Company Morale

[RoAF-Mig21]

...PICUS is ridiculous by definition - you’re either PIC with all the responsibility that entails, or you’re not...

Agreed. I'll add to that:

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Some Canadian rules on ATPL licensing are irrelevant and downright stupid.

You can get your ATPL flying C172s in a circuit or to the practice area and just the bare minimum of multi and IFR flying.

A CRJ F/O, with 1500 hours on type, has a lot more experienced and is a lot more qualified to have his or her ATPLs than someone having flown mostly single engine pistons. The "A" in ATPL is for "Airline", not instructing, not sight seeing, not pipeline inspection, not weekend flying so you can impress that girl from Tinder.

What I would change is remove the minimum 250 hrs PIC / 100 hrs PICUS (which is useless anyways, especially when it's flown on a single engine piston) and replace it with 100 hrs PIC (from your CPL) and 500 hrs on a multi crew, multi engine aircraft that is being flown in IFR operations. At a bare minimum a King Air that operates with two crews. I would even go further that it would need to be an actual 2 crew aircraft to get your ATPLs, like an ATR42, Dash 8 or bigger. That word "Airline" keeps popping in my head.

Why do I say that? Because I had quite a bit of PIC time before I even started my CPL training. For many years I just had a PPL and used it on weekends to take my friends flying. What kind of decisions making do you think I learned there, THAT WOULD BENEFIT AN AIRLINE OPERATION? Very little. I flew on Saturdays and Sundays in nice sunny days from Calgary to Drumheller or Calgary to Bragg Creek. That's not very relevant to airline operations. Sure, it's experience... but I really don't think it's something that will help you fly an IFR approach into Chicago O'Hare.

Also, if any instructors here feel the need to defend their experience, don't. I can't go with my 6000+ hours on turboprops and jets and just demand a Class IV instructor rating. My experience is not relevant. I'd have to get my license just like the 200 hr guy does and rightfully so. Different experience, different skills for different jobs. Any FOR THE RECORD, for all of those easily offended, I really want to get my instructor's rating. I want to justify that $12K somehow, but (call me old fashion European), I think it would be a nice retirement gig, or even part time gig, being able to teach the next generation of pilots.

[photofly]

Also, if any instructors here feel the need to defend their experience, don't.

I think you're failing to distinguish between 2000 hours of flying your 172, and 2000 hours of teaching and evaluating other people flying a 172. I don't offer any comment about whether either of those things is any help in flogging a 737 in O'Hare on autopilot with weather radar and ATC telling you exactly where to fly (see what I did there? don't take offence, honestly, no insult intended) but if any flight instructor was going to take issue with anything you wrote, it might be this bit:

I really want to get my instructor's rating. I want to justify that $12K somehow, but (call me old fashion European), I think it would be a nice retirement gig, or even part time gig, being able to teach the next generation of pilots.

Why do you think that teaching people to fly is a "nice" retirement "gig" or "part time" "gig"? For whom is that "nice"? Not for your students, for sure.

[RoAF-Mig21]

Also, if any instructors here feel the need to defend their experience, don't.

If any flight instructor was going to take issue with anything you wrote, it might be this bit:

I really want to get my instructor's rating. I want to justify that $12K somehow, but (call me old fashion European), I think it would be a nice retirement gig, or even part time gig, being able to teach the next generation of pilots.

Why do you think that teaching people to fly is a "nice" retirement "gig" or "part time" "gig"? For whom is that "nice"? Not for your students, for sure.

Why would they take offense to that? Why would it 'not be nice' for students?

Assuming I retire at 60-65, I would hope my 30+ years of flying experience could come into play, especially teaching IFR. I want to reiterate, once I get my instructor rating. Why wouldn't it be good for my students? Most certainly I enjoy teaching (I used to do it before, although not aviation related). To be honest I'd be more inclined into teaching ground school than actually flying. I don't get it.

Anyway, this is not the topic at hand. I'll stop here.

[photofly]

Assuming I retire at 60-65, I would hope my 30+ years of flying experience could come into play, especially teaching IFR.

If 2000 hours teaching flying a 172 isn't any help in airline operations (and I am prepared to accept that it isn't) why should the reverse be true? If your airline experience is valuable in teaching IFR, why isn't teaching IFR valuable in airline operations?

I do detect a bit of a double standard there.

My experience of instruction is that it's 20% about flying, and 80% about teaching. Teaching isn't a "retirement" gig, or something that you can just do casually "part time".

[RoAF-Mig21]

If 2000 hours teaching flying a 172 isn't any help in airline operations (and I am prepared to accept that it isn't) why should the reverse be true?

They’re not comparable. A CPL pilot, with no IFR or multi engine experience, with 250-300 hrs can get their Class IV instructor rating. It’s not like they have a lot of experience, yet they still teach.

Airline flying is a bit more complex than that and that’s why Air Canada doesn’t hire with 200 hrs out of flight school. That’s why European carriers don’t give an ATPL at 250 hrs… and so on.

If your airline experience is valuable in teaching IFR, why isn't teaching IFR valuable in airline operations?

Absolutely it is, but come on man, how many instructors moving from instructing to the airlines have taught multi IFR? 10%? The majority have PIC time on single engine, VFR instructing.

Ex instructors, like what the guys at Perimeter did back in the day (instructing in actual IFR / flying bag runs on the Travel Air / Baron) is a different type of experience that is VERY VALID to airline operations.

We both know that’s not the case for the majority of instructors. My statements above were referring to the guys getting their AAs flying circuits or the practice area. ZERO IFR experience aside form their own multi IFR training / license.

I do detect a bit of a double standard there.

Not at all. We’re talking relevant experience.

Notice that when I said one can be an instructor after retiring from the airlines, I was referring to a class IV or III instructor. I am not going to pretend that a guy with 20,000 hrs on an RJ can retire and go directly to a class I instructor. That takes years to get to that experience.

My experience of instruction is that it's 20% about flying, and 80% about teaching. Teaching isn't a "retirement" gig, or something that you can just do casually "part time".

I disagree with you 100%. So if I retire at 60 years old and decide to get my class IV instructing, why can’t I do it? So I can be a Q400 captain till 65, but not an instructor? Why? Is it because I’m too set in my old age and can’t relate to the young kids? What’s the difference between a 300 hr Class IV instructor and a 20,000 hr pilot that has 300 hrs as a Class IV instructor? About 19,700 hrs of flying experience.

For your information lots of people instructor part time. I flew with a guy out of YQG that was a full time university professor and part time flight instructor.

I’d be happy to continue this conversation in private. We’re hijacking this thread that has nothing to do with what we’re discussing here.

[rudder]

Rumore going around all cpts will be able to give picus.

If the union gave on that maybe a deal is being made?

PICUS is company policy, has nothing to do with them Union. They could probably allow any CA to do it, but will the CAs actually do it? Would there Union tell them not to? Who knows.

Just another way for the company to get around paying training staff

PICUS authority would be voluntary. No override? Not sure what the rate of volunteerism would be.

ACP/LCP/LTC/TP positions are also ‘voluntary’ for those that the company deems qualified. There are associated overrides. For some those overrides are adequate. For others, insufficient.

Nothing in life is free. And price equilibrium is found in the supply/demand curve which is rarely static.

[photofly]

My statements above were referring to the guys getting their AAs flying circuits or the practice area. ZERO IFR experience aside form their own multi IFR training / license.

I noted that's what you said. But very few people get their AAs flying circuits and in the practice area. I think what you have in mind, and what is more common, is people getting AAs teaching others to fly circuits, and teaching others to do things in the practice area. Teaching, demonstrating, supervising, monitoring, and evaluating. And providing thoughtful and (hopefully) valuable feedback on how other people do these things. Those are rather different task to just flying. I also note that you don't have an instructor rating, and haven't done any teaching of circuits, or teaching work in the practice area - or of evaluating, supervising, monitoring and providing feedback. So your opinion of the relevance of doing those things to any other kind of operation cannot be based on your experience.

I do accept your first-hand experience that flying Saturdays and Sundays in nice sunny days from Calgary to Drumheller or Calgary to Bragg Creek didn't contribute towards your airline flying skills. I think your extension from there to what instructors do, is not rooted in experience of what instructors do.

Ex instructors, like what the guys at Perimeter did back in the day (instructing in actual IFR / flying bag runs on the Travel Air / Baron) is a different type of experience that is VERY VALID to airline operations.

Again I don't comment on the idea - but even those experiences would be outside your own new criteria for getting an ATPL, which in your own words would be

500 hrs on a multi crew, multi engine aircraft that is being flown in IFR operations. At a bare minimum a King Air that operates with two crews. I would even go further that it would need to be an actual 2 crew aircraft to get your ATPLs, like an ATR42, Dash 8 or bigger. That word "Airline" keeps popping in my head.

You said you wanted to get an instructor rating, and teach, when you retire.

You might be interested to know that to teach IFR and multi-engine flying, you wouldn't need to get an instructor rating; you can already do those things, in retirement, or now, based your experience. In your position, an instructor rating is only needed for teaching ab-initio flying.

What’s the difference between a 300 hr Class IV instructor and a 20,000 hr pilot that has 300 hrs as a Class IV instructor? About 19,700 hrs of flying experience.

By your own admission, not all flying experience is equivalent. If 19,700 hours of that experience is in airline operations, how does it help in ab-initio instruction? And if it does help, why do thousands of hours of ab-initio instruction not help in airline operations?

I think the double-standard I was referring to was the implicit assumption that IFR airline flying is relevant to ab-initio instruction (assumed by someone who has a lot of airline experience) per your statement above, and your saying with certainty that ab-initio instruction has no relevance to IFR airline flying (a certainty based on zero ab-initio instruction experience given) per your prior post on the subject.

[Transition9er2]

Just my thoughts, and probably not a very popular opinion.

If this rumour is true, and ALL captains at Jazz will be able to issue PICUS to help the company, I for one will be strongly discouraging my family and friends from flying Jazz in an abundance of caution for their safety.

I used to work for Jazz, great company, but eventually someone needs to say “STOP”… the Swiss cheese slices are aligning quickly here in Canada and our Colgan Air is coming.

Some airlines in Canada tried to be creative and they developed a program that allowed 250hr pilots into their employ to meet their hiring needs. The industry has changed so much over the last few years and these companies now find themselves in a difficult position when it comes to staffing. Once again they’re putting profits ahead of safety with this being the latest example of how they’re trying to get over a hurdle.

I get it. Time spent in the right seat of a Q or an RJ shooting approaches is far better than burning circuits in a 172 to gain hours. I completely agree with you, but the whole idea of PICUS is to accelerate the time it takes to be qualified for an upgrade and as a result this is one more program setup to drive experience levels lower and lower in our industry and safety is being compromised.

An abundance of low time and inexperienced FO’s is a problem created by the company. Now they need to find a way out of it and this is their solution?? The term “green on green” is being watered down to scary levels.

The holes are lining up folks. This industry is becoming very worrying if this way of thinking is allowed to continue.

Just my 2 cents.

[McKinley]

Just my thoughts, and probably not a very popular opinion.

If this rumour is true, and ALL captains at Jazz will be able to issue PICUS to help the company, I for one will be strongly discouraging my family and friends from flying Jazz in an abundance of caution for their safety.

I used to work for Jazz, great company, but eventually someone needs to say “STOP”… the Swiss cheese slices are aligning quickly here in Canada and our Colgan Air is coming.

Some airlines in Canada tried to be creative and they developed a program that allowed 250hr pilots into their employ to meet their hiring needs. The industry has changed so much over the last few years and these companies now find themselves in a difficult position when it comes to staffing. Once again they’re putting profits ahead of safety with this being the latest example of how they’re trying to get over a hurdle.

I get it. Time spent in the right seat of a Q or an RJ shooting approaches is far better than burning circuits in a 172 to gain hours. I completely agree with you, but the whole idea of PICUS is to accelerate the time it takes to be qualified for an upgrade and as a result this is one more program setup to drive experience levels lower and lower in our industry and safety is being compromised.

An abundance of low time and inexperienced FO’s is a problem created by the company. Now they need to find a way out of it and this is their solution?? The term “green on green” is being watered down to scary levels.

The holes are lining up folks. This industry is becoming very worrying if this way of thinking is allowed to continue.

Just my 2 cents.

Historically speaking, Canada lags behind the US.

I think you are 100% correct that we are heading for a Colgan 3407. Hell, employers want a reversal of the new duty regs ..

It’s scary … and it’s coming.

[Stu Pidasso]

Just my perspective Yolked, without starting a generational battle. Articling Chartered Accountants (now CPA's) and Lawyers, Resident Medical Doctors all have shockingly low pay and work substantially longer hours/days than Airline Pilots. We have a certain skill set and are certainly worth more than we are currently paid.

I have said countless times here that I believe the starting pay at AC should be 100K / year, no Pilot at AC should earn less than the person making your coffee or loading the luggage. Which tragically at the moment the pay is a complete embarrassment.

What should the pay be for a first year Jazz Pilot as you referenced at the start of the thread?

Largest problem is you are based two of the most expensive cities on earth. Jazz predominately hires 250 hour College Grads, some still living in Moms basement and getting driven to work. I don't have an answer for you, for sure you can find higher paying employment but many other Professions have lousy starting pay. As bad as the pay is it sure seems to me that the generation doesn't miss out on wearing Lululemon and taking up all the hip restaurants in Yale town.

For the next generational debate let's talk "work ethic," seems there is a bulletin out that flying a domestic Airplane 16 days / month is a hardship and below some Pilots dignity.

Best wishes with your career, short of the late 60's into the early 70's it has never been a better time to be a Pilot.

[McKinley]

Just my perspective Yolked, without starting a generational battle. Articling Chartered Accountants (now CPA's) and Lawyers, Resident Medical Doctors all have shockingly low pay and work substantially longer hours/days than Airline Pilots. We have a certain skill set and are certainly worth more than we are currently paid.

I have said countless times here that I believe the starting pay at AC should be 100K / year, no Pilot at AC should earn less than the person making your coffee or loading the luggage. Which tragically at the moment the pay is a complete embarrassment.

What should the pay be for a first year Jazz Pilot as you referenced at the start of the thread?

Largest problem is you are based two of the most expensive cities on earth. Jazz predominately hires 250 hour College Grads, some still living in Moms basement and getting driven to work. I don't have an answer for you, for sure you can find higher paying employment but many other Professions have lousy starting pay. As bad as the pay is it sure seems to me that the generation doesn't miss out on wearing Lululemon and taking up all the hip restaurants in Yale town.

For the next generational debate let's talk "work ethic," seems there is a bulletin out that flying a domestic Airplane 16 days / month is a hardship and below some Pilots dignity.

Best wishes with your career, short of the late 60's into the early 70's it has never been a better time to be a Pilot.


———————see reply below ———————————————-

I know of a few people at Jazz. ( this was pre pandemic ) When they got on, they have north of 1500- 4000 hours.. their groundschool was the same.

The issue is the continually low pay… eg. I pay my dues as as an articling student at company A. Then I leave to company B, C, D and have to article again and again and again .. on the ramp or various other entry level positions or start at an entry level pay over and over again… there’s no end.

Also, in other industries, the responsibility is far less. To top it off, in many industries the start pay is livable. Additionally, industry experience is cumulative. Eg. I work in an entry level position at company A and then when I leave this job “ articling” at company A this gets taken into account at company B.- even the next contract at company A.

On the 16 days a month.. not every job involves crossing time zones at all hours of the day. I also don’t know of any regional that has their employees working 16 days a month.

I’ve heard 18-19 at Encore / Jazz not including overtime. ( someone else can chime in here if need be and correct me if need be)

Similarly, those are 16 days away from home… doing up to 12 hours a day duty ( duty time isn’t paid remember )

I’ve worked in mining, forestry and aviation in horrendous conditions. I started out when we needed a logbook for ramp time and flight time… if this generation wants to improve things what’s the issue? As long as their ego’s are aren’t writing cheques they can’t cash I’m all for it.

Also, Likely, If someone is at a major airline in Canada they’ve worked the ramp etc etc and likely several other industries.

[Babar350]

Rumeurs on the street say, the union and company are willing to trade the flow for better pay.
Maybe this is good, or maybe it is not.

[truedude]

Rumeurs on the street say, the union and company are willing to trade the flow for better pay.
Maybe this is good, or maybe it is not.

Devils in the details. Everything had a price tag.

[Little Star]

The beatings will continue until morale improves.