Westjet hiring of sunwing cadets

[Blackdog0301]

When a captain pulls up their schedule, they will immediately see that they only have a CPL. You don't need to ask them or interview them. You'll already know. Now you have to decide... Which leg do you let them fly? Do you let them have the YYZ-YYC leg where the weather is good, daylight, long runways? Or do you let them fly the YYC-PSP leg with gusty winds and a turbulent approach, an airport they've never flown into, where ATC always keeps you high, and then slamdunks you onto a visual approach? It doesn't take a genius to decide.

I'm sorry, but you don't have the experience as a sub-1500 hour pilot to complain about when the captain let's you fly or doesn't let you fly. You've got a job. Enjoy it. And in your off time, study for your exams, write them, rent a 152,get your PIC and night cross country in, and get the friggin licence! If you don't like it and want to go your whole career with a CPL, go work somewhere that hires CPL pilots! Because you now have a job that no other CPL pilot in the country can get.

You are assuming that CPL means sub 1500. That might be true for some, but not for all.
Again, they are looking at 9 to 15 year upgrade times. There's no rush to get it. Just getting the license to please some captains or FOs that are somehow upset you got the job without is extremely bizarre.

Final thought on this: Sure! Go your whole career with that cute CPL of yours. But you're still going to go write those exams within 12 months and pass them.

[digits_]

I'm simply defending the use of these codes to identify a low time pilot the same way the codes are used to identify WestJet's Age Retricted pilots, new captain's with high minimums, initial FO's, etc. I'm also defending the captain's right to lengthen or shorten the leash of their FO's based on their experience level.

If you want a system to identify low experienced pilots, base it on time on type. By linking it to holding an ATPL (or ATPL written apparently?) which seems to be a touchy subject for some, you're turning it into a political tool.

Let's face it, captains that fly with new pilots are basically instructors whether they want to be or not. Can't judge them for not wanting to teach junior how to plant a 737 on the touchdown markers in a gusty crosswind on a short runway, but having to go missed as a result.

Mentoring junior pilots is a major part of a captain position. The majority of the pilots hired at WJ would qualify as junior pilots on a 737, whether they old an ATPL or not. If a captain is uncomfortable or unwilling to do that, I think the problem is the captain, not the FO. Even ATPL holders will have to land a 737 on the touchdown markers in a gusty crosswind on a short runway for the first time. That will most likely be done during line operations under the authority of a non-training captain.

Will writing the ATPLs give one the experience necessary to execute this maneuver?

Final thought on this: Sure! Go your whole career with that cute CPL of yours. But you're still going to go write those exams within 12 months and pass them.

Which shows again that it has nothing to do with safety but all with politics. Very sad.


On a more positive note, I'd say it seems like you guys had a pretty fair merger if the biggest issue seems to be that some FOs don't hold an ATPL...

[cdnavater]

I'm simply defending the use of these codes to identify a low time pilot the same way the codes are used to identify WestJet's Age Retricted pilots, new captain's with high minimums, initial FO's, etc. I'm also defending the captain's right to lengthen or shorten the leash of their FO's based on their experience level.

If you want a system to identify low experienced pilots, base it on time on type. By linking it to holding an ATPL (or ATPL written apparently?) which seems to be a touchy subject for some, you're turning it into a political tool.

Let's face it, captains that fly with new pilots are basically instructors whether they want to be or not. Can't judge them for not wanting to teach junior how to plant a 737 on the touchdown markers in a gusty crosswind on a short runway, but having to go missed as a result.

Mentoring junior pilots is a major part of a captain position. The majority of the pilots hired at WJ would qualify as junior pilots on a 737, whether they old an ATPL or not. If a captain is uncomfortable or unwilling to do that, I think the problem is the captain, not the FO. Even ATPL holders will have to land a 737 on the touchdown markers in a gusty crosswind on a short runway for the first time. That will most likely be done during line operations under the authority of a non-training captain.

Will writing the ATPLs give one the experience necessary to execute this maneuver?

Final thought on this: Sure! Go your whole career with that cute CPL of yours. But you're still going to go write those exams within 12 months and pass them.

Which shows again that it has nothing to do with safety but all with politics. Very sad.


On a more positive note, I'd say it seems like you guys had a pretty fair merger if the biggest issue seems to be that some FOs don't hold an ATPL...

Sorry, you are wrong!
The expectation is that a pilot off line indoc is qualified, with company restrictions in place, that is the checks and balance.
WJ has never had an experience problem, therefore nothing to fix in the AOM/SOPs before now. At Jazz, again my point of reference, we have these restrictions now but not always, they’ve slowly been introduced over the years based on SMS reports, when I started I was not restricted and landed many times at limits, I had several thousand hours when I started. This is not the current reality, half of the ATPL holders got their time in the circuit flying a 172 to flight school restricted limits.
Line trainers have to go through training specific to bringing pilots up to line standards, including “threat SIM” which is four hours of torture, TPs making the kind of mistakes that new hires make and you trying not to die because of it, I don’t do line indoc because I don’t fly enough to have to worry about that crap. Without some type of restrictions with time on type in your ops manual, the Captains are left to decide how much to trust the new pilots and as we are aware of how fast things can fall apart, 200’ above the runway is not where you want to find out!
I’d be completely surprised if the CP is not already modifying the current AOM to have some well defined restrictions in place!

[Blackdog0301]

I'm simply defending the use of these codes to identify a low time pilot the same way the codes are used to identify WestJet's Age Retricted pilots, new captain's with high minimums, initial FO's, etc. I'm also defending the captain's right to lengthen or shorten the leash of their FO's based on their experience level.

If you want a system to identify low experienced pilots, base it on time on type. By linking it to holding an ATPL (or ATPL written apparently?) which seems to be a touchy subject for some, you're turning it into a political tool.

Yes, maybe I am a tad jealous that more than a hundred pilots now have a job at Canada's second largest airline when they don't meet their hiring minimums. Its not their doing. I'm happy for them. However, Sunwing was equipped to manage these low time pilots. Dare I say they were coddled? At WestJet, this is a new experience. You seem to have a hard time understanding why things are being done the way they are. At the end of the day, if a captain looks at an FO and sees they're flying with someone who has less experience than anyone else he's flown with in the last 20 years, and decides to not let them fly a leg or two, so what? Its their ship.

I won't drag this topic on any further. I do truly hope that Sunwing pilots enjoy their time at WestJet. It's a different operation and there's going to be a feeling out process over the next few months for the company, the pilots, the FA's. I hope everyone can remain professional and safe despite the differences in opinion.

[Tbayer2021]

I love how these guys would feel safer with a 2000 hour kid that just started flying a 737 three months prior just because they have an ATPL. Meanwhile their previous job was flying something below 10,000 pounds. Over a cadet that has been flying it for 3 years but hasn't quite reached 1500 yet.

I wonder what happened with those aces that almost went for a swim in SXM. That was pre merger so the FO definitely had their ATPL.

[cdnavater]

I love how these guys would feel safer with a 2000 hour kid that just started flying a 737 three months prior just because they have an ATPL. Meanwhile their previous job was flying something below 10,000 pounds. Over a cadet that has been flying it for 3 years but hasn't quite reached 1500 yet.

I wonder what happened with those aces that almost went for a swim in SXM. That was pre merger so the FO definitely had their ATPL.

Question for you, are ALL of the cadets sitting there with three years or have you hired a bunch this year and last year who have much less experience?

[Blackdog0301]

I wonder what happened with those aces that almost went for a swim in SXM. That was pre merger so the FO definitely had their ATPL.

So did the pilots that overran the runway at Kitchener.

A pilot that has 1600 hours and a Group 1 CPL is no better a pilot than a 1600 ATPL. So why do we even have an ATPL?

Easy... It proves that a pilot has a base amount of experience and knowledge... That base amount being a hiring minimum. A CPL does not.

[digits_]

I'm simply defending the use of these codes to identify a low time pilot the same way the codes are used to identify WestJet's Age Retricted pilots, new captain's with high minimums, initial FO's, etc. I'm also defending the captain's right to lengthen or shorten the leash of their FO's based on their experience level.

If you want a system to identify low experienced pilots, base it on time on type. By linking it to holding an ATPL (or ATPL written apparently?) which seems to be a touchy subject for some, you're turning it into a political tool.

Let's face it, captains that fly with new pilots are basically instructors whether they want to be or not. Can't judge them for not wanting to teach junior how to plant a 737 on the touchdown markers in a gusty crosswind on a short runway, but having to go missed as a result.

Mentoring junior pilots is a major part of a captain position. The majority of the pilots hired at WJ would qualify as junior pilots on a 737, whether they old an ATPL or not. If a captain is uncomfortable or unwilling to do that, I think the problem is the captain, not the FO. Even ATPL holders will have to land a 737 on the touchdown markers in a gusty crosswind on a short runway for the first time. That will most likely be done during line operations under the authority of a non-training captain.

Will writing the ATPLs give one the experience necessary to execute this maneuver?

Final thought on this: Sure! Go your whole career with that cute CPL of yours. But you're still going to go write those exams within 12 months and pass them.

Which shows again that it has nothing to do with safety but all with politics. Very sad.


On a more positive note, I'd say it seems like you guys had a pretty fair merger if the biggest issue seems to be that some FOs don't hold an ATPL...

Sorry, you are wrong!
The expectation is that a pilot off line indoc is qualified, with company restrictions in place, that is the checks and balance.
WJ has never had an experience problem, therefore nothing to fix in the AOM/SOPs before now. At Jazz, again my point of reference, we have these restrictions now but not always, they’ve slowly been introduced over the years based on SMS reports, when I started I was not restricted and landed many times at limits, I had several thousand hours when I started. This is not the current reality, half of the ATPL holders got their time in the circuit flying a 172 to flight school restricted limits.
Line trainers have to go through training specific to bringing pilots up to line standards, including “threat SIM” which is four hours of torture, TPs making the kind of mistakes that new hires make and you trying not to die because of it, I don’t do line indoc because I don’t fly enough to have to worry about that crap. Without some type of restrictions with time on type in your ops manual, the Captains are left to decide how much to trust the new pilots and as we are aware of how fast things can fall apart,

Where am I wrong? The CPL holders have to pass the same line indoc that the ATPL holders passed. Doesn't matter what your initial experience is, you're still flying a new type and thus some mentoring past line indoc will take place. Not sure if it's in the COM, but it's definitely in most (all?) job descriptions posted out there. I don't think you have the option to say you don't want to deal with mentoring your FOs. Note that mentoring is completely different than initial line indoc training.

Company restrictions are becoming the norm unfortunately. While I personally don't think its' a good idea, I do understand the reasoning behind it, and they somewhat make sense. However, using the 'do you hold an ATPL/ have you written your ATPL' seems completely irrelevant.

200’ above the runway is not where you want to find out!
I’d be completely surprised if the CP is not already modifying the current AOM to have some well defined restrictions in place!

But can't that happen any flight? Are you, as a captain, not required to look for that every flight? If you implicitly assume that [insert_experience_level_here] is an experience level that you can trust, doesn't that make things less safe as you'll be less inclined to intervene?

Perhaps lower experienced pilots will cause you to intervene at a higher rate, but you still should/must monitor every approach. The whole CRM system is built around 2 sets of eyes in the cockpit, with checks and balances and the authority of the captain to intervene when necessary. It doesn't have a memory. It focuses on what's happening at *that* moment.



I have a feeling that if we require captains to have flight instructor experience, all these perceived problems would just go away

[Tbayer2021]

I love how these guys would feel safer with a 2000 hour kid that just started flying a 737 three months prior just because they have an ATPL. Meanwhile their previous job was flying something below 10,000 pounds. Over a cadet that has been flying it for 3 years but hasn't quite reached 1500 yet.

I wonder what happened with those aces that almost went for a swim in SXM. That was pre merger so the FO definitely had their ATPL.

Question for you, are ALL of the cadets sitting there with three years or have you hired a bunch this year and last year who have much less experience?

I'm neither at SW or WJ. While I have no doubt some cadets don't have much experience. My point was more directed at the blanket statement accusing cadets of being essentially useless seat warmers. Either way, I'm sure most will feel enough pressure to write their AA's asap. But don't kid yourselves, the company can't dismiss them if the don't. Not only are they fully qualified for the seat they hold, but having an ATPL wasn't part of the merger conditions.

All its going to do is raise the blood pressure of some boomer that had to tough it out up north for 10+ years only have to groom the jet for many more when they finally made it to the big leagues. "How dare this kid have the same job at 22?!?!?" - "It should have been me spending 3 months deployed in Prague. Not doing YYZ-YEG red-eyes for years!"

[Blackdog0301]

I love how these guys would feel safer with a 2000 hour kid that just started flying a 737 three months prior just because they have an ATPL. Meanwhile their previous job was flying something below 10,000 pounds. Over a cadet that has been flying it for 3 years but hasn't quite reached 1500 yet.

I wonder what happened with those aces that almost went for a swim in SXM. That was pre merger so the FO definitely had their ATPL.

Question for you, are ALL of the cadets sitting there with three years or have you hired a bunch this year and last year who have much less experience?

Either way, I'm sure most will feel enough pressure to write their AA's asap. But don't kid yourselves, the company can't dismiss them if the don't. Not only are they fully qualified for the seat they hold, but having an ATPL wasn't part of the merger conditions.

Maybe not, but they can remove them from the line until they complete it the same way you can be removed if you don't do your online courses.

Edit: it being the exams, not acquiring the license itself.

[Tbayer2021]

Question for you, are ALL of the cadets sitting there with three years or have you hired a bunch this year and last year who have much less experience?

Either way, I'm sure most will feel enough pressure to write their AA's asap. But don't kid yourselves, the company can't dismiss them if the don't. Not only are they fully qualified for the seat they hold, but having an ATPL wasn't part of the merger conditions.

Maybe not, but they can remove them from the line until they complete it the same way you can be removed if you don't do your online courses.

Edit: it being the exams, not acquiring the license itself.

If telling yourself the company will remove them from the flight line for something not required of them helps you sleep at night. Go for it.

[Blackdog0301]

Either way, I'm sure most will feel enough pressure to write their AA's asap. But don't kid yourselves, the company can't dismiss them if the don't. Not only are they fully qualified for the seat they hold, but having an ATPL wasn't part of the merger conditions.

Maybe not, but they can remove them from the line until they complete it the same way you can be removed if you don't do your online courses.

Edit: it being the exams, not acquiring the license itself.

If telling yourself the company will remove them from the flight line for something not required of them helps you sleep at night. Go for it.

So you'd call their bluff, and continue on your merry way expecting no consequences in 12 months? That's funny!

Straight from the memo: "Non-ATPL pilots will be required to complete ATPL exams (SAMRA/SAMRON) within 12 months of their WestJet Report Date."

Tbayer: lol, they won't do anything.

[Tbayer2021]

Maybe not, but they can remove them from the line until they complete it the same way you can be removed if you don't do your online courses.

Edit: it being the exams, not acquiring the license itself.

If telling yourself the company will remove them from the flight line for something not required of them helps you sleep at night. Go for it.

So you'd call their bluff, and continue on your merry way expecting no consequences in 12 months? That's funny!

Straight from the memo: "Non-ATPL pilots will be required to complete ATPL exams (SAMRA/SAMRON) within 12 months of their WestJet Report Date."

Tbayer: lol, they won't do anything.

Like I said before, most and possibly all will feel enough pressure to get it done. But I guess you're not familiar with the fact that not all company policies and even laws will stand up to a legal challenge. Of course this requires someone to actually challenge it and I'd agree the chance of that happening are low. Have you had your head stuck in the sand since you started your working life not have have read of the countless cases of companies being taken to court for illegal policies and the company actually loses?

Hell, even the CRA was taken to court a few years ago for trying to tell a business owner how to conduct his business and they lost.

But why am i arguing with you. I almost forgot that most boomers are hardcore bootlickers.

[rudder]

First point - SWG pilots were not ‘hired’ by WJ. There is no pre-employment screening in a merger.

Second point - time on 705 type is more relevant to a 705 operation than time flown on 703/704.

Third point - the largest deficiency is not operator licensing limitations but TC experience limitations. A commercial pilot with 1000 hours as SIC on a 737 has more valuable experience towards an ATPL than a 1500 hour ATPL flight instructor with a GRP1 IFR and zero Part 705 experience. The licensing regulations should be revisited reflecting the fact that there are many direct entry 705 first officers.

Having said all of that, the recent CRJ900 accident in YYZ is indicative of the risks associated with minimum currency requirements (sectors). They should be increased. In particular, low experience pilots should be ‘forced to fly’ as should pilots whose primary duties are not line flying.

[digits_]

Maybe not, but they can remove them from the line until they complete it the same way you can be removed if you don't do your online courses.

Edit: it being the exams, not acquiring the license itself.

If telling yourself the company will remove them from the flight line for something not required of them helps you sleep at night. Go for it.

So you'd call their bluff, and continue on your merry way expecting no consequences in 12 months? That's funny!

Straight from the memo: "Non-ATPL pilots will be required to complete ATPL exams (SAMRA/SAMRON) within 12 months of their WestJet Report Date."

Tbayer: lol, they won't do anything.

A company can not just change requirements willy nilly.

If the memo had said that all non university degree holders would need to get a degree in the next 3 years, do you think that would hold up in court?
There's extra cost and time involved for which the company is not compensating you. It's on a different scale, but the principle is the same. And there's the added complexity of the union which may or may not agree to the extra conditions.

But it's not a clear cut case of 'they'll get fired if they don't get their ATPL written haha!'.
There's also a chance, be it a slim one, that people may not pass the first time around, or the second one. And then miss the deadline that way. I highly doubt they'll be fired. And then you'll get to fly with CPL holders that failed the ATPL written exams. Won't that be fun
And the scary part: you won't even know!

[Bede]

I've already flown with some captains who have told me that if their FO is flying around with a CPL, then they will not allow them to fly under various circumstances... Night, crosswinds, busy airports, short runways, etc. Probably a tad extreme, yes.

What happens if the CPL pilot is sharper than the captain?

When I was an FO, I was sharper than some captains. I'm a captain now and I have some FO's that are sharper than I am. I'm fully prepared for flying with some 26 year old whiz kid who's better at this gig than I am. It's happened before and it will happen again.

From the training guys I know, I've been told that the ex-cadets (SWG doesn't have any more cadets-that's an extended line indoc thing-they're fully qualified CPL holders now) are doing better in the sim than the experienced pilots.

[Blackdog0301]

If telling yourself the company will remove them from the flight line for something not required of them helps you sleep at night. Go for it.

So you'd call their bluff, and continue on your merry way expecting no consequences in 12 months? That's funny!

Straight from the memo: "Non-ATPL pilots will be required to complete ATPL exams (SAMRA/SAMRON) within 12 months of their WestJet Report Date."

Tbayer: lol, they won't do anything.

Like I said before, most and possibly all will feel enough pressure to get it done. But I guess you're not familiar with the fact that not all company policies and even laws will stand up to a legal challenge. Of course this requires someone to actually challenge it and I'd agree the chance of that happening are low. Have you had your head stuck in the sand since you started your working life not have have read of the countless cases of companies being taken to court for illegal policies and the company actually loses?

Hell, even the CRA was taken to court a few years ago for trying to tell a business owner how to conduct his business and they lost.

But why am i arguing with you. I almost forgot that most boomers are hardcore bootlickers.

You're right. There'd be a case to be made if someone actually challenged the company's requirement on this. I just don't get why a pilot would knowingly put off with something like that for so long, and be willing to risk punitive measures. The only thing I can think of is either they are lazy, or plan on being a bum their whole career in the right seat. Both of which are big red flags. Time will tell.

I can agree that one probably can not be fired. Removed from the line? Maybe! But is that risk really worth not writing your exams for? Do you really want that "I'm only a CPL holder" code next to your name for all Pilots and FA's to see? Yes, even the FA's can see those codes when viewing their paired crew.

Anyways, this is all speculative and a matter of opinions. We will see what the end result will be.

[digits_]

I just don't get why a pilot would knowingly put off with something like that for so long, and be willing to risk punitive measures. The only thing I can think of is either they are lazy, or plan on being a bum their whole career in the right seat. Both of which are big red flags. Time will tell.

Then think harder. Full time working, young family, kids crying all night. Sure, it's the perfect moment now to study for our ATPL written which I won't need for 9 years but otherwise Blackdog030 will get upset...

Working 2 or 3 jobs to pay off debt and afford a house at my base. Barely holding on. Let's study now for something I won't need for 9 years.


Generally one gets a license to advance one's career. Not to alleviate perceived slights of coworkers.

I can agree that one probably can not be fired. Removed from the line? Maybe! But is that risk really worth not writing your exams for? Do you really want that "I'm only a CPL holder" code next to your name for all Pilots and FA's to see? Yes, even the FA's can see those codes when viewing their paired crew.

Even with the ATPL written they will be 'only a CPL holder'. But nobody will know. That's what it's all about I suppose?


You needed an ATPL to get hired. Some colleagues didn't. Get over it. Stop trying to justify your envy. You are the problem, your colleagues are not.

[Blackdog0301]

You needed an ATPL to get hired. Some colleagues didn't. Get over it. Stop trying to justify your envy. You are the problem, your colleagues are not.

Envy? Not in the slightest! I already shared that I'm happy that our Sunwing colleagues are here with us. They make us stronger. What I speak is my opinion, but you seem to be easily offended that my opinion does not match yours. So for your safety and wellbeing, I will discontinue my engagement in this thread. I hope you find peace.

[digits_]

Envy? Not in the slightest! I already shared that I'm happy that our Sunwing colleagues are here with us.

You already stated you were jealous (which I think is the wrong word, you likely meant envious):

Yes, maybe I am a tad jealous that more than a hundred pilots now have a job at Canada's second largest airline when they don't meet their hiring minimums.

What I speak is my opinion, but you seem to be easily offended that my opinion does not match yours.

Nice try. You can hold any opinion you want. It's when you attempt to peer pressure and borderling threaten pilots into doing a pointless test to make you feel better, that you're crossing a line.

[Blackdog0301]

Envy? Not in the slightest! I already shared that I'm happy that our Sunwing colleagues are here with us.

You already stated you were jealous (which I think is the wrong word, you likely meant envious):

Yes, maybe I am a tad jealous that more than a hundred pilots now have a job at Canada's second largest airline when they don't meet their hiring minimums.

What I speak is my opinion, but you seem to be easily offended that my opinion does not match yours.

Nice try. You can hold any opinion you want. It's when you attempt to peer pressure and borderling threaten pilots into doing a pointless test to make you feel better, that you're crossing a line.

If you want to play word games, we can play word games. You clearly don't know the difference between being jealous and being envious. I already have an ATPL. I can't be envious of a pilot who has a CPL and works for the same company as I do with a lower seniority. I have more. I was correct the first time... I'm slightly jealous that pilots are coming to WestJet with less experience than I had.

Come on, digits! I thought you were smarter than that!

[digits_]

Envy? Not in the slightest! I already shared that I'm happy that our Sunwing colleagues are here with us.

You already stated you were jealous (which I think is the wrong word, you likely meant envious):

Yes, maybe I am a tad jealous that more than a hundred pilots now have a job at Canada's second largest airline when they don't meet their hiring minimums.

What I speak is my opinion, but you seem to be easily offended that my opinion does not match yours.

Nice try. You can hold any opinion you want. It's when you attempt to peer pressure and borderling threaten pilots into doing a pointless test to make you feel better, that you're crossing a line.

If you want to play word games, we can play word games. You clearly don't know the difference between being jealous and being envious. I already have an ATPL. I can't be envious of a pilot who has a CPL and works for the same company as I do with a lower seniority. I have more. I was correct the first time... I'm slightly jealous that pilots are coming to WestJet with less experience than I had.

Come on, digits! I thought you were smarter than that!

*sigh*

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/com ... 20jealousy.

You're envious they got hired without an ATPL while you needed it. You wanted that, you didn't get it.
Jealousy implies you are afraid you'll be losing what you have.

[Blackdog0301]

You already stated you were jealous (which I think is the wrong word, you likely meant envious):







Nice try. You can hold any opinion you want. It's when you attempt to peer pressure and borderling threaten pilots into doing a pointless test to make you feel better, that you're crossing a line.

If you want to play word games, we can play word games. You clearly don't know the difference between being jealous and being envious. I already have an ATPL. I can't be envious of a pilot who has a CPL and works for the same company as I do with a lower seniority. I have more. I was correct the first time... I'm slightly jealous that pilots are coming to WestJet with less experience than I had.

Come on, digits! I thought you were smarter than that!

*sigh*

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/com ... 20jealousy.

You're envious they got hired without an ATPL while you needed it. You wanted that, you didn't get it.
Jealousy implies you are afraid you'll be losing what you have.

Alright this is just comical now.

"Envy is when you want what someone else has"

I don't want it! I already have it and more! If I own a 2025 Civic, I can't be envious of someone who has a 2024 Civic. That's moving backwards! And so is being envious of someone coming to WestJet with a license lesser than what I have. Also, none of these low time Sunwing pilots were HIRED. They would never be hired with their qualifications. They got a free pass through merging, along with ex employees who were fired in the past.

I'm sorry, I'm stubborn just like you are. At this point, I'm just waiting for a moderator to lock this up.

[ant_321]

It’s going to be a non issue for most of the “cadets” anyway. Most of them wrote their ATPL exams as part of their college programs.

[sicamore]

In the US, you don’t fly a 705 equivalent aircraft without an ATPL, so those airline pilots are not dealing with this!
AC doesn’t hire without, not entirely sure about AT but we know Sunwing, Jazz, PAL, Encore and a couple smaller companies but that’s hardly 90% of the airline pilots!

I didn't realize the rest of the known world didn't have airline pilots