Frontier Pilots Ready To Walk

[Palmpilot]

In many occupations, there's a large disparity in bargaining power when individual employees try to negotiate wages and working conditions with a corporation. In a free market economy, business owners are free to organize themselves into corporations, and employees are free to organize themselves into unions.

Did anyone (including myself argue otherwise)? I understand fully what unions are for, and how they function. I also understand when they can be beneficial or harmful to an industry. I didn't argue anyone's right to organize into a union. I only said that unions actions are often self-serving, and no union boss will work to dissolve his own union or find ways to eliminate their necessity in the workplace.

Are you saying that you agree with what I wrote?

 

[vman]

These threads are usually borderline depressing. Typical ****ing match between those who fly for a living and those who don't.

and those who know what they speak of vs the rest,

i like to hear from & mostly tune in to the experts

 

[mscard88]

The better employee is the one who follows the rules. A good employer will empower its employees to use some discretion, but it's the airline's plane, fuel, and passengers. Yes, if a pilot refuses to fly a legal airplane, he should probably be penalized.

Nah, you have it wrong. Refused to fly quite a few planes, most due to safety, and even, hidden forbid, passenger comfort. All of these were legal planes to fly however.

 

[jmp470]

It reminds me of military pay, and the seniority there. I hate that type of system, as it rewards laziness.

What is the potential strikes goals? More pay? What else, as it cannot just be about money.

 

[SkyDog58]

So do you pay the Captain more who refuses an airplane with multiple MEL deferrals or the one who takes the (legal) airplane without question? Do you pay more for insisting on more fuel than legally required or more for routinely accepting the minimum? Do you pay more to the guy who's decisions take better care of the customers (running the APU in hot weather) or the one who saves the company the most money by not running it? Sometimes the better pilot is the one who makes the unpopular decisions. How do you prevent that from being 'punished'? How do you prevent the compensation system from putting pressure to make the "popular" decision?

I guess if the pilot wants to make all of his own operational decisions, he needs to be a Part 135 Single Pilot Operator.

 

[SkyDog58]

A legal plane or a safe plane? I refused a legal plane a few weeks ago. If you were like my 150 passengers you would have agreed that legal doesn’t make it safe.

Yes, I'm sure that your 150 passengers know better as to what makes an airplane safe than does maintenance, engineering, the manufacturer, the FAA, etc.

 

[kayoh190]

Amazing to hear fellow pilots - many with supposedly lots of experience - come on here and claim that because it's legal it must be safe. Unbelievable.

Being able to make operational decisions without fear of career implications is *exactly* the reason even a competent pilot (which the vast majority of us are) doesn't complain about the seniority system.

 

[Groundpounder]

I always LOL when non aviation people comment on what it's like to fly for a living.

 

[Sluggo63]

It reminds me of military pay, and the seniority there. I hate that type of system, as it rewards laziness.

Well, in a flying squadron, there is no "seniority" system, but it'd be (mostly) better if there was. In an Air Force flying squadron I've seen the wrong people upgraded to Aircraft Commander (PIC), not because they were the best pilots, but because they were the ones who volunteered to organize the squadron holiday party, or come in on the weekends to paint parking spaces, or lead the CFC campaign. All things which had no bearing on whether they would be a good AC, but if they did enough stuff to please the bosses. I'll take the airline's seniority system any day over that system of rewarding the brown-nosers and "yes men/women" of the group.

 

[Rex Kramer]

Yes, I'm sure that your 150 passengers know better as to what makes an airplane safe than does maintenance, engineering, the manufacturer, the FAA, etc.

You left out the most important one, the one backed up by the FARs. The one that gets paid a lot of money to make unpopular choices.

The fact you didn’t even mention it says a lot about your philosophy about being a pilot.

 

[Rex Kramer]

Amazing to hear fellow pilots - many with supposedly lots of experience - come on here and claim that because it's legal it must be safe. Unbelievable.

Being able to make operational decisions without fear of career implications is *exactly* the reason even a competent pilot (which the vast majority of us are) doesn't complain about the seniority system.

Well said.

The seniority system is far from perfect but it works well for this business because it prevents corner cutting in the name of career advancement or job security.

 

[Lindberg]

Spoken like someone with zero understanding of the concept of moral hazard.

I think i have a pretty good understanding of it. Can you explain how it applies in this situation?

 

[Lindberg]

Nah, you have it wrong. Refused to fly quite a few planes, most due to safety, and even, hidden forbid, passenger comfort. All of these were legal planes to fly however.

Safety sure. Passenger comfort, that should be the airline's call. They're the ones with the financial transaction with the passengers. I was on a plane that was delayed over two hours because the captain wanted a piece of carpet switched out twice for "passenger comfort." Just long enough fur all the passengers on the last flight out of NY day before Thanksgiving to miss their connections. Every single passenger on that plane would have rather flown with the dirty carpet and gotten home for Thanksgiving. But I'm sure the captain's union backed him up since they were in the middle of negotiations.

Pilot's unions don't exist for passenger's comfort and safety any more than teacher's unions exist to educate students. But those subjects sure make for better press releases.

 

[Groundpounder]

Safety sure. Passenger comfort, that should be the airline's call. They're the ones with the financial transaction with the passengers. I was on a plane that was delayed over two hours because the captain wanted a piece of carpet switched out twice for "passenger comfort." Just long enough fur all the passengers on the last flight out of NY day before Thanksgiving to miss their connections. Every single passenger on that plane would have rather flown with the dirty carpet and gotten home for Thanksgiving. But I'm sure the captain's union backed him up since they were in the middle of negotiations.

Pilot's unions don't exist for passenger's comfort and safety any more than teacher's unions exist to educate students. But those subjects sure make for better press releases.

What about a pilot that refuses an airplane with an inop APU on a 100* day in Atlanta with a long taxi time?

Keep in mind this type of airplane cannot cool the cabin very well with the packs running off the engines at taxi power.

 

[Palmpilot]

I guess if the pilot wants to make all of his own operational decisions, he needs to be a Part 135 Single Pilot Operator.

Maybe you should petition the FAA to change the term "pilot in command" to just "pilot" and repeal 91.3.

 

[MauleSkinner]

What about a pilot that refuses an airplane with an inop APU on a 100* day in Atlanta with a long taxi time?

Keep in mind this type of airplane cannot cool the cabin very well with the packs running off the engines at taxi power.

I’ve always felt that if those kind of things were a job retention issue, I’d be better off somewhere else anyway.

 

[Palmpilot]

Amazing to hear fellow pilots - many with supposedly lots of experience - come on here and claim that because it's legal it must be safe. Unbelievable....

My reaction as well. I have far fewer hours than the professional pilots here, but it's not hard to think of times when it would have been legal for me to take off, but not safe.

 

[Palmpilot]

I guess if the pilot wants to make all of his own operational decisions, he needs to be a Part 135 Single Pilot Operator.

I would not feel safe riding on an airline whose pilots in command were not the final authority on safety issues.

"The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft."​

 

[Groundpounder]

I’ve always felt that if those kind of things were a job retention issue, I’d be better off somewhere else anyway.

I'm using this as an example that pilots should refuse an airplane because of passenger comfort. The airplane is perfectly legal to fly. But if you have 50 people in a tube that is 100+ degrees in the back for well over an hour without any water, because the F/A has to be seated during taxi, you're going to have a huge issue with passenger comfort, and very possibly a medical emergency. But according to posters up thread, the pilot should fly this airplane no matter what, because passenger comfort isn't their problem

 

[MauleSkinner]

I'm using this as an example that pilots should refuse an airplane because of passenger comfort. The airplane is perfectly legal to fly. But if you have 50 people in a tube that is 100+ degrees in the back for well over an hour without any water, because the F/A has to be seated during taxi, you're going to have a huge issue with passenger comfort, and very possibly a medical emergency. But according to posters up thread, the pilot should fly this airplane no matter what, because passenger comfort isn't their problem

...and if the posters up thread don't think refusing the airplane is appropriate, I'm not going to be working for them. No amount of seniority, union representation, or whatever, will make that employer trustworthy.

 

[jordane93]

I feel like some of you guys would be like my passengers yesterday.

“JetBlue took off 2 hours ago!!!! Why are we delayed? It doesn’t look too bad.”

 

[Groundpounder]

...and if the posters up thread don't think refusing the airplane is appropriate, I'm not going to be working for them. No amount of seniority, union representation, or whatever, will make that employer trustworthy.

That is not true, because the union will protect you in the event you make a decision that the company doesn't agree with, like my example of refusing the airplane with an APU inop.

 

[hindsight2020]

I think i have a pretty good understanding of it. Can you explain how it applies in this situation?

Plenty of examples already provided by other posters in this thread. If I'm coerced by financial duress (and don't give me that "we're all free" neo-slavery dogwhistle argument in a "capitalist" Country with our GINI index) to engage in unsafe behavior on your behalf and bend metal, I get punished. If I refuse to bend metal on your behalf, I get punished. If I go beyond that and make the ultimate sacrifice, I get ultimately punished. You merely get to skate past the slammer with insurance policies. You're certainly not going to jail for it, nor dying for it. That's a moral hazard that would spread like an STD if the workplace relationship regulations weren't there to put a stick through the spokes of the perverse profit motive in industries where public safety is involved.

 

[Lindberg]

That is not true, because the union will protect you in the event you make a decision that the company doesn't agree with, like my example of refusing the airplane with an APU inop.

Ask Hindsight about moral hazards. The fact that the airline will bear 100% of the repercussions of this judgment call that you think should be the pilot's sole discretion is a perfect example.

No one said pilots should fly the plane no matter what. But this is a customer service issue, not a flying issue. It should be a customer service call, not the pilot's call. And the fact that the pilot can declare king's ex and refuse to go anyway is a negative consequence of the unions, not a positive one. To everyone but the pilot. I don't expect you to agree, for obvious reasons.

 

[vman]

"The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft."

Maybe you should petition the FAA to change the term "pilot in command" to just "pilot" and repeal 91.3.

 

[MauleSkinner]

That is not true, because the union will protect you in the event you make a decision that the company doesn't agree with, like my example of refusing the airplane with an APU inop.

If you need a union to protect you from your employer, how is the employer trustworthy?

 

[vman]

if there was no need for unions, they wouldn't be around

 

[Larry in TN]

What is the potential strikes goals?

The goal of the credible threat of a strike is to encourage management to negotiate so that an agreement can be reached without there being a strike or lock-out.

The RLA requires that both parties maintain status quo during negotiations. The current agreement never expires (as they do in almost any other industry) The negotiations often stretch for years; some nearly a decade. Frontier is still working under a bankruptcy contract in which they gave significant concessions in order for the airline to survive. The airline is now thriving and the rest of the US airline industry has left them behind in pay, benefits, and working conditions. Their starting pay is now lower than at most regional airlines flying airplanes one-third the size. In this type of situation, the status quo provision of the RLA allows management to stall negotiations for years while enjoying the low costs of the outdated contract. The only thing motivating the airline to negotiate is the threat of a strike which can only occur after the NMB declares the mediated negotiations at an impasse, a 30-day cooling-off period expires, and the POTUS declines to enact a presidential emergency board (as Clinton did to stop the AA pilots strike in the 1997).

The current actions of the Frontier pilot's union are attempting to generate pressure to move the process forward. In situations where management has a clear incentive to avoid a new agreement, the real negotiations (movement on economic issues) don't typically occur until the last days of an NMB cooling off period.

I guess if the pilot wants to make all of his own operational decisions, he needs to be a Part 135 Single Pilot Operator.

Actually, the company-authored, FAA-required, flight operations manual says that it is the PICs job as well. I wish I could post the language from the FOM but we aren't allowed to release company manuals. All airlines have that language in their FOMs. The union ensures that the airline follows it when it is exercised. (Such as the pilot who was fired for ordering an evacuation of his jet as it was filling with smoke in 2015)

I’ve always felt that if those kind of things were a job retention issue, I’d be better off somewhere else anyway.

You generally can't get to the better-somewhere-elses until you've spent your time at the not-so-much-better places. And the better places got to be better places because of the work of their strong unions that built the protections which give the crews the confidence to do what they believe is right.

I'm at my sixth airline since 1990. I still have an unsigned letter I received from "Flight Control" (the Asst. Chief Pilot wrote it) at my first airline that directed me to contact the Chief Pilot prior to entering a write-ups in the aircraft's maintenance log. A blatant violation of FARs, of course, which is why the computer-printed letter was unsigned and could be disavowed if obtained by the FAA. The issue that generated that letter was a chronically malfunctioning auto-wastegate on a turbocharged C-402 engine. It had been written up multiple times, by several pilots, but the company did not want to replace it. They maintained that you can't expect the wastegate to operate properly on 'older engines'. Interestingly, when the engine was eventually replaced, similar writeups on the wastegate on the new engine were dismissed as 'the engine is still breaking in'.

Pilots who didn't cooperate were fired for "poor customer service". I got out of there as quickly as I could but that still ended up being ten months. That was my only non-union airline.

 

[vman]

Being in an adversarial relationship with an employer is unlikely to lead to long term satisfaction even if you win a short term victory.

then there would be no unions, or union shops out there, many that excel at the highest levels

i'm a big harley fan, and of pilots who fly for a living

 

[MauleSkinner]

You generally can't get to the better-somewhere-elses until you've spent your time at the not-so-much-better places. And the better places got to be better places because of the work of their strong unions that built the protections which give the crews the confidence to do what they believe is right.

I'm at my sixth airline since 1990. I still have an unsigned letter I received from "Flight Control" (the Asst. Chief Pilot wrote it) at my first airline that directed me to contact the Chief Pilot prior to entering a write-ups in the aircraft's maintenance log. A blatant violation of FARs, of course, which is why the computer-printed letter was unsigned and could be disavowed if obtained by the FAA. The issue that generated that letter was a chronically malfunctioning auto-wastegate on a turbocharged C-402 engine. It had been written up multiple times, by several pilots, but the company did not want to replace it. They maintained that you can't expect the wastegate to operate properly on 'older engines'. Interestingly, when the engine was eventually replaced, similar writeups on the wastegate on the new engine were dismissed as 'the engine is still breaking in'.

Pilots who didn't cooperate were fired for "poor customer service". I got out of there as quickly as I could but that still ended up being ten months. That was my only non-union airline.

I’m at my 4th non-union job since 1990...while it still sometimes takes a few attempts to get things finally figured out, I’ve never had an employer refuse to fix an airplane. Apparently unions aren’t a requirement for getting airplanes fixed.

 

[vman]

apparently, a vast majority of pilots who fly for a living are unionized

 

[hindsight2020]

apparently, a vast majority of pilots who fly for a living are unionized

I wouldn't go that far. Only in part 121.

ETA: I have no idea if part 121 is the lion's share of pilot employment.

 

[vman]

The goal of the credible threat of a strike is to encourage management to negotiate so that an agreement can be reached without there being a strike or lock-out.

iow, showtime, red zone, a line in the sand etc

 

[Velocity173]

I wouldn't go that far. Only in part 121.

ETA: I have no idea if part 121 is the lion's share of pilot employment.

Our company (Part 135) is the largest air ambulance company in the world and we’re non-union.

We were solicited by unions a few years back but we never got signed up for union representation. I think they’re a joke. I’ve got friends in other companies under union rep and they make roughly the same pay, work conditions, benefits, etc. When their bases closes, they lose seniority and have to reapply through their union. My base closes (never happen) I’m in a new base the next day and keep seniority.

I laugh when they say they’ll improve my work conditions. Yeah, I sit around all day watching TV (when I’m not sleeping) and fly a whopping 150-175 hrs a year. Can take vacation anytime, always home every night, no pressure to fly, aircraft maint is impeccable and hardly ever hear from management unless it’s a pat on the back. Slave drivers I tell ya!

 

[Lindberg]

Our company (Part 135) is the largest air ambulance company in the world and we’re non-union.

We were solicited by unions a few years back but we never got signed up for union representation. I think they’re a joke. I’ve got friends in other companies under union rep and they make roughly the same pay, work conditions, benefits, etc. When their bases closes, they lose seniority and have to reapply through their union. My base closes (never happen) I’m in a new base the next day and keep seniority.

I laugh when they say they’ll improve my work conditions. Yeah, I sit around all watching TV all day (when I’m not sleeping) and fly a whopping 150-175 hrs a year. Can take vacation anytime, always home every night, no pressure to fly, aircraft maint is impeccable and hardly ever hear from management unless it’s a pat on the back. Slave drivers I tell ya!

I'll bet you never have open positions for long.

 

[vman]

sounds like the brown noser bunch

 

[Larry in TN]

Apparently unions aren’t a requirement for getting airplanes fixed.

Never said that they were. I said that the union provides the backup so that a pilot can confidently make unpopular decisions without fear of retaliation.

Our company (Part 135) is the largest air ambulance company in the world and we’re non-union.

Works well with smaller work groups where you can have a personal relationship with your supervisor and other management. Not so much in large groups where pilots are interchangeable parts with a thousand, or more, pilots per chief pilot.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Never said that they were. I said that the union provides the backup so that a pilot can confidently make unpopular decisions without fear of retaliation.

And I said I wouldn’t work where I didn’t trust the company not to retaliate without having union representation, so I guess we largely agree on what they do.

We just solve the same problem differently.

 

[Velocity173]

I'll bet you never have open positions for long.

Depends on the base. Clovis NM? Yeah, no one wants to go there. Used to have openings there for months at a time. Now, Colorado Springs? That place will get filled internally and won’t go public.

 

[Zeldman]

We were solicited by unions a few years back but we never got signed up for union representation.

Years back I worked for a 135 commuter in Alaska that was power on nose diving into the ground. They cut pilot wages with the ploy of saving the company. Then a month later they cut every one else's wages. Someone got the idea to bring in a union.

Well, someone did just that. A union representative showed up asking questions and looking around. A week later we all got a letter telling us our company was too small for them and that the money would not be enough for them to "represent" us.

Years later at my first air ambulance job, I was working 14 on, 14 off. After a few years I was getting 4 weeks paid vacation a year. I usually took two weeks off and cashed in the other two weeks. But if I wanted to I could have had 10 straight weeks off.

Clovis NM? Yeah, no one wants to go there

Man, I would have loved to go to Clovis. I have friends in Muleshoe.