Originally Posted by
FDX8891
From the latest Jetstream:
"2) As a result of the new ATP requirement for pilots in part 121 operations, what will be the impact on pilot supply for part 121 operations? For part 135 operations? For part 141 pilot schools? For Part 142 training centers?
The new ATP requirements will adversely impact the staffing needs of all air carrier operations. Since October 2010, ExpressJet has hired approximately 790 pilots. The rules currently proposed would have eliminated almost 400 pilots that ExpressJet hired. That equates to the staffing of approximately 40 aircraft that could have potentially been parked on the ramp due to lack of staffing. With the Aug. 1, 2013 First Officer ATP requirement rapidly approaching, ExpressJet has been adjusting hiring requirements to meet the requirements of the law. In March 2012, the airline ran out of applicants who had the qualifications that meet public law 111-216. This has occurred 17 months prior to the enactment date. It is obvious that a pilot supply shortage has already occurred and will only deepen as retirements and other regulatory enactments occur. It should also be considered that pilots, who are already burdened with high debt loads exiting training, will now have to come up with additional funding to bridge the gap in flight time to be qualified for air carrier employment."
Of course, the company could be completely lying...this was their response to the HR5900 NPRM. Tighten the supply of cheap labor and of course the company would say something like this...Food for thought though...
Which Jet Stream was that in? I didn't see it in June's...
Anyway, that seems pretty misleading.. Just because 40% of the pilots the company
actually hired wouldn't have qualified, it doesn't mean there were not pilots they chose not to hire that
were qualified. For example, there were four people in my interview group in Atlanta. I think I was the only one of the four that was hired, but at least two of the others already had plenty of flight time. Now, maybe they bombed one part of the interview process that I didn't hear about, but some of the interview is obviously subjective, so it's not as if we would be 400 pilots short if we already had to hire people qualified under the new law.
That being said, I hope everyone struggles with staffing next year - it's the only thing that will drive up wages and benefits. However, if the industry runs to Congress whining "hey, we are unable to find pilots!" and is able to get the law changed, we can kiss that goodbye. Of course, what they really mean is not, "we are unable to find pilots," it's "we are unable to find CHEAP pilots." God forbid the general public have to pay about $5 more per ticket, because that's really all it would take to very significantly increase our compensation to reasonable levels. Why this scares the crap out of the airlines I have no idea, but the supply/demand curve can't be that tight. I mean, the government is happy to charge $30-50 in taxes per ticket already...
I just spoke to someone commuting up to ORD that's getting ready to quit her regional job to go back to flight instructing, because she can make twice as much and be home every night. When teaching in 95 degrees in a beat up old 172 is more attractive than flying a 50-seat or more jet for an airline, we know the industry has reached its bottom.
Enough is enough - if things don't work out or the airlines find a way to lobby congress to head off the shortage, or increase retirement age again, there will at least one less pilot you guys have to compete with for a job (me). I'd be gone in a heartbeat.