Woerth to Head the FAA?

[stlflyguy]

+1

It's amazing to me how blind with anger some of you ALPA haters are. Duane running the FAA could be, in my opinion, a very positive thing for the airline piloting profession. I'm under no illusion that we're going to get everything we want just because we have Democrats in power and Duane possibly running the FAA but c'mon! A unionist, ex-airlne pilot running the FAA? I hope very much this comes true.

Forget about it--Duane's a f*&kin' mercenary. If it doesn't suit Duane, it isn't going to get done. Ask any TWA pilot...or better yet, wait for the evidence to become public.

stlflyguy

 

[JoeMerchant]

I can't believe the attitudes of some people on this board. If Duane is appointed to this position, you finally have a chance of getting good flight/duty time rules. Duane will also help the controllers get a decent contract so we don't have constant turnover in ATC positions and a bunch of inexperienced kids vectoring us around crowded airspace. I hope Duane gets it. We could use the help in high places.

...will he support MPL? We don't inexperienced kids sitting in the right seat either....but ALPA doesn't seem to oppose that.....

 

[PCL_128]

...will he support MPL

I highly doubt it.

 

[JoeMerchant]

I highly doubt it.

....ALPA passed a resolution at the BOD supporting MPL....

 

[ualdriver]

....ALPA passed a resolution at the BOD supporting MPL....

I'm not familiar with the resolution, but I'll take your word for it that they did pass one.

But this represents yet another issue that ALPA has to face and they're "damned if they do, damned if they don't." Then they're criticized roundly no matter what they do.

So let's look at this MPL issue a different way.

You're criticizing ALPA for having passed a resolution supporting MPL. But lets say they do what you want, and condemn MPL and refuse to endorse it or participate in its formation in any way, shape, or form on principle. That would be the right thing to do in your opinion, correct, based upon your statement above?

One of two things then happen:

1) MPL comes anyway (which IMO will happen) and ALPA has no influence on what shapes MPL as it is developed in the U.S. Is that good for us or bad? If you're running a national union representing pilots that will be trained (eventually) under a MPL program, is that good or bad? If you're running a national union that will have members flying with MPL graduates, is that good or bad?

2) ALPA flexes its muscle and gets MPL killed soundly. Great, I guess? Now we have 300 hr. pilots sitting in the right seat of RJ's that go through ALL ATP's (or whoever) instead of MPL. Is that better for us or not?

If you had a 300 hr. pilot sitting next to you, what kind of training would you want that pilot to have had? MPL training that takes a guy from day one and trains him to be a co-pilot in a crew type environment in high performance aircraft simulators or a guy who did most of his training in a Cessna doing turns around a point and lazy 8's? I'm not sure what the correct answer is and there certainly isn't a good answer, but I would probably lean toward the MPL guy.

Now if your beef is 300 hr. pilots sitting in the right seat, shouldn't your (our) beef be with the FAA? They are the body that writes the rules, no? I wonder who it would be easier to convince about the dangers of putting a 300 hr. guy in the right seat of a high performance jet- Woerth or a guy who's never seen the inside of a cockpit?

 

[JoeMerchant]

I'm not familiar with the resolution, but I'll take your word for it that they did pass one.

But this represents yet another issue that ALPA has to face and they're "damned if they do, damned if they don't." Then they're criticized roundly no matter what they do.

So let's look at this MPL issue a different way.

You're criticizing ALPA for having passed a resolution supporting MPL. But lets say they do what you want, and condemn MPL and refuse to endorse it or participate in its formation in any way, shape, or form on principle. That would be the right thing to do in your opinion, correct, based upon your statement above?

One of two things then happen:

1) MPL comes anyway (which IMO will happen) and ALPA has no influence on what shapes MPL as it is developed in the U.S. Is that good for us or bad? If you're running a national union representing pilots that will be trained (eventually) under a MPL program, is that good or bad? If you're running a national union that will have members flying with MPL graduates, is that good or bad?

2) ALPA flexes its muscle and gets MPL killed soundly. Great, I guess? Now we have 300 hr. pilots sitting in the right seat of RJ's that go through ALL ATP's (or whoever) instead of MPL. Is that better for us or not?

If you had a 300 hr. pilot sitting next to you, what kind of training would you want that pilot to have had? MPL training that takes a guy from day one and trains him to be a co-pilot in a crew type environment in high performance aircraft simulators or a guy who did most of his training in a Cessna doing turns around a point and lazy 8's? I'm not sure what the correct answer is and there certainly isn't a good answer, but I would probably lean toward the MPL guy.

Now if your beef is 300 hr. pilots sitting in the right seat, shouldn't your (our) beef be with the FAA? They are the body that writes the rules, no? I wonder who it would be easier to convince about the dangers of putting a 300 hr. guy in the right seat of a high performance jet- Woerth or a guy who's never seen the inside of a cockpit?

UAL,

This is precisely why ALPA is a failure....The AMA and ABA have done a good job keeping the barriers to entry high....We have failed....

There is NO other profession that allows such low entry requirements....You cannot demand doctor/lawyer type pay for a job that can be trained for in as little as 11 months.....

I have heard the argument you have made from many ALPA apologists...My question is why have other professions done a better job of keeping the entry requirements high.....They aren't even unions.....

 

[stlflyguy]

Spot on, Joe. If you watch the different trade unions (plumbers, pipefitters, carpenters, etc) you see their advertisements or hear their radio ads talking about their experience. Not once does ALPA make any type of advertisement (outside the rag, Air Line Pilot) to talk about the experience or trials and tribulations of their membership.

So it leaves the public guessing that all they need to do is head to their local airport and get a few licenses and then they're qualified to be $300k/year airline captains.

ALPA will look at MPL as just another vehicle in which to gain a dues paying member.

stlflyguy

 

[JoeMerchant]

Spot on, Joe. If you watch the different trade unions (plumbers, pipefitters, carpenters, etc) you see their advertisements or hear their radio ads talking about their experience. Not once does ALPA make any type of advertisement (outside the rag, Air Line Pilot) to talk about the experience or trials and tribulations of their membership.

So it leaves the public guessing that all they need to do is head to their local airport and get a few licenses and then they're qualified to be $300k/year airline captains.

ALPA will look at MPL as just another vehicle in which to gain a dues paying member.

stlflyguy

BINGO...ALPA is more concerned with collecting dues than actually defending the profession....Defending the profession is difficult when you support putting 200 hour pilots in the cockpit!

 

[WayBack]

BINGO...ALPA is more concerned with collecting dues than actually defending the profession....Defending the profession is difficult when you support putting 200 hour pilots in the cockpit!

I can't believe, ALPA, who is all about safety. Thinks it's a smart idea to put a no time guy in the right seat, allowing him to do the job that some guys with 1,000's of hours, have trouble doing.
I'd hate to be the captain, flying a 4 day trip on the East Coast, shooting CAT II approaches with one of these guys in the right seat.

I'm assuming that these guys would fly with a certified Captain, such as an IOE captain. I hope to God.

 

[ualdriver]

I can't believe, ALPA, who is all about safety. Thinks it's a smart idea to put a no time guy in the right seat, allowing him to do the job that some guys with 1,000's of hours, have trouble doing.

I can't believe it either. Can you find me one verifiable statement where an ALPA ranking official (or any major pilot union official) has stated "that it is a smart idea to put a no time guy in the right seat," or similar?

That goes for you too, Joe. Can you find me anything that states that ALPA wants to put 200 hr. pilots in the right seat of a jet? Please spare me the MPL argument as proof of such a statement.

Thanks.

P.S. I have some interesting stuff concerning the ABA and the AMA and the misconceptions you posted earlier.....post coming shortly