Goldfein advocating FAA 1500 hour rule change???

[Jaded]

4 minutes ago, HAWDINGL said:

I tried googling this and couldn't find anything. Anyone have a source on this?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=air+force+goldfein+1500

[HeloDude]

1 hour ago, 08Dawg said:

I get the sense all this would really do is knock the mins to be a regional FO back down to the 250-500 range and make it easier for all the poor kids coming out of ATP with $100K+ in debt to get a job.  And since nobody I know has done anything but go straight to the right seat at Delta, American or United....nothing to see here, move along. 

So then why does the CSAF have an interest in non-AF matters?

[pawnman]

22 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

So then why does the CSAF have an interest in non-AF matters?

He's playing the long game.  This won't solve his immediate problem, but in 5-10 years it would widen the civilian applicant pool to the airlines.

I get that this is an attempt to increase retention by restriction options outside, which may or may not even work...but at least he's acknowledged that we have a problem and he's proposing solutions to fix it.

[nunya]

19 minutes ago, pawnman said:

he's proposing solutions to fix it.

Is a solution that ignores the real problem(s) a viable solution?

I'm not sure CSAF gets a pass when he acts like a high-turnover ghetto landlord that makes tenants sign a longer lease or burns down the neighboring complex, but doesn't fix the broken heater, dishwasher, and moldy carpet.

Edited February 9, 2017 by nunya

[Gazmo]

The Legacies aren't going to change their min requirements. Even in this day and age of a pending "pilot shortage", the average new-hire at a major is near 4,000 hrs. That's your 1,500 hr fighter pilot on one end of the spectrum and a 7,000 hr regional captain at the other.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[TnkrToad]

1 hour ago, HeloDude said:

So then why does the CSAF have an interest in non-AF matters?

Umm, since before the Air Force was an independent service.

There's a whole lotta butthurtness on this forum over something they really need not to be butthurt over. There was no 1500 hr rule in the late 90s, yet folks had no problem getting hired then. If the airlines keep hiring at the levels they're projecting, you're worth your salt, you'll have no problem getting hired--even if they rescind the 1500 rule.

For Goldfein, the issue is that the 1500 hr rule screwed over Air Force pilot retention even more. At least before, there was a marginally financially viable way for folks to build their hours through the civilian-only route. Folks would take the financial risk of paying for all the training and quals, and would suck up flying for peanuts in the regionals, since they had the hope of eventually reaching the big leagues, with their big league pay. The 1500 hr rule screwed that whole path up. Once the pool of maybe 3,000 (I get this number from a previous poster--can't vouch for its accuracy) well-qualified folks dries up, where are the major airlines, regionals, business aviation companies, etc., going to find their pilots, other than the military services--most notably Air Force, but also Navy, Marine Corps and Army? Rescinding the 1500 hr rule would at least offer a little bit of relief, and at this point, every little bit helps.

Goldfein faces a further problem, in that a surprising amount of the military mission is executed by civilian contractors. The 1500 hr rule thus not only makes AF pilot retention harder, but it threatens the national aviation industry, by raising the barriers to entry too high for pilots. USTRANSCOM, for instance, contracts a helluva a lot of cargo movement; what happens when Atlas, Kalitta, DHL, etc., can't fly due to aircrew unavailability? It's not like they'll be able to task more C-17s to meet mission requirements, since--you guessed it--the AD and ARC C-17 units will have been gutted by airline hiring.

In my mind, it would help if Goldfein approached the problem as a threat to the national aerospace system and industry, than "simply" a pilot retention problem.

TT

[HEFOE P]

“We are looking at all the possibilities, the ways we can increase the available pool [of pilots] that serves both the military and commercial industry, without going into direct competition,” he said. According to Everhart, a potential solution is bringing more predictability to Air Force Reserve commitments or adjusting the required flight hours needed to join a commercial airline. -

 

Why would they want to avoid "direct competition?" Let me answer that for you.  They will lose.  It's easier to eliminate competition than win the competition.

Everhart, Goldfein, and the airlines have a meeting in May.  I'm guessing we'll know more at that point.

https://www.ngaus.org/newsroom/news/air-force-airlines-talk-pilot-shortage#sthash.jQvtBkWK.dpuf

[Champ Kind]

2 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

Goldfein faces a further problem, in that a surprising amount of the military mission is executed by civilian contractors. The 1500 hr rule thus not only makes AF pilot retention harder, but it threatens the national aviation industry, by raising the barriers to entry too high for pilots. USTRANSCOM, for instance, contracts a helluva a lot of cargo movement; what happens when Atlas, Kalitta, DHL, etc., can't fly due to aircrew unavailability? It's not like they'll be able to task more C-17s to meet mission requirements, since--you guessed it--the AD and ARC C-17 units will have been gutted by airline hiring.

Wouldn't the remaining cargo carriers absorb the demand from USTRANSCOM for commercial airlift?  It would mean that the government would have to pay a premium for that service with diminished competition, but being a jobs program ACMI carriers shouldn't be a part of the calculus.

Edited February 9, 2017 by Champ Kind

[Longhorn15]

The 1500 hour rule does a ton of good things for pilots that Fingers is trying to undo.  

1.  Enhances flight safety.  If you have doubts, go watch the Colgan crash video again.  

2.  It makes the regional airline model unsustainable.  Most of the majors are already moving former regional routes back to mainline.  Good for pilots to not work for regional slave wages, also means more majors hiring to fill expanding routes.  This is driving a lot of the hiring.

3.  It shifts the supply/demand for pilots.  They aren't going to run out, they just can't be as choosy as they were for the last 15 years.  They have 10K apps on file and the military putting out 1k+ a year.  A lot of the apps are those they'd rather not hire for various reasons.  To ensure they're getting quality candidates (mil pilots generally fall into this category) they are having to up pay and benefits to compete with other carriers.  Look at pay rate rises over the past 18 months.  

It still never ceases to amaze me that the AF has made me count the days until I get out of a job that should be so awesome.  I love flying fighters, but I hate being in the AF.

The solution to keeping your people is not to try and reduce their prospects of future employment, or make that employment less desirable.  I think that is a total shitbag move.  If I ever had a doubt that I'm nothing but a number to the AF, it is completely erased with this line of effort.

[TnkrToad]

1 hour ago, Longhorn15 said:

The 1500 hour rule does a ton of good things for pilots that Fingers is trying to undo.  

1.  Enhances flight safety.  If you have doubts, go watch the Colgan crash video again.  

2.  It makes the regional airline model unsustainable.  Most of the majors are already moving former regional routes back to mainline.  Good for pilots to not work for regional slave wages, also means more majors hiring to fill expanding routes.  This is driving a lot of the hiring.

3.  It shifts the supply/demand for pilots.  They aren't going to run out, they just can't be as choosy as they were for the last 15 years.  They have 10K apps on file and the military putting out 1k+ a year.  A lot of the apps are those they'd rather not hire for various reasons.  To ensure they're getting quality candidates (mil pilots generally fall into this category) they are having to up pay and benefits to compete with other carriers.  Look at pay rate rises over the past 18 months.  

It still never ceases to amaze me that the AF has made me count the days until I get out of a job that should be so awesome.  I love flying fighters, but I hate being in the AF.

The solution to keeping your people is not to try and reduce their prospects of future employment, or make that employment less desirable.  I think that is a total shitbag move.  If I ever had a doubt that I'm nothing but a number to the AF, it is completely erased with this line of effort.

Let's see...

1. Both the Captain and First Officer in the Colgan Air crash had well over 1,500 hrs, yet they still died. Total flying hours was not the issue. It didn't save them that day.

2. Who is flying the regional jets--mainline or regional airlines--still doesn't fix the fundamental problem--there has to be a financially-viable way for folks (outside of the military) to get to 1,500 hrs. I don't see what your solution is to this problem, other than jacking up mainline payscales so much that the financial incentives are so great that nobody will stay on AD. Seems like a concern the CSAF should involve himself with.

3. As I wrote in a previous post, rescinding the 1,500 hr rule wouldn't preclude a quality prior-mil dude from getting hired when he retires/separates (see late-90s AF retention woes). It'll just tweak the supply/demand curve a bit, so you don't get quite so much cash as you would with the rule still in place. In other words, the concerns you voice are primarily economic/financial; what Goldfein & Co. are doing to try to make is comparatively irrelevant--it's all about the Benjamins.

I get it; senior Air Force leaders can/should do more to eliminate queep/refocus on the mission/etc. Objections to the CSAFs efforts to have the 1500 hr rule rescinded, though, sound suspiciously like whining.

TT

[Longhorn15]

38 minutes ago, TnkrToad said:

3. As I wrote in a previous post, rescinding the 1,500 hr rule wouldn't preclude a quality prior-mil dude from getting hired when he retires/separates (see late-90s AF retention woes). It'll just tweak the supply/demand curve a bit, so you don't get quite so much cash as you would with the rule still in place. In other words, the concerns you voice are primarily economic/financial; what Goldfein & Co. are doing to try to make is comparatively irrelevant--it's all about the Benjamins.

I get it; senior Air Force leaders can/should do more to eliminate queep/refocus on the mission/etc. Objections to the CSAFs efforts to have the 1500 hr rule rescinded, though, sound suspiciously like whining.

TT

So you see that Fingers is trying to reduce future compensation for a large chunk of his pilot force, and you seem to be okay with it.  You're not going to convince me that is ok, so agree to disagree.

Nice try with the whining comment, it adds a lot to the conversation...

[TnkrToad]

21 minutes ago, Longhorn15 said:

So you see that Fingers is trying to reduce future compensation for a large chunk of his pilot force, and you seem to be okay with it.  You're not going to convince me that is ok, so agree to disagree.

Nice try with the whining comment, it adds a lot to the conversation...

I would say that Fingers is trying to find a way to keep adequate numbers of pilots on AD past the ends of their SUPT commitments, in order to meet warfighting requirements. The 1500 rule works directly and dramatically against Fingers' efforts, as discussed above. Rescinding the 1500 hour rule is no panacea--the Air Force will continue to hemorrhage people anyway; the economic and QOL benefits are too substantial even without it. I simply don't understand why folks on this forum are upset with him trying to do his job. There are plenty more valid things to complain about than this.

[Marco]

9 minutes ago, TnkrToad said:

I would say that Fingers is trying to find a way to keep adequate numbers of pilots on AD past the ends of their SUPT commitments, in order to meet warfighting requirements. The 1500 rule works directly and dramatically against Fingers' efforts, as discussed above. Rescinding the 1500 hour rule is no panacea--the Air Force will continue to hemorrhage people anyway; the economic and QOL benefits are too substantial even without it. I simply don't understand why folks on this forum are upset with him trying to do his job. There are plenty more valid things to complain about than this.

Maybe because there are other, better ways for him to do his job and meet his requirements; than to try and restrict the ability of people to make a living once their service commitment is complete.

[TnkrToad]

1 minute ago, Marco said:

Maybe because there are other, better ways for him to do his job and meet his requirements; than to try and restrict the ability of people to make a living once their service commitment is complete.

Do you really think you'd be unable to make a living outside of the Air Force, if the 1500 hr rule was rescinded? If so, you're completely ignoring decades of pre-1500 hr rule history (and/or you have a very low opinion of your own marketability as an AF pilot). You've apparently ignored my references to the late-90s (read pre-1500 hr rule) hiring spree. Folks hired by the majors back then weren't exactly starving.

BTW, the anti-1500 hr rule argument isn't the only thing he's doing to try to stop the hemorrhaging.

[Marco]

4 minutes ago, TnkrToad said:

Do you really think you'd be unable to make a living outside of the Air Force, if the 1500 hr rule was rescinded? If so, you're completely ignoring decades of pre-1500 hr rule history (and/or you have a very low opinion of your own marketability as an AF pilot). You've apparently ignored my references to the late-90s (read pre-1500 hr rule) hiring spree. Folks hired by the majors back then weren't exactly starving.

BTW, the anti-1500 hr rule argument isn't the only thing he's doing to try to stop the hemorrhaging.

You asked for a reason as to why, in your opinion, people seemed upset.  I gave you one.

As for my own personal situation, no it does not preclude me from making a living.  However, I am not an airline pilot; I'm an engineer and a business owner.  I employ aerospace engineers, aircraft maintenance technicians, as well as pilots and flight engineers to fly my aircraft.  From the perspective of an employer, yes it appears that an effort is being made to restrict the options of those looking to get out (further down the line) in order to shore up numbers.  A spade is a spade, I call it like I see it.  Other things may be going on, but it doesn't change perception.  

[Herk Driver]

Is this just an AF effort or does Fingers have DoD behind him? It sounds like the former...if so, I can imagine the response from the FAA. While he's at it, why not ask to move the retirement age up to 70. That would have more of an immediate relief on hiring than anything else.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[ViperStud]

TT, you're way off base on this one. I understand how this can be perceived as an administrative move to shore up numbers. The problem is that when your means to do so is to alienate the people you claim to care about the most, we are smart enough to see through it. 

We've been talking about crap leadership in the AF for many years - managers who get where they are by filling squares and walking over people. When a new boss takes over and opts to fight this battle before meaningfully addressing the myriad of reasons that we're running for the door, we will rightfully assess that he's another asshat incapable of righting the ship. I hope Congress laughs in his face. 

[*]

2 hours ago, Herk Driver said:

Is this just an AF effort or does Fingers have DoD behind him? It sounds like the former...if so, I can imagine the response from the FAA. While he's at it, why not ask to move the retirement age up to 70. That would have more of an immediate relief on hiring than anything else.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Don't mention the retirement age again. They probably haven't thought of that yet. 

[Prozac]

Rest assured, my airline pilot colleagues and I are dead set against any effort by the USAF to impede our quality of life.  Congress and the FAA passed the 1500 hour rule to address the safety of the flying public. I'm pretty sure the USAF's pilot retention problem does not trump public safety.  Repealing this rule would signal a return to regionals hiring at substandard wages, commuters showing up to fly with little rest, and generally drive down wages and QOL in the airline industry as a whole.  If I may, I would suggest those of you currently employed in the industry contact your union representation and urge them to oppose this underhanded effort by Air Force leadership. 

[BashiChuni]

beerman, fair enough...but i refuse to believe the answer to AF retention is to bring back more lower paying regional pilot jobs reducing the number of high paying Legacy airline cockpit jobs...lowering the incentive for AF pilots to bail...something about that doesn't seem right

[F16Deuce]

9 minutes ago, BeerMan said:

So he's an asshat because he's trying one of several long term solutions to solve a problem that is already having a significant impact on our national security, and if let unchecked will cripple the United States military in the next decade? Walk into a fighter squadron, how many experienced flight commanders and ADOs are there? I can't personally speak for the MAF, but I'd wager that the experience is thinning out. All TT is saying is that Fingers is doing his job and looking at all-aspects of the problem. We all know and see first hand that the pilot shortage in the military is going to be around for at least the next decade. We're already seeing big impacts on the 11F community, and many guys have mentioned that impacts to the 11B and 11M communities aren't far behind.

I agree with you that there are other issues that need to be addressed immediately. I'm still waiting to see the results from the focus on the squadrons piece he put out a few months ago. I have seen the ACC squadrons hire about 6-9 contractors to works in scheduling, stan eval, mobility, and other support areas. It has had an immediate impact from what I've seen. A lot more pilots being pilots, and a lot more dudes and dudettes in the vault! 

Every day pilots on this board throw out stats about major airlines retiring 500-1000 pilots a year for the next 10-20 years. Sleeves and contracts for queep are good steps, but they aren't going to solve the shortage. Many of us have admitted that even with a $60k a year bonus, we would pause and think about it a little more, but would still jump ship at the end of our commitments.  

Big problems need to be attacked from multiple angles. I agree with TT that this is just one of many proposed solutions, and it does not personally impact an experienced Air Force pilot separating for an airline job.

Valid points.  The issue I have with it is that it doesn't address the root cause of why pilots are getting out.  One thing I heard a different GO say was that we don't have a retention problem, we have a leadership problem, which I actually agree with (meaning people leaving in large numbers is symptomatic, rather than the problem itself).  Looking at external factors beyond control as opposed to issues internal to the Air Force and how we lead and manage our people is a poor approach.

[*]

33 minutes ago, BeerMan said:

I have seen the ACC squadrons hire about 6-9 contractors to works in scheduling, stan eval, mobility, and other support areas. It has had an immediate impact from what I've seen. A lot more pilots being pilots, and a lot more dudes and dudettes in the vault! 

 

I don't want to derail this thread, but I have not seen contractors getting hired in my community. Who has been able to get them? My assumption would be fighter units since they have been the focus of leadership but curious if we can expect that coming down the road. An actual CSS and some contractors would make a world of difference. 

[TnkrToad]

Honest question: has the 1500 hr rule solved a problem, or simply shifted it elsewhere?

The 1500 hr rule has obviously made it impossible for folks with a commercial ticket to build hours for their ATPs by flying with the regionals. The substantial pay raises airline pilots are seeing (in part due to the barrier to entry the 1500 hr rule poses) mean that civilians are still going to look for ways to build enough hours to break into the big leagues. Purely conjecture on my part, but I'd assume this means more folks will be willing to work for slave wages and experience crappy quality of life (but just not in the regionals) as a means to build the necessary hours. I presume they'll remain CFIs, fly for a low-rent cargo outfit, or maybe go overseas and get paid slave wages while flying with a multi-pilot license for a foreign airline. Perhaps there are other ways in the U.S. to build the requisite hours--I have no real background in the civil sector--but I have difficulty seeing how any of them will offer awesome QOL while folks build toward the magic 1500 hr mark. 

Godspeed to military and civilian folks looking to eventually secure jobs with major airlines. Neither route is easy.

TT

[ViperStud]

4 hours ago, F16Deuce said:

Looking at external factors beyond control as opposed to issues internal to the Air Force and how we lead and manage our people is a poor approach.

Couldn't have said it better and this is why I think "asshat" is still a valid moniker. I've yet to see the 6-9 contractors hired in my corner of the fighter world (granted, ANG) and we're starting to really hemmorhage dudes. If the 1500-hr rule is pursued full-bore without other meaningful changes being put in place, it feels a lot like trying to address the problem by ignoring the root causes. 

[Karl Hungus]

7 hours ago, BeerMan said:

I agree with you. I think understanding this is critical to solving the problem long term. Most of the things that impact my professional life can be solved somewhere between the flight commander and wing commander level. 

You think the leadership problem is between the O-3 and O-6 level?  Really?

AFPAK Hands.  Worthless 365s/179s to shitholes to do busy work.  Silly additional duties.  A broken, archaic promotion system.  Flight pay that hasn't changed since the early 1990s.  A bonus that hasn't changed since 1999.  Rampant micromanagement of squadrons/groups/wings by the NAF/MAJCOM.  Have those very solvable issues been fixed yet?  No?  How many of those things are solvable at the O-3 to O-6 level?  Yeah, I didn't think management was serious about fixing things either- easier to just send your top "leader" (LOL) to whine to the FAA.