Funny thing is that there are a lot of people flying LCCs that pay more because they didn't research

True but that's because legacy airline have had to reduce their fares because of competition from the LCCs. Without the LCCs fares would still have been at the traditionally high levels,

Something doesn't add up and things need to change.

Maybe some pilots should show some self-respect and not accept jobs at such low salaries.

Edited February 8, 201214 yr by mgh

Minimum wage in New Zealand is now going to $13.50/hr. So if you worked a 40 hour work week that would be $28,080 (or $23,454 USD). This also includes 11 paid public holidays, 20 paid holidays and 5 paid sick days as that is in accordance to New Zealand law. So that is $23,454 USD a year including 36 paid days off.A regional pilot in the USA can make under $22,350, which is less then minimum wage in New Zealand, Wouldn't get 11 public holidays (more like 5), wouldn't get 20 paid holidays (more like 10) and wouldn't get any sick days. I think I would rather work at McDonalds in New Zealand then work as a Regional Pilot in the USA.Something doesn't add up and things need to change.

If I was offered free meals and accomodation I would jump at that offer. Why work in a fast food outlet when you could be building your career?Yes, even pilots in Australia do it tough. I had a top flying instructor that once told me, "Sell your grandmother", "Work nights at a bar" and the income they were making was about $30000 AUD a year as flight instructing/chartering.If you look at the bright side of it, after flying commercial for 250 hours of flight time, Emirates or Jetstar, or Tiger would jump at your application for work.If you put the hard yards in, airline recruiters admire your determination. I doubt United Airlines pay their pilots (even F/Os) under $65000 a year. Even Railroad Engineers (train drivers) get that much!If you hear the stories I have, that low pay rate may be true, but you aren't going to be at the bottom for long. Plus, in the US everything is sooo cheap! In the 1990s when their economy was GREAT, you could buy a new car on a 0% interest loan.People don't understand that. Go there and see it. You will be impressed.Daniel

"A Doctor has to deal with life and death every day. A pilot does not. Even when all engines flame out, it has been proved with an A330 AND a 767 that they both glided to an airfield."They got very lucky, and the skill & experience of the pilots in those incidents was a very big factor in their successful outcomes. You seem to imply that the planes landed themselves.

Edited February 8, 201214 yr by Raindance

Daniel, United pays less than $30000 a year before taxes for a new FO. It about doubles after the first year.Though I don't think handing out immediate raises has any quick impact on raising safety levels commensurately, downward pressure on wages does put downward pressure on safety rather quickly. As pointed put already, Colgan airlines in the US is an easy example of this effect.Colgan had been a very low paying airline to begin with. Because of this low cost advantage they were able to underbid others and gain significant flying for Continental. Because of this gain in flying, they were forced to expand quickly. Their low cost advantage was a result of low compensation and minimal training expense. Obviously this is a formula for a downward spiral in safety. An increasing number of inexperienced and minimally trained pilots in the system. The result was a crash that killed over 50. We all knew that crash was coming.When Colgan was ramping up the Q400 operations they had posted a recruiter outside one of the wx rooms in ewr to recruit away our FOs with a promise of upgrade to captain in 6 months. Think about that. Their strategy was to poach away the least experienced to be put in charge of their planes. Why not poach away experienced captains to put in charge of their planes? That's what Netjets does. Plenty of captains at the regionals have made lateral moves to Netjets for better pay and lifestyles. Why couldn't Colgan offer the same and attract some experience? Because they can't afford to with their lowball contract with cal. So instead they need to fill their rosters with the least experience and give them just the minimally required training because they can't afford anything else.And because they were expanding like that, they couldn't afford to fire people like Marvin Renslow either, who proved to them time and again that he was not fit to fly an aircraft. And people died. While operators that had more experienced pilots, trained them to a higher level and expected them to perform well, saw their share of flying reduced. This is the result of downward cost pressure. An overall decrease in safety becsuse of increasing inexperience, less training and reductions in numbers of experienced and highly trained pilots. This is the result of our desire for cheapness. Nothing comes for free. The money you saved on your ticket came at the expense of your odds of getting there alive.

Daniel, United pays less than $30000 a year before taxes for a new FO. It about doubles after the first year.Though I don't think handing out immediate raises has any quick impact on raising safety levels commensurately, downward pressure on wages does put downward pressure on safety rather quickly. As pointed put already, Colgan airlines in the US is an easy example of this effect.Colgan had been a very low paying airline to begin with. Because of this low cost advantage they were able to underbid others and gain significant flying for Continental. Because of this gain in flying, they were forced to expand quickly. Their low cost advantage was a result of low compensation and minimal training expense. Obviously this is a formula for a downward spiral in safety. An increasing number of inexperienced and minimally trained pilots in the system. The result was a crash that killed over 50. We all knew that crash was coming.When Colgan was ramping up the Q400 operations they had posted a recruiter outside one of the wx rooms in ewr to recruit away our FOs with a promise of upgrade to captain in 6 months. Think about that. Their strategy was to poach away the least experienced to be put in charge of their planes. Why not poach away experienced captains to put in charge of their planes? That's what Netjets does. Plenty of captains at the regionals have made lateral moves to Netjets for better pay and lifestyles. Why couldn't Colgan offer the same and attract some experience? Because they can't afford to with their lowball contract with cal. So instead they need to fill their rosters with the least experience and give them just the minimally required training because they can't afford anything else.And because they were expanding like that, they couldn't afford to fire people like Marvin Renslow either, who proved to them time and again that he was not fit to fly an aircraft. And people died.While operators that had more experienced pilots, trained them to a higher level and expected them to perform well, saw their share of flying reduced. This is the result of downward cost pressure. An overall decrease in safety becsuse of increasing inexperience, less training and reductions in numbers of experienced and highly trained pilots. This is the result of our desire for cheapness. Nothing comes for free. The money you saved on your ticket came at the expense of your odds of getting there alive.

I have never flown LCC but I think people should have the choice. Coglan yes they had a business model that put other's safety at risk.Are you suggesting then that the FAA receive business models from every operator to ensure that this doesn't happen?Daniel

Nope. I'm just pointing out that nothing comes for free. There is always something being given up somewhere. You can say what you want about where you want to take your truck but the true cost will get extracted one way or another in due time. You can't pay those great low fares without unbalancing something.Actually the FAA does take business conditions into account. They consider a company under economic pressure as high risk and will try to pay more attention to their operations. Obviously after the crash they plastered colgan with inspectors. Even when my company underwent cost cuttings in part because of the competition from colgan, they increased our inspections because they considered our safeness at greater risk as a result. The low cost culture brings everybody down.

Edited February 8, 201214 yr by KevinAu

Are you working at Colgan? I thought you was Aussie from your name?I thought that LCCs just remove the costs of meals and extras etc and that lowers costs. Yes you do get the occasional baddies, but hey it isn't that bad?Daniel

I've been accused of being a libetarian as well. My point is not that we pilots should be paid more or that American employees deserve anything, but rather you eventually get what you pay for. If you want to pay less than the true cost of a service then you should at least expect to get less. That's a pretty straightforward principle.

Are you working at Colgan? I thought you was Aussie from your name?I thought that LCCs just remove the costs of meals and extras etc and that lowers costs. Yes you do get the occasional baddies, but hey it isn't that bad?Daniel

I don't work at Colgan, if you were directing that question at me. There's more to it than just getting rid of the chicken meal.Some things are meant to be free enterprise and some things are not. Public transportation, as a public good, cannot work as a competitive private free enterprise. It's oxymoronic to do so.

Edited February 8, 201214 yr by KevinAu

.Now we have another problem. China and the Middle East are massively flooding the market with seats and they have the money to bankrupt the Western carriers.Big changes are ahead. We have to accept the fact that : We compete or we lose.

International seats maybe but cabatoge rules wouldn't hurt the national and regional carriers in the US.

If I was offered free meals and accomodation I would jump at that offer. Why work in a fast food outlet when you could be building your career?

There is truth to this. The reason people follow a career to be a pilot is that they love what they do.

People seem to forget that airline employees work back of the clock shifts,weekends and holidays. You have to compensate people for this.I sacrificed my health,working at the airlines,Getting. bladder cancer related to chemical exposure, working as a mechanic. What is that worth?

International seats maybe but cabatoge rules wouldn't hurt the national and regional carriers in the US.

That would be the same for Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Russia. China has nothing to do with domestic operations in any of the countries with a large land mass or Trans-Tasman agreements between Australia and New Zealand.

Edited February 8, 201214 yr by ytzpilot

People seem to forget that airline employees work back of the clock shifts,weekends and holidays. You have to compensate people for this.I sacrificed my health,working at the airlines,Getting. bladder cancer related to chemical exposure, working as a mechanic. What is that worth?

You have every right to say what you said....I think MR from Australia is completely out of touch.This is not coming from a Kiwi as I am actually an EXPAT living in New Zealand, and that guy from Australia was very out of touch to make a comment like that.

Edited February 9, 201214 yr by ytzpilot

Yeah I saw the earlier posts and Daniel's were way out of touch. I hope you are doing well, Jim. Cancer is a scary fight in ones life.

Hi Chris, I am doing well,Thankyou for asking. Iam now in a different field,and doing ok.