Originally Posted by The Juice (Post 687865)

Sling gear...yes.

But should your first 121 PIC experience come when you are sitting left seat for a mainline heavy? Experience in the left seat at a regional is an important experience.

Originally Posted by cgtpilot (Post 688715)

Nice thought but the corp world is such a small piece of the pie. You typically get your 1-3 guys in each 121 major class. If your so happy with your bizjet just logon to bizjetpilotcentral.com and talk about your high starting pay and slow climbing top end pay 365/24/7 schedules (the majority of the bizjet jobs, not the Fortune 50 strech CRJ jobs). In the end, the majors want prior 121 or military officers in their left seats, period. Get over it, your CJ5++++xls X isn't what they want, sorry. But hey you've got great starting pay right!?!

Originally Posted by CALTEX (Post 688603)

I guess I just don't see the difference between someone upgrading on an E-175 and E-190 and an MD80 or 737. Is it the extra 40 or so seats that make it more difficult? Is it the extra flight attendant? I am not saying that PIC is worthless? I am just saying that PIC at a regional and PIC at a major is THE SAME THING! Now, would I put a brand new captain on a 777? No. There is more envolved in that kind of flying. Flying into Toronto and crossing the pacific are two different things. Let's get real. Total time has more to do with experience than PIC. Like I said before, who would you rather have flying your family? A 9 year Eagle FO who has 10,000 hours and all the experience that brings or a 2000 hour captain at some crappy regional? I guess you would pick the 2000 hour guy, because he has more time in the left seat.

That is all I'm saying. The experience is not limited to PIC only. However, we have seen from some that it is all that matters.

Originally Posted by BoilerUP (Post 688842)

Let's not let this evolve into a "my industry segment is superior to yours" argument, and instead, let's talk about any VALID reasons that might exist for excluding someone of a certain background from employment at a major.

Originally Posted by DeadHead (Post 688856)

But for arguments sake, 121 pilots are better right?

Originally Posted by BoilerUP (Post 688842)

I can't quite tell if you're flamebaiting or really that ignorant about realities of business aviation...but if you think the majority of bizjet jobs are 24/7/365 then I'm gonna lean toward ignorance.

Bizav is "such a small piece of the pie"...but the first and biggest piece that airline pilots start trying to grab a crumb of when facing a furlough.

As a prior airline and now corporate pilot I personally have no desire to go back to an airline lifestyle, and obviously our E190-driving friend has no desire to experience the corporate lifestyle...but personal preferences shouldn't be elevated to artificial barriers for well-qualified pilots in either segment from exploring alternate employment.

Without rehashing old sterotyping arguments or getting into a peener-measuring contest...a very strong argument could be made that a pilot flying a 15,000lb+ jet 400 hours per year who has to be their own Dispatch, Crew scheduling, Maintenance control, Inflight, Customer Service & Concierge departments actually has more "experience", albeit in fewer hours, than an airline pilot who flies 800+ hours per year in either seat.

Let's not let this evolve into a "my industry segment is superior to yours" argument, and instead, let's talk about any VALID reasons that might exist for excluding someone of a certain background from employment at a major.

Originally Posted by SamFoxpilot (Post 688852)

I agree with CALTEX--there should be no difference for upgrading in RJs vs the 73 or MD-80. Pilot in Command is a very important responsibility regardless of the size of aircraft you fly.

There should be no difference for sitting in the right seat as well. That's why I think there should be a minimum PIC requirement for all 121 FOs as well. ALL FOs are "captains in training" and are expected to be able to assume command should the captain become incapacitated. You can debate just how much PIC time would be a "minimum", but 250 hours would be a start--isn't that what you need to get your ATP??

I also agree with CALTEX that PIC time alone should not be a measure of someone's experience. That's why the ATP requirements also dictate a minimum (I emphasize minimum) amount of total time, as well as instrument, and night time requirements.

The best way to save our profession in my opinion is not to lower hiring standards, but raise them by requiring all Part 121 FOs to have an ATP. Individual companies can have higher standards as market conditions allow, but the best way to stop the regionals' race to the bottom as far as pay scales go is by raising the hiring minimums to requiring an ATP.

Originally Posted by Bucking Bar (Post 688798)

Agreed, +1

The military Officers do an excellent job too. Piloting is about 40% of the Captain gig. Managing people effectively, working the system, and of course judgment make up the the majority of the job. Those skills can be picked up in a variety of places, but command actually weeds out a few folks. The majors would like to pick from the most refined pool they can find.

I'd also add that right seat time in a heavy / international operation is valuable experience ... . and 135 time seems to be some of the best experience in either seat.

I'm glad to see many people on this board are beginning to realize we can not blame new hires for contracts that were negotiated before they were even on the property. I don't blame the new hire Virgin, or Republic pilot as much as I do their more senior guys who had a greater opportunity to raise the standards and failed to do so.