Whacker77

I guess it's a matter of interpretation, but I don't read the bill as saying after implementation any new entrant must have an ATP certificate. In fact, I think the current wording leaves that question unanswered.

The bill does state that after implementation all current members will have three years to obtain the certificate. As I read it though, there appears to be a gap of three years that would allow new entrants to be hired without an ATP as long as an ATP is obtained by the end of the three year period.

I think after the three year period is over, then all applicants would need an ATP. From the date of passge until three years later, airlines would have some flexibility.

Whacker77

In the short run, I agree with you, but we hold a minority view. For a time, I think this move COULD cause an artificial pilot shortage. The good news is all those considering flying a career and just starting their training will now know what is expected. Those who got in when hiring times were good have been expo factoed in a way. Given the current economic climate, it remains to be seen how many stick it out. That's where I think the short term shortage may develop. But I acknowledge I'm very much in the minority.

Engineer Pilot

This is how I read it, too. "Prospective pilots"... potentially meaning whether you are currently employed, were employed, or never employed.

If this is true then I would see things getting better for those entering the industry in the next couple years with entry being more difficult after 3 years from the bill passage, economy recovering, and pilot retirements coming.

Splanky

Less an artificial shortage and more an actual shortage. If the career was more attractive there would have been enough starts in a time period that 1,500 hour pilots would be available for any need. Just as raising to 65 created an actual surplus, not an artificial one. But the 65 thing only pushed things back, it won't have the long-term effect the airlines hoped for.

121PyLut

Don't know if I missed it, but (and I know this would've been next to impossible) I thought this bill was also supposed to address pay...did I miss that somewhere?

steak pilot

The issue of pay should be left to the contracts that we all have, if you're not happy with the pay 1) dont vote for the cantract. 2) When the next one comes around, vote for higher pay. It shouldnt be the governments resposibility to see that we get equil/ fair pay, it's up to us and collective barganing.

Also, if you are a furloghee it should be up to the company to get you that ATP when you get called back. A pilot on the street probably dosent have enough disposable income to rent a twin for the checkride let alone get to those ATP mins.

Call your Senators and Congress people tell them your ideas.

own nav

If you think this bill is about raising regional pay, think again. IMHO, it's more about getting major airlines to reduce outsourcing. Why do you think it was so important to include the part about making it clear to the customer when the flight was being flown by a regional partner.

Many of the people who flew on Colgan 3407 thought they were buying a ticket for an actual Continental mainline flight. Pretty reasonable, considering the size of Buffalo, but, in the end, they got a regional partner.

If there are routes that are flown by both mainline and regional partners, and it's completely transparent to customers, you better believe they're going to flock to the mainline flights.

Also, if we're talking pilot shortage, remember what airlines looked like before 2001. Regionals didn't always constitute half of flying in this country. It wasn't until this decade that regionals really started flying between larger cities served by mainline aircraft.

In the event of a pilot shortage, this trend will likely reverse. As regional airlines have a hard time hiring, and government doesn't have another (age 65) quick fix, regionals will have to start cancelling flights, and the solution will be for mainline carriers to reclaim routes. Every time you put in a 737, you replace 2 or 3 RJs, and there you have it, pilot shortage solved.

The customer will complain that they have less departure times to chose from, but they'll complain less about that than having their ticket price go up.

StrikeTime

I agree with you only if they get rid of the RLA. Otherwise, if were restricted by the government, we should at least get some help from them on setting the minimum wage for our career.

If you think we will see higher pay with the RLA in place, that is a dream that will never take place.

Nevets

Sounds good to me!

STILL GROUNDED

no offense but Where did you get that idea? Congress is never going to set a pay rate. That would go against everything big companies pay lobbyist for.