Make ATP retroactive?
 

So here's a question I've been pondering for a few days. Should the new proposed rule requiring an ATP and 1500 hours include a retroactive requirement? More specifically, should airlines be required to train First Officers already employed and issue them ATPs? Perhaps they would only be required to do so once the First Officer reaches ATP minimums - if they are not there at the time of rule issuance.

I see one huge advantage for pilots: a free ATP if you're already employed at an airline.

And I see one disadvantage: another training event at which your certificate is on the line.

Thoughts? Suggestions? Preferences?

I'd rather keep this forum focused on the retroactive question instead of the validity of the ATP and 1500 hr requirement, since that's already a pretty extensive thread. Thanks.

1) Its pretty much a non issue because anyone currently employed will have 1500 hrs in 3 years.

2) An ATP is just a type ride. At many airlines, FO's and captains pretty much do the same maneuvers and approaches. The only difference would be learning the callouts.

At the time when the ATP is required, EVERYONE should be an ATP if they work 121. There will be plenty of time to prepare and get certs done. I think the issue should be that anyone working the line for 121 should have an ATP, not, anyone hired should have an ATP.

The difference is that a new hire would need the time to qualify, but could potentially take the ATP/Type ride at the conclusion of sim training.

This is a moot point because you are going to have to take the ride at some point in time anyway. Unless, of course, one plans on retiring as an FO at a regional which I don't think many do.

I hope this thing passes so that the pilot shortage will be expedited. There is no way somone would want to invest time and money for this bus driving job up in the air. Kids, if you are reading this. It's not too late, take that 50K check from dad for embry dribble or flight training and use it for Law school or become a doctor so that you will make more starting out than I will after a decade of take off and landings. That's all:eek:

If Congress really was intent on improving safety, they'd require all airline pilots to have an ATP and be fully type rated in the airplane they operate...and they'd give airlines 12 months to make sure all their pilots meet this standard.

Joint ATP/type rides are given all the time and if you can pass a 121 FO PC check then you won't have any problem with an upgrade ride...they aren't exactly difficult.

+1

The airline should be responsible for your ATP ride on your next recurrent. They way the bill looks right now, they are allowing 3 years for everyone already flying to be in compliance.

I said the same thing bit technically we are typed SIC with out the ATP. At least at my airline. I totally agree, if they forced full type ratings on employers then this would be the end all. The way it looks now you could potentially be having to go out on your own dime, get checked out and retrained in a light twin and get stuck with some gung ho DE that wants to rid the world of subpar Seminole pilots. There goes the job! At least when the company does it you have a check ride based on relevance to what you do everyday.

But they're not. All they're concerned with is giving the constituents lips service that they're "doing something" while quietly taking the lobbying money from the RAA and ATA, promising the lobbyists they won't screw the airlines.

I expect to see a lot of talk and very little action on this issue. They'll require "scientific studies" and committee reports. If the minimums are actually raised, I would expect it to effect all new hires going forward. It would be time consuming and expensive to make it retroactive.

This says it all, I actually have no reason to post...

Not every lawyer is representing a Fortune 500 company and not every doctor is a neurosurgeon. The grass isn't always greener.