3 ms·

For a "business" publication, Businessweek seems to have dropped the ball on basic economics here: there's fewer pilots available to work at the wages regionals

by al2o3cr 13y ago

For a "business" publication, Businessweek seems to have dropped the ball on basic economics here: there's fewer pilots available to work at the wages regionals want to pay, but that's not a "shortage", that's the market expressing a preference for higher pay. See also the yoyos whining about a "skilled-worker shortage" when then actually mean "we can't hire experienced machinists for $10/hr!".

ozi 13y ago
The problem is that a lot of the young workforce has been disillusioned and waning since 08/09. Most of these people were already aware that being a commercial pilot isn't as glamorous of a job as people think; add in shit pay and job instability and you'd have to be crazy to stick with it. My friend graduated from LA Tech in 08 with a degree in professional aviation with the goal of working for ATC or a commercial airline. He initially got a job as a flight instructor making ~$25/hour and was lucky to get more than 20 hours per week. Then the bottom fell out with the economy, massive job cuts across the board at airlines, and he looked for a better job because nobody would be hiring for a long time, everything is seniority based, and he wasn't going to pay out of pocket to keep his flight hours up for a few years. Now he's an accountant.
bostonpete 13y ago
Maybe I'm missing something -- isn't this the point of the the article? Even the title seems to explicitly tie the shortage to the low pay. Maybe you're just arguing against the term "shortage" and saying there's never a shortage of labor supply in any field, just a shortage of people willing to do the work at what's considered the going rate? Can't we just stipulate that this is what a shortage of <profession-here> means?
yardie 13y ago
It's not economics its rational pilots being rational. The FAA has raised the hours a flight officer needs to operate a commerical plane. This has created a double hump in the D/S curve. Low hour pilots are worthless and high hour pilots cost too much. So you raise salaries right? High hour pilots don't want to leave their nice, stable job (with benefits!) to work for perpetually bankrupt regional carrier. They might be able to get the occasional burnout or fired with cause pilot but not in any good quantity.
Loughla 13y ago
That is appallingly true in the manufacturing field, (and finally something on HN that I've researched to death). I now work in education, part of which is career and technical education. We are approached by two very large businesses constantly complaining about the shortage of skilled workers. "We can't fill these jobs fast enough" is the theme, and students bite constantly. These jobs range from machine operators, to skilled machinists to engineers. One look at the job postings reveal a couple of themes: Machine operator listed at $10.00; 28 hours a week, so they don't have to provide benefits. That's an unskilled position, so I don't disagree with the wage. BUT, for the last 40 years, these positions were full-time with benefits. In the last 5 to 10 years they've been downsized to whatever the number is that keeps it just under full-time so the business doesn't have to worry about benefits. Skilled Machinist: the last post was for a master machinist (20 years exp? I'm not sure how long that takes) with various CAD, MAZAK and other various certifications depending on the job - one even required that the applicant be a Bridge certified welder in addition to master machinist (price those people out sometime). They listed at a ‘competitive’ $15-$25 an hour. That's a joke for the time, energy and ability that it takes to do that job. If you ever want to see what the definition of good at everything is – talk to a master machinist those men and women can quite literally use any piece of machinery that exists. These wages are almost identical to what this position made in the 1970's. That is over 40 years later, and they expect to pay the same wage. I'm not certain what they post for a journeyman machinist, but I have to assume that it's low as well. Engineer: They can't hire these, because 'your institution isn't turning out quality applicants'. We were spooked by this, so we did a careful inventory of current student prospects, and past graduate employment. Turns out that they can't hire our graduates because they're offering 30,XXX-45,XXX lower per year than John Deer, Caterpillar and other heavy machinery organizations that are within 4 hours of our town. Granted, these businesses aren't as large as JD or Cat, but they are still multi-billion dollar international companies. My prediction is the following: In 10-15 years we will have an overabundance of ‘skilled workers’ in the manufacturing field, much as we have a surplus of college graduates right now. The message to kids used to be ‘go to college,’ now it’s ‘be an engineer or work in the manufacturing industry’. It’s just a matter of time before the software gets to the point that the monkey entering numbers doesn’t have to actually understand the numbers to turn out a product. When that happens, look out kiddos, the bottom will drop out of that market as well. My proof? Five years ago our first-time, first-year students were 75% liberal arts/soft sciences, 25% hard sciences and engineering. Our enrollment figures for Fall 2014 show more of a 50/50 split, with the number of new engineering students growing faster than any other category. This shift is nearly unprecedented. The train is headed down the tracks full speed, and no one is manning the brakes.

by al2o3cr 13y ago

ozi 13y ago

The problem is that a lot of the young workforce has been disillusioned and waning since 08/09. Most of these people were already aware that being a commercial pilot isn't as glamorous of a job as people think; add in shit pay and job instability and you'd have to be crazy to stick with it. My friend graduated from LA Tech in 08 with a degree in professional aviation with the goal of working for ATC or a commercial airline. He initially got a job as a flight instructor making ~$25/hour and was lucky to get more than 20 hours per week. Then the bottom fell out with the economy, massive job cuts across the board at airlines, and he looked for a better job because nobody would be hiring for a long time, everything is seniority based, and he wasn't going to pay out of pocket to keep his flight hours up for a few years. Now he's an accountant.

bostonpete 13y ago

Maybe I'm missing something -- isn't this the point of the the article? Even the title seems to explicitly tie the shortage to the low pay. Maybe you're just arguing against the term "shortage" and saying there's never a shortage of labor supply in any field, just a shortage of people willing to do the work at what's considered the going rate? Can't we just stipulate that this is what a shortage of <profession-here> means?

yardie 13y ago

It's not economics its rational pilots being rational. The FAA has raised the hours a flight officer needs to operate a commerical plane. This has created a double hump in the D/S curve. Low hour pilots are worthless and high hour pilots cost too much. So you raise salaries right? High hour pilots don't want to leave their nice, stable job (with benefits!) to work for perpetually bankrupt regional carrier. They might be able to get the occasional burnout or fired with cause pilot but not in any good quantity.

Loughla 13y ago

That is appallingly true in the manufacturing field, (and finally something on HN that I've researched to death). I now work in education, part of which is career and technical education. We are approached by two very large businesses constantly complaining about the shortage of skilled workers. "We can't fill these jobs fast enough" is the theme, and students bite constantly. These jobs range from machine operators, to skilled machinists to engineers. One look at the job postings reveal a couple of themes: Machine operator listed at $10.00; 28 hours a week, so they don't have to provide benefits. That's an unskilled position, so I don't disagree with the wage. BUT, for the last 40 years, these positions were full-time with benefits. In the last 5 to 10 years they've been downsized to whatever the number is that keeps it just under full-time so the business doesn't have to worry about benefits. Skilled Machinist: the last post was for a master machinist (20 years exp? I'm not sure how long that takes) with various CAD, MAZAK and other various certifications depending on the job - one even required that the applicant be a Bridge certified welder in addition to master machinist (price those people out sometime). They listed at a ‘competitive’ $15-$25 an hour. That's a joke for the time, energy and ability that it takes to do that job. If you ever want to see what the definition of good at everything is – talk to a master machinist those men and women can quite literally use any piece of machinery that exists. These wages are almost identical to what this position made in the 1970's. That is over 40 years later, and they expect to pay the same wage. I'm not certain what they post for a journeyman machinist, but I have to assume that it's low as well. Engineer: They can't hire these, because 'your institution isn't turning out quality applicants'. We were spooked by this, so we did a careful inventory of current student prospects, and past graduate employment. Turns out that they can't hire our graduates because they're offering 30,XXX-45,XXX lower per year than John Deer, Caterpillar and other heavy machinery organizations that are within 4 hours of our town. Granted, these businesses aren't as large as JD or Cat, but they are still multi-billion dollar international companies. My prediction is the following: In 10-15 years we will have an overabundance of ‘skilled workers’ in the manufacturing field, much as we have a surplus of college graduates right now. The message to kids used to be ‘go to college,’ now it’s ‘be an engineer or work in the manufacturing industry’. It’s just a matter of time before the software gets to the point that the monkey entering numbers doesn’t have to actually understand the numbers to turn out a product. When that happens, look out kiddos, the bottom will drop out of that market as well. My proof? Five years ago our first-time, first-year students were 75% liberal arts/soft sciences, 25% hard sciences and engineering. Our enrollment figures for Fall 2014 show more of a 50/50 split, with the number of new engineering students growing faster than any other category. This shift is nearly unprecedented. The train is headed down the tracks full speed, and no one is manning the brakes.