ATP impact

[Tarheelpilot]

I have no personal knowledge, but this theory observation strikes me as spot-on. Is there any way that a system that allows for lateral transfers could exist that protects the interests of both sides?

Yes,

A single seniority list for all airline pilots. Pipe fitters, electricians, elevator mechanics, etc figured out a long time ago that seniority only matters if it exists independent of any particular company. Get furloughed at Bobs elevator service after 11 years of employment and go work for Daves elevator in the next town over and you start out at 11 year pay on the contract dave signed with the union along with the benefits of 11 years longevity. Airlines should be no different. The only reason the airline industry is not structured this way is because of selfish pilots that only worry about themselves.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Us professional pilots do not think it would be better for us. We have enough experience in the profession to understand how management would use this new power against us.

We understand the limitations of the current system very well because we live with them everyday. We also understand that, even with its flaws, it is the best system so far devised--and a lot of us have been thinking about this for many decades.

FWIW, I agree with Larry.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

IMO the concern isn't one pilot changing airlines. It's an old airline going out of business (as they often trend to do) and suddenly a huge group of senior pilots show up at your airline pushing you back to Jr. FO working every Christmas.

Or worse yet, clear out of a job. But that isn't how the system would work The only way a senior pilot could come onto a new property would be if that company needed pilots. A furloughed pilot could not just say, "Hey, I am Senior" and bump someone else out of a job.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

That is meaningless when it comes to coming up with a better system. Sooner or later, there will be a better system that comes along, and by then you'll have been thinking about it for even more decades. That doesn't mean that seniority will be any better then.

What system could POSSIBLY be better that is fair to everyone? No matter what system is devised, a bunch of people are not going to like it. The seniority system has been used fo . . .

Aw hell. No one is going to change any minds here so what is the point?

 

[Henning]

I know. I am only amusing myself. But if everyone feels the same way, I suppose you could have a race to the bottom.

The airlines have been a steady race to the bottom since deregulation.

 

[Henning]

Yes,

A single seniority list for all airline pilots. Pipe fitters, electricians, elevator mechanics, etc figured out a long time ago that seniority only matters if it exists independent of any particular company. Get furloughed at Bobs elevator service after 11 years of employment and go work for Daves elevator in the next town over and you start out at 11 year pay on the contract dave signed with the union along with the benefits of 11 years longevity. Airlines should be no different. The only reason the airline industry is not structured this way is because of selfish pilots that only worry about themselves.

Yep, most unions you keep your seniority between employers at a hall, and often from hall to hall, city to city depending on your skill set. Pipe fitters working nuclear plant shut down/refit cycles go world wide taking their pay scale with them.

 

[Henning]

Or worse yet, clear out of a job. But that isn't how the system would work The only way a senior pilot could come onto a new property would be if that company needed pilots. A furloughed pilot could not just say, "Hey, I am Senior" and bump someone else out of a job.

Exactly, that's how most union shops work. If the shop needs a person of a certain caliber, they call the hall with the particulars, and available members can bid for the job. If there is no job available, there is no call to the hall and a 3rd year journeyman doesn't get displaced just because there is a 4th year journeyman available. I never understood how a union system that could only work under the terms of a regulated airline industry as under which they were created failed to adapt to the deregulated business model. Y'all are getting ****ed because half the rules that protected pilots and aircrews in the regulated airline era are now missing.

 

[jhausch]

My crazy ass idea is this:

It all starts by structuring the union to provide trained pilots on an as needed basis.

Airlines, working with unions and manufacturers, slowly (over the course of 1-2 decades) move towards commonality in the cockpit (more so between the same models of AC, but, where possible, between different models, too). During that same time, airline training departments slowly wind down. Pay to pilots goes up, but that is partially (largely) absorbed by union dues as the union training systems, sims, trainers, and other equipment winds up.

People who want to fly for a living get their, say, PP and IR, before applying to the union apprenticeship program. Union invests in these people to gain time and experience. These people also spend time riding jump seat for exposure and experience.

Single national seniority list with adjustments on pay based on location. Airline needs a pilot and calls the union halls in the origination city and takes the next appropriately rated pilot. This also works to prevent the crazy commute stuff like the gal from Colgan was doing.

Here is where it gets even more interesting....Union pension has percentage dedicated to airline investment. In other words, aircraft leases and technology investments by airlines would have this as a source of funds. This is similar to how the building trades' pensions invest in building projects and then require prevailing wage clauses.

In this example, unions provide value and partnership to the airlines. The airlines are on a level playing field wrt pilot pay. The union fosters and develops the pilot workforce as needed. "Apprenticeship" and "Journeyman" advancement is still a challenge. People will washout. The kids will have to want it and I would not be surprised if one would need to hold a second job for their first year in the union (until they get to a point where they can fly for a living).

Of course, this single union would be a giant monopoly, but an effort to write the bylaws to keep union management in check and some appropriate fed oversight (in return for the ability to create this monopoly) would work to prevent abuse.

Ok, let me have it....

 

[Henning]

My crazy ass idea is this:

It all starts by structuring the union to provide trained pilots on an as needed basis.

This IS the key. Airline unions provide no comparable benefit for their cost, not to management, not to rank and file. If the Union would take over the training roll, kind of like AMO has their Star Center in Dania Beach with all the sims and training equipment where you can not only get what ratings you need for a particular job, if off work, you can go and stay on campus for free and take whatever classes you want to advance yourself. If you get furloughed, you can work on type ratings. To join the union you need to come with a Commercial Pilot cert and $12k for initiation training and TR of choice.

 

[jhausch]

I was hoping some pros would reply to my ideas. I expected either "that will never work, too many moving parts and/or not practical" or "you just might be on to something".

Henning, I agree. There are parts of the USMM comparison that would apply, too. Just like the building trades comparison...some good parts, some bad parts.

 

[Slipkid65]

Depends who you ask.

And how you weight things makes all the difference in the world, and that is true of both the overall system and for the skill portion itself. As far as the overall system goes, for the necessary buy-in of the pilot unions, longevity would still have to be weighted the highest... But I think experience matters a lot as well. "Skill" and reviews of other pilots would have to be less.

How's this: (Disclaimer: This is NOT a comprehensive description of a finished system, merely a starting point/example, especially as it relates to the sim/skill portion!)

40% years of service. Integer years, that is! No more "I started on January 15th of 1975 and you started on January 20th of 1975 so I'm better than you."

30% experience. Again, the grain on this only needs to be at the thousands-of-hours level.

20% skill score. This would be based only on the required parts of sim training and would measure things like ability to control altitude and airspeed, hold glideslope, etc. while dealing with the various emergencies being thrown at you. There could be a portion of this (say, 5-10%) that would be subjective based on the sim instructor's evaluation of your ability to calmly deal with things, or maybe that part would be "extra credit" that the sim instructor could give to a limited number of pilots per time period.

10% Other crew evaluations. Pilots and FAs could give each other points for things like pleasantness to work with and customer service "wins", while pilots could also rate each other on flight-related things. Both this and the subjective portion of the skill score would be normalized based on the evaluator as described before to eliminate as much bias as possible.

It's not perfect, but I think both pilots and the industry would benefit from doing something like this instead of a solely seniority based system.

What problem, exactly, are you trying to solve?


I'm guessing that you're not an airline pilot......

 

[kayoh190]

I was hoping some pros would reply to my ideas. I expected either "that will never work, too many moving parts and/or not practical" or "you just might be on to something".

I don't think it's a bad idea at all, but I'm not sure how you'd get there from where we are now. The amount of inertia that exists amongst the rank and file tends to kill new ideas, even good ones, before they have time to get traction. Even a small change can cause an entire pilot group to lose their collective minds, and you're proposing a radical overhaul to a very, very entrenched system that's existed for as long as anyone can remember. And of course, this will be a huge change for not just the pilots, but management and the FAA as well.

I realize this isn't a good answer at all (which is why I haven't participated in this thread), but I've spent a lot of time banging my head against a wall trying to get even the smallest improvements implemented without much luck, and after awhile the mantra "just shut up and color" begins to make a ton of sense.

As mentioned on this thread, it seems to me that you'd have to start clean with a new union and new carrier, and then demonstrate a sustained level of success under your new model.

 

[Slipkid65]

My one and only airline gig was in a BAe 3100, no automation there, and the flight director was a nusiance. You learned to hand fly in all weather.

IMHO, every airline pilot should be required to spend 1k hours in a Junkstream prior to succumbing to the magenta line.

The only passenger carrying airplane more unstable than the Jstream was the Jstream simulator.

I did over 2k in that POS, and I was never more proficient at stick and rudder flying than I was during those few years. Interview rides in "real" airliner sims were a non event.

About halfway through my tenure in it, my airline went to a PFT deal for new hires, so instead of getting experienced pilots with several thousand hours, we got folks with a commercial, instrument and $8500. Some of them were so bad, that I might as well have been flying it single pilot in the Northeast corridor. Heck, I'd have been better off. At the time, I hated every minute of flying that thing, but in retrospect, wouldn't trade the experience for twice the hours in an RJ.

After a few years in the J31, I went to the ATR. The ATR was so much more stable than the Jstream, that I thought the motion was off during my first ATR sim

However I disagree that a modern cockpit is a poor teaching environment since systems management and understanding is very important.

Certainly, but if I had to choose between being proficient at the basic stick and rudder stuff, or magenta line (what's it doing now?) management, I'd choose the former, every time.

IMHO, you're not gonna get the S&R experience flying the box in an RJ.

 

[jhausch]

Thanks for the reply. I realize it is unlikely to happen, but it its an interesting thought experiment.

I had not considered the idea of easing it in with a new airline and union...interesting thought. I would be worried that hitting critical mass quickly enough with only one carrier would be tough.

I don't think it's a bad idea at all, but I'm not sure how you'd get there from where we are now. The amount of inertia that exists amongst the rank and file tends to kill new ideas, even good ones, before they have time to get traction. Even a small change can cause an entire pilot group to lose their collective minds, and you're proposing a radical overhaul to a very, very entrenched system that's existed for as long as anyone can remember. And of course, this will be a huge change for not just the pilots, but management and the FAA as well.

I realize this isn't a good answer at all (which is why I haven't participated in this thread), but I've spent a lot of time banging my head against a wall trying to get even the smallest improvements implemented without much luck, and after awhile the mantra "just shut up and color" begins to make a ton of sense.

As mentioned on this thread, it seems to me that you'd have to start clean with a new union and new carrier, and then demonstrate a sustained level of success under your new model.

 

[Larry in TN]

IMHO, every airline pilot should be required to spend 1k hours in a Junkstream prior to succumbing to the magenta line.

The only passenger carrying airplane more unstable than the Jstream was the Jstream simulator.

I have about 3300 in the Jetstream (J32). My theory was that they gave up on trying to make a simulator that flew like an airplane so they made the Jetstream, an airplane that flew like a simulator!

 

[Slipkid65]

I have about 3300 in the Jetstream (J32). My theory was that they gave up on trying to make a simulator that flew like an airplane so they made the Jetstream, an airplane that flew like a simulator!

LOL.... You've definitely been there!

I flew them in FL for about 9 months, then they sent them to the NE corridor. It was actually fun bombing around VFR in the Bahamas etc. in them, but they were horrible doing 5-6 per day up in the NE corridor where you'd go days without seeing the ground above 200'.

Flying it in actual IFR was like trying to read a newspaper while standing on a bowling ball. If you took your eyes off the ADI/HSI for a second to switch freqs etc., you were in an unusual attitude when you resumed your scan.....

The pax tapping on your shoulder at JFK (2 hours into a 3 hour taxi for a 40 minute flight), inquiring about the lav location, and having to explain that it was in the terminal, was icing on the cake.

The size 12EEE yaw damper was almost as effective as the AP (FO)!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

What problem, exactly, are you trying to solve?

As stated before, lack of job portability.

I'm guessing that you're not an airline pilot......

Nope - I would love to, but I'd never take a job where the actions of individuals in management at my employer would have such dire consequences on my own life. (Independent of my own actions, that is.)

 

[Slipkid65]

As stated before, lack of job portability.

It's not really that much of an issue. IMHO, any cure would be worse than the symptom for the vast majority of airline pilots.

Nope -

In that case, why are you so determined to see the seniority system "fixed"?

I would love to, but I'd never take a job where the actions of individuals in management at my employer would have such dire consequences on my own life. (Independent of my own actions, that is.)

Are you self employed? If not, you've described just about any job, anywhere.


A national seniority list would be like a never ending seniority list integration.

 

[Art VanDelay]

No, quite the opposite - Right now, those at the bottom of the seniority list can already switch jobs without much of a penalty, so if their company totally sucks, it's not a big drop for them to switch to another airline. It's the experienced senior pilots who have everything to lose by transferring. If there was suddenly an airline where they wouldn't lose everything, that airline would be flooded with resumés from lots of very experienced

No, that is incorrect. New airlines are quite frequently a flash in the pan. Nobody is going to jump ship until they can be certain that airline X is viable.

 

[Art VanDelay]

Everyone.



"Why do we do it this way?"
"Well, it's always been done that way."



The system I'm proposing would not change any of that. It WOULD allow you to switch to another airline without starting over at rock bottom. Thus, it is better for the pilots, and it's better for the airlines in that it makes the job more attractive to future pilots.



Likewise, this system would allow things like scheduling to work exactly as they do now, simply based on a different ranking. In fact, I have not anywhere mentioned a single thing that would require management to be any more involved than they are now.

You're proposing a fantasy with NO real solutions. You have yet to actually address what you would use to rank pilots. Right now you're building a wonderful mansion without any foundation. Stop daydreaming and come to the nuts and bolts. I seriously doubt you know what that might be.

 

[Henning]

Are you self employed? If not, you've described just about any job, anywhere.

No, it's not, that's the point. You leave the carrier you are with for whatever reason, you will not maintain your pay grade, much less improve it (unless you are willing to live as an ExPat), when you move to another airline. I retain my same pay regardless what position I fill on whatever size boat I happen to be on.

 

[Slipkid65]

No, it's not, that's the point. You leave the carrier you are with for whatever reason, you will not maintain your pay grade, much less improve it (unless you are willing to live as an ExPat), when you move to another airline.

The guy I responded to was discussing not wanting to be tied to the whims of management, which, unless your self employed, describes just about every job in the world.

I've worked at 7 different airlines in 28 years. Every move, except one, was a step up in pay/benefits/QOL, and I've never lived as an expat.

I retain my same pay regardless what position I fill on whatever size boat I happen to be on.

Completely different profession, and therefore, not a valid comparison.

 

[Henning]

I've worked at 7 different airlines. Every move, except one, was a step up in pay/benefits/QOL, and I've never lived as an expat.




Completely different profession, and therefore, not a valid comparison.

Maritime and aviation professions are married at the hip since deregulation.

 

[Slipkid65]

Maritime and aviation professions are married at the hip since deregulation.

Uhh, OK.

You drive boats, right?

 

[Henning]

Uhh, OK.

You drive boats, right?

Yep, and I have belonged to Maritime and Airline unions. The personnel needs of the industries are much the same.

 

[Slipkid65]

Yep, and I have belonged to Maritime and Airline unions. The personnel needs of the industries are much the same.

Having never skippered anything larger than a 42' Hatteras, I'll forego comment, other than I can't see all that many similarities in the job or labor pool, other than both require skilled/qualified laborers.

 

[Henning]

Having never skippered anything larger than a 42' Hatteras, I'll forego comment, other than I can't see all that many similarities in the job or labor pool, other than both require skilled/qualified laborers.

Skilled and qualified, sometimes additional qualifications and re certifications, some sim work. You have need of having easy access to more of these people to meet contract and opportunity growth as there are duty limitations. The difference is a qualified mariner is fungible between companies and an aviator is not so much.

 

[Slipkid65]

Skilled and qualified, sometimes additional qualifications and re certifications, some sim work. You have need of having easy access to more of these people to meet contract and opportunity growth as there are duty limitations. The difference is a qualified mariner is fungible between companies and an aviator is not so much.

As I said, the current system, while far from perfect, is not a problem for the vast majority of airline pilots that actually live in it.

 

[Sluggo63]

Yep, most unions you keep your seniority between employers at a hall, and often from hall to hall, city to city depending on your skill set. Pipe fitters working nuclear plant shut down/refit cycles go world wide taking their pay scale with them.

If a laborer, who is a member of an AFL-CIO union, leaves and goes over to a Teamsters division (in the same job), does he carry his seniority/payscale with him.

 

[kayoh190]

I don't really understand what this discussion is about. I'm not happy about having to endure year one pay if I change companies (voluntarily or not), but I want to fly airplanes for a living, so I deal with it. So far the career has treated me well, and I hope it continues.

I have no interest in boats, so the comparison is meaningless to me. But iHenning - it seems you enjoy it, and that's great.

 

[Slipkid65]

I don't really understand what this discussion is about. I'm not happy about having to endure year one pay if I change companies (voluntarily or not), but I want to fly airplanes for a living, so I deal with it. So far the career has treated me well, and I hope it continues.

I have no interest in boats, so the comparison is meaningless to me. But iHenning - it seems you enjoy it, and that's great.

Agreed, on all parts....

As an airline Capt. that's been around boats my entire life, I think being a ship Capt. would be awesome!

 

[kayoh190]

I'd love to own a sailboat someday. It'd be nice to have a place to go when my wife kicks me out of the house!

 

[jhausch]

The comparisons Henning is making ain't on sailboats nor Hatteri... Think Tug, Tow, Tanker, container, etc.

 

[Everskyward]

The comparison Henning is making is more akin to corporate contract pilots. I know some who enjoy it but you need to be able to make contacts and be a good negotiator.

 

[RotorAndWing]

The comparison Henning is making is more akin to corporate contract pilots. I know some who enjoy it but you need to be able to make contacts and be a good negotiator.

Exactly.

Same scenarios. "Contract" yacht captains will tell you "I make $150,000/year" yet what they don't tell you is most of their jobs only last a couple or 3 months at a time with lots of down time in between, thus diluting their numbers. Just put the word out you need a boat captain and watch them start bidding against each other to get the work.

Same with the airplane contractors. However there are a few as you mention who are good negotiators and have contacts who can make it work out, but they are the minority not the majority.

 

[jhausch]

I actually thought he wa referring to commercial ops and nothing to do with working on "pleasure" boats...

 

[kayoh190]

I actually thought he wa referring to commercial ops and nothing to do with working on "pleasure" boats...

Yeah, I went off on a tangent about sailboats, but I think we all realized that he does the big commercial stuff. I just thought he was comparing being an airline pilot to his job, when perhaps he was making a point about choosing an aviation profession where the experience is transferrable, such as in a contract or corporate situation.

I dunno. I'm just saying that I fly because I enjoy doing it - since I have no interest in being a commercial boat operator, the comparison doesn't mean anything to me. Now if we were to engage in a conversation about airline vs. corporate, contract, or some other flying job - I can discuss it in a more meaningful manner. That said, I'm pretty sure that topic has been hashed out just as much as low wing vs. high wing!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

In that case, why are you so determined to see the seniority system "fixed"?

Look at the subject line... That started it, and we moved on to talking about the airline profession and Bad Things that might be coming down the pipe. I just had some thoughts about improving the system... I'd love to be an airline pilot if there were any sort of portability. As it is, I'll keep my plain ol' Monday-Friday ground pounder job and portability.

Are you self employed? If not, you've described just about any job, anywhere.

Not at all. If my boss runs the company into the ground or just starts treating me like crap, I can go to another company in the industry and get a job with all the pay, benefits, schedule, vacation, etc. I have now. Piece of cake. If I worked for an airline and the same thing happened, I'm screwed - I have to start over at zero and watch some snot-nosed kid who happened to get hired the week before me get promoted first. That's ridiculous.

A national seniority list would be like a never ending seniority list integration.

I never proposed a national seniority list. If you go back and read what I proposed, seniority is still the largest part of the equation.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

No, that is incorrect. New airlines are quite frequently a flash in the pan. Nobody is going to jump ship until they can be certain that airline X is viable.

Only because of the seniority system... You're right, it'd probably take multiple airlines doing this to get a lot of people to jump ship.

You're proposing a fantasy with NO real solutions. You have yet to actually address what you would use to rank pilots. Right now you're building a wonderful mansion without any foundation. Stop daydreaming and come to the nuts and bolts. I seriously doubt you know what that might be.

No, the largest component would still be seniority, then flight experience. Those are easy. The "merit" component is more difficult. The reason I haven't created an exact specification for that is that I don't have the information to do so yet. I'd use the same process I use in my day job (Business Intelligence). The simple version: Meetings with stakeholders to learn the business inside and out, examination of data, and THEN coming up with a new system. I won't pretend to know everything I need to know to come up with a fully baked system - But you don't either. In fact, likely nobody does.

 

[Everskyward]

I never proposed a national seniority list. If you go back and read what I proposed, seniority is still the largest part of the equation.

You proposed a national ranking system with other, more subjective elements.