Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

BALPA video on the future or airline pilot jobs

The argument hat “piloting a smaller plane with less passengers therefore exposes the airline to less risk” would be correct if risk were not provisioned against (or insured for) also based on event probability. A lesser experienced pilot flying more per day will be a scenario with a higher expected shortfall than a long-haul pilot with four flights per month.

T28
Switzerland

If you do the maths it doesn’t make any difference. Let’s say (to keep numbers simple) there’s a 1 in 10 million chance of paying out for people dying on any flight.

On any given DAY that means an airline should expect to pay out for:
- 0.00005 deaths per day if a plane carries 500 people long haul (one flight only)
- 0.0001 deaths per day if a plane carries 250 people short haul, but does 4 sectors

We're glad you're here
Oxford EGTK

300 passengers versus 30 at any one time is a big ratio to overcome in a consequence x probability calculation for any given pilot. Also if the single accident prevented by a more experienced pilot is large enough to put the airline out of business, PSA as an example, I think the airline would want to disproportionately guard against it.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 08 Nov 17:37

Surely the reason for long haul paying more is the antisocial lifestyle.

Very high rates of marriage breakup, etc.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

“Lose a home, gain two stone”

Posts are personal views only.
Oxfordshire, United Kingdom

Surely the reason for long haul paying more is the antisocial lifestyle. Very high rates of marriage breakup, etc.

…is the same regardless of short/longhaul.

I understand why you would think that, but the opposite is the case.

Most network airlines flying short/medium haul trips one is usually working and gone more days per month than longhaul (network airlines overnight planes for the early morning feed all over europe).

Most lowco airlines have pretty bad terms, opening/closing bases at short notice, working the maximum legal hours possible etc…

always learning
LO__, Austria

The only reason I can logically think of is that it’s a hangover from the early days of international aviation when long haul involved a lot of stops along the way and aviation was far less automated and standardised.

Back then, flying multiple sectors to get to Hong Kong was much more complex than doing a load of return flights to Paris – and therefore warranted more senior and experienced pilots, and more pay.

Today that isn’t the case (particularly with the way LoCos work their people) but it hasn’t been in senior pilots’ interests (who also are the union representatives) to change it.

We're glad you're here
Oxford EGTK

I honestly don’t think that kind of analytical design has gone into it, and cannot see how (these days anyway) accidents happen frequently enough that their risk would determine pay and responsibilities.

I would say it’s just historic. The most senior pilots generally fly the biggest aeroplanes and get paid the most….. bigger boys = bigger toys.

In fact, once modern management gets its hands on an airline I doubt if individual pilots are viewed as anything other than identical units of economic productivity that can, should they depart for pastures new, be replaced by the next cab off the rank.

EGLM & EGTN

“units of economic productivity”
The bigger the plane, the bigger the economic productivity?

Maoraigh
EGPE, United Kingdom

Some outlets still have the audacity to make such false claims and ruin people’s lives:

Aviation will need 27,000 new pilots in 2021 as shortage continues despite downturn

Unless airlines start providing free * to CPL/IR holders, there IS no pilot shortage going on!

Last Edited by Dimme at 09 Nov 21:05
ESME, ESMS
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top