Word. ALPA has been fear mongering the membership for a while now. Time for that to end. I for one don't even believe in all the crap ALPA is spouting about MPL, foreign pilots, cabotage etc as an excuse to lowring the 1500hr requirement. Till last week they were telling us that we gonna have to reduce 1500hrs to 500hrs to keep Emirates away! That made no sense...so they just came up with a better story this week.

I am copying and pasting what ACL65PILOT had to say defending ALPA on the 1500 hr issue on 10/19/2010:

"What is a bigger threat to our careers is Emirates trying to levy the UAE's allowance of military base locations for more landing rights for their carrier in this country. Europe and Canada shot back and lost basing rights there. If we have to settle for something less than 1500 hrs to get the government to back fighting the UAE on this, I understand it. It is all about politics and the maneuvering that always goes on. Changing unions will not all of a sudden allow every issue to be dealt with separately."

ACL, I know you're a smart guy. I really do believe you have the best interests of the pilots in yourheart. If you run for ALPA (or DPA) office, I will even vote for you...may be you can fix them once you see what really goes on. But sometimes I wonder: are you drinking a little too much ALPA coolaid? Maybe you know something I don't.

I think the real issue is keeping the regional industry happy as they are a big part of the ALPA membership today. I'm sorry...but I am going to have to post that letter again here as proof:

"The FAA's aviation safety bill passed earlier this year, but a new report suggests the included prerequisite 1,500 hours flight experience for commercial airline copilots may not be necessary. An FAA advisory committee led by a regional airline official has proposed that 500 actual flight hours may be enough. Language in the safety legislation says that the FAA Administrator "may allow specific academic training courses ... to be credited toward the total flight hours required." The committee suggests that through an elaborate structure of training courses, up to two-thirds of the safety law's required 1,500 flight hours could be satisfied with other credited training. The proposal is merely a recommendation and it is not clear that there is any wiggle room in other language that specifically imposes the flight hours requirement. Meanwhile, the proposal has reignited the total hours versus quality-of-training argument. And pilot groups, industry voices and safety advocates are weighing in.


Legislators who fought for the safety bill's language say the law explicitly requires 1,500 flight hours, and any modifications must be justified by a resultant increase in safety. The president of the Regional Airline Association, Roger Cohen, has a different opinion. Cohen said academic work is "far more useful in training pilots for modern airline operations" than hours spent "towing banners above the beach." As for the FAA, Administrator Randy Babbitt supports improved training over a general requirement for more flight hours. Babbitt has previously commented on the subject, saying "experience is not measured by flight time alone." The Regional Airline Association holds the view that a "proper mix of the experience and academic/training approaches" would best ensure safety. And two pilot groups represented on the committee have split on the issue. The Air Line Pilots Association backed the committee's recommendations, while the Coalition of Air Line Pilot Associations supported experience over even enhanced training."