Você pode nos ajudar a manter o FlightAware gratuito, permitindo anúncios de FlightAware.com. Trabalhamos muito para manter nossa publicidade relevante e discreta para criar uma ótima experiência. É rápido e fácil
permitir anúncios no FlightAware ou, caso prefira, considere nossas
contas premium.
Does anyone else see the irony of the president of a major airline pilots union complaining that too many pilots choose to work overseas at largely non-unionized airlines that have better stability, pay and benefits than largely unionized domestic airlines?.
That pilots give up living and working in their own country because working conditions are much better elsewhere doesn't sound like a resounding endorsement of the value add of union-negotiated collective bargaining agreements.
It could be argued that the rigid pay scales arrived at through collective bargaining, in as far as these deviate from market conditions, contributes to disruption in the industry and the lack of stability at airlines that are arbitrarily restricted by these artificial pay scales.
Sometimes the pay scales get too far out of equilibrium, forcing the employing airline into financial ruin, and only bankruptcy restores equilibrium. This is instability and disruption, that artificially forcing pay scales beyond balance creates.
Isn't is wiser for professionals to be negotiate their pay directly with their employer. Works for other professionals. Seems to be working overseas for many pilots too.
My guess is that without collective bargaining agreements, starting pay for pilots would be better at both mainlines and regionals. Each airline wants to attract the best candidates, and so many would want to pay just slightly more than the others (except spirit of course and others like them).
Conversely, pay at the top would be likely be somewhat lower except the most valuable pilots, eg. those who take on additional instructional or administrative duties to justify the higher wage.
But it seems that in most collective bargaining agreements (certainly at airlines, but potentially elsewhere too), the newest hires (especially future hires) are thrown under the bus to pay for continued increasing pay for pilots with high seniority.
The current mess seems to be a direct consequence of such collusion between senior pilots, their unions and management. It's gotten so bad that working in the Middle East and Asia is sern by many pilots as preferable, even with the insanely long commutes.
That seems a sad condemnation of the added value of the ALPA president's organization to the world. They don't seem to be doing any favors to the airlines they employ their members, nor to low seniority pilots.