PILOT SHORTAGE/AGE 60 RULE
Apr 21, 2003
Author:

PILOT SHORTAGE/AGE 60 RULE
"At Atlantic Coast Airlines, 100 of the regional carrier's 540 pilots quit last year." (Wall Street Journal, June 4, 1998)

"Our members, depending on where they are, are experiencing turnover rates of between 5% and 30% per year." (Walter Coleman, president of the Regional Airline Association, June 11,1998)

"But large numbers of Captains will be retiring from most U.S. carriers, and indeed European ones as well, at the turn of the century and soon after. This will cause the majors to hire a further mass of new pilots in a relatively short period of time. The effects on the air transportation system could be disastrous as a sudden surge of poor-caliber pilots is dragged from the bottom of the system, perhaps all the way to the majors. The real losers will be the air-taxi and regional operators that must fly their aircraft with the pilots the majors cannot attract. The effect on safety does not bear thinking about." (Air Line Pilot Magazine, May 1998)

These are frightening words spoken by reputable sources. They are all pointing to the same problem (actually four problems). Firstly, boom times mean expansion and the need for pilots. At the same time, retirements within the airline industry are on a sharp rise as the huge block of pilots hired back in the '60s reaches retirement. This surge begins around the year 2000 and peaks in 2007. Third, the pilot pool from which the necessary new-hires are drawn is shrinking. Lastly, the military cannot hold onto the pilots it has (n@) because they are leaving for the airlines.

Airlines are hiring like crazy. So far in 1998, pilot hiring totals are 6,480 and are projected to reach 15,372. Twelve of the 14 major carriers have hired 302 pilots in May alone. U.S. airlines hired more than 10,600 pilots in 1996 and almost 12,000 in 1997. Part of this is due to a steady growth within the airline industry. However, the hiring is also fueled by the beginning of a retirement surge that hasn't been see in decades.

According to Air Inc., twelve of the largest airlines lost 1,000 pilots to retirement in 19,96. That number will go up every annually until it peaks at 2,300 in 2007. This means that our most experienced pilots are being pulled out of the system in record numbers, at the same time that the DOT and the National Airline Commission are projecting a huge increase in flights and near gridlock in the system. The FAA predicts passenger totals to rise from 574 million in 1996 to 900 million by 2007, up 60% from today. Said the National Civil Aviation Review Commission, "our nation's aviation system will succumb to gridlock."

This is hardly the place for rookie pilots to thrive.

The losses in the majors will create a domino effect, as pilots are replaced by less experienced pilots from the regional carriers and pilots rejecting continued military service.

According to Kit Darby of Air Inc., regionals hired 5,550 pilots in the past 17 months. Many of those hirings are due to attrition. Said Darby, "Some [regional carriers] are losing 20, 30, 40 pilots each month."

Skyway Airlines has an annual turnover rate of 20-30%. In 1997 Mesaba hired some 250 pilots - and lost 37. In, 1998 Mesaba is losing about eight per month. Said Paul Keene, recruiting manager at Atlantic Coast Airlines, "It's a recruitment nightmare." With the regional airline industry rapidly transitioning to all-j et (see related story below) and being primarily code-sharing partners with the major airlines, this has huge implications.

Where are these pilots coming from? This country no longer has the huge surplus of military pilots available after the Vietnam War. Neither does this country have any national training program as many other countries do. Airlines, with few exceptions, have no ‘ab initio’ programs where new, pilots will be trained and groomed for hiring into their affiliated feeder carriers and then the majors themselves. That leaves an assortment of unrelated civilian training programs, from the single instructor in farm country to large schools such as Embry- Riddle. It won't be enough. Indeed, stripping the regional carriers means the next level is being stripped by the regionals. Flight Instructors, corporate pilots, etc. are all moving up ... and leaving a void behind them. Said Jim Moran, head of flight technology for Embry-Riddle flight school in Florida, "I lose my best people first." Who then, is training the pilots of the future?

The military cannot help. It is struggling to hold its own pilots, many of whom are abandoning military service for the much more attractive pay and living conditions at the major carriers. The modern down-sized military, with fewer flying hours and more unattractive overseas missions ("Sorry, honey. I'm going to the Gulf for six months ... again.") is at a disadvantage. Retention bonuses in the Air Force almost doubled, from ,000 to 0,000, in hopes the pilots will stay another five years. Only one-third are taking the offer. The Navy expects to be unable to maintain its strength in the year 2000, when its time for today's pilots to take their second fleet duty on the "boat".

If the military is losing its experienced pilots, who then is replacing them? Newly hired pilots are ruinously expensive to train and do not have the experience necessary to fulfill the mission. Under strength units cannot fulfill the mission either. The airline pilot shortage is, then, an impact on our nation's military readiness as well.

If I am drawing fairly bleak picture in this article, I am not alone. The Air Line Pilots' Association, the largest pilot union in the country, recently printed an article in its national magazine, Air Line Pilot. The article was titled, "Pull Up, Pilot Shortage Looming". Written by Trevor Nash, the editor of CAT, The Journal for Civil Aviation Training, the article observes "the current system [pilot-sourcing chain] is becoming ever more squeezed as general aviation becomes more expensive, as governments fail to support pilot training, and as our bright young people are increasingly pressured to undertake other professions in a globally growing economy." The thrust of the argument by Mr. Nash is that airlines "to take a much closer look at their future pilot requirements" and get more involved with raising standards.

This is a laudable argument. But it ignores one easy and available source of experienced pilots – the pilots now flying for our nation's major airlines,

Pilots flying for United States Federal Aviation Regulation Part 121 and Part 135 carriers (all our scheduled passenger carriers) are required to retire at the age of 60 - regardless of competency, health, etc. Think about this absurdity. Think about it hard. After accruing 35 or so years of aviation experience, our pilots are asked to step out of the cockpit. Elsewhere in our nations' skies, pilots fly overhead with impunity - at the age of 62, 65, 68 and up. The FAA's own pilots are not subject to retirement at age 60. Neither are those pilots flying freight for carriers not covered under Part 121 or unscheduled passenger service or corporate jets. Aircraft manufacturer Boeing's pilots fly past age 60 also. Yet they all fly into the same airports, use the same airspace and follow the same rules as Part 121 and Part 135 pilots do.

How about foreign airlines? Lufthansa is no slouch when it hauls passengers. Neither is Japan Air Lines, Ansett, Quantas, Air France, or British Airways. All allow their pilots to fly past the age of 60.

Why? Because age is not a valid reason for excluding their pilots- from the cockpit.

Japan Air Lines began a five-year test of pilots over age 60 flying their airliners. A-fter three years they called off the test. Why? Because it was a waste of time. There was no correlation between age and performance.

It is high time this country joins the rest of the world. The solution for our pilot shortage is already in the air - our most experienced pilots, those time-tested by years of situations only dreamed of by younger and less-experienced pilots.

As ALPA said in its May 1998 issue of Air Line Pilot, "The sooner airlines start working together to address the issue, the better chance they will have of averting it. There may not be time to pull up!"

We couldn't agree more.