BoeingBoy

While true, what I meant to convey is that the chief pilot doesn't see the pilots he supervises in the "office", since when the pilot is performing their primary job functions the "office" is traveling 500 mph and not down the hall. So when it's time to fill the 10-20 vacancies per month due to attrition, as well as the slots opened by those filling those attrition vacancies, how do the chief pilots around the system determine who most merits advancement? Should it be based on which pilots take the time to stop by and say "Hi" most often? Like I said, the seniority system has it's warts, but in a field where job performance (flying) is nearly identical and supervisors almost never see their subordinates "at work", it's as good a system of determining the order of advancement (or reverse, at times) as any.

I'll say up front that I was a lowly enlisted rank in the Air Force, but one of my brothers was a pilot as well as an uncle. Based on that, it's some of both. In the lower officer ranks, keeping one's nose clean and putting the time in results in advancement. Once the higher ranks are reached, where slots are limited, it's a case of filling in the right squares (assignments), politics, and merit. That starts kicking in around the rank of bird colonel and above.

Disregarding the retirement age debate, both are preferred - skill and experience are a great combination. Generally, to get a job with a "big" airline one has to have skill plus experience (and a good dose of luck) since there are usually hundreds, if not thousands, competing for each opening. Skill enables you to handle the extraordinary while experience teaches you that there are situations that skill won't get you out of so it's better not to get into them in the first place. The most dangerous pilots are probably at the two ends of the spectrum - the young hotshot that doesn't have the experience to know that he's fallible or the old experienced pilot that fails to realize that age has taken it's toll on his skills and that he can't necessarily handle situations he could have when younger. Either is capable of getting themselves (and their passengers) into situations they can't get out of.

Jim

jerseyfinn

I completely understand and agree with you on that! Although the moderator deleted the individual's comment, a couple of other posters had already replied with quotes and folks can still see what the individual said. It's not nice and that person should be ashamed of themselves.

Working in the OR where I see people at their best and their worst, you attempt to try to understhand them and reserve final judgement until you're more informed. I myself try to keep an even keel ( or at least bail the water out if I do blow my top at someone). I looked at the individual's user sheet and saw that he was a recent member with few posts, so I hoped for the best. But now I've pulled up his threads and read what he says in general. He most frequently has nothing constructive to say ( he comes from PSA ).

My own take now is that this guy should not be flying a plane ( or at least not the one that I'm in ). It's way beyond bad virtual behavior. Most likely, some folks on USAv know who he is and the rule of the mob will rub a scarlet letter onto his forehead for all to see. He's definitely someone who isn't worthy of a promotion.

That said, I guess that the rest of the non-productive circular talk there is simply folks venting anger and frustration at continued bad news. But the sun will come up and the big birds will take off. Let's hope things settle out and find a new equilibrium for beleagured east folks. We're flying on Wednesday and are hoping for nice skies and a smooth flight.

Barry

warbo

Unions are there to protect employees rights. Why should loyal key employees lose their seniority, have their pensions decimated, and endure massive pay cuts when the senior management are coining in the cash?

OK, the European perspective is different, and perhaps a little socialist. But I'm all for that if it protects employees rights and looks after their and their families' futures. Even here, there are way too many senior managers walking away from companies with a big fat wad while leaving redundancies and lost pensions for the ordinary folks behind them in their wake. Morally, it's a disgrace.

GaryZ

Thanks Jim for the nice ex-insider insight

I think your current decision not to post on the 'other' board is a good one, and hopefully others will not drag their debate over here.

BoeingBoy

Agreed. Hopefully the only debate here will be what, if any, effect this might have on the people that really matter - all of you that buy the tickets and make US' existence (and the pilot's jobs) possible.

Jim

Mrp Alert

Is HAL at PHX reading this or an airport operator

tommyleo

Ah, the old union vs. management debate.

Here's why senior management get paid so much: there are relatively few people in this world who are qualified to at least try to run an airline (or any large corporation). Even though many of us on this board complain a lot, I doubt that any of us could actually run an airline. The skill set necessary to run an airline is enormous, and few people have those skills. In order to attract people who can run a large corporation, corporations must pay these people a lot of money -- or else these managers will go to another big company who will pay them what they are worth.

Unfortunately for most union workers (even pilots), their positions can more easily be filled by other people who can do the job. So they have little leverage. Being unionized helps give them some leverage, but it's not much help when the company may collapse anyway.

Union or not, when you work for a company, you are always at the mercy of the success of the company. It's the risk you take when you work for someone else. Unfortunately, few people who work for formerly successful companies considered what would happen to them if the company were to go sour.

alanh

There's an article on this subject in today's Arizona Republic.

martin33

it shouldn't be. this all started out as the old union vs. union debate.

If US had been bought by AA instead of HP, APA would have stapled the US pilots firmly to the bottom of their list. That's what the acquired party essentially faces as the worst case scenario. At the other extreme, the d.o.h.-at-either-firm method is what the AFA forced upon the flight attendants, much to the chagrin of the HP side's members. ALPA policy is supposed to be a deliberate balance somewhere in between, balancing calendar seniorities against career expectations in devising a merged list.

joshua-bwi

I'm suprised someone else didn't post this already...


http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?c...1-be2657c45d95

Will Rank Lower Than More Recent Hires At America West
An arbitrator ruled this week that some 1,800 pilots at US Airways will return to their jobs at the airline, now merged with America West, lower on the seniority-list totem pole than when they left. More recent hires by America West, prior to the merger, will hold higher positions.
The only exceptions will be 517 US Airways veterans who fly routes to Europe. They will remain at the top of the combined list, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. But that's little consolation to the rank-and-file on the flight line.
"Our pilots are infuriated," US Airways pilots spokesman Arnie Gentile told the paper. "Absolutely infuriated. [Seniority] is everything. It's career goals, it's money, it's time off, weekends off, vacation. It's who gets to ride in the airplane. It's everything."
The arbitrator's decision reflects the generally stronger position America West maintained throughout the merger, a source close to the proceedings, who wished to remain anonymous, told ANN. While the combined airline carries the name US Airways, it is headed by former America West CEO Doug Parker, and is based at AW's former headquarters in Tempe, AZ.
US Airways pilot Bill Pollock, who once chaired the airline's branch of the Air Line Pilots Association, says the ruling ignores sacrifices pilots at US Airways made throughout two bankruptcies within two years, prior to the merger. He says if ALPA lets the arbitrator's ruling stand,
it "could be the straw the breaks the camel's back."
"Our national union must see that this is corrected before permanent damage is done," Pollock said. "When you have nothing left to lose, you entertain extreme actions, one of them being kicking (the Air Line Pilots Association) off of the US Airways property."
The decision will also further complicate efforts to create a single contract for pilots at America West and US Airways, still operating under their own contracts after two years.
"The contract is no longer our main focus," ALPA spokesman Gentile said "We are just too busy right now to deal with that," adding "all avenues" are being considered to protest the arbitrator's decision.
US Airways spokesman Phil Gee expressed hope a single contract for all pilots might still be reached before the end of the year. But that's likely wishful thinking.
"I've never seen USAir pilots this mad," one Pittsburgh pilot told the Post-Gazette.

FWAAA

Someone did post it, some 10 days ago:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=689600

To be fair, thread title on the existing thread doesn't give much clue about the content.

Greg P.

Is the arbitration binding? Why would US want to do that to their pilots? What's the advantage to the company?

BoeingBoy

Yes

This was strictly an intra-union process - the company played no role

Remains to be seen if there is one.

Jim

jimcfsus

From this morning's USA Today (and yesterday's Arizona Republic)

A snip...

Last weekend, shortly after US Airways pilots learned where they rank on a long-awaited seniority list, the airline's on-time performance plunged.

Half the Arizona-based airline's flights were delayed on Sunday — levels not seen since its March meltdown — but without the reservation-systems problems or winter weather to blame.

Coincidence or concerted slowdown?

The airline attributed the poor performance to packed planes and said it held flights to avoid stranding fliers.

But dozens of pilots privately tell a different story. They say some former US Airways pilots on the East Coast — frustrated that many now rank below less-tenured America West pilots — didn't show up for work, did the minimum required or took their time on routine items.

PHL

It's sad for the rest of the company and its employees because this could do the whole airline in. Then there will be tens of thousands of people on the unemployment line.

If this trend continues, the stock will plunge, the airline will continue to lose business, spend the cash and be ready for another suitor to swoop in. But those suitors won't do that now that they know how the unions play. So they start circling the carcas and wait for chapter 7 to open up and they come in and pick apart the scraps.

I work for a very large company in PHL where the sales and consulting force that travels week in and out are actively booking away from US. I'm sure this isn't the only company that has been doing this, either.