Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

ALPA backing "restricted" ATP? WHY??

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Superpilot92

LONGCALL KING
Joined
Nov 7, 2004
Posts
3,719
Is alpa ever going to stop shooting it self in the foot?

In regards to requiring an ATP for 121 ops,

"Also in the Safety realm, last week we submitted comments to the FAA’s docket for an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on new pilot-certification requirements for air carrier operations. You will recall that I provided a draft of those comments to the Executive Board a couple of weeks ago to inform you of this activity and to give an opportunity for you to share your perspectives.

In our finalized comments, we called on the agency to amend FAR Part 61 to make several needed changes to the certification requirements that will, if enacted into regulation, provide both safety and industrial benefits to our members. In response to questions posed in the ANPRM, we have recommended to the FAA, among other things, that all future airline pilots hold an Air Transport Pilot certificate with a “121 Air Carrier Endorsement.”

To earn the ATP, the pilot would have no fewer than 1,500 hours of total flying time, including 200 hours of multicrew and multiengine operating experience, plus accredited aviation instruction from a college or university. We have endorsed an exception for graduates of accredited aviation programs with a bachelor of science degree, which would permit those under the age of 23 and having at least 750 hours to be issued a “restricted” ATP with the 121 Air Carrier Endorsement."
 
Dues.

I also have a problem with the age 23 limit. Patent age discrimination.
 
So the Colgan F/O didn't have an ATP and fewer hours than what an ATP requires. So now to make Congress happy, they're going to say "every airline pilot has an ATP, sort of......" To be PIC you still need an ATP. Period. Not a restricted.

One thing to keep in mind, there are carriers elsewhere in the world where the first officer of a transoceanic heavy has fewer hours total than what a regional airline would look at to fly a 1900.
 
Seems to me this takes away the option of going to a flight school in Florida and going from zero to hero in 6 months. Isn't that a good thing?
 
Someone quote this so it archived forever in the hallowed FI forums.

After this new rule is passed and the supply of pilots of dries up, the airlines will begin to lobby Congress heavily. Their argument will be they are unable to conduct business due to limited pilot resources. The Congress will look at the money being slipped into the campaign coffers and elect to allow some sort of cabotage. Once the backlash form this hits the airlines in the pocketbooks, Ab initio will be next driving wages down again.

My crystal ball is somewhat hazy on when this will occur but if we continue down this road, it may sound good initially. But since when has government fixing anything really worked well in the long run?
 
Is alpa ever going to stop shooting it self in the foot?
I'm not completely happy with it either, but it's called playing ball. Do you really think our own Union was the one who came up with this idea?:
We have endorsed an exception for graduates of accredited aviation programs with a bachelor of science degree, which would permit those under the age of 23 and having at least 750 hours to be issued a “restricted” ATP with the 121 Air Carrier Endorsement."

It was the schools. Probably supported by the airlines. Facing a decision of fighting this for the next few years and risk an "all or nothing" solution or opting to negotiate a mutually satisfactory solution, the smarter decision is to negotiate.
 
One thing to keep in mind, there are carriers elsewhere in the world where the first officer of a transoceanic heavy has fewer hours total than what a regional airline would look at to fly a 1900.
Yes, but those foregin airlines have an extremely stringent selection and weeding out process that lasts a long time. In 2007 USA, the 'selection process' at bridge programs was your ability to pay $$$$$. I saw drunk DUI pilots coming through, and the school took them for their $$$. At a foreign airline, they wouldn't even give you the time of the day if you had even a speck on your record. There are plenty in competition. If you're lucky enough to get hired at that foreign airline as a cadet pilot, you are sent away to a place like Australia or USA to begin flight training, and that can last anywhere from 12-24+ months. Then you come back and begin sim training. When you're finally on the line, you spent a loong time as a relief officer, and then one day finally, a regular FO. Make no mistake about it, this is much different than the 250 hr Gulfstream Academy graduates.
 
Just goes to show that ALPA doesn't have clue what supply and demand means, or how to create a demand of our services.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top