EASA has presided over a change in the pilot training system that has gone from allowing those with talent and determination to get into the business to a system that is based entirely on how much money you can afford.
Do you think so? In the 19 years or so that this website has been in existence I have seen the transition taking place under (here in the UK) the CAA, then JAA, and only recently EASA. Those with "talent and determination" always had the hurdle of affordability to contend with. The
pinnacle level jobs were always keenly competed for. For many years now I have advised those seeking
fasttrack entry into this profession to avail themselves of the integrated cadet programmes. Not because (as have some have erroneously suggested) I have any beneficial connection with that regime, but because for a long time now the writing has been clearly on the wall that this was the direction the industry was inevitably moving in.
Looking back over the last 30 years, the standard of entry level cadets in recent years, is significantly improved on where it was twenty or thirty years ago. There are many reasons for this, but not least amongst them is the consistency in
ab-initio training, and the airlines ability to have input into that training as they deem fit. Today the attrition rate of new cadets is a tiny fraction of where it was 30 years ago, and that takes into account the fact that todays candidate arrives with maybe 200 hours, whereas those candidates from bygone eras often arrived with at least 4 times that level of quantitative experience, and usually anything up to ten times that level.
The training via these routes is without doubt expensive. However it is an expense that these days (and nearly always has) falls firmly at the feet of the prospective candidate. Despite this, there is no shortage whatsoever of potential candidates, and their ability (or lack of) to afford that training has no bearing on the standards that the airline sets for its requirements.
I am not sure how the regulatory authority can control how many hours a pilot chooses to travel on a bus (outside of his duty period). In the USA you frequently come across the relatively widespread practice of pilots making transcontinental commutes in order to work at their assigned bases. Most airlines will contractually stipulate the domicile requirements for pre-duty reporting, however in reality neither they nor the regulators can enforce whether a pilot elects to comply with those requirements. Indeed, if they could, it would presumably make the job even more slanted towards those with the ability to afford those costs.
The remuneration for the job is not, and cannot really be a regulated sum. Like everything in a market, it is governed by supply and demand. The supply is plentiful and that sets the benchmark. The affordability issue is undoubtably a significant factor in restricting supply. I can't see how removing that restriction would improve the situation.