Oldfreightdawg

Interestingly; the Regional Airline Association--the regional airline lobby group in Washington--has come out in support of this legislation, which I found very surprising, because it's the regional airlines that stand to lose the most should this legislation become law. Randy Babbit--former ALPA president and current FAA chief supports it. It's in the house subcommittee being prepared for a house vote. Write your congressman or representative asking they support it.

The only group that has shown any opposition to this is the ATA--which is the lobby group for the airline industry (major). Maybe they're afraid of the coming pilot shortage...

BoilerUP

And yet, somehow, me not having an ATP didn't diminish safety of flight one iota.

While I don't think it unreasonable for airline pilots to be required to have an ATP despite me not having one, I also know one doesn't automatically become safer after simply passing a checkride.

rickair7777

That's surprising...I would have thought that the majors would not care, and the RAA would be up in arms over this.

Perhaps the regionals think (correctly) that such a requirement will reduce their liability exposure by enhancing safety. If it is an across-the-board requirement, then the bottom-feeders cannot gain a competitive advantage by scrapping the bottom of the barrel. Long-term, any additional costs will get passed on to the majors anyway.

That may be what the majors are afraid of...additional costs flowing uphill and a reduction in the economic benefit of outsourcing.

rickair7777

Same for me....but I had better than ATP mins before I got into 121, and a 121 turbojet checkride is at least as good as an ATP ride in a duchess.

I think there is a safety benefit to hiring pilots with some GA PIC time...if nothing else they will be more assertive when they get stuck with the occasional worthless captain, and will be better captains themselves when the time comes.

forumname

Blanket statement. Especially if the guy built his time in a job by himself. Pipeline, traffic, banner tow, etc.

flyinaway411

maybe its just me...but i dont think this ReasonableMan is really a pilot....

Thedude

I'll bite.
I will belittle you and ask you point blank. Are you a pilot? and IF so what level of certificate do you hold and what is your background? Your post make you come off like some sort of reporter (I think so) or some congressman's aide looking for info.

I like to think I would know the difference. and this statement leads me to believe you are not.

Yes it does. The road to hell is pave with good intentions. You need to have a good working knowledge of an industry before you can make effective and sensible laws that govern and regulate said industry.

Stand up and identify yourself. Don't try to hind behind some misdirection and try to play elusive word games.

ReasonableMan

And yet you continue to miss the point. It's not about the rating, it's the experience that historically comes with requirements that make you eligible to earn the rating, hence why there are numbers attached to the rating. There are obviously exceptions to every rule however, the mass majority of pilots without that level of experience (according to research) is neither as knowledgeable nor capable as one with that level of experience. Thus, the industry would statistically be safer it this were a FAR.
Along the pay lines, because of the qualification, ALPA has more leverage to establish an "Industry Standard Pay" and not those (not all) greedy managers who are currently establishing it. There will be a definite line in the sand. Thoughts???

Thedude

Why is it unfortunate and why is it a safety reason? You seem to be throwing out buzzwords without really knowing anything specific. An ATP certificate is just another piece of paper and not some life changing event. I was the same guy the day after my ATP ride that I was before it. With that being said, the mins to work for ANY airline need to be increased. So far the ATP has been put out there mainly because it is a benchmark sorts. It takes X amount of expeience to apply for one and a known set of standards to past the test. Its a start and nothing wrong with it. I also think 1200TT/200ME/500 PIC would be enough to hold an SIC position at a 121 company.

But FIRST the FAA needs to address the antiquated rest rules that all airlines operate under. Esp in the 121 Supp world. I bet you were probably not aware there is NO minimum duty day under 121 Supp International rules. Meaning you can be on duty for in excess of 24 hrs (and I have) but only be limited by flight time. Before you even ask, there are plenty of passenger carriers that operate under 121 Supp as well as cargo haulers. I would prefer to see the rest rules revamped to mirror something of the UK system. It is based on scientific reserach and limits the duty day based on report time and number of sectors. A better approach in my opinion.

I'll restate this point for clarity. Having an ATP currently does nothing to improve my QOL. Having better rest rules would have a dramatic effect though.

Have I sufficiently answered your baited/coded question?

Thedude

I guess you missed the day the Railway Labor Act and collective bargaining were taught.

About 10 years ago, during a staff meeting, I proposed the idea of adding a surcharge to the pax ticket. It was $1 per hour of flight time per pax per flight crewmember. Meaning if you were on a 2 hour flight with 2 pilots in the cockpit it would cost each pax an extra $4. I think most pax would be more than happy to pay a mear $4 to get a "quality crew". It would basically cost the company nothing and give the crews a much needed raise. I was greeted with blank stares


Its a little of topic but I think its humors and a little educational.
About 5 yrs ago I was working for a "prestigious" 121 Supp company that flew pax. We had to divert into XXX airfield becase the weather at the destination was socked in due to a thunderstorm on top of the airfiled. When we reach out alternate airport, we of course needed gas. The fuelers refused to put gas in the airplane until it was payed for. We had contract fuel at this destination but the locals decided they would try to scam us (the crew) and make us pay in cash. Well, we don't carry that kinda cash and we no longer have Captain's checks or credit cards. So some of the pax came up with the idea that they (all 170 of 'em) would take up a collection to get to their destination. This was a great idea until I informed them that it would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $10,000. Of course they promptly recognized their error. After a couple hours of waiting, a few phone calls and faxes, the fuelers realized they were not going to win and finally gave us the necessary gas.

Moral of the story. Pax have NO IDEA how much money it takes to operate an aircraft nor the logistics involved. Most equate it to the simplicity of driving a car.