How will Pilot shops survive the purposed FAA mandate of 1500/ATP

[414Flyer]

That is the x-factor here. If QOL and wages do not increase, regional carriers and some major carriers will not be able to hire anyone once all the furloughed guys are re-hired.

Delta, CAL, UAL and AMR will need to replace 28923 pilots between 2010 and 2031. As of 7/30/2009, there are 6322 pilots on furlough from Majors, Regionals, Cargo, Charter and 135. This number does not include unannounced or rumored fuloughs. That leaves 22601 pilots to be hired in the next 20 years from only 4 legacy carriers, and that does not include any airline re-growth from this last few years of shrinking due to falling demand. That also does not include USAir, FedEx, UPS, Southwest, and a bunch of other carriers with substantial retirement numbers.

A larger chunk of those guys needed at the higher 121 level will come from regionals, the other portion from military, and the smaller percentage will come from other areas. Assuming the legislation passes, but pay/QOL stay the same as they are now, what do you guys think will happen?

If you think you can guess the future of airline hiring from 2010 to 2031, you should not be in aviation anyways, I would go start playing the lottery or becoming a professional gambler. Most normal people do not seem to be able to predict aviation with any certainty even a few days in advance, and you can do it out to 2031, even knowing what airlines will be around.

 

[CFI2766]

You're going to see alot more false entries in log books as people try to get up to 1500 hours. Getting an ATP is not good enough. How can the quality of flying be monitored?

This is the basic premise of FOQA.

In the future, it will be critical to have non-punitive, constructive safety based language in each each contract so that FOQA doesn't bite us.

 

[laserman2431]

isn't that counteracted by the change to age 65? at least until 2012

I think the difference is that our current situation reflects the change in age 65 retirement requirements and the ATP requirement has not happened yet. One has changed our present for a limited time. The other would change our future.

 

[laserman2431]

1500 hours TT and an ATP rating are not really good indications of a persons ability to be a safe airline pilot. There are so many other factors that go in to the mix of who we are. Intelligence, decision, self confidence, bravery, leadership, etc. Unfortunately, those things are hard to measure. TT and an ATP rating are easy to determine.

I had 1800 hours and some corporate turbo prop and jet time before I went to a regional 121 job. Maybe I'm not the sharpest guy to go through it but I found the initial 121 training to be challenging. For that reason, I have to respect the pilot who can make it through a 121 training program with only 300 hours in his logbook. Maybe low hour 121 pilot deserve more respect because they had the ability to complete the training with less experience.

I don't really think an ATP rating is necessarily a reliable indicator of ability in the same way that a failed checkride should be considered an indator of lack of ability. We all know there are the "brother-in-law" type examiners out there who will give the easy checkride and there are the bad day scenarios that can leave a permanent bad mark on your record. Neither one should be considered a true reflection of our ability.

It looks like the lawmakers are going to make some changes. Requiring an ATP may not be the perfect solution but it will probably have a positive impact.

I think any move that increases the requirements to get a job will be a positive for our pay and benefits.

 

[xjcaptain]

First let me say that good training at airlines is incredibly important, but perhaps we have lost sight of what an airline is/does. It exists to make money by transporting people in aircraft. They do not make money training pilots and are not in the pilot training business.

An airline should hire qualified pilots just as any other person should be qualified for the position they apply for. The terminology isn't FAR correct, but I view any training event at an airline as "differences" training. What do you need to know about operating this aircraft that is different from other types you have operated. I see way too many of our younger/inexperienced pilots assuming that if the airline doesn't tell them something, then they don't need to know it. Because of the lack of previous experience we tend to spend way too much time teaching skills that should have been mastered YEARS before somebody is put in a position of flying passengers for hire under FAR 121. I'm sorry but I should not be drawing out holds and DME arcs on REVENUE flights because the low time pilot is not proficient in basic instrument skills.

People that come in with many more hours, having flown many many different types of aircraft tend to take more personal responsibility for their own competence. Perhaps this was learned by FLYING many hours on their own with no net.

I find it hard to comprehend why anybody would be against the proposed standards. Having been a check-airman for over 10 years, I have trained 300 hour pilots and 30,000 hour pilots. Some of the 300 hours guys have done O.K. but by and large people with more experience bring much more to the cockpit beyond just being able to flip a switch at the appropriate time. I personally feel 1500 and an ATP is very little to ask for when you have unsuspecting paying passengers behind the cockpit door.

 

[CaribPilot]

If you think you can guess the future of airline hiring from 2010 to 2031, you should not be in aviation anyways, I would go start playing the lottery or becoming a professional gambler. Most normal people do not seem to be able to predict aviation with any certainty even a few days in advance, and you can do it out to 2031, even knowing what airlines will be around.

Those are hard numbers, not guesses. A whole entire generation is getting ready to retire, and the economy is beginning to turn around. You would be a fool to not realize the next boom in hiring coming.

My main point is that pilot factories are going to be toast if the legislations passes, and alot of regionals will be toast too, if they do not increase wages and QOL.

 

[dooork]

I completely agree. I think 1500 hours and an ATP is a good requirement for a professional pilot.

When I was hired at a regional back in 02' I had 2300 hours and 275 multi. Yes, I didn't have my ATP but....I met all the requirements and could have (I just wanted to save a little $$$$ and have the airline give it to me). But if an ATP was required, it would not have been a problem.

I worked hard for those hours and felt like I earned my $17k a year job flying turbo props. I felt well trained, learned, experienced, and knowledgeable. I feel sometimes that the 300 hour wonder pilots haven't earned their keep and I question the skills and experience at that level. Twenty years ago guys had to fight each other to get a regional job and had thousands of hours of experience which usually consisted of late night freight jobs. Those guys had it rough and earned their job.

I just watched a Northwest CRJ 200 attempt to land in White Plains, NY today during a thunderstorm, gusty winds and a 15+ knot tailwind. I was in disbelief watching this and almost shouted out "go around". Thankfully the pilots at that point did so as they went floating down the runway 20 feet above it. I'm not knocking their skills, but what training an experience would have lead you to even attempt such a thing?

I don't know.....why don't you ask the AA pilots that actually did it in LIT!

 

[flyslow24]

I like how people on this board think that landing this 17K per year job should be "earned" through many years of experience.

I say make a 17k per year job as easy to land as a McDonald's job. Why would a job with so little pay be difficult to obtain?

I think we are also missing the point that pay was higher at some and most regionals "back then." Example Fo's at Air Wisconsin made $60+ per hour on the BAE 146 after a few years in the right seat.

You barely break that as a captain at Republic now in the left seat flying an aircraft with just as many seats!

 

[BoilerUP]

I think we are also missing the point that pay was higher at some and most regionals "back then." Example Fo's at Air Wisconsin made $60+ per hour on the BAE 146 after a few years in the right seat.

$60.29/hr to be exact, at the top of the B146 FO scale (10 years), effective Aug 1 2005 in the 2001 CBA. Unfortunately, concessions which went into effect on Oct 1 2003 (the same date the CHQ 2003 contract went into effect) meant that rate was never recognized.

The highest rate any AWAC BACjet FO would have seen was the Aug 1 2003 rate of $55.48/hr at 10 years longevity...and the highest payrate under the concessionary contract before the 146s were parked was at 8 years longevity and was $47.28/hr.

 

[BigPappa]

All you people bashing the regionals (some corporate dudes on here), get a grip! I did my flight training in the military (fighters). I am a CA for a regional now and can tell that you need to quit hammering the regional pilot. Most of the people I work with are very skilled professionals.
Corporate Flying: been there done that too. I remember a lot of guys that were far more dangerous in corporate aviation than the most inexperienced 121 guys that I've flown with (trying to please their boss).
I dare to argue that most regional pilots at my company are equally as good as any major pilot out there.
Now shut up and go fly something!

Ohhh, and forgot to mention that the Citation is sooooo slow that a Baron could beat it if it wanted to.

 

[BoilerUP]

All you people bashing the regionals (some corporate dudes on here), get a grip!

Haven't really seen much of that, other than the retired NJA guy up the thread.

Ohhh, and forgot to mention that the Citation is sooooo slow that a Baron could beat it if it wanted to.

Not sure who that is directed at...if me, well that's kinda the point of my avatar. You know, satire and all.

But doing 400kt+ at FL450 and burning 730pph ain't too bad

 

[Tristar]

I like how people on this board think that landing this 17K per year job should be "earned" through many years of experience.

It shouldn't be a $17K a year job. Cut off the supply of puppy mill pilots and force the industry to adjust.

 

[Tristar]

Most of the people I work with are very skilled professionals.

Certainly true, and there are also many who are are just embarrassing, either through ignorance, inexperience, or just plain incompetence. Certainly there are guys at the majors that fit the same bill, but it certainly seems to be a much smaller percentage.

Corporate Flying: been there done that too. I remember a lot of guys that were far more dangerous in corporate aviation than the most inexperienced 121 guys that I've flown with (trying to please their boss).

True, but there are at least two major differences:
1) The boss knows who the pilot is, what his qualifications and background are. They have made a deliberate choice to select that pilot, whatever their qualifications may or may not be, and they accept that level of risk.
2) The boss knows who owns/operates the aircraft, and what level of training is provided for it's crew.
The traveling public is generally completely clueless on either of these topics and is limited in their ability to make informed decisions, partly due to the nonsense of "code-sharing."

Ohhh, and forgot to mention that the Citation is sooooo slow that a Baron could beat it if it wanted to.

I'd rather do a night circling approach in a Citation than a Baron, and on an average business stage length of about 400 miles, the slowest Citation will only arrive a few minutes later than the fastest business jet out there. Your point being?

 

[CaribPilot]

It shouldn't be a $17K a year job. Cut off the supply of puppy mill pilots and force the industry to adjust.

This industry will die a painful death before it adjusted its wages and rules for us.

 

[Tristar]

What are you doing, reading the RAA talking points?!?

The industry won't die, people and products still need to move and will. Some carriers may die, and if they do they probably needed to go anyhow.

Let's have a little math fun, shall we? [note, I haven't flown for a regional, so I'm trying to be pessimistic in my numbers, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong]

Let's say we're going to have to bump FO pay from $17K to $50K to attract applicants - that's a difference of $23K.

Assuming our FO flies 180 days in a year [sounds low to me], that works out to a pay increase of about $128 per day each day he works. Let's assume he averages 5 legs a day [again, I think that's low], that works out to about $26 per leg. Assume an 80% load factor (and I haven't been on a flight recently that was only 80% full) and that works out to roughly 65 cents per passenger per leg. If my numbers are indeed conservative, and the FO works more "revenue days" a year, averages more than 5 legs per day, or has a CRJ or ERJ with more than 40 passengers, the costs are further diluted, resulting in less expense per passenger.

Now, let's give the Captain a similar bump, now we're at $1.30 per pax. Go crazy and double that to account for other compensation expenses that I haven't included (taxes, 410K match, etc), and we have $2.60 per pax per leg. Now double it again just to be safe and account for reserves and anything else you care to throw in with the kitchen sink. That works out to $5.20 per passenger per leg, so assuming the average pax flies two legs, they are going to have to increase fares less than $21 for the round trip to cover the cost of increasing wages. Remembering that all regionals are going to be effected by this, I don't see a $21 R/T having that much of an effect. I'm sure there will be a few people who won't go to see Grandma for thanks giving, but on the whole it just isn't that big an increase - if a family of 5 was going to Disney, that's a $105 increase in their R/T. Given what such a trip costs in the first place, that's not much of an increase. I'm doubting the average business traveler will notice a $21 increase per leg trip, which works out to $1050 increase per year if he travels once a week.

I just don't see it affecting passenger traffic that much.

 

[fam62c]

My guess is the ATP (or 1500 hours) requirement for all 121 pilots is never going to happen. The carriers will lobby against this on the basis that it will drive up costs for consumers and the requirement will either be shot down completely or watered down with exceptions and exclusions to the point of basically being worthless. It will probably end up being 1500 hours for the average joe but 200 hours for pilots willing to go through a "special" school (very expensive) that meets certain "accelerated learning" requirements. I've been in this game a long time and, in the end, economics will always trump safety. Nobody is going to take away the supply of eager, cheap labor for the small airlines because the result would be a lower supply of qualified pilots, higher wages because of competition by carriers to fill jobs, increased union leverage and ultimately higher ticket prices. It's a WalMart world people and a few dead folks in Buffalo isn't going to change that. This will all blow over and in the end the customers will still buy the cheapest ticket. The public has a very short memory.

 

[BoilerUP]

Tristar, the problem with your math (other than $17k to $50k is a $33,000 difference not 23,000) is that it doesn't take into account the nature of fee-for-departure contracts.

Major airlines are NOT going to pay their contracted regional carriers one red cent more than their contract stipulates. As such, regional airlines will have to absorb these increased costs with no increase in their revenue. In an industry that already operates on razor-thin margins, this could literally break the finances of many regional airlines.

 

[acaTerry]

I'd rather do a night circling approach in a Citation than a Baron,

I don't know...doing that at 100 kts feels a lot better than 170.

 

[acaTerry]

Anyone know how to follow the progress on this NPRM anyways?

 

[BoilerUP]

I don't know...doing that at 100 kts feels a lot better than 170.

The Encore circles at 170kt?