Originally Posted by
NYC96
This individual had the responsibility of 150 LIVES that day. While other jobs out there have required reduced pay and benefits, I think Sully is forewarning our government to those reductions. It may not attract our aviators from the military, like it has for decades. They may go overseas for more pay. (The cream of the crop). Why go into an industry that has mediocre pay with that experience?
Anyone care to have a DOCTOR that gets paid lousy? Would that industry attract the brightest if pay and benefits BECAME mediocre?
This debate has been made over and over again, but a bus driver has the lives of everyone on board in his hands too, so let's not use that alone as a criteria to higher pay and benefits for airline pilots.
Again, I would like to know what Capt. Sully was getting at. He tried to make the Congressional sub-committee aware that the air crews experience made the safe landing of Flight 1549 possible. He warned that less experienced pilots is what you are going to get with lower pay. I guess he implied that these same less experienced pilots could not have pulled the water landing off successfully. Maybe so, but are we asking the Federal Government to step in and restore some of the lost pay and benefits, to keep the best Captains and First Officers? Can such pressure be brought on the airlines?
I don't ever remember seeing an airline run a marketing campaign based on the competence and experience of the air crews. Surely, if people were willing to pay more for a quality product, then why don't airlines charge more, and hire the best Captains they can, and then market them that way?
BTW, a lousy Doctor can happen to anyone. In every graduating medical class, someone is at the bottom. Low pay does not exactly equate to poor medical practice. Some Doctors do it for the love of the job, not just the pay. Conversely, some Doctors are very well paid, and are probably not the best in their field either.