Jump to content

How They Ruined Airline Jobs


deicer

Recommended Posts

Deicer, your headline says they but the story says we. I suggest it is both, after all it was the employees that allowed the spooling off of lower paid jobs to feed the beast so that it, although showing a profit, could show ever more by selling more and cheaper seats to us the great unwashed.  You do have to wonder "what if" , what if the unions etc. had held the line?.     Guess we will never know. :head:  Didn't start with but was also fed from "Do you offer an airline discount? which evolved into "discount/discount/discount", cheaper is better from the masses.  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Super 80 said:

I know a number of US regional pilots who aren't flying because it just isn't worth it. They hear from their former employers regularly but other than signing bonuses there has been no material change in the reasons they pursued other careers.

So these are pilot friends who invested their time and money to fly for a living but have decided to change careers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here is where we are going unless  we take back control, just imagine what if the unions and the airlines emploiyees say (enough is enough and no-one (especially the pilots) refuse to work for less? 

Logistics & Transportation #BigBusiness Sep 8, 2017 @ 05:58 PM456 12 Stocks to Buy Now

Airline Price War Arrives With $236 Transcontinental FlightsFORT LAUDERDALE, FL - MAY 09: 

  •  

With $236 coast-to-coast flights arriving Friday, the long-anticipated airline price war may finally be here. Or rather, it’s the latest skirmish in the state of perpetual price war that the airline industry finds itself.

Domestic prices like Chicago to Los Angeles for $49, Dallas to San Francisco for $40, and Denver to Dallas for $25 have also been appearing this summer. So while stockholders may reach for the antacids, passengers may grab their credit card and small carry-on.

(Full disclosure: I own stock in Southwest Airlines.)

After school is back in session, travel is traditionally slower, so part of the price war is seasonal. But much of it is kicked off by upstarts like Spirit and Frontier, challenging The Big 3 (United, American, and Delta) at their hubs.
  

In the U.S., the Big Three previously dismissed the leisure traveler. Instead, they wooed higher-fare business travelers with a dizzying array of perks and statuses. But now the airlines have begun to woo younger, non-luxury travelers. As United President Scott Kirby told Bloomberg, “A lot of our customers are price sensitive.”

United has been one of the most aggressive discounters to defend their hubs again low-cost carriers, but Southwest has been pulled in as well. As Andrew Watterson, Southwest’s chief revenue officer, told Bloomberg “If one airline moves and another does not, you could lose an awful lot of volume and you’re worse off doing nothing.”

Perhaps the most dramatic price cuts are the newly-announced $236 round trip transcontinental flights. With this deal, available from September to November (forget Thanksgiving), you can fly from New York (EWR and JFK) to West Coast cities including Los Angeles (LAX), San Francisco (SFO) and Seattle (SEA) starting at just $236 round-trip, according to our friends at ThePointsGuy.

For an upcoming trip from LAX to Boston October 21 to 25th, I couldn’t find $236, but I did find $254 on Spirit, $289 on Delta, Alaska, United and Virgin round trip.

There are some great short haul oprices out there as well, like Burbank to San Jose, $94 round trip on Alaska from Oct 4-October 10. This trip could easily cost $266 or more in September, even on Southwest’s lowest Wanna Get Away Fares. So Southwest is offering a $47 departure on October 4, and a $49 return from San Jose October 10, or $96 round-trip. Southwest, which is promoting its flights starting at $59, has a month-full of October departures from Burbank to Las Vegas for $57 one-way.

Right now much of the price war action is domestic. But with WOW offering deals like $69 to Europe, and upstart Scoot (a division of Singapore Air) promising sub-$200 one-way flights to India from Britain, we will soon see a world war on ticket prices and airline profits.

 

Like lemmings, the other carriers have jumped into the price war fray to maintain market share. But the conventional wisdom is that the airline price war will have no winner, at least among the Big Three. With a much higher cost per seat mile, any price war can only cut their profitability.

One can also argue that the passengers aren’t winners either. The traveler gets lower prices with cattle-car treatment, surely a devil’s bargain. For example, if you’re flying from Dublin to North America on Aer Lingus on a “Saver” ticket, no blanket for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, blues deville said:

So these are pilot friends who invested their time and money to fly for a living but have decided to change careers?

Yes, they resigned from a regional airline because they couldn't keep their heads above water personally or financially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Super 80 said:

Yes, they resigned from a regional airline because they couldn't keep their heads above water personally or financially.

Good article and I think this is more common than many think; much better money in deployed UAV operations if you have the right background. 

In another thread, I postulated that WestJet’s evolution (ULC, regional, mixed fleet, international) is a radical departure from it’s roots and contrary to its original values and corporate beliefs… putting it on track to becoming the next Canadian. 

 While it seems to me they have progressed in a thoughtful and rational manner doing well in the process, history has a way of repeating itself and old enemies simply don wigs and change clothes. If it weren’t so my universe would implode… and it hasn’t yet. Hopefully they remain cautious and don't get caught up in a ruinous market share battle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My observation is that the 705 carriers in Canada still basically have their heads in the sand on this issue. lalalalalalalalala can't hear you!! Evidence of this are the various proposals to expand while still demanding wage cuts to do so. They still don't believe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they're oblivious to it, but I think it is a manifestation of the perverse incentives that discourage long-term thinking in public companies.

I think they're probably just counting on cadet programs to save the day when the time comes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The airline will hold out as long as they can while waiting for the economy to turn again all the while hoping they have just enough pilots with minimal experience to hire. They don't value experience and don't want to pay for it! They can't quantify experience in terms of safety or dollars and so it is not a priority. If it was wages would have risen for experience long ago. There are lots of Cdn pilots overseas that would come back if anyone would hire them and pay them reasonably. Instead we have more leaving to China etc.

When a new hire at AC (or any other airline) makes $50,000 there is a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Trader said:

When a new hire at AC (or any other airline) makes $50,000 there is a problem.


Cool, it’s gone up a bit. Now, if you double it you might be able to coax a few truck drivers back to the industry. Triple it and you might get some UAV guys tired of being deployed... or not, most of us no longer care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's a difficult concept to accept in this part of the world but not every airline seat needs to be filled by someone who scared the crap out of themselves in an overloaded Otter to be considered "experienced". The future of aviation in Canada includes low time cadets in the right seat and we may as well accept it. It's been happening in Europe and elsewhere for over 20 years with an excellent safety record. That said, any operator who assumes that the program begins and ends with the cadet training program will be doing themselves a disservice. That new reality also means every line captain becomes a line trainer in some fashion and your training and SOPs had better account for it if you want to manage the risk effectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J.O. said:

I know it's a difficult concept to accept in this part of the world but not every airline seat needs to be filled by someone who scared the crap out of themselves in an overloaded Otter to be considered "experienced". The future of aviation in Canada includes low time cadets in the right seat and we may as well accept it. It's been happening in Europe and elsewhere for over 20 years with an excellent safety record. That said, any operator who assumes that the program begins and ends with the cadet training program will be doing themselves a disservice. That new reality also means every line captain becomes a line trainer in some fashion and your training and SOPs had better account for it if you want to manage the risk effectively.

Agreed, I think you’re right and it’s not what I have the problem with. It’s the experience vs pay thing that I see as a barrier, it creates the illusion of a shortage when there is only a shortage of people willing to work for an entry level salary or post a bond etc. I guess that, in a nutshell, is what bugs me even if it won’t effect me (in a couple of years).

I can't think of another occupation that pays entry level wages for an experienced “journeymen”.  If they did, I suspect the same shortages, in the land of plenty, would occur and welders would become chefs. I certainly don’t see the experience vs company seniority issue an insurmountable problem either. The entry level wage is simply “because they can”. I guess they can until they can’t. They should try it with airline executives. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed on all counts.

By the by, the history around starting wages doesn't begin and end with management. Union leaders have refused to negotiate for "the ones who aren't even here yet" for decades, all so they could keep a bigger chunk of the pot for themselves. That simple inaction has helped to deflate wages all down the food chain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rich Pulman said:

Jeff, I've been living the dream with low-time, zero-experience F/Os for nearly 12 years now. I've seen first-hand what happens in the sim when they're asked to hand-fly an ILS. Don't even think about a non-precision approach! I've seen first-hand the deer-in-the-headlights looks when they're faced with something a little out of the ordinary. I've seen first-hand their willingness to fly through a CB when not given "permission" to deviate. It's not about them scarring the crap out of themselves in an overloaded Otter, it's about them scarring the crap out of me in a normally loaded A330. I'm thankful everyday that the automation is so robust.

Exactly! The problem is that pilots flying in Canada (and Cdn companies) have not had to deal with this. When you add to that lack of experience the expectations of some of these low timers and it adds a new dimension. I have had FO's who are upset that command times have increased and they have been flying for a GRAND TOTAL of 4 years! It can be interesting when you get these types in the sim and let them try handle and manage a situation that they can't grasp. For some it is humbling....others dismiss it and STILL believe they deserve a command!!!

Something as basic as hand flying a 3 degree approach with the ILS and nav aids off is a challenge! The Otter pilot would have little issue in a jet doing the same. So while that experience may be changing it is certainly valuable.

Worse, airlines don't want to invest the money is the type of training it takes to get these low experience FO's to a suitable standard. The safty record is as good as it is through luck, experience in the left seat and reliable automation. I 'd suggest that the AF 330 accident in the South Atlantic is a good example of what happens when inexperience meets an unusual situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is pretty simple. Other than contract speciality operations, there is and will be no value placed on experience (or retaining it) until such time as it leaves the building. Interestingly enough, the RCAF is only now beginning to grasp this concept in a world where flying from point A to B is arguably the easiest part of the job. The airlines will need to experience the inevitable results of this for themselves and they won’t until the last dregs of the “hands and feet generation” retire or move on to other endeavours. There is no going back now... I've simply embraced it for what it is, a horror show I call The Children of Magenta. It's wages that attract experience, just get a minimum wage carpenter to put in your new windows if you don't believe it. There won't be a level in sight.

 The cheap tool is always the most expensive. It's too big for small jobs and too small for big ones. I just drive now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Trader said:

Worse, airlines don't want to invest the money is the type of training it takes to get these low experience FO's to a suitable standard. The safty record is as good as it is through luck, experience in the left seat and reliable automation. I 'd suggest that the AF 330 accident in the South Atlantic is a good example of what happens when inexperience meets an unusual situation.

I don't believe in luck. Much work has gone into making the system as safe as it is. Of course there's room for improvement but operators need not reinvent the wheel to have robust cadet programs. Lufthansa and SAL have well established programs that churn out top notch pilots. 

The AF 330 was an example of many things, including inadequate training, poor management decision making (delaying the installation of pitot system mods) and automation design problems, but above all else, the accident chain began with an abject failure of command decision making. No captain in their right mind leaves the flight deck for a nap during a night flight through active weather in the ITCZ - I don't care how experienced your FO is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JO, in general I would agree. But while Lufthansa may have a robust cadet system many other airlines do not. But it costs - and if an airline can compete by cutting that cost, in an environment that is becoming 'less' regulated (and many parts of the world with essentially no regulation or true oversight) then it will remain an issue.

The AF accident highlights that well - why have a flight operated by 2 FO's and 1 Captain - cost! In the end, after all the holes lined up, what should have been the final line of defense - well trained/experienced pilots - didn't exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rich Pulman said:

All fine and good, but you're forgetting one thing... Right now, the training pilots have "real" experience and can impart some of same in a cadet system. Within a generation, it will be former cadets training new cadets. The "real" knowledge and experience will be gone from the system. At least the experienced folks can keep the airplane upright using standby instruments. Good luck doing that with the new generation, let alone the next.

Are you saying there will be a Zero Growth in experience by the former cadets?  Too sheltered by the computers? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hand fly most departures to 11 or 12 k, because I like to. My 31 year old FO had not seen it done and was intrigued, he asked if he could do the same on his departure. He has been on the jet for two years and said it was the very first time he had every hand flown the aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"That new reality also means every line captain becomes a line trainer in some fashion"

That observation has always been a reality of sorts, but as experience levels wane the arrangement is becoming more of a case of the blind leading the blind.

The travelling public should thank their gods the retirement age was extended to age 65. If 67 is the next goal we should first acknowledge the need to retain experience exceeds any benefit the short sighted medical evaluations have been providing over the years.

Regardless, ike Wolfhunter, I prefer to take my chances on the roads nowadays.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...