Here is what it looks like in a sellers market for pilots in the US ULCC segment:

https://www.aerocrewnews.com/aviation-n ... pensation/

Will be tough in Canada because Canadian pilots think they are worthless and dont value their profession at all. Some even vote for permanent wage concessions of 10% just because the company asks. To "capture the flying". Once the US Visa opens and 30% of the pilots apply to American carriers (I am one), things will change. Unless you have serious heavy ties to this hellhole, I cant see anyone sane staying in Canada. This Country is pathetic.

On a currency adjusted basis, those ‘starting’ pay rates at a US ULCC equal the top scale rates at the highest paying CDN NB operator.

Pathetic.

RRJetPilot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:36 pm Will be tough in Canada because Canadian pilots think they are worthless and dont value their profession at all. Some even vote for permanent wage concessions of 10% just because the company asks. To "capture the flying". Once the US Visa opens and 30% of the pilots apply to American carriers (I am one), things will change. Unless you have serious heavy ties to this hellhole, I cant see anyone sane staying in Canada. This Country is pathetic.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way through it, Caio

My next wife is going to be American. She may be old and ugly but that’s ok. I need me a green card.

RRJetPilot wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 4:36 pm Once the US Visa opens and 30% of the pilots apply to American carriers (I am one), things will change. Unless you have serious heavy ties to this hellhole, I cant see anyone sane staying in Canada. This Country is pathetic.

I know Cannabis is legal now but you might be over doing it.

Wouldn’t it be refreshing if Lynx/Flair/Swoop followed suit!

Col. Panic wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:29 pm Wouldn’t it be refreshing if Lynx/Flair/Swoop followed suit!

, In typical Cdn fashion it will be who can lower the requirements the fastest. The States requires an ATPL to be an FO, after the Colgan crash. Here not so much, so a CA will be babysitting/training every flight with 189 peeps in the back. It’s already happened at the regional level, and I bet with will be standard practice at the ULCC within 1-2 years.

Sunwing has a Cadet program for 250 hour Seneca grads just like Jazz does. 250 hour 737 FO was already happening before COVID

CaptainHaddock wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 11:45 am
, In typical Cdn fashion it will be who can lower the requirements the fastest. The States requires an ATPL to be an FO, after the Colgan crash. Here not so much, so a CA will be babysitting/training every flight with 189 peeps in the back. It’s already happened at the regional level, and I bet with will be standard practice at the ULCC within 1-2 years.

If that is the case, wouldn't at least Captains make make money equivalent to the US Captains?

Ask a Sunwing CA I guess

Federally mandating both pilots have a ATPL in the front would be a start.

CaptainHaddock wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 1:34 pm Federally mandating both pilots have a ATPL in the front would be a start.

Ha, as if having an ATPL makes you a good pilot. Some of the biggest clowns I’ve flown with have an ATPL. It’s not really a good measure of a professional Pilot.

Acquiring an ATPL and the associated 1500 hours would definitely improve the abilities/confidence of First Officers over a 250 hour candidate. There are clowns with 15000 hours.

PRM1 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 01, 2022 8:33 am

CaptainHaddock wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 1:34 pm Federally mandating both pilots have a ATPL in the front would be a start.

Ha, as if having an ATPL makes you a good pilot. Some of the biggest clowns I’ve flown with have an ATPL. It’s not really a good measure of a professional Pilot.

I'm not sure how you cold be missing the point here. Does having an ATPL mean you're usually more experienced and competent than someone without it? Of course it does, but there are also exceptions. But that is besides the point. A 1500 hour rule similar to the US's would severely restrict the pool of qualified candidates for the airlines. At that point is simply becomes a matter of supply and demand. Let me know if you also need that explained to you.

Not only is the WAWCON at most Canadian airlines abysmal compared to US industry wages (even before the glory years pre-COVID), but what will amplify a shortage of industry workers going forward (ie. pilots/AME's/Flt Attn./ground staff etc) is the current real rate of inflation. As it stands now most contracts don't accurately reflect this, putting everyone working for subpar wages to start with at an even bigger wage disadvantage, this could drive many from joining or/and leaving the airline industry. With some airlines already lowering applicant qualifications to the bare minimum, to try and make up any staffing shortages, this won't end well, with perhaps in the near future a Colgan type incident happening in Canada....

Kosiw wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:00 pm Not only is the WAWCON at most Canadian airlines abysmal compared to US industry wages (even before the glory years pre-COVID), but what will amplify a shortage of industry workers going forward (ie. pilots/AME's/Flt Attn./ground staff etc) is the current real rate of inflation. As it stands now most contracts don't accurately reflect this, putting everyone working for subpar wages to start with at an even bigger wage disadvantage, this could drive many from joining or/and leaving the airline industry. With some airlines already lowering applicant qualifications to the bare minimum, to try and make up any staffing shortages, this won't end well, with perhaps in the near future a Colgan type incident happening in Canada....

I don't see what the Colgan accident has to do with hiring low time pilots. The Captain had 3379 hours total, and the F/O had 2244 hours total.




.

Kosiw wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 12:00 pm With some airlines already lowering applicant qualifications to the bare minimum, to try and make up any staffing shortages, this won't end well, with perhaps in the near future a Colgan type incident happening in Canada....

Take a look at the history of transport category aircraft incidents in Canada. The majority involved pilots in the 10,000+ hour group.

The folks whining for a 1500 hour rule in Canada dont understand one of the realities of how the regulator works. The regulator is tasked with ensuring safety of the travelling public, not with creating an environment that artificially increases pilot wages.

“The folks whining for a 1500 hour rule in Canada dont understand one of the realities of how the regulator works. The regulator is tasked with ensuring safety of the travelling public, not with creating an environment that artificially increases pilot wages.”

We really haven’t had whole-scale adoption of 250hr First Officers here (yet)on large jets, so there wouldn’t be a lot of transport aircraft accident data available here. We have a pretty enviable safety record for such a large country, there have been many international accidents connected to inexperience in the flight deck. The regulator was very slow to enact the duty regs that were proposed about 15 years ago, they certainly aren’t a flawless organization. Having a copilot with 1-2 years commercial flying experience occupying the right seat on a A320/B737 shouldn’t seem like a big ask for the ‘travelling public’. They are certainly not a single pilot Aircraft.

I’m guessing you are against it as a lever for pilot wages in a shortage, not the idea of have experienced competent flight crew in the cockpit.

CaptainHaddock wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:36 pm “The folks whining for a 1500 hour rule in Canada dont understand one of the realities of how the regulator works. The regulator is tasked with ensuring safety of the travelling public, not with creating an environment that artificially increases pilot wages.”

We really haven’t had whole-scale adoption of 250hr First Officers here (yet)on large jets, so there wouldn’t be a lot of transport aircraft accident data available here. We have a pretty enviable safety record for such a large country, there have been many international accidents connected to inexperience in the flight deck. The regulator was very slow to enact the duty regs that were proposed about 15 years ago, they certainly aren’t a flawless organization. Having a copilot with 1-2 years commercial flying experience occupying the right seat on a A320/B737 shouldn’t seem like a big ask for the ‘travelling public’. They are certainly not a single pilot Aircraft.

I’m guessing you are against it as a lever for pilot wages in a shortage, not the idea of have experienced competent flight crew in the cockpit.

The whole notion of 250 hour pilots being unsafe is nonsense. Look at Europe, everybody goes direct to a 320 or similar airframe. On the contrary, we have AC759 in SFO which was seconds away from being the deadliest crash in aviation. The cause? Pilot fatigue. The captain was 19 hours without "significant rest" at this point.

Wages are low because people just keep taking the jobs. There are KingAir captains at 140K/year, yet people rush to Jazz for the AC carrot.

CaptainHaddock wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 1:34 pm Federally mandating both pilots have a ATPL in the front would be a start.

This will absolutely not happen ever in this country. We had some of the worst duty regulations on the planet, and the new ones aren't much better and still don't apply to smaller operators!

There was not reason for them to be so lax, and it only changed due to multiple near disasters happening.

throwawaycorporate wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 3:39 pm

CaptainHaddock wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:36 pm “The folks whining for a 1500 hour rule in Canada dont understand one of the realities of how the regulator works. The regulator is tasked with ensuring safety of the travelling public, not with creating an environment that artificially increases pilot wages.”

We really haven’t had whole-scale adoption of 250hr First Officers here (yet)on large jets, so there wouldn’t be a lot of transport aircraft accident data available here. We have a pretty enviable safety record for such a large country, there have been many international accidents connected to inexperience in the flight deck. The regulator was very slow to enact the duty regs that were proposed about 15 years ago, they certainly aren’t a flawless organization. Having a copilot with 1-2 years commercial flying experience occupying the right seat on a A320/B737 shouldn’t seem like a big ask for the ‘travelling public’. They are certainly not a single pilot Aircraft.

I’m guessing you are against it as a lever for pilot wages in a shortage, not the idea of have experienced competent flight crew in the cockpit.

The whole notion of 250 hour pilots being unsafe is nonsense. Look at Europe, everybody goes direct to a 320 or similar airframe. On the contrary, we have AC759 in SFO which was seconds away from being the deadliest crash in aviation. The cause? Pilot fatigue. The captain was 19 hours without "significant rest" at this point.

Wages are low because people just keep taking the jobs. There are KingAir captains at 140K/year, yet people rush to Jazz for the AC carrot.

This is exactly it. Sure an ATPL means somebody has sat in a seat for at least 1500 hrs. But can anyone honestly make the argument that an instructor on a 172 flying circuits for 2 years will be better prepared for an airline operation than a 250 hour pilot who has been trained an-initio to operate a 320 or similar? Probably not.

There are many of us out here that got into the industry at low total time and still have to go rent a Cessna to finish part of the 250 PIC time that isn’t covered by the 100 PICUS hours. Now tell me how flying a Cessna for 10 hours after flying 705 for 5+ years will give me the necessary experience to be an airline captain?

It’s just ridiculous.

The pay issue has a lot more to do with the fact that we are willing to take just about any job for any pay. And if you aren’t willing to take a job because of the pay, you can bet there is some other guy/gal out there who will jump at the chance.

Pilots are fairly unique in that we are passionate about what we do, but it is prohibitively expensive to pursue our passion on a daily basis without flying equipment owned by somebody else. The airlines understand this and will exploit it as long as they can. Change in the industry isn’t going to happen until we all refuse to fly for relative peanuts. But we also know that won’t happen.

Guess we will have to wait for retirements and pilot supply issues… LOL

Hate to break it to you, but 100 hours of flying a Cessna by yourself, having to make your own decisions, and not following a script is better experience than your 100 hours of PICUS! Please enlighten me on how those PICUS hours differed from all of your other hours as FO— what made them qualify as command time?

Someone once said that the hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no. You learn way more about that fly a small airplane, under self dispatch, etc. than you do in an airline environment. But those skills sure come in handy when you are at an airline and things are going sideways.

I’m not comparing 100hrs of PICUS to 100hrs of PIC cross country. I’m comparing it to flying around in a circuit or to the practice area with a student. But thanks for pointing out the obvious…

DP