More Seats = More Pay ???

WAFlyBoy · December 15th, 2007, 00:19

Finding myself a little bored tonight, I was listlessly browsing pay-related fodder when I stumbled upon something that piqued my interest.

It's generally accepted in this business that the larger the airplane, the higher pay will be, right? So what's the deal with [a certain airline in the Pacific Northwest] and the disparity in pay between the Q400 and CRJ 700? $6/hr more to fly a jet that has 4 fewer seats???

Ok, so I worked for Horizon briefly a while back. For some reason this never occurred to me. It doesn't stop there, however.

What about Colgan's rate on the Q400? It's lower than any I could find for a CRJ200! Lynx is just as bad.

I guess you prop drivers had it comin'. After all, it doesn't take mad skills to fly a 63,000 pound t-prop like it does to fly a 53,000 pound jet. EXTREME

What's the deal with this? What BS. Just my opinion, of course.

MQAAord · December 15th, 2007, 00:21

In addition to the "given" that more seats = more pay, it's also a "given" that jet pay > prop pay. Not that I agree with it, but that's just the way it's been.

WAFlyBoy · December 15th, 2007, 00:24

I thought that was because jets typically have more seats......

MQAAord · December 15th, 2007, 00:35

The ATR 72s have more seats than an EMB (64 or 66 seats, depending on model of ATR vs. 50, 44 or 34 seats, depending on model), but Eagle's payrate on the EMB is still higher than the ATR rate. (I think.......)

In the "old" days when there was a big difference between jets & props, think Convair vs. 707, it was pretty cut-and-dry which was "bigger" and "worthy" of more pay. (If you wanna call it that.)

Nowdays, the distinction is blurry. Like Great-Grandma-vision blurry.

MikeOH58 · December 15th, 2007, 00:39

Only in the 121 world...Don't forget, outside this magical bubble, guys (or gals) flying around an 8 seat TP, can make more money in 1 year, than a guy flying a 60 seat jet will make in 5.

staplegun · December 15th, 2007, 00:49

Read Flying The Line, folks!

Alpa originally tied pay to a formula which included Gross Weight & Speed, hence the reason that an RJ may pay more than a tubo-prop, regardless of the number of seats...

Kevin

USMC-SGT · December 15th, 2007, 01:39

Q400= 74 seats and 65,400 lbs max weight and at CJC has the 2nd worst pay in the industry for Q400 (lynx)

i have hopes that me and my cjc brothers can help turn this around because you are right, it is not right that we make less than or equal to those who fly a beech 1900, saab 340, emb 120/135/145, crj 100/200 and pretty much anything else that has wings and generates lift.

parmandjack · December 15th, 2007, 02:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeOH58

Only in the 121 world...Don't forget, outside this magical bubble, guys (or gals) flying around an 8 seat TP, can make more money in 1 year, than a guy flying a 60 seat jet will make in 5.

Mike, what is an "8 seat TP"?

Cheers.

parmandjack · December 15th, 2007, 02:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by parmandjack

Mike, what is an "8 seat TP"?

Cheers.

doh! TP= Turbo-Prop... correct? I believe I clued in right as I hit enter on my last post

bdhill1979 · December 15th, 2007, 02:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeOH58

flying around an 8 seat TP

Man I'm flying a 6 seat (pilot included) 100LL burner and making more; not 5 times more, but enough that I would not consider switching anytime soon.

WAFlyBoy · December 15th, 2007, 04:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdhill1979

Man I'm flying a 6 seat (pilot included) 100LL burner and making more; not 5 times more, but enough that I would not consider switching anytime soon.

If I could find a gig like that in Seattle, I'd be all over it.

WAFlyBoy · December 15th, 2007, 04:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by staplegun

Read Flying The Line, folks!

Alpa originally tied pay to a formula which included Gross Weight & Speed, hence the reason that an RJ may pay more than a tubo-prop, regardless of the number of seats...

I have a copy, but never read it. Now I'm rather inspired to read it.

jtrain609 · December 15th, 2007, 12:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by USMC-SGT

Q400= 74 seats and 65,400 lbs max weight and at CJC has the 2nd worst pay in the industry for Q400 (lynx)

i have hopes that me and my cjc brothers can help turn this around because you are right, it is not right that we make less than or equal to those who fly a beech 1900, saab 340, emb 120/135/145, crj 100/200 and pretty much anything else that has wings and generates lift.

I hate to be a ###### here, but...how? You don't have a union, you don't have anything to negotiate with and...well...I mean you could quit and say, "THIS STINKS!" but you know somebody will be lined up right behind you because they're sick of saying, "MORE RIGHT RUDDER!!!!"

Bumblebee · December 15th, 2007, 12:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by parmandjack

doh! TP= Turbo-Prop... correct? I believe I clued in right as I hit enter on my last post

King Air . . . and you can try the edit button on the lower right to edit or delete a post. (Wouldn't THAT be nice in the real world!)

USMC-SGT · December 15th, 2007, 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtrain609

I hate to be a ###### here, but...how? You don't have a union, you don't have anything to negotiate with and...well...I mean you could quit and say, "THIS STINKS!" but you know somebody will be lined up right behind you because they're sick of saying, "MORE RIGHT RUDDER!!!!"

What I meant in regards to turning it around is doing our part to GET a union on board. Obviously at this point there is no way we can possibly negotiate but as far as I see we have 8 months to get any and all CJCers that we see to see the light and vote yes in August. THIS is the way that we will be able to turn things around. Less talking and more doing, there is light at the end of the tunnel, other airlines have turned it around and we certainly wont go down in August without a fight.

p.s. it also wouldnt hurt to see the colganpilot group go away because the more naive pilots that think an online forum can get us a contract and increase our pay and give us some quality of life the worse off we are in August.

sleepy3528 · December 15th, 2007, 17:51

i will say what almost everyone is thinking.... i think colgan is an embarrassment of an airline. How can you have pride in your company when you know you have undercut your competition with non-existent work rules, poverty level pay, and have yet to be able to organize your pilot group, after all this time, to join a union. I really cant stand colgan and its bottom feeder employees. Enjoy the quick upgrade! Dont kid yourself into thinking your helping this profession at all.

SIUAv8r · December 15th, 2007, 18:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy3528

i will say what almost everyone is thinking.... i think colgan is an embarrassment of an airline. How can you have pride in your company when you know you have undercut your competition with non-existent work rules, poverty level pay, and have yet to be able to organize your pilot group, after all this time, to join a union. I really cant stand colgan and its bottom feeder employees. Enjoy the quick upgrade! Dont kid yourself into thinking your helping this profession at all.

Wow. Bold statement.

Rocketman99 · December 15th, 2007, 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy3528

i will say what almost everyone is thinking.... i think colgan is an embarrassment of an airline. How can you have pride in your company when you know you have undercut your competition with non-existent work rules, poverty level pay, and have yet to be able to organize your pilot group, after all this time, to join a union. I really cant stand colgan and its bottom feeder employees. Enjoy the quick upgrade! Dont kid yourself into thinking your helping this profession at all.

What have you done for the profession?

Thought so.

Next.

kellwolf · December 15th, 2007, 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by WAFlyBoy

I have a copy, but never read it. Now I'm rather inspired to read it.

Read it, Matt. You'll like it.

USMC-SGT · December 16th, 2007, 00:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy3528

i will say what almost everyone is thinking.... i think colgan is an embarrassment of an airline. How can you have pride in your company when you know you have undercut your competition with non-existent work rules, poverty level pay, and have yet to be able to organize your pilot group, after all this time, to join a union. I really cant stand colgan and its bottom feeder employees. Enjoy the quick upgrade! Dont kid yourself into thinking your helping this profession at all.

noted

-usmc

Chris_Ford · December 16th, 2007, 00:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rocketman99

What have you done for the profession?

Thought so.

Next.

And you?

/Two can play this game

Mr.Maximus · December 16th, 2007, 00:27

And there are alot of guys flying 9-18 seat jets around that make more in their first year as CA than any of the Regionals CA's make in their 15th year. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Regionals - get what you need and don't look back.

December 15th, 2007, 00:19	#1
WAFlyBoy Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: wa Posts: 744	More Seats = More Pay ??? Finding myself a little bored tonight, I was listlessly browsing pay-related fodder when I stumbled upon something that piqued my interest. It's generally accepted in this business that the larger the airplane, the higher pay will be, right? So what's the deal with [a certain airline in the Pacific Northwest] and the disparity in pay between the Q400 and CRJ 700? $6/hr more to fly a jet that has 4 fewer seats??? Ok, so I worked for Horizon briefly a while back. For some reason this never occurred to me. It doesn't stop there, however. What about Colgan's rate on the Q400? It's lower than any I could find for a CRJ200! Lynx is just as bad. I guess you prop drivers had it comin'. After all, it doesn't take mad skills to fly a 63,000 pound t-prop like it does to fly a 53,000 pound jet. EXTREME What's the deal with this? What BS. Just my opinion, of course.

December 15th, 2007, 00:21	#2
MQAAord Super Moderator Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: The Looney Bin Posts: 9,624	Re: More Seats = More Pay ??? In addition to the "given" that more seats = more pay, it's also a "given" that jet pay > prop pay. Not that I agree with it, but that's just the way it's been. __________________ PPL SEL 100-ish TT Former AA F/A (12 months) Former Simmons/AE F/A (6 years) Former AE ground school instructor (1 year) Former AE IOE instructor (3 years) http://www.scentsy.com/ALsmith

December 15th, 2007, 00:24	#3
WAFlyBoy Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: wa Posts: 744	Re: More Seats = More Pay ??? I thought that was because jets typically have more seats......

December 15th, 2007, 00:35	#4
MQAAord Super Moderator Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: The Looney Bin Posts: 9,624	Re: More Seats = More Pay ??? The ATR 72s have more seats than an EMB (64 or 66 seats, depending on model of ATR vs. 50, 44 or 34 seats, depending on model), but Eagle's payrate on the EMB is still higher than the ATR rate. (I think.......) In the "old" days when there was a big difference between jets & props, think Convair vs. 707, it was pretty cut-and-dry which was "bigger" and "worthy" of more pay. (If you wanna call it that.) Nowdays, the distinction is blurry. Like Great-Grandma-vision blurry. __________________ PPL SEL 100-ish TT Former AA F/A (12 months) Former Simmons/AE F/A (6 years) Former AE ground school instructor (1 year) Former AE IOE instructor (3 years) http://www.scentsy.com/ALsmith

December 15th, 2007, 00:39	#5
MikeOH58 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: CT Posts: 1,171	Re: More Seats = More Pay ??? Only in the 121 world...Don't forget, outside this magical bubble, guys (or gals) flying around an 8 seat TP, can make more money in 1 year, than a guy flying a 60 seat jet will make in 5.

December 15th, 2007, 00:49	#6
staplegun Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Park Ridge, IL Posts: 1,154	Re: More Seats = More Pay ??? Read Flying The Line, folks! Alpa originally tied pay to a formula which included *Gross Weight & Speed, hence the reason that an RJ may pay more than a tubo-prop, regardless of the number of seats... Kevin __________________ "Be bold and mighty forces will come to your aid!"* - Goethe

December 15th, 2007, 01:39	#7
USMC-SGT Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Location: East Posts: 1,172	Re: More Seats = More Pay ??? Q400= 74 seats and 65,400 lbs max weight and at CJC has the 2nd worst pay in the industry for Q400 (lynx) i have hopes that me and my cjc brothers can help turn this around because you are right, it is not right that we make less than or equal to those who fly a beech 1900, saab 340, emb 120/135/145, crj 100/200 and pretty much anything else that has wings and generates lift. __________________ .....i have two speeds, walk and kill

December 15th, 2007, 17:51	#16
sleepy3528 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: NJ/ NY, USA Posts: 52	Re: More Seats = More Pay ??? i will say what almost everyone is thinking.... i think colgan is an embarrassment of an airline. How can you have pride in your company when you know you have undercut your competition with non-existent work rules, poverty level pay, and have yet to be able to organize your pilot group, after all this time, to join a union. I really cant stand colgan and its bottom feeder employees. Enjoy the quick upgrade! Dont kid yourself into thinking your helping this profession at all. __________________ The pilots life is founded on three things: sex, seniority, and salary, in that order. -Dr. Ludwig Lederer, corporate physician, American Airlines

December 16th, 2007, 00:27	#22
Mr.Maximus Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: This One Posts: 289	Re: More Seats = More Pay ??? And there are alot of guys flying 9-18 seat jets around that make more in their first year as CA than any of the Regionals CA's make in their 15th year. Different strokes for different folks I guess. Regionals - get what you need and don't look back.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode