USAF Chief retention plan
02-21-2017, 06:10 AM
#31
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,293
Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox
More so, I still believe we need a national flight academy for air transport pilots, separate from our military academies, similar to the Merchant Marine Academy.
The big difference today is that the feedstock, instead of being farm kids with a 3rd grade education, are college grads.
I don't think we really need the merchant marine academies any more. Most of their grads end up serving in the navy anyway.
The service academies are probably still useful because in addition to technical skills, military leaders benefit from a liberal arts education as well, particularly history. Even more important, the academies attempt to instill an innate sense of honor and duty into the students, and that works better at a young age. That core group sets the tone for all the officers commissioned from other sources. The military at least tries to not mirror the society (in same cases different sub-societies) from which it's members come.
I don't think the airline industry "needs" the government to subsidize pilot training just yet. Pilots don't need a deep appreciation for history, etc. Even if it came down to it, airlines would probably be better off doing this...
1) Take control of their regional pilot hiring, either contractually or by bringing it in-house, so as to control the pipeline.
2) Granting scholarships to pilot candidates to attend either 4-year aviation colleges (for HS grads) or designated fast-track pilot schools (college grads).
3) Start those pilots as regional FO's with a set career path to mainline (flow or seniority number).
That would be a lot cheaper than paying the taxes/user fees to establish and maintain another government bureaucracy to generate pilots. It also has two other very big advantages:
- The airlines can control the training standards.
- When times are slow, they can throttle back on scholarships. If you create a federal pilot academy, you're stuck with it, it's probably going to make X number of pilots every year whether you need them or not, and of course the airlines/consumers will be paying for that in perpetuity. Once you create some federal jobs, the employment, comfort, and lucrative pensions of those federal employees will of course over-ride all other considerations...
#2 and #3 are already happening.
02-22-2017, 11:42 AM
#32
On Reserve
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 15
[QUOTE=Albief15;2305167]It is not as dumb as you think...
While it is a tragic story, the fact is one poor regional pilot with a bad training record probably did more to enhance our profession than years of dedicated work and effort by many ALPA volunteers. The Colgan crash put pilot experience and competency into the discussion in the media and in Congress, and also flight time and duty time issues. Subsequent legislation meant to enhance safety like the Part 117 regulations and the 2013 ATP changes not only helped enhance safety, but also gave pilot groups more leverage than they have had in years by shrinking the pool of available labor. What Goldfein hopes to do--as do the RAA and a host of others--is lower the requirements to increase that pool size. In the process, he will take pressure off his manning crisis by not only increasing the of non-military pilots available for airlines, but by potentially reducing our future pay as well. He doesn't just want to keep his pilots--he wants to make the airlines an overall less attractive option.
Using history as a guide a USAF pilot applicant will be competitive against any other applicant for any desirable airline position. So unless the Pay/QOL becomes so degraded at the legacies that the USAF pilot wants to stay put this would not help Goldfein's attrition problem.
You would hope he would take the energy he's putting toward this push and use it to try to improve morale, compensation, and QOL in the AF. Making the AF a more attractive place to be instead of trying to make the airline world look less attractive seems like it would benefit the AF in more ways than one.
While it is a tragic story, the fact is one poor regional pilot with a bad training record probably did more to enhance our profession than years of dedicated work and effort by many ALPA volunteers. The Colgan crash put pilot experience and competency into the discussion in the media and in Congress, and also flight time and duty time issues. Subsequent legislation meant to enhance safety like the Part 117 regulations and the 2013 ATP changes not only helped enhance safety, but also gave pilot groups more leverage than they have had in years by shrinking the pool of available labor. What Goldfein hopes to do--as do the RAA and a host of others--is lower the requirements to increase that pool size. In the process, he will take pressure off his manning crisis by not only increasing the of non-military pilots available for airlines, but by potentially reducing our future pay as well. He doesn't just want to keep his pilots--he wants to make the airlines an overall less attractive option.
Using history as a guide a USAF pilot applicant will be competitive against any other applicant for any desirable airline position. So unless the Pay/QOL becomes so degraded at the legacies that the USAF pilot wants to stay put this would not help Goldfein's attrition problem.
You would hope he would take the energy he's putting toward this push and use it to try to improve morale, compensation, and QOL in the AF. Making the AF a more attractive place to be instead of trying to make the airline world look less attractive seems like it would benefit the AF in more ways than one.
02-22-2017, 02:35 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,193
This isn't a pilot shortage, it's a pay shortage. The regionals, and the majors that whipsawed them, made entry into the job so undesirable for so long they re now reaping what they've sewn.
Same wth the military, they've made staying in a great job so painful guys would rather quit and go where the shortage is making their skills and quality of life much more appealing. The military had it too good for to long, being able to hold pilots hostage. It didn't take a crystal ball to see what was coming, and they're now reaping.... ah you get it.
Same wth the military, they've made staying in a great job so painful guys would rather quit and go where the shortage is making their skills and quality of life much more appealing. The military had it too good for to long, being able to hold pilots hostage. It didn't take a crystal ball to see what was coming, and they're now reaping.... ah you get it.
02-23-2017, 03:34 AM
#35
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,293
Originally Posted by Grumble
This isn't a pilot shortage, it's a pay shortage. The regionals, and the majors that whipsawed them, made entry into the job so undesirable for so long they re now reaping what they've sewn.
Those folks are not going to put up with the dues-paying. There's plenty of pay at the majors, even most of the LCCs have fast upgrade. The problem is getting younger folks to sign up for the dues paying phase. Easy sounding answer is raise pay, but if you pay regional new-hires $80, the CA's who suffered through the lost decade will want $150, and rightfully so. At some point the economics of most of the regional fleet become questionable...unless the majors want to operate them at a loss just to maintain a pilot farm league.
* Caveat: Most of the millenials I fly with do not fit the negative stereotype at all. That's probably why they're in aviation.
Originally Posted by Grumble
Same with the military, they've made staying in a great job so painful guys would rather quit and go where the shortage is making their skills and quality of life much more appealing. The military had it too good for to long, being able to hold pilots hostage. It didn't take a crystal ball to see what was coming, and they're now reaping.... ah you get it.
02-23-2017, 05:34 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2011
Position: Taco Rocket Operator
Posts: 2,485
Originally Posted by Albief15
It is not as dumb as you think...
Part of the reason pilots are doing so well in contracts now is the pilot shortage has decimated regionals. This move by Goldfein would make the regionals able to hire less experienced and less expensive pilots. This labor shortfall could be significantly reduced by producing more regional pilots sooner, which is his goal in reducing the flight time required for these jobs.
If regionals could again hire guys at 250 hours with a commercial, they could fill a lot more right seats...quickly. Until the ATP requirement, young pilots could get a loan for their training and build time for only a short while before being scooped up. There were plenty of pilots in the mid 2000s that would take out a 100k loan to get to that hour mark.
Two things stopped that. First--the requirement to have an ATP and 1500 hours. Second, the financial crisis drove a lot of folks out of the loan making business, which funded the "puppy mill" flight schools across Florida and the sunbelt. Many of those schools and programs shrunk or disappeared.
750 hours isn't at easy at 250 and a commercial to acquire, but it is half of what they need now. It is a big cut.
If the regionals can start stacking their right seats again, here's some potential ramifications...
1. The bonuses/wage increases we've seen in the regionals might ebb or disappear. The financial barrier for a new pilot to gain 750 hours, while not insignificant, is reduced. So is the time it takes (by 6-18 months) to get those hours as a CFI in those same schools. Those helo transition courses might fade as well...
2. Regionals being better manned will allow some code-share and out-sourced flying to go back downhill to the regionals from mainline. Part of the reason Delta is interested in 100 seaters and bought the 717s from SWA was the lack of reliability and shrinking cost advantage of regional feeders. More pilots to fly those 50/70/90 seaters for less money puts downward pressure on mainline pay and benefits.
3. Once regionals can successfully fill their own schedules, they will again be whipsawed to lower their costs or face losing routes to their regional competitors. The downward pressure on wages when that occurs has already been demonstrated many times since 2002.
While it is a tragic story, the fact is one poor regional pilot with a bad training record probably did more to enhance our profession than years of dedicated work and effort by many ALPA volunteers. The Colgan crash put pilot experience and competency into the discussion in the media and in Congress, and also flight time and duty time issues. Subsequent legislation meant to enhance safety like the Part 117 regulations and the 2013 ATP changes not only helped enhance safety, but also gave pilot groups more leverage than they have had in years by shrinking the pool of available labor. What Goldfein hopes to do--as do the RAA and a host of others--is lower the requirements to increase that pool size. In the process, he will take pressure off his manning crisis by not only increasing the of non-military pilots available for airlines, but by potentially reducing our future pay as well. He doesn't just want to keep his pilots--he wants to make the airlines an overall less attractive option.
The hero in these stories? The Colgan families. They have never let up in their fight to highlight the issues that affect airline safety. They are on the Hill--even now--quietly walking the office halls wearing their red jackets and adored with a simple button that usually has a picture of the loved one they lost. They are going to need to keep the fight going, along with the help of ALPA and others, if the 1500 hour requirement is to be preserved.
https://www.faa.gov/news/press_relea...m?newsId=14838
Congress tightens requirements for airline pilots - latimes
Part of the reason pilots are doing so well in contracts now is the pilot shortage has decimated regionals. This move by Goldfein would make the regionals able to hire less experienced and less expensive pilots. This labor shortfall could be significantly reduced by producing more regional pilots sooner, which is his goal in reducing the flight time required for these jobs.
If regionals could again hire guys at 250 hours with a commercial, they could fill a lot more right seats...quickly. Until the ATP requirement, young pilots could get a loan for their training and build time for only a short while before being scooped up. There were plenty of pilots in the mid 2000s that would take out a 100k loan to get to that hour mark.
Two things stopped that. First--the requirement to have an ATP and 1500 hours. Second, the financial crisis drove a lot of folks out of the loan making business, which funded the "puppy mill" flight schools across Florida and the sunbelt. Many of those schools and programs shrunk or disappeared.
750 hours isn't at easy at 250 and a commercial to acquire, but it is half of what they need now. It is a big cut.
If the regionals can start stacking their right seats again, here's some potential ramifications...
1. The bonuses/wage increases we've seen in the regionals might ebb or disappear. The financial barrier for a new pilot to gain 750 hours, while not insignificant, is reduced. So is the time it takes (by 6-18 months) to get those hours as a CFI in those same schools. Those helo transition courses might fade as well...
2. Regionals being better manned will allow some code-share and out-sourced flying to go back downhill to the regionals from mainline. Part of the reason Delta is interested in 100 seaters and bought the 717s from SWA was the lack of reliability and shrinking cost advantage of regional feeders. More pilots to fly those 50/70/90 seaters for less money puts downward pressure on mainline pay and benefits.
3. Once regionals can successfully fill their own schedules, they will again be whipsawed to lower their costs or face losing routes to their regional competitors. The downward pressure on wages when that occurs has already been demonstrated many times since 2002.
While it is a tragic story, the fact is one poor regional pilot with a bad training record probably did more to enhance our profession than years of dedicated work and effort by many ALPA volunteers. The Colgan crash put pilot experience and competency into the discussion in the media and in Congress, and also flight time and duty time issues. Subsequent legislation meant to enhance safety like the Part 117 regulations and the 2013 ATP changes not only helped enhance safety, but also gave pilot groups more leverage than they have had in years by shrinking the pool of available labor. What Goldfein hopes to do--as do the RAA and a host of others--is lower the requirements to increase that pool size. In the process, he will take pressure off his manning crisis by not only increasing the of non-military pilots available for airlines, but by potentially reducing our future pay as well. He doesn't just want to keep his pilots--he wants to make the airlines an overall less attractive option.
The hero in these stories? The Colgan families. They have never let up in their fight to highlight the issues that affect airline safety. They are on the Hill--even now--quietly walking the office halls wearing their red jackets and adored with a simple button that usually has a picture of the loved one they lost. They are going to need to keep the fight going, along with the help of ALPA and others, if the 1500 hour requirement is to be preserved.
https://www.faa.gov/news/press_relea...m?newsId=14838
Congress tightens requirements for airline pilots - latimes
The reason financing is so difficult has nothing to do with Colgan or the financial crisis. There are two reasons for the shortage of people willing to enter this profession. First the average cost of an Aviation Education has skyrocketed from an average of 40 or 50 thousand ten years ago to $150000-$200000 today. Guys going to UND or Riddle are spending upwards of $250,000. And that is just to get to 200 hours with a Commericial, Multi, and CFI. Second, during the last furlough bubble in 2007-2008 many furloughed guys got sharp bankruptcy attorneys that figured out that even though those Aviation Loans from Key and Sallie Mae said "student loan", they were in fact private loans due to the terms of the loan, mainly that they were not government backed and could not be deferred or forbearanced during times of financial difficulty like government backed loans. So these sharp attorneys were able to get these loans discharged in bankruptcy. That caused Sallie Mae and Key to back out of financing any Aviation Education loan that wasn't backed by the government which, last I heard limits you to $80,000. This is what caused all the pilot puppy mills in Florida to collapse in 2008 and 09 because students could no longer get financed and they required a constant flow of loan cash to keep the doors open, many closed abruptly and left a lot of people in the lurch. So if the 1500 hour rule were repealed tomorrow, it wouldn't change these two facts. Plus these kids aren't stupid. They are looking at what they have to spend for an aviation education compared to other careers, and what they are getting paid, and going elsewhere. Until you come up with an easier way to finance an Aviation Education AND (most importantly) start compensating pilots on a level that is commensurate with the investment you have to make, nothing will change. The one effect changing the 1500 hour rule will have is to make it easier because you don't have to build up as much time as a CFI or freight pilot. However with the partnerships being developed where people are decently compensated and are being given benefits as CFIs, even that isn't as bad as it used to be.
Basically this comes down to compensation. Until airlines start paying pilots doctor/lawyer type money from the time they enter the profession, don't expect these kids to spend doctor lawyer money to get into the field and be compensated like a teacher. They are going to laugh at you and go for the MBA instead.
However don't expect the ATP rule to get changed anytime soon. That bill was Chuck Schumer's baby and those Colgan families live in New York. As long as he is the Democratic leader in the Senate and he has 41 votes to block any changes, nothing is going to happen.
02-23-2017, 10:56 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2011
Position: Taco Rocket Operator
Posts: 2,485
Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox
^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^
More so, I still believe we need a national flight academy for air transport pilots, separate from our military academies, similar to the Merchant Marine Academy.
We all would be fools to let the 1500 rule be changed or removed.
More so, I still believe we need a national flight academy for air transport pilots, separate from our military academies, similar to the Merchant Marine Academy.
We all would be fools to let the 1500 rule be changed or removed.
02-23-2017, 01:02 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,193
So i ask again, under this national flight school, who foots the bill? Obviously gettting a loan for it has been discussed and is nit longer feasible or financially prudent. So if its going to be the tax payer, when are you allowed to wash them out? Three strikes and youre out? Ala military primary style? Are line captains going to see their pay boosted for the added burden of raising these young ducks out in the wild? Will they be union protected so that you cant wash out the ones that slipped through the cracks?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
