Write your congressman...

comstsa

comstsa

Well-Known Member
The interest groups are hard at it folks, trying to lobby congress to change the 1500 hr rule and it's going to get worse. Regardless of how you feel about hours and experience requirements, there's no doubt that it has had a positive impact on compensation. The powers at work would love to start putting 250 hr guys in the right seat and pay them $19,000/yr again and have them work at the regionals for 10 years. CEOs are given hearings and are making their argument directly to congress in person. The best we can do is call and write in.
 
comstsa said:
The interest groups are hard at it folks, trying to lobby congress to change the 1500 hr rule and it's going to get worse. Regardless of how you feel about hours and experience requirements, there's no doubt that it has had a positive impact on compensation. The powers at work would love to start putting 250 hr guys in the right seat and pay them $19,000/yr again and have them work at the regionals for 10 years. CEOs are given hearings and are making their argument directly to congress in person. The best we can do is call and write in.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw the little temper tantrum that 'ole Chip had. FU Chip. You have a problem with staffing because you treat your alter ego airline like chit. You aren't mainline trying to whip a regional into shape. You're a regional, trying to whip another regional into shape, and it bit you in the ass.
 
A lot of small and mid-sized markets have seen their capacity slashed as a result of this rule. I agree with it as a passenger and fellow (private) pilot. As an airport leader, though, it's not doing our industry any favors.
 
comstsa said:
The interest groups are hard at it folks, trying to lobby congress to change the 1500 hr rule and it's going to get worse. Regardless of how you feel about hours and experience requirements, there's no doubt that it has had a positive impact on compensation. The powers at work would love to start putting 250 hr guys in the right seat and pay them $19,000/yr again and have them work at the regionals for 10 years. CEOs are given hearings and are making their argument directly to congress in person. The best we can do is call and write in.
Click to expand...

I have to wonder if repealing the 1500 hr rule would change staffing levels at the regionals in a positive way? Or it would go the opposite way. In the short term I think that it might get an immediate small bounce, from those short-sided individuals that have "get there itis", that don't want to instruct. But if salaries went back to $19k, I think that it would have a detrimental effect on hiring long term. As that's one of the main reasons for the so called shortage. The interest drastically dropped in aviation, because no one wanted $100k in debt, for a $19k starting salary. Employment numbers at the regionals are just starting to pick up again, with the liveable wages being paid out. Hopefully regional CEO's won't be so short-sided, for the one bird in the hand, and the two in the bush.

Awww... who am I kidding. Write your Congressmen folks.
 
If there were some other way to get regionals to pay guys what their experience and responsibilities diserve than I'm all for it (although I do think 250hrs is a bit low). Unfortunately, they're not going to do it out of the kindness of their hearts and the 1500 hr rule has had an indirect effect on resolving a messed up system that the airlines created in the first place.
 
I absolutely loved the flying I did for the airlines, but ultimately it was the pay that forced me out. Now I have a nice schedule, a good pay and QoL, I see my family everyday. I miss flying but I don't miss being treated like a red-headed step child. If I had the opportunity I would give the largest of FUs to CC, what a piece of crap
 
If this rule got over turned, it would mean a LOT of would-be CFIs and existing CFIs who jumped into the instructional gig just to build time, would jump to the regional airlines overnight.

That said, if the pay decreased commensurate with the low required hours for hire, that could indeed reduce the number of pilot starts for the career. We would be back to 2009 before this all started.

Definitely write your congress representatives to keep the 1500 hour rule. It has done more good than bad for pilots.
 
Flying Ninja said:
That said, if the pay decreased commensurate with the low required hours for hire, that could indeed reduce the number of pilot starts for the career. We would be back to 2009 before this all started.
Click to expand...


Exactly. I'm 30 years old making 6 figures and fly for fun. But with the increase in wages and positive long term outlook I've considered the CFI route to build the hours faster to 1500.

If pay went back down to what it was, no thanks.

So not ALL time builders out there are in favor of the lower mins. Many certainly are though.
 
Murdoughnut said:
A lot of small and mid-sized markets have seen their capacity slashed as a result of this rule. I agree with it as a passenger and fellow (private) pilot. As an airport leader, though, it's not doing our industry any favors.
Click to expand...

What you are describing is called capitalism, comrade. While I stand in solidarity with you against the imperialist pig-dogs, it is wise to understand their system while we work to overthrow their corrupt economic system that works to enslave the working class. But we cannot work so quickly as to arouse suspicion.

для России-матушки
 
Meh...if the pay goes down you have to blame the appropriate representative group, NOT the airline management!!!
 
Last I checked the CFIs were in high demand and the pay still sucks, because it is still a time building job.
I'm more worried about the long term implications of the sizeable share of CFIs being forced into the job and the end product pilot that comes out of it after three or four iterations.
Don't get me wrong, most junior CFIs I know do try to do their best at least initially, but they often lack the fundamental understanding themselves, because their CFI has been CFIing for over two years and wanted to move on asap.
Yes, if there was no pay bump in the airlines I wouldn't be considering that career still. I'd still be happy with 120 hrs of corporate contracts a year, another 100 hours on my own plane and making a living elsewhere.
But I personally don't have a clean cut solution to the problem. Not that I put any serious thought into it, but it's not within my area of expertise either.
Hence not writing anything to the congressman.
 
BigZ said:
but it's not within my area of expertise either.
Click to expand...

Before 1500 hr rule $19000/yr
After 1500 hr rule up to $60000/ yr
That's all the expertise I need brotha
Hence, I'm writing my congressman and probably your congressman too
 
Last edited:
comstsa said:
Before 1500 hr rule $19000/hr
After 1500 hr rule up to $60000/ yr
That's all the expertise I need brotha
Hence, I'm writing my congressman and probably your congressman too
Click to expand...

Mkay. Just plz don't tell him I endorse what you said, because to me that's insufficient data for analysis.
Check out the new hires five years from now and please tell us how they are.
 
If the 1500 hour rule gets changed. I can see regionals creating a lower pay scale for those that are hired sub 1500 and with a R-ATP. You know it would work, telling a fresh commercial pilot they can fly a shiny jet but at a lower pay rate until they reach 1500. I hope that doesn't happen, but the industry is crazy and people have flown for 15-20k a year before. Most sub 750 hour pilots would if that means getting to the next level.
 
BigZ said:
Mkay. Just plz don't tell him I endorse what you said, because to me that's insufficient data for analysis.
Check out the new hires five years from now and please tell us how they are.
Click to expand...

Nope, I'm telling him that you like it and want even more restrictions and requirements
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top