and would be willing to buy the leftovers of any US airlines right now, as the dollar is cheap.

Anyway, that's $5 of my $.02