Where is this so called shortage

[C.W.E.]

There is nothing wrong with higher education if you can afford it, however you can become a commercial pilot as long as you can read and write.

There is no minimum education requirement to get a Commercial Pilot License or an ATPL.

Unless of course they have changed the rules since I was in aviation.

[ARGO]

How do other professions market shortages in skilled Human Resources as a result of the baby boomers retiring?

I don’t understand how the “pilot shortage” always gets the front page when there must be other professions which (I would think) are starving for experienced workers as well...and pay/quality of life is a lot better than sitting beside 19 year old Jimmy in a Q400. Or do they?

This is an honest question to those who work in different professions other than flying. Certain trades come to mind, but there must be quite a few professions that are feeling the effects of retirement and the options (as the OP stated) are more appealing.

[jakeandelwood]

How do other professions market shortages in skilled Human Resources as a result of the baby boomers retiring?

I don’t understand how the “pilot shortage” always gets the front page when there must be other professions which (I would think) are starving for experienced workers as well...and pay/quality of life is a lot better than sitting beside 19 year old Jimmy in a Q400. Or do they?

This is an honest question to those who work in different professions other than flying. Certain trades come to mind, but there must be quite a few professions that are feeling the effects of retirement and the options (as the OP stated) are more appealing.

One thing other professions do to attract people is POST THEIR PAY SCALES ON JOB ADS. In aviation ypou have to go to an interview to find out and then you get a strange look.

[pelmet]

As far as I was concerned, the 'ramp equivalent' work had many great moments and no shortage of not particularly enjoyable moments but I am a more knowledgeable pilot for doing that work. While a degree in something aviation-related can have some use, the idea of requiring one and then accepting years of study in totally unrelated areas as qualification is completely stupid and may explain some of the incidents we see in the industry where basic errors are made which should have been lessons learned during the hour-building portion of ones career.

You had to go there eh

I'd like to claim that a somewhat scientific related degree will serve you far more in aviation than an equivalent amount of ramp experience. Someone who can get a science/engineering/... degree WILL be able to learn whatever you throw at him airplane related and actually understand said systems better. He will also have developed an attitude of seeing things through, helping each other out, team work etc, while learning to think analytically, objectively and logically.

If we combine all the info in this topic, we can conclude that the ramp is the only education people will ever need. You will learn everything there. How to behave, how to tie your shoes, how to make great money, how to fly an airplane. And now it even replaces a higher eduction!

(The following is not necessarily directed at you, pelmet, as I don't know you)

I don't know if you got a degree or not in science but if you re-read my post you will notice that I said during the hour-building portion of one's career. Hour-building meant flying hours, not ramp hours.

I have discovered something important over the years when it comes to the belief that smart guys make good pilots because they can get a degree or are a successful businessman. It is a false narrative. While intelligence is important, it is a much smaller portion than many of us might believe. This was reinforced to me just yesterday when I read an article about a dentist with a large practice that killed himself and five others in a Navajo.

The degree-requirers would have loved this guy if he had enough hours....but what an incompetent. No logic there when one assumes that both engines lost their fuel pumps within minutes of each other. A degree didn't help this guy with"an attitude of seeing things through, learning to think analytically, objectively and logically". Call it a one-off if you like but there has been a long list of smart doctors, dentists, and businessmen killed in airplane crashes. It takes a lot more aspects of personality to make a safe pilot. Learning ability can be figured out in a detailed interview process.

http://aviationweek.com/business-aviati ... -and-small

[pelmet]

The ugly truth is: you hated it, it was mostly useless, and you didn't want to do it either. You had to do it, because it was the only option available at that time. Nowadays, it is not. There are other options. And that's where the ugly Canadian Aviation Attitude comes in: "I suffered, so you should too!". That's wrong. You'd think that the ramp would have learned you some more empathy and comraderie

I hated some aspects of the job and loved other aspects but that goes with any job. Overall, I am glad I did it as compared to other typical first jobs. I liked marshalling in, pushing back, and when delivering the newspapers, sitting in the cockpit the 747 and imagining what it would be like to fly:). Sure I could have worked at McDonalds, K-Mart, etc. I chose the aviation industry.

Ironically, when I got my first real job( I was really only targeting one company), I was going at it from two directions...the baggage handler way and the direct entry way. Apparently I was unqualified for the ramp as they never called back. Fortunately the flight ops division did as their hirer later mentioned that the ramp division doesn't make his hiring decisions for him. Good thing too as I already had plenty of ramp experience. But I don't know how to fill a tooth cavity.

[EPR]

digits_, I guess I should have been more specific. I am referring to the kid that graduates with all his ratings but lacks any "real world" work experience and can't tell the difference between a Herc Strap and a Bungee Cord!
The experience they learn on the job, be it a Dock Hand, Ramp Rat, Customer Service Agent, Ticket Agent, Dispatcher, De-Ice Crew...whatever... will only make them a much better, well rounded employee down the road!

[TheStig]

digits_, I guess I should have been more specific. I am referring to the kid that graduates with all his ratings but lacks any "real world" work experience and can't tell the difference between a Herc Strap and a Bungee Cord!
The experience they learn on the job, be it a Dock Hand, Ramp Rat, Customer Service Agent, Ticket Agent, Dispatcher, De-Ice Crew...whatever... will only make them a much better, well rounded employee down the road!

I would have agreed with you a few years ago, but now I'm not so sure. Work experience outside the flight deck is always useful, but none of the jobs you mentioned have anything to do with flying. I've worked with quite a pilots who had part-time McJobs in high school and university then have had fast tracked careers from a couple months instructing before being picked up by a regional for a couple years before landing at an airline. Not one of them met the stereotype commonly portrayed in threads such as this, of the entitled millennial who doesn't know how good they have it.

Career progression that older pilots could have only dreamed of is becoming more common. Young pilots today, seem to follow the same steps pilots followed over the past couple of decades they are simply moving through the operators much (much) quicker. Reading the new hire bios posted at my airline, there aren't any that say "from 2002-2007 I flew out of Thunder Bay for XXX", they more commonly say something along the lines of, "after graduating in 2015 from XXX, I briefly instructed at XXX, before getting hired at Jazz." That's just they way it is, I don't feel it takes anything away from the long road earlier generations took.

[FICU]

I'd like to claim that a somewhat scientific related degree will serve you far more in aviation than an equivalent amount of ramp experience. Someone who can get a science/engineering/... degree WILL be able to learn whatever you throw at him airplane related and actually understand said systems better. He will also have developed an attitude of seeing things through, helping each other out, team work etc, while learning to think analytically, objectively and logically.

Hmmm... I have no aviation related diploma/science degree but I do have a degree in Skibumology and...

... I AM be able to learn whatever you throw at ME airplane related and actually understand said systems better. I have developed an attitude of seeing things through, helping others out, and my team work and CRM skills are exemplary, while I think analytically, objectively and logically.

[C.W.E.]

I only finished grade eight and I have never had any problem with learning or understanding anything related to flying an airplane and obviously I managed to think clearly and fly safely and lived long enough to retire and live comfortably off my savings from flying.

[digits_]

I'd like to claim that a somewhat scientific related degree will serve you far more in aviation than an equivalent amount of ramp experience. Someone who can get a science/engineering/... degree WILL be able to learn whatever you throw at him airplane related and actually understand said systems better. He will also have developed an attitude of seeing things through, helping each other out, team work etc, while learning to think analytically, objectively and logically.

Hmmm... I have no aviation related diploma/science degree but I do have a degree in Skibumology and...

... I AM be able to learn whatever you throw at ME airplane related and actually understand said systems better. I have developed an attitude of seeing things through, helping others out, and my team work and CRM skills are exemplary, while I think analytically, objectively and logically.

I never said a degree was a requirement for that, only that having a science related degree is a better indication for such skills, than working on the ramp. If you take a group of applicants (for a pilot position) with a degree, and a group of applicants that are working the ramp, then I think that more people in the degree group will have the above mentioned skills. I find having a degree (well, to be precise, the knowledge and skill gained to get the degree, not the actual piece of paper) is more beneficial than ramp experience. Some airlines seem to think the same.

And no, neither ramp experience nor a degree is required to be a (good) pilot.

As far as I was concerned, the 'ramp equivalent' work had many great moments and no shortage of not particularly enjoyable moments but I am a more knowledgeable pilot for doing that work. While a degree in something aviation-related can have some use, the idea of requiring one and then accepting years of study in totally unrelated areas as qualification is completely stupid and may explain some of the incidents we see in the industry where basic errors are made which should have been lessons learned during the hour-building portion of ones career.

You had to go there eh

I'd like to claim that a somewhat scientific related degree will serve you far more in aviation than an equivalent amount of ramp experience. Someone who can get a science/engineering/... degree WILL be able to learn whatever you throw at him airplane related and actually understand said systems better. He will also have developed an attitude of seeing things through, helping each other out, team work etc, while learning to think analytically, objectively and logically.

If we combine all the info in this topic, we can conclude that the ramp is the only education people will ever need. You will learn everything there. How to behave, how to tie your shoes, how to make great money, how to fly an airplane. And now it even replaces a higher eduction!

(The following is not necessarily directed at you, pelmet, as I don't know you)

I don't know if you got a degree or not in science but if you re-read my post you will notice that I said during the hour-building portion of one's career. Hour-building meant flying hours, not ramp hours.

I have discovered something important over the years when it comes to the belief that smart guys make good pilots because they can get a degree or are a successful businessman. It is a false narrative. While intelligence is important, it is a much smaller portion than many of us might believe. This was reinforced to me just yesterday when I read an article about a dentist with a large practice that killed himself and five others in a Navajo.

The degree-requirers would have loved this guy if he had enough hours....but what an incompetent. No logic there when one assumes that both engines lost their fuel pumps within minutes of each other. A degree didn't help this guy with"an attitude of seeing things through, learning to think analytically, objectively and logically". Call it a one-off if you like but there has been a long list of smart doctors, dentists, and businessmen killed in airplane crashes. It takes a lot more aspects of personality to make a safe pilot. Learning ability can be figured out in a detailed interview process.

http://aviationweek.com/business-aviati ... -and-small

I must have misunderstood then. Yes, flying experience is more valuable experience for a pilot than just a degree in itself. No argument there.

Your examples of crashing doctors are irrelevant though. The issue there is that you have low time, low experience people flying relatively high performance aircraft just a few hours a year. The reason that people with a degree show up in there, is that usually they have the money to finance such airplanes. If you would put a PPL ramp guy in the same airplane, the accident rate would probably be similar. Likewise, the doctors and dentists would still crash their plane, even if you somehow put them on the ramp for a year.

digits_, I guess I should have been more specific. I am referring to the kid that graduates with all his ratings but lacks any "real world" work experience and can't tell the difference between a Herc Strap and a Bungee Cord!
The experience they learn on the job, be it a Dock Hand, Ramp Rat, Customer Service Agent, Ticket Agent, Dispatcher, De-Ice Crew...whatever... will only make them a much better, well rounded employee down the road!

Yes, a bit of work experience is better than no work experience, but why not put the pilot in a plane? He might be awkward with customers, and might have to learn dealing with customers a bit, but he might as well learn that while flying the plane. The 206 should be the entry job for pilots, not the ramp.

Nothing I've read has me convinced that working on a ramp is/should be a requirement for pilots, or that it makes you a better pilot. It merely exists because companies get away with it. It can filter out the bad apples a bit, but that doesn't mean it makes the good apples better.

One could also ask how many great pilots companies are missing out on with their ramp schemes. A pilot confident in his abilities might not bother applying at a ramp-to-cockpit scheme. Nowadays, the amount of companies requiring you to work the ramp is getting smaller. Which means that the ramp companies get a smaller pool of candidates, and -in general- probably the pilots that didn't make a stellar impression at other companies: bad at interview, resume issues, personality quirks, .... So they are using the ramp to filter out the bad applicants, while they could have had better applicants if they didn't use the ramp.

[shimmydampner]

I spent a couple summers on a couple docks back in the bad old days. I can't say that I got much out of it really, but it wasn't a total loss. Aside from making some good friends and memories, the contacts I made directly led to me getting my first flying gig and a few offers thereafter. In the absence of any other options and a very bleak hiring outlook in that time, it was worth it for that alone. I did learn a bit about stuff that would help me later on as a float pilot, but not a ton. Nothing that I couldn't have figured out on the job flying. Still, it wasn't a loss. Learning stuff you don't know is good for you. Besides, after multiple road trips and hundreds of resumes, it was literally my only option.
Things are very different now to be sure, but I don't know just how much better they are for 200 hour wonders. The way I see it, if it were so great that they can get directly into airline-type flying jobs that are strictly flying, they absolutely would not need the ramp. However, I don't know if that's necessarily the case and you can count me in the group that thinks that 250 hour kids directly into the right seat of 705 machines is a bad idea (based on experience). I'm inclined to believe that most will have to work their way up through 703/704 jobs, that often require duties beyond just flying, as a matter of course. A bit of time on a dock or ramp could feasibly make a 19 year old kid fresh out of his or her parents' basement, a much more knowledgeable, competent and well-rounded crew member in that regard. If that kid is angling for the 185 job, a half a summer on the dock learning how to tie knots, correctly load airplanes, clean a boat motor carb, change a hundred pounder of propane, etc. are a little things that will be a part of their day to day that if mastered before the flying starts could, at the very least make their job a bit easier or at best, keep them from coming to grief when they should be devoting all available brain power to figuring out how to fly the airplane without inadvertently killing themselves. If that kid is in line for a twin otter FO job, 6 months on the ramp figuring out all the various important non-flying duties that are associated with being a crew member on such a workhorse would certainly make their lives easier by not having to think about it when they hit the flight line. It would certainly make their captains at least a bit less uneasy about having to sit next to a kid who they know damn well will try to murder them many times over the course of their first year or so on the machine. At least they will know they will be good for something when the flying stops and the real work begins, if they already have mastered how to load the plane, tie it up, the difference between the smart end and the dumb end of a ratchet strap, etc. It's easier to be patient with someone who constantly makes attempts on your life if you don't also have to do all the hard work yourself. These are just a couple examples, but they extend to other aircraft and other types of flying as well.
From an operator perspective, a bit of time on the ramp can reveal much about a person that an interview just does not. I've seen plenty of rampies come and go. Some start out saying all the right things, but when confronted with the actual day to day grind that exists at some operations quickly turn sour and lazy. They skate through the hiring process because anyone with half a brain can figure out how to put on the right appearances. But sometimes, when the rubber meets the road, their true character is revealed.
At the end of the day, I don't believe the ramp or dock is a requirement, by any means. But I do believe that to suggest that it offers no benefit to the aspiring pilot is simply untrue. Nor do I believe that it is strictly just a way for operators to extract cheap labour by exploiting young people's dreams. If you can find a flying job straight away, great. But the unavoidable reality is that, in many cases it is the only option available to young pilots, and if they are discerning in their job hunt, they can find a good reputable operator to start at that will start them on a long, successful career. Far more important than the merits of working or not working the ramp, in my opinion, is that a young pilot devote the time and energy into mastering the art of their chosen craft at each stage of their progression. I'm far more bothered by the attitudes that I see where they just view their current positions as nothing more than a necessary evil to make it to the next step. So many seem to view flying small airplanes as some sort of unnecessary joke that they can't learn anything pertinent from and just keep looking past it to the time when they will be granted a wide body captain job that they believe is commensurate with their self-perceived skills. To me, that attitude is dangerous and does a disservice to our profession and their own development. Experience is a very important thing, no matter what form it comes in. Make the decision to consciously extract every bit of it that you can from each step of the way and try to become a master of what you are doing. That's way more important than working or not working the ramp, or whether or not the shortage of experienced pilots is working out to your own personal benefit.

[StudentPilot]

If you can get a flying job from the start, go for it. Hopefully more companies hire local rampies and pay them a fair and competitive wage (compared to other similar jobs locally, outside aviation) while hiring pilots straight to a seat. Until that is common, if you don't get offered a flying job, you can either hold out for one (which may or may not come) or take a ramp job that leads to a flying job. Or take a ramp job while continuing to look for a flying position (albeit without any road tripping).

As always, talk to the operators at the end of the road and/or in small communities for a better chance (and a shorter wait if you start on the ramp).

The shortage is not bad enough that operators are significantly increasing the pay - most can still find crew by reducing their requirements and operate normally - but some of the more specialized/niche operators have increased their pay and/or conditions to attract and retain experience.

[mixturerich]

I think the major airlines are feeling the shortage but the general public hasn’t yet. When will that be? Well that’s the million dollar question.

[DanWEC]

I think the major airlines are feeling the shortage but the general public hasn’t yet. When will that be? Well that’s the million dollar question.

2 years.

I accept PayPal.

[GRK2]

Question:
How is it the rest of the Aviation world, with the exception of Canada, the US and maybe Oz, can take an interested candidate off the street with ZERO hours and train him/her to an acceptable standard on a large jet (typically a B737 of a modern variant) and they're able to handle all the issues that flying the jet, in any high density airspace and have a successful career, without all the "weneedtoseehowheshehandlesaramploadbagswashthebossescar" BS I see here? What makes Canada so special that no one can possibly be any good unless they "earn their right" to be in the right seat at 250 hours? Anyone here able to tell me?
It's done all the time overseas with great success. I fly with them all the time. Some first timers first jet is a widebody flying international routes...shocking right?

[C-GGGQ]

Mostly just because then no one would fly for most (not all their are some great 703/704 ops but be honest....not the majority) of the Navajo etc. Jobs out there. Except for the guys who want to make a career in floats or have one of the fewer stellar small operator gigs. Unfortunately even most of the bad 703 ops are usually the only lifeline to many communities so someone DOES have to do it.

So we need some barrier to the big leagues or very few people would bother 703 which is what almost all of these other places don't have. Not in the quantity we do. Not saying it's right... Just saying it IS

[valleyboy]

I guess that's why a lot of those companies advertise to direct entry captains, but I hear you and you need to understand that cadet programs cost money that airlines here are not forking out. It also is about time. To start as a cadet to to left seat I suspect it would be a minimum of 10 years or more depending on demand. No matter what you think a new cadet in the right seat and it is basically a single pilot aircraft. Very little goes wrong with today's aircraft and with good training the system works. Ironically it would mean total rethinking of our system. Aviation does not move quickly with issues like that. We can't even introduce FDT changes in a reasonable time frame, 2011 until now and still counting -- really!

[pelmet]

Your examples of crashing doctors are irrelevant though. The issue there is that you have low time, low experience people flying relatively high performance aircraft just a few hours a year. The reason that people with a degree show up in there, is that usually they have the money to finance such airplanes. If you would put a PPL ramp guy in the same airplane, the accident rate would probably be similar. Likewise, the doctors and dentists would still crash their plane, even if you somehow put them on the ramp for a year.

One could also ask how many great pilots companies are missing out on with their ramp schemes. A pilot confident in his abilities might not bother applying at a ramp-to-cockpit scheme. Nowadays, the amount of companies requiring you to work the ramp is getting smaller. Which means that the ramp companies get a smaller pool of candidates, and -in general- probably the pilots that didn't make a stellar impression at other companies: bad at interview, resume issues, personality quirks, .... So they are using the ramp to filter out the bad applicants, while they could have had better applicants if they didn't use the ramp.

Flying experience is no doubt better than ramp experience. But the crashing doctors and dentists for stupid reasons is very relevent. Why?....because it proves that a degree does not in any way guarantee a good pilot or a pilot any better than anyone else. Yet we have airlines making it mandatory.

If I was hiring and I saw a science degree unreated in any significance to aviation versus 3 years on the ramp, I can't say that I would be willing to give the degree any more value. I would give it more value than McDonald's or Wal-Mart entry level work but not aviation operation stuff. People learn stuff on the ramp such as the hazards associated with refuelling, weight and balance, cautions when towing, and likely a multitude of other various things varying from job to job. And most importantly, seeing incidents happen and learning from them.

A degree in meteorology or aerodynamics would have far more relevence. Then again, if I was operating a bush outfit, trucking and farm work might be more appropriate for someone wanted to do blue collar flying than a college boy who is likely already applying to the airlines as I spend money training him. Striclty from a business bottom line point of view, guys with degrees might be the last ones you want at an entry level operation.

[digits_]

But the crashing doctors and dentists for stupid reasons is very relevent. Why?....because it proves that a degree does not in any way guarantee a good pilot or a pilot any better than anyone else. Yet we have airlines making it mandatory.

No it isn't, because there is no suitable control group. You would have to compare groups with similar flying experience if you wanted to determine the effect of a degree.

The group of people without a degree flying around with a PPL in a high performance twin or single is pretty much non-existent.

If you want to compare stats, you can try and compare the accidents of airline pilots with a degree vs airline pilots without a degree. No idea if anyone has ever done the research, I couldn't find anything.

[StudentPilot]

I think the major airlines are feeling the shortage but the general public hasn’t yet.

I suppose it depends on your point of view. I do not think the major airlines (ie Air Canada & WestJet) are feeling the shortage yet, I have not heard of either of them hiring 200 hour pilots. Once they are typically hiring 200 hour pilots and still failing to fill all of their vacancies they will be feeling the shortage. Until then it is just a shortage of previous experience levels. The regionals are only hiring the odd 200 hour pilot, not exactly desperate.

Similar to many/most operators of all sizes they are dropping experience requirements rather than increasing pay. There are plenty of pilots, just not with as much experience as in the past, and no one is parking planes yet as far as I have heard. As long as they realize and train/mentor the lower time pilots well they should not have much issue with them. Many airlines around the globe have been dropping 200/250 hour pilots into the right seat for quite awhile.