PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Merged: Senate Inquiry
View Single Post
Old 31st Dec 2010, 01:42
  #124 (permalink)  
Roller Merlin
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: OZ
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 1 Post
Regardless of the operational argument for experienced pilots, there is a wider National imperative to enforcing mandatory pilot experience in RPT.

Historically the GA pathway to the airlines has provided the GA sector with a ready low-cost workforce keen to gain experience requirements of the big employers. Our small but nationally important GA sector needs only relatively small government sponsorship in remote and other critical areas due to it being the pathway to better pilot jobs. If this pathway is no longer viewed as such, governments will be forced to top up millions to keep remote and other smaller essential services running as more operators struggle to get low-paid pilots and salaries jump. The Euro-cadet model in Australia would incur cost shifting from the airline to the taxpayer, and governments will cop this economic deficit without supportive legislation to protect the fragile GA sector.

NZ has a law prohibiting pilot flying as RPT crew with <500hours. US congress has approved law of similar intent, but with higher hours. These countries have GA sectors of vital importance that will now be supported by the legislated RPT requirements. Australia, like the USA in the past, has had no such law, largely due to previous levels of industry self regulation. The USA is now leading the way in enforcing a strategy that keeps the balance right for governments, the economy and the travelling public. This is what the senate enquiry should take note of, and this alone is enough to enforce a minimum experience level for RPT in Australia.
Roller Merlin is offline