Committee Challenges New 1500 Hr Requirement
10-14-2010, 05:55 PM
#1
Bracing for Fallacies
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: In favor of good things, not in favor of bad things
Posts: 3,543
Committee Challenges New 1500 Hr Requirement
Anybody else tracking this? Boo!
What further proof is needed that the 1500 hour rule is good for pilots than having airline management and Roger Cohen fighting against the bill?
Committee Challenges New 1500 Hr Requirement For FO's
What further proof is needed that the 1500 hour rule is good for pilots than having airline management and Roger Cohen fighting against the bill?
Committee Challenges New 1500 Hr Requirement For FO's
10-14-2010, 06:07 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: CL-65 / Gear Wrangler
Posts: 321
Originally Posted by block30
Anybody else tracking this? Boo!
What further proof is needed that the 1500 hour rule is good for pilots than having airline management and Roger Cohen fighting against the bill?
Committee Challenges New 1500 Hr Requirement For FO's
What further proof is needed that the 1500 hour rule is good for pilots than having airline management and Roger Cohen fighting against the bill?
Committee Challenges New 1500 Hr Requirement For FO's
Can someone get Roger Cohen put on the no fly list? Maybe even dig up some associations with some terrorists, get him labeled an enemy combatent and held indefinately without trial. You know, it wouldn't be so bad. Just sayin'
10-14-2010, 06:12 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 607
An FAA advisory committee led by a regional airline official has proposed that 500 actual flight hours may be enough.
The Air Line Pilots Association backed the committee's recommendations.
10-14-2010, 06:58 PM
#4
ULTP-Ultra Low Tier Pilot
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,228
Not only does this proposal lower the standards for airline hiring but it would encourage new pilots to train at expensive 141 flight schools. I can see the glossy ad "Learn to fly here and get a 1000 hour deduction in your hours requirement," too bad that reduction will cost them $100,000 in debt.
Perfect example of how stupid congress can be. In one room they will debate the merits of this proposal and in the other hold hearings with Sallie Mae on why so many young adults are defaulting on their student loans.
Perfect example of how stupid congress can be. In one room they will debate the merits of this proposal and in the other hold hearings with Sallie Mae on why so many young adults are defaulting on their student loans.
10-14-2010, 07:48 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 607
Originally Posted by sso1078
That's exactly one of the reasons why we have to fire a good chunk of Congress in just 19 days guys!
1.) The incumbent to be replaced.
2.) The challenger with a more favorable stance on the 1500 rule.
I'd love to know whom to vote for, thanks!
10-14-2010, 07:55 PM
#7
Does NOT get weekends off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: ERJ - 145
Posts: 1,631
I'll be honest, before I wasn't too gun-ho about this. I was for safety, a better wage, at higher standard of living. However, I wasn't quite sure this rule would be the cause of that. I like the outcome, I just wasn't sure this requirement would be the means to the ends.
After seeing this, I support the requirement MUCH more.
After seeing this, I support the requirement MUCH more.
10-14-2010, 09:04 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Radio Flyer (The lil red wagon)
Posts: 317
"The Air Line Pilots Association backed the committee's recommendations, while the Coalition of Air Line Pilot Associations supported experience over even enhanced training."
time to bounce ALPA and vote in an in house w CAPA affiliation
time to bounce ALPA and vote in an in house w CAPA affiliation
10-14-2010, 09:08 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 146
Originally Posted by DeadStick
As an example, please cite the names of:
1.) The incumbent to be replaced.
2.) The challenger with a more favorable stance on the 1500 rule.
I'd love to know whom to vote for, thanks!
1.) The incumbent to be replaced.
2.) The challenger with a more favorable stance on the 1500 rule.
I'd love to know whom to vote for, thanks!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
