As a dependent of one at AA, I'll do my best to answer this in an objective manner.
Being a pilot with 35 years of seniority at AA (not my dad; a hypothetical person) is a lot different than being a pilot. Pilots take a lot of sh+t and work very hard to get where they get. My dad is 58. The government says that two years from now, he
will retire. He is a 767 captain based out of LAX and primarily flies the JFK transcons. His typical trips involve flying to JFK, having an overnight at the Milford at Times Square, and flying home. Would you believe that it's not always this good? Here's my dad's abbreviated life story on how he got to where he is today:
- Grew up in a "typical" (if there is such a thing) family. His dad was a trucker and mom was a homemaker.
- Was on the track to become a trucker like his father and enrolled in community college.
- One day, he decided he could do better with his life. Moved to Santa Barbara and spent the next 3 months (and his life savings) getting trained to be a pilot.
- Got hired on with various charters and now-defunct small airlines. 20 years ago, when I was born,
he was on unemployment.
- Got a job with Air California, a regional airline based out of SNA. It eventually grew and became AirCal.
- In the mid 1980s, AirCal was bought by American. While long term it was certainly better, my dad barely held captain when he was forced off the 737 and onto the MD80. If he could even get a line (as opposed to reserve), it would typically involve an all-nighter leaving at 2AM, arriving in the morning at ORD or DFW and a tag leg to an "exciting" city like (no offense intended) Tulsa, OK or Little Rock, AR or Lincoln, NE. Where he had to sleep during daylight hours. Arriving home, he would be extremely jet-lagged. This basically meant that in the 24 hours after every trip, he couldn't function and tried to maintain a normal sleep schedule. I can attest to the fact that he was a zombie for 24-hours. He would be so f'ed up returning from trips that there was a "60 minute rule". Basically, none of us were to talk to him or get in his way for the first hour after he got home. This lasted for 6 years before he could hold a daylight line.
- He is at the peak of his career, and really enjoying the opportunities he has. The problem is that he is done in two years.
To those who complain that senior captains get paid a lot solely because of seniority, you are correct. But, I ask you what other companies keep employees for 25+ years without giving them raises along the way? The seemingly excessive salary at the end is a payoff for the hard work and years of putting up with less than ideal circumstances.
Some background information:
At AMR, pilots are paid an hourly rate, which comes from seniority (up to a max of "12 year pay") and the seat and plane flown. A domestic F100 captain makes more per hour than the most senior 777 Int'l FO. American Airlines "only hires Captains." They won't hire people in their 50s because they will never make captain. When someone with lower seniority upgrades to Captain, you have 2 years to upgrade. Upgrading to Captain is not easy, and it is the second biggest test a pilot will ever face. The first being the probationary first year where you have no job protection. Because pilots are a self-selecting group and most incompetent pilots will be 'out of the system', by their upgrade time, most pilots pass. But, if you don't pass, you can't just go be an FO for the rest of your career. You will have one more chance, and if you don't cut it, you have no job. Once you have qualified as captain and served your "lock-in" time, you can go back to be a co-pilot. But, you must prove your ability to be a captain before you can spend your career as an FO. This policy is different from other airlines, but it maintains that only capable leaders are flying the planes.
Regarding those "evil" United pilots not flying overtime. But, using examples from AMR...
At AA, lines (a set of trips flown in one month and "bid" on in the previous month) can be contractually built to 75 hours per month. There are clauses that they can be "flexed" to 78 hours if the company desires. In practice, lines are almost always flexed to 78 hours. This means that at the start of the month, a pilot won't be scheduled for more than 78 hours. Some lines may only have 60-some hours in them, it really varies. But, pilots can adjust their schedules up to 83 hours. One way is with Trip Trade with Open Time (TTOT). Think of Open Time as a giant bulletin board to trade flights. So, if my dad wants an extra hour of pay, he might drop a LAX-MIA trip into OT and pick up a JFK turn. When the lines are built at the start of the month, many trips are not assigned to a crew, but left in Open Time. If nobody picks them up, they may be assigned to a reserve crew. Month in and month out, American is taking the calculated risk that people will adjust their schedules to get over 80 hours. The entire "system" that is American Airlines is built around that assumption. The problem is that when pilots choose not to fly over 78 hours (such as just flying their lines), the company is left short crews. My view on the issue is that if a company chooses to build it's operations around employees performing volunteer overtime, the company is leaving itself open to problems. At AA, these would be referred to as a "WOE (Withdrawal Of Enthusiasm) to volunteerism." While the UAL pilots deserve some blame for the cancellations, I believe UAL shares an equal part for (like every other airline out there...) choosing to operate in such an at-risk situation.
Re: Non-revving
It's not as great as it sounds. If it's important to be somewhere, I will buy tickets. In some cases, it is cheaper than non-revenue travel, which at AA is not free. In fact, AMR makes a few million in profit each year associated with the perceived benefit of "free travel" as you call it. It's nice, but not as great as you may be led to think.
Military
Presently, more new hires are coming out of general aviation than the military. It used to be the case that airlines would hire from the military, but for various reasons, that has changed.
FedEx
... may pay their pilots well, but there is a reason why their life expectancy is 66 years old. You only work the graveyard shift, and you have a few hours to kill in the middle of the night at some hub airport while they do the "sort" before sending you back out. It is not a glamorous life and in many ways is more difficult than airline flying. The only advantage is that cardboard boxes aren't known to have Air Rage.
Tango: The salary for pilots has gotten out of control. In the old days of aviation most pilots had to fly the plane by the seat of their pants. The planes were fairly basic so everyone delveloped very good flying skills. Today, the job is so automated you really never have to fly the plane. The result is aircraft that are much more capable of flying but pilots who do not have the same skill level as past pilots.
With inflation factored out, no other career has been more eroded in terms of average salary over the past 50 years. The fact is that relative to cost of living pilots have it a lot worse now than they ever did.
It's not a bad standard of living, but fact is, it's worse than it used to be.
I invite you to go to a FBO at your local airport and just try getting your private pilot's license. It's not as easy as you think. There may be increased automation in the cockpit, but don't think for a moment that that means current-day pilots know how to fly a plane any less than the good old days. If pilots truly have it so good, then why aren't you one yourself? When you go to a doctor's office, do you ask him to justify his salary because there is all this new automated health care equipment. Do you have sympathy for him because of how HMOs have "destroyed his job"? A gentleman named Frank Lorenzo did the equivalent to pilots. Read
Hard Landing by Petzinger if you want to continue this babble. Pilots are professionals like other well-paying jobs. Just because the job is nontraditional or you don't understand it (and trust me, you don't) is no reason to put them down.
It is very ironic that "most" pilots want to make it to the 747 captains chair. These are the flights that require the least amount of skill due to the limited number of take-offs and landings done in a monthly cycle
And isn't it ironic that employees strive to become CEOs? Being a 747 captain has nothing to do with how many flights you do per month. It's about the natural progression up the ladder that all pilots do.
ATC people can retire at 55 (and most do). Pilots complain that they have to retire at 60.
Let me guess, you are a salesman for both apples and oranges? Nobody is stopping the pilots from retiring earlier. The fact is that they cannot work at age 60 + one day. Airline pilots can also retire at 55. Controllers aren't forced to retire at 55, so don't make the comparison.
For the record,
dranz is spot on. I welcome feedback here or via email.
[This message has been edited by The Who (edited 07-11-2000).]