Wow, RW landing in major x-winds today at KDCA

[Guest Tim13]

>>>>Yes, there is a reason...but it's completely arbitrary and>>it's spelled U N I O N.>>Cheers>>>>Bob Scott>>ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300>>Santiago de Chile>>>>>>J.O.'s gotta love you. You take the cake for being the most>ignorant person here.Apparently after you've carved out the biggest piece for yourself. Bob makes some very valid points here. Tim13

[Hornit 3]

You guys all really need to do some simple research. We get paid by the hour which is correct, but for the 7 hours or so of flight time I put in today, I completed a duty day, from sign in (in my uniform) until I finished my trip in ATL, of just about 14 hours. My three day trip was worth about 15:30 total hours pay. I actually worked just a bit less than 40 total hours. You see while Im doing the walk around, the preflight planning, etc I consider that work, its just traditional that we get paid by the flight hour, not the hours we are "at" work. If I fly five three day trips in a month Im working a whole lot more than any of you thought I'd guess. You cannot consider yourself "off" when changing aircraft at a hub or babysitting a maintenance problem in the aircraft. As far as the liability goes, ask any lawyer buddy you know which has more, the 777-200 with 250 folks on board or the ATR with 60? It has to do with equipment size and dollar amounts for the hardware and the number of people carried. I don't see why you are having trouble with that, it makes perfect sense to me. A lot of the airlines have standards which go above and beyond the FARS. Our safety record here in the US is second to NONE, there is a reason for that. Think it through. You get the best folks by compensating them well and making the job tough to get and very competitive. By doing this you ensure a level of skill and judgement you don't tend to get in other aviation jobs. The top airlines here in the US get to cherry pick from the most experienced and qualified folks who make it through the application process. I'm not saying we have a "lock" on this, but our record speaks for itself. I see the argument as one of jealousy and sour grapes, just because you couldn't attain the position you can't seem to understand it's worth. Sounds a bit like Communism to me, last time I checked we don't have that kind of system here. Look, I'm a mature individual and I realize we are at a crossroads in this industry. I don't like it, but I'm not gonna whine about it. I'll do this job mostly because I love it, and I'm very good at it. It's been very rewarding for me. The bottom line is that I have other talents and skills and they just may turn out to be more lucrative than this job in the long run, that remains to be seen. I'm already working on other things as this industry may never turn around and even If It does, this job will likely never be what it once was, nor command the pay it once did. The bottom line is that it's not our pay which is bankrupting the airlines, never was, and never will be. It is corporate greed, avarice, ineptitude, and unethical behavior which is driving the losses, period. I've seen it from the inside out, you have not. Hornit

[Hornit 3]

I can't believe you actually think that an RJ is more cost efficient than a larger aircraft! Could you show me the math on that one? We have pretty much proven here at Delta and the connection carriers that nothing could be farther from the truth. Wonder why they are parking those things now huh?Hornit

[KevinAu 441]

>>>Apparently after you've carved out the biggest piece for>yourself. Bob makes some very valid points here. >>Tim13Like what? Like we only work 80-90 hours a month? The only time we get paid is when the brakes are off and the plane is pushing back. Everything else that we do on duty in association with getting the brakes released is gratis. Our duty day by law is limited to 16 hours. And we work right up to that limit very often. Buddy, we work 320 hours a month and get paid for 80-90 of those. That statement right there about 80-90 hours is pure and utter ignorance. I'll bet you even think we all make $200,000/yr per the USA Today. How many guys on a seniority list do you think actually make that much?There is no U N I O N either. There is no union hall in the airline industry. Each pilot group is a separate entity. The RLA keeps all pilots divided by law. There is no union hall. There is no union. Each pilot group is too busy keeping other pilot groups from taking their jobs away. That is no union. ALPA is merely an association that provides funding and expertise support for each individual little group of pilots at each airline when it comes time to negotiate a new contract. All it means is that they help a little when your local "student body" leaders go negotiate a salary on behalf of you. That is all. And a monthly magazine. There is no U N I O N in the airline industry. That is the absolute last thing pilots have...unity. Your comments about U N I O N show exactly how shallow your knowledge of our profession is.And you say you don't know who Jonathan Ornstein is. Wow. Now, once again, tell me who the ignoramus is.You and Bob go enjoy your Ignorance Cake.

[Bob Scott 7,720]

Kevin, it's always easy to tell when you're winning on the merits of an argument when the other guy starts tossing personal insults...a defense mechanism generally used when one can't get any traction with a weak argument.Hornit--RJs are more efficient on low density routes. Certainly I wouldn't suggest that a CRJ can compete with an MD-88 on the same route and at the same load factors. For the significant part of the population that doesn't live near a major airport, the regionals are a good thing. And of course that's RJs, regional turboprops like the ATR, Dash etc which are going strong. And of course the airlines are prevented from using the RJs to their potential because the unions do everything they can to impede their use.You make a point on work hours...but I still have to observe that my buddies who've been at this for 10-15 years are still averaging half the month--12 to 15 days--away from work. Slice it how you want, but few occupations offer that kind of free time. Now for those who choose to live away from their hub and commute...that bill is on them.It's really not about jealousy and sour grapes...and it's somewhat arrogant to assume that everyone wants your job. I don't. I certainly had the opportunity more than once, and I chose intentionally not to go down your path, as I also chose to back out of the stock market tech sector well before it crashed, and as I choose now not to buy a home in one of the many extremely overpriced markets in the US (like DC). I'm VERY comfortable with the choices I've made. It's all about risk management, and for a long time I've felt that airline pilots are paid far in excess of their market value.You guys can take this all personally, but in all honesty it's not meant that way. Except for Kevin. I hope that he's gassing Pipers while swatting mosquitos at a North Dakotan FBO in his...ummm...retirement. OK, I really don't hope for that. But the mere thought does entertain...perhaps it would teach him some manners.Kevin, I looked up Ornstein. Chairman of the Mesa Group. Now why would the CEO of some piddly little commuter outfit be a household word outside the airline industry? I think maybe you're too busy simmering in your own stew of self pity to realize that the entire world does not revolve around the airline business. Far from it.Anyway...Hornit...thanks for some objective discussion. Surely we don't agree, but I do understand your side of the argument a bit better.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile

[KevinAu 441]

>Kevin, it's always easy to tell when you're winning on the>merits of an argument when the other guy starts tossing>personal insults...a defense mechanism generally used when one>can't get any traction with a weak argument.>>>You guys can take this all personally, but in all honesty it's not >meant that way. Except for Kevin. I hope that he's gassing Pipers >while swatting mosquitos at a North Dakotan FBO in >his...ummm...retirement. OK, I really don't hope for that. But the >mere thought does entertain...perhaps it would teach him some >manners.>>Kevin, I looked up Ornstein. Chairman of the Mesa Group. Now>why would the CEO of some piddly little commuter outfit be a>household word outside the airline industry? I think maybe>you're too busy simmering in your own stew of self pity to>realize that the entire world does not revolve around the>airline business. Far from it.>>Regards>>Bob Scott>ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300>Santiago de ChileAnd thank you for addressing my points about the work hours and the state of the union. This has been a very enlightening exchange with you as well, Mr. Scott.BTW, a short personal insult does not mean somebody is out of arguments. It means it is almost 11pm and somebody has just done 5 legs in the northeast US where the winds are blowing at 40 miles an hour on the ground, with 30+ knot crosswind components on the landings, a go around because of a gpws windshear warning, having to take over the approach from an FO who is in way over his head, having to play flight instructor and counselor, and having to fight gate agents trying to overload your plane. Thinking to myself as I got out of my car "man they don't pay me enough for this $h!t" and then 20 minutes later reading the trash that you wrote, what else would you expect from me?I appreciate your sentiments that us RJ types are grossly underpaid, however the rest of your sentiments are, with all due respect, wrong.

[Bob Scott 7,720]

Kevin, here's how you started your part of this discussion:>J.O.'s gotta love you. You take the cake for being the most >ignorant person here.Now you want me to have a rational discussion with you on the ideas you have interspersed into your ad-hominem trashing? Nope, sorry, you don't rate it. Go discuss it with yourself.Bob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile

[KevinAu 441]

>Now you want me to have a rational discussion with you on the>ideas you have interspersed into your ad-hominem trashing? >Nope, sorry, you don't rate it. Go discuss it with yourself.>>Bob Scott>ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300>Santiago de Chile>And you go "off" yourself as well. Have a good life.

[Bob Scott 7,720]

>And you go "off" yourself as well. Have a good life.Why thanks for the kind sentiments. I'm having a great life. And living well really is the best revenge against those who would wish you ill.Bob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile

[KevinAu 441]

>Why thanks for the kind sentiments. I'm having a great life.> >>And living well really is the best revenge.>>Bob Scott>ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300>Santiago de ChileI didn't know you're in the process of taking revenge. It's not good to be like that, you know. What happened Bob? Why did you have to leave?

[Hornit 3]

Bob, I guess I'm just tired of folks not knowing the whole story before they spout off. The media does it routinely here. Personally I'm not upset about anything in this thread, just wanted others to get some insight from someone doing this on the front lines. You may find it arrogant that I think this way and that is your perogative, but I dont see it like that and dont consider myself an arrogant person, quite the contrary. I just believe that what we do is currently undervalued and its due to economics and the state of the industry. In a nutshell, it is what it is. We can agree to disagree about the pay and thats fine. The stark reality is that airline management groups are racing for the bottom and everyone is suffering, including those we serve. The end result is going to be broken aircraft and body parts. The pilot pay issue is just a small part of what I am seeing but its all related and our job today is far more difficult and IMPORTANT than it was just a few short years ago. We are the last line of defense in an increasingly difficult operating environment. Devaluing that job will have dangerous implications. Kevin, I was in that same boat yesterday and the day before, ugly weather, aircraft problems, and a FO in over his head on several occasions. The guy had just come off furlough and while he is a fine pilot it was like jumping into a furnace for him. Dont let the #### get you down.Hornit

[B777ER 2,486]

Hornit,Off topic but what type do you fly? I have booked a roundtrip on Delta from MCO to LAS via ATL (sprung for 2 first class tickets on this trip as I am going out there to get married-again). Aircraft for the 4 legs are 757-763-764-757. Would be neat to meet up with you along the way to say hello. Its not until May 28 with a return on June 4.

[Guest Peter Sidoli]

>sprung for 2 first class tickets on this trip as I am going out there to get married-again

[Hornit 3]

I am a Captain on the MD-88. I have seen my pay cut nearly 60% in the last year. I can't even begin to describe what it's like. I'm 45 and my pension is basically gone. Im not asking for the moon, I just want someone in corporate America to make the same sacrifices and try to keep at least a few of the contractual promises they have made. Its criminal in my mind what is going on.Hornit

[Bob Scott 7,720]

>>I see the argument as one of jealousy and sour grapes, just because >>you couldn't attain the position you can't seem to understand it's >>worth.>You may find it arrogant that I think this way This is the part I found objectionable..."arrogant" as it were: the assumption that I hold my views because I wanted your job and couldn't get it. The opposite holds true...I didn't want an airline career despite the fact that I could have gone that way. I watched nearly every separation-eligible pilot leave my AF squadron and get hired by the majors...first in the mid 80s, then again in the mid 90s. During those big hiring years there was nothing competitive at all about leaving the military and getting a job with a major carrier. Many...well over half...had multiple offers. Getting one of those jobs was not about being one of the best ones applying, it was about just being one of the ones applying.Not sure I understand how pay can be summarily excluded as a cause for airline bankruptcy when wages are widely accepted to be the second most expensive cost, only behind fuel. Although "corporate greed, avarice, ineptitude, and unethical behavior" are certainly bad sounding things, I really haven't seen a good factual argument ever made as to how that's taking the industry down. I see the emotional finger pointing at CEOs (and a handful of other top corporate managers in each company) that are making way too much money, and although I'm not too sympathetic to them either, their numbers are too small for their benefits to account for million dollar a day losses. And in the case of Delta, I wonder how much a good CFO would have been worth to its pilots...one with the foresight, training and experience to not sell off the fuel options contracts right before they were needed more than any time in the company's history.The pension fund mess is bad, but it isn't new. I had a neighbor who flew for Continental in the 50s and 60s, retired, and after being in retirement for over 15 years, Lorenzo pillaged their pension fund, and he lost more than 80% of it with no way to recover. That was in the days before the PBGC provided the pension insurance we have today. My grandfather was a retired Eastern pilot, and he saved and diversified wisely...he always said that one of the reasons he got paid so well was that nobody knew for sure one day to the next what the sign on the hangar would say. And I have friends in the airlines who were earning $150-200K a year for over a decade who are just a paycheck or two away from personal bankruptcy at any given moment because they failed to grasp the risk inherent in their historically cyclic industry and tailor their lifestyles accordingly. It frustrates me to see them fail, because I like them.I'll grant you that you have an inside view of the industry that I do not. But being inside can be at least as perception-limiting as being outside.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Santiago de Chile