FAA Revising ATP Regs

mshunter said:
Drop the Sim requirement. Leave the rest alone. A lot of people aren't looking forward with this realizing that if the regionals can't hire, mainline has to pick up the slack. Short term loss, long term gain.
Click to expand...
I agree but something tells me mainline doesn't want to pick up the slack. They wish to leave the status quo alone. And has a previous poster mentioned if the regionals do try to pay a fair wage on their own they will get Comair'd. Look at what Delta pays endeavor there wholly owned subsidiary. If you go to work there you get a crap wage for the chance to get on at mainline Delta. In my opinion mainline doesn't want the flying back. They want it done as cheaply as possible.
 
floridabeachbum said:
I agree but something tells me mainline doesn't want to pick up the slack. They wish to leave the status quo alone. And has a previous poster mentioned if the regionals do try to pay a fair wage on their own they will get Comair'd. Look at what Delta pays endeavor there wholly owned subsidiary. If you go to work there you get a crap wage for the chance to get on at mainline Delta. In my opinion mainline doesn't want the flying back. They want it done as cheaply as possible.
Click to expand...

Then why did Delta buy all those 717's and "Conited" not renew a contract out of IAD for "streamlining?"

And the Endeavor "flow" is the biggest smack in the face to the regional industry since I've been flying. The guys that are there got screwed, and the guys there for the flow will probably never see it. You'd be better off going to Mesa and taking your chances getting hired from "outside."
 
My personal feelings aside on what is and what is not qualified has no bearing on the issue at hand. The truth is that the rule under it's current state is unsustainable so it is unrealistic to expect it to remain as is. Nor is it worth getting emotional about the fact that it will be altered. So in the end, it will and probably should be changed. Do I think someone should be piloting 50 or more people around with 250? Of course not. Do I think it is necessary for someone to have 1500 hours before they are hired? Certainly doesn't hurt but isn't a requirement and doesn't define the level of pilot.

The important part is the quality of the individual, the quality of the training, the quality of experience, and the standards required to attain the necessary ratings. 500 hrs, 1500 hrs, 2000 hrs, or 3000 hrs mean nothing in regards to airline safety if the training sucked and the experience is entirely unrelated (no IFR experience for example). I don't have the answer on how to best accomplish that but I've said for a long time that we need higher and tougher standards, more barriers to entry, and better "apprentice" type of oversight.
 
mshunter said:
Then why did Delta buy all those 717's and "Conited" not renew a contract out of IAD for "streamlining?"

And the Endeavor "flow" is the biggest smack in the face to the regional industry since I've been flying. The guys that are there got screwed, and the guys there for the flow will probably never see it. You'd be better off going to Mesa and taking your chances getting hired from "outside."
Click to expand...

I agree totally. As far as UniCal I would say it goes back to seeing a consistently oversold route and a businessman saying I can make money if I put a bigger plane on this route and charge mainline fares. At least that's what I think but yeah the endeavor guys and gals they got a bad deal! Viva Comair!!
 
Cav said:
My personal feelings aside on what is and what is not qualified has no bearing on the issue at hand. The truth is that the rule under it's current state is unsustainable so it is unrealistic to expect it to remain as is. Nor is it worth getting emotional about the fact that it will be altered. So in the end, it will and probably should be changed. Do I think someone should be piloting 50 or more people around with 250? Of course not. Do I think it is necessary for someone to have 1500 hours before they are hired? Certainly doesn't hurt but isn't a requirement and doesn't define the level of pilot.

The important part is the quality of the individual, the quality of the training, the quality of experience, and the standards required to attain the necessary ratings. 500 hrs, 1500 hrs, 2000 hrs, or 3000 hrs mean nothing in regards to airline safety if the training sucked and the experience is entirely unrelated (no IFR experience for example). I don't have the answer on how to best accomplish that but I've said for a long time that we need higher and tougher standards, more barriers to entry, and better "apprentice" type of oversight.
Click to expand...
You make too much sense!!! Begone!! And take your reasonableness with you!! How dare you make valid educated points presented in a logical argument in this discussion based on emotions!! What are you some type of thinker??? :)
 
Last edited:
mshunter said:
Then why did Delta buy all those 717's and "Conited" not renew a contract out of IAD for "streamlining?"
Click to expand...

True! Why has year over year flying been increasingly moving back towards mainline? It has more to do with economics than scope. It's pretty simple. Airlines have learned to make money in spite of high fuel prices. They shrunk post bankruptcy, now as (currently) successful publicly traded companies if they aren't growing they are dying. Except growing merely means taking back what they previously outsourced. Many will disagree with me but it's hard to argue that capacity discipline and some M & A wasn't good for the airlines overall. There certainly was overcapacity before and there will be again in the future. Mergers weren't always pleasant for pilots but contrary to our opinion, airlines don't exist for our benefit! Without some mergers I don't think the airlines would be in as healthy of a financial position as they currently are and that's not a bad thing for pilots.
 
All they need to do is raise the pay and QOL a notch and people who have the quals but couldn't afford the job will come fourth. Pilot pay is a small fraction of the overall costs to run an airline. If the FAA bows to the RAA on this what's next? Sad state of affairs....
 
DE727UPS said:
All they need to do is raise the pay and QOL a notch and people who have the quals but couldn't afford the job will come fourth. Pilot pay is a small fraction of the overall costs to run an airline. If the FAA bows to the RAA on this what's next? Sad state of affairs....
Click to expand...

True of carriers like UPS, Delta, and United. Not so true of the avg regional where pilot pay makes up a large portion of the "airline's" costs. I say "airline's" because they are really staffing agencies disguised as airlines. Raise the pilot pay to the levels that they should be and there's no reason to outsource flying to them because they are no longer viable.

No I'm not advocating tearing down the entry requirements and keeping the pay low. Far from it. Raising the pay would change the landscape entirely. But hey, raise the pay at the bottom and put the regionals out of business. I'm all for it! Won't happen. To believe otherwise is a fool's errand. It's reality.
 
DE727UPS said:
All they need to do is raise the pay and QOL a notch and people who have the quals but couldn't afford the job will come fourth. Pilot pay is a small fraction of the overall costs to run an airline. If the FAA bows to the RAA on this what's next? Sad state of affairs....
Click to expand...

Exactly!

I'm going to solve the problem right here. GET RID OF FIRST YEAR PAY! I shouldn't have to work out my finances, and calculate how much I need to save just in order to survive my first year here at a regional. Eliminate the year 1 pay and see how many qualified applicants will start appearing. I know plenty of pilots at 135 companies who say "Yeah I'd love to fly for the airlines, but no way I'm taking that pay cut."
 
Nothing ever changes, does it? There are plenty of pilots. Heck, I'm a pilot! At least that's what it says on my license.

But I'm not working at a Regional. Why do you suppose that might be?

Round and round we go.
 
The only way to "get rid of first year pay" is for the economics to force the issue. That appears to be happening.
 
Cav said:
The only way to "get rid of first year pay" is for the economics to force the issue. That appears to be happening.
Click to expand...
I agree with that assessment Cav. But it appears are going to try to lower the minimums first. Once they see that will not give them a 500 hour pilot overnight then I suspect first year pay will go up.
 
Last edited:
Cav said:
The only way to "get rid of first year pay" is for the economics to force the issue. That appears to be happening.
Click to expand...

Appearances can be deceiving. It's not. When every contract that has been up for negotiation (minus one IIRC) has had concessions, it's not. The whole FFD model is broken. And the whipsaw will continue, so those that negotiate the contract with mainline can keep their cushy salary and jobs, at the cost of those below them. I'll believe it's happening when FO pay actually changes to a livable wage.
 
floridabeachbum said:
Okay everybody take a deep breath, because what I am about to say will seem hard to believe but it is true. Yesterday I spoke to the FAA because I heard a rumor they were granting ATP written extensions. So while that proved to be untrue we got on the subject of the pilot shortage cities losing service and the airlines cutting capacity. I was told rather ambiguously that the 1500 hour rule is going to drop. The FAA is closely monitoring the pilot shortage and seeing how it is affecting the nations airline service - especially at the regional level. They are starting to have some concerns with the flight cancellations and capacity cuts looks like Brian Bedford and the gang are getting ready to have their way. The RAA has even started a website. I will try to post a link later. Just the messenger. Okay got the website address. It is at - take flight tomorrow.org
Click to expand...

Who exactly at the FAA is saying this?
 
mshunter said:
Appearances can be deceiving. It's not. When every contract that has been up for negotiation (minus one IIRC) has had concessions, it's not. The whole FFD model is broken. And the whipsaw will continue, so those that negotiate the contract with mainline can keep their cushy salary and jobs, at the cost of those below them. I'll believe it's happening when FO pay actually changes to a livable wage.
Click to expand...

I've got to stop reading these depressing threads right before I'm about to study for the day.
 
mshunter said:
Appearances can be deceiving. It's not. When every contract that has been up for negotiation (minus one IIRC) has had concessions, it's not. The whole FFD model is broken. And the whipsaw will continue, so those that negotiate the contract with mainline can keep their cushy salary and jobs, at the cost of those below them. I'll believe it's happening when FO pay actually changes to a livable wage.
Click to expand...

Which is kind of what I was getting at. The FFD model is done. Changing pilot pay won't do a thing to change that. In fact raising pilot pay will only hasten the end of the FFD model. So yes by all means raise it and we'll all benefit long term.

Pretty clear folks...lots of healthy legacy airlines right now looking to expand and a bunch of regionals that aren't far economically from becoming part of airline history. The contracts have no margin in them and why would they? If pilots keep failing to fill classes and legacies hire off the top, something has to give. No one said it was going to happen overnight. No raise at the regional level that doesn't result in said company's demise is going to move the needle enough to make a difference.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top