Did we reach the next phase of the pilot shortage?

[photofly]

...

[digits_]

If 1% of the pilot population at any given time are instructors, and therefore it's not worth Jazz hiring them away - then that same 1% is too few to fill the gaping voids at your flight schools.

In the hypothetical situation as discussed:
It's not worth it to Jazz to double the salary of ALL their junior pilots to get a few extra pilots.
It's worth it for flight schools to increase the salary of ALL their pilots because they'll loose them all in the next 6 months if they don't.

You can't mandate what salary should be "good enough" for people. The dismal command economy experiment that was called the Soviet Union proved that.

I'm not mandating anything. I am estimating and trying to predict what would happen in hyothetical situations. Just like you've been doing here.

[photofly]

It's worth it for flight schools to increase the salary of ALL their pilots because they'll loose them all...

Lose, not loose. And no they won't lose them all. Not the ones that only have three hundred hours, and not the ones with the wooden leg and that personal hygiene problem I promised never to talk about.

And, the flight school can pay some instructors more - the more senior ones - rather more easily than Jazz can, so they don't need to double the pay of every instructor.

Overall, It's not an all-or-nothing situation.

As far as who should do what, there are two things, both of which need government support:

1. reduced regulation
2. single pilot transport operations

Otherwise it's fewer airline flights and higher ticket prices. You can't have it all, you know.

[Squaretail]

If the government were to do anything else, it would also be that it needs to encourage more kids to get into aviation, and make the entrance to it easier. From what I've seen you can get all the funding in the world to chase a career as a dancer, play the violin, or add to the growing list of yoga instructors, but heaven forbid if you want to become a pilot. It was difficult when I started a long time ago, and its only gotten worse. From what I've seen enrollments into pilot programs have been steadily declining from domestic students, there were some articles in AOPA regarding it recently as I recall, and last time I saw any licensing stats here bore it out, especially for instructor rating and CPL applications.

For starters when it comes to regulations, it certainly needs to be easier to retain an instructor rating. Up the validity lengths, and make it so its easier to get a refresher course done. Might get more people of the "experienced" crowd to stay in the game.

But that's just small fry. The main problem is that there is a bottleneck forming with training pilots, but people ignore some of the main points about it. First, increase in pay won't keep instructors. Instructing has several problems as a career. It has no growth, one can't ignore the pull of big iron for pilots. I would speculate that even if you were paying instructors $125/hr, Jazz could poach them at $100/hr. For instructors after all, going up the rank has a top - becoming a class 1 - and most of the advancement means less time flying and more time on the ground. Not what most people want to do as pilots. At any school of course, that advancement may be shorter if there are already some full time guys doing all the advanced training or management. There's also just the problem that mass production flight training just plain sucks to do. Somewhat soul crushing.

[gtanorth]

If 1% of the pilot population at any given time are instructors, and therefore it's not worth Jazz hiring them away - then that same 1% is too few to fill the gaping voids at your flight schools.

In the hypothetical situation as discussed:
It's not worth it to Jazz to double the salary of ALL their junior pilots to get a few extra pilots.
It's worth it for flight schools to increase the salary of ALL their pilots because they'll loose them all in the next 6 months if they don't.

You can't mandate what salary should be "good enough" for people. The dismal command economy experiment that was called the Soviet Union proved that.

I'm not mandating anything. I am estimating and trying to predict what would happen in hyothetical situations. Just like you've been doing here.

How much would you need to get paid to be an instructor and not fly a 787 at some point of normal progression if you go to AC or WJ.... 100K a year, 150K, 200K

[digits_]

How much would you need to get paid to be an instructor and not fly a 787 at some point of normal progression if you go to AC or WJ.... 100K a year, 150K, 200K

You're asking the wrong question. If you have your eyes set on a 787, nothing will ever be enough untill you are flying that 787. However, after flying in the middle of the night, flying like a zombie during medevac ops and preferring not to move and start over yet again, I'd be happy with 100k/year to work 4 x 9 hour days per week with at least one weekend day off, 3 weeks of vacation and all flying expenses paid (medical, flight tests etc). I'd start considering it for 75k/year.

You don't have to pay a premium to attract people, you only have to pay enough for people who want to instruct to be able to stay.

The other caveat is, even if you find a job like that now, as soon as things are slowing down again, you'd probably be the first one out the door again, so long term success is not guaranteed...

[Zaibatsu]

That’s what the colleges have done. Typically around $80-$100k salary (vs hours) for instructors that have industry experience. Lots of takers too since it doesn’t require extensive travel. I considered it, but currently have a good schedule with equivalent pay.

[momnosam7]

That’s what the colleges have done. Typically around $80-$100k salary (vs hours) for instructors that have industry experience. Lots of takers too since it doesn’t require extensive travel. I considered it, but currently have a good schedule with equivalent pay.

The colleges are partially funded by provincial and federal govt. Not a good comparison.