For the past decade or so, a vast majority of new pilot jobs in the US have been at regional airlines. That's because after 9/11, when airlines weren't doing well, most of the legacy airlines had a hiring freeze. Some didn't hire any new pilots for nearly a decade. Given the mandatory retirement age, we're…
Continue reading: Horizon Air Is Canceling Hundreds Of Flights Due To A Pilot Shortage
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
The pilot shortage was not primarily caused by the 9/11 hiring freezes, it was caused by the "1,500 hour rule" which was implemented after the Cogan Air accident.
I can actually understand where the union is coming from. Allowing Horizon Air to unilaterally make changes to a labor contract when "the times are good", even if for a good reason, sets an awful precedent for when "the times are bad". In other words, the union is trying to prevent Horizon from unilaterally offering lower pay when the next airline industry downturn occurs, and Horizon decides they can only temporarly pay pilots 125% OT pay, and they cite their temporarily 200% OT pay as reason to be allowed to do so.
Plus your article states that the union just renegotiated a contract in April ... so, did this shortage issue only develop in May? I doubt that it has since you state that legacies are on a big hiring push which probably started before they signed their contract in April. So, why wasn't this addressed by management in their last contract negotation 3 months ago?
What this screams to me is that management knew that shortages might be a problem, but didn't want a 200% OT rate baked into a multi-year contract they just negotiated. Further, I could understand the union's hesitance to deviate from a contract that was just negotiated; they are probably irked to no end. But I am sure if Horizion wanted to amend said contract, to increase pay, I am pretty sure the union would say yes. However, I'm willing to bet Horizon doesn't want to do that, so they are trying to have their cake and eat it too.
@jouniormint: "In other words, the union is trying to prevent Horizon from unilaterally offering lower pay when the next airline industry downturn occurs, and Horizon decides they can only temporarly pay pilots 125% OT pay, and they cite their temporarily 200% OT pay as reason to be allowed to do so."
That's not the way contracts work. There is no harm/damages in paying people more than the agreed upon rate, but there is harm/damages when paying them less.
"It seems like Horizon Air is doing everything they can here"
Well, clearly they're not. I see they've increased their starting wage to $40/h which, I assume, is still lower than Delta etc. If Horizon were really "doing everything they can here" they'd increase their salary to X% above what the big boys pay and they've have all the pilots they want. 1st yr econ....if they can't offer a competitive salary for their revenue then, again, basic econ tells use their business model is not viable.
@Juniormint
It sounds like you know nothing about unions and union contracts. It is very common in union practices to accept "greater benefits" during times of company need. Like for instance overtime paid as 200% rather that 150%. There is no possible way for them to pay less in the event of a downturn, because that in turn is protected in the union contract which is binding and any court would uphold in a second.
"I’m not sure I totally follow the union’s logic here."
That was your first error in analyzing their statement.
Seriously the union wants higher standard wages, and more pilots, and hence members. Generally speaking they are not going to be looking for win win solutions. They view this as a zero sum game. Standard MO.
I noticed that SEA-SBA is going mainline in Sept. I wonder if this has anything to do with it, or if there are similar routes going to mainline.
True, I don't. I also never said that they would be successful in getting to pay lower than what the contract stipulates, but that hasn't stopped companies from trying to not uphold their labor contracts in the past or else you wouldn't have relevant case law to cite as to why I may be wrong. It has been my experience in non-labor/union related contracts where deviating from agreed upon terms, even if it benefits and is not objected to by the other party, can establish a precedent to deviate from said contract in the future, which in turn could cut in the opposite direction. That to me, sounded like the reasoning provided by the union rep above where he said "...[the] union objects to the company unilaterally amending the terms of the contract."
This is all because of FAA's useless 1500hr rule to accomplish this after spending a lot on flight school is scary and disheartening
I think the union's position here is interesting. It's like they've realized their members will happily leave for a mainline carrier as soon as they can and now they're paying attention to their prospective members as much as their current. It's a smart move and overdue. Horizon, Republic, etc are now on notice that they cannot count on an unlimited supply of junior pilots at whatever price they decide. For what it's worth, I typically feel for the management side in most disputes, but I'm glad to see a middle class union actually do what they're supposed to and represent all their workers, not just the old ones. This can be nothing but beneficial for the industry. It's inexcusable that a pilot can make less than a fast food assistant manager.
Juniormint - Do you really have any "experience" with contracts? I find it hard to believe there is a legally binding employment contract that allows companies to pay less than the contract states you must be paid on the basis that "they voluntarily paid extra in the past so can just choose to pay less whenever they want in the future".
I'm no expert, so I'm genuinely curious what type of contracts allows such precedents to be made.
It is called concessions and when times are bad the first thing mgt does is go to the union and say "hey we are going to have to furlough people unless you guys take concessions. I.e. Pay cut.
I should know I am a 20 year united pilot.
James - And then the union can say "no".... This does not remotely tie their hands or force them to accept anything. If times were tough Horizon could do exactly the same without increasing pay from 150%.
Apparently the US senate feels the crush too
"I’m not sure I totally follow the union’s logic here."
Snickered at that one. I don't follow the logic either, but it must have something to do with impacting union dues.
It is a bribe to get through a crisis.
If they crewed the airline above an absolute minimum staff they would have a reserve and wouldn't be cancelling flights.
$30-40 an hour is barely a living wage too. Remember, pilots are paid only when the plane is moving. 75 to 80 pay hours per month is an average block... despite spending many more hours at the airport flight planning and preparing for flights, not to mention all the time on the road in hotels...
Pay more and you'll get more pilots applying.
What we have is not a shortage of pilots, but a shortage of pilots willing to work for poor wages.
Not sure when Horizon is scheduled to get their first E175 but I would speculate that many Q400 pilots have transitioned or are in training now for the new airplane and thus are unable to help with the current shortfall. Complications associated with adding a new airplane type that management failed to plan for.