Stopping the slide

[PCL_128]

Rich, that's just ridiculous. As someone that represents pilots in disciplinary hearings, I can tell you for a fact that someone's "rapport" with the MEC has nothing to do with how well I represent them. I will always do my best to represent any pilot that needs the help of the Association, and there isn't an elected or appointed rep in the entire PCL union structure that is any different.

 

[Lear70]

I'm not talking about disciplinary meetings with base managers / chief pilots - I know the majority of reps in the domiciles do their best most of the time, although I've seen some reps do half-assed jobs as well.

I'm mainly talking about termination hearings with arbitrators where our attorney doesn't even bother to show up.

I stick by my statements, as several people from this airline and friends from other airlines have had this problem. It's not a matter of "intent", it's a matter of "aggressive follow through".

An attorney you hire will aggressively go to work for you because his or her livelihood and reputation are at stake. An unpaid union rep will do what is REQUIRED by the bylaws for someone they don't necessarily like or agree with, and no more. The difference is HUGE.

Blind faith in any group is always a bad thing.

 

[fastbird]

Looks like we're all about finding nit-noid problems to bicker about than trying to find UNITY within the loose Association that is our union.

No standard for pilot pay...it's every MEC for itself
No parity amongst the various organizations, APA, ALPA, Teamsters, etc.
Lack of a common goal regarding pilot earnings or QOL

It's no wonder airline management can and does screw us like the crack addict whores we are.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Looks like we're all about finding nit-noid problems to bicker about than trying to find UNITY within the loose Association that is our union.

No standard for pilot pay...it's every MEC for itself
No parity amongst the various organizations, APA, ALPA, Teamsters, etc.
Lack of a common goal regarding pilot earnings or QOL

It's no wonder airline management can and does screw us like the crack addict whores we are.

FB,

Unity? are you kidding? ALPA is a service. The membership motto: What have you done for me lately!

The no standard for pilot pay isn't valid. Becuase when times are good we all love to spring board off the latest and greatest contract. It just backfires when times are bad. If you want stardard pay, then, say the FedEx guys couldn't say to management, you are making record profits, we want a fiar percentage of that. Management will say, nope, you wanted standard pay...you got it...

There is parity amongts the unions through the AFL-CIO. But this is part of your third bullet point.

Look, with only 5% of the membership turning up to LEC meetings and 95% of the membership completely ignorant on the history, how the system works, its limitations and what one can reasonalbly expect, ALPA's effectiveness will continue to remain low.

Until pilots take ownership of thier own circumstance instead of blaming others, calling for salary cuts, decertification, a regional union or no union we are going to continue to be useless.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Requiring 1200 TT to be hired as a 121 pilot just like a 135 pilot is lowering the 121 standard in what way? I use this section because all my Part 121 flying has been on an IFR flight plan.

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]FAA FAR 135.243c Operating Requirements[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]Certificate holders may not use a person, nor may any person serve, as pilot in command of an aircraft under IFR unless that person--[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica](1) Holds at least a commercial pilot certificate with appropriate category and class ratings and, if required, an appropriate type rating for that aircraft; and[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica](2) Has had at least 1,200 hours of flight time as a pilot, including 500 hours of cross-country flight time, 100 hours of night flight time, and 75 hours of actual or simulated instrument time at least 50 hours of which were in actual flight; and[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica](3) For an airplane, holds an instrument rating or an airline transport pilot certificate with an airplane category rating; or[/FONT]
(4) For a helicopter, holds a helicopter instrument rating, or an airline transport pilot certificate with a category and class rating for that aircraft, not limited to VFR.

So what you are proposing is to take a 135 PIC requirement and turn it into a 121 SIC requirement. I would hope you are not suggesting making 135 mins standard for both FOs and CAs at 121 carriers.

Consider the follwing two arguments being made to a lawmaker who knows very little about flying:

Argument A:

Mr. Senator, we need to require all airline pilots to hold an Airline Transport Pilot certificate, to enhance safety in the system.

Argument B:

Mr. Senator, we need to implement an arbitrarily chosen minimum-hour requirement for airline first officers.

In my opinion, argument A would be a much easier one to sell. There's an airline pilot "license" (yeah, I know, certificate). Let's just require that for all airline pilots.

It might be hard to argue that a 135 PIC requirement is somehow translatable to a 121 SIC requirement. Go with the "icensing" issue.

Besides, it would force PFT from GIA to go out and actually gain some real experience for they deem themselves fit to fly for an airline.

In actuality, if a lot of those 'streamers got a real 135 job flying real northern wx, they would all end up "Hey dude-ing" themselves right into the dirt.

Probably better that they get babysat for a couple thousand hours on second thought.

 

[fastbird]

You are saying then...that none of the arbitrary flying hour milestones we all met to earn our various rating don't equate to anything more than random points in time.

If actual hours flying an airplane don't mean something, then what does having another line on your certificate mean? Anyone can prep long enough and pass a checkride. We all know about the hard DE's but everyone wants to test with guy who is more leinient. I bet no pilot in the history of aviation has ever padded their log book either.


Most standards start out as arbitrary values and with time they get adjusted to meet the actual requirements of the task.

 

[Lear70]

You are saying then...that none of the arbitrary flying hour milestones we all met to earn our various rating don't equate to anything more than random points in time.

Sounds about right to me...

If actual hours flying an airplane don't mean something, then what does having another line on your certificate mean? Anyone can prep long enough and pass a checkride.

You're absolutely right... they're testing for a skill set and a minimum number of hours where "some" individual(s) in the FAA who were setting the rules decided enough experience had been met to START working for compensation.

In THEIR world (at the time those regs were written) EVERYONE either "came up through the ranks" of flight instructing, crap night piston freight, Part 135 charter, then an airline job, OR they came out of the military.

Who'd ever have thought they'd go straight from a wet 250 hour Comm MEI certificate into the right seat of a Part 121 airline jet job?

Most standards start out as arbitrary values and with time they get adjusted to meet the actual requirements of the task.

Exactly right... and it's TIME they got adjusted.

Consider the follwing two arguments being made to a lawmaker who knows very little about flying:

Argument A:

Mr. Senator, we need to require all airline pilots to hold an Airline Transport Pilot certificate, to enhance safety in the system.

Argument B:

Mr. Senator, we need to implement an arbitrarily chosen minimum-hour requirement for airline first officers.

In my opinion, argument A would be a much easier one to sell. There's an airline pilot "license" (yeah, I know, certificate). Let's just require that for all airline pilots.

It might be hard to argue that a 135 PIC requirement is somehow translatable to a 121 SIC requirement. Go with the "icensing" issue.

BINGO!

 

[fastbird]

Sounds about right to me...

Who'd ever have thought they'd go straight from a wet 250 hour Comm MEI certificate into the right seat of a Part 121 airline jet job?

Exactly right... and it's TIME they got adjusted.

ATP standard...1500 hrs and age 23

how is that an easier argument than...

135 IFR standard...1200 hrs

I'm afraid our non-aviation savy politician will have harder time grasping why a SIC position needs an ATP rather than just the minimum hours to qualify as a Part 135 PIC.

Since you mentioned it, I see either as potential option. I'm not target locked on Part 135 numbers. I just think the uneducated outside of the aviation community will buy it quicker.

Why not start contacting the alphabet agencies and politicians to see if they support one or the other?

 

[Lear70]

ATP standard...1500 hrs and age 23

how is that an easier argument than...

135 IFR standard...1200 hrs

I'm afraid our non-aviation savy politician will have harder time grasping why a SIC position needs an ATP rather than just the minimum hours to qualify as a Part 135 PIC.

I agree, either is a potential option, although I think a non aviation-savvy politician would be more tripped up by your statement of "why a SIC position needs an ATP..." acronyms unknown to the uninitiated.

By that same token, a non aviation-savvy politician could EASILY grasp why having an ATP should be the requirement by explaining one simple acronym:

ATP = AIRLINE Transport PILOT

The argument: any PILOT who wants to work for an AIRLINE should have an AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT rating.

Seems simple enough for even John McCain...

Not to mention the fact that when you present statistics that show that a LARGE percentage of regional airline new-hires are under the legal drinking age, much less 23... you might get their attention (no one likes to see someone who looks younger than their grandkid sitting up front).

Why not start contacting the alphabet agencies and politicians to see if they support one or the other?

You're going to face a LOT of opposition from the RALA on this one - management would FIERCELY challenge such a movement, knowing it would decrease the available pilot pool and drive up the compensation they would have to offer.

I'd start with ALPA - the fight will have to be fought on Congressional Hill, and they're the only ones with the pockets to do it.

Second, find a friendly Senator or two and start rallying support for it. The easiest time to do this is immediately following two aircraft accidents involving passenger fatalities within a short time span,,, simply because the voter's ATTENTION span is short as well, and politicians cater to what their voters want.

Long battle, but we have to start somewhere. To those on this board who are serious about it, PM me... I do have a favor or two owed from one of our esteemed Senators from the state of TN - I've been hedging it for the right fight and this one is one that's been in the back of my head for a while...

 

[FR8mastr]

I have been saying this for a while. I'll do you one better - require an ATP to fly for an airline. And stop allowing incompetents pilots to get their ATP on a $900 weekend at a certificate mill.

ATP rides with FAA or Airline check airman only.

That certificate is WAY too wasy to get. It is meaningless.

Do you remember when the ATP ride actually had tougher standards than the instrument? 50 feet on the ALT, etc.