@dublinpilot
Thanks for that post. An airline pilot!
Malibuflyer wrote:
That is a very good question: How much does Southwest pay for somebody who just got it’s CPL and is hundreds of hours away from getting an ATPL?
Eh, no CPL’s in the US right seat. ATP. And Southwest pay well.
As much as I hate regulation, I think the US 1500hr/ATP rule was a good one. It had instant results on wages and hiring. I know there are fewer opportunities to build hours in Europe, but it would end the current slave trade overnight and force bottom dwellers to either step up or get out of the business and go and die. It’s not a human right to be able to fly to Bari from Stansted for £29, after all. Aviation needs to stop racing towards the bottom.
AdamFrisch wrote:
It’s not a human right to be able to fly to Bari from Stansted for £29, after all. Aviation needs to stop racing towards the bottom.
Drift…
I keep hearing people talk about these 30quid cheap tickets… now maybe its just me, but the cheapest ticket Ive ever bought was still over £100 one way. Within Europe I usually seem to buy at 250-350 return.
Just sayin’… SD..
I keep hearing people talk about these 30quid cheap tickets… now maybe its just me, but the cheapest ticket Ive ever bought was still over £100 one way.
True, and yet some airline „pylutes“ are koolaided (rose tinted glasses) and dumb enough to think it’s about ticket prices („Flying is cheap so I can’t earn more that’s ok“).
Ryanair has billions of cash. They could hire every one and pay double salary and pension without harm.
The average ticket on a 737 or A3xx has to be around €150, to recover the DOC of the flight from say central Europe to Greece.
I have seen RYA tickets for £400 (Pula to Gatwick for example) and they must sell lots of those.
AdamFrisch wrote:
Eh, no CPL’s in the US right seat. ATP. And Southwest pay well.
That is exactly what I was trying to say – many people compare EU to US entry level airline salaries and “forget” to mention that this is far away from being a like for like comparison as US “entry” levels have hundreds of hours more experience.
dublinpilot wrote:
Honestly, I think that’s unfair.
I don’t think so. It is just to point out that there are different people with different preferences and requirements. I know many pilots who actually like the “civil servant” type of employment they have at Lufthansa. But I also know many that are actually happy that they are self employed (some for tax reasons, some because they run other jobs in parallel, some because they just like perceived freedom, …).
The problem is that some people who can not imagine that others like to be self employed always demand that such engagement models should be banned by law.
AdamFrisch wrote:
As much as I hate regulation, I think the US 1500hr/ATP rule was a good one. It had instant results on wages and hiring. I know there are fewer opportunities to build hours in Europe, but it would end the current slave trade overnight and force bottom dwellers to either step up or get out of the business and go and die.
The US rule was imposed after an accident which exposed training and crew composition on commuter airlines to be deficient. Primarily, it was possible there to upgrade real fast and on demanding airplanes. A 737 is much less demanding than a Dash 8 or heaven forbid an ATR (which should not be flying anywhere there is icing in the first place). So it was a safety concern which prompted this, not the idea of getting better pay out of it.
In Europe getting 1500 hours to be employed by an airline is next to impossible. What it would require is that there are jobs in between which you can do with a CPL/IR. I believe in the US most people scrape their hours together with instructing (and what do 1500 hours in a C150 help?) or getting hunger jobs flying what you can do with a CPL/IR. As far as I know, this does not work in Europe alone for the fact that basically all Biz Jet operations also require ATPL type FO’s these days.
Apart, there have been no incidents or accidents which in general would prompt such a move, as opposed to the US. Mainly because low hours pairings are much less common, even in the lowest cost airlines, it takes considerably longer to get your PIC than it did in the US commuters. Ryan, of all people, have an impeccable safety record, mainly because they know that everyone outside Ryan is just waiting for them to have an accident so they could kill them off. There are some less than optimum outfits in some parts of Europe, which get called out from time to time, but their safety problems are cultural, not the way they hire people. So a totally different situation.
If you look at it carefully, the way things work in Europe is not that different. Instead of crop dusting or scraping flight hours by instructing, people here get on programs like the one offered by Ryan, earn their hours and once they are there, leave for greener pastures. The same thing goes for low pay airlines even within larger airline groups, by far not all entry level pilots end up with Ryan. Quite a few go onto biz jets, others to similar outfits or even entry level airlines which fly for larger operators.
The main problem is, that flight schools and recruiters work with inaccurate commercials (which again is absolutely normal in advertizing, it is one legal form of lying brought to perfection) fantasizing about pilot shortages which never existed and how great your chances are when they are not. Hence, the market is totally overheated. A friend I have in one of the entry level airlines told me they get 150 applications per job. No wonder this erodes employment, it does so in any other profession where there is such a massive discrepancy in applicants to available slots. In other trades, the same problem applies (e.g. teaching jobs in higher schools are totally overcrowded with applicants) but it is better known.
Why this whole whining makes me angry is that EVERYBODY KNOWS 100% what is going on but is in DENIAL because the DREAM is stronger than ratio. This is not something which is restricted to aviation either, but here it is a dream which, with sufficient sacrifices, can in most cases be satisfied one way or the other. People KNOW it, and THINK they are ready to do it just to get their dream materialized and quite a few are actually happy doing it. The others have made the wrong professional choice, so what, also that happens all the time.
If you look at all the sad characters who end up on talent shows or even worse, girls going into modelling, you get the same kind of thing. Exploitation of hopefuls but totally unrealistic young people who have a dream where 1 out of 1000 succeeds. Talk a cut throth profession with a suicide rate higher than in Japan. And those who fail whine of course.
The only way to stop such schemes short of outlawing them, which then is going to do damages elsewhere, is when people finally stop applying for them. But that won’t happen. The prospect of flying a shiny jet and bonking stewardesses on the way is hard wired into far too many people’s brains. Hoping that ratio would win over this is comparable to telling a randy teenager to keep his pants zipped. As recent examples show, this doesn’t work even for elderly business magnates and no, I don’t mean Donald Trump but folks who were regarded by many as top intellectual and integral until their marriages fail spectacularly due to constant infidelity.
It’s human nature, nothing else. You make your choices and you have to live with them.
If you look at it carefully, the way things work in Europe is not that different. Instead of crop dusting or scraping flight hours by instructing, people here get on programs like the one offered by Ryan, earn their hours and once they are there, leave for greener pastures.
Good post overall. Just adding there are less greener pastures than ryan cadets.
We can all criticise Mr O’Leary and the way he does things. But his business model, like it or not, has been very successful. I once talked with one of his shareholders about how I thought some of his practices were scandalous.
He simply pointed out that he was very happy with his dividends.
Others tried in the past an failed because of pilot’s and cabin crew unions or pressure that was brought on them by a cartel of other airlines.
Does anyone remember Freddie Laker. Or the initial problems of Virgin Atlantic?
So whilst I criticise RYR and get angry when I feel I have been duped but I still occasionally fly them. Sometimes it’s the cost of a ticket and sometimes it’s the route.
It will be interesting to see what will happen if they do start long haul.
Also AIUI they have both a very good safety record and are high in the punctuality ratings.
gallois wrote:
Does anyone remember Freddie Laker.
Sure do. But he never had the problems with his staff. His problem was that BA killed him because he undermined their business. Freddy was a true business man but he was well liked and respected by his staff. BA tried the same with Virgin but failed. Maybe because Sir Richard knew what to expect and was ready for it. Freddy was not.
gallois wrote:
It will be interesting to see what will happen if they do start long haul.
I think O’Leary knows better. See Norwegian. Long Haul is a very risky business, particularly now when the flight plan changes every day due to covid lockdowns. And make no mistake, those will remain on the long haul routes for MANY MANY years. So long haul really is only for airlines who have state backing, official or not. Apart, mass travel long haul is dead for the same reasons for the forseeable future.
