Looks Like 1500 Hours May Become the New Hiring Minimum Among Other Things:

[ualdriver]

So much for you ignoring me because I am not a member in good standing....I guess things started hitting too close to home...This is a start....

Just wanted to show that I wasn't dodging questions.....and I have to admit I'm bored tonight. However, I suspect you won't get much out of me after this and you'll revert to the "dodging questions" thing.

You are wrong...I'm not an "angry bitter pilot"....I didn't leave to chase the dream at United like you did...I suspect it is you that is angry and bitter.....I have a great schedule....Why should I be bitter....Things are great where I sit...Even you have said that...

You're not bitter and angry? Right. I'm angry and bitter? Nope. I willingly took a job in the private industry. Capitalism is incredibly darwinistic. Is UAL fails, so be it. I'll move on and find something else to do. Family, friends, and health are far more important than this industry ever will be. If I wanted a secure job I'd go work for the government.

How has that worked for you at United? I'm sorry, but I'll take a profitable company that treats it's employees good....Skywest Inc does that...United...not so much....

It's worked out incredibly well for me, Joe, from a financial standpoint (thanks ALPA). Kind of OK from a career standpoint, but we'll see what the next 20 odd years brings me before I make any final determinations. But we're not talking about me. Skywest only treats its employees well for fear of getting a union on the property. So you can thank ALPA for your 6 figure, 18 days off job AND you can thank ALPA for forcing Skywest management to treat its employees at least as well as you have been treated as ASA for fear of getting a union on the property.

Some are valid are they? Which ones?

You weren't reading what I wrote if I have to answer that again.

Actually, I have admitted that ALPA has done some good things....However I believe the bad outweighs the good..

Says the guy flying a 50 seat RJ for 6 figures and 18 days off per month. Yup, ALPA has failed YOU. I'm sure if the regionals weren't unionized by ALPA or anyone else, you'd still be earning that salary today, right? Maybe even more, huh? Yup, the bad outweighs the good, I'm sure.

You are right...That's why I am not a big supporter of big organizations....I was a registered Republican, but I voted Libertarian this time around.....The Republican failed. I am Catholic, but they failed also with the priest/sex scandel....The Federal govt. continues to fail and I only wish I could stop paying taxes.....

I honestly could care less about your political views or your religion unless they relate directly to our discussion. You'll have to save that stuff for a different thread. I deleted other paragraphs from your post for the same reason.

But after reading your last sentence in this paragraph, I do have some advice for you- you dont have to "wish." You are free to leave this "failing" country whenever you want. I think if you renounce your citizenship and sell all of your U.S. assets you don't have to pay U.S. taxes anymore. Drop a question here under "other tax questions" and I'm sure one of those guys will describe the process for you.

I don't support organizations that fail

Yes you do. You've posted previously that you suppport the NRA, AOPA, and Paul. All three have failed miserably at some point. I illustrated with examples for the 2 former. The latter continued to take people's money even though it was clear he would never win. That makes all 3 complete failures using your logic. Also, the country you live in is failing (your words, not mine), and you support it with your continued presence in the U.S. and with the taxes you pay. So make that 4 failing organizations that you (willingly) support.

Actually they screwed up with outsourcing of the turboprops first....But the mainline egos were too big to fly "little airplanes"

For the life of me, I don't know where the guys who post this get that from. When we voted away RJ's at UAL, not once did I, nor anyone I know, or anyone who I heard speak to the issue, describe themselves as "too good" to fly them or even make the implication. There were definitely other issues at play, but somehow I think that statement is more urban legend than anything else.

It's my job now, and I will do anything and everything to protect from you....I'm sorry United hasn't worked out for you, but that isn't MY problem...That is YOUR problem....If you want to work on a mutual solution, let me know....If you want to dictate the solution, then GFYS!

I think economics are going to take your job away from you before I or any mainline pilot does. It doesn't make sense to replace a 6 figure, 14 day off a month, 737 Captain flying 140 seats with a 6 figure, 18 days off a month RJ Captain flying 50 seats. No union can fix that high cost discrepancy, and I think your contractor will take that job away. Of course, it's ALPA's failure that allows you have this great 6 figure, 18 days off a month job, and then it will be ALPA's failure if it gets taken away, right? BTW, nice closure on that paragraph, Joe.

Where do I start.....

Where do I start?

1. ALPA has never pushed for higher requirements for pilots, despite many of us pushing for it....They ignored us...

2. ALPA pushes for regulations all the time...Right now they are pushing for tougher rest rules....Why haven't they pushed for tought pilot requirements?

3. Nobody cared until Buffalo? UYFCM? Many of us have complained for years about the inexperience in the cockpit....Even now, you cheerleaders are trying to blame it on fatigue instead of inexperience....Despite the fact that he had over 22 hours of rest...GMAFB!

Nobody meaning the entities sitting on the other side of the table. That point might have been lost on you. Like you said in #2 above, ALPA is always there, pushing for regulations all the time but there has to be a willing entity on the other end of the table for ALPA to actually "get" anything. Until Buffalo, Congress and the FAA could have cared less about pilot rest/duty or experience levels. Not enough people had died yet.

Also, I really could care less about the 22 hours of rest thing being a factor or not. If it's misguided logic (your implication) stemming from the unfortunate Buffalo crash or Orberstar having a vision in his sleep, it doesn't matter now- change is finally coming.

4. ALPA supported MPL for the same reason that it never pushed for tougher requirements.....Low timers love ALPA and think it is great.....They love nothing more than to put on that ALPA lanyard and believe they have made it to the big leagues....The AMA or ABA would never support a fast track to becomming a doctor or lawyer.....ALPA on the other hand endorses it.....

Huh? ALPA supports MPL so that low timers can love ALPA? So if ALPA doesn't support MPL and the low timer goes the All ATP's route instead, they won't love ALPA anyway?

5. Can you become a resident or an intern in 10 months? You can become an airline pilot in 10 months....Lame argument....but not surprising...

I've never bought the whole doctor/pilot comparison, but again you missed my point. You said "no other organization supports low experience" or something similar to that, and I pointed out 3 other organizations that, using your argument, do. The other two organizations I mentioned have members that require less than 10 months of training, and are "supported" (your definition) by government regulatory agencies. You shouldn't use points that can be completely invalidated when you debate someone that can be proved wrong with only one example, which I did. You're hung up on a pilot/doctor comparison which I completely don't buy. They're two entirely different professions.

You have it backwards grasshopper.....This guy getting 18 days off a month making 6 figures is d@mn glad he didn't go to United....That would have made me bitter.....

Joe, first of all, you are very bitter, I don't care what you say. Just read your last 100 posts. Second of all, why do you keep trying to turn this argument around on me and United? What do you want me to say? Bravo Joe. Excellent decision to not go to United when I did in the mid 90's. Will you stop now with me and United and focus on the points?

 

[amlplt]

Does Unemployment count.

P. S. Joe is an idiot

 

[Father Jack]

@Ualdriver

I think if Joe were to renounce his citizenship and move overseas to avoid taxes, the IRS could still come after him.
Thanks for the good post, but I did have to change every "could care less" to "couldn't care less" for it to make sense.

 

[AC560]

Wow, another ALPA basher with a cute little phrase that probably doesn't have a clue what ALPA has done, continues to do, and will do for airline pilots.

If you are happy with where you are, who am I to question it. It is your future, not mine we are discussing.

what a cheap shot to disparage a fellow pilot implying that he's only worth his seniority number.

That is all the pilot is worth. That is how everything is measured, that isn't a cheap shot that is a fact. If I am a better pilot, have more experience, more knowledge, etc. it is meaningless. You choose to measure yourself by that, other professionals measure themselves by their skills and what they can contribute.

Every airline pilot in the industry is tied to a seniority number, union or non-union, and if you choose to work in the airline industry, that's what your stuck with.

You choose that, not management, not the industry.

All the more reason they need regulations like this one to protect themselves from the downward spiral in the industry they're creating, without even knowing it.

So the ultimate is you can't save yourself, can't be responsible for what has occurred, you need government to save you? Seriously if that is your answer you are going to be wildly disappointed.

It suggests that you are a corporate pilot..... or a well endowned porn star..... regardless, good luck.... an hick ups in your solid career should be easy to recover from....

I have stated in this thread and others my background and what I do. I am a former FT employee (non-pilot) on the cargo side. When FX bought FT I transitioned to the forwarding side. Predominately my background is in the air cargo side. I hold a MEI/CFII in addition to an unused ATP certificate and quit logging hours a long time ago. I also am well endowed and enjoy debating FAR's with Avbug.

 

[ualdriver]

If you are happy with where you are, who am I to question it. It is your future, not mine we are discussing.

Who are you to question it???? You're the non-pilot making wise a$$ comments about organized labor on a pilot forum..........you tell me?

That is all the pilot is worth. That is how everything is measured, that isn't a cheap shot that is a fact. If I am a better pilot, have more experience, more knowledge, etc. it is meaningless. You choose to measure yourself by that, other professionals measure themselves by their skills and what they can contribute.

You choose that, not management, not the industry.

So because I chose to be an airline pilot, and the seniority lists are the way things go in the airlines, I only measure myself by my seniority number? Really? So a good airline pilot can't measure himself by being a smart guy studying, and being selected to go into the training center to help train his fellow pilots? Is that knowledge useless? How about the pilot that takes pride in being interactive with passengers, makes great PA's, hobnobs with the high yield passengers, and is handing out wings to the little ones? Is that meaningless? How about the pilots that are always trying to save that extra 100 lbs. of fuel on every leg? How about the pilot who strives during every PC to get every maneuver picture perfect and isn't happy with anything less? Do you really think the extra experience, knowledge, etc., displayed by those types of professionals is meaningless? So because the pilots in the above examples are pilots at an airline with a seniority list, they're not, "measuring themselves by their skills and what they can contribute?"

Wow, you really do think you are special making statements like that. Are you pissed off or something because you couldn't make it as an airline pilot?

So the ultimate is you can't save yourself, can't be responsible for what has occurred, you need government to save you? Seriously if that is your answer you are going to be wildly disappointed.

The airline passenger needs regulation to protect himself from what the industry will devolve into if airline management is left unchecked. Replacing experienced pilots by placing 250 hr. pilots in the right seat of an airliner, for example, is a bad idea. 14+ hour duty days for professionals in a safety sensitive position (pilots or otherwise) are a bad idea. Laying off talented mechanics so that you can fly your airliner to a 3rd world country in order to save a buck on maintenance is a bad idea. Those are examples of "bad" things that happen when the consumer rewards the airline with the most creative ways to produce the cheapest ticket. It's an example of where a regulatory agency needs to step in and protect consumers from themselves as they know not what they do. This isn't about me. If you actually worked in this industry instead of a comfortable, air conditioned office, you'd see first hand, like most of us do, the degradation in training, maintenance, and cockpit experience the consumer is unwittingly rewarding. If our goals, as professionals, is a *ZERO* accident rate, that trend needs to stop before more people get hurt.

However, if you as a consumer are comfortable with a hull loss and the associated loss of life now and then to save a couple of bucks on your airline ticket, that's your prerogative and I can respect that even though I don't agree with it. Call your Congressman and tell them that all this ridiculousness going on in the House, Senate, and FAA is a waste of time and the government doesn't need to "save you."

 

[AC560]

So a good airline pilot can't measure himself by being a smart guy studying, and being selected to go into the training center to help train his fellow pilots? Is that knowledge useless? How about the pilot that takes pride in being interactive with passengers, makes great PA's, hobnobs with the high yield passengers, and is handing out wings to the little ones? Is that meaningless? How about the pilots that are always trying to save that extra 100 lbs. of fuel on every leg? How about the pilot who strives during every PC to get every maneuver picture perfect and isn't happy with anything less? Do you really think the extra experience, knowledge, etc., displayed by those types of professionals is meaningless?

Completely meaningless to that pilots pay or advancement at the airline. It should and pilots who do those things should be compensated better. The reality is no matter what you do it has zero impact on anything in terms of your career (short of say flying into a building).

So because the pilots in the above examples are pilots at an airline with a seniority list, they're not, "measuring themselves by their skills and what they can contribute?"

Doesn't have any impact on their job, advancement, etc. It is a basic concept. Your entire life revolves solely around one thing and one thing alone which is your seniority number. It is rather embarrassing I understand but it is what it is.

Wow, you really do think you are special making statements like that. Are you pissed off or something because you couldn't make it as an airline pilot?

What is anything I have said to indicate I am pissed off. I am pointing out the problems you have in your profession and the things that you need to change so you get to be around 10yrs from now.

As you point out in numerous places in this thread the requirements to be an airline pilot aren't exactly high, thus if I wanted to make it as one pretty sure I could swing it.

The airline passenger needs regulation to protect himself from what the industry will devolve into if airline management is left unchecked. Replacing experienced pilots by placing 250 hr. pilots in the right seat of an airliner, for example, is a bad idea. 14+ hour duty days for professionals in a safety sensitive position (pilots or otherwise) are a bad idea.

The problem is none of the statistics support your statements. Air travel has gotten safer, cheaper, and more available since deregulation. What has changed as your earning power has decreased as has your job security. If you think Obama, The Congress, or Santa Claus is going to fix that situation you are very much mistaken.

If you actually worked in this industry instead of a comfortable, air conditioned office, you'd see first hand, like most of us do, the degradation in training, maintenance, and cockpit experience the consumer is unwittingly rewarding.

Which again your solution is lets do what you did for the past 20yrs, what has that gotten you? Seriously when UAL folds and you are making $20K a year crying in a cup, I hope you at least reflect and think gee maybe we should have tried something different.

 

[ualdriver]

Completely meaningless to that pilots pay or advancement at the airline. It should and pilots who do those things should be compensated better. The reality is no matter what you do it has zero impact on anything in terms of your career (short of say flying into a building).

Wait a minute. Did you not post this yesterday?
Labor has to become part of the solution and not the problem.

But no matter what I do.........?

Doesn't have any impact on their job, advancement, etc. It is a basic concept. Your entire life revolves solely around one thing and one thing alone which is your seniority number. It is rather embarrassing I understand but it is what it is.

It's rather embarrassing? Really? Seniority is extremely important, but beyond that I think your understanding is wrong. So should all the airline pilots on this forum, and for that matter, in the country, be embarrassed for the profession because we have a seniority based advancement system? I've listened to some very interesting arguments for merit based systems, some on this forum, and I'm not sure that system isn't without serious flaws as well. My bottom line on the issue is that I don't think the merit based system lends itself well to large airline operations, particularly when pilot management has practically no day-to-day contact with pilot labor. I think merit based systems, however, may work better for small flight departments.

What is anything I have said to indicate I am pissed off. I am pointing out the problems you have in your profession and the things that you need to change so you get to be around 10yrs from now.

I think your pissed off because you're telling the pilots on this forum that they should be embarrassed about their employer using a seniority based system, you've taken some swings at organized pilot labor and you're not even a pilot (why else would you even care?), and you have no problem telling another pilot poster, "I speak from the luxury of being a trained professional who is highly desired and compensated in my field for my ability to achieve results. You speak as somebody whose only worth is his seniority number." If you didn't want to rub that smugness into the faces of the pilots who read this forum, then why did you write it? Again, I suspect someone's career expectations didn't quite pan out as desired, hence the tone of your posts. I mean, if UAL fails and I go off into some other profession, I can't imagine a circumstance where I would come back on flightinfo.com and tell a pilot how I'm such a "highly trained professional, etc., etc."

But frankly, you're really in no position to point out problems as an outsider. You main point seems to be that you don't like unions and you don't like seniority based systems. Great. Thanks for the advice. I'm not sure, but I don't think JoeMerchant likes unions either.

As you point out in numerous places in this thread the requirements to be an airline pilot aren't exactly high, thus if I wanted to make it as one pretty sure I could swing it.

So you spent 10's of thousands of dollars on flight training and at least a few years of your life gaining the flight time to obtain an ATP certificate.......to be a freight forwarder? There's nothing wrong with being a freight forwarder, don't get me wrong, but it seems like a pretty expensive path to me. That's why I suspect there's some underlying motive for some of your posts.....

The problem is none of the statistics support your statements. Air travel has gotten safer, cheaper, and more available since deregulation. What has changed as your earning power has decreased as has your job security. If you think Obama, The Congress, or Santa Claus is going to fix that situation you are very much mistaken.

When you say "statistics" you mean dead bodies, right? So we should wait for "statistics" before we, as professionals and those that regulate us, fix glaring problems?

Let me ask you a question. Do you think the airlines have participated in practices that have made traveling safer for the average passenger over the past 10 years? Do you think it is wise to replace an experienced, skilled pilot with a 250 hr. guy fresh out of flight school to save a buck? Do you think it's smart to hire a pilot without even digging into his past training? Do you think it is a good idea when airlines lay off skilled mechanics and instead send an aircraft to insert third world country here for heavy maintenance? Do you think it's a good idea to have pilots flying 14+ hour duty days? Ask the pilots on this forum about what they've seen over the past decade. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, patterns are developing that need to be reversed before someone becomes a statistic? We're all shooting for a *zero* accident rate, right?

Also, read this slowly. I think Obama, Congress, and Santa Claus should do *nothing* to regulate pilot salaries. Zero. Nada. Ultimately, the free market will determine pilot salaries. All the three you mention should do is regulate as little as possible, keep free market practices safe for passengers, and bring presents to me on December 25th. Job security? I chose to work in the private sector. If I wanted job security, I'd take a government job.

Which again your solution is lets do what you did for the past 20yrs, what has that gotten you? Seriously when UAL folds and you are making $20K a year crying in a cup, I hope you at least reflect and think gee maybe we should have tried something different.

Why do you think I'd be making $20K/year crying in a cup if UAL fails? Why would you think anyone would be like that? Do you think you'd be the only ex-pilot who can succeed in another field if their airline goes away?

This will be the extent of my reflection if UAL folds: I was lucky to be a United pilot, it was fun while it lasted, time to find something else to do. Maybe I'll become a freight forwarder.....

 

[pilotyip]

The airline passenger needs regulation to protect himself from what the industry will devolve into if airline management is left unchecked. Replacing experienced pilots by placing 250 hr. pilots in the right seat of an airliner, for example, is a bad idea. 14+ hour duty days for professionals in a safety sensitive position (pilots or otherwise) are a bad idea. "

Again it seems we want to go back to the "good ole days" of regulation. It may be good for you, but bad for many others. Life was good for a few pilots under regulation. There are probably 3-4 times as many pilot’s jobs in 2007 as there was in 1977. Back in reg time it was about 90% military that went to the majors. Dereg opened up a lot of airline job to non-military pilots. To return to regulation would raise ticket prices, and due to a consumers marginal propensity to consume it would reduce the number of passengers, and therefore reduce the number of Captains and co-pilots needed. But for the few that kept theri jobs, it would be a good thing.

 

[ualdriver]

Again it seems we want to go back to the "good ole days" of regulation. It may be good for you, but bad for many others. Life was good for a few pilots under regulation. There are probably 3-4 times as many pilot’s jobs in 2007 as there was in 1977. Back in reg time it was about 90% military that went to the majors. Dereg opened up a lot of airline job to non-military pilots. To return to regulation would raise ticket prices, and due to a consumers marginal propensity to consume it would reduce the number of passengers, and therefore reduce the number of Captains and co-pilots needed. But for the few that kept theri jobs, it would be a good thing.

Copy and paste the text where I said I want to return to the days of pre-1978 days of regulation? In fact, in my last reponse to the freight forwarder above, I think you'll see I wrote that I desire regulatory agencies to do as little as possible but still keep passengers safe. Desiring that this industry be properly regulated does not mean I desire that Amercian Airlines have to ask permission to fly between Dallas and Denver. The 2 examples you quoted in the post above are exactly the types of items that do need to better regulated, however. If less people fly or ticket prices go up or my airline goes out of business because pilots can't work a 16 hour duty day- oh well.

 

[AC560]

Wait a minute. Did you not post this yesterday?
Labor has to become part of the solution and not the problem.

But no matter what I do.........?

That is correct you do, in order to do that though there has to be a dramatic shift. Your posts reiterate two things which is keeping the status quo and lobbying to reregulate the industry (in the extent that it will impact pilot pay). That idea is the problem where you are so entrenched in your ideals/beliefs you are entirely unwilling to look dynamically at what could realistically solve the problem. Labor has no power to dictate demands to management and has largely failed over the past 20yrs in doing so. Regulation isn't coming back. Thus the choice is to discuss other alternatives or accept the inevitable which is a continued slide in job security and wages.

It's rather embarrassing? Really? Seniority is extremely important, but beyond that I think your understanding is wrong. So should all the airline pilots on this forum, and for that matter, in the country, be embarrassed for the profession because we have a seniority based advancement system?

Because you are not compensated, promoted, given additional responsibility, etc. No matter what you do in the current model you are not judged upon it. You come to my airline as a former check airmen, NAFI instructor of the year, successfully landed a burning plane on top of a runway and saved everyone on board twice, with 30,000hrs in type. I on the other hand regularly fail check rides and in general am a poor pilot but I was there 1yr before you. I make more money, get to fly better equipment, and get more advantages.

You are not paid on your skills, there is no real argument to this it is just the fact of the matter. Your skills are not in anyway relative to your position.

I've listened to some very interesting arguments for merit based systems, some on this forum, and I'm not sure that system isn't without serious flaws as well. My bottom line on the issue is that I don't think the merit based system lends itself well to large airline operations, particularly when pilot management has practically no day-to-day contact with pilot labor. I think merit based systems, however, may work better for small flight departments.

No system is perfect, the question becomes what system could be made which would be better. Clearly a pure merit system wouldn't work nor does a pure seniority system. There are blends out there though which have been successul. This gets into looking at what the outsiders are doing (UAW, Teamsters, other industries) are doing instead of saying as a non-pilot your ideas are baseless.

I think your pissed off because you're telling the pilots on this forum that they should be embarrassed about their employer using a seniority based system, you've taken some swings at organized pilot labor and you're not even a pilot (why else would you even care?), and you have no problem telling another pilot poster, "I speak from the luxury of being a trained professional who is highly desired and compensated in my field for my ability to achieve results. You speak as somebody whose only worth is his seniority number." If you didn't want to rub that smugness into the faces of the pilots who read this forum, then why did you write it? Again, I suspect someone's career expectations didn't quite pan out as desired, hence the tone of your posts. I mean, if UAL fails and I go off into some other profession, I can't imagine a circumstance where I would come back on flightinfo.com and tell a pilot how I'm such a "highly trained professional, etc., etc."

I assure you I had no career expectations as an airline pilot. When I left FT I ended up working with a guy who had an airplane and ended up getting my private certificate and became one of the many GA pilots out there things just sort of grew from there. Had I wanted an airline career there were two realities facing me. One was at the time I could only get a waiver for a 2nd class due to my eyes and no possibility of a first class (today because of rule changes I can get a first class with no waiver). Two I would have had to taken a $10K a year pay cut at minimum and pilot job's were pretty tough in the late 80's. Not everyone had hopes and dreams of being an airline pilot. I do think though when I retire that I might do some part time 91/135 work just to kill time.

But frankly, you're really in no position to point out problems as an outsider. You main point seems to be that you don't like unions and you don't like seniority based systems. Great. Thanks for the advice. I'm not sure, but I don't think JoeMerchant likes unions either.

Most businesses bring in outsiders to point problems, offer solutions to the problems, and help implement the solutions. They are called consultants and while everyone can make jokes about them, outsiders tend to offer fresh perspectives as they are not shackled by predefined ideas.

I have nothing against unions, look through numerous posts. I have a lot of experience with the Teamsters including implementing things such as union team leaders (labor managing/supervising labor) a differential pay based upon skill and role.

I find this to be an interesting discussion in which I am more then happy to share a management perspective and learn from a union perspective. We are as I stated all in this together.

So you spent 10's of thousands of dollars on flight training and at least a few years of your life gaining the flight time to obtain an ATP certificate.......to be a freight forwarder? There's nothing wrong with being a freight forwarder, don't get me wrong, but it seems like a pretty expensive path to me. That's why I suspect there's some underlying motive for some of your posts.....

My wife would have preferred I bought a boat. Flying is a hobby, we all blow our $$$ on something.

When you say "statistics" you mean dead bodies, right? So we should wait for "statistics" before we, as professionals and those that regulate us, fix glaring problems?

Well it has been 30yrs since deregulation and again safety has improved, prices have decreased, and air travel is readily available to everyone. There is no data which supports your idea that safety is being compromised. I certainly agree pay has decreased, work conditions have changed, job security has decreased largely as a result of deregulation. The data though just doesn't support your agrument.

Do you think the airlines have participated in practices that have made traveling safer for the average passenger over the past 10 years?

Yes and so have unions. I think unions in some ways have actively fought in some ways against safety. Clearly one of the core problems behind the Colgan incident was rest issues due to commuting. Airlines I am sure have fought against some safety issues as well which I am sure you can point out. This is why the industry still has regulation through the FAA to keep the flying public safe the question is what is reasonable regulation and what is unreasonable regulation.

Do you think it is wise to replace an experienced, skilled pilot with a 250 hr. guy fresh out of flight school to save a buck?

My personal opinion is yes. At 250hrs you get a pilot with very few bad habits. That pilot can then be trained over the next 1250hrs by the airline in a structured fashion that specifically addresses things like CRM, airline practices, specific equipment requirements, etc. I have a couple of students who got on Eagle with very low time and I am amazed at the quality of their training and in many ways their knowledge and expertise in certain areas far outweighs mine. Had they gone the CFI to 135 route there is greater potential for macho tendencies and the issues with the law of primacy that probably would need to be overcome.

Do you think it's smart to hire a pilot without even digging into his past training?

No and I believe training records are required to be reported and made available to hiring parties today under existing regulations. Particularly in a union environment it is very critical to hire the best person as once they get the job it is extremely difficult to fire them.

Do you think it is a good idea when airlines lay off skilled mechanics and instead send an aircraft to insert third world country here for heavy maintenance?

This has gone on forever. I was shipping engines out of the US to Caledonian in the UK and Singapore 20+ years ago for rebuilds. As a bit of UA trivia for you the D1F that engined out in HNL in the 90's got its engine courtesy of me via KZ and it came from SIN (this was after the attempt to sling an engine under the wing on a D10 which made a diversion in DEN after almost vibrating the plane apart).

Price of labor does not always directly equate to skill. I have a lot of people who work for me in China that have 4+ year university degrees and are unbelievably smart, we pay them about $12K a year which is certainly low by US standards but very high by Chinese standards.

I will say though I thought it was pretty stupid strategically for pilots to allow all the other union groups to largely be eliminated thereby weakening their own position.

Do you think it's a good idea to have pilots flying 14+ hour duty days?

I think that rest issues need to be looked at both in terms of duty hours and what qualifies as rest (i.e. commuting and other issues).