I'm certain that any large scale ab initio program would be structured like this...

You take out a loan for training. The company makes the payments as long as you're in good standing. Good standing will be pretty much anything the company says it is. Including X years of service, with Y years as PIC.

You can walk away at any time, you just have to start making payments.

You can't sue the airline and say "well I decided I wanted to be home more with my dog, grow my beard out, and open a coffee shop but I want them to keep paying off my flight training loan".

There is a big difference between "training contract" and "employer-sponsored vocational training/certification".

Not unless they're both old and senior. I think the memo is out now about the stability and reliability of the regional model.

If times are good, you're eventually going the way of COMAIR. If times are bad, anything can happen. One way or another, the good times will not last.

The raises will keep a few more, people who were on the fence, but it's not going to be a game changer IMO.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...c17f2c55a9.jpg

Well, he WOULD BE right, setting aside politics. But politics are a reality that affect a lot of things involving transportation. That’s why there is Amtrak out West stopping the train at 3AM to pick up one passenger in the middle of nowhere and AMTRAK money going to states that have no AMTRAK service (Hawa’ii? Seriously?) and why we have essential air service and PSP programs and why F-35s are built from parts made in 42 states and Puerto Rico.

And politics is not going away.

Well if you like the free market, then let it be free…

Or you can let the state run it, like the PRC…or keep subsidizing welfare for big corps and certain states who continually suck our tax dollars down in disproportionate amounts

So you think we should let crashes and deaths drive public consumption?

I mean, I’m a free market guy too… to an extent that it makes sense. We’ve learned from experience we’re better off with an experience barrier to entry. It seems to be working. Why would we fudge that?

Is the regional model imploding?
 

OP said don’t need to change safety regs to address pilot shortage airlines themselves created…why would making them bear this economic burden cause aircraft to fall out of the sky?

I’m not in the least philosophically opposed to a free market, but I don’t Think you can realistically keep politics out of it

Example:

https://i.ibb.co/my3hD5j/7-D7-F272-E...18-BFB8562.jpg[/url]

Now do you really think that Lockheed-Martin is building F-35 parts in 46 states because that’s the most efficient way to build F-35s? They are doing it because it buys 92 votes in the Senate and as many House votes as possible.

Nor did I see myself or my coworkers turning down PSP because - you know - it was sucking up tax dollars.

This times one hundred. But takes maturity to understand. And pilots are not very good at that

That’s true…of course politics drives where our tax dollars go. I watch more money leave my state every year than we get back, outflowing to states that couldn’t function without fed tax $$ coming in.

That said, we have wasted zillions propping up businesses that deserved to, and should have been allowed to, fail. If we are going to start bailing bad management out again, guess I’ll join everyone in being happy with airline subsidies as it helps me. But then let’s just all be honest about it then and refrain from bashing others with their hands out for tax dollars too.