Several reasons. They are far too unreliable for me to bank on getting to work and more importantly I don't feel comfortable with the training/experience level of many of the pilots at regional carriers, so I don't put myself on their flights. I just commute on mainline flights with other airlines.
If I do find myself on a UAX flight on a deadhead, I check the cockpit and talk with the crew. If I'm not comfortable, I'll take a different flight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CollegeFlyer
Does that mean that management-level employees don't get charged for NRSA travel in C/F? What level (and up) is required?
I'm not really sure at what level free travel for management starts. I do know that all senior managers and BOD members get free positive space when they travel, even on vacation. Employees pay for NRSA when we are not in E.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Last edited by aluminumdriver; Jul 1, 09 at 11:43 am.
If I find myself on a UAX flight on a deadhead, I check the cockpit and talk with the crew. I find myself on a flight with 2 twenty something 300 hour wonders, I walk off the flight.
Does that mean you ask them how old they are and how many hours they have?
Does that mean you ask them how old they are and how many hours they have?
Again, I RARELY fly UAX, I just avoid it. I rarely fly any regional carrier for that matter. If I do find myself on a regional carrier, I stop by the cockpit, and chat with the pilots. Through small talk I can see how experienced they are, where they got their training, how long they have been there, the weather I will be flying through, etc...
I don't get on a flight I'm not comfortable with the crew and their experience/training. I would recommend the same to anyone flying, whether it's a regional carrier, a foreign carrier, whereever you fly. Flying is not driving a car, things can go bad very quickly if you don't have the experience to deal with it.
There is a reason that when hiring, United hired 1 out of every 10 pilots interviewed, (average age mid 30's with over 5000 hours of flight time experience) and regional carriers hired new hire pilots with an average age in the low 20's with some pilots hired with as few as 300-500 flight hours. That's just not enough experience for me to fly on comfortably, so I don't, a personal choice.
Cheers,
AD
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Last edited by aluminumdriver; Jun 29, 09 at 9:27 am.
Yes, we get charged unless it's a scheduled deadhead. It costs something in fuel, water, soft drinks, etc, so they charge for it. It was a couple years ago that they quit charging for coach travel. We used to pay 1/2 the cost of a first or business class seat.
We also pay regular price for things that everyone else pays for, like chips, sandwiches, beer, etc. That's true even when deadheading.
Everyone, other than management, is subject to nickel & diming.
Freshairborne
Frankly, I'd be TPO, UA are treating you pilots even worse than us customers. I guess it's even worse for other staff excepting a few hundred managers. I always assummed airlines shuttled staff around according to their schedules and controlled availability of seats accordingly. Do you know if the UA situation common in airlines throughout the world?
Frankly, I'd be TPO, UA are treating you pilots even worse than us customers. I guess it's even worse for other staff excepting a few hundred managers. I always assummed airlines shuttled staff around according to their schedules and controlled availability of seats accordingly. Do you know if the UA situation common in airlines throughout the world?
Not sure what you are asking, whether employees at other airlines have to pay for their non-rev travel benefits, or whether senior management gets free travel all the time? If so, then the answer is each airline is different. Some airlines charge their employees, but give them so many free RT passes a year. Others are like United, charging for some seats, not for others. As for senior management, I would venture to guess that most airlines reward their senior management with flight benefits. It's just how management uses those benefits that vary.
__________________
These views are my own and do not represent the views of United Airlines or the ALPA.
Again, I RARELY fly UAX, I just avoid it. I rarely fly any regional carrier for that matter. If I do find myself on a regional carrier, I stop by the cockpit, and chat with the pilots. Through small talk I can see how experienced they are, where they got their training, how long they have been there, the weather I will be flying through, etc...
I don't get on a flight I'm not comfortable with the crew and their experience/training. I would recommend the same to anyone flying, whether it's a regional carrier, a foreign carrier, whereever you fly. Flying is not driving a car, things can go bad very quickly if you don't have the experience to deal with it.
There is a reason that when hiring, United hired 1 out of every 10 pilots interviewed, (average age mid 30's with over 5000 hours of flight time experience) and regional carriers hired new hire pilots with an average age in the low 20's with some pilots hired with as few as 300-500 flight hours. That's just not enough experience for me to fly on comfortably, so I don't, a personal choice.
Cheers,
AD
AD, I find this interesting if a little curious. I can understand your point about experience, and I can also accept that some training establishments have better reputations than others. The common denominator here though is safety; is there any statistics available in the public domain that would allow you and us to compare the number of incidents and/or accidents on mainline UA v's UAX, or with any other airlines? Is there any other basis to your concerns other than age/experience?
Also, in relation to safety does it concern you that some pilots are overweight, perhaps even obese? Especially, if they are closer to retiring than graduation? In transit in the USA it has always struck me that a noticeable proportion of the pilots I see coming and going are overweight, moreso than in other countries where the majority appear to be of normal weight. I always assumed that the medicals you guys had to undergo are very strict and that the pilot would have a problem passing them if he or she was overweight?
There is a reason that when hiring, United hired 1 out of every 10 pilots interviewed, (average age mid 30's with over 5000 hours of flight time experience) and regional carriers hired new hire pilots with an average age in the low 20's with some pilots hired with as few as 300-500 flight hours.
As you know, United was once famous for hiring low-time pilots. In the 1960s UAL recruited pilots who didn't even have a commercial pilot certificate yet.
The average flight time for a regional new-hire today is probably in the 5000 hours. There are so few jobs, and so many unemployed high-time pilots, that the few regionals that are hiring have a lot of experience from which to choose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottieFlyer
I always assumed that the medicals you guys had to undergo are very strict and that the pilot would have a problem passing them if he or she was overweight?
They are not strict. The standards are set so as to look for things which would make the pilot unsafe right now or that would cause a high risk of sudden incapacitation over the term of the medical. Blood pressure limits, for example, are 155/95 which is way beyond the point that would send your personal doctor into full-blown lecture mode.
AD, I find this interesting if a little curious. I can understand your point about experience, and I can also accept that some training establishments have better reputations than others. The common denominator here though is safety; is there any statistics available in the public domain that would allow you and us to compare the number of incidents and/or accidents on mainline UA v's UAX, or with any other airlines? Is there any other basis to your concerns other than age/experience?
The problem with accident statistics is that crashes are so rare that trying to tease out any trends is almost impossible. I've never been one to advocate digging through FAA and NTSB reports to figure out who is better or worse, it just doesn't make sense because there is little data to go on.
I'm also one to think that avoiding certain airlines in the US for safety reasons is worthless. We are getting to the point that accidents are occurring for very obscure issues with long accident chains so it can happen to anyone. Right now, if we are avoiding regionals, we should avoid anything with the Continental name because they seem to be having a run of very bad luck. But that is all it is, luck.
Of course, training and experience are factors and in recent years and regionals have been where the crashes have been. However, experience has been varied and IMO one of the most egregious incidents (not including the Pinnacle crash, that was just gross stupidity) was AA in Little Rock with a very experienced management pilot at the helm. Being human and making mistakes doesn't discriminate.
The point is, that as an industry, we are learning from our mistakes and I know from experience that the FAA is now heavily scrutinizing regional airlines. While the FAA tends to be a blunt instrument and there is always collateral damage, they will ensure that flying will be even safer (if that is possible) than it already has been.
Checko
__________________
Please note: Opinions expressed here are my own and not that of my employer or any other organization. Thank You!
Last edited by GreatChecko; Jun 29, 09 at 2:25 pm.
Programs: AC E/*G, Hilton Silver, Hertz 5*, dirt in DL and nearly every hotel program...
Posts: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreatChecko
The problem with accident statistics is that crashes are so rare that trying to tease out any trends is almost impossible. I've never been one to advocate digging through FAA and NTSB reports to figure out who is better or worse, it just doesn't make sense because there is little data to go on.
"A report prepared for FAA by GRA, Inc. entitled A Report on Issues Related to Public Interest in Aviation Safety Data, found that '... there currently is no evidence in accident data that would support the ranking of individual airlines based on their safety records….While there may be apparent differences in carrier safety records at any particular time, due largely to the infrequent but catastrophic nature of an air accident, there is no evidence that such distinctions persist nor that they are predictive of future safety performance. Rankings of airlines based on past accident records therefore provide no information to consumers seeking to make safety-enhancing comparisons for current or future travel choices.'"
I can certainly understand AD's preference (at a gut level, if nothing else); that experience is a good thing, all other things being equal. Naturally, all other things are rarely equal...
As you know, United was once famous for hiring low-time pilots. In the 1960s UAL recruited pilots who didn't even have a commercial pilot certificate yet.
That is true. I flew with some of those guys years ago. The difference probably has something to do with the fact that they spent 6-9 months in training, which is more time in training than some current pilots had been flying when they were hired.
Freshairborne.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottieFlyer
Frankly, I'd be TPO, UA are treating you pilots even worse than us customers. I guess it's even worse for other staff excepting a few hundred managers. I always assummed airlines shuttled staff around according to their schedules and controlled availability of seats accordingly. Do you know if the UA situation common in airlines throughout the world?
The justification the airlines have for not providing anything other than the ability to jumpseat or passride to work comes from the fact that they didn't ask us how we planned on making it to work when they hired us. It's assumed almost universally that some flight crew members will not live where they are based, and it is the responsibility of that crew member to be at work when they're scheduled, and be near their base airport if on reserve.
A few of the fractionals, charter companies and the big freight companies will provide either a ticket on an offline airline or a transportation allowance, but it's pretty much non-existent among the passenger carriers.
Freshairborne
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottieFlyer
Also, in relation to safety does it concern you that some pilots are overweight, perhaps even obese? Especially, if they are closer to retiring than graduation? In transit in the USA it has always struck me that a noticeable proportion of the pilots I see coming and going are overweight, moreso than in other countries where the majority appear to be of normal weight. I always assumed that the medicals you guys had to undergo are very strict and that the pilot would have a problem passing them if he or she was overweight?
Personally, my feeling is that inexperience and lack of maturity is much more of a danger than a fat belly. I'll take an old, experienced fatty over a 2000 hour wonder any time.
The FAA physicals are not really that rigorous, but then, without going through a whole bunch of expensive testing, it's nearly impossible to predict when someone is going to fall over dead on the spot.
United used to have a medical department, and we used to be required to have a very thorough medical exam once a year in addition to the FAA physicals that captains and international first officers have to take twice a year, and domestic first officers have to take once a year.
They took blood, an EKG, poked you in a lot of places, tested sight, hearing, and tons of other stuff. They were truly the most comprehensive physicals I'd ever taken.
Then, money got tight, and all that talk about wanting the most fit pilots in the industry went by the wayside.
Freshairborne
__________________
These are my own observations and/or opinions, and not necessarily those of the Air Line Pilots Association or UAL Corp.
Last edited by FlyinHawaiian; Jun 29, 09 at 4:33 pm.
Reason: multi-quote
The problem with accident statistics is that crashes are so rare that trying to tease out any trends is almost impossible. I've never been one to advocate digging through FAA and NTSB reports to figure out who is better or worse, it just doesn't make sense because there is little data to go on.
I'm also one to think that avoiding certain airlines in the US for safety reasons is worthless. We are getting to the point that accidents are occurring for very obscure issues with long accident chains so it can happen to anyone. Right now, if we are avoiding regionals, we should avoid anything with the Continental name because they seem to be having a run of very bad luck. But that is all it is, luck.
Of course, training and experience are factors and in recent years and regionals have been where the crashes have been. However, experience has been varied and IMO one of the most egregious incidents (not including the Pinnacle crash, that was just gross stupidity) was AA in Little Rock with a very experienced management pilot at the helm. Being human and making mistakes doesn't discriminate.
The point is, that as an industry, we are learning from our mistakes and I know from experience that the FAA is now heavily scrutinizing regional airlines. While the FAA tends to be a blunt instrument and there is always collateral damage, they will ensure that flying will be even safer (if that is possible) than it already has been.
Checko
If it's nothing but luck, then why are training experience considered factors?
As far as management pilots go, many might have prior experience, but flying 2 or 3 days a month is not maintaining a significant amount of recent experience. I'm highly experienced as an automotive mechanic, but last time I did a brake job was 27 years ago. Would you like me to fix your brakes for you? I could do it, but wouldn't you want someone with some currency?
As for making mistakes being non-descriminatory, I beg to differ. I'll take a well-trained and experienced professional over a newbie any day of the week. Who do you want taking care of that heart valve thing, the Scrubs kid, or the doc who did 12 of then last week?
Freshairborne
__________________
These are my own observations and/or opinions, and not necessarily those of the Air Line Pilots Association or UAL Corp.
