Pilot Compensation Up To $590,000 Per Year

[0W-16]

It will attract wrong people. But, by design, they should be washed out.
Are few manage to get thru? Probably.

But, it is absolutely insane to even discuss this pay. We as a society agreed to reward people that truly don’t contribute anything, and we reward them much more.
People who are paid much more just bankrupted 16th largest bank in the US. And we still talk pay for people that are responsible for hundreds of lives.

If you are in a protected class, you won't wash out. The airlines are scared to death of the publicity a "wrongful termination" lawsuit for being racist and/or anti LGBTQXYZ would bring. Those protected class incompetents know they have the airlines by the balls and will sue them in a heartbeat if they try to fire them for their aviation incompetence.

Airlines today are more interested in which left wing organizations you "volunteer" your time for than what your experience and competence is as a pilot. Most airlines don't even do a basic simulator screening during your interview.

United has stated they are targeting women, POC, LGBTQXYZ and any other protected class as a priority.

 

[edyvw]

If you are in a protected class, you won't wash out. The airlines are scared to death of the publicity a "wrongful termination" lawsuit for being racist and/or anti LGBTQXYZ would bring. Those protected class incompetents know they have the airlines by the balls and will sue them in a heartbeat if they try to fire them for their aviation incompetence.

Airlines today are more interested in which left wing organizations you "volunteer" your time for than what your experience and competence is as a pilot. Most airlines don't even do a basic simulator screening during your interview.

United has stated they are targeting women, POC, LGBTQXYZ and any other protected class as a priority.

Ask @Astro14 about company policies.
But, I will say this, “assumption is mother of all screwups.”

 

[0W-16]

Ask @Astro14 about company policies.
But, I will say this, “assumption is mother of all screwups.”

I know all about United's policies and hiring practices as of late. No assumptions being made.

 

[edyvw]

I know all about United's policies and hiring practices as of late. No assumptions being made.

You work for United?

 

[john_pifer]

Very tough lessons have been learned in the past about prioritizing identity over competence in aviation.

Even in the recent past (Prime Air Flight 3591).

I have to think (I hope) that there are policies in place to prevent these kinds of past mistakes.

 

[0W-16]

Very tough lessons have been learned in the past about prioritizing identity over competence in aviation.

Even in the recent past (Prime Air Flight 3591).

I have to think (I hope) that there are policies in place to prevent these kinds of past mistakes.

Sadly, there are none in place. Those incompetent pilots that are a member of a protected class know they yield the power. Identity politics is in charge and big corporations are scared to death to be labeled racist or anti-whatever by some activist group.

 

[y_p_w]

Who's taking bets on how long before this gets locked?

 

[Astro14]

Sadly, there are none in place. Those incompetent pilots that are a member of a protected class know they yield the power. Identity politics is in charge and big corporations are scared to death to be labeled racist or anti-whatever by some activist group.

You make a lot of social comments, with nothing but rock throwing.

Do you work for a major airline? In what capacity?

Or is this all just supposition on your part?

I have put my cards on the table before, but let me reiterate. I’ve been with United Airlines for 26 years. I’ve spent 10 years in the training center.

I am currently an evaluator, and Line Check Pilot, on the 757 and 767.

I have seen firsthand the students that we get, the new pilots that we have been hiring. There are a lot of brand new hires who start out with my fleet, and I have the pleasure of training many of them

The vast majority are extremely impressive, and I’m glad to have them on board.

I have always had extraordinarily high standards. When I used to teach F-14 carrier landings, many careers ended with my decision. I have not backed off of that standard. Ever. In the 30+ years I have been instructing.

There are some pilots hired who are not up to our standards. Those pilots either get the extra training necessary to bring them up to standard, or they are let go to seek other careers.

I have also seen quite a few bitter, entitled, regional jet pilots, who thought they were owed a career at United Airlines.

I have had to listen to their incessant, whining and complaining, while on their jumpseat. Out of courtesy, I do not correct them. They would rather believe that United doesn’t hire people that look like them, while nothing could be further from the truth.

It has nothing to do with quotas, it has everything to do with quality.

There are quite a few pilots, whose ego, and attitude, are incompatible.

Unable to face their own shortcomings, and unable to examine their qualifications, or failures, objectively, their own egos force them into believing unsubstantiated wild conspiracy theories, rather than confront the reality of their own inadequacy.

Your posts sounded a great deal like the diatribe, and foolishness, that I hear in those cockpits.

So, I have put my cards on the table.

I call.

 

[Cujet]

Your posts sounded a great deal like the diatribe, and foolishness, that I hear in those cockpits.

Like Astro14, I hear the very same things from corporate pilots. Let me be clear, there are more than a few corporate pilots who simply are not up to major airline standards. They fly part 91 or 135 (general aviation) and, we hope, get regular training at Flight Safety or other training firms.

I know of one person who was recently "walked out" of Flight Safety because they deserved it. So at least Flight Safety is doing their job in this case.

 

[0W-16]

Like Astro14, I hear the very same things from corporate pilots. Let me be clear, there are more than a few corporate pilots who simply are not up to major airline standards. They fly part 91 or 135 (general aviation) and, we hope, get regular training at Flight Safety or other training firms.

I know of one person who was recently "walked out" of Flight Safety because they deserved it. So at least Flight Safety is doing their job in this case.

Many corporate dudes are cowboys and are very non-standard.

 

[edyvw]

Many corporate dudes are cowboys and are very non-standard.

So, are you working for major airline or this is “knowledge “ similar to Toyota oil pump?

 

[0W-16]

You make a lot of social comments, with nothing but rock throwing.

Do you work for a major airline? In what capacity?

Or is this all just supposition on your part?

I have put my cards on the table before, but let me reiterate. I’ve been with United Airlines for 26 years. I’ve spent 10 years in the training center.

I am currently an evaluator, and Line Check Pilot, on the 757 and 767.

I have seen firsthand the students that we get, the new pilots that we have been hiring. There are a lot of brand new hires who start out with my fleet, and I have the pleasure of training many of them

The vast majority are extremely impressive, and I’m glad to have them on board.

I have always had extraordinarily high standards. When I used to teach F-14 carrier landings, many careers ended with my decision. I have not backed off of that standard. Ever. In the 30+ years I have been instructing.

There are some pilots hired who are not up to our standards. Those pilots either get the extra training necessary to bring them up to standard, or they are let go to seek other careers.

I have also seen quite a few bitter, entitled, regional jet pilots, who thought they were owed a career at United Airlines.

I have had to listen to their incessant, whining and complaining, while on their jumpseat. Out of courtesy, I do not correct them. They would rather believe that United doesn’t hire people that look like them, while nothing could be further from the truth.

It has nothing to do with quotas, it has everything to do with quality.

There are quite a few pilots, whose ego, and attitude, are incompatible.

Unable to face their own shortcomings, and unable to examine their qualifications, or failures, objectively, their own egos force them into believing unsubstantiated wild conspiracy theories, rather than confront the reality of their own inadequacy.

Your posts sounded a great deal like the diatribe, and foolishness, that I hear in those cockpits.

So, I have put my cards on the table.

I call.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/united...t-shortage-graduating-class-women-minorities/

 

[Astro14]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/united...t-shortage-graduating-class-women-minorities/

Nowhere in that article does it say that we lowered standards to make that happen. That is because we absolutely have maintained our standards.

So, is it your contention that women and minorities cannot be good pilots?

Because that sure appears to be your point.

You talked about lowering standards, and your evidence is that we hired women and minorities.

You conveniently ignore the possibility that individual women and minority candidates might actually possess aptitude and skills for a highly technical job.

You have judged our Aviate graduates solely on the basis of their race and their gender. That’s how you see them.

You, sir, have a problem.

 

[edyvw]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/united...t-shortage-graduating-class-women-minorities/

I would really, really like to hear what is exactly the problem here.

 

[Astro14]

I would really, really like to hear what is exactly the problem here.

There isn’t a problem, as I see it. Need more fish? Cast a wider net.

What’s wrong with reaching out to groups who are not well represented in our ranks?

Most pilots came from middle/upper class backgrounds. It took money to get them into a cockpit. A college education for military pilots, and both a college education and six figure cost of flight training for civilian track. Many had a parent who was a pilot - who was able to both provide inspiration and a path to offset the cost of flight training.

That’s a huge barrier to entry into the profession.

If our hiring class looks like America - with women and men, and a multitude of races represented - then that’s something of which I’m proud.

I don’t care if we’re talking about educating doctors, or pilots, or lawyers, or any other profession - making opportunities available to those who would not have had them is a good thing.

The key point: we haven’t lowered standards. That’s just a bunch of race-baiting nonsense.

If we had lowered standards, I would be among the first to protest, on the basis of safety and public interest.

But we didn’t.

By increasing the size of the group of candidates we have under consideration, we are actually better able to maintain standards. The bigger group allows a greater number of people in the top % of aptitude.

 

[edyvw]

There isn’t a problem, as I see it. Need more fish? Cast a wider net.

What’s wrong with reaching out to groups who are not well represented in our ranks?

Most pilots came from middle/upper class backgrounds. It took money to get them into a cockpit. A college education for military pilots, and both a college education and six figure cost of flight training for civilian track. Many had a parent who was a pilot - who was able to both provide inspiration and a path to offset the cost of flight training.

That’s a huge barrier to entry into the profession.

If our hiring class looks like America - with women and men, and a multitude of races represented - then that’s something of which I’m proud.

I don’t care if we’re talking about educating doctors, or pilots, or lawyers, or any other profession - making opportunities available to those who would not have had them is a good thing.

The key point: we haven’t lowered standards. That’s just a bunch of race-baiting nonsense.

If we had lowered standards, I would be among the first to protest, on the basis of safety and public interest.

But we didn’t.

By increasing the size of the group of candidates we have under consideration, we are actually better able to maintain standards. The bigger group allows a greater number of people in the top % of aptitude.

I know where you coming from. It is not an issue. It is a perceived issue in people's heads.
That is why I assign students in the first intro class at graduate school, "Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment," regardless of their background!
I really do not want to go into what I actually think about his post.

 

[Astro14]

I know where you coming from. It is not an issue. It is a perceived issue in people's heads.
That is why I assign students in the first intro class at graduate school, "Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment," regardless of their background!
I really do not want to go into what I actually think about his post.

My oldest daughter is a surgeon.

But everyone knows that women should be nurses, not doctors, right?

Because clearly, women aren’t as good at medicine as men. In medicine, as in flying, they can’t handle the higher education required, nor do a highly technical and demanding job where lives are on the line.

I should’ve been a better father and told her to go into nursing, where she was better suited, because of her gender, instead of building her confidence, encouraging her dreams.

And treating her like an equal.

Right?

I hope my sarcasm is as clear as my derision.

The sentiments, the bigotry, expressed in some of these posts sickens me.

 

[edyvw]

My oldest daughter is a surgeon.

But everyone knows that women should be nurses, not doctors, right?

Because clearly, women aren’t as good at medicine as men. In medicine, as in flying, they can’t handle the higher education required, nor do a highly technical and demanding job where lives are on the line.

I should’ve been a better father and told her to go into nursing, where she was better suited, because of her gender, instead of building her confidence, encouraging her dreams.

And treating her like an equal.

Right?

I hope my sarcasm is as clear as my derision.

The sentiments, the bigotry, expressed in some of these posts sickens me.

Maybe I should tell my daughter that nursing school at UCCS is her limit, not the school on another side of I25.

 

[JHZR2]

Either way, I’ll pay more for my ticket. It all evens out in the end From the consumers point.

The CEO will still make the big $$$$ though. I will again say deregulation is the worst thing to happen to the airline industry.

I think we’re already seeing the costs pop up. Wife and I were talking about a quick trip with the family (5 seats) to London to see a show. Looked at the prices and they’re 2.5x what were expected. On top of that, half the flights are like they don’t want to fly. We fly a lot, I fly even more, and I see it more and more with obnoxious flights with ridiculous times and stops. I get it that fuel is $$, and some of the layover/stops necessary are supposed to be due to the shortages…

I’m all for pilots being paid more for the function and competence they are expected to provide. But when the CEO is banking it in an insane amount, no thanks.

When American doubles the CEO’s pay from $6xxk to $1.3M, and his total compensation is $6.xxM, how many qualified pilots could have been raised for that money?

Instead we are flying less. One less European trip, one less FL trip, quite possibly one or two others. Either doing something else or driving. CEOs getting paid more, prices rising, with yet poorer service, worse flights and more connections is not an equation for me wanting to spend my money to fly.

 

[Dave Hess]

Astro,

What is the washout rate at Aviate after the students are accepted into program ?