I can't give you a definite, but I would imagine late September or early October. The direct entry captains are now hitting the sims full steam and should be finished by the time those classes would get there. Just a WAG, though. I'll see if I can find some info for you.

 

I heard someone say they had an October 5th FO class. No clue on anything before that though.

 

Really appreciate it. I'm just curious to see how the next 6-12 months look with the hiring they need to do versus the aircraft they are supposed to receive. Doesn't seem like they've done a spectacular job with either so far.

 

Some of this, but not all, is growing pains. When at Comair, I heard of guys being sent home waiting to be called by the training department for IOE. Some waited as long as six months. Some were content to wait and be paid for doing nothing. Others called the training department or the chief pilot.

Sometimes, the chief pilot called them and asked why they weren't flying. Every time, the reply was "I'm doing what the training department told me to do...wait for their call."

My worst training memory was threatening to walk out of training because my systems integration instructor was in the simulator with another crew when I was in ground school. Training scheduled him to be in two places at one time. Finding a replacement instructor was something they couldn't handle.

 

We've had growing pains but I think most of that is getting smoothed out. I see the biggest issue facing PSA through 2016 as attracting new FOs. Many regional's are getting better contracts, the quick upgrade here will be slowing and fading by spring/summer 2016, and we aren't likely to announce another hub base. The company needs to quit dragging its feet and asking for concessions from the pilots in order to increase the SSP. Increasing our SSP is in the best interest of the pilots AND the company. Yet they are trying to hold it over our heads like we are the only ones that will benefit. Oh well, I don't see the pilots giving anything up for it. Especially not some of the things they are purportedly asking for.

 

I'm in an FO class sept 14th if that helps the discussion


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

There ya go, Buck.

 

Perfection. Thanks Tiki. I completely agree, though. Growing pains have been the name of the game the last year or so at PSA. Sounds like the time to get on there has come and gone. Staffing will be tough in the next year or so, but that seems to be plaguing everywhere. The pilot shortage has arrived! We'll see.

 

What is SSP?

 

Seems more and more like the growing pains really aren't so much growing pains as they are symptoms of management just being in over their head. Expansion problems are going to be magnified when the company can't run itself properly in the first place, but that doesn't necessarily mean the expansion is the source of the problems.

You could blame the long wait times for training or IOE on expansion, but it's harder to blame expansion for the inability to have a forward-looking strategy on the SSP, or the continued desire to try and operate an airline of the size PSA is planned to be using mostly outstation bases. That's just the higher-ups dropping the ball.

I forget exactly what it stands for (special selection program, I think), but it's basically a guaranteed interview with the major partner (in this case American). It's an interview only, so not as solid as a flow-through agreement, but it is at least a foot in the door. American's other two wholly-owned regionals have flow-through agreements, however, and in similar or greater numbers on a monthly basis than PSA, so the PSA pilots want to improve what they have. American was contractually obligated to discuss improvements with PSA, but they weren't obligated to actually improve the agreement. They have fulfilled their contractual agreement at this point, and discussions continue, but no firm improvements are in sight.

Logically, it would be to everybody's advantage to increase the numbers going through the SSP per month (currently 4, which equates to 48 per year, which is okay when you have 400 pilots on property, not so good when you have the 1500 PSA is planning to have). More pilots going to American per month means more movement at PSA, which is good for the pilots. More movement at PSA means it's easier to recruit pilots to PSA, which is good for American. Additionally, getting more senior people at PSA to move on to American means that they can be replaced with less senior people lower down the payscale, which saves money on crew costs, again good for American. So it should be something that everyone would want, and the only things that would have to be ironed out are the specifics. But it seems like American is choosing to look at increased SSP numbers as solely benefiting the pilots, and thus requiring some sort of concession from the pilots in return. That's unlikely to fly with the pilots unless the concession is very minor and the increase in the SSP is huge.