You get what you pay for.

Now we have walmart airlines and it is good for America.

Unions are evil and corporations don't need to be forced to pay decent wages. BTW, how would you feel if the plane you were flying on had repairs and maintenance done in third world countries by employees working for dirt wages????

They are danni, there is currently a proposed bill to stop such but the corporations have managed to get it tabled.

Welcome to Delta, American, and united and the cheap labor of south America.

When the plane gets so bad that good maintenance is needed they bring it up here and cheat the maintenance bases out of work by trying to get damaged found for free.

Does this mean that if they paid her $36,000 per annum this accident would not have happened?

Commuter planes have lower standards...that's how the flights are relatively inexpensive. That this person is "underpaid" is not the issue here...though the writer of the story does a nice job in using it to obscure the real issue.

The issue here is that an airline trusted the FAA to do their due diligence in determining whether or not a pilot is fit for duty. The FAA is a government agency that is completely inept and failed to do their job competently (stunning...I know). The airline became complacent because they tragically assumed that the FAA was doing their job properly. If the airline were responsible for doing it's own legwork on it's employees, this pilot never would have got off the ground.

She was cute as a speckled pup, too.

What a damn shame.

"Buffalo Flight Co-Pilot Paid $16,000/Year"

You get what you pay for.

If the airline were responsible for doing it's own legwork on it's employees,

Corporate apologist.

Every employer, especially one's that put other peoples lives in their hands have a duty to ensure the people they hire are adequately trained and able to do their job.

Moreover, the carrier, Colgan Air, never double-checked with federal officials to see whether Renslow's application which listed only one failed "check ride" had revealed his complete test record.

"Corporate apologist."

Right on the money 726.

No real pilot or anyone in the cockpit can make so little annually, not even flying for Air Swaziland and especially transporting passengers, not cargo. There's got to be something wrong with this story.

Crisis

There are cabbies making more money than that pilot. That's nuts.

There's got to be something wrong with this story.

Feel free to present evidence to the contrary.

I myself had no idea the pay was that shitty at regional airlines.

This pilot had to "commute" to work in NJ from Seattle (where she lived with her husbands parents) because she could not afford to live anywhere else.

Hell even Air Force pilots make $27,000.

Corporate apologist.

Every employer, especially one's that put other peoples lives in their hands have a duty to ensure the people they hire are adequately trained and able to do their job.

Moreover, the carrier, Colgan Air, never double-checked with federal officials to see whether Renslow's application which listed only one failed "check ride" had revealed his complete test record.

What are you talking about? I said they had become complacent by trusting the FAA. Furthermore, they will use the FAA as a crutch to avoid penance for their failures. Notice the "government official" is clear to assign blame everywhere...except the government agency.

It's long been my understanding that a lot of these side seat jobs, especially with the smaller carriers were similar to apprenticeships. The pay is low but the pilots gain hours and build a resume to move to the left seat and move to bigger ships, better routes and major airlines. Sorta similar to doctors making $24k/yr while doing internships. Good idea? I dunno.

danni and others.
you are making the wrong comparison

in the not too distant future, your heart surgeon may be paid about that much as the others get out or flee because the government doesnt pay them enough...........

Watch the drone technology we use to fight in Pakistan become the new pilots for future airlines.
They'll have "pilots" in India making $200 month flying us by remote control.

government doesnt pay them enough...........

#16 | Posted by afkabl2

As was the case here, the government wasn't paying the pilot.......oh wait......

Furthermore, they will use the FAA as a crutch to avoid penance for their failures.

#14 | Posted by IraqiBukkake at 2009-05-14 11:13 AM |

And I pointed out that THEY DID NOT CHECK WITH THE FAA and therefore were not relying on it.

"because the government doesnt pay them enough..........."

Cuz in countries with National Health Care doctors work for minimum wage.

And I pointed out that THEY DID NOT CHECK WITH THE FAA and therefore were not relying on it.

And why did they not check with the FAA? They thought that the FAA was doing it's job.

If the FAA is not responsible for following up on the testing of it's pilots that THEY certify, what the fucking point of the FAA?

There are cabbies making more money than that pilot. That's nuts.

Except when you're young and right out of flight school, the name of the game is building time--not money. The only other option for a lot of these guys at this point in their careers is doing CFI stuff in a 172, waiting for some student to kill them.

You can build shit-loads of time quickly with a regional, plus you have a schedule---which, as the corporate aviation guys know, beats the shit out of sitting around the FBO "on-call" all day, blogging on Drudge and never knowing if you're gonna be in Spokane or D.C. that night.

Except when you're young and right out of flight school, the name of the game is building time--not money. The only other option for a lot of these guys at this point in their careers is doing CFI stuff in a 172, waiting for some student to kill them.

Not to mention if the commuter flight from New York to Buffalo is 250 dollars so the pilots can be paid a "proper" wage, you won't have to worry about that commuter flight existing much longer.

Except when you're young and right out of flight school, the name of the game is building time--not money.

Even the pilot on that plane wasn't making much. A year ago he had to take a second job sacking groceries to make ends meet.

Even the pilot on that plane wasn't making much. A year ago he had to take a second job sacking groceries to make ends meet.

Sounds like someone made a poor career choice.

"If the FAA is not responsible for following up on the testing of it's pilots that THEY certify, what the fucking point of the FAA?"

He had passed the last six checkrides before the accident. Failing a checkride isn't the end of the road.

The plane stalled going from 5-15dg flaps. From the look of the simulations, he didn't appear to apply power after leveling off on the approach and lowering the flaps.

His reactions were that of a tail stall, pull up, retract flaps, reduce power, but he applied full power.

From the Flight Safety Q400 Flight Crew Operating Manual (Jan 2008) -

On the Q400, the stall shaker/pusher requires 80lbs of force of pulling to override, the reports indicate 25lbs, was the pusher disengaged? (pressing a latchable switch on the glare shield)

Sometimes and accident, is just an accident, as unfortunate as it is. We should try to learn about how it occurred, educate and correct, not blame.

Does this mean that if they paid her $36,000 per annum this accident would not have happened?

#5 | Posted by tiger150

No-dummy-that means-if they had hired a Pilot that was WORTH 36 Grand/Yr-it may not have happened.

Be sure to stuff your own strawman, now.

This explains why I never did much commercial flying except for skydivers; That was fun. Better to make enough money to buy your own plane and fly yourself.

"If the FAA is not responsible for following up on the testing of it's pilots that THEY certify, what the fucking point of the FAA?"

If I were a truck driver with an expired drivers' license would I expect the Dept. of Highway Safety to come to my job and inspect my license or would I expect my employer to check my license???
If the pilot was not still certified the employer should have known that and told her to get certified or don't come back to work.

These pilots can have schedules up to 360 hours away from home per month. They get paid around 80-90 per month grossing them around 17K per year. Working extra days to pull down another couple grand per year could lead to fatigue which leads to this.

in the not too distant future, your heart surgeon may be paid about that much as the others get out or flee because the government doesnt pay them enough...........
#16 | POSTED BY AFKABL2

The Humanity!

MORE PAY for English Teachers...

The Salon aviation writer Patrick Smith was on NPR yesterday stating that new hires on regional carriers now qualify with as little as 400 hours. Years ago if you didn't have at least 1500 hours they would laugh. A newby pilot flying a Cessna is considered dangerous by insurance Co's if they have less than 500 hours.

Joe Biden might have been correct...

I cant believe that people here are supporting the idea of pilots making 16k per year

And why did they not check with the FAA?

#22 | Posted by IraqiBukkake at 2009-05-14 11:38 AM

Because they were neglegent.

But hey this is what the public is asking for, cheap airfare. They never think about the COST of a $150 ticket from NY to LA.

The COST is rookie pilots that are undertrained, sleep deprived and over worked flying planes that are maintained by third world countries.

It used to be that pilots would fly for the regionals for a few years then get hired at American, Delta,United,Continental etc. In the last 10 years the regionals are doing about half the domestic flying the majors did 10 years ago. Those regional jobs are no longer 2-3 year jobs they are becoming 10yr and up careers still paying low wages.

I love that the public won't flinch at paying $60-100 for a cab ride from their home to the airport but also expect to be able to fly across country for $200. In 1952 it cost about $300 to fly round trip from SFO to New York. Today it is about the same.

#35 | Posted by bph320

Labor is a commodity to be purchased at the lowest possible price.

It is the corporate way.

Are the regionals unionized?

Today it is about the same.

#37 | Posted by bph320 at 2009-05-14 01:12 PM

The corporate apologists see nothing wrong in a stagnating wage for everyone else.

This is a consequence of that.

$$$War

Re your #4 --

I'm glad you chimed in on this. This plane crash is exactly why I am so relieved Bush is finally out of office. He encouraged and allowed the cutting down and/or elimination of any and all rules and regulations for even the most dangerous occupations -- all in the name of corporate profit.

If Bush wasn't busy cutting back on food and other import inspections, he was doing something else to trash consumer safety. (Obama is now trying to get many of these rules and regulations put back into place, which is one of the main reasons I voted for him, but it's going to take awhile.)

Bush, Inc. pushed for outsourcing and privatizing of everything in this country in order to get around all U.S. standards and quality control. Disgusting at the very least and these passengers paid for it with their lives.

I would no more think of flying on a jet with a pilot who made $16,000 a year than riding my bike across the ocean. Anyone who had half a brain would know the standards were lowered and they scraped the bottom of the barrel when hiring.

Just some trivia -- did you know a generation ago (when my Dad was an airline captain) the airlines wouldn't even hire a pilot unless he had military aviation experience -- preferably in combat. After more years had passed they lessed that particular requirement for hiring but never would any of the major airlines scrape rock bottom in hiring as was done in this instance.

You may not know all the answers to my following questions, but maybe you could take a shot at answering few of them?

Did the passengers think they were actually on a Continental airliner or did the passengers know it was another company flying for Continental? What company's name was on the airliner?

When it's called a "Continental Connection" plane is it under the SAME standards for safety, pilot hour requirements to fly, etc. as for Continental Airlines? The pilot and co-pilot (who, sorry, looks more like some recently graduated high school cheerleader than an experienced pilot with serious flighttime under her belt) were so unqualified it was a disgrace.

This is going to end up being a zillion dollar lawsuit. There were some serious violations here! I wonder if it's going to be Continental who'll end up paying off these lawsuits.

Anyway, I would be interested in hearing your thoughts.

This is going to end up being a zillion dollar lawsuit. There were some serious violations here! I wonder if it's going to be Continental who'll end up paying off these lawsuits.

I doubt it probably a Holding Company Firewall..

Do you people not read?

You don't just take one test and that it.....

He had passed his last six checkrides before the accident, who is negligent?

Failing a checkride isn't the end of the road, nor bottom of the barrel.

Thinking about this some more on the way to work, while getting into the stall was bad, (NTSB says it happened recently at Burlington, in a Q400) when she zeroed the flaps, that was the end, there is no way to recover, stall speed goes up dramatically. The SOP on tail stall (if thats what it was), is to reduce to previous known good angle.

Most accidents are an accumulation of errors, I believe this is one of those times.

Andrea,

Yes, it was a culmination of errors....

1) Hiring inexperienced pilots for flying in inclement weather.
2) Paying them so piss poor that they had to live across the country and commute from Seattle.
3) Not observing their own standards regarding rest and fatigue.
4) Having no training in icing conditions in that plane.
5) Not checking the background of the pilot with the FAA.
6) Pilots not observing the sterile cabin rule.

It goes on and on.....

Most errors are based in shortcuts and lack of training. That is the company's fault.

Most accidents are an accumulation of errors, I believe this is one of those times.

No. No. No.

Its corporate greed, dammit.

Profit over safety.

Don't fuck with the paradigm.

AndreaMackris

He had passed his last six checkrides before the accident, who is negligent?

Failing a checkride isn't the end of the road, nor bottom of the barrel.

I truly don't know the answer, but what grades did this pilot get on his other 6 checkrides? He got an "F" when he failed, of course, but were his all his other checkrides graded a "D" and they gave him a pass? Just curious.

No. No. No.
Its corporate greed, dammit.
Profit over safety.
Don't fuck with the paradigm.

LOL

Sorry it still fits starting with less qualified.

" new hires on regional carriers now qualify with as little as 400 hours "

You can't get an Airline Transport Pilot certificate with less than 1500 hours.

8. Accumulate flight experience (FAR 61.159).

1. Except as provided in b. and c. on the next page, you must log at least 1,500 hr. of total time as a pilot that includes at least ...

Because they were neglegent.

But hey this is what the public is asking for, cheap airfare. They never think about the COST of a $150 ticket from NY to LA.

The COST is rookie pilots that are undertrained, sleep deprived and over worked flying planes that are maintained by third world countries.

Yes, they were negligent.

But attempting to compare a commuter plane on a 30 minute flight with a cross country flight is a bit misleading.

The only reason this plane is in the air is because it is a cheap commuter flight. If you attempt to tie bloated, major airline prices to these commuter flights, you won't have to worry about 18k a year, because these flights will never leave the ground.

You can't get an Airline Transport Pilot certificate with less than 1500 hours.

Indeed do you need an ATP to fly right seat?

I just went looking for my FAR /AIM and no joy...

I can't remember when you actually need an ATP over a Commercial certificate..

From Wiki:

The Airline Transport Pilot Certificate (ATP) is the highest level of aircraft pilot certification. Those certified as Airline Transport Pilots are authorized to act as pilot-in-command of an aircraft in air carrier service in aircraft with a max gross weight over 12,500 pounds or 5,700 kg and/or over 9 passenger seats.

Sounds like you could have a first officer with just a commercial..

Co-pilot can have a Commercial as long as he/she has a type rating in the aircraft. PIC must be an ATP.

But attempting to compare a commuter plane on a 30 minute flight with a cross country flight is a bit misleading.

#49 | Posted by IraqiBukkake at 2009-05-14 02:19 PM |

The reason why regional airlines are "partnered" with the big airlines is because they are extremely profitable. Part of that profit is paying the pilots dirt wages by hiring inexperienced pilots.

Inexperience is a major factor in what caused this crash.

Including the Buffalo crash, 135 people have been killed in five crashes involving regional airline flights since 2002. NTSB officials looking into the crashes found pilot fatigue, high turnover rates among pilots and a pattern of sloppiness at the airlines involved.

I cant believe that people here are supporting the idea of pilots making 16k per year

#35 | Posted by bph320

Don't come around here much, eh? The pinheads on this board will support their conservative agenda no matter how ridiculous it becomes. If Dick Cheney was eating a human baby for supper every day, these morons would be praising the nutritional value of baby meat.

"The issue here is that an airline trusted the FAA to do their due diligence in determining whether or not a pilot is fit for duty. The FAA is a government agency that is completely inept and failed to do their job competently (stunning...I know). The airline became complacent because they tragically assumed that the FAA was doing their job properly. If the airline were responsible for doing it's own legwork on it's employees, this pilot never would have got off the ground."

A few weeks ago I was talking to a British pilot in a pub. We werre discussing airlines safety. His experience in the US when he was certified to fly there along with a few colleagues was it was a joke. They took their test for the first time and passed with outstanding marks. They said that couldn't be right since they were being checked out on the type of plane for the first time. The FAA said they were far better than the US pilots who normally would take the tests.

Point is the US airlines are not investing in training and the FAA isn't mandating it.

Back in the mid-90s I met a couple of FAA agents at a dinner party. Talked them about security checks at the airport. They said security was paid minimum waged by contract companies. The tests the FAA administered were told to them ahead of time, which passenger, which bag and what weapon they needed to find to pass.

9/11 wasn't a terrorist act it was an act of incompetence.

Sounds like someone made a poor career choice.

If passengers knew how little pilots were making, would so many get in those planes?

I cant believe that people here are supporting the idea of pilots making 16k per year

Me neither. It's insane that we'd put the lives of hundreds of people in the hands of someone who is valued so little by their employer.

That's deregulation for you.

It's insane that we'd put the lives of hundreds of people in the hands of someone who is valued so little by their employer.

I't's prolly not so much insanity as it is untrammelled greed.

The people who made the decision to reduce co-piot wages so much prolly do most of their flying in corporate jets and are thus not so worried about the occasional negative results of their cost saving measures here.

They may be greed-fueled, corporate biatches but they are not insane.

That's deregulation for you.

Saint Ronnie!

Be Well.

$16,000

That's what I made my last year in the Navy as an E-5 in 1998.

I think I wasn't far from the poverty line then.

I cant believe that people here are supporting the idea of pilots making 16k per year

#35 | Posted by bph320
Don't come around here much, eh? The pinheads on this board will support their conservative agenda no matter how ridiculous it becomes. If Dick Cheney was eating a human baby for supper every day, these morons would be praising the nutritional value of baby meat.

#55 | POSTED BY RASTACYBORG AT 2009-05-14 03:00 PM | REPLY | FLAG

I have to tell you that what makes me laugh the most is the people on the left will talk all day about higher wages and even publicly critizicise low wages but then without admitting their own hypocrisy they will shop at Walmart.

I flew a trip to Beijing a years ago in the month of November. One of the our crew members was very outspoken about how bad Bush was for sending jobs overseas. While on the bus to the hotel for the layover she was talking about how she was getting all of her Christmas shopping done on this one trip. I asked her why she doesn't do her Christmas shopping where she lives and she said "Because the prices are so much cheaper here in Beijing."

I guarantee that everyone here buys their plane tickets based on the lowest price, period. Not one of you could care a less about what the employees of the airline are making. Most here probably cannot believe that an airline pilot actually makes 16k per year. The common illusion most people on both the left and right think that airline pilots make $350k per year and only work 3 days per month.

Most here probably cannot believe that an airline pilot actually makes 16k per year.

There's two sets of signatures on the labor union contract that determines what pilots will make.

(guess who I am?)

Co-pilot can have a Commercial as long as he/she has a type rating in the aircraft. PIC must be an ATP.

#53 | POSTED BY ZATOICHI AT 2009-05-14 02:38 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Actually you have to have a Type rating in the plane to be the PIC. The FO doesn't need an ATP or a Type Rating. He just needs a Commercial Pilots License. You cannot have a type rating unless you have an ATP first.

The airlines that pay 16k per year I guarantee that they do not have to deal with a pilot union. More and more regional airlines are electing union representation for this very reason.

Even the pilot on that plane wasn't making much. A year ago he had to take a second job sacking groceries to make ends meet.
Sounds like someone made a poor career choice.

#26 | POSTED BY IRAQIBUKKAKE AT 2009-05-14 11:52 AM

Iraqibukkake,

making that kind of stupid statement is like saying the passengers made a poor consumer choice

"You cannot have a type rating unless you have an ATP first."

Appendix J to Part 141 - Aircraft Type Rating Course, For Other Than an Airline Transport Pilot Certificate

2. Eligibility for enrollment. Prior to enrolling in the flight portion of an aircraft type rating course, a person must hold at least a private pilot certificate ...

Let me correct my statement, In order to be PIC in the Q400 in scheduled airline operations you must possess a Type rating for that aircraft and an ATP.

"scheduled airline operations"

Yup, Part 121 as I recall.
I hate the airlines.

Hate the airlines? Drive.

"Drive."

Posted by bph320 at 2009-05-14 06:59 PM

Considering their performance, both pilot and co-pilot were overpaid. I'll be their employer is in a lot of deep shit for not properly certifying them.

The issue here is that an airline trusted the FAA to do their due diligence in determining whether or not a pilot is fit for duty. The FAA is a government agency that is completely inept and failed to do their job competently (stunning...I know). The airline became complacent because they tragically assumed that the FAA was doing their job properly. If the airline were responsible for doing it's own legwork on it's employees, this pilot never would have got off the ground.

Wow! just Wow.

You have no idea what so ever how the system works.

The airline doesn't trust the FAA, it is the other way around. The FAA sets the standard, it is the airline who needs to meet the standard. The FAA allows the airlines to regulate itself and does spot checks to make sure the regulations are met.

Considering their performance, both pilot and co-pilot were overpaid.

Yes, they should pay the next ones less and they will get better performance.

ZATOICHI

Nice Baron.

Beechcraft Barons and Bonanzas are great planes

She didn't look very good after the 30 foot high hangar door fell on her during a microburst. RIP TJ-415. I did have ten glorious years of money-burning, though. Nothing like a pressurized twin for burning money.

You know what they say, If it flies, floats, or fornicates it is cheaper to rent.

"it is cheaper to rent."

Posted by bph320 at 2009-05-14 08:22 PM

But you never know where it's been.

I cant believe that people here are supporting the idea of pilots making 16k per year

#35 | Posted by bph320

Can you point to one person who has posted here that says they support it?

Even the pilot on that plane wasn't making much. A year ago he had to take a second job sacking groceries to make ends meet.

#25 | Posted by rcade

Someone who makes between $53,000 and $55,000 as the article states has to take a job sacking groceries just to make ends meet? It may sound harsh but maybe he was living outside of his means.

Does anyone on here actually believe they make what they are worth? If so you have a very poor view of yourself. The individual is worth far more than any amount of money. You are not paid for what you are worth you are paid for what your skills and experience are worth. What is the proper amount to be paid to a new green pilot?

I would assume there are many reasons they are paid such paltry amounts. Two of which are lack of experience and a saturated employment pool too many pilots not enough jobs which is also one of the many reasons teachers make such low incomes to many teachers not enough classrooms. I know both of these groups don't make nearly enough money but don't pretend they didn't know how much they were going to be making when they decided make these career choices.

Hate the airlines? Drive.

#70 | Posted by bph320 at 2009-05-14 06:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's great advice for the people who didn't hate the airlines and instead, trusted them enough to board the plane.

You won't be able to dispense that wisdom though. They're dead.

Ok, everyone here needs to fess up to what they do for a living and justify their pay and benefits to the rest of us. I am willing to bet that few on this thread have a job that pays virtually nothing and if you make a mistake it kills you and 50 other people intantly

#81 | Posted by bph320

Why would anyone need to justify to you or anyone else what they earn?

The only people anyone needs to justify how much they make to is the person signing the paychecks.

#2 | Posted by moneywar at 2009-05-14 08:51 AM

BTW, how would you feel if the plane you were flying on had repairs and maintenance done in third world countries by employees working for dirt wages????
...........................
The airlines already outsource about 80% according to Consumer Reports. So how does that make you feel?