The company wouldn't spend a dime to help their employees succeed.

The same could be said for Alaska...move out of the state if you can't get around! We can play this game all day.

BTW, I am not a supporter of EAS, just happy to have the opportunity to get my thousand and go to greener pastures.

ZK doesn't operate solely on EAS. There are numerous destinations that they operate that the plane gets filled and the company makes money. EAS is the bread and butter but it isn't the only game they play.

Eight non EAS routes!

Route Map

When did that happen? I thought both could *log* PIC but only one is considered the *acting* PIC. I have Jepp's "The FAR's Explained" sitting around somewhere. Granted it is a couple years old.

For the record, there are only a few FO's that will not make 1500 by August. The company increased the minimums to get hired every month to prevent this, but a few slipped through the cracks and flew less on RSV than the company predicted. I know Great Lakes isn't the only airline that has FO's in the same boat.

Upgrade time at Lakes is currently very fast. We have about 12 going through upgrade this month, and most of them have been here less than one year. We are not short staffed at this time, although as many of our FO's upgrade in the next few months we likely will end up being short on FO's. I am honestly surprised that we haven't gotten more applicants looking for the quick upgrade time. 6 month upgrade at lakes or 6 year upgrade at Eagle. Obviously Lakes is not for everyone, but we have had a lot of Lakers move on the the majors recently.

Not really..I mean, you like oil right? But other than just oil, these are natives that have no other way to get around due to the environment. It's not like the 4-corners area of the US where you have the biggest Native American reservation in the US, yet it pales in comparison to Alaska native villages and the distances they are spread apart. To a significant extent, the US government helped encourage and sustained a lot of these village outposts with dozens of AFB installations, early warning radars, communications relays, and other sorts of stuff, not to mention most of the villages already existed for the most part, unlike most cities that have been build after "discovery" by Europe. Many of the "EAS" contracts in AK are for "mail service" as well, because it's the only way to get mail out there. The planes usually do double or triple duty, fulfilling many other roles (with the same plane)-cargo, passengers, combination, etc. These aren't people that have the option of easily just "moving", as it's large families, native communities, people that sustain themselves on things that you'd never consider putting in your mouth, etc.

I would say it's very much not the same thing, we have like 3 highways, for an area the same size as half the lower 48 states roughly. Nowhere near the road infrastructure. The reasons why AK needs EAS are exactly the reasons the lower 48 largely doesn't need it. They try to apply the same criteria, but it's a totally different situation. Whether the Federal or State government pays for EAS here, I don't really care, but this ain't Kansas, and you'd likely die trying to get to a village by other means. We aren't going to tell people in the lower 48 to move to cities, and it's probably not appropriate to say that anywhere, but there are certain realities that have to be realized.

If there's really any place in the lower US that is more than 2hrs away from a hub by car, I'd be for ensuring that they have adequate emergency medical service, although im sure health corporations find ways to make their helicopter operations profitable, by using them and charging...

Well, here's one example, but I wouldn't necessarily use the date as "that's when it changed", it's just the quickest one I could find. You'd have to go back through legal counsel's interpretations and see if there's an earlier version that says the same thing:

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...2/Trussell.pdf

Anyway, I used to think the same as you, it surprised me.

This really didn't change anything. All the safety pilot has to do to log PIC is assume the role of "acting" PIC and log as such. Then the person under the hood can log it as PIC since they are the ones on the controls. If thats not acceptable then the FAA needs to clear that up too. Most of the large flight academies programs are still putting out pilots with lots of this type of time and still are to this day. Plus they are still selling "time building" packages too. So...

See this is why I don't like to post on forums.

Lets say out of 300 Pilots that only 10% won't have 1500 hours. Yes, that is a grand total of 30 pilots and that seems like just a handful will have a real problem and cause for concern. From the company perspective (since they claim to be shrinking) this is a GOOD thing. They get rid of an extra 10% of the pilot group and claim their $7500 training contract to pocket for profit. Well I'm sorry but I can't be so cavalier about this. Some FOs are faced with RSV until Aug because of the shrinking lines and are not getting 60 hours a month. In fact, some are getting 6 (read SIX) hours of RSV making it impossible to reach 1500. And as for picking up extra flying outside Lakes....well that is a breach of contract unless you get written authorization from the company. And I can tell you they are not giving that in written form.

Yes, this is more of a per person problem that should be addressed on an individual basis. I just feel that tossing this under the rug is not a attitude fellow Lakers should have toward low-time FOs.

I try to look at the math this way, out of 300 pilots, 150 are f/o's. Of that, how many are chasing 1500 (and the other atp requirements?). I cannot attest to the Beech side, but what I see on the EMB side is that say 4 of 16 of us are chasing the 1500. Thats 25% of our group, or roughly 37 F/O's if the ratio is the same across the board. Obviously thats terrible math in a statistics world.

The "shrinking" referenced, the number of F/O's that upgrade, then the number of F/O's who think they see "the writing on the wall" and leave over the next several months. I imagine the airline will be done shrinking as much as it'd like by August. Then when the F/O's get furloughed that don't meet ATP requirements, 25% or more of them, that means by me using elementary math, 25% of our flights cancel or operate with two captains.

And the suggestion that the company fires the individuals and collects $7,500 only sounds to me like a scare. I see not meeting minimums a furlough event ("call us when you get an atp"), not a termination of employment event. If furloughed, the company cannot collect the money, your 15 months has hit the pause button until you get called back to work. So the company gains nothing by holding individuals under 1500 hours.

If I am one who gets let go and they were to demand $7,500 I wish them luck trying to find a way to squeeze water from a rock. I have no assets and have nothing to offer this company other than the debt I've accrued working on first year F/O wages.

All this just one guy thinking to himself aloud in an open forum.

Think of it as a big chess board....All of us are pawns, uppers are the Bishops, knights, Queen, and King. Who gets sacrificed? Pawn. Who gets brought out last? Queen (not Freddy Mercury's band). Who gets blamed for everything even though it wasn't our fault? Knights. I've got this figured out. Enough of this "math" stuff Ben, lets talk STRATEGY!!! Chess anyone?

You'll probably beat me at chess, but if you are inciting the pawns into an angry, torch carrying mob-

-I'm in!!! :D

Are they actually threatening pilots?

I think the pawns on my board are going to have rocket launchers!

No.

Again, there are only a few guys who probably won't make 1500 hours by August. Well under 10% of the FOs. There is no threat to them by the company. The company has not said what the plan is for the few that miss the 1500 come August. As mentioned, it will likely be a furlough and a "please come back when you have 1500"

For people interested in applying to Lakes, obviously we are hiring and running very quick upgrade times. The company is not shinking by much at all. I think we lost a whopping two cities. Ely, NV lost its EAS contract, so we are no longer serving Las Vegas. I think we are down to 46 cities instead of 48. No need for concern.

As far as pay at Lakes goes, with upgrades running at less than one year, you won't be on the FO pay for long. 1st year FO is $16, 2nd year CA is $29.

I'm only defending Lakes because no one else seems willing to :)

I'm flying with BenS tomorrow. I'll whoop him into shape.

Ouch. That CA pay is only a few bucks more than most 1st year FO slots at other regionals.

It's also a 19 seat turbo prop compared to what a 50 or larger seat jet.....

The company has been really quiet on what the plans are for low time FO's. I think they are counting on an exception for people with part 141 college training. It's going to be close for me. I have ~1200hrs right now and I'm flying about 70/month. My line this month only has 59/hrs on it and I've picked up some stuff to make it alittle better.

By that metric it's also far less than a 9 seat piston captain makes at Cape.

Wow...you weren't kidding; you really are a volleyball player...

Do you have any flying to do?

So the natives in Alaska are more important than the natives in the lower 48. Gotcha. I stand corrected.

I find it hard to think that the FAA won't put a waiver for FO's already with the company. Why would an FO all of a sudden become "not good enough to fly a 121 airplane" even though that FO has been training under that air carriers training program and undergoing routine recurrent training. Stupid

People have known the ATP rule has been coming for the last, nearly, three years. How there are still people who won't have the 1500 gets me.

You got me, I was thinking of something else. I think some local inspectors have decided to turn against some of those time-building situations, but they can be overruled by FAA counsel.

You mean the ones in the lower 48 with roads and not arctic temperatures? It's not just natives that live in the villages, but whomever they are, they are citizens of the US. We can't just shoot them or put them in camps.

So? Just because one has been brainwashed to think that the bigger an aircraft is the more it should pay doesn't mean that everyone should think that or that it should be the foundation of this industry. Based on the numbers, if you ever fly anything smaller than a 19 seat turboprop you should pay someone to allow you the privilege of flying it?

It's ignorant thinking like that that must have landed you at great lakes! (I'm assuming great lakes, correct me if I'm wrong.)

It appears to me that such a waiver wouldn't be consistent with the law that is forcing this down our throats (Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010). The law states that an ATP will be required beginning 3 years after it's passage (Aug 1, 2013) whether the FAA publishes a rule or not.
See Sec.216(c):
Full Text of H.R. 5900 (111th): Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 - GovTrack.us

Thanks for bringing my hopes and dreams to a grinding halt, CG. There could always be a possibility of extending it for current employees, but until the FAA comes up with a final ruling, we'll all be at the mercy of this.

companies have known this was coming for years. to act as if it's a complete surprise just proves that they were expecting a waiver eventually, and are facing substantial staffing issues as a result.

sadly, new pilots are feeling the brunt of this oversight.

simply put, they shouldn't have been hiring pilots that were under qualified knowing this was coming.

good luck. there are options beyond the airlines.

Busted again. The locals are on to me...

I think James no brakes should be the new union president. All us trouble makers would be taken care of and the company could return to greatness. Sounds like he has all the answers

Ha, we need a like button on APC...

MEOW!

So it's agreed.....he's the new Prez

So after 1 year of flying 121 and a of couple PC's / checking events all of a sudden on August 2, 2013 I'm "under qualified" to do the job I've been doing?

Guess I better go do a few hundred hours of traffic pattern work in a 172 so I can become "qualified" again. Whatever, it is what it is. We'll all see what happens and adjust accordingly.

So you a left seat 120 capt/IP? I think you'll be ok...

Not if he doesn't have any FO's to fly with him. He's just a really cool paperweight at that point. Unless he gets right-seated...but that couldn't possibly happen (that was sarcasm).

Also, who is he going to instruct without any new hires? Tough to train that empty seat.

Oh boy, this'll get fun:

It's on me to get all of our FO's ATP rated by August, but when my low time guys aren't flying at all on reserve, this hampers my ability to do so. Without FO's to fly our aircraft, we'll need to run additional training on ATP rated newhires, who will take approximately 2 months from start to finish. Since we can barely find pilots with 1500+ (without the ATP nonetheless), and since we'll be short staffed for the flying we do, I won't even be able to use my instructors to train said pilots or we'll be cancelling more flights due to the lack of Captains because all of our junior captains will be flying FO lines to make up for the lack of FO's. This results in a situation where in order to have more FO's, we'll need to cancel flying. If we don't run FO's, we're going to cancel flying. After the 2 month period of training, hopefully we haven't lost pilots, resulting in more training, resulting in me needing training captains, etc, etc etc.

Thus the "hope" that the FAA will grant some kind of waiver or delay for FO's that have been maintained under our training program, because like other carriers, we adjusted our minimum times based on average flight hours gained when online, but due to lines getting reduced, as well as the block times too, those average hours went down drastically. Most other carriers, especially ones who use AQP for training, had a little faster integration of the ATP training program as it's considerably easier to run them through AQP than it is an Appendix F, 2 segment, cover everything under the sun, checkride.

OR: the FAA can grant a Single Pilot type for the EMB from the Jumpseat. Then we'll be good.