SkyWest, Inc. Confirms Firm Order for Seven E175 Jets for Alaska

777_Jackpot

Bang!
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Posts
175
Total Time
6000+
What about them? I rather those 175s be operated by Alaska Airline pilots under the terms of their collective bargaining agreement. Those are better compensated jobs at a better company.
It's not all about pay rates. I don't know why you and other pilots always look at just pay rates. Your airline isn't even at the top of the compensation ladder among regionals and you think it stacks up to Alaska Airlines?




See my post above on how it's absurd to simply compare pay rates. As for quality of companies, yes it's subjective. I never said Skywest pilots would say it's a bad place to work. But I would be willing to bet that the majority of them would rather work for Alaska than Skywest.
Do I need to say more?
 

DYLIN

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 16, 2003
Posts
237
Total Time
A few
Do I need to say more?
The point is, Jackpot, SKYW is basically a joke compared to any mainline carrier. The pay, the [lack of] work rules, the hotels, the retirement plan, disability, etc. Not one single category is better. Not that it's much different than most other fee-for-departure airlines in this regard, because they're in just the same boat -- but the point is, a job at SKYW is no good in the long run compared to a legacy such as Alaska.
 

Nevets

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Posts
2,431
Total Time
5000
Do I need to say more?

I didn't make myself clear then. Compensation is not just pay rates or salary/wages or even what's on your W2. On top of work rules and soft time, there is matching funds, b fund, profit sharing, company's share of health care insurance premiums, etc. Again, except for maybe profit sharing, none of those categories of compensation is industry leading among regionals, much less Alaska Airlines or any other legacy, LCC, or ULCC.

It's not meant to be as a personal attack. It's just meant as a statement of fact that if these pilot jobs were at the brand airline, it would be a higher compensated job than at any regional.
 
Last edited:

777_Jackpot

Bang!
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Posts
175
Total Time
6000+
The point is, Jackpot, SKYW is basically a joke compared to any mainline carrier. The pay, the [lack of] work rules, the hotels, the retirement plan, disability, etc. Not one single category is better. Not that it's much different than most other fee-for-departure airlines in this regard, because they're in just the same boat -- but the point is, a job at SKYW is no good in the long run compared to a legacy such as Alaska.
That is incredible ironic; SKYW (or any FFD carrier) "is basically a joke compared to any mainline carrier" because of the very arguments that started this discussion. Specifically, the travesty that is the very thought that a FFD carrier should get additional flying (on an E-R-J mind you) that may come at the expense of a "mainline" carrier. Yet, in order to generate revenue sufficient to become "not a joke", you have to fly larger aircraft on traditional "mainline routes". Those who actually buy into this type of logic must find it comforting knowing that so long as they add their two cents (no pun intended) to the argument that one niche must suffer as to subsidize the other, they will have a long and happy career in aviation. That is until they inevitably put their applications in at one of those FFD carriers that they criticized after their "mainline" jobs disappear as a result of artificial job security and a general immoderation with respect to what can be reasonably demanded for accomplishing identical duties.
 

777_Jackpot

Bang!
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Posts
175
Total Time
6000+
It's not meant to be as a personal attack. It's just meant as a statement of fact that if these pilot jobs were at the brand airline, it would be a higher compensated job than at any regional.
I don't take it personally, its what needs to happen in this industry in my opinion, honest discussions about the path forward. But, I would argue that if enough of "these pilot jobs" were to go to INC., higher compensation would naturally follow. Would it come at an expense to others? Yes, of course. Principles of scarcity apply to airlines as they do any other industry. I just think we (as an industry) have become overly infatuated with the notion of "protecting mainline jobs" as if they were lent to the FFD carriers in some sort of "hey can you hold on to this for a second for me" type of deal after mainline carriers hemorrhaged ASMs in reaction to the economy's downturn.
 

Nevets

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Posts
2,431
Total Time
5000
I don't take it personally, its what needs to happen in this industry in my opinion, honest discussions about the path forward. But, I would argue that if enough of "these pilot jobs" were to go to INC., higher compensation would naturally follow. Would it come at an expense to others? Yes, of course. Principles of scarcity apply to airlines as they do any other industry. I just think we (as an industry) have become overly infatuated with the notion of "protecting mainline jobs" as if they were lent to the FFD carriers in some sort of "hey can you hold on to this for a second for me" type of deal after mainline carriers hemorrhaged ASMs in reaction to the economy's downturn.

We all know it's fact that the reason this flying gets outsourced is because it's done more cheaply at FFD carriers. That's really the crux of my point. If it wasn't true, they wouldn't go to the expense of doing it while risking their brand. And part of why it's cheaply (be necessity since you are duplicating all other facets of the brand airline) is because its employees are compensated a lot less than the mainline employees. The biggest controllable cost is employee compensation and the biggest compensation pie is those of pilots.

I understand that others and maybe you will have opposite bias than me and others that are trying to get out of the FFD world. In the end, mainline pilots "gave" this flying away or as you put it, have lend it out. If one of these days they decide to scope the entire brand, there is nothing that FFD pilots or management will be able to do about it.
 

777_Jackpot

Bang!
Joined
Mar 22, 2004
Posts
175
Total Time
6000+
We all know it's fact that the reason this flying gets outsourced is because it's done more cheaply at FFD carriers. That's really the crux of my point. If it wasn't true, they wouldn't go to the expense of doing it while risking their brand. And part of why it's cheaply (be necessity since you are duplicating all other facets of the brand airline) is because its employees are compensated a lot less than the mainline employees. The biggest controllable cost is employee compensation and the biggest compensation pie is those of pilots.

I understand that others and maybe you will have opposite bias than me and others that are trying to get out of the FFD world. In the end, mainline pilots "gave" this flying away or as you put it, have lend it out. If one of these days they decide to scope the entire brand, there is nothing that FFD pilots or management will be able to do about it.
I am sorry but "its done more cheaply at FFD carriers" is just factually incorrect. First, mainline carriers don't fly RJs (the exception being AMR, Republic and JB) so the comparison falls apart unless you can make the comparison on a rate/rate basis for identical (or nearly so) airframes. Second, as was illustrated earlier, comparing mainline RJ rates to FFD RJ rates reveals near compensation parity (sorry General, when they negotiate a better rate at AMR and Republic we can have this argument again... until then they are still flying the ERJ for those rates and are thus subject to scrutinization). Do mainline carriers have higher hourly pay rates overall? Yes, but in general they also fly bigger equipment so it is only natural for them to have a higher rate. But again if you consider it on a $/hr/seat basis the FFD carriers are perfectly inline with compensation rates at mainline carriers. The exception would be FO pay rates which is disproportionately low on the FFD side and I would agree needs to be fixed dramatically. So, when put in the context of what began this discussion (i.e. ERJs should be flown by mainline pilots) everything suggests that the those rates, that don't exist at Alaska mind you, would be similar to those of a FFD counterpart, or roughly 1.25 $/hr/seat. Could this change? Sure, as General Lee said there are negotiations coming, but until then this is what you can go on and not be considered speculative. All of this does of course neglect none pay rate compensation topics (retirement etc.) But I leave that for another thread.

And I think it substantially easier to make the argument that mainline flying was "lost to" rather than "given/lent/whatever to" FFD carriers as you suggest, and the difference is not trival. As such nothing the pilots or management can do about it is a bit of an overstatement, otherwise it would have already been done.
 

Nevets

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Posts
2,431
Total Time
5000
I am sorry but "its done more cheaply at FFD carriers" is just factually incorrect. First, mainline carriers don't fly RJs (the exception being AMR, Republic and JB) so the comparison falls apart unless you can make the comparison on a rate/rate basis for identical (or nearly so) airframes. Second, as was illustrated earlier, comparing mainline RJ rates to FFD RJ rates reveals near compensation parity (sorry General, when they negotiate a better rate at AMR and Republic we can have this argument again... until then they are still flying the ERJ for those rates and are thus subject to scrutinization). Do mainline carriers have higher hourly pay rates overall? Yes, but in general they also fly bigger equipment so it is only natural for them to have a higher rate. But again if you consider it on a $/hr/seat basis the FFD carriers are perfectly inline with compensation rates at mainline carriers. The exception would be FO pay rates which is disproportionately low on the FFD side and I would agree needs to be fixed dramatically. So, when put in the context of what began this discussion (i.e. ERJs should be flown by mainline pilots) everything suggests that the those rates, that don't exist at Alaska mind you, would be similar to those of a FFD counterpart, or roughly 1.25 $/hr/seat. Could this change? Sure, as General Lee said there are negotiations coming, but until then this is what you can go on and not be considered speculative. All of this does of course neglect none pay rate compensation topics (retirement etc.) But I leave that for another thread.



And I think it substantially easier to make the argument that mainline flying was "lost to" rather than "given/lent/whatever to" FFD carriers as you suggest, and the difference is not trival. As such nothing the pilots or management can do about it is a bit of an overstatement, otherwise it would have already been done.

No, it's not a subject for another thread. Pay rates alone does not equal total compensation. I don't know why you continue to want to ignore that. Of course work rules, retirement, and insurance adds costs to the mainline carriers! If it wasn't cheaper for the mainline carrier to outsource this flying, they would do it themselves. That is not a controversial statement! For example, take the highest pay rates you have now at Skywest and combine them with Alaska Airlines contract, and guess what? It will be more costly to the carrier and more compensation to the pilot. This isn't rocket science.

As for giving away or losing flying, the point is that neither regional management nor regional pilots have any say in it whatsoever. If the day ever comes that mainline carriers want to do that flying, no FFD airline will be able to do about it. No FFD airline owns their mainline partners' brand and until that changes they are at the whim of another entity. This isn't complicated it either.
 
Top