Originally Posted by
waflyboy
I know it's a bit off topic and a little late, but I've got to say it:
Also, some have suggested this proposal will improve pilot compensation. I'd like to believe this, but I am again doubtful. Market forces have degraded compensation, and market forces will be required to improve it. With so many well-qualified airmen currently out of work, I feel it will take many years to shore up excess supply. Perhaps by then the FAA will have adopted the new ICAO multi-pilot crew concept, and exempt them from the 1,500 hour rule. This may again break down the barriers of entry and flood the ranks with "qualified" newly minted commercial pilots. But in the mean time, the folks who stack the deck will continue to transform high-time 737 pilots into RJ drivers.
I support this legislation because I believe it has the potential to improve safety. But I don't indulge in the delusion that it may improve my pay and quality of life.
I needed to come in and post in agreement. You are exactly right.
Automation, Glass cockpits, all combined with NextGen, will continue making the job of a pilot
easier. From the view of a manager, any experience requirements
at all will become arbitrary if the training is good enough.
Because of this, the FAA raising experience minimums will signal the first major step towards MPL. Barring a drastic increase in military or GA pilot training (unlikely), the supply of qualified pilots will eventually dwindle. It doesn't mean airlines will raise the pay. They will bring in quicker avenues (MPL) to improve supply. I'd be willing to bet that one could get applicants to a multi-crew program to pay for the training too...
It really just makes too much sense.