Originally Posted by knobcrk

I think the issue is deeper than inability to get loans or the expenses or even low pay. I really don't think kids want to become pilots anymore. Up to just 10 years ago being an airline pilot was considered cool. Now you are just a driver. I see the change in society, nobody cares anymore. Even the pilots themselves have been beaten down so much the last decade since 911 they just want to collect their paycheck and go home. People take flying for granted and it's not special. Also being a pilot used to be top 10 career choices now it's barely even ranked on most new polls. It was like number 48 out of 50 best jobs on a recent one.

Originally Posted by Cloudnine

I think the problem is more complex than just Pay. At least in terms of restoring the pipeline.
Ms. Black mentioned how EAS contracts are being won by 135 carriers nowadays.

Rather than regulation to reduce ATP mins further, why not lift the 9 seat cap on 135 commuter and raise it to like 19 or 25 seats. They could use 2 pilot aircraft/fly under IFR, and hire FO's with commercial/multi creating a "seamless" pipeline from flight school to ATP once again. The 135 carriers could greatly increase capacity.
It's probably not economically feasible to fly these routes with just 9 seats in most cases unless EAS subsidized. The other problem is there are no aircraft in development in this category.
CAPE Air alone cannot produce the FO's the 121 carriers need.

From what I've seen, most graduates aren't taking crop dusting jobs, no, but the part 91 flying has diminished greatly, as evidenced the AOPA president's testimony. Part 135 is mostly single pilot as it stands. So you do have a gap (from 250-700 or so). This I believe does influence career decision making at the very outset.
Everyone says get a CFI but it is an additional expense that people don't always have. As a side note, I believe the CFI mins should be something like 500 hours anyways.

Many people on here want the regional model to implode but its such a haphazard way of solving the issue.

Originally Posted by bedrock

Sullenberger called the industry’s concerns “spin.” He said that more pilots would be entering the system if the industry paid better, noting the $16,400 salary of the primary pilot of Flight 3407.

I LOVE THIS GUY. He doesn't need to do this, he could retire to the south seas, but he cares about those coming up behind him, just as those ahead of him, helped him.

I would make this deal with the RAA, reduce mins to 1200 hrs, but then the regionals have to add that "structure" they want so badly. 100 hrs multi-instrument on their dime. What they really want is more "structure" and get the govt. to give loans for it.

Originally Posted by knobcrk

I think the issue is deeper than inability to get loans or the expenses or even low pay. I really don't think kids want to become pilots anymore. Up to just 10 years ago being an airline pilot was considered cool. Now you are just a driver. I see the change in society, nobody cares anymore. Even the pilots themselves have been beaten down so much the last decade since 911 they just want to collect their paycheck and go home. People take flying for granted and it's not special. Also being a pilot used to be top 10 career choices now it's barely even ranked on most new polls. It was like number 48 out of 50 best jobs on a recent one.

Originally Posted by NuGuy

This is all about bringing the "Euro Plan" to the States. Over there, they call it "self-funded training schemes".

I know it's a quirk of Euro English that "scheme" is used for "program", but it's really pretty ironic how it "translates" into American English.

In the Euro model, you pay your own way through training (anyone remember the PFT from the 1990s? It's back again!). You then get an MPL which essentially locks you into the carrier you go to work for, OR, you get a CMEL equivalent, do type specific training (self-funded again) and then get "placed" by a staffing company.

In either case, you are locked into the type of aircraft you train....on your own nickel.

Why do they want this here?

1) Training is almost entirely self-funded.

2) The "structural educational requirement", Euro style, practically locks you to your employer for a significant period of time. You gonna rock the boat when if you get let go, you're a low time wannabe who can really only fly FO on a specific type?

Say "buh bye" to any kind of negotiating leverage with that plan.

There are some Euro pilot forums. Check them out and see what you think of how the Euro industry treats their low time guys. It will make CFIing, towing gliders/banners, or pipe line patrol, for a year or two, while getting paid to do it, look like a walk in the park.

Nu

Originally Posted by JetDoc

Word on the street is that Reverend Bedford and RAH will be throwing unheard of money at the F.O.'s in the latest proposal to the I.B.T. to get guys in the door. Take it with a LARGE grain of salt of course but the source is pretty reliable.

Originally Posted by rdneckpilot

I also find it somewhat ironic that being an AG pilot was brought up as a way for pilots to build time to have a career... I was an active 121/135 pilot for over ten years and left jets for an AG career. Best total compensation I have ever had as a pilot and I actually look forward to going to work. It has been a nice change.

Originally Posted by Slick111

Rev. Bedford tried this in his last offer to his pilots. He tendered an offer to raise first-year f.o. pay to $30/hour, as I recall, but threw only pennies at the rest of the pilot group. Of course, the pilot group voted it down.

The most galling thing about it was that after the vote failed, the good reverend went around telling people that he was trying to pay his pilots more money,...... but that the pilots wouldn't accept his generous offering. Of course, he left out the part where he was only offering more money to new first officers while ****ssing on the rest of the group, simply to make it easier for him to continue to hire pilots at severely depressed wages,...... (and allowing him to collect larger and larger bonus checks and stock options).


Isn't there some commandment that says "thou shall not bear false witness", reverend?

Originally Posted by Slick111

Rev. Bedford tried this in his last offer to his pilots. He tendered an offer to raise first-year f.o. pay to $30/hour, as I recall, but threw only pennies at the rest of the pilot group. Of course, the pilot group voted it down.

The most galling thing about it was that after the vote failed, the good reverend went around telling people that he was trying to pay his pilots more money,...... but that the pilots wouldn't accept his generous offering. Of course, he left out the part where he was only offering more money to new first officers while ****ssing on the rest of the group, simply to make it easier for him to continue to hire pilots at severely depressed wages,...... (and allowing him to collect larger and larger bonus checks and stock options).

Isn't there some commandment that says "thou shall not bear false witness", reverend?