Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




Pages : [1] 2

Varsity
09-16-2017, 04:03 PM
Why isn't this stickied? The impending flood of 250 hour wonders is going to crash salaries industry wide.

An influential industry committee recommended Thursday that the Federal Aviation Administration eliminate or scale back dozens of safety rules, including one on airline pilot qualifications.

The FAA's Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee said the recommendations are a response to an effort by the agency to comply with President Donald Trump's directives to cut government regulations. The committee approved a report containing the recommendations by a vote of 14 to 4 with one abstention.

Pilots unions and safety groups oppose the recommendation on pilot qualifications, saying it would undermine safety. Regional airlines have been trying to roll back the pilot qualifications rule since it was adopted by the FAA in response to a sweeping aviation safety law passed by Congress after the last fatal crash of a U.S. passenger airliner.

Lawmakers said at the time that they were concerned about reports in the wake of the crash of Colgan Flight 3407 in February 2009 near Buffalo, New York, that some rapidly growing regional airlines were hiring first officers with far less experience than pilots at major airlines. All 49 people on board and a man on the ground were killed after the captain responded incorrectly to safety systems, causing the plane to stall.

After the crash, lawmakers increased the minimum number of flight hours first officers must have in order to obtain a license to fly commercial passenger airliners to 1,500 hours, the same as captains, leading to more experienced first officers.

Before that, airlines were allowed to hire first officers with as few as 250 hours of flying experience. Some airlines would move first officers into a captain's seat as soon as they had the minimum 1,500 hours of flying experience.

The report recommends permitting pilots with less than 1,500 hours to qualify for an "air transport" license if they receive academic training from their airline.

Airlines say the current rule is acerbating a pilot shortage that has caused some regional carriers to cancel flights. The problem, they say, is that it can cost prospective pilots as much as they might pay for a four-year college education to acquire the greater flying hours they now need to qualify for an air transport license. As a result, fewer people are willing to pursue careers as pilots.

Faye Malarkey Black, president of the regional airline association, said the proposed changes would incorporate more meaningful education into pilot training than mere flight hours.

"Far from weakening safety, it's one of the most important things we can do right now to advance pilot training," she said.

Airline pilot unions and safety advocates say the problem is regional airlines don't pay high enough entry-level salaries to attract as many pilots as they need.

"UPS and FedEx have good pay and benefits and thousands of highly qualified pilot applicants," the National Air Disaster Foundation, a safety advocacy group, said in a dissenting opinion to the committee's report. "There is only a pilot shortage of pilots able to work for $25,000 a year."

The Air Line Pilots Association International also opposed opposes the change, saying in its dissenting opinion that the pilot supply in the United States remains strong. Chad Balentine, an ALPA representative and member of the committee, said reducing the required entry-level flight hours would "jeopardize safety."

A group representing the families of victims of the Colgan crash said in a statement last week that regional airlines have taken their case to the advisory panel "to bypass the legislative process where they have run into considerable resistance."

In June, the Senate Commerce committee passed a bill that included a provision allowing prospective airline pilots to substitute academic training for flying hours. Opposition to the provision from Democrats has prevented Republicans from bringing the bill to the floor for a vote.

The report also recommends 53 other changes to safety rules, include regulations governing the strength of hinges, emergency exit markings and whether ashtrays should be required in restrooms since smoking isn't allowed on planes.


https://www.manufacturing.net/news/2017/09/industry-panel-recommends-roll-back-aviation-safety-rules

Maintaining the Current Minimum First Officer Qualifications (http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/first-officer-qualifications)


JTwift
09-17-2017, 03:55 AM
"Airline pilot unions and safety advocates say the problem is regional airlines don't pay high enough entry-level salaries to attract as many pilots as they need."

I fly for a Regional. I'm in a crash pad with a guy from Delta who used to be at the same Regional.

We do the same job. Base out of the same airport. He has a better schedule. He has far better pay and benefits.
I knew what I was getting into, so I'm not blaming anyone. I can quit when I want (soon, I think).

Now, granted, I'm new to this, but it seems to me the whole system is flawed. You hear stories about the guys at the top who work three days a month and make $300k. Why, again? That's just a bad system. What are people like that contributing to the company? And don't say they, "paid their dues."

This whole thing should be leveled out more, the regional model is garbage (again..same job, and I can bumped off a flight to work by a retiree and their kids on the Wholly Owned parent).

It's just weird from the top down.

lionflyer
09-17-2017, 06:54 AM
If they want to cut regulations they can start with O2 mask above 250 BS.


Lemons
09-17-2017, 07:04 AM
If they want to cut regulations they can start with O2 mask above 250 BS.
Or having to get a $150 first class medical every year.

UAL T38 Phlyer
09-17-2017, 07:19 AM
How about everyone respond to ALPA's call to action?

Took 35 seconds yesterday. Sent emails to both my Senators and Congressman.

Aptaper
09-17-2017, 07:33 AM
How about everyone respond to ALPA's call to action?

Took 35 seconds yesterday. Sent emails to both my Senators and Congressman.

Amen +1 :cool:

trip
09-17-2017, 07:49 AM
To quote my favorite money talker B. Brinker.
"We have the best government money can buy"

tomgoodman
09-17-2017, 07:57 AM
If they want to cut regulations they can start with O2 mask above 250 BS.

Or having to get a $150 first class medical every year.

Since they can't drop all the regs, how about giving each pilot an exemption from one rule of their choice. It would have to be printed on their airman certificate, to prevent a retroactive "post violation" selection. :D

UAL T38 Phlyer
09-17-2017, 08:04 AM
The OP put this link in, but didn't label it.

CLICK THIS LINK and take less than a minute to send emails to your Senators and Congressman to maintain the ATP requirement.

Maintaining the Current Minimum First Officer Qualifications (http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/first-officer-qualifications)

Politicians respond to constituent responses when they achieve a numerical threshold. A dozen; a few hundred? Meh.

Multiple thousands? They might put down their latest issue of "Modern Malfeasance" long enough to craft a response.

Later, while conducting a 'caucus' at a DC gentlemen's club, if a cohort grouses about "....a bunch of whiney pilots clogging my mail and phone; I can't even enjoy this lap-dance," they may resolve to look at it in committee.

Sadly, statistics show that fewer than 10% of all ALPA members can even be bothered to respond to Calls to Action.

joe hokie
09-17-2017, 08:15 AM
Click the link!!

Takes less than a minute. Thanks for posting.

Xtreme87
09-17-2017, 08:20 AM
I'll play along, but unless you're sending them large amounts of cash or gifts, it is a waste of time. Little emails from ordinary citizens are worthless to them.

UALfoLIFE
09-17-2017, 11:43 AM
I'll play along, but unless you're sending them large amounts of cash or gifts, it is a waste of time. Little emails from ordinary citizens are worthless to them.

That's what the ALPA PAC is for......

C130driver
09-17-2017, 11:57 AM
Why isn't this stickied? The impending flood of 250 hour wonders is going to crash salaries industry wide.




https://www.manufacturing.net/news/2017/09/industry-panel-recommends-roll-back-aviation-safety-rules

Maintaining the Current Minimum First Officer Qualifications (http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/first-officer-qualifications)

They will crash more than salaries :(

FLYMIA
09-17-2017, 01:19 PM
took me less than a minute to submit.

Chakerik
09-17-2017, 01:47 PM
"Airline pilot unions and safety advocates say the problem is regional airlines don't pay high enough entry-level salaries to attract as many pilots as they need."

I fly for a Regional. I'm in a crash pad with a guy from Delta who used to be at the same Regional.

We do the same job. Base out of the same airport. He has a better schedule. He has far better pay and benefits.
I knew what I was getting into, so I'm not blaming anyone. I can quit when I want (soon, I think).

Now, granted, I'm new to this, but it seems to me the whole system is flawed. You hear stories about the guys at the top who work three days a month and make $300k. Why, again? That's just a bad system. What are people like that contributing to the company? And don't say they, "paid their dues."

This whole thing should be leveled out more, the regional model is garbage (again..same job, and I can bumped off a flight to work by a retiree and their kids on the Wholly Owned parent).

It's just weird from the top down.

What's your point exactly?

TogaParty
09-17-2017, 02:31 PM
Super easy. Submitted.

WSPLT
09-17-2017, 02:53 PM
We have a fair number of folks that wash out of the sim at my shop that exceed the 1500 hour rule, and they want to remove it?

If this gets pulled, there will come a time when people will be putting their family's lives in the hands of crews that have barely 2000 hours combined between them. In the days where it took several years to upgrade, this probably wouldn't have happened and would have been less of an issue, but those days are gone. Most shops are upgrading at 1000 hours SIC these days I think.

The public generally has no idea they are even flying on a regional airline. The plane says Delta, United, American, Alaska, whatever on the side. They just don't pay attention, and have NO IDEA of the difference in training.

I sent the letters, took less than a minute. I hope you do too!

And lets be real, the 1500 hour rule really doesn't raise the cost of flight training at all. If you're paying out of your own pocket beyond 300ish hours, you're doing it wrong!

KnotSee
09-17-2017, 03:44 PM
"Airline pilot unions and safety advocates say the problem is regional airlines don't pay high enough entry-level salaries to attract as many pilots as they need."

I fly for a Regional. I'm in a crash pad with a guy from Delta who used to be at the same Regional.

We do the same job. Base out of the same airport. He has a better schedule. He has far better pay and benefits.
I knew what I was getting into, so I'm not blaming anyone. I can quit when I want (soon, I think).

Now, granted, I'm new to this, but it seems to me the whole system is flawed. You hear stories about the guys at the top who work three days a month and make $300k. Why, again? That's just a bad system. What are people like that contributing to the company? And don't say they, "paid their dues."

This whole thing should be leveled out more, the regional model is garbage (again..same job, and I can bumped off a flight to work by a retiree and their kids on the Wholly Owned parent).

It's just weird from the top down.


You sure sound like a little socialist snowflake who wants income redistribution. The dudes at the Legacies and especially those at the top, EARNED every dang thing they receive in pay and benefits.

KnotSee
09-17-2017, 03:47 PM
They will crash more than salaries :(

Marvin had more than 1500hrs and so did his copilot.

Chakerik
09-17-2017, 04:06 PM
Marvin had more than 1500hrs and so did his copilot.

Not when they were hired as airline pilots....

Chakerik
09-17-2017, 04:07 PM
You sure sound like a little socialist who wants income redistribution. The dudes at the Legacies and especially those at the top, EARNED every dang thing they receive in pay and benefits.

Spot on right there.

KnotSee
09-17-2017, 04:15 PM
Not when they were hired as airline pilots....

They didn't crash until they both had over 1500hrs.

Chakerik
09-17-2017, 04:18 PM
They didn't crash until they both had over 1500hrs.

That's not the point. They had less than 1500 when hired. Getting experience outside of automated 121 type flying, aka flight instructing and the like, builds fundamentals that could have allowed them to recognize a stall... That's been discussed over and over. Fundamental flying skills, and the lack thereof are the issue. Experience means something.

KnotSee
09-17-2017, 04:32 PM
That's not the point. They had less than 1500 when hired. Getting experience outside of automated 121 type flying, aka flight instructing and the like, builds fundamentals that could have allowed them to recognize a stall... That's been discussed over and over. Fundamental flying skills, and the lack thereof are the issue. Experience means something.

Marvin flew 1900s also. It doesn't get much more manual than that.

CRJoperator
09-17-2017, 04:35 PM
That's not the point. They had less than 1500 when hired. Getting experience outside of automated 121 type flying, aka flight instructing and the like, builds fundamentals that could have allowed them to recognize a stall... That's been discussed over and over. Fundamental flying skills, and the lack thereof are the issue. Experience means something.


So someone towing a banner for 2000 hours has more experience than a 600 hour flight instructor teaching instrument in NYC airspace? The ATP requirement (to get hired 121)was and is completely BS. Quality NOT quantity!

UAL T38 Phlyer
09-17-2017, 04:42 PM
A better way to phrase it is not manual, but "edge of the envelope."

Whether in a 1900 or other 121 op, airline flying is almost exclusively middle of the envelope. Training events are designed to return to the "security" of the center of the envelope.

The (flawed) counter-argument for ab initio or multiplace license crews is that the military gets away with less than 300 hours to put a guy in a fighter or heavy.

The difference? They spent between 6 months and a year and a half deliberately working to the edge of the envelope, and staying there. (And...they were in a program that if they were marginal, they were eliminated).

Guys who work the civilian rout will do a lot of that edge-of-envelope flying as a CFI, banner tow, jumpers, flying in lousy weather with underpowered airplanes and no radar...

Part 121 is not a place to hone your skills. Very little changes, skill-wise, once you get in the comfy chair of aviation.

Chakerik
09-17-2017, 04:43 PM
So someone towing a banner for 2000 hours has more experience than a 600 hour flight instructor teaching instrument in NYC airspace? The ATP requirement (to get hired 121)was and is completely BS. Quality NOT quantity!

I never said that. Don't know where you got the idea I think banner towing is better than flight instructing. Yes hours vary in the quality of experience. I'm not here to debate that. I'm saying that someone with 1000 plus hours flying something other then jets is an assset to safety. If you want 250 hour pilots in the right seat go ride in the back of a jet in India or China. See if you think it makes a difference.

Chakerik
09-17-2017, 04:44 PM
Marvin flew 1900s also. It doesn't get much more manual than that.

Again, not the point....

Chakerik
09-17-2017, 04:45 PM
A better way to phrase it is not manual, but "edge of the envelope."

Whether in a 1900 or other 121 op, airline flying is almost exclusively middle of the envelope. Training events are designed to return to the "security" of the center of the envelope.

The (flawed) counter-argument for ab initio or multiplace license crews is that the military gets away with less than 300 hours to put a guy in a fighter or heavy.

The difference? They spent between 6 months and a year and a half deliberately working to the edge of the envelope, and staying there. (And...they were in a program that if they were marginal, they were eliminated).

Guys who work the civilian rout will do a lot of that edge-of-envelope flying as a CFI, banner tow, jumpers, flying in lousy weather with underpowered airplanes and no radar...

Part 121 is not a place to hone your skills. Very little changes, skill-wise, once you get in the comfy chair of aviation.

Thank you. You said what I was thinking in a much more eloquent way:D

deadstick35
09-17-2017, 04:45 PM
A better way to phrase it is not manual, but "edge of the envelope."

Whether in a 1900 or other 121 op, airline flying is almost exclusively middle of the envelope. Training events are designed to return to the "security" of the center of the envelope.

The (flawed) counter-argument for ab initio or multiplace license crews is that the military gets away with less than 300 hours to put a guy in a fighter or heavy.

The difference? They spent between 6 months and a year and a half deliberately working to the edge of the envelope, and staying there. (And...they were in a program that if they were marginal, they were eliminated).

Guys who work the civilian rout will do a lot of that edge-of-envelope flying as a CFI, banner tow, jumpers, flying in lousy weather with underpowered airplanes and no radar...

Part 121 is not a place to hone your skills. Very little changes, skill-wise, once you get in the comfy chair of aviation.


That is the best, most logical explanation I've ever read.

CRJoperator
09-17-2017, 04:46 PM
A better way to phrase it is not manual, but "edge of the envelope."

Whether in a 1900 or other 121 op, airline flying is almost exclusively middle of the envelope. Training events are designed to return to the "security" of the center of the envelope.

The (flawed) counter-argument for ab initio or multiplace license crews is that the military gets away with less than 300 hours to put a guy in a fighter or heavy.

The difference? They spent between 6 months and a year and a half deliberately working to the edge of the envelope, and staying there. (And...they were in a program that if they were marginal, they were eliminated).

Guys who work the civilian rout will do a lot of that edge-of-envelope flying as a CFI, banner tow, jumpers, flying in lousy weather with underpowered airplanes and no radar...

Part 121 is not a place to hone your skills. Very little changes, skill-wise, once you get in the comfy chair of aviation.

What's the **%*%^£ are you talking about? Military does not let you "think"'outside the box. Exactly why military crashes ALL the time.

Chakerik
09-17-2017, 04:53 PM
What's the **%*%^£ are you talking about? Military does not let you "think"'outside the box. Exactly why military crashes ALL the time.

What are you talking about? He never said anything about thinking outside the box. Operating on the edge of the envelope. Not sitting straight and level in an airliner. You know, flying.

Military crashing all the time? Are you kidding me? Look at the mission that they do compared to civilian. Your statements are getting more and more ludicrous.

CBreezy
09-17-2017, 05:21 PM
Marvin flew 1900s also. It doesn't get much more manual than that.

You mean he swung gear in a pay to play time building scheme?

CBreezy
09-17-2017, 05:23 PM
What's the **%*%^£ are you talking about? Military does not let you "think"'outside the box. Exactly why military crashes ALL the time.

Says the guy who never flew in the military? You haven't the slightest clue what you are talking about.

Mover
09-17-2017, 05:31 PM
What's the **%*%^£ are you talking about? Military does not let you "think"'outside the box. Exactly why military crashes ALL the time.

What are you smoking?

WSPLT
09-17-2017, 05:35 PM
What's the **%*%^£ are you talking about? Military does not let you "think"'outside the box. Exactly why military crashes ALL the time.
Or it could be the fact that they're doing things like landing jets on ships at night, and flying at 400+ knots through canyons all while sitting on a seat packed with explosives. Oh, and sometimes people shoot at them.

CBreezy
09-17-2017, 05:40 PM
Or it could be the fact that they're doing things like landing jets on ships at night, and flying at 400+ knots through canyons all while sitting on a seat packed with explosives. Oh, and sometimes people shoot at them.

I'd love to see that hero fly his CRJ at 400 knots low level through a combat zone. And no, a TCAS RA doesn't count as BFM

RhinoBallAuto
09-17-2017, 05:51 PM
What's the **%*%^£ are you talking about? Military does not let you "think"'outside the box. Exactly why military crashes ALL the time.

You may have to be prepared to defend this statement. Not only against criticism from military aviators, but also from recruiting departments, both in and out of the 121 world -- because they ALL want to hire military experienced leaders (aviation or otherwise)....largely because they can think outside the box.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that you either know very little about military aviation, or you wish you did. Or both.

thornfc6
09-17-2017, 07:32 PM
Thank you for the link. I will be sure to share with my pilot friends.

Speaking of civilian experience, I spent the last year flying a 206 all over the country for aerial survey. The experience and confidence gained is ABSOLUTEY invauable, and a will be a huge help as my career progresses into larger, faster equipment. Recently flew with a guy with a fresh commercial, looking at the way he flew and his aeronautical decision making was an eye opener. Not by any fault of his own, just not enough time in the skies and exposure to different scenarios you can't simulate during training.

And they want to put those level of pilots in jets? Carrying passengers? Nope

SonicFlyer
09-17-2017, 07:37 PM
National Air Disaster Foundation, a safety advocacy group, said in a dissenting opinion to the committee's report. "There is only a pilot shortage of pilots able to work for $25,000 a year."

Well they no longer have any credibility lol :rolleyes:

SonicFlyer
09-17-2017, 07:38 PM
We have a fair number of folks that wash out of the sim at my shop that exceed the 1500 hour rule, and they want to remove it? Your point explains why the hour rule isn't needed.



And lets be real, the 1500 hour rule really doesn't raise the cost of flight training at all. Of course it does... first off whenever the government intervenes in the market it causes distortions. One example of that is CFIs are now a lot more expensive.

SonicFlyer
09-17-2017, 07:40 PM
That's not the point. They had less than 1500 when hired. Getting experience outside of automated 121 type flying, aka flight instructing and the like, builds fundamentals that could have allowed them to recognize a stall... That's been discussed over and over. Fundamental flying skills, and the lack thereof are the issue. Experience means something.That's called poor training.

And yes 250 hrs is too low, but 500-750 or so is about right for most. 1500 was nothing more than an arbitrary political knee-jerk reaction gift from Obama to the unions.

It's like FDR who used to set price controls based upon superstition... he'd literally just make numbers up.

JamesNoBrakes
09-17-2017, 07:57 PM
So is Aviation Great Again yet?

hindsight2020
09-17-2017, 08:22 PM
So what about that FFD vs mainline whipsaw dichotomy? 16% to 45% of domestic departures in just 15 years. From a mere 5% of domestic lift in 1978 mind you. Yikes. Anyone wanna tackle that doozy? Seems like the elephant in the room, and a sticking point everybody has avoided since post No. freggin 2 brought it up. And the best the gallery has for that guy is "socialist"? LOL Look in the mirror... aaaand there's the industry's problem.

WSPLT
09-17-2017, 09:09 PM
Your point explains why the hour rule isn't needed.
Perhaps you could explain to me how knocking 1200 hours off of someone's resume is going to make them a better pilot? For sure, it's the QUALITY of the experience that matters, but there's no way someone flies around for 1500 hours without learning at least a few valuable lessons.



Of course it does... first off whenever the government intervenes in the market it causes distortions. One example of that is CFIs are now a lot more expensive.
So let me get this straight, the government forces people to work in other areas of aviation (such as flight instructing) to build time before they are eligible for the airlines, and somehow that is responsible for increasing the cost of CFIs?

I'm generally in favor of smaller government, but there are times when the free market's values are NOT aligned with the best interest of the public, and in my opinion, this qualifies. If the free market were allowed to dictate aviation safety unhindered by the FAA and the federal government, airlines would be single pilot!

Regionals are NOT here because they are safer, they are here because they are cheaper, and the 1500 hour rule threatens that! It's NOT that difficult to get 1500 hours, and it requires people to do some flying away from the comforts of the 121 world.

ShyGuy
09-17-2017, 09:39 PM
Not when they were hired as airline pilots....

He had about 660 hrs and she had about 1200-1300 when hired. She was a CFI who taught at the Sabena flight training facility in Arizona. They had about 3,00 hrs and 2,200 hrs at the time of crash.



Lets be honest, and the crash reports of accidents back this up. When it's a pretty bad pilot error, you usually find that the PF had a history of failures, sometimes both before the airline and then during the airline. The Colgan CA was one of the nicest guys in the world but from a pass/fail standpoint, failed numerous times in primary and advanced training, and then failed just about every checking step once at Colgan. He should never have been in the left seat that night.

The company may want to fire someone, but the union will try and protect the pilot (it's their job after all to represent). And the system works at times, but it also fails and you have people who shouldn't be flying passenger planes but they get to do so anyway. And more food for thought, at an A320 airline a 1st year pilot was fired after being on line for about 8 months and that was after numerous additional training sessions, sims, and all the help they could muster. He's at GoJets now.

WSPLT
09-17-2017, 09:43 PM
So what about that FFD vs mainline whipsaw dichotomy? 16% to 45% of domestic departures in just 15 years. From a mere 5% of domestic lift in 1978 mind you. Yikes. Anyone wanna tackle that doozy? Seems like the elephant in the room, and a sticking point everybody has avoided since post No. freggin 2 brought it up. And the best the gallery has for that guy is "socialist"? LOL Look in the mirror... aaaand there's the industry's problem.
Truth! The mainline carriers CREATED the pilot shortage by expanding the regional airline industry. The regional carriers exist to save the mainline carriers money by allowing them to pay less, and hire less experienced pilots to fly the same routes in smaller airplanes.

The 1500 hour rule simply accelerated the effects of the pilot shortage, but ultimately the labor pool has shown that there is a shortage of people willing to drop $100k+ on an education to do a job that pays very little for quite a few years. This industry shot itself in the foot IMHO by expanding the regional carriers, and I think we're seeing the beginning of the end of them.

Our Canadian counterparts don't have the 1500 hour rule, and they're just beginning to feel the impact of the pilot shortage, but make no mistake, it's there too! Their regionals are canceling flights too, and it's just a matter of time before they're in the same boat.

JTwift
09-18-2017, 06:54 AM
So what about that FFD vs mainline whipsaw dichotomy? 16% to 45% of domestic departures in just 15 years. From a mere 5% of domestic lift in 1978 mind you. Yikes. Anyone wanna tackle that doozy? Seems like the elephant in the room, and a sticking point everybody has avoided since post No. freggin 2 brought it up. And the best the gallery has for that guy is "socialist"? LOL Look in the mirror... aaaand there's the industry's problem.

I don't mind people calling me whatever they want....I was just throwing out some thoughts.

I jumpseated the other day and the captain (major carrier for over 20 years) was saying the same thing as me. The pay scale should be the same for all FOs and again the same for all CAs....in other words, why does an Airbus FO make more than a CRJ FO? After watching what they're doing, the CRJ FO works way harder. Why does a 777 FO make more than an A320 FO? We all have to deal with LGA, we're in the same airspace.

In what other business can someone work a fraction of what they did when they started and make so much more money that it's a joke of a comparison? They'd be fired/let go for being a burden on the company.

Sorry for derailing the main topic. And, no, I'm not a socialist.

Chakerik
09-18-2017, 07:14 AM
I don't mind people calling me whatever they want....I was just throwing out some thoughts.

I jumpseated the other day and the captain (major carrier for over 20 years) was saying the same thing as me. The pay scale should be the same for all FOs and again the same for all CAs....in other words, why does an Airbus FO make more than a CRJ FO? After watching what they're doing, the CRJ FO works way harder. Why does a 777 FO make more than an A320 FO? We all have to deal with LGA, we're in the same airspace.

In what other business can someone work a fraction of what they did when they started and make so much more money that it's a joke of a comparison? They'd be fired/let go for being a burden on the company.

Sorry for derailing the main topic. And, no, I'm not a socialist.

Understand your point, however the guy flying the crj makes less than the 320 guy because he works for a different company. That's the key. You work for someone else, you know that the day you get hired.

The rule not only increases the experience required, but acts as a barrier to entry. What's happened in the last few years? You go from making $20k at a regional first year to 70k. Regionals are having trouble filling classes. Regionals are being replaced by mainline. Everything you want to have happen is happening. Which is why it blows my mind that pilots want this to go away. It's only been beneficial to the profession. People are short sighted and see that it will take an extra year to get hired at a regional, then fail to see their compensation over a longer term is greatly increased.

Correlation does not equal causation, but as of late regionals have been pretty safe too since this rule.

Most states you need to be 16 to get your driver's license. Most states make you get a permit first at either 14/15. Hone your experience before being unleashed on the public. Are there some kids out there that could start driving at 16 alone and be just fine? Absolutely. Will some not improve at all after a year of driving with their parents? Absolutely. But for most, I'd venture to say that the more they drive, the more they get experience, the safer they will be when they are out driving alone. Obviously the kid in California is going to have a different experience then the kid driving in nowhere Nebraska. Quality of experience matters like many state. But when has more time to practice a skill before being unleashed upon the public hurt anyone?

It's s pretty simple concept.

hindsight2020
09-18-2017, 08:19 AM
Understand your point, however the guy flying the crj makes less than the 320 guy because he works for a different company. That's the key. You work for someone else, you know that the day you get hired.

The rule not only increases the experience required, but acts as a barrier to entry. What's happened in the last few years? You go from making $20k at a regional first year to 70k. Regionals are having trouble filling classes. Regionals are being replaced by mainline. Everything you want to have happen is happening. Which is why it blows my mind that pilots want this to go away. It's only been beneficial to the profession. People are short sighted and see that it will take an extra year to get hired at a regional, then fail to see their compensation over a longer term is greatly increased.

Correlation does not equal causation, but as of late regionals have been pretty safe too since this rule.

Most states you need to be 16 to get your driver's license. Most states make you get a permit first at either 14/15. Hone your experience before being unleashed on the public. Are there some kids out there that could start driving at 16 alone and be just fine? Absolutely. Will some not improve at all after a year of driving with their parents? Absolutely. But for most, I'd venture to say that the more they drive, the more they get experience, the safer they will be when they are out driving alone. Obviously the kid in California is going to have a different experience then the kid driving in nowhere Nebraska. Quality of experience matters like many state. But when has more time to practice a skill before being unleashed upon the public hurt anyone?

It's s pretty simple concept.

All great, but we're conflating topics. You can keep the barriers to entry as they exist, it still doesn't account for the land grab FFD departures attained in the industry. The 1500 hours rule didn't create a shortage. The opportunity cost of being stuck making regional money for life in a career where 45% of domestic lift is paid under said de facto C-scale IS what did it. People are gonna look at that and run the numbers and say: "meh, too protracted of a compensation scale with too little assurance I'll make it to the A-scale for the same job performed (especially after 5 years) to make it worth my while". And then add to that no lateral income portability like what 99% of pedestrians in the work force do enjoy? And y'all are surprised? Jesus....:rolleyes:

That's what's happening. I know it's the hobby du jour to cartoon millennials as want-it-now myopics, but this goes beyond the "pay your dues" fallacy. This is a monster of a gamble for someone who doesn't believe in principle that a poorly paid apprenticeship should last 10 years. Let's bark at the right tree here. Don't shoot the messenger either, the FFD hiring numbers speak for themselves.

I also don't agree with you that present circumstances (increase of regional pay via bonus, classes short of pilots) will create an environment where you will see a reversal of the domestic lift % flown by mainline to CY 2000 levels, let alone 1978 levels. I'd love for you to be correct on that account, I just don't see that out there. Which is to say, the optics will remain the same at the level where the "pilot shortage" canard is being exploited at its loudest.

The prior poster merely scratched at the topic and some mainline folks immediately blew their tops off. Think about that for a second. Unity is a party punchline during section 6 negotiations in the airline pilot demographic, nothing more. They know damn well what would happen if the industry returned to the days of 85%+ domestic lift being flown under mainline level contract, and they want no part of that. F to the U to the I got mine. :rolleyes:

As a mil guy I have no dog in the fight. But when I was a civilian I did have one, and I chose to bypass the profession for exactly the points I've illustrated. I believe the calculus is similar to other bright folks with multiple career options, who could thrive as airline pilots if the incentives were there. Never mind the monster shadow inventory of ATPs who won't come out the shadows to fly FFDs at current market price. I digress. To each their own.

Chakerik
09-18-2017, 08:40 AM
All great, but we're conflating topics. You can keep the barriers to entry as they exist, it still doesn't account for the land grab FFD departures attained in the industry. The 1500 hours rule didn't create a shortage. The opportunity cost of being stuck making regional money for life in a career where 45% of domestic lift is paid under said de facto C-scale IS what did it. People are gonna look at that and run the numbers and say: "meh, too protracted of a compensation scale with too little assurance I'll make it to the A-scale for the same job performed (especially after 5 years) to make it worth my while". And then add to that no lateral income portability like what 99% of pedestrians in the work force do enjoy? And y'all are surprised? Jesus....:rolleyes:

That's what's happening. I know it's the hobby du jour to cartoon millennials as want-it-now myopics, but this goes beyond the "pay your dues" fallacy. This is a monster of a gamble for someone who doesn't believe in principle that a poorly paid apprenticeship should last 10 years. Let's bark at the right tree here. Don't shoot the messenger either, the FFD hiring numbers speak for themselves.

I also don't agree with you that present circumstances (increase of regional pay via bonus, classes short of pilots) will create an environment where you will see a reversal of the domestic lift % flown by mainline to CY 2000 levels, let alone 1978 levels. I'd love for you to be correct on that account, I just don't see that out there. Which is to say, the optics will remain the same at the level where the "pilot shortage" canard is being exploited at its loudest.

The prior poster merely scratched at the topic and some mainline folks immediately blew their tops off. Think about that for a second. Unity is a party punchline during section 6 negotiations in the airline pilot demographic, nothing more. They know damn well what would happen if the industry returned to the days of 85%+ domestic lift being flown under mainline level contract, and they want no part of that. F to the U to the I got mine. :rolleyes:

As a mil guy I have no dog in the fight. But when I was a civilian I did have one, and I chose to bypass the profession for exactly the points I've illustrated. I believe the calculus is similar to other bright folks with multiple career options, who could thrive as airline pilots if the incentives were there. Never mind the monster shadow inventory of ATPs who won't come out the shadows to fly FFDs at current market price. I digress. To each their own.

Don't disagree with anything you say. My point is, as line pilots, how do we fix this? An industry that has been this way since before many of us were born. It's not simple. My only point is I think the rule has been aiding in reversing that trend. It has at my own shop anyways. CRJ-200 flying up gauged to CRJ-900/E175 and eventually 717 and the like. Our regional lift has been decreasing, and seems to be on the path to continue to do so.

animation
09-18-2017, 09:19 AM
Don't disagree with anything you say. My point is, as line pilots, how do we fix this? An industry that has been this way since before many of us were born. It's not simple. My only point is I think the rule has been aiding in reversing that trend. It has at my own shop anyways. CRJ-200 flying up gauged to CRJ-900/E175 and eventually 717 and the like. Our regional lift has been decreasing, and seems to be on the path to continue to do so.

We gotta keep scope where it is or push it back down. Hopefully that and the pilot shortage choke the regionals.

DrunkIrishman
09-18-2017, 09:24 AM
Why does a 777 FO make more than an A320 FO? We all have to deal with LGA, we're in the same airspace.

Why does a Cardiologist make more than a General Practice doctor? Same job right? They're both doctors, yet one makes three times more than the other.

320's fly one continent, 777's fly one globe. Big difference there in skillsets. IMHO there is a good reason to make more.

JTwift
09-18-2017, 09:37 AM
Why does a Cardiologist make more than a General Practice doctor? Same job right? They're both doctors, yet one makes three times more than the other.

320's fly one continent, 777's fly one globe. Big difference there in skillsets. IMHO there is a good reason to make more.

Oh, c'mon. I've flown in literally the worst country for ATC (Djibouti), and it still isn't that hard.

And you're comparing one doctor who does checkups to another that cuts out and replaces your heart?

Chakerik
09-18-2017, 09:57 AM
Why does a Cardiologist make more than a General Practice doctor? Same job right? They're both doctors, yet one makes three times more than the other.

320's fly one continent, 777's fly one globe. Big difference there in skillsets. IMHO there is a good reason to make more.

777 vs 320 vs crj 200. All the same job in a sense. Difference is inherent responsibility. More lives one is responsible for. Just like the boss that makes more then the office employee. Inherent responsibility of the position. Even though the jobs may be relatively similar, and even if the employee is doing more leg work. Why do captains make more than fos? Responsibility. That's what the money is for. Not that one job is "harder" then the other.

DrunkIrishman
09-18-2017, 10:31 AM
Oh, c'mon. I've flown in literally the worst country for ATC (Djibouti), and it still isn't that hard.

And you're comparing one doctor who does checkups to another that cuts out and replaces your heart?

How "hard" the job is has little to do with the pay. If it did, ditchdiggers would be millionaires. I've flown both regional and international/long haul. In my humble opinion, flying 777's is a different skillset as well as doing damage to your body with the circadian disruption.

Of course the real reason there is a difference in pay, as the airplane size increases, has to do with the unions attaching the number of seats to the paycheck many decades ago.

Now that we've had this highly educational discussion, I hope you have emailed your Representatives about keeping the 1500 hour limit.

Fly safe

GogglesPisano
09-18-2017, 10:31 AM
You guys seem to be confusing fairness with collective bargaining leverage.

Regional pilots will never have negotiating leverage (supply-and-demand pressures notwithstanding.)

badflaps
09-18-2017, 12:49 PM
During a doc visit, I lamented wearing glasses. The very old and wise AME mumbled something about, "They already have a pilot, you're just there to watch the property.":D

BlueMoon
09-18-2017, 12:52 PM
Why does a Cardiologist make more than a General Practice doctor? Same job right? They're both doctors, yet one makes three times more than the other.

320's fly one continent, 777's fly one globe. Big difference there in skillsets. IMHO there is a good reason to make more.

Yet all it takes to be a 777 ca vs a 320 ca, is the requirement to be hired first.

Larry in TN
09-18-2017, 01:04 PM
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.

A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.

If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.

On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.

ShyGuy
09-18-2017, 03:37 PM
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.

A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.

If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.

On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.

:rolleyes:

If I had a dollar every time a pilot equates hourly payrate to seat capacity in a plane..........

badflaps
09-18-2017, 05:11 PM
I still say one bag of mail, in a J-3, Wednesday only.

labbats
09-18-2017, 08:25 PM
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.

A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.

If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.

On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.

Probably the most well thought out and articulated post in a while. Kudos

deadstick35
09-18-2017, 08:49 PM
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.

A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.

If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.

On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.


You have to factor in the employee costs and benefits, too. The 401k match value is lower, in general, regional employees are younger and healthier. This is where subcontracting pats off.

JamesNoBrakes
09-18-2017, 08:58 PM
Some of these arguments made more sense back in the day (likely when they experienced this) when Part 135s and mainly prop/piston aircraft were doing actual regional flying, feeding mainline.

Things couldn't be more different than that now, with "regional" jet aircraft more modern and better-equipped than many, if not most, "mainline" jets. And now, these airlines have to meet the same 121 standards and fly routes that are even longer than many of the "mainline routes". Things made a paradigm shift a few decades ago, but they (the airlines) have managed to keep some pilots on a "B" schedule, despite having the "regional" flying rise to the level of "mainline", to make their bottom line better, by pitting these smaller "regional" airlines against each other. Like it or not, "regional" pilots are flying jets that fly just as fast as mainline to the exact same places, it ain't 1970 no more.

From a safety point of view, the goal should be just as much experience and safety at the "regional" airline level, as compared to "mainline".

at6d
09-18-2017, 11:14 PM
So...should one need more or less experience to operate a non-glass, round dial, no moving map jet in today's modern world?

Just saying, but for a few more weeks it's still 1984 at SWA!

JetDoc
09-18-2017, 11:45 PM
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.

A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.

If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.

On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.

HILARIOUS! You do realize that a "C" series Captain at delta will make $151.00 an hour MORE than a "regional" Captain for flying a plane that seats only 24 more people? Using your very own flawed math that would mean only $147.00 to split between that C-100 crew. Try again boss.

deadstick35
09-19-2017, 03:10 AM
From a safety point of view, the goal should be just as much experience and safety at the "regional" airline level, as compared to "mainline".

In the eyes of the FAA, the requirements are the same. It's the operator who raises the bar.

Consuela
09-19-2017, 04:54 AM
HILARIOUS! You do realize that a "C" series Captain at delta will make $151.00 an hour MORE than a "regional" Captain for flying a plane that seats only 24 more people? Using your very own flawed math that would mean only $147.00 to split between that C-100 crew. Try again boss.

You should re-read what Larry wrote. He's explaining the economics, not the worth of the pilot. A DAL C-series Captain is very expensive compared to their 777 captains based on revenue generated for a given flight.

Hacker15e
09-19-2017, 05:42 AM
Pilots are paid what they can negotiate with their employer.

Trying to rationalize that number with "value" or "importance" or "compensation commensurate to contribution or risk" is a fruitless endeavor, because they're simply not related. The argument for years has been that pay is linked to the amount of revenue generated (e.g. the 777 pilot hauls more people per hour than the CRJ one does), and the pay charts sort of follow that inclined pattern, but it isn't a direct link. It is ultimately supply and demand and market forces (including pattern bargaining) which decide these things.

Life -- and pay -- isn't fair. Nor should it be in a free market.

If you think the airline industry is weird, go take a look at most corporate business, where salaries and bonuses aren't publicly known and are often times individually negotiated. Two folks sitting right next to one another and doing the exact same job may have wildly divergent compensation and not have any awareness that their pay differs so drastically from one another.

tomgoodman
09-19-2017, 06:07 AM
Pilots are paid what they can negotiate with their employer.

Or, as Cousin Boudreaux said: "The juice you get depends on what was in the orange and how hard you squoze it." :D

Larry in TN
09-19-2017, 10:07 AM
A DAL C-series Captain is very expensive compared to their 777 captains based on revenue generated for a given flight.
Exactly.

Time will tell if Delta is able to leverage the benefits that the C-Series will bring with it's efficiency, and what should be the most comfortable narrow-body cabin in the industry, to achieve reasonable overall costs and high enough yields. Hopefully they will.

The 100-seaters haven't fared so well economically at USAirways/AAL and JetBlue in the form of the E190. Maybe that's due mostly to E190 issues that the C-Series will overcome. If it does, this could be a big improvement overall as more flying will move from regional operators to higher-paid mainline.

As far as you getting only what you negotiate, that's true but it isn't what I'm talking about. Your work must produce more for the company than they pay you or your job won't be around for very long. Being productive doesn't guarantee high compensation but being productive is necessary in order to maintain high compensation.

Larger, faster airplanes have a productivity advantage over smaller, slower ones. That makes the economics of the smaller airplanes more challenging for both the pilots and the airlines.

BlueMoon
09-19-2017, 11:14 AM
Productivity must be there in order for the pay to be there. Productivity doesn't guarantee pay but pay is not sustainable without productivity. For pilot pay, productivity is cost per available seat mile (CASM). We can simplify that to cost per seat.

A 777 crew at a US Major would make around $325/hr (CA) + $215/hr (FO) = $540/hr. UAL's new 777-300 has 366 seats so that's $1.47 per seat.

If we pay a ERJ145 or CRJ200 crew the same $1.47 per seat you only have $73.50 to divide between the Captain and First Officer.

On the balance sheet, the RJ crew is more expensive to the airline than is the 777 crew even though they are paid far less. The difference is productivity measured as the number of sellable seats each pilot produces. That's also what makes the <120 seat airplane difficult to justify at mainline. The pilots see the pay rates as too low while the company sees the CASM as too high and they're both right.

You arbitrarily started at the top of the scale.

We could Start from the bottom (CRJ) and work up. Then the 777 crew looks underpaid per seat.

WesternSkies
09-19-2017, 12:06 PM
Productivity is a tough nut to crack.

What is more productive, moving three hundred people once in a day or 100 people three times. Depends. Changes. Variables.

Also with the previous example, if you throw in a third crew member for long haul, you then have $2 per pax for he RJ FO is actually pretty close to what things were - An $80 captain and a $20 (now $40) FO.


The question people should be asking about the 1500 hour rule is if the time it takes to go from 250 hours to 1500 hours has elapsed (it has), then where are the pilots.
They should be here by now.

sailingfun
09-19-2017, 12:52 PM
Productivity is a tough nut to crack.

What is more productive, moving three hundred people once in a day or 100 people three times. Depends. Changes. Variables.

Also with the previous example, if you throw in a third crew member for long haul, you then have $2 per pax for he RJ FO is actually pretty close to what things were - An $80 captain and a $20 (now $40) FO.


The question people should be asking about the 1500 hour rule is if the time it takes to go from 250 hours to 1500 hours has elapsed (it has), then where are the pilots.
They should be here by now.

I saw a graph of revenue generation per aircraft. The 777 flying international total revenue generation on a per pilot bases was huge compared to the revenue generated by a MD88 pilot which was the smallest airframe in Delta fleet at the time. The cargo revenue alone was almost double the entire revenue generation of the mad dog. This was on a per flight hour bases to eliminate the issue of multiple legs.
When you are really trying to compare saleries to fleet makeup you need to look at the averages in fleet size across each airline since the bigger airframes subsidize the smaller airframes on a salary basis. Delta's average seat count is probable somewhere in the 180 to 190 seat range. Most regionals are probably around 65 to 70 seat average.
Back in 2000 during the discussion on the pilot contract at Delta the then CEO stated he didn't mind paying a 777 Captain 500,000 a year because the airframe could support it. He followed that remark however by stating if he did do that we would demand 375,000 a year for a 737 CA which was not supportable.

John Carr
09-19-2017, 05:32 PM
Pilots are paid what they can negotiate with their employer.

Trying to rationalize that number with "value" or "importance" or "compensation commensurate to contribution or risk" is a fruitless endeavor, because they're simply not related. The argument for years has been that pay is linked to the amount of revenue generated (e.g. the 777 pilot hauls more people per hour than the CRJ one does), and the pay charts sort of follow that inclined pattern, but it isn't a direct link. It is ultimately supply and demand and market forces (including pattern bargaining) which decide these things.

EXACTLY

Pilots that equate themselves to revenue generation crack me up. This debate/discussion has taken place as naseum here.

Pilots DONT generate revenue. All we can do is manage said revenue withon the confines of our job. Just like dispatch, mechanics, what have you.

That revenue was "generated" before we stepped on the plane 99.9999% of the time. Whether it was the leisure traveler that bought the ticket months before, the cargo customer that bought the palate space/tonnage/volume, the business traveler, the corporation with the travel contract, what have you.

The people that generate the the revenue are the suit wearing MBA marketing types and others that's work in the puzzle palace/Head shed.

SeamusTheHound
09-19-2017, 07:01 PM
"Airline pilot unions and safety advocates say the problem is regional airlines don't pay high enough entry-level salaries to attract as many pilots as they need."

I fly for a Regional. I'm in a crash pad with a guy from Delta who used to be at the same Regional.

We do the same job. Base out of the same airport. He has a better schedule. He has far better pay and benefits.
I knew what I was getting into, so I'm not blaming anyone. I can quit when I want (soon, I think).

Now, granted, I'm new to this, but it seems to me the whole system is flawed. You hear stories about the guys at the top who work three days a month and make $300k. Why, again? That's just a bad system. What are people like that contributing to the company? And don't say they, "paid their dues."

This whole thing should be leveled out more, the regional model is garbage (again..same job, and I can bumped off a flight to work by a retiree and their kids on the Wholly Owned parent).

It's just weird from the top down.

THIS ^^^^ is the problem with our industry - There is always someone coming up beneath you who would gladly do your job for LESS, and THAT'S what a 1500 rule helps protect. These *** regionals would let an 18 year old with a moped license fly their planes as long as he'd do it cheaper. No worries if it kills a few people here and there.

coolyokeluke
09-20-2017, 04:51 AM
How about everyone respond to ALPA's call to action?

Took 35 seconds yesterday. Sent emails to both my Senators and Congressman.Because my waste of oxygen senators are Cruz and Cornyn. They have their minds made up about everything before it ever gets to them. Instead of a response the last time I contacted Cruz I was put on his spam list.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

mkfmbos
09-20-2017, 07:07 AM
THIS ^^^^ is the problem with our industry - There is always someone coming up beneath you who would gladly do your job for LESS, and THAT'S what a 1500 rule helps protect. These schitty regionals would let an 18 year old with a moped license fly their planes as long as he'd do it cheaper. No worries if it kills a few people here and there.

Spot on.

CFI's salaries are up. Regional airlines pay is up. Some companies even give hotel rooms to commuters now. This is all a result of the 1500 hr rule. Why would any pilot want to give up the very rule that is changing the industry for the better? Just because you don't want to flight instruct for another year or two? Look at the big picture. This is a 45 year career. Pay your dues, that is what this job is all about. Its not supposed to be easy. And then when your 60 making 300k a year working 3 days a month you will be glad that you did that extra year of traffic watch and I guarantee you will look at some rookie with 250 hrs like he/she is a baby.

We all should be fighting this, from the top to the bottom. To think that a guy whose daughter died on that Colgen flight was the one who got the ball rolling on this. He wasn't even a pilot. United we stand divided we fall.

appleadam
09-20-2017, 12:17 PM
Yep, was 35 sec flat.

Stryder
09-21-2017, 06:02 AM
Of course it does... first off whenever the government intervenes in the market it causes distortions. One example of that is CFIs are now a lot more expensive.

You mean pilots, even CFIs, are making more money now? Thats terrible news for us pilots!

CBreezy
09-21-2017, 07:48 AM
You mean pilots, even CFIs, are making more money now? Thats terrible news for us pilots!

Right. This pilot shortage was coming regardless of the ATP rule change. The cost of training HAS NOT CHANGED. It doesn't cost a prospective pilot a dime extra to become an airline pilot. The only thing that has changed is the amount of time at a flight instructing job before flying passengers in an airline environment. If you find one of the many well-paying CFI jobs in the country, a pilot can expect to make between $30k-$50k a year compared to $15-$25 less than a decade ago. Many of these pilots were being forced to spend a decade in the flight instructor sweat shops until they could get the competitive minimums of 3000 hours. The ATP rule did not have an effect on this.

For decades, the regional model has relied on super cheap labor through an oversupply. It has been through their poor long term planning that this undersupply has occured. They have been told FOR A DECADE that this was coming and they did nothing. Now, when they can't fill classes even with tens of thousands of dollars being thrown at pilots, they want a quick fix. While the regionals were making profits hand over fist, they could have set up a flight school like a ComAir Academy, but they didn't.

Even if they changed the rule to 250 hours tomorrow, it would not fix the crisis. In fact, it would probably make it worse. No one would go on to get their instructor certs. No one would stick around to teach when they could make $40k in the right seat of an RJ. The cost of training would skyrocket in order to compete with RJs and the few instructors left could start charging incredible rates...and why wouldn't they?

But yes, keep telling us how it was the government that caused this lack of planning and poor safety practices at the regional airlines.

ShyGuy
09-21-2017, 12:29 PM
Right. This pilot shortage was coming regardless of the ATP rule change. The cost of training HAS NOT CHANGED. It doesn't cost a prospective pilot a dime extra to become an airline pilot. The only thing that has changed is the amount of time at a flight instructing job before flying passengers in an airline environment. If you find one of the many well-paying CFI jobs in the country, a pilot can expect to make between $30k-$50k a year compared to $15-$25 less than a decade ago. Many of these pilots were being forced to spend a decade in the flight instructor sweat shops until they could get the competitive minimums of 3000 hours. The ATP rule did not have an effect on this.

For decades, the regional model has relied on super cheap labor through an oversupply. It has been through their poor long term planning that this undersupply has occured. They have been told FOR A DECADE that this was coming and they did nothing. Now, when they can't fill classes even with tens of thousands of dollars being thrown at pilots, they want a quick fix. While the regionals were making profits hand over fist, they could have set up a flight school like a ComAir Academy, but they didn't.

Even if they changed the rule to 250 hours tomorrow, it would not fix the crisis. In fact, it would probably make it worse. No one would go on to get their instructor certs. No one would stick around to teach when they could make $40k in the right seat of an RJ. The cost of training would skyrocket in order to compete with RJs and the few instructors left could start charging incredible rates...and why wouldn't they?

But yes, keep telling us how it was the government that caused this lack of planning and poor safety practices at the regional airlines.

Of course cost of training has gone up over the years, what are you talking about? Even adjusted for inflation and increase of oil price, the cost of rental aircraft and instructor rates have skyrocketed.

CBreezy
09-21-2017, 02:58 PM
Of course cost of training has gone up over the years, what are you talking about? Even adjusted for inflation and increase of oil price, the cost of rental aircraft and instructor rates have skyrocketed.

The ATP rule has had zero influence on training costs. It would cost the pilot the same whether or not he could get hired by an airline or a 135 like Great Lakes or Air Choice One.

ShyGuy
09-21-2017, 03:18 PM
The ATP rule has had zero influence on training costs. It would cost the pilot the same whether or not he could get hired by an airline or a 135 like Great Lakes or Air Choice One.

How? You can get straight to a 135 operator with just 3 checkrides: Private, Instrument, initial Commercial in a Multi. Some places you can get hired at 250 hrs. Just not under Part 121. The ATP rule forces pilots to get 1,500 (less for some cases) and most likely means these guys have to get a Comm SE and CFI certificates. No matter which way you cut it, it will cost more.

gzsg
09-21-2017, 04:01 PM
Interesting. Lots of passion and emotion.

All pilots, all of us, have had the moments of sheer terror. If you are reading this, you survived those moments.

In my opinion, lowering the standards is a horrible idea.

For those like me with children and those fat cat do nothing congressmen, when that moment of sheer terror hits (and it will) do you want a 250 hour pilot or a 1500 hour pilot?

Blood money. This is all about greed. They want to pay a pilot flying a $30 million dollar jet with 76 passengers the same as a Walmart greeter.

And if they crash? What will it cost?

Hundreds of millions.

Who has responsibility like that?

No one but pilots.

Jet757
09-21-2017, 04:37 PM
Signed. Took less than a minute.

For those of us who are below the 1500hr mark it will only take you a year or two years to get your experience. Nowadays you can find 135 jobs that will pay you a respectable wage while you're at it too. Don't undercut your fellow pilots. We have to stick together here.

SDFflyboy
09-21-2017, 05:05 PM
Signed. Took less than a minute.

For those of us who are below the 1500hr mark it will only take you a year or two years to get your experience. Nowadays you can find 135 jobs that will pay you a respectable wage while you're at it too. Don't undercut your fellow pilots. We have to stick together here.

+1

What has 2 thumbs and wants to fly a jet and still live in their parents basement on Food Stamps!! NOT THIS GUY!

Can someone make an anti-SJS pill??

CBreezy
09-21-2017, 06:35 PM
How? You can get straight to a 135 operator with just 3 checkrides: Private, Instrument, initial Commercial in a Multi. Some places you can get hired at 250 hrs. Just not under Part 121. The ATP rule forces pilots to get 1,500 (less for some cases) and most likely means these guys have to get a Comm SE and CFI certificates. No matter which way you cut it, it will cost more.

Or you could go do exactly what you just said you could do. Instructing isn't the only way. The ATP rule hasn't cost the prospective pilot a dime especially since pilots were getting the instructor ratings to build time even before the rule.

SonicFlyer
09-21-2017, 08:10 PM
The ATP rule has had zero influence on training costs. It would cost the pilot the same whether or not he could get hired by an airline or a 135 like Great Lakes or Air Choice One.You must have failed economics in high school, or even basic critical thinking.

Flight schools have to pay more for CFIs... that mean prices to the students increase.

SonicFlyer
09-21-2017, 08:13 PM
Why would any pilot want to give up the very rule that is changing the industry for the better? Because not every pilot is selfish and greedy. Some of us understand economics and realize that when the government distorts the market it hurts others, even if it helps us. Bad policy is bad policy.

tomgoodman
09-21-2017, 09:03 PM
Because not every pilot is selfish and greedy. Some of us understand economics and realize that when the government distorts the market it hurts others, even if it helps us. Bad policy is bad policy.

Don't be too shocked, but the main purpose of a union is to distort the market in favor of its members. That's why we pay dues. :cool:

CBreezy
09-22-2017, 03:27 AM
You must have failed economics in high school, or even basic critical thinking.

Flight schools have to pay more for CFIs... that mean prices to the students increase.

The ATP rule has kept more people flight instructing than would have had the rule not been enacted. If anything, it has kept the cost of training lower than it would have been.

The irony of someone saying you don't understand economics when his own 10th grade level knowledge fails you. It's cool man.

WesternSkies
09-22-2017, 04:07 AM
How? You can get straight to a 135 operator with just 3 checkrides: Private, Instrument, initial Commercial in a Multi. Some places you can get hired at 250 hrs. Just not under Part 121. The ATP rule forces pilots to get 1,500 (less for some cases) and most likely means these guys have to get a Comm SE and CFI certificates. No matter which way you cut it, it will cost more.

Do you wear a helmet?

Gatsby
09-22-2017, 04:29 AM
Sent. I'm actually just starting out, and even if it takes an extra year or two to reach the regionals, I still believe that the higher hourly requirement is a proper way to keep the barrier to entry at the regional level a bit elevated, which hopefully, in turn, will keep the pay and standard of living up, plus no matter how you cut it, a pilot with more hours has more hours to fall back on when the turds start hitting the fan, even if the occasional bad pilot whom no number of hours could help make better does still slide by, I believe that in aggregate it still is a good thing for air safety, and for pilots.

Perhaps this is merely wishful thinking, and it probably is. But if pay at the regionals started at 60k with the req. ATP 1500 from here on forward without these temporary bonuses then perhaps the trajectory of getting the required licenses along with the time instructing or towing banners would seem more bearable to most and we could eventually have a steadier flow of pilot candidates to feed the needs of the regionals.

I find it ridiculous that in this field, a field in which the barrier to entry is already pretty high in the form of costs to get the necessary licenses...that most new pilots won't respect themselves and their efforts and so they go out and sell their craft for pennies on the dollar. Just look at the whole RyanAir debacle going on in Europe, coming out at 250 hours with 100k loans plus paying for an interview and a type rating, only to have your CEO say that you are pretty much and overpaid addition to the autopilot. If that's the case, then why even bother with all the licenses, exams, and check rides, just give us 20 hours on X-Plane and as soon as we get the handle on that nifty little autopilot, we'll start cashing our wal-mart greeter mimicking paychecks, but hey...when those turds start hitting the fan, we'll make sure to let the passengers know that the autopilot has disengaged, we thought it flew itself, but it's disengaged and that this is beyond our purview and the plane is going down, but don't fret since this cost has been built into the airlines working model in order to offer you cheaper fares as a whole, and this here now is just the luck of the draw and hasta la vista... down we go. Lol ...anyways, I'm just rambling now... haha.

ShyGuy
09-22-2017, 06:19 AM
Do you wear a helmet?

My Special Ed helmet, yes.

https://comedycentral.mtvnimages.com/images/shows/crankyankers/crankyankers_03_0309_specialed.jpg

GogglesPisano
09-22-2017, 06:24 AM
Because not every pilot is selfish and greedy. Some of us understand economics and realize that when the government distorts the market it hurts others, even if it helps us. Bad policy is bad policy.

Sonic: Do you think we should be licensed?

ShyGuy
09-22-2017, 06:29 AM
The ATP rule has kept more people flight instructing than would have had the rule not been enacted. If anything, it has kept the cost of training lower than it would have been.

The irony of someone saying you don't understand economics when his own 10th grade level knowledge fails you. It's cool man.

Flight training costs have gone up since 2013, even accounting for inflation and oil prices. It's a barrier for entry, and anytime you put a barrier for entry then the drawback is going to be increased costs.

Stop selling this as a zero-cost argument. Let me guess, you also buy the specious argument that ALPA uses that 1,100 passengers died from 1990-2009, and 0 died from 2010-present, and 2010 was the passage of the act. So therefore, it saved lives. Causation doesn't imply correlation. I'm sure TWA 800 falling out of they sky had nothing to do with the the FO requirements:

http://www.alpa.org/~/media/ALPA/Images/advocacy/chart-airline-safety-act-2010.png?la=en&hash=DFDB51AA092C91393B02894B31B292234F970FB2

CBreezy
09-22-2017, 06:51 AM
Flight training costs have gone up since 2013, even accounting for inflation and oil prices. It's a barrier for entry, and anytime you put a barrier for entry then the drawback is going to be increased costs.

Stop selling this as a zero-cost argument. Let me guess, you also buy the specious argument that ALPA uses that 1,100 passengers died from 1990-2009, and 0 died from 2010-present, and 2010 was the passage of the act. So therefore, it saved lives. Causation doesn't imply correlation. I'm sure TWA 800 falling out of they sky had nothing to do with the the FO requirements:

http://www.alpa.org/~/media/ALPA/Images/advocacy/chart-airline-safety-act-2010.png?la=en&hash=DFDB51AA092C91393B02894B31B292234F970FB2

Of course it's a barrier. You keep missing my argument. I'll say it very clearly. The ATP rule has not caused an increase in pilot training costs. Yes, costs have gone up but it has nothing to do with the ATP rule because the ATP didn't touch any of the lower rating experience requirements. If the ATP went away or never existed in the first place, the costs would have continued to rise. In fact, if it went away, the flight instructor rates would skyrocket making the ratings even more expensive. If anything, requiring people to flight instruct for a year, causing an unnatural oversupply of labor, has kept prices low.

ShyGuy
09-22-2017, 09:52 AM
The cost of becoming an airline pilot has gone up since the ATP rule. The net money spent even adjusted for inflation is more now to become a 121 pilot.

RhinoBallAuto
09-22-2017, 10:00 AM
the cost of becoming an airline pilot has gone up since the atp rule. The net money spent even adjusted for inflation is more now to become a 121 pilot.

ctp ~= $5k

CBreezy
09-22-2017, 11:14 AM
ctp ~= $5k

CTP is free if hired by most regional airlines.

CBreezy
09-22-2017, 11:15 AM
The cost of becoming an airline pilot has gone up since the ATP rule. The net money spent even adjusted for inflation is more now to become a 121 pilot.

There is no evidence that the ATP rule is what has caused the flight trainings prices to increase.

RhinoBallAuto
09-22-2017, 11:15 AM
CTP is free if hired by most regional airlines.

If you're marking time at a regional, it is definitely costing you something.

ShyGuy
09-22-2017, 11:22 AM
There is no evidence that the ATP rule is what has caused the flight trainings prices to increase.

Not the sole reason, but one of the reasons and a fairly decent one.

CBreezy
09-22-2017, 12:19 PM
Not the sole reason, but one of the reasons and a fairly decent one.

You could say flight training prices have risen because we cancelled the shuttle program and you would want me to believe you. You keep making statements but haven't even provided the slightest defense of your opinion other than "do you believe everything ALPA says," which is not a reason and "because, economics" which again I have refuted.

LeeFXDWG
09-22-2017, 12:59 PM
Sent. I'm actually just starting out, and even if it takes an extra year or two to reach the regionals, I still believe that the higher hourly requirement is a proper way to keep the barrier to entry at the regional level a bit elevated, which hopefully, in turn, will keep the pay and standard of living up, plus no matter how you cut it, a pilot with more hours has more hours to fall back on when the turds start hitting the fan, even if the occasional bad pilot whom no number of hours could help make better does still slide by, I believe that in aggregate it still is a good thing for air safety, and for pilots.

Perhaps this is merely wishful thinking, and it probably is. But if pay at the regionals started at 60k with the req. ATP 1500 from here on forward without these temporary bonuses then perhaps the trajectory of getting the required licenses along with the time instructing or towing banners would seem more bearable to most and we could eventually have a steadier flow of pilot candidates to feed the needs of the regionals.

I find it ridiculous that in this field, a field in which the barrier to entry is already pretty high in the form of costs to get the necessary licenses...that most new pilots won't respect themselves and their efforts and so they go out and sell their craft for pennies on the dollar. Just look at the whole RyanAir debacle going on in Europe, coming out at 250 hours with 100k loans plus paying for an interview and a type rating, only to have your CEO say that you are pretty much and overpaid addition to the autopilot. If that's the case, then why even bother with all the licenses, exams, and check rides, just give us 20 hours on X-Plane and as soon as we get the handle on that nifty little autopilot, we'll start cashing our wal-mart greeter mimicking paychecks, but hey...when those turds start hitting the fan, we'll make sure to let the passengers know that the autopilot has disengaged, we thought it flew itself, but it's disengaged and that this is beyond our purview and the plane is going down, but don't fret since this cost has been built into the airlines working model in order to offer you cheaper fares as a whole, and this here now is just the luck of the draw and hasta la vista... down we go. Lol ...anyways, I'm just rambling now... haha.

For one who is just starting out on the quest to 121 land, you seem to have a good handle on things.

Any thoughts to active duty or guard/reserve options out there. You seem to have your stuff in one bag and see things for what they are rather than the hyperbole you will find here.

And, parting thought, never let a CEO tell you what your value is. CEOs come and go......you'll still be there operating in all kinds of bad conditions at 3am. And if you screw up, they'll throw you under the bus if it suits their PR needs.

Keep the high road and best of luck.

Lee

ShyGuy
09-22-2017, 02:08 PM
You could say flight training prices have risen because we cancelled the shuttle program and you would want me to believe you. You keep making statements but haven't even provided the slightest defense of your opinion other than "do you believe everything ALPA says," which is not a reason and "because, economics" which again I have refuted.

And there's your typical slant, just like in the socio/political threads. "I am right, though I give you no evidence. And you are wrong, and you have no evidence."

I know better than to argue with your type.

SonicFlyer
09-22-2017, 10:07 PM
The ATP rule has kept more people flight instructing than would have had the rule not been enacted. If anything, it has kept the cost of training lower than it would have been. Uh no, there is a shortage of CFIs right now which is a direct result of 1500. Less people want to continue to be CFIs when they can actually now make a real living in their first year of 121.

SonicFlyer
09-22-2017, 10:08 PM
Sonic: Do you think we should be licensed?

Certified, yes. But no, not licensed by the government. SCUBA is a perfect example of how it should work.

CBreezy
09-23-2017, 06:41 AM
Uh no, there is a shortage of CFIs right now which is a direct result of 1500. Less people want to continue to be CFIs when they can actually now make a real living in their first year of 121.

And what do you think would happen if everyone could get hired at 250? How many people would go on to get their CFI?

CBreezy
09-23-2017, 06:47 AM
Certified, yes. But no, not licensed by the government. SCUBA is a perfect example of how it should work.

I disagree. Being s certified SCUBA diver is a very different thing than being a certificated pilot capable of carrying passengers. I would not trust Mesa or a place called Colgan(remember them) to certify their pilots in the best interest of aviation safety over profits.

SonicFlyer
09-23-2017, 08:33 AM
And what do you think would happen if everyone could get hired at 250? The pilot shortage wouldn't be as bad and few would be hired 121 at 250hrs because there wouldn't be as much of a demand.

SonicFlyer
09-23-2017, 08:34 AM
I disagree. Being s certified SCUBA diver is a very different thing than being a certificated pilot capable of carrying passengers. I would not trust Mesa or a place called Colgan(remember them) to certify their pilots in the best interest of aviation safety over profits.Yes because the government always knows best :rolleyes:

Competition = innovation

GogglesPisano
09-23-2017, 09:32 AM
Certified, yes. But no, not licensed by the government. SCUBA is a perfect example of how it should work.

So you'd be okay with a "certified but not licensed" dude operating on your kid?

Libertarianism has it's limits.

JamesNoBrakes
09-23-2017, 08:52 PM
Yes because the government always knows best :rolleyes:

Competition = innovation

Like Allegient?

SonicFlyer
09-23-2017, 11:53 PM
So you'd be okay with a "certified but not licensed" dude operating on your kid?

Libertarianism has it's limits.You think the government knows best?


Statism has it's limits.

Gatsby
09-24-2017, 02:53 AM
For one who is just starting out on the quest to 121 land, you seem to have a good handle on things.

Any thoughts to active duty or guard/reserve options out there. You seem to have your stuff in one bag and see things for what they are rather than the hyperbole you will find here.

And, parting thought, never let a CEO tell you what your value is. CEOs come and go......you'll still be there operating in all kinds of bad conditions at 3am. And if you screw up, they'll throw you under the bus if it suits their PR needs.

Keep the high road and best of luck.

Lee

Thanks, Lee! I appreciate the kind words. This forum has been a wealth of information and I'm sure it'll continue to be. I would have loved to fly for any of the military branches (esp. Air Force), but unfortunately, I have trouble with the Ishihara Plates...just the plates themselves, thankfully I can still see the req. colors, and can use a different testing method for civilian flying. Anyhow, such is the luck of the draw...

Beans
09-24-2017, 11:42 AM
"Airline pilot unions and safety advocates say the problem is regional airlines don't pay high enough entry-level salaries to attract as many pilots as they need."

I fly for a Regional. I'm in a crash pad with a guy from Delta who used to be at the same Regional.

We do the same job. Base out of the same airport. He has a better schedule. He has far better pay and benefits.
I knew what I was getting into, so I'm not blaming anyone. I can quit when I want (soon, I think).

Now, granted, I'm new to this, but it seems to me the whole system is flawed. You hear stories about the guys at the top who work three days a month and make $300k. Why, again? That's just a bad system. What are people like that contributing to the company? And don't say they, "paid their dues."

This whole thing should be leveled out more, the regional model is garbage (again..same job, and I can bumped off a flight to work by a retiree and their kids on the Wholly Owned parent).

It's just weird from the top down.

So let me get this straight. You want to be paid similar money as a guy at Delta. Even though you have probably half or less the experiance as that Delta FO. You fly an airplane that holds half the revenue as another domestic mainline airplane. So does an accountant who is 2-4 years out of college make the same as one who has 10-15 years of experiance? You see my point? Now dont get me wrong the regionals have raised and need to continue to raise pay but to say you deserve similar pay as a Delta FO is just laughable. This just sounds like a millenial I want 100k the day I step into the work force argument.

JTwift
09-24-2017, 01:05 PM
So let me get this straight. You want to be paid similar money as a guy at Delta. Even though you have probably half or less the experiance as that Delta FO. You fly an airplane that holds half the revenue as another domestic mainline airplane. So does an accountant who is 2-4 years out of college make the same as one who has 10-15 years of experiance? You see my point? Now dont get me wrong the regionals have raised and need to continue to raise pay but to say you deserve similar pay as a Delta FO is just laughable. This just sounds like a millenial I want 100k the day I step into the work force argument.

Well, I have 20 years Air Force experience and over 4,000 hours. Does that entitle me to a pay raise in your eyes now?

CBreezy
09-24-2017, 05:53 PM
Well, I have 20 years Air Force experience and over 4,000 hours. Does that entitle me to a pay raise in your eyes now?

It entitles you to go straight to a major like the vast majority of your peers. If you choose to take a RJ job knowing full well that it is both a subcontractor job and vastly lower paying, that is your problem.

Beans
09-24-2017, 05:58 PM
Well, I have 20 years Air Force experience and over 4,000 hours. Does that entitle me to a pay raise in your eyes now?

No. Once again as stated above at a regional your flying as a contractor in a 50-75 seat airplane. With your experiance you can get hired at many different places that pay the money your experience deserves. So why are you at a regional? Regionals are made as an experiance getter for new pilots. I know that some at regionals have much more experiance but as a whole they are a stepping stone. As I stated above the revune on an RJ is much different than an Airbus. The bigger the airplane the more revenue the more money the pilot makes. This is the same at mainline Delta. The 717 doesent pay the same money as the 350.

JTwift
09-24-2017, 06:07 PM
It entitles you to go straight to a major..

Don't we all wish.

ShyGuy
09-24-2017, 09:48 PM
No. Once again as stated above at a regional your flying as a contractor in a 50-75 seat airplane. With your experiance you can get hired at many different places that pay the money your experience deserves. So why are you at a regional? Regionals are made as an experiance getter for new pilots. I know that some at regionals have much more experiance but as a whole they are a stepping stone. As I stated above the revune on an RJ is much different than an Airbus. The bigger the airplane the more revenue the more money the pilot makes. This is the same at mainline Delta. The 717 doesent pay the same money as the 350.

That was a pain to read. If you're a major pilot putting down a regional pilot, at least get your spelling and punctuation correct. :D

And here's an airplane size shocker: a UPS 757 pilot gets paid the same as their 747 pilot.

Regularguy
09-24-2017, 09:53 PM
Well, I have 20 years Air Force experience and over 4,000 hours. Does that entitle me to a pay raise in your eyes now?

Nope.

You all who keep measuring your experience as if it’s some sort of manhood test are missing the point. Over my years the type of pilots the majors are looking for has changed from literally no-time to requiring “command” experience. At one time I heard Delta was mostly interested in Navy grads while UAL changed their ways and hire 1200 hour single seat fighter dudes.

The point is some one else in charge of the standards and they keep moving them, kind of a ‘Catch 22’ thing.

I do feel for the writer I quoted, because I’ll bet the RJ outfit has been the only one who has offered him a job so far.

Just remember this if and when you get hired by a major no one will really care if you flew Airforce One or came from a CFI job, because you met the standards of the day.

Look at a B737 (or any other airplane) from the outside, it’s always the same pilot flying it.


******
Hey I just noticed something; Shy Guy isn’t so shy, he has over 5400 posts since 2005 here on the forum

CBreezy
09-25-2017, 03:12 AM
Don't we all wish.

With 20 years and 4000 hours, you couldn't get hired at a major? I find that virtually unbelievable.

Castle Bravo
09-25-2017, 04:36 AM
Many Air Force guys spent their last 5-6 years flying a desk in a basement of some staff job somewhere, including a 365 day remote tour to that garden spot we call the Middle East. Or they retired from the AF during the middle of the 5 year hiring hiatus, so they have no recency of experience. Mainlines won't touch these guys, but the Regional's increasingly will. I have a bud out of the jet over 10 years, over 3,000 TT in heavies, retired AF and did the 9-5 corporate gig for a decade, but is now back flying an RJ and should be competitive for a legacy after he gets enough 121 time.

Lots of different factors at play for some of the military guys regarding their timelines and recency of flying time.

ShyGuy
09-25-2017, 09:25 AM
******
Hey I just noticed something; Shy Guy isnít so shy, he has over 5400 posts since 2005 here on the forum

It's a character from the Super Mario 2 https://www.mariowiki.com/images/5/59/ShyMB2.png

Beans
09-25-2017, 10:39 AM
That was a pain to read. If you're a major pilot putting down a regional pilot, at least get your spelling and punctuation correct. :D

And here's an airplane size shocker: a UPS 757 pilot gets paid the same as their 747 pilot.

Ok, I give up pay the RJ driver who just came out of flight school the same as the 747 guy/gal who has 30 years of experience. Sorry for not spell checking previous post.

gzsg
09-25-2017, 06:20 PM
And there's your typical slant, just like in the socio/political threads. "I am right, though I give you no evidence. And you are wrong, and you have no evidence."

I know better than to argue with your type.

Let's say you have a brain tumor that must be removed.

Would you choose a highly trained and experienced doctor or the surgeon who was under the new rules where medical school is 6 ten minute youtube videos?

You don't need to answer. We know how guys like you operate.

Beans
09-26-2017, 10:34 AM
With 20 years and 4000 hours, you couldn't get hired at a major? I find that virtually unbelievable.

Couldnt agree with you more CBreezy.

The only way he/she wouldn't get called is if they flew a desk for the last few years. So once again in this scenario the pilot is using the regional as a stepping stone for currency/121 experience gainer. Once again this goes towards what I stated previously about the pay goes with things such as specific experience, aircraft size and who you are flying the airplane for. This is no different than any other job when looking how pay is structured. A lawyer out of law school doesent make what his counterpart who has 20 years and 50 cases under his belt makes.

SDFflyboy
09-27-2017, 06:53 AM
This law effectively requires more skin in the game from future pilots... aka me. When I had 250 hrs I had SJS bad. As I work toward my 1500 I now value myself not to work for crappy wages. It cut the easy way to the airlines. Now you have to (actually ) critically think about how you are going to get your 1500 hrs. Now that youíve developed that part of your brain you will ďin theory Ē make better career decisions and look at things like work rules and QOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dorn
09-27-2017, 11:10 AM
Just so everyone knows since it's not being discussed but the "1500" hour rule isn't exactly a hard number. It's 750- mil, 1000 college degree w/aviation program, 1250- w/ college degree, then 1500 for those without a college degree. So many of you who are upset that they may lower the number below 1500 understand the law already does.

Castle Bravo
09-27-2017, 12:00 PM
Just so everyone knows since it's not being discussed but the "1500" hour rule isn't exactly a hard number. It's 750- mil, 1000 college degree w/aviation program, 1250- w/ college degree, then 1500 for those without a college degree. So many of you who are upset that they may lower the number below 1500 understand the law already does.

Incorrect.

750 if Military pilot
1000 with 4 yr degree from FAA accredited aviation program;
1250 with Associates degree from FAA accredited aviation program;
1500 for anyone else. The "Anyone else" is who the new law would effect.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=2fdca65a0b18116d5c93bc2132e877f5&mc=true&node=pt14.2.61&rgn=div5#se14.2.61_1159


I have a Master's Degree, but it doesn't fall into the categories above.

It will be interesting to see what this Bill holds...67? 1200 ATP for FO? Who knows.

Dorn
09-27-2017, 07:12 PM
Ok, well my mistake I said non 4 year degree was 1250 when it's associates. My point was that some are making this ruling to hire with less than 1500 something that's it's not. I was simply pointing out that many are already being hired with less than the 1500. 1500 is just a blanket number. Don't misinterpret me, I'm not for the notion that we should lower these numbers I was only trying to point out that fact since people only seem to mention that 1500 number when in reality there are several ways one can acquire less time. That's all.

Duesenflieger
09-29-2017, 06:43 AM
Incorrect.

750 if Military pilot
1000 with 4 yr degree from FAA accredited aviation program;
1250 with Associates degree from FAA accredited aviation program;
1500 for anyone else. The "Anyone else" is who the new law would effect.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=2fdca65a0b18116d5c93bc2132e877f5&mc=true&node=pt14.2.61&rgn=div5#se14.2.61_1159


I have a Master's Degree, but it doesn't fall into the categories above.

It will be interesting to see what this Bill holds...67? 1200 ATP for FO? Who knows.

And the exceptions which you list, to the traditional total time of 1500 hours do not stray too far from the minimum time preferences of regional airlines around the 2010 - 2014 timeframe. I can distinctly recall many of the regional airlines hiring at 1200 hours total time and 500 hour multi-engine piston. Things are actually easier now even with the new first officer regulation in effect!

Beans
09-29-2017, 10:59 AM
And the exceptions which you list, to the traditional total time of 1500 hours do not stray too far from the minimum time preferences of regional airlines around the 2010 - 2014 timeframe. I can distinctly recall many of the regional airlines hiring at 1200 hours total time and 500 hour multi-engine piston. Things are actually easier now even with the new first officer regulation in effect!


Bingo!!! So many millennials now want that instant gratification with very little experience. The new regs are less restrictive than the market dictated in many diffrent times in aviation history. Hell people were paying to fly a 1900 less than 10 years ago. Get the proper experiance and move up.

Castle Bravo
09-29-2017, 11:21 AM
And the exceptions which you list, to the traditional total time of 1500 hours do not stray too far from the minimum time preferences of regional airlines around the 2010 - 2014 timeframe. I can distinctly recall many of the regional airlines hiring at 1200 hours total time and 500 hour multi-engine piston. Things are actually easier now even with the new first officer regulation in effect!

IIRC, 2010-2014 was a period of very low hiring due to the Mainline guys being allowed to stay until age 65; so the Regionals could afford to be very selective and demand high ME time, turbine time, etc. The next 10-15 years are going to be a high-hiring time.

deadstick35
09-29-2017, 11:29 AM
Bingo!!! So many millennials now want that instant gratification with very little experience. The new regs are less restrictive than the market dictated in many diffrent times in aviation history. Hell people were paying to fly a 1900 less than 10 years ago. Get the proper experiance and move up.

Heck 25 years ago, 2500TT/500ME might get you an interview at Great Lakes. Think about that one.

at6d
09-29-2017, 05:19 PM
Heck 25 years ago, 2500TT/500ME might get you an interview at Great Lakes. Think about that one.

You aren't kidding. I had an ATP with 600 multi and Skywest sent back my application because I was short 5 hours of actual time.

When I got hired at Eagle, I was in the bottom of my class, and in the bottom of experience, too.

Made $17K first year. That was in 2000.

maxjet
09-30-2017, 11:55 AM
Just raise the retirement age to 67 and put this whole thing off for another 2 years.

Mover
10-01-2017, 04:51 AM
Just raise the retirement age to 67 and put this whole thing off for another 2 years.

No thanks!

Flying Taco
10-02-2017, 08:03 PM
Just raise the retirement age to 67 and put this whole thing off for another 2 years.
All that does is just delay the inevitable.

tomgoodman
10-03-2017, 06:32 AM
All that does is just delay the inevitable.

Thatís all that doctors and hospitals do. ;)

LeeFXDWG
10-03-2017, 10:55 AM
Thatís all that doctors and hospitals do. ;)

Loved that.

sourdough44
10-04-2017, 03:35 AM
To quote my favorite money talker B. Brinker.
"We have the best government money can buy"


Heís my favorite also, going back a good number of years.

phrogfella
10-11-2017, 12:17 AM
Incorrect.

750 if Military pilot
1000 with 4 yr degree from FAA accredited aviation program;
1250 with Associates degree from FAA accredited aviation program;
1500 for anyone else. The "Anyone else" is who the new law would effect.

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=2fdca65a0b18116d5c93bc2132e877f5&mc=true&node=pt14.2.61&rgn=div5#se14.2.61_1159


I have a Master's Degree, but it doesn't fall into the categories above.

It will be interesting to see what this Bill holds...67? 1200 ATP for FO? Who knows.

Ask and you shall receive. Here's the report of the FAA rule making committee:

https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/media/Phase%202%20Report_Final%20Recommendations_Post%20 ARAC%20Mt_Sept%2018%20(1).pdf

Search the document for "1500" or "61.160" to get to the relevant parts. After doing the same myself, it sounds like the real meat and potatoes of any plan to reduce flight hour requirements is in the "Enhanced Qualification Program" report, which I haven't been able to find. As an aside, I believe that what ever comes of this will be a regulation not a bill, which doesn't require Congress's involvement since authority was already delegated to the FAA back in 2010 when the Colgan legislation was signed.

Han Solo
10-16-2017, 03:29 AM
The OP put this link in, but didn't label it.

CLICK THIS LINK and take less than a minute to send emails to your Senators and Congressman to maintain the ATP requirement.

Maintaining the Current Minimum First Officer Qualifications (http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/first-officer-qualifications)

Politicians respond to constituent responses when they achieve a numerical threshold. A dozen; a few hundred? Meh.

Multiple thousands? They might put down their latest issue of "Modern Malfeasance" long enough to craft a response.

Later, while conducting a 'caucus' at a DC gentlemen's club, if a cohort grouses about "....a bunch of whiney pilots clogging my mail and phone; I can't even enjoy this lap-dance," they may resolve to look at it in committee.

Sadly, statistics show that fewer than 10% of all ALPA members can even be bothered to respond to Calls to Action.

Done, and I put it on my FB and had takers in under 5 minutes. No idea if it will have any effect but it certainly can't hurt. And seriously, it takes less time than the ads you have to sift through to see the pictures of Kim Kardashian's cellulite. Don't ask me how I know.

takingmessages
10-18-2017, 11:43 AM
Cartel destroys pilot job then cites shortage
http://tinyurl.com/yacb4b4r

Varsity
10-18-2017, 03:52 PM
Please continue to write/notify your representatives on this issue.

It is still 'alive and well'.

MacrossJet
10-20-2017, 11:50 PM
Just raise the retirement age to 67 and put this whole thing off for another 2 years.

Okay, then here you go:

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2017-10-19/congress-said-mull-age-65-extension-part-91k/135

Flatspot89
10-25-2017, 03:33 PM
Filled out the ALPA link for senator letter. Takes less than a minute. Itís a good idea to keep this law in effect.

USPilot89
10-27-2017, 10:29 PM
Itís very sad to see all of you guys support a rule that was based on emotions. There is something called quality and thatís what we need to reinforce rather than promoting and supporting a rule that was mostly put in place by non Aviation guys. Iíve flown with lot of pilots and I canít tell you how disappointed I get when I come across guys with 4000+ hours and still donít know how to determine a hold entry off of their head without using the FMS. Iíve met brilliant pilots with very low hours and met dumb pilots with lots of hours. The problem here is we need to work on how we can improve the quality of training these new pilots are getting. The airlines in Europe hire their FO at 250 hours and most of them have a very structured training put in place to make sure those guys are ready for the job in hand. Knowledge is the key. The person who has the knowledge or experience is important;
the one who has both the knowledge and the ability to use it is more important. There is really more to this than just a simple argument. The regionals are hiring lot of dumb pilots as we live and they really donít care about how these folks accumulate their hours. None of the pilots involved in the Colgan crash had less the 2000 hours. Give me a break. The FAA came up with a R-ATP minimums if you get a better training at designated schools or the military. Why? Again because of the quality of training.

SonicFlyer
10-28-2017, 10:49 PM
Itís very sad to see all of you guys support a rule that was based on emotions. ... The regionals are hiring lot of dumb pilots as we live and they really donít care about how these folks accumulate their hours. None of the pilots involved in the Colgan crash had less the 2000 hours. Give me a break. The FAA came up with a R-ATP minimums if you get a better training at designated schools or the military. Why? Again because of the quality of training.


Bingo!

In many ways the 1500 hour rule makes us less safe because the regionals are now hiring anyone who can fog a mirror.

tomgoodman
10-29-2017, 08:25 AM
There are at least three reasons for the 1500 hour rule:

1. The reason that the government announced (safety).
2. The real reason they passed it (public pressure).
3. The reason pilots with 1500+ hours want to keep it (wages).

bajthejino
10-29-2017, 09:03 AM
Itís very sad to see all of you guys support a rule that was based on emotions. There is something called quality and thatís what we need to reinforce rather than promoting and supporting a rule that was mostly put in place by non Aviation guys. Iíve flown with lot of pilots and I canít tell you how disappointed I get when I come across guys with 4000+ hours and still donít know how to determine a hold entry off of their head without using the FMS. Iíve met brilliant pilots with very low hours and met dumb pilots with lots of hours. The problem here is we need to work on how we can improve the quality of training these new pilots are getting. The airlines in Europe hire their FO at 250 hours and most of them have a very structured training put in place to make sure those guys are ready for the job in hand. Knowledge is the key. The person who has the knowledge or experience is important;
the one who has both the knowledge and the ability to use it is more important. There is really more to this than just a simple argument. The regionals are hiring lot of dumb pilots as we live and they really donít care about how these folks accumulate their hours. None of the pilots involved in the Colgan crash had less the 2000 hours. Give me a break. The FAA came up with a R-ATP minimums if you get a better training at designated schools or the military. Why? Again because of the quality of training.

Eh, I'm not a big believer that if you go to Riddle or UND you somehow are a better trained pilot. Euro pilots are just the same. Just because they have to take more written exams than we do doesn't make them a better pilot.
The regionals have always hired dumb pilots. Nothing has changed there.

GogglesPisano
10-29-2017, 09:07 AM
Hard to believe there are pilots arguing for lowering the barrier to entry to their profession.

Make a statement like: "Hey I think we should make it easier for people to become doctors, like maybe 3 years of med school instead of 4 or, cut residencies in half," you'd be laughed out of the room.

SonicFlyer
10-29-2017, 01:42 PM
There are at least three reasons for the 1500 hour rule:

1. The reason that the government announced (safety).
2. The real reason they passed it (public pressure).
3. The reason pilots with 1500+ hours want to keep it (wages).

Exactly. Glad I'm not the only one around here who understands this.

SonicFlyer
10-29-2017, 01:43 PM
Eh, I'm not a big believer that if you go to Riddle or UND you somehow are a better trained pilot.In my limited experience I will say that those who got their training 141 do seem more knowledgeable than those who did 61. Anecdotal though I realize

SonicFlyer
10-29-2017, 01:45 PM
Hard to believe there are pilots arguing for lowering the barrier to entry to their profession.Yes not everyone is a selfish statist who thinks that the laws of economics should be ignored.



Make a statement like: "Hey I think we should make it easier for people to become doctors, like maybe 3 years of med school instead of 4 or, cut residencies in half," you'd be laughed out of the room.Except that your analogy is false because you left out the fact that until a couple of years ago it only used to take docs 3 years to become a doc... in your example.

GogglesPisano
10-29-2017, 06:04 PM
Yes not everyone is a selfish statist who thinks that the laws of economics should be ignore.

Thatís cute. Why donít go sell that libertarian slop at the next AMA conference? See how well itís received.

SonicFlyer
10-29-2017, 06:26 PM
Thatís cute. Why donít go sell that libertarian slop at the next AMA conference? See how well itís received.Ideas are not good or bad based upon how popular they are. :rolleyes:

goodyear859
10-29-2017, 07:53 PM
Looks like there is an update from yesterday - the FAA Committee is recommending a drop to 500 hours through aviation college programs (R-ATP).

FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: Travel Weekly (http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/FAA-committee-recommends-accelerated-pilot-training)

Recommendations for Enhanced Qualification Program
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/media/Air_Carrier_Training_ARC.pdf

Jet Jockey 00
10-29-2017, 08:07 PM
Looks like there is an update from yesterday - the FAA Committee is recommending a drop to 500 hours through aviation college programs (R-ATP).

FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: Travel Weekly (http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/FAA-committee-recommends-accelerated-pilot-training)

Recommendations for Enhanced Qualification Program
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/media/Air_Carrier_Training_ARC.pdf

They can recommend all they want 500 hrs would never pass. It's a pay shortage not a pilot shortage. When mainline can't fill classes then it's a pilot shortage. And that will never happen.

SonicFlyer
10-30-2017, 04:10 PM
It's a pay shortage not a pilot shortage. The tired worn out union talking points just get old after a while, especially considering they have been proven to be false time and time again. :rolleyes:

StrykerB21
10-30-2017, 06:35 PM
The tired worn out union talking points just get old after a while, especially considering they have been proven to be false time and time again. :rolleyes:

When major airlines struggle to fill classes because of some pilot shortage please let me know.

SonicFlyer
10-30-2017, 07:39 PM
When major airlines struggle to fill classes because of some pilot shortage please let me know.
Some regionals and other non majors already are having problems filling classes.

kevbo
10-31-2017, 09:52 AM
They can recommend all they want 500 hrs would never pass. It's a pay shortage not a pilot shortage. When mainline can't fill classes then it's a pilot shortage. And that will never happen.
The industry will get whatever law it is willing to pay for. Plus those are big student loans that the government will inherit if the kids cant get a job quickly. The US is the only country that is trying to maintain a high social status for pilots. Everyone else gets screened, trained, and put to work like an ordinary office worker.

Bloggs
11-01-2017, 07:03 AM
Some regionals and other non majors already are having problems filling classes.

...UNTIL they raise their pay rates, and voila! Classes filled.

I'm at a regional. No shortage here. Fully staffed, in fact.

SonicFlyer
11-01-2017, 04:21 PM
...UNTIL they raise their pay rates, and voila! Classes filled.

I'm at a regional. No shortage here. Fully staffed, in fact.

First off, not all regionals are able to raise their pay rates economically speaking. And even if they were, what happens when they are all at parity? There simply are not enough pilots to go around and it takes a few years to make more pilots (largely thanks to the stupid 1500hr rule)

C130driver
11-01-2017, 04:25 PM
The US is the only country that is trying to maintain a high social status for pilots. Everyone else gets screened, trained, and put to work like an ordinary office worker.

Good! Iím glad there are forces in this country that realize that unlike an ďordinary office worker,Ē pilots are responsible for numerous lives and that both quality and experience matter. It has little to do with ďhigh social status.Ē It troubles me that there are pilots out there that view their job just like an ordinary office job. I hope you arenít flying my family.

Fifty50
11-02-2017, 12:04 PM
Good! Iím glad there are forces in this country that realize that unlike an ďordinary office worker,Ē pilots are responsible for numerous lives and that both quality and experience matter. It has little to do with ďhigh social status.Ē It troubles me that there are pilots out there that view their job just like an ordinary office job. I hope you arenít flying my family.

Amen!
........

kevbo
11-04-2017, 08:18 PM
Good! Iím glad there are forces in this country that realize that unlike an ďordinary office worker,Ē pilots are responsible for numerous lives and that both quality and experience matter. It has little to do with ďhigh social status.Ē It troubles me that there are pilots out there that view their job just like an ordinary office job. I hope you arenít flying my family.
I think Airbus and modern cockpits in general have detached the crew enough to make their role redundant. Im seeing really bad pilots with very little experience get by well enough these days. Some of these guys wouldnt make it in a 1960s cockpit. The rest of the world sees this and acts accordingly. The US makes a big deal out of flying because its the most exciting thing that they can use to lure kids into military service. The status that pilots are given is what attracts 99% of the people who become professional pilots in the US. I fell for it for a while. There is a lot more to aviation than flying but everyone wants to be a pilot.

aiir
11-04-2017, 10:46 PM
I think Airbus and modern cockpits in general have detached the crew enough to make their role redundant. Im seeing really bad pilots with very little experience get by well enough these days. Some of these guys wouldnt make it in a 1960s cockpit. The rest of the world sees this and acts accordingly. The US makes a big deal out of flying because its the most exciting thing that they can use to lure kids into military service. The status that pilots are given is what attracts 99% of the people who become professional pilots in the US. I fell for it for a while. There is a lot more to aviation than flying but everyone wants to be a pilot.

I'm just starting my training but stick and rudder skills are going to be my number one priority because without them I won't have a basis for understanding the automation and I have enough respect for the profession and the people that I'll be transporting to know that if that automation ever fails, I'll be the last line of defense between wherever we are and terrain, terrain. Not to mention that my personal work ethic doesn't allow me to half-ass things, and half understand things...but to each their own.

kevbo
11-05-2017, 02:54 AM
I'm just starting my training but stick and rudder skills are going to be my number one priority because without them I won't have a basis for understanding the automation and I have enough respect for the profession and the people that I'll be transporting to know that if that automation ever fails, I'll be the last line of defense between wherever we are and terrain, terrain. Not to mention that my personal work ethic doesn't allow me to half-ass things, and half understand things...but to each their own.

BTW, that little video game controller in the Airbus does nothing but make suggestions to the computer. When automation fails, you'll be the first on the scene.

FraxAvi8tor
11-05-2017, 07:35 AM
Looks like there is an update from yesterday - the FAA Committee is recommending a drop to 500 hours through aviation college programs (R-ATP).

FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: Travel Weekly (http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/FAA-committee-recommends-accelerated-pilot-training)

Recommendations for Enhanced Qualification Program
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/media/Air_Carrier_Training_ARC.pdf

Sounds like ALPA is already prepared to compromise on the 500 hour requirement with a recommendation for 750 for 4-year grads:

"ALPA supported more moderate credits of 250 hours across the board for aspiring pilots who complete the proposed airline-run training module. Under that proposal, military pilots could get an ATP license with 500 hours of flight time, four-year aviation school graduates would need 750 hours and two-year graduates would need 1,000 hours."

So basically ALPA supports Method 1 for EQP (enhanced qualification program), table 2 in the FAA (ACT ARC) recommendation (https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/media/Air_Carrier_Training_ARC.pdf).

Duesenflieger
11-05-2017, 09:00 AM
This isn't too terribly shocking. Money is the energy that lets the FAA and U.S. government function. It was only a matter of time before the Colgan crash became a thing of distant memory and regional lobbyists paid Congressmen enough so that they would be more open in watering down the ATP original qualifications. It will be sad, should it pass. The recent raises in compensation and quality of life being realized all across the regional airline arena will soon see a reversal as regional airline ground schools everywhere are able to fill classes to their heart's content, and bonus schemes are retracted.

One must wonder though how this will affect part 135 certificated operators. Most of them hire SICs according to Wyvern/Argus minimums of 1000 hours total time. If the regionals begin to hire at 500 hrs/750 hrs, these 135s will struggle hard to find interested pilots. It does not end there either way. Flight schools in the USA will suffer just as hard. A flight instructor will work at a flight school for perhaps a couple of months and then be gone for the regionals upon reaching 500 hours. Who will then train the next generation of professional pilots?

I do not foresee good things emerging out of the airline first officer minimum qualifications reduction. The regionals are doing whatever they can to stay alive even for a few years more, if they can manage it. It will come at the cost of general aviation as we have known it for decades metamorphosing into some new quantity unrecognizable to us. Instead of protecting the regionals, we should be protecting our national aviation system.

Planepirate
11-06-2017, 11:07 AM
Looks like there is an update from yesterday - the FAA Committee is recommending a drop to 500 hours through aviation college programs (R-ATP).

FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: Travel Weekly (http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/FAA-committee-recommends-accelerated-pilot-training)

Recommendations for Enhanced Qualification Program
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/media/Air_Carrier_Training_ARC.pdf

You are so far off I donít know where to start haha. Maybe you should actually read that second link you posted?

This is basically a document of recommendations to the FAA.

There are 2 different methods being proposed to the FAA to allow the reduction of flight hours for those who are:
1: Military,
2: 4-year aviation degrees,
3: 2-year Aviation degrees.

The three groups above will be able to take an Enhanced Qualification Program (EQP) to reduce the number of hours required to obtain a Restricted ATP.

(METHOD 1)
ALPA recommendation
Reduction of flight hours with completion of EQP to
500 hours for military
750 hours for 4-year aviation degrees
1000 hours with 2-year aviation degrees

(METHOD 2)
Delta Airlines, Regional Airline Association, Flight Safety, and the Nationa Air Cartier Association recommendation:
Reduction of flight hours with completion of EQP

Military: 500 hours
4 year aviation degree: 500 hours
2 year aviation degree: 500 hours.

The second method is ridiculous in my opinion. It gives more credit for the EQP to those who have a 2 year degree than the other two groups.

Planepirate
11-06-2017, 11:40 AM
Looks like there is an update from yesterday - the FAA Committee is recommending a drop to 500 hours through aviation college programs (R-ATP).

FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: FAA committee recommends accelerated pilot training: Travel Weekly (http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/FAA-committee-recommends-accelerated-pilot-training)

Recommendations for Enhanced Qualification Program
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/media/Air_Carrier_Training_ARC.pdf

In your defense, the first link to the Travel Weekley article is misleading. I donít think he read that 88 page document either.

FraxAvi8tor
11-06-2017, 03:58 PM
You are so far off I donít know where to start haha. Maybe you should actually read that second link you posted?

The OP you're shouting at here states "500 hours through aviation college programs" which is the same thing you referenced in your reply under "Method 2", so I'm not sure why you're getting wound up.

Either way, thanks for summarizing the 88 pages here.

Varsity
11-06-2017, 08:54 PM
Saw this coming from a million miles away. Airline pilots need a PAC to protect our interests.

kevbo
11-07-2017, 01:14 AM
The OP you're shouting at here states "500 hours through aviation college programs" which is the same thing you referenced in your reply under "Method 2", so I'm not sure why you're getting wound up.

Either way, thanks for summarizing the 88 pages here.
No, method one is what we want. Its all about social status guys! If you have only a two year degree, you aren't a golden boy or have a rich daddy! The later two must make captain first! LOL.

Sputnik
11-07-2017, 05:33 AM
Saw this coming from a million miles away. Airline pilots need a PAC to protect our interests.

Dont we have one?

sailingfun
11-08-2017, 03:40 AM
Dont we have one?

That only a small percentage of pilots donate to. Money is power in DC.

Planepirate
11-08-2017, 11:24 AM
The OP you're shouting at here states "500 hours through aviation college programs" which is the same thing you referenced in your reply under "Method 2", so I'm not sure why you're getting wound up.

Either way, thanks for summarizing the 88 pages here.

I wasnít shouting. This is how false information gets passed around. That being said, his post wasnít completely inaccurate. It just didnít tell the whole truth.

Planepirate
11-08-2017, 11:30 AM
You are so far off I donít know where to start haha. Maybe you should actually read that second link you posted?

This is basically a document of recommendations to the FAA.

There are 2 different methods being proposed to the FAA to allow the reduction of flight hours for those who are:
1: Military,
2: 4-year aviation degrees,
3: 2-year Aviation degrees.

The three groups above will be able to take an Enhanced Qualification Program (EQP) to reduce the number of hours required to obtain a Restricted ATP.

(METHOD 1)
ALPA recommendation
Reduction of flight hours with completion of EQP to
500 hours for military
750 hours for 4-year aviation degrees
1000 hours with 2-year aviation degrees

(METHOD 2)
Delta Airlines, Regional Airline Association, Flight Safety, and the Nationa Air Cartier Association recommendation:
Reduction of flight hours with completion of EQP

Military: 500 hours
4 year aviation degree: 500 hours
2 year aviation degree: 500 hours.

The second method is ridiculous in my opinion. It gives more credit for the EQP to those who have a 2 year degree than the other two groups.

To be 100% accurate. The recommendations (method 1 vs method 2) are being recommended by the Air Carrier Training Aviation Rulemaking Committee TO the Associate Administer for Aviation Safety.

chuck h
11-13-2017, 09:55 AM
BTW, that little video game controller in the Airbus does nothing but make suggestions to the computer. When automation fails, you'll be the first on the scene.

Up, down, left, right, fast, slow. They all fly the same. As if that cable on a Cessna or a Boeing does any more than make a suggestion. But that's probably way to philosophical for an office worker. Luckily what we know and believe has no relation to what is true.

jsled
11-15-2017, 06:28 AM
How about everyone respond to ALPA's call to action?

Took 35 seconds yesterday. Sent emails to both my Senators and Congressman.

Done. But the R's rule both Houses and the Presidency. Therefore, the ATP mins are toast. TOAST. Politics matter. ;)

Out West
11-18-2017, 12:36 PM
No, method one is what we want. Its all about social status guys! If you have only a two year degree, you aren't a golden boy or have a rich daddy! The later two must make captain first! LOL.

"Golden boy or rich daddy" must be new age English for "too f*%#ing lazy to meet a simple requirement."

I got an undergrad degree while quite literally eligible for food stamps and feeding my kid cheerios, peanut butter and whatever else WIC paid for.

You just want a short cut. Meet the requirements, or get a different job - just stop whining about it being someone else's fault.

MidLife
11-18-2017, 12:49 PM
If the flying public knew that relaxing this rule puts a sack of potatoes in the right seat, and gives them a single ATP on most regional flights they would SCREAM.

When I explain the old model to lay people - they are incredulous that it was ever allowed.

Doesnt ALPA need to do a PR campaign?

Out West
11-18-2017, 01:23 PM
One would hope, but, unfortunately they wouldn't know what that means. The flying public cares about how cheap it is to fly. That's about the complete list.

bennet00
11-18-2017, 01:30 PM
Trump admin launches program to help veterans become commercial pilots | TheHill (http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/360766-trump-admin-launches-program-to-help-veterans-become-commercial-airline?amp)

FraxAvi8tor
11-19-2017, 06:49 AM
One would hope, but, unfortunately they wouldn't know what that means. The flying public cares about how cheap it is to fly. That's about the complete list.

Right - same line of thought applies to everything consumers buy anymore.

NJaded
11-20-2017, 02:08 PM
I dont agree Frakavi8tor,,the public compares cost vs quality on almost everything except airlines. They want cheapest ticket possible and if they are dissapointed they know to post on FB or call the local news station and they will get a reward of some type.

SonicFlyer
11-20-2017, 04:35 PM
I dont agree Frakavi8tor,,the public compares cost vs quality on almost everything except airlines. Then how do so many first class tickets get sold? :rolleyes:

MidLife
11-21-2017, 04:06 AM
Then how do so many first class tickets get sold? :rolleyes:AFAIK, other than me :D hardly any one is buying upper class tickets with their own wallet - only if paid by government or company, or FF upgrades....

kevbo
11-21-2017, 07:13 PM
"Golden boy or rich daddy" must be new age English for "too f*%#ing lazy to meet a simple requirement."

I got an undergrad degree while quite literally eligible for food stamps and feeding my kid cheerios, peanut butter and whatever else WIC paid for.

You just want a short cut. Meet the requirements, or get a different job - just stop whining about it being someone else's fault.

In saying that the qualification should be the same for everyone. As it is, "special" people get special treatment. Minorities and golden boys are the most obvious.

flapshalfspeed
11-22-2017, 11:54 AM
First off, not all regionals are able to raise their pay rates economically speaking. And even if they were, what happens when they are all at parity? There simply are not enough pilots to go around and it takes a few years to make more pilots (largely thanks to the stupid 1500hr rule)

Most regionals have proven to be competitive and resourceful enough--and/or valuable enough to their codeshare partners--to pay the going market rate for 1,500 hour pilots.

The small handful that can't afford the prevailing market rate and/or attract employees with flowthrough/QOL/etc. thus represent uncompetitive entities, and regardless of any level of government regulation, allowing them to be slowly culled from the herd is a good thing for the industry and the economy.

Same goes for an airline that can't pay the going market rate for fuel, parts, compliance with maintenance standards, gates, etc..

If the 1,500 hour rule was driving regionals out of business left and right, I might agree with your sentiment that the govt pushed a bit too far--but they aren't. Most of them are doing fine, most of them are thriving--the ones that aren't are a drag on the economy and industry and we shouldn't do anything to help them.

Out West
11-22-2017, 05:19 PM
In saying that the qualification should be the same for everyone. As it is, "special" people get special treatment. Minorities and golden boys are the most obvious.

The requirement is the same.

Bachelorís degree.

Pyro
11-30-2017, 05:04 PM
The requirement is the same.

Bachelorís degree.

I know 1 person at a major without one.

TransWorld
11-30-2017, 05:14 PM
I know 1 person at a major without one.

As rare as henís teeth.

kevbo
12-07-2017, 04:56 PM
If it makes anyone feel better, they are about to lower the experience requirements for mechanics as well. Two years of trade school that doesn't teach any specific airframe is absurd. They are going to let students pay for type training and give them an A&P.

takingmessages
12-17-2017, 01:29 PM
Viewpoints: Standing firm on the new pilot training standards
Viewpoints: Standing firm on the new pilot training standards - The Buffalo News (http://buffalonews.com/2017/12/16/viewpoints-standing-firm-on-the-new-pilot-training-standards/)

JetDoc
12-18-2017, 08:49 AM
If it makes anyone feel better, they are about to lower the experience requirements for mechanics as well. Two years of trade school that doesn't teach any specific airframe is absurd. They are going to let students pay for type training and give them an A&P.

The A&P certificate has always been that way. This isn't Europe and the JAA, nothing has changed. How is anyone to know what specific "airframe" they will be working on while they are earning the certificate? This is why you learn about Sitka spruce and the modified baseball stitch as well as welding and driving rivets.

kevbo
12-18-2017, 01:23 PM
The A&P certificate has always been that way. This isn't Europe and the JAA, nothing has changed. How is anyone to know what specific "airframe" they will be working on while they are earning the certificate? This is why you learn about Sitka spruce and the modified baseball stitch as well as welding and driving rivets.

They want to replace the basics with airliner specific training and call it an A&P. This way industry gets to shift their training burden onto the student. this will feel strange only to people that actually went to school and later earned experience. Many A&Ps never had to do either one and the system is fine with it. Most of the work is being performed by day laborers anyway.

JetDoc
12-18-2017, 03:56 PM
They want to replace the basics with airliner specific training and call it an A&P. This way industry gets to shift their training burden onto the student. this will feel strange only to people that actually went to school and later earned experience. Many A&Ps never had to do either one and the system is fine with it. Most of the work is being performed by day laborers anyway.

Ahhhh, I see. That's no bueno. Back in the olden days, one had to have at least an airframe certificate to work overhaul at UAL. The airline would train you on specific airframes too. This is all very sad.

takingmessages
12-19-2017, 05:24 AM
https://www.bna.com/thune-suggests-willingness-n73014473157/

By Shaun Courtney

A Senate committee chairman told Bloomberg Government he is open to dropping a contentious pilot-training provision from a Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill so the measure can move to the floor for debate and a vote in the new year.

Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) wrote a provision into the Senateís FAA bill (S. 1405) to create flexibility in how pilots earn training hours. The language would loosen the federally mandated 1,500 flight hours minimum for commercial airline co-pilots to allow other forms of non-flight training.

The provision aims to curb a pilot shortage among regional airlines, such as Mesa Air Group Inc., Great Lakes Aviation Inc., and SkyWest Inc.

ďIt may be that the bill is not the best place to get that addressed, if we can get that addressed in another form,Ē Thune said. ďIf we feel like weíre making sufficient headway on the 1,500 hours or at least on the pilot shortage issue in some other venue then we might be able to just start moving our bill.Ē

The 1,500-hour rule resulted from the deadly 2009 Colgan Air crash in New York. The proposal to change that rule has generated enough opposition to stall the billís progress since it was approved in committee in June. Opponents include Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

Transportation Secretary Elaine Chaoís attention to the pilot shortage and willingness to address it through regulation give Thune reason to believe a legislative fix may not be needed, he said.

The current FAA authorization runs through March 31.

To contact the reporter on this story: Shaun Courtney in Washington at [email protected]

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Paul Hendrie at [email protected]

Copyright © 2017 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Duesenflieger
12-19-2017, 05:46 AM
Mesa, Great Lakes and SkyWest, the three lowest-paying regional airlines in the United States, championing dropping the current ATP time requirements. Why should we be surprised....

FlyingKat
12-27-2017, 07:46 AM
This is just a bunch of posturing until Chuck Schumer changes his mind. The 1500 hour rule was his bill, and the Colgan families live in his state. He is the minority leader in the Senate, and can block any bill as long as he has 41 votes (which he has), and no FAA Administrator is going to take the chance of going against him when he will likely be the Majority Leader when (and if) the Democrats ever get control of the Senate.

SCHUMER RENEWS PUSH TO PROTECT & KEEP CRITICAL AVIATION SAFETY REGULATIONS RESULTING FROM CRASH OF FLIGHT 3407 IN PLACE Ė RULES THAT 3407 FAMILIES SUCCESSFULLY PASSED ARE AT RISK OF BEING UNDERMINED BY AIRLINE INDUSTRY & SENATOR SAYS THEY CANNOT BE ROLLED BACK; ANY WEAKENING OF SAFETY STANDARDS IS UNACCEPTABLE
Sept. 23, 2016 ē Original Press Release
Following Tragic 2009 Plane Crash That Claimed Lives of 50 People, Including Many WNYers, Families of Flight 3407 Victims Fought to Create Tough Flight Safety Regulations, Including Requirement That Pilots Log 1,500 Flight Hours In Order To Receive Certificate

More Than 7 Years After Tragedy, Regional Airline Industry Is Pushing Federal Aviation Administration To Reduce The Number of Hours Required For Pilot Qualification Standards Ė Schumer Says Any Weakening Of Provisions That Make Air Travel Safer Are Non-Starter

Schumer: Families of Flight 3407 Fought Too Hard For Efforts To Be Rolled Back

U.S. Senator Charles E. Schumer today renewed his push to protect the critical aviation safety regulations put in place following the crash of Flight 3407 in 2009. Schumer explained that Flight 3407 crashed in bad weather outside of Buffalo in February 2009, claiming the lives of all 49 passengers and crew, and a man on the ground. After investigators concluded that inexperience contributed to fatal decisions by the pilots, the families of Flight 3407 victims led the charge to mandate better training standards. New rules passed into law in as part of the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 included a requirement for 1,500 hours of flying time for a first-officer's certification. This was part of a broader initiative by the families to ensure ďOne Level of SafetyĒ for both regional and mainline airlines. However, recent efforts by the aviation industry to water down the training requirements ignores the lessons of Flight 3407 and substantially raises the risk of another such disaster. Schumer therefore urged the FAA to reject such a proposal to roll back these life-saving rules.

ďAfter the heart breaking tragedy of Flight 3407, the families of victims came together and advocated for aviation regulations that undoubtedly save lives and keep the traveling public safe. It is unthinkable that some in the aviation industry are pushing the FAA to water down these standards, and it is an affront to the 3407 familiesí efforts over the last seven years,Ē said Senator Schumer. ďThatís why I am renewing my push to ensure the FAA maintains its current safety rules and make sure travelers can expect a safe journey, regardless of the size of the airline. It is a matter of public safety and doing right by the families of Flight 3407 victims.Ē

The tragic February 2009 crash of Continental Flight 3407 near Buffalo, New York claimed 50 lives and alerted the nation to the shortfalls in our aviation safety system, particularly at the regional airline level. Continental Flight 3407 was flown by a regional carrier, Colgan Air, which is no longer in existence. In the wake of the tragedy, Schumer and the Western New York delegation worked together with the families who lost loved ones in the crash, to pass the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010. This landmark aviation safety legislation sought to address many of the factors contributing to the increasing safety gap between regional and mainline carriers by requiring the FAA to develop regulations to improve safety, including enhanced entry-level pilot training and qualification standards, pilot fatigue rules, airline pilot training and safety management programs, and through the creation of an electronic pilot record database.

This legislation established a number of mechanisms for increasing aviation safety in an effort to achieve a true ďOne Level of SafetyĒ between our nationís regional and mainline carriers. In particular, this legislation included a mandate that first officers ó also known as co-pilots ó hold an Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) certificate, which requires that the pilot log 1,500 flight hours. Previously, first officers were required to have only a commercial pilot certificate, which requires 250 hours of flight time. Schumer explained that this rule helps ensure our nationís pilots have the best set of skills and knowledge available before getting into the cockpit of a commercial plane. Schumer said there are exceptions to the 1,500 hour rule, including one for military pilots with fewer piloting hours, but some in the aviation industry would like to water down these rules even further to make it easier to hire pilots with less flying experience. Schumer said that the families of Flight 3407 fought too hard for the pilot training rule, for their successful efforts to be thwarted, and under no circumstances should we weaken the standards surrounding pilot qualifications.

Schumer said the 3407 familiesí efforts also led to the passage of the law that mandates stricter flight and duty time regulations to combat pilot fatigue. These new pilot fatigue rules incorporate the latest fatigue science to set requirements based on the time of day pilots begin their first flight, the number of flight segments, and the number of time zones they cross. Under these pilot fatigue rules, the FAA now sets limits on flight time to eight or nine hours, depending on the start time of the pilotís entire flight duty period, and sets a 10-hour minimum rest period, mandating that the pilot have an opportunity for eight hours of uninterrupted sleep within that period. These FAA rules also address potential cumulative fatigue by requiring that pilots have at least 30 consecutive hours free from duty on a weekly basis. Schumer said that rolling back any of these critical safety enhancements would be unacceptable.

A copy of Schumerís letter to the FAA appears below:

Dear Administrator Huerta:

I write to express my concern with the recommendations of the Air Carrier Training Aviation Rulemaking Committeeís Education, Training and Experience Alternatives for an ATP Workgroup, as outlined in a recent media report. I urge you to continue to demonstrate your strong commitment to aviation safety by resisting any attempts to undermine the pilot qualification rule for first officers.

As you know, Colgan Flight 3407 tragically crashed in Clarence Center, New York in February 2009, claiming the lives of all 49 on board and an additional individual on the ground. After dedicated advocacy from the families of those lost, Congress enacted sweeping aviation reforms designed to achieve One Level of Safety between regional and mainline carriers. Some regional carriers have attempted to water down these safety improvements in recent years, and have pushed proposals to reduce the number of hours required for a first officer to attain an Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) certificate, typically achieved through 1,500 hours of flight time.

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, members of industry are attempting to undermine these important safety rules through the working groupís recommendations to the FAA. The article states, ďU.S. airlines would be able to hire new pilots with far less cockpit experience than currently required under a proposal aimed at addressing a staffing shortageÖĒ I understand that the FAA is currently reviewing these recommendations; I urge you to categorically reject any recommendations that would undermine the pilot qualification rules for first officers. Any attempt to weaken or create a loophole in the requirements would be an affront both to aviation safety, the flying public and to the families affected by the Flight 3407 crash.

Thank you in advance for your attention to this important issue. The pilot qualification standards are a critical component in moving toward One Level of Safety between regional and mainline carriers, and should not be weakened in any way. I look forward to continuing to work with you to improve aviation safety.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Schumer

United States Senator

bozobigtop
12-27-2017, 12:07 PM
DT has proven he will not and cannot be stopped by no one, certainly not by Schumer!

DrainTheSwamp
12-27-2017, 08:43 PM
That only a small percentage of pilots donate to. Money is power in DC.

Money is power everywhere in the USA

WutFace
12-30-2017, 08:27 PM
DT has proven he will not and cannot be stopped by no one, certainly not by Schumer!

Many 15 year old beauty pageant contestants can testify to that!

Roundup
12-31-2017, 09:26 AM
"Airline pilot unions and safety advocates say the problem is regional airlines don't pay high enough entry-level salaries to attract as many pilots as they need."

I fly for a Regional. I'm in a crash pad with a guy from Delta who used to be at the same Regional.

We do the same job. Base out of the same airport. He has a better schedule. He has far better pay and benefits.
I knew what I was getting into, so I'm not blaming anyone. I can quit when I want (soon, I think).

Now, granted, I'm new to this, but it seems to me the whole system is flawed. You hear stories about the guys at the top who work three days a month and make $300k. Why, again? That's just a bad system. What are people like that contributing to the company? And don't say they, "paid their dues."

This whole thing should be leveled out more, the regional model is garbage (again..same job, and I can bumped off a flight to work by a retiree and their kids on the Wholly Owned parent).

It's just weird from the top down.
I recommended that american eagle pilots go with an in house union a few years ago, and then go straight to management and offer to fly those MD-80's for slightly less. Im sure aa mngt would have loved the bargaining chip and who knows, maybe at some point the allied boys would have come to the understanding that they need one pilot group, one seniority list. Naaa,,,never happen, greed rules.

Roundup
12-31-2017, 09:37 AM
Spot on right there.
Any of you knott heads remember the 80's. When delta wasn't crashing they were landing at the wrong airport. By the 90's it was american's turn with united pitching in. A few years later and fed-up cannot land an MD-11 without major damage. Always ex-military pilots, you know, socialist.
Windshear was not invented in the 80's and experience is always the best teacher, lots of it.

BarrySeal
12-31-2017, 07:51 PM
Guys, great New Years wishful thinking this thread. ALPA and other industry forces will not allow this. See below ALPA graphic and attached PDF file

http://www.alpa.org/~/media/ALPA/Images/advocacy/chart-airline-safety-act-2010.png?la=en&hash=DFDB51AA092C91393B02894B31B292234F970FB2

http://www.alpa.org/~/media/ALPA/Files/pdfs/news-events/white-papers/keep-america-flying.pdf?la=en

BarrySeal
12-31-2017, 07:52 PM
I recommended that american eagle pilots go with an in house union a few years ago, and then go straight to management and offer to fly those MD-80's for slightly less. Im sure aa mngt would have loved the bargaining chip and who knows, maybe at some point the allied boys would have come to the understanding that they need one pilot group, one seniority list. Naaa,,,never happen, greed rules.

ah, 80 for 80

C130driver
12-31-2017, 10:27 PM
Many 15 year old beauty pageant contestants can testify to that!

Clever, did you get that from Rachel Maddow?

SonicFlyer
01-01-2018, 01:24 PM
Guys, great New Years wishful thinking this thread. ALPA and other industry forces will not allow this. See below ALPA graphic and attached PDF file

First off they may not be able to prevent it. Secondly the 1500 hour rule was never about safety, it was about politics. Third, correlation does not equal causation. And fourth, the tired old worn liberal union propaganda is just that, tired, old, and worn.

BarrySeal
01-01-2018, 10:59 PM
First off they may not be able to prevent it. Secondly the 1500 hour rule was never about safety, it was about politics. Third, correlation does not equal causation. And fourth, the tired old worn liberal union propaganda is just that, tired, old, and worn.

Never gonna happen. ALPA loves Trump, who is America First and scrutinizing non-US workers taking jobs from US folks. This includes the transportation industry.

Air Line Pilots Association to Trump Administration: America First (http://aviationtribune.com/airlines/north-america/alpa-trump-administration-america-first/)

ALPA pro-1500 hour rule. ALPA pro Trump.

Back to regular programming.

SonicFlyer
01-02-2018, 06:32 PM
Never gonna happen. ALPA loves Trump, who is America First and scrutinizing non-US workers taking jobs from US folks. This includes the transportation industry.

Air Line Pilots Association to Trump Administration: America First (http://aviationtribune.com/airlines/north-america/alpa-trump-administration-america-first/)

ALPA pro-1500 hour rule. ALPA pro Trump.

Back to regular programming.
Perhaps, but what if Trump & Co decides to make Boeing a higher priority than ALPA when it comes to flags of convenience, tariffs, etc?

kevbo
01-02-2018, 07:55 PM
The 1500hr rule: It may not buy a new Cadillac every month but it does keep the spoon silver!

BarrySeal
01-02-2018, 11:08 PM
Perhaps, but what if Trump & Co decides to make Boeing a higher priority than ALPA when it comes to flags of convenience, tariffs, etc?

He is already p1ssed at Airbus and Europe in general. Boeing ? Loves Boeing. He has always flown a personal Boeing....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-bombardier/trump-administration-sides-with-boeing-in-bombardier-dispute-idUSKBN1EE2J4

If you are not aware, Trump is all over twitter talking about Aviation Safety.

Since taking office I have been very strict on Commercial Aviation. Good news - it was just reported that there were Zero deaths in 2017, the best and safest year on record!
ó Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 2, 2018 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/948195478428102657?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

Best selling author and Aviation cable news frequent guest Sully is against changing it. http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/351992-fight-erupts-over-training-hours-for-pilots

ALPA against changing it: http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/first-officer-qualifications

APA against changing it: http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/labor/308406-faa-should-not-relax-rules-for-first-officers

Me ? I want it changed to require 2500 TT for ATP. This will create a crisis shortage and maybe help our salaries.

But, some of our "brothers" in the industry would never vote for that, would they ?

changes to ATP ? Never gonna happen

kevbo
01-03-2018, 08:48 AM
He seems to like pilots a little bit but clearly hates mechanics. He's letting the airlines relocate their maintenance facilities to South America.

JetDoc
01-04-2018, 11:11 PM
He seems to like pilots a little bit but clearly hates mechanics. He's letting the airlines relocate their maintenance facilities to South America.

That's been going on since the early 2000's and Bush II. When UAL went bankrupt in 2003, tossed the keys for the hangar back to the Port of Oakland and shut down the wide body overhaul facility there the 777's went to communist mainland China and the 747's went to South Korea.

takingmessages
01-05-2018, 05:15 AM
Imagine that...
Families of plane crash victims seek commitment from Trump on safety rules

Families of plane crash victims seek commitment from Trump on safety rules | TheHill (http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/367277-families-of-plane-crash-victims-seek-commitment-from-trump-on-safety)

The families of victims who died in a 2009 airplane crash are seeking a commitment from President Trump to protect aviation safety rules after he boasted this week that his administration has been “very strict” on commercial aviation.

On Tuesday Trump took credit for reports that 2017 was the safest global year of commercial airline travel, even though the U.S. has not seen a deadly crash in years.

The last fatal crash involving a U.S. passenger airline was the 2009 Colgan Air crash in New York, which killed 49 people on board and one person on the ground.

BarrySeal
01-05-2018, 05:53 AM
Imagine that...
Families of plane crash victims seek commitment from Trump on safety rules

Families of plane crash victims seek commitment from Trump on safety rules | TheHill (http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/367277-families-of-plane-crash-victims-seek-commitment-from-trump-on-safety)

The families of victims who died in a 2009 airplane crash are seeking a commitment from President Trump to protect aviation safety rules after he boasted this week that his administration has been ďvery strictĒ on commercial aviation.

On Tuesday Trump took credit for reports that 2017 was the safest global year of commercial airline travel, even though the U.S. has not seen a deadly crash in years.

The last fatal crash involving a U.S. passenger airline was the 2009 Colgan Air crash in New York, which killed 49 people on board and one person on the ground.

I hope revised ATP rule becomes 2500 TT required

:D

GogglesPisano
01-05-2018, 06:36 AM
I hope revised ATP rule becomes 2500 TT required

:D

And 500 multi to be competitive at a regional, like the good ol' days.

Pay for training would be a bit much, though.:p

Slick111
01-05-2018, 06:40 AM
Notice what the airlines are NOT trying to get from congress: Increasing/abolishing the mandatory retirement age, (age 65).

And before I get started, I'm not advocating an increase in the retirement age. I'm just pointing out the fallacy in their argument.

If airlines were really panicked over a shortage of pilots, in ADDITION to getting new blood in the door at the regionals they would be trying to keep ALL of the pilots that they currently have, including those who are approaching mandatory retirement. And by keeping more "gray hairs", they would slow their regional pilots progession to the majors, thus allowing them to more easily staff their regional feeders.

But it costs an airline a lot less money to hire a CFI into the right seat of an RJ at $30/hour which then "trickle-up" replaces a 30 year Airbus Captain who earns $250/hour.

The fact that the airlines are not actively attacking the "pilot shortage" at BOTH ENDS tells you all that you need to know about their current push to lower the requirements for newbies. It's not about solving a "pilot shortage". It's about maximizing PROFITS!

BarrySeal
01-05-2018, 09:56 AM
And 500 multi to be competitive at a regional, like the good ol' days.

Pay for training would be a bit much, though.:p

500 ME - absolutely

then, only then, can you get an interview for a Beech 1900 or EMB-110 job

BarrySeal
01-05-2018, 10:00 AM
Notice what the airlines are NOT trying to get from congress: Increasing/abolishing the mandatory retirement age, (age 65).

And before I get started, I'm not advocating an increase in the retirement age. I'm just pointing out the fallacy in their argument.

If airlines were really panicked over a shortage of pilots, in ADDITION to getting new blood in the door at the regionals they would be trying to keep ALL of the pilots that they currently have, including those who are approaching mandatory retirement. And by keeping more "gray hairs", they would slow their regional pilots progession to the majors, thus allowing them to more easily staff their regional feeders.

But it costs an airline a lot less money to hire a CFI into the right seat of an RJ at $30/hour which then "trickle-up" replaces a 30 year Airbus Captain who earns $250/hour.

The fact that the airlines are not actively attacking the "pilot shortage" at BOTH ENDS tells you all that you need to know about their current push to lower the requirements for newbies. It's not about solving a "pilot shortage". It's about maximizing PROFITS!

Kind of a "duh" observation. Not being disrespectful. A CEO's primary job in life is maximize profits for the company. Most dudes at age 65 are all senior Captains. making the most, working (probably) the least. why would he keep them ? great work for you, Delta or FDX Captain on a heavy at age 64.8 years old. but put yourself in CEO shoes.

it is what it is

kevbo
01-05-2018, 11:33 AM
That's been going on since the early 2000's and Bush II. When UAL went bankrupt in 2003, tossed the keys for the hangar back to the Port of Oakland and shut down the wide body overhaul facility there the 777's went to communist mainland China and the 747's went to South Korea.

Well, I guess that makes the continued dismantling of US based maintenance OK. MAGA????

JetDoc
01-05-2018, 12:13 PM
Well, I guess that makes the continued dismantling of US based maintenance OK. MAGA????

Not ok, in fact I find it deplorable and I lost my my job because of it. Just pointing out that the outsourcing to foreign countries en masse has been going on since the early 2000's and is not a byproduct of the current administration but also that administration has done nothing to stop it.

baseball
01-05-2018, 04:14 PM
Not ok, in fact I find it deplorable and I lost my my job because of it. Just pointing out that the outsourcing to foreign countries en masse has been going on since the early 2000's and is not a byproduct of the current administration but also that administration has done nothing to stop it.

I am hopeful that outsourcing will become the exception rather than the norm. Hoping that there are incentives in cost, quality, taxes, HR related costs to justify bringing back more in house maintenance, depot, inspections, heavy checks, and major maintenance. I am personally more trusting in western maintenance technicians and in particular US/Canadian, British A & P's.

takingmessages
01-08-2018, 04:31 AM
Oh boy, it's got to be simple...

For cheaper flights and more options, the solution is simple (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/for-cheaper-flights-and-more-options-the-solution-is-simple/article/2645075)

For cheaper flights and more options, the solution is simple.

Born of changes introduced following a 2009 crash, the Federal Aviation Administration now requires commercial pilots to have 1,500 hours under their belts rather than the original requirement of 250 hours. That vast difference adds up to a lot of extra training time and tuition expenses, and it deserves to be cut.

Indeed, in Canada a commercial pilot license requires just "200 hours total flight time and 100 hours pilot in command time including 20 hours cross country." Recognizing that 250 hours might have been too low, why don't we reduce the 1,500-hour requirement to somewhere in the region of 750 hours?


Seems to go along with:
CARTEL DESTROYS PILOT JOB THEN CITES SHORTAGE FOR CHOKING THE LIFE OUT OF NON HUB AIRPORTS
Oct 17, 2017

United Capital Management dba as an airline said it closed its CLE hub because of a pilot shortage, omitting that destroying the job of pilot by using regionals-paying less than 30k to pilots-was a core strategy of the relentlessly avaricious cabal. As they did time and time again they decimated every job they could-your local airport was once a fortress of well paid middle class jobs with long serving employees. Today, many of the worst, lowest paid highest turnover jobs are in aviation. Now treating its readers like imbeciles, Fortune repeats the deceit that there is a shortage of pilots which is not true as they well know: for the right wage, pilots will be lined up for jobs. Ask Ryanair which is losing tons of pilots to higher paying Norwegian. Once again, the effluent of US air travel could not be accomplished without able assistance of corporate media. Equally deceitful: no mention that overjamming hubs and starving local airports is a linchpin of the cartel's windfall profits and absurd executive compensation.
America Pilot Shortage Effect on Regional Flights, Ticket Prices | Fortune (http://fortune.com/2017/10/16/pilot-shortage-airports-tickets-flights/)

astroglider
01-15-2018, 07:40 AM
Wow, you really need study the industry a little more. #1 No airline pilot is making $300,000 and flying three days per month. Also, you sound like a passenger asking why a child must pay the same ticket price as an adult (after all the child is smaller).

You might think you are doing the same job...but that's not what you are getting paid for...you are getting paid for experience. How much experience do you have versus a 15 years mainline 737 First Officer? An experienced pilot is worth more to the company...and is therefore paid more for doing the same job as a new hire. Now here's a homework assignment...why is an experienced airline pilot more valuable than a less experienced one? If you can't answer that one...maybe a career change (as you've hinted at) should be in order.

ItnStln
01-15-2018, 10:32 AM
Also, you sound like a passenger asking why a child must pay the same ticket price as an adult (after all the child is smaller).

That got me thinking about which airline would be the first to charge passengers by the weight.

takingmessages
01-15-2018, 03:52 PM
Makes me wonder...

From the link below:

"The legislation involves the change in the hours required to fly commercial planes.
That went from 250 to 300 hours up to 1500 hours," said Carr. "That gap pulls the real problem, because the person who got their certificates basically has to pay for those difference in hours."


Note the "went from 250 to 300" statement.
Priceless...


Airline companies grapple with pilot retirement problems - Story | KSAZ (http://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-news/airline-companies-grapple-with-pilot-retirement-problems)

Two things help people to be misinformed:
The first one is the statement '1500 hours rule'.
It is not a '1500 hours rule'.
It is a rule to require a pilot to hold an 'Airline Transport Certificate' to operate a transport category aircraft for an airline. And which, BTW, has required 1500 hrs for as long as I can remember (which is not much nowadays...).

Then there is people like the one in the interview stating that 'because they increased the hour requirements from 250 to 1500 yadayadayada...'
It is BS, we know it, there are jobs (not counting hard-to-find flight instructors) to be had between the 250 and the (mythical) '1500 hours'

But people interested in perpetuating the charade (or clueless) won't tell you that.

How about if someone with the resources to undertake the effort to educate the population, began explaining people that pilots flying transport category aircraft (as opposite as "commercial planes") are required to hold an ATP for a reason?

Beats me... :(


And never mind about https://insideflyer.com/forums/threads/cartel-destroys-pilot-job-then-cites-shortage-for-choking-the-life-out-of-non-hub-airports.138843/

CARTEL DESTROYS PILOT JOB THEN CITES SHORTAGE FOR CHOKING THE LIFE OUT OF NON HUB AIRPORTS

United Capital Management dba as an airline said it closed its CLE hub because of a pilot shortage, omitting that destroying the job of pilot by using regionals-paying less than 30k to pilots-was a core strategy of the relentlessly avaricious cabal. As they did time and time again they decimated every job they could-your local airport was once a fortress of well paid middle class jobs with long serving employees. Today, many of the worst, lowest paid highest turnover jobs are in aviation. Now treating its readers like imbeciles, Fortune repeats the deceit that there is a shortage of pilots which is not true as they well know: for the right wage, pilots will be lined up for jobs. Ask Ryanair which is losing tons of pilots to higher paying Norwegian. Once again, the effluent of US air travel could not be accomplished without able assistance of corporate media. Equally deceitful: no mention that overjamming hubs and starving local airports is a linchpin of the cartel's windfall profits and absurd executive compensation.

No Land 3
01-20-2018, 05:25 PM
Removing the ATP requirement would start up the race to the bottom overnight. Anyone who is in favor of this should have their medical taken away permanently due to cognitive deficiencies.

JTwift
01-28-2018, 09:40 AM
You might think you are doing the same job...but that's not what you are getting paid for...you are getting paid for experience. How much experience do you have versus a 15 years mainline 737 First Officer? An experienced pilot is worth more to the company...and is therefore paid more for doing the same job as a new hire. Now here's a homework assignment...why is an experienced airline pilot more valuable than a less experienced one? If you can't answer that one...maybe a career change (as you've hinted at) should be in order.

Well, this isn't exactly true, either.

If you have a 20 year military pilot, and a 2 year Regional airline pilot.

Both get hired at [insert major airline] on the same date, for the sake of argument. Both will make the same pay. Which one has more experience?

Is it 20 years of "air sense, combat, general flying, etc" or is it the guy that has been in and out of LGA/DTW, and knows what ACARS is?

It doesn't matter. Same pay.

Sliceback
01-29-2018, 07:05 AM
The avg regional guy getting hired has approx 6-7 yrs experience.
So itís a 12-20yr mil guy vs a civilian guy with 8-10yr civilian guy.

For many regional/civilian guys itís an easier transition than it is for the former military guys.

at6d
01-30-2018, 11:11 PM
Or in the case of the PHX SWA base, what transition? :)

sailingfun
01-31-2018, 10:58 AM
The avg regional guy getting hired has approx 6-7 yrs experience.
So itís a 12-20yr mil guy vs a civilian guy with 8-10yr civilian guy.

For many regional/civilian guys itís an easier transition than it is for the former military guys.

For the first month and itís mainly ground ramp operations. Used to be a non issue when everyone did 3 to 5 years as a engineer.

iHateAMR
01-31-2018, 06:18 PM
For many regional/civilian guys itís an easier transition than it is for the former military guys.

This has been acknowledged by FedEx check airmen. Even of pilots half a year or more on the line.

at6d
02-02-2018, 10:04 PM
Great username!

takingmessages
02-13-2018, 08:32 PM
https://generalaviationnews.com/2018/02/07/isnt-pilot-shortage-compensation-shortage/



ďWhat we are seeing is a limited supply of pilots willing to work for the amount the airlines want to pay. Once the airlines pay what the pilots feel they are worth, plenty of pilots will show up.Ē

PilotGR
02-15-2018, 09:16 AM
The OP put this link in, but didn't label it.

CLICK THIS LINK and take less than a minute to send emails to your Senators and Congressman to maintain the ATP requirement.

Maintaining the Current Minimum First Officer Qualifications (http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/first-officer-qualifications)

Politicians respond to constituent responses when they achieve a numerical threshold. A dozen; a few hundred? Meh.

Multiple thousands? They might put down their latest issue of "Modern Malfeasance" long enough to craft a response.

Later, while conducting a 'caucus' at a DC gentlemen's club, if a cohort grouses about "....a bunch of whiney pilots clogging my mail and phone; I can't even enjoy this lap-dance," they may resolve to look at it in committee.

Sadly, statistics show that fewer than 10% of all ALPA members can even be bothered to respond to Calls to Action.


done...thanks for sharing..

takingmessages
02-16-2018, 04:49 PM
Flight 3407 families get good news upon returning to D.C.
Flight 3407 families get good news upon returning to D.C. ? The Buffalo News (http://buffalonews.com/2018/02/15/flight-3407-families-get-good-news-upon-returning-to-d-c/)

Published February 15, 2018
WASHINGTON – The Families of Continental Flight 3407 returned to the capital on Thursday, and they came away from a series of meetings feeling good about their efforts to beat back the airline industry's attempt to weaken the aviation safety law they got passed in 2010.


http://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/buffalo/news/2018/02/15/working-for-safer-skies-following-the-flight-3407-tragedy-


http://news.wbfo.org/post/families-continue-pushing-maintain-flight-safety-rules

SonicFlyer
02-16-2018, 09:24 PM
WASHINGTON Ė The Families of Continental Flight 3407 returned to the capital on Thursday, and they came away from a series of meetings feeling good about their efforts to beat back the airline industry's attempt to weaken the aviation safety law they got passed in 2010.



Fake news... the 1500 hour rule had nothing to do with safety

takingmessages
02-17-2018, 03:59 AM
Fake news... the 1500 hour rule had nothing to do with safety

I personally feel better knowing that both guys in the front hold an ATP.
1500 hours or not...

takingmessages
03-09-2018, 02:54 PM
The horse ain't dead yet...

Aviation safety group appears to break with Flight 3407 families:
Aviation safety group appears to break with Flight 3407 families ? The Buffalo News (http://buffalonews.com/2018/03/07/flight-safety-group-appears-to-break-with-flight-3407-families/)

WASHINGTON Ė A venerable flight safety organization appears to be subtly criticizing one of the key provisions of the 2010 aviation safety law advocated by the Families of Continental Flight 3407, and Rep. Brian Higgins is not at all happy about it.
The Flight Safety Foundation, an independent, international flight safety group with a 70-year history, published a position paper (https://flightsafety.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FSF-position-paper-pilot-training-and-competency-FINAL-03-01-18.pdf) this week that's less than a rousing endorsement of the law's requirement that all new commercial copilots have 1,500 hours of flight experience.
...

Position Paper: Pilot training and competency
https://flightsafety.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FSF-position-paper-pilot-training-and-competency-FINAL-03-01-18.pdf

...
Higgins pushes back on Flight Safety Foundation's position on pilot training requirements:
https://www.wnypapers.com/news/article/current/2018/03/09/131811/higgins-pushes-back-on-flight-safety-foundations-position-on-pilot-training-requirements

Congressman Brian Higgins is pushing back on a position paper recently released by the Flight Safety Foundation that suggests reducing the flight time requirements for new airline pilots.
Higgins responded, "There is no give-and-take on flight safety. Any effort to give up the flight safety improvements, based on lessons learned after Flight 3407 and recommendations made by professionals at the NTSB, threatens the lives of passengers. Families in our community know the pain of what happens when tired, inexperienced pilots step into the cockpit. We've successfully fought to protect other families from that pain and we're not going back."
...

Flight Safety Foundation Calls for Sweeping Changes to Pilot Training
https://www.flyingmag.com/flight-safety-foundation-calls-for-sweeping-changes-to-pilot-training
...



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1