[snprbob86]

Where?

She could go to a totally different industry, but she'd be starting her career over again at the bottom.

She loves flying & traveling, so she'd probably want to go to another airline. However, Delta (one of the largest airlines) accepts a only few thousand new flight attendants per year out of many tens of thousands of applicants. Smaller airlines would be even more difficult to get a job at. All the airlines are also seniority based, so she's have to start her career over again at the bottom. Experience at other airlines wouldn't contribute one iota to her standing in a new airline.

College put her (and everybody else) in substantial debt, so she can't start a business or do anything really risky like that.

This is a story you have all heard over and over again...

If you're a well paid engineer, it might be hard for you to understand: Educated, hard working people, are constantly screwed by the system and consistently ignored by people who don't understand their plight.

[greenyoda]

"All the airlines are also seniority based..."

That's probably something that's dictated by the union contract, just as it is with school teachers and other unionized workers. If it was up to the airline, they'd probably promote based on how well people did their jobs rather than seniority. So in this way, the unions are decreasing the ability of employees to look for jobs elsewhere.

[snprbob86]

> If it was up to the airline, they'd probably promote based on how well people did their jobs rather than seniority.

How does an airline know how well people do their jobs?

There are thousands of flight attendants based in NYC alone. It's not uncommon for the flight leader to never lead a particular team member a second time. How are you going to have peer reviews?

The best they can do is find bad people via complaints and the best people via complement cards. Finding the best people by process of elimination isn't really a good strategy. And complement cards are only really provided by frequent flyers and in first class, which is predominantly staffed by more senior crew members.

But this generalizes too: What does it mean to be the best factory workers? For some employers, the definition would be "doesn't get sick and/or complain".

The best flight attendants are only twice as helpful and friendly as the pretty good flight attendants. Should they get paid double for something so subjective as "friendly and helpful?" Meanwhile, the best engineers are (some say) 10X (or even 100X) more productive. Yet they only make what 3X to 6X the pay on average, but only if they know how to negotiate... oh and by the way, they work in the field with the lowest supply and highest demand. Unlike effectively unskilled labor that most of the world has no choice but to do.

[greenyoda]

"There are thousands of flight attendants based in NYC alone. It's not uncommon for the flight leader to never lead a particular team member a second time."

Just because this is the way that flight crews are scheduled today doesn't mean that it's the only way it can be done. Why can't the schedule be arranged so that the same crew and leader stay together (as much as possible) on subsequent flights? Of course, there's no reason for the airlines to try any new approaches as long as unions won't budge on seniority.

[snprbob86]

We're now way off topic into the details of a particular industry, but I'll entertain your comment anyway. I just want to stress again: These problems generalize to many many many other industries.

> Why can't the schedule be arranged so that the same crew and leader stay together (as much as possible)

Because...

1) Flights get delayed or canceled

2) Crew member get sick or stuck elsewhere around the world

3) Planes are of varying size with varying size crews

4) Destinations change seasonally

5) Holidays and events alter flight schedules

6) People quit

7) People move and transfer bases

Never mind that flexibility to travel is the #1 job perk that they have to offer as career bait. Flight attendants trade flights, full trips, and destinations all the time. They are in that line of work so that they can go to interesting locations, if only for a short while. You could half their pay and they would still complain much more loudly if you halved their destination flexibility.

[dillona]

How much responsibility do you place on her for choosing a career with low mobility and high competition?

[snprbob86]

Not every profession has high mobility and low competition. In fact, the overwhelming majority of professions, even highly skilled ones, have medium-low mobility and high competition. Even doctors and lawyers have pretty low mobility these days, thanks to crushing debt.

What do you think would happen if the > 90% of workers in low mobility jobs just magically got high mobility jobs? There would be no one left doing the sorts of critical jobs that make civilized life possible for us pampered engineers.

[RestlessMind]

> There would be no one left doing the sorts of critical jobs that make civilized life possible for us pampered engineers.

I don't think so. If a job is critical for a functional society, "market" will ensure that it will be done. Right now, lots of critical fields have low paying jobs because there is high supply of labor.

[snprbob86]

Are you refuting what I'm saying? Or are you making an additional point in my favor? I'm not sure...

Because if high supply of labor means low paying jobs, then you're suggesting that if everybody suddenly became skilled enough to get a high paying job, then those jobs would become low paying jobs due to labor surplus.

Either side of the hypothetical makes it clear that it is absurd to think that everybody can magically be more mobile via shear force of will.

[RestlessMind]

I was commenting on "There would be no one left" part. I don't think that is ever possible for critical jobs. If a job is essential for the society, usually there are enough workers to do it. You are right about this point - if too many people have skills to perform "high paying jobs", those jobs won't remain "high paying" for long.

[sultezdukes]

She could go to a totally different industry, but she'd be starting her career over again at the bottom.

She loves flying & traveling, so she'd probably want to go to another airline.

So why didn't your girlfriend research the industry she was going into? Just because she loves flying and traveling doesn't mean she had to make a career out of being a flight attendant.

And it's not like she was a the top of her "career" anyway as a flight attendant, so what's the big deal.

Your sense of entitlement is disturbing, but pretty common.

[snprbob86]

You're missing the point. She was treated very well at Northwest pre-merger and at Delta until the union vote failed. She's have to take a major pay cut to reboot her career. I'm not saying that due to a sense of entitlement. That's a fact. But other than the recent changes, she likes her job, so she's started volunteering for the union and otherwise actively working to improve the situation for her and her coworkers.

Your willingness to parrot the party line (specifically the word "entitlement") is disturbing, but pretty common.