US Airways' Employees Unite, Warn Management to Dump Anti-Labor Tactics
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
That is a good point. However, the problem evident at that end of the labor market is the tendency of pilots to succumb to the romance of the job. Therefore they willingly prostitute themselves for pathetic salaries, all for that coveted office in the sky with a great view. This is very different dynamic from other airline jobs (although F/As and perhaps mechanics have this too, but to a much lesser degree). This inherent weakness in the pilot psyche has created a glut, especially post-9/11. It seems like that is changing now, however, as the post-9/11 glut ebbs around the world and as many commuter-type outfits now have very low hours requirements to get hired as a FO.
An additional factor is that pilots spend tremendous investments in time, effot and/or money to obtain their skills, which are of little use outside the cockpit. They are therefore reluctant to turn their back on those skills by seeking employment outside the cockpit and to admit those skills may not be worth much when so many others have comparable skills (relative to the number of positions available).
Because of these differing dynamics, I do not see the wisdom of pilots hooking themselves to the fortunes of other airline employees. They are better off playing to their own unique strengths as a work group, and trying to minimize their unique weaknesses.
nostradamus
Veteran
- Dec 7, 2004
- 2,038
- 0
Just like some lawyers.
Very true.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
What good does all this chest thumping do?
Labor is barred from taking any organized action, management knows it.
Labor is barred from taking any organized action, management knows it.
leprechaun
Senior
What education is that? What degree is required to be a pilot?
I think most airlines require some sort of bachelor's degree for their pilots.
But that wasn't what I meant. By "education" I wasn't referring to formal academic degrees, but rather to training. The "degrees" are in the form of FAA certifications (commercial, instrument, multi-engine, ATP, etc. ratings).
If you must think in terms of academic degrees, achieving the commercial, instrument and multi-engine ratings can be seen as roughly equivalent to achieving a master's degree, and the ATP as a PhD, IMO.
But that wasn't what I meant. By "education" I wasn't referring to formal academic degrees, but rather to training. The "degrees" are in the form of FAA certifications (commercial, instrument, multi-engine, ATP, etc. ratings).
If you must think in terms of academic degrees, achieving the commercial, instrument and multi-engine ratings can be seen as roughly equivalent to achieving a master's degree, and the ATP as a PhD, IMO.
leprechaun
Senior
I don't thinks so, as a a matter of fact, until a few years ago, you didn't even need a high school diploma.
Get off the high horse.
I am not sure what that has to do with my point. Did you miss the part where I clearly explained I wasn't talking about formal academic degrees when I used the term "education"?
If it helps, I'll reword the post that is apparently causing you trouble:
Let me put it another way. Could a pilot, who has had no experience being a F/A, or CSR, or ramper, etc., be trained do those jobs in a few weeks to the standards required by the airline? Overwhelmingly likely. Is the reverse true? No way.
But hey, keep pretending otherwise. Your posts are more proof why pilots are better off separating themselves from other airline employees: most other employees hate pilots and have no respect for what goes into becoming a pilot for a major airline, yet expect pilots to sacrifice for them. Who needs that?
Yes, that is why I have been careful to refer to "most" airline employees. Certainly in some other techincal fields, like AMTs, significant training is also required. (Still not as much as a pilot, though.)
But since the mindset on this board seems to be that extra training isn't worth anything, I suppose you think that in a perfect world AMTs would get the same pay and benefits as the people who clean the planes between flights, right?
But since the mindset on this board seems to be that extra training isn't worth anything, I suppose you think that in a perfect world AMTs would get the same pay and benefits as the people who clean the planes between flights, right?
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #43
Let me ask you this Bear, a pilot flies only one type of Aircraft, Mechanics are expected to learn everytype of A/C.
At one point US had 737-200, 300s, 400s, DC-9s, MD-80s, F28-1000, 4000s, F100s, 757s, 767s and A320 Family A/C, and sub-types within those aircrafts, no tell me who needs to know more?
And I never seen an auto-fix on an airplane, but every airplanes has auto throttles and autopilots.
And once again you throw a jab at me instead of sticking to the issue, well how about Vending Machines in the Galleys instead of FAs?
At one point US had 737-200, 300s, 400s, DC-9s, MD-80s, F28-1000, 4000s, F100s, 757s, 767s and A320 Family A/C, and sub-types within those aircrafts, no tell me who needs to know more?
And I never seen an auto-fix on an airplane, but every airplanes has auto throttles and autopilots.
And once again you throw a jab at me instead of sticking to the issue, well how about Vending Machines in the Galleys instead of FAs?
Yes, under FAA rules pilots can only remain current on a limited number of aircraft at a time (often more than one -- i.e., the 757/767). But they have actually "learned" many types of A/C.
OK. Pilots need to know more.
At UA (don't know how it is at other airlines), F/As are trained and current, and tested annually about the operational and emergency procedures, on ALL A/C in the UA fleet. Does that mean UA F/As "know more" than (or at least as much as) UA's mechanics? I never thought so, but I guess you do.
Irrelevant but, OK, your position is essentially that being a pilot for a major airline takes no more training than being an AMT. We will have to simply disagree on that point, which is fine. But consider this: Who gets paid more, major airline pilot or AMT (on average)? Why do you think that is?
Honestly, while I know we have had many hearty disagreements in the past, in this thread I never meant to "throw a jab" at you, and have been trying to stick to the issue. I am not sure what you are referring to, but I apologize for any misunderstanding.
Not a bad idea for some low cost airlines. Too bad about those pesky FAA regs though. Another option is to get F/As from low-wage countries the right to work on U.S. domestic flights. But this is a different topic.
Therefore your points are irrelevant
