I’m not quite sure I got this correct from your bios but it seems that you guys both got to fly as wide body FO’s within about 4(?) years of you getting to your respective majors? Is this typical or was is more due to the circumstances during your particular time of joining? What would you say is an average “now” (assuming pre-Covid for more apples to apples comparison)? Also @Chris is there a wide spread in seniority for getting a wide body FO seat between the United bases?
One last question, do you think new long range narrow body planes like the 321XLR will have an impact on the current seniority dynamics of long haul flying?
I know things can vary greatly, especially with how travel might change going forward after Covid. Just trying to gather some reference data points.
At United, at Continental before it, we fly the 757s (narrow body) and 767s (wide body) together as one group. While I was qualified to fly both, I almost exclusively flew the 757 as that is what my seniority allowed. The 767 pays a much higher hourly rate and thus is much more senior within the base itself.
It did take me about four years to get to the 757/767, but I could have done it much sooner. Many pilots (including myself) like domestic flying and thus it is not that hard to get to the 757/767 as many pilots chose to stay on the 737 or A320. Now the 777 and 787 are much more senior.
There is a wide spread in seniority for wide body FO positions amongst the bases. EWR and SFO are pretty junior, IAD and ORD is middle of the road and the few slots in IAH and DEN are very senior. Basically, the more international flying a base has, the more junior it can go.
I do not see the 321 XLR having a huge impact on seniority at United. The senior Airbus pilots will get to fly it, while the rest of us keep doing what we are doing.
Again as with anything, circumstances can and do change but getting to be a widebody FO isn’t that challenging seniority wise. Particularly if there’s a variety of aircraft in the fleet. Many pilots want to fly whatever is new and shiny. So if your airline just bought a bunch of 787s, all the senior guys will do there ASAP. That means the less senior guys will get to upgrade on the older planes (A330s, 767, etc) and the new guys can also get an FO seat on one of those. Fairly common and very realistic it can happen relatively quick. Chris can speak more as to the bases but in my experience yes seniority can vary greatly from base to base.
The new long range aircraft absolutely have an affect. It’s another opportunity for growth and movement if that’s someone’s goal. At Hawaiian we have the 321 Neo’s. Great plane and I could easily hold Capt on it. Problem is it’s doing many of the same trips as the 330 and the pilots are getting paid much less. I’m lazy and fly InterIsland. The only motivation for me to do long haul is pay and on the 321 it’s not enough. Others disagree and that’s fine. Again that’s what creates opportunities.
Thank you for the thoughtful responses guys. Interesting how you guys have slightly different takes on the XLR.
For me I guess I need to separate the concept of “long haul” from “wide body”, as you guys have mentioned, you can fly transatlantic (or Hawaii to mainland, or Transcontinental) on a longer range narrow body such as the 757 or the 321.
Is it pretty safe to assume that seniority tends to trend with pay? Meaning which ever airframes pays the most tends to get the most senior pilots and has little to do with what routes are flown?
Seniority and pay do generally go together, but there are always exceptions to the rule. You will always seem to find a certain contingent of pilots that stay on the smaller airplanes because they either like the airplane, or like being super senior on it.
The larger airplanes tend to fly the longer routes as that is what they were designed for and where they can really make money for the company, but not always.
Browsing through some old threads here, but this comment specifically caught my eye. You mention that it’s doing many of the same trips as larger, more comfy planes, but for less pay. Could this potentially be a problem where airlines switch over to this method to pay their pilots less but accomplish the same goal? Or could this backfire if no pilots want to fly the smaller plane for less (but still face consequences such as jet lag)?
Short answer is no. There have always been multiple airframes serving the same routes and there will always be a need for the variety of airplanes. Factor that with the pilot shortage and i don’t see salaries going anywhere but up.