Everyone’s talking about it...

[digits_]

Some pay scales out there have lost all touch with reality. In an ideal world, your pay is an indicator as to the value you bring to a company.
That means your pay increases most in the first few years at the company, not in the last.

I think your pay does rise the steepest in the first years at most airlines.

I think formula pay absolutely is designed to represent and pay for the value you bring the company. weight/speed/responsibility

Or perhaps I should say relative value. Unfortunately, pilots in this country, even the new hires on the fast track, no longer are being paid for the value we bring.

Jazz

If we assume upgrades after one year, we can focus only on the captain scale. We see that in year 5 and 6 you have some bigger jumps. The jump from year 1 to year 2, is the same as year 10 to year 11. That doesn't make sense. Your value should increase most from year 1 to year 2.

AC
(source: https://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/air ... air_canada)
See the flat pay discussion. Doesn't make sense there is a big jump in year 5 (for most FOs)

Westjet
(source: https://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/air ... an/westjet)
FO jumps most from 2 to 3 and 4 to 5.


All that while the most significant investment that an airline makes in a pilot happens in year 1.

All these jumps can be explained as a result from negotiations between unions and management. Determine where most pilots on the scale are, and give the biggest raises there were the least pilots are located, but it doesn't make sense from a value to the company perspective.


If the biggest jumps were to happen in year 1-2, I could see a more significant amount of experienced people be willing to take the big pay cut for one year. Now they often have to wait 5 years for a significant raise, at which time the collective agreements could have been changed.

[flying4dollars]

Hahahaha.

Well there you go.

Explains a lot.

Buddy has zero experience or credibility to make assumptions.

I agree the flight planning being done for you helps, but like the other guy higher up said, when I did do it, it was a morning ritual while drinking my coffee and wasn't all that hard.

The challenging part of being in the left seat of a 705 machine has really nothing to do with basic control of the aircraft. Anyone who's done the job would know that. When things get really fun is middle of winter, 6 legs, dealing with deicing, take off alternates, actual alternates, CRFI into fun places like Ft st John, and all while trying to stay on sked for the day with a 500 hour pilot with you in the right seat. And that's just what I can think of off the top of my head. If something breaks then the real fun begins. Ever have to deal with dead boots on arrival into YVR with moderate to severe icing? Let me tell you it's not ideal.

Agreed!

Flying the airplane isn't really that hard if you have a decent amount of experience. It's managing the aircraft, the crew and the cockpit. Though conversely to the 500 hour inexperienced pilot, you can actually have a worse day with a 5,000+ hour FO who tries to pushback everything you do because he or she has the mentality that they should be a captain. I've actually had more pleasant experiences with low time and inexperienced FO's who care to learn vs experienced guys who feel they know it all and are just waiting for their left seat bid to be accepted. So there are always caveats to the experience levels when quantified by hours.

[rudder]

All that while the most significant investment that an airline makes in a pilot happens in year 1.

All these jumps can be explained as a result from negotiations between unions and management. Determine where most pilots on the scale are, and give the biggest raises there were the least pilots are located, but it doesn't make sense from a value to the company perspective.


If the biggest jumps were to happen in year 1-2, I could see a more significant amount of experienced people be willing to take the big pay cut for one year. Now they often have to wait 5 years for a significant raise, at which time the collective agreements could have been changed.

Firstly, pay scales are negotiated (except in the case where you get screwed over by the Minister of Labour).

Secondly, there is a huge difference between a carrier with 60-80% career attrition (regional) and a carrier with 1% career attrition (AC).

So, it there is $1 to be spent - where is it best spent? Very different answer for one segment of the industry vs another.

Make no mistake, there are gross flaws in most of the pilot pay scales in Canada. This has not corrected itself as it has in the US. Personally, I would not waste the bargaining capital to fix it. Let the experience problem continue to manifest itself and eventually the employer will need to make changes. But those changes should not come with a price tag. Time for the employers to realize that the pilot pay honeymoon is soon ending.

[ogc]

I didn't know that pilots who are flying 705 could do their own flight planning?...

I believe it has something to do with total amount of seats at the operator and what category they are in (704 705) if you need co authority dispatch.

[Dash.Trash]

I didn't know that pilots who are flying 705 could do their own flight planning?...

I believe it has something to do with total amount of seats at the operator and what category they are in (704 705) if you need co authority dispatch.

IIRC, in order to have more than 3 705 category A/C in the air at a time, you need co-authority dispatch. I know of a company that had 3 Saabs, then got a 4th. But they couldn’t all be in the air at once because they didn’t have proper dispatch.

I could be mistaken though.

[Canoehead]

I’ve been at Jazz for 20 years and I’ve never had to worry about the weather at my planned alternate. My dispatcher is sending me info on a new alternate and fuel requirements before I even know it’s changing. And if I’m watching weather at my destination change I know my dispatcher is watching just as close and dispatch in conjunction with other people in the room are making plans for if we miss.

Funny. I've been at Jazz roughly the same amount of time, and I've caught my dispatcher "sleeping at the switch" on more than a few occasions.

Only takes one time. The bottom line is, the dispatcher is not the one taking responsibility for the flight. They can plan all they want, but the reality is that when we set takeoff power, the buck stops with the pointy end.

Anyone who thinks there's no concern with 1500 hour Captains in a 705 regulation operation is naive.

[derateNO]

I’ve been at Jazz for 20 years and I’ve never had to worry about the weather at my planned alternate. My dispatcher is sending me info on a new alternate and fuel requirements before I even know it’s changing. And if I’m watching weather at my destination change I know my dispatcher is watching just as close and dispatch in conjunction with other people in the room are making plans for if we miss.

Funny. I've been at Jazz roughly the same amount of time, and I've caught my dispatcher "sleeping at the switch" on more than a few occasions.

Only takes one time. The bottom line is, the dispatcher is not the one taking responsibility for the flight. They can plan all they want, but the reality is that when we set takeoff power, the buck stops with the pointy end.

Anyone who thinks there's no concern with 1500 hour Captains in a 705 regulation operation is naive.

Funny I only had a few years there and I've had more than a few times where my alternate was junk and dispatch didn't get back to me when sent an ACARS.

[GATRKGA]

I’ve been at Jazz for 20 years and I’ve never had to worry about the weather at my planned alternate. My dispatcher is sending me info on a new alternate and fuel requirements before I even know it’s changing. And if I’m watching weather at my destination change I know my dispatcher is watching just as close and dispatch in conjunction with other people in the room are making plans for if we miss.

Funny. I've been at Jazz roughly the same amount of time, and I've caught my dispatcher "sleeping at the switch" on more than a few occasions.

Only takes one time. The bottom line is, the dispatcher is not the one taking responsibility for the flight. They can plan all they want, but the reality is that when we set takeoff power, the buck stops with the pointy end.

Anyone who thinks there's no concern with 1500 hour Captains in a 705 regulation operation is naive.

And the funny part is that the naive ones, are usually the 1500 hour 705 captains themselves who think one season as an FO where they got to see some things, and got feedback from their "superiors" how "great of a captain" they will make, somehow made them ready for command. I'm not saying sit there for 10, 000 hours before you upgrade. But 1500 hours is purely, in my opinion, not enough time to be in charge. Type A dispatch or not, you need more time to be responsible for an image that has a multi-million-dollar public relations/interest team behind it to protect its identity.

Put one of these kids in a sticky situation, and they will look as frazzled as their FO on wtf to do now. How many Q400's has encore written off now that hasn't been publicly announced? The one in YEG recently was a blatant fail. Or the sky regional "training captain" who managed to tail strike an E175 in ORD with a checker in the jumpseat? How about the rouge flight descending into terrain in Huatulco? Or the Jazz Dash 8 that had an MEL'd autopilot with both pilots getting distracted while descending into Castlegar, resulting to a GPWS and an FA with broken bones as a result of the evasive maneuver? The problem isn't just at the regionals. It's widespread. Those cog/psych evals don't show you much when it comes to competency in a flight deck.

The thing is, us older so-called "experienced" folk can sit here and bicker at the matter all we want, ultimately a large part of the problem is the lack of leadership in our industry. Most chief pilots and flight ops supervisors are busy licking the rear ends of their bosses to keep their positions as they navigate the corporate latter, and resultantly aren't actually being leaders in their positions. They resort to some bs "command" upgrade eval, pass the kids through the bucket list, give them a few more tries if they fail so that their snowflake feelings arent hurt, then eventually they give them that 4th bar. This trickles downwards in the company to eventually the kid who thinks that he's ready for responsibility on his wet ATPL, so he can keep up with his peers and get another follower on Instagram. Coupled with 23-year-old art majors that are concerned about their hiring quotas, and you get what you see today. An epic fail in what will be the demise of many upcoming hull losses.

Add to that a system where the kids' priority is keeping up with his buddy who just went captain, and the manager's priority being another days worth of shit taste in his mouth so he can be home for dinner every night.

The system will collapse.

Btw, a huge plus 1 to the poster who talked about 500-hour pilots that can be q400 captain's and 5000 hours pilot's that can't even pass a 705 ride. The problem being, somewhere between 500 and 5000 hours is where that 500-hour pilot will get the exposure to make 5000-hour decisions with peoples lives and a carrier's legacy on his/her hands, even if at 500 hours the kid was super sharp to sit left seat of a q400.

And to those that sit here and talk about it being done around the world - that "stellar" training program resulted in a 330 at the bottom of the Atlantic as well... It's a delicate thing this flying career. And as someone so beautifully said, it's hard to put into words. But there is such a thing as the correct sequence of experience before you're truly qualified to be the big cheese, and deal with the difficult service directors... And I, for one, can't even tell you exactly what that is. If I was to create a few hashtags for it #attitude #beattentive #resourceful #doasmanyjobsasyoucaninaviation #5040302010-thousand footers-not-halfway-down-the-runway?

[doiwannabeapilot]

It's a money problem plain and simple.

No, its a systemic problem brought on by the concept of seniority numbers.

If an airline could hire qualified people and put them directly into the seat they are qualified for, rather than 'bottom of the list', there would be a flood of experience coming home from overseas.

But the bottom line is, airline management loves the seniority system because that seniority number is the golden handcuffs that prevent folks from moving on to greener pastures, the only way into a greener pasture is the long slow climb thru another seniority list.

"concept of seniority numbers"

Well, then lets ask our unions to bargain in the next contract to end seniority numbers and YOS payscales.

and the airlines' h.r. department can renegotiate salaries. Interview and assess pilots and pay them whatever they think they are actually worth in terms of experience and skill, fuel savings, etc.

Pilots can have bidding wars with the HR at different airlines........."ABC has offered me this much, can you match it XYZ ?"

Only 40 odd days til April 1st !

[derateNO]

Some pay scales out there have lost all touch with reality. In an ideal world, your pay is an indicator as to the value you bring to a company.
That means your pay increases most in the first few years at the company, not in the last.

I think your pay does rise the steepest in the first years at most airlines.

I think formula pay absolutely is designed to represent and pay for the value you bring the company. weight/speed/responsibility

Or perhaps I should say relative value. Unfortunately, pilots in this country, even the new hires on the fast track, no longer are being paid for the value we bring.

The problem is not everyone is starting as an EMB FO or RP anymore. Now we have people being forced into WB FO positions and being told they're "so lucky for how amazing it is they can be a 777 FO already.". While they sit there trying to smile knowing the company just took their only WB FO bid away from them for $55k and years of reserve. Good times.

[altiplano]

Short term problem with a negative affect on very few who are just joining. Be patient, it week sort itself out.

They can bid away from it if required.
They have other bids, unrestricted.

Most of those guys will bid NB CA when they can anyway.

Don't be in a rush to solve the company's problems, you start giving away stuff and fucking with with contract, something else ends up out of whack and the company screws us.

[GATRKGA]

Some pay scales out there have lost all touch with reality. In an ideal world, your pay is an indicator as to the value you bring to a company.
That means your pay increases most in the first few years at the company, not in the last.

I think your pay does rise the steepest in the first years at most airlines.

I think formula pay absolutely is designed to represent and pay for the value you bring the company. weight/speed/responsibility

Or perhaps I should say relative value. Unfortunately, pilots in this country, even the new hires on the fast track, no longer are being paid for the value we bring.

The problem is not everyone is starting as an EMB FO or RP anymore. Now we have people being forced into WB FO positions and being told they're "so lucky for how amazing it is they can be a 777 FO already.". While they sit there trying to smile knowing the company just took their only WB FO bid away from them for $55k and years of reserve. Good times.

This is the problem with the Canadian aviation industry, and I'd even argue our culture as a whole. We are sold mediocrity as if it's this amazing royaltyesque lifestyle. AC is sold to us as the end all be all. It's not. Maybe in this country, but this country is also taxing you half your paycheque for this so beloved career because of what we make. So to be lucky to fly a 777 is slapping lipstick on a pig. And the people falling for it are also part of the problem.

['97 Tercel]

Nothing will change here until this country adopts the US 1500hr rule - and unfortunately that will take our own version of a Colgan crash...maybe.

[ayseven]

Correct me if I am wrong, but Colgan had two relatively experienced people driving. One if them didn't know how to fly, and I think the other one panicked. 1500 hrs had nothing to do with it. There have always been incidents, that very few people ever talked about, or quickly forgot.

So many people want to get into management. Maybe they should apply for those jobs. Companies are not stupid, but do not always explain themselves very well. I am all for more experience, but the airlines know what they want, and I guess they get it. Some of us never made it, but that was the airlines choices. I am just happy some people get to do their dream jobs.

These are just my own observations. I have no real idea, except as a former business owner and pilot.

[co-joe]

Do you folks honestly think it's just a matter of time before the low experience level in the flight deck at Jazz causes a hull loss?

Would each of you fly as a passenger on Jazz/ would you allow your family to fly on Jazz knowing how low the experience level up front is?

[derateNO]

Depends. I'd be sending texts to friends to find out who the crew is.

[digits_]

Depends. I'd be sending texts to friends to find out who the crew is.

If you're that concerned, have you SMS'd the "bad" crews?

[GATRKGA]

Depends. I'd be sending texts to friends to find out who the crew is.

If you're that concerned, have you SMS'd the "bad" crews?

No, we leave that to the demographics of Millenials that SMS themselves for forgetting to wear a safety west and a rotating beacon on their head when they went for their own walk around.

Or the idiots that SMS the front end because they think a call to the cockpit, that went unanswered due to a busy re-route transmission in foreign airspace, to ask them to bring the temp up, was a safety concern for the cabin.

You're a special something digits.

[digits_]

Depends. I'd be sending texts to friends to find out who the crew is.

If you're that concerned, have you SMS'd the "bad" crews?

You're a special something digits.

Thank you. Does that mean you'd do nothing?

If you are concerned about the flying skills of a crew, to that level that you would pull your friends off the flight, you would still happily let 79 other people board the plane?

The way I see it, statements like those on a public forum, which could possibly hurt a named company, are either an exaggeration or they are not.
If they are an exaggeration, they are only polluting the discussion, and shouldn't be made
If they are not an exaggeration, and the situation is as dire as described, then I'd say it is your bloody duty to report it.

I'm sure people would love to boast with the inevitable "I told you so" if someting happens, but I'd like to think it would be much more impressive if employees of the company actually did something to correct a potentially unsafe situation.

You can make jokes about SMS all you want, that doesn't mean it shouldn't be used if safety is actually compromised.

[derateNO]

They are capable of flying the plane, they've passed training and don't necessarily do things unsafe. I'm just not too confident in the ability to get things done if there's an emergency or shit hits the fan. Lack of SA or just overall experience.

I flew with many FOs who were OK but now I've seen them on Captain lists... But they passed training and the PIC assessment so who am I to say otherwise. I can however make a decision not to fly on a plane piloted by some of these individuals.