Oooooo....I know it's been posted on one of the 25 pages of this thread...but man I like the sound of this...looks like there will be a 3 year period before the ATP req hits the line, but that should work out well b/c by then it might not even be necessary to have a "grandfather clause" and the regionals will prob only hire at 1500+ for any hiring that goes on in the next 3 years anyways...so within 3 years every pilot in the US 121 world will have an ATP...IF this can pass...let's write our reps guys!!!! Make this reality!!!


SEC. 10. FLIGHT CREWMEMBER SCREENING AND QUALIFICATIONS.

(a) Requirements-

(1) RULEMAKING PROCEEDING- The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall conduct a rulemaking proceeding to require part 121 air carriers to develop and implement means and methods for ensuring that flight crewmembers have proper qualifications and experience.

(2) MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS-

(A) PROSPECTIVE FLIGHT CREWMEMBERS- Rules issued under paragraph (1) shall ensure that prospective flight crewmembers undergo comprehensive pre-employment screening, including an assessment of the skills, aptitudes, airmanship, and suitability of each applicant for a position as a flight crewmember in terms of functioning effectively in the air carrier’s operational environment.

(B) ALL FLIGHT CREWMEMBERS- Rules issued under paragraph (1) shall ensure that, after the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, all flight crewmembers–

(i) have obtained an airline transport pilot license under part 61 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; and

(ii) have appropriate multi-engine aircraft flight experience, as determined by the Administrator.

(b) Deadlines- The Administrator shall issue–

(1) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, a notice of proposed rulemaking under subsection (a); and

(2) not later than 24 months after such date of enactment, a final rule under subsection (a).

 

Fulltext of HR 3371 "Airline Safety and Pilot Training Improvement Act of 2009"

Not sure if this is a redundant post...please delete admins if this is redundant:

H.R. 3371: Airline Safety and Pilot Training Improvement Act of 2009 Res Communis

 

The late 90's, the last really big hiring boom, Air Willie, Comair wanted about 2500/500 for the RJ's. You could get an interview at Great Lakes, Skyway etc (1900's) with around 1200/200. That's when AMR, DAL, UAL were going nuts.

 

I dont' like the ATP requirement. People already pay enough money as is to get to a minimum wage paying job. Wonder what this does for current pilots that don't have them. After I received my CFII I refused to ever pay for training again.

 

2 ATP's in the cockpit is a great idea

 

so the fo needs an atp thats fine. I did the zero flap landing and a circling approach to circling minimums during my AQP CQ this year. What would be left for me to be Capt qualified?

 

Gain seniority and learn to shorthand your name.

 

This is a great idea. Hopefully our pay can go up now that people will take a weekend off to do a couple of touch and gos and stalls on a Seminole with a DPE. Or better yet, do an extra non precision single engine approach in the company sim. Is it OK to put my down payment on that GTR just yet?

 

This would be fantastic for pilots in the industry. The RAA will be fighting it tooth and nail.

 

While my opinion on safety first seems to be supported with this 1500TT(ATP) requirement, it does seem to be a bit irrelevant to me. Did this not stem from the Colgan crash?? where both the pilot's had more than 1500TT. While the FO may not have had her ATP, aren't the 121 checkrides performed to those standards? If these are correct, how does this prevent us from another accident? how many more laps around the pattern do these CFI's have to do, until they're "qualified" ?? I"m sure there are still some CFI's with 2000 hours who don't even need to be in a cessna, but there are many who have made it through with no problem. And what about the pilots who are under 1500TT but have been working for 121 carriers for the past 2 years? Are they no longer qualified to do what they have been doing??

Just seems to me like the accident has demanded a change. However, this seems to be completely irrelevant... how about better pay? so the FO could have afforded a hotel the night before... and somebody said it earlier... but $80k seems reasonable...

by the way, if i'm completely wrong, then somebody fill me in because i really am confused...