Pilot Shortage Spurs Debate on Certification Standards
Jeff Edwards September 01, 2015
First Officer of a modern commercial airplane studying approach charts for destination
Airline industry lobbyists are urging Congress to reduce some FAA-mandated requirements for new pilots in the face of a dwindling talent pool of qualified aviators.
Regional carriers in the U.S. say that Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rules requiring new pilots to complete 1,500 hours of flight time before becoming eligible to fly commercially has resulted in too few qualified pilots to staff regional and commuter flights across the country. USA Today reports that the regional airlines that fly more than half of the passengers daily in the U.S. are pressuring members of Congress to reduce the flight time requirements when FAA legislation is reauthorized this Fall.
The increased flight hour requirements were put in place following the deadly crash of Colgan Air Flight 3407 in February of 2009. An inexperienced crew was blamed for the air disaster in the midst of a heavy snowstorm near Buffalo. The airlines blame the steeped up regulations requiring even copilots to complete 1,500 hours of flight time before becoming eligible to fly commercial flights for a shortage of trained pilots to hire.
Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon says the airlines are playing hardball, warning congressmen that flights in their districts might be reduced or discontinued if the flight hour requirements are not repealed. “They’ve a number of my colleagues in a panic,” DeFazio said. “We’re going to have to fight to keep that.”
Not everyone is onboard with a return to the less stringent regulations. Scott Maurer, who lost his daughter in the Colgan Air crash that sparked the increased experience requirements for new pilots, says he will be vigilant in opposing any rollback of rules that might protect others from sharing his daughter’s fate.
“Our antenna’s up,” said Maurer. “You’ve got to keep watching — there are so many snakes in the grass.”
The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) claims that the airlines are disingenuous in blaming onerous regulation for their inability to find new pilots. ALPA insists that the airlines would have little trouble finding qualified flight deck officers if they were willing to pay “livable wages.”
[Photo: iStock]
Airline pay is very low for starting pilots, and every aspiring pilot who lays down tens of thousands of dollars knows this unless they have no basic research skills into their career path (in which case maybe they shouldn't be a pilot in the first place). Yet, many pursue the path. I started my training in 1994. At the time, the prospects for being hired by an airline in the subsequent years was very likely due to huge growth, but the starting pay still sucked. Nothing's changed except that now, more aspiring pilots are being turned off to the career path knowing that they won't get the airline job until they get their ATP certification after attaining at least 1500 hours. This will have a domino effect as the seniors mandatorily retire at age 65 and the pilots from the regionals move their way up to bigger metal. Question: Why aren't airlines pushing congress to simply raise the mandatory 65 year old retirement rule as long as the pilot's 6 month medical exams continue to check out good (yes, they recently raised it from 60 to 65) Answer: Because they will have to keep paying those veteran, well experienced pilots more $$$ than hiring a 250-300 hour pilot as a first officer with only a Commercial rating. He/she will take another 12-15 months to reach ATP level, and still have a good bit of time to go before becoming 'senior' enough to get a left seat position when the money is a little bit better.
This rule was not created by the FAA. This was implemented via Congress enacting a new law after the Colgan Air accident in Buffalo. Don't blame the FAA. Blame your elected officials. This was not the FAA's choice.
Echoing what BearX220 said......nothing such thing as a pilot shortage. I have been hearing about the impending pilot shortage for about 30 yrs now. Its always just around the corner. Its more about the commuters (regional airlines) keeping a low cost work force that they have become accustomed too.
Good comment Bear X220. You do NOT reduce flight hours and the experience it brings because you have an issue with recruiting pilots. This is the accountant speaking. The industry knows that it is heading for a shortage of pilots as a large demographic group are due to retire. It is a simple issue of supply and demand; pay their pilots the correct rate and the shortage will disappear.
This article perpetuates one of the stupidest tropes in coverage of US commercial aviation. There is no "pilot shortage." There are thousands of well-qualified, well-trained pilots. There is a shortage of professional pilots who, having dropped close to six figures on their training, are willing to go to work for less money than they'd make waiting tables at Olive Garden. The problem is not a "pilot shortage" or the 1500 hour requirement but the airlines' refusal to raise compensation to market levels. They would apparently rather trim their schedules and park planes than pay these guys another $10k-$15k per year.