British Pilot working for US airlines

[am111]

Hi All,

I was wondering if I could get some feedback and thoughts from our cousins over the pond.

I'm a British citizen married to an American, and we are currently living in the UK. I am due to start flight training at Oxford Aviation Academy in September, an ab initio course that will see me qualify with an EASA frozen ATPL and approximately 200 hours TT. I will also be doing the addon BSc (Honours) degree in Air Transport Management. This is sufficient to get into the RHS of an airline in Europe. If all goes to plan I will get my first job and type rating with a european airline (probably a low cost) and build up my hours.

I believe, after gaining enough hours, I can then convert my EASA ATPL to an FAA ATP - with a bit of paper shuffling, an exam and a check ride. Am I right in making the assumption that I will be more desirable to the US carriers with 1500 hours on type vs a US pilot who has 1500 hours as a CFI or such like? Or do recruiters like to see that their pilots have put that hard graft in of hour building?

If I am employable in the US with 1500 hours on, say a 737, would I more likely have to apply to a regional or could I apply straight to the majors? Will the majors recognise my Bachelors degree even though isn't not from a US institution?

Thank you in advance, any and all advice or info will be greatly appreciated.

AM

[galaxy flyer]

With just 1500 hours, regardless of type, you won't be competitive for anything other than a regional airline. Civil background pilots needs 3,000-5,000 hours of RJ time, 4-year degree and some other resume stuff, like LCA, Safety, or volunteer work, etc to be competitive.

GF

[zondaracer]

With 1500 hours, you will only be competitive at a regional, and right now regionals are hiring any 1500 hour pilot with a pulse, regardless of its A380 time or Cessna 152 time. I just saw an infographic today and in 2015, the AVERAGE amount of flight time for a new hire was 5,900 hours. Delta and American are about the same.

[careerSO]

Would I be correct in assuming then that most successful candidates for the majors would be mid to late twenties at the earliest? Looking at the very poor pay in the first few years at the majors, when I guess most people would be at the age of wanting to start a family it seems impossible unless you're willing to commute out to the country with a lower cost of living. Am I missing something? All the majors seeks to quote an hourly pay figure for around 75hr pm.

[mustangsally]

Ten years ago most 121 companies wanted, ATP, and at least 1000 hours of pure jet time. Turboprop did not count. Now, things have changed, the ATP is still a must but the turboprop restrictions have been deleted. Age wise, young or old doesn't matter. I know of pilots in there mid fifties have been hired, (most will never see the left seat.) The four year degree is desired but not required. As for pay, that is also a supply and demand. In the 1980's there were lots of pilots in the market. Today the number has almost disappeared. Get an ATP, fly for a regional for a couple of years and you will be very attractive to any of the majors.

[am111]

Hi,

Thanks for all of your replies, really helpful. Just to clarify, will my jet experience put me in a better position than my American counterparts? Would I have a better chance at getting a job with one of the better regionals? Which ones are considered the better ones?

If, hypothetically speaking, I wanted to end up working for Delta, should I aim to land a job with Endeavour Air or does it not really make that much difference.

Also, if the regionals are hiring anyone they can get their hands on, this pilot shortage I keep hearing about is actually real. Or is that me being naive and optimistic?

AM

[flyhayes]

The pilot shortage is real at the regional airline level, this isn't being felt at the major airline level yet. As long as you fulfill the time requirements for getting your FAA ATP you should have a good shot at which ever regional airline you decide on regardless of experience.

[CSU_Ram]

Not at all. If you can see lightning, hear thunder and have 1500 hours you can pick and choose which regional you want to work for.

[NuGuy]

A four year degree is mandatory at any of the majors. Sure, some people will say you can get hired without, and sure, there are a few that have been, but the vast, vast majority of your competition will have it, and you don't want to give them any reason to toss your application to the bottom. Your degree should be fine, but conventional wisdom is to get one unrelated to aviation so as to have something to fall back on during the hard times (accounting, engineering, etc). And there are always hard times. US Majors don't care what your degree is in, and in fact, they like to see some diversity and interests outside of aviation.


Practically all of the US regionals operate jets of some kind. The majors don't care if it's a Airbus or a Embraer. The regionals don't care if you flew a Gulfstream or a DC-3. That your 1,500 hours is in a jet won't matter to anyone. There is zero chance to get on with the majors with that time, or even 3,000 hours for that matter.


Civilian track it is a LONG road to the US majors. Figure at least 6-7,000 hours total time, irrespective of the types flown (no one cares), including some good PIC time, a clean record and at least some instructor/checkairman time. That's 7-8 years of busting your tail.


Major US carriers simply do not care about type specific experience. Their point of view is that a good pilot is a well-rounded individual that has strong basic flying skills transferrable to any aircraft. They'll train you to fly their aircraft their way (and on their dime). Rather, they see the long period as a vetting process. If you survive the 8 years, most of which flying 121, and keep your nose clean, then you have a high probability of being OK, especially since all 121/135 training has a paper trail they review prior to hiring.


All US carriers, regional and majors, have a high expectation that you can manually handle airplanes PRIOR to showing up for training. The training is focused on systems and procedures with zero hand holding for basic flying skills. You are expected to have very strong hand flying instrument & flying skills from day 1.


Something relatively new in the hiring process over the last few years is that most US Majors want you to have some kind of community involvement...volunteering, interests outside of aviation, or similar.


Hope this isn't too discouraging.


Nu

[CSU_Ram]

Yeah, that community service requirement is a sign of HR gone wild.

[NorthwestFlyer]

Incorrect.

Even though most regional airlines in the US are hiring, you simply can not pick and chose. The top 3 will still have you go through quite a thorough selection process. The rest, reminds me of one in FL and one out of AZ among others, will take those who do not make it to the top 3.

Good Luck!

[am111]

NuGuy,

Thanks for the detailed reply, very informative and not discouraging at all, very aware of the long road ahead but definitely excited to go down it.

If time and money were no object I would absolutely invest in an unrelated degree. As it is, the FTO offers the Air Transport Management BSc alongside the flight training, so for only a little extra investment and in a shorter amount of time I can get the letters after my name to please the majors.

About this hand flying experience...obviously part of my training involves gaining an EASA CPL, mostly in a Piper PA28 but various other single and multi engine aircraft as well as sim time, so I do gain some 'true' manual flying experience. Obviously the course is specifically set up to give me the skills to be an airline pilot. But once I am in the RHS, I get the impression the manual flying time is limited.

I know the airlines require you to manually take off and land, plus there are sim assessments every 6 months. Is this enough to keep your handling skills sharp or do you do other things? Obviously the FAA think this is an issue, hence the 1500 hour limit. Do the pilots feel it was necessary or has made a difference? Or is there another reason that the FAA introduced that rule? Or are those questions best saved for another thread?

AM

[misd-agin]

A four year college degree is not required to get a major airline job IF you go to one of the regional airlines that has a 'flow through' agreement to a major airline.

[misd-agin]

In the U.S. your manual flying time is limited to how much you want to do it. Most guys hand fly for several thousand feet on departure and arrival.

[atpcliff]

By the time you get 1500 hours, and transfer your stuff to US licenses, with your larger aircraft time, you can probably get a job at a major straight away. There will be regionals with flow-through agreements to the majors that will fight over you.

As of 6 months ago, there were flight instructors with FIVE and SEVEN NEW HIRE CLASS DATES!!!...not interviews, actual class dates. The Pilot Shortage is gathering strength...still the tsunami wave to come...

[Reverserbucket]

Or is there another reason that the FAA introduced that rule?
Yes - a former flight instructor who had worked for a contractor, coincidentally used by Oxford Aviation Academy, played a part in a nasty accident in 2009:


http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/AAR1001.aspx

[am111]

By the time you get 1500 hours, and transfer your stuff to US licenses, with your larger aircraft time, you can probably get a job at a major straight away.

It's reassuring that you think the pilot shortage will get to that level in 5 or 6 years time. Is there any precedence of the majors lowering their requirements before?

A four year college degree is not required to get a major airline job IF you go to one of the regional airlines that has a 'flow through' agreement to a major airline.

Is there anywhere I can look up which airlines have relationships with each other? I apologise that I don't know much about the American airline industry. Presumably it's still better to have a degree than not to have one? How do the flow through agreements work, are you guaranteed to move up to the majors or are you competing for spaces still, you just have a better chance than someone not in a 'flow through' agreement.

Yes - a former flight instructor who had worked for a contractor, coincidentally used by Oxford Aviation Academy, played a part in a nasty accident in 2009:

http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/A...s/AAR1001.aspx

I knew that the 1500 hour rule was implemented after an accident, although had never looked at the report, so thanks for linking that. I have only read the conclusion and recommendations, so apologies if I missed something. Whilst it is obvious that the pilots' inexperience and inadequate training, amongst other things, lead to the accident, there is no mention of changing the hour requirement for Part 121 pilots. At least I didn't interpret any of the recommendations that way. So did anything else lead to the introduction of this rule?

AM

[MarkerInbound]

The families of the victims of 3407 lobbied Congress to do something. Congress passed the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010. Mixed in with the year's funding for the FAA and airport improvements on Midway Island was the requirement to change the way ATPs are issued, limit flight and duty times to limit fatigue and insure flight crewmembers have proper qualifications and experience.

[flyhayes]

The American Eagle branded airlines (Piedmont, PSA and Envoy Air) are wholly owned by American Airlines and offer flow through agreements to their parent company. Although, I hear that it can take some time before you flow through.

United recently purchased a large stake in CommutAir (which is slated to grow by 300% over the next few years). Concurrently with this they announced a Career Pathway Program (CPP), which allows you to chance to interview directly with United Airlines. I f accepted into the CPP program, once you meet the qualifications you will be placed into the pool of candidates awaiting a class date (So it's not a true flow through agreement per se, but you will upgrade to captain much much faster than at the American branded regionals).
ExpressJet also just recently announced a CPP program with United, although that airline is shrinking, and the CPP was probably a way to slow the attrition.

Full disclosure, I am a pilot with CommutAir.

Better info can be had at the well known US Airline forum regarding these airlines.

[flyhayes]

Forgot Delta, they own Endeavor Air. Which has a flow through agreement.

[zondaracer]

Also, United Airlines and Expressjet just signed a deal that will have a hiring pathway for Expressjet Embraer pilots.

[bafanguy]

Since the subject of flow-up has been mentioned, is it possible for someone who "belongs" to the regional in question to apply independently to the parent airline while still in the pipeline...out of turn so to speak ?

I seem to remember talking to someone knowledgeable of the Endeavor-to-Delta program and was told you couldn't do that but haven't heard anything about the other deals.

It's all a bit academic, I suppose.

[zondaracer]

independently to the parent airline while still in the pipeline...out of turn so to speak ?

We call that applying outside the flow or off the street. Some programs allow you to apply off the street for the same airline and some don't.

[flyhayes]

United's CPP program with CommutAir allows you to also apply the traditional way. I would Imagine the CPP they have with Express Jet functions the same.

[bafanguy]

flyhayes,

"I would Imagine the CPP they have with Express Jet functions the same. "

Well, it's hard to tell under what circumstances people left XJT for UAL but some of 'em sure have made the jump:

2014: 75
2015: 148

Haven't seen any data for this year yet.

[flyhayes]

As far as I know, nobody has left either regional as part of the CPP program yet.

[zondaracer]

http://s31.postimg.org/s3tlel5q3/image.png

[bafanguy]

Zonda,


That's a nice breakdown of the UAL info. Is it available on the ALPA National website ?

I know that UAL has hired almost twice as many XJT pilots as DL in 2014 and 2015 combined. It was twice as many (+) in 2015: 148 vs 63. Kinda makes a guy think, "...hmmmm...". :-(

[am111]

Thanks for all the replies everyone. I think I'm starting to understand the structure of the regional and major airlines and how the pipelines work. It is very different to Europe. Are the American Eagle airlines based on seniority whilst the UAL CPP based on experience, i.e you apply for a position with your CV and an interview etc but competing only with those in you airline rather than everyone else?

Am I right in thinking that if I wanted to work for a particular major airline, I would have the best chance of getting there by first landing a job with one of their regional partners. I assume I could still get a job with one of the other majors if I wanted? For example, I get a job with Piedmont and join the queue to move up to AA. I then decide that I would rather work for United, and so apply to them directly. Will I be passed over in favour of pilots from their own regionals?

AM

[chitolin]

Civilian and military add up to 115%! neat

[zondaracer]

Civilian and military add up to 115%! neat

There are a few military guys who went to regionals to get current or get the 121 box ticked while they waited for an interview at the majors. I know several guys who did this. There are also pilots in the guard and reserve that were hired straight into the guard and reserve, and once they hit 750hours they went to a regional to help build time, while concurrently flying in the guard and reserve.

[zondaracer]

. Are the American Eagle airlines based on seniority whilst the UAL CPP based on experience, i.e you apply for a position with your CV and an interview etc but competing only with those in you airline rather than everyone else?



It is all seniority based. If you are at Envoy, you can also apply to American off the street and hope to get hired before you flow. I believe PSA's contract says you cannot apply to American off the street in an attempt to get hired before you flow. Some PSA guys were saying that if you get hired at PSA today, the one major that you will never work for is American, but I don't know how true that is.


I know that Envoy has shrunk their fleet considerably recently, so they are fat on pilots. Long reserve right now and longer upgrade, and line holders have lower credit trips in general. Having a flow is a great way to reduce the pilot numbers to the correct number required for their fleet. A lot of pilots speculate that American will meter the flow if it will cause staffing issues for their regional feed.


Expressjet has the preferential interview program with United, only for United dedicated pilots (ERJ pilots). Keep in mind that Expressjet operates only old 50 seat airplanes for United. United has pubicly stated that they want to reduce 50 seat feed by over 50%. What great combination of hiring pilots from the 50 seat fleet as the fleet shrinks over time...


Am I right in thinking that if I wanted to work for a particular major airline, I would have the best chance of getting there by first landing a job with one of their regional partners. I assume I could still get a job with one of the other majors if I wanted? For example, I get a job with Piedmont and join the queue to move up to AA. I then decide that I would rather work for United, and so apply to them directly. Will I be passed over in favour of pilots from their own regionals?



Flawed thinking here...
Many regionals operate for more than one major:


Horizon Airlines - owned by Alaska Airlines, operates for Alaska
Air Wisconsin - Operates for American as American Eagle
CommutAir - Partially owned by United, operates for United Express


Trans States Airlines - Owned by Trans States Holdings, operates United and American
GoJet - Owned by Trans States Holdings - operates Delta and United
Compass - owned by Trans States Holdings - Operates Delta and American


Endeavor - Owned by Delta, operates for Delta


Envoy - Owned by American, operates American Eagle
Piedmont - Owned by American, operates American Eagle
PSA - Owned by American, Operates American Eagle


Expressjet - Owned by Skywest, operates Delta, American, and United
Skywest Airlines -Owned by Skywest Inc, operates United, Delta, American, Alaska


Mesa - Owned by Mesa, operates for American and United


Republic Airlines - Owned by Republic, operates for American and Delta
Shuttle America - Owned by Republic, operates for United and Delta


Silver - Operates for United


In general, the majors don't give preferential hiring to one regional or another unless they have explicitly stated it, for example CommutAir and United, Expressjet and United, Endeavor and Delta, and the American owned regionals. There is some speculation that some of these majors would prefer to hire from regionals that support their competition. For example, if PSA, who operates for American, cannot staff their airplanes, and United decides to hire a bunch of PSA pilots, now American is going to have to cancel some PSA operated American Eagle flights... This is just speculation. Southwest does not have any regional affiliates, and they hire quite a few regional pilots. Some people are cautious about going to a wholly owned regional after Comair was shutdown by Delta. Everything can change overnight with the regionals. If you look at any regional and look at their history, (fleet, mainline flying partners, growth, shrinkage, pilot bases), you will see some pretty crazy adaptation to the market.

[Reverserbucket]

I am due to start flight training at Oxford Aviation Academy in September
If all goes to plan I will get my first job and type rating with a european airline (probably a low cost) and build up my hours
Good for the OP for doing some homework, however I find it particularly interesting that someone who has yet to start training is discussing using a European airline as a springboard into the US market and particularly the regionals - they don't pay much by comparison to even the LC's in most of the EU but that's another story...

Interesting times following many years of so few jobs, that a candidate would contemplate leaving a much coveted jet job in Europe before they've started training - why not cut out all the additional time, cost and effort spent in the pursuit of an EASA CPL/IR and MCC, emigrate to the US and complete an FAA Private/Commercial/Instrument and CFI, build your 1500hrs instructing then apply to the regionals seeing as you still have to go via the regionals to get to the majors?

[bafanguy]

Rverserbucket,

Under the circumstances, I'm surprised that eligible foreign nationals haven't been more actively, overtly recruited. The only example I've seen is Republic Airlines' effort to get some Brazilians in here. The CEO was just barking up the wrong tree. There must be some other trees. :-)

[Reverserbucket]

True, but as you point out, the key is eligibility and those Brazilians were not. With a US citizen for a wife, am111 is in principal, eligible for Permanent Residency so will meet that requirement. A colleague of mine with around 10K on 737's/320's in the UK applied for several jobs with regionals in the US a few years ago on the basis that he wanted a ticket to live and work in the States. He told me he didn't get a single response from any of them. Coincidentally, I met a skipper from the US flying the 'bus for BA yesterday - I guess it works both ways.

[bafanguy]

Reverserbucket,

I suppose it's hard to know how many foreign nationals would qualify under the "married to" or dual citizenship banner to grease the skids into the US regionals. But I suspect those who do just take matters into their hands individually. You'd expect some enterprising FTO to put together a program for them (those with existing non-FAA tickets).

I keep hearing that many regionals are struggling to fill seats but it's mostly anecdotal from here in the Peanut Gallery except for the one where I have a little bit of inside perspective…and it's not the best of the lot (nor the worst). It's puzzling that these airlines would sit there and let things go to pot without exhausting every potential source. Have they ?

There are frequently ways around the ham fisted interference of the kakistocracy.

Maybe it's just not all THAT dire ?

And then, there's that Aussie thing…untapped resource ? Maybe someone should've told Republic. :-))

[am111]

why not cut out all the additional time, cost and effort spent in the pursuit of an EASA CPL/IR and MCC, emigrate to the US and complete an FAA Private/Commercial/Instrument and CFI, build your 1500hrs instructing then apply to the regionals

This is something I looked into but figured that I would rather do my first 1500 hours in the RHS of an airliner. The question about moving from Europe to the USA was less about financial career progression and more about where the wife and I would rather settle, sunny California or rainy old England.

I wrongly assumed I could go straight in to the majors with 1500 hours of european airline experience, hence why I started this thread. Who knows what will happen in the next 4 years. We may decide to stay in Europe a little longer until I can get a job at one of the majors. Then again, we may get sick of the rain sooner than that so it will be good to know my options.

AM

[misd-agin]

chitolin - ALPA needs new calculator Civilian and military add up to 115%! neat


*************************


Only civilian - 78%
Military - 37%
Civ/Mil - 15%?


Or put another way, 40% of the military pilots have civilian experience and 60% have only military experience.

[zondaracer]

American Airlines Hiring Department


You can see that the Flow Throughs were very senior at their company.
You can see that the average for flow throughs and Street hires combined is 5000hrs, and the majority of those off the Street hires are the military guys who are bringing the average down.
Right now, Envoy flow throughs have 12 years at Envoy. Recruiters are saying 2 years to upgrade, 6 to flow. At the moment, guys are getting off reserve at 2 years and upgrading at 6 years, flowing at 12, but the recruiters' numbers are based on current flow numbers for someone hired tomorrow... we will see if that becomes true or not.
http://s32.postimg.org/exo5zy8gl/image.jpg

[bafanguy]

Zonda,

The graphic you posted shows, IIUC, AA as having 16,000+ apps on file. That's a pretty significant number considering DL only claims to have 5,000 in their undefined "hiring pool". It appears the majority of people being taken on at AA are flows. Comparatively little street hiring ?

I got this very recently from my buddy who's a TWA staple victim who stays in close touch with the situation at AA:

"The number of current on furlough returnees at AA is about 863 and includes all the junior natives (original AA who are still on furlough). ...most of the folks still on furlough are in their late 40's or early 50's. Some a bit older/younger. AA hasn't even thought about the impending shortage because they think they're soooo cool, there will be thousands lined up to apply to the 'wonderful' AA."

It's hard to see AA's mindset in the pilot replacement game but thinking they've got 16+K people to pick from to fill their ~8K pending vacancies might be just a little bit off the mark ?

Without specific definitions of terms, I suppose it's hard to know for sure what they're saying.

[zondaracer]

Yes, AA has 16,000 applications. Delta has well over 10,000 applications. Same with United, but it's the same 16,000 applying to all three companies.

Yes, the majority of AA hires are through the flows. Most off the street hired at AA are military with a splattering of civilian pilots.

All of the AA furloughed pilots have until May 6th to return. I personally know two pilots on furlough who will not accept the recall. The closer we get to May 6th, the less likely the furloughs will come back as they have found other work or their life situation has changed.

[SextanteUK]

Hey hi zondaracer, you're awesome. :E

[zondaracer]

SextanteUK,

Yeah especially because I chose an awesome birthday cake for you.

[NuGuy]

Reverserbucket,

I suppose it's hard to know how many foreign nationals would qualify under the "married to" or dual citizenship banner to grease the skids into the US regionals. But I suspect those who do just take matters into their hands individually. You'd expect some enterprising FTO to put together a program for them (those with existing non-FAA tickets).

I keep hearing that many regionals are struggling to fill seats but it's mostly anecdotal from here in the Peanut Gallery except for the one where I have a little bit of inside perspective…and it's not the best of the lot (nor the worst). It's puzzling that these airlines would sit there and let things go to pot without exhausting every potential source. Have they ?

There are frequently ways around the ham fisted interference of the kakistocracy.

Maybe it's just not all THAT dire ?

And then, there's that Aussie thing…untapped resource ? Maybe someone should've told Republic. :-))

You're on to something.


First, the major carriers, and many of the smaller large-jet carriers have zero problem filling their seats. People are clamoring to work for them.


If the regionals tried to "press-to-test" on something similar to an H1B visa program, their case would be completely deflated, because, clearly, there are plenty of pilots, and the qualifications to fly at both, majors and regionals are, technically, the same.


Having plenty of potential qualified applicants, but using the argument "well, yea, but we don't want to pay them enough to come work for us" doesn't really work out all that well in this situation.


Very hard to make the case that what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander in this particular set of circumstances.


The long and the short of it, if you want to fly for a US major, you need a lot of time (>5,000 TT) or slightly less time and be ex-military (>2,000TT). It doesn't have to be air carrier time, but at least some should be, and some of that should be turbine PIC. You should have a 4-year (or equivalent degree), and at least show some advancement to a "leadership" position (instructor pilot, checkairman, stand/eval pilot (for mil guys), assistant chief pilot, or even union rep). Have a life outside of work.


If you can check at least some of those boxes (oh, and have a legal right to work in the US), then you stand a reasonable chance at getting looked at without working for the associated regional airline. Super deluxe that one might have 1500 hours in 737s, but if you have 1800 hours total time, that's not going to cut it in the US due to radically different hiring philosophy. Golly, it's neat that someone might have flown a A320, but any US major can train anyone who meets their qualification to fly it, and that person has the same training footprint as someone with previous Airbus time.


One can fuss and fume, but its not going to change any time in the foreseeable future.


Nu

[bafanguy]

Nu,

"One can fuss and fume, but its not going to change any time in the foreseeable future."

Agree. I'm just a little surprised some regional, in particular, hasn't made more of an overt, serious effort to get access to expats...if it's all as dire as alleged. Perhaps it isn't ?

[zondaracer]

Two regionals have tried to get expats and both were unsuccessful. The pool of applicants has not dried up yet. All this talk about the pilot shortage is bringing lots of pilots out of the woodwork. I know several guys who gave up on flying as a career, and they decided to get current and apply to the airlines. I know lots of young guys in the training pipeline who are getting their training done in 6-12 months and getting their first flying jobs. They anticipate getting their 1500 and going to a regional within two years of finishing their ratings. The well is not quite dry.

[am111]

The long and the short of it, if you want to fly for a US major, you need a lot of time (>5,000 TT) or slightly less time and be ex-military (>2,000TT). It doesn't have to be air carrier time, but at least some should be, and some of that should be turbine PIC. You should have a 4-year (or equivalent degree), and at least show some advancement to a "leadership" position (instructor pilot, checkairman, stand/eval pilot (for mil guys), assistant chief pilot, or even union rep). Have a life outside of work.

If you can check at least some of those boxes (oh, and have a legal right to work in the US), then you stand a reasonable chance at getting looked at without working for the associated regional airline. Super deluxe that one might have 1500 hours in 737s, but if you have 1800 hours total time, that's not going to cut it in the US due to radically different hiring philosophy. Golly, it's neat that someone might have flown a A320, but any US major can train anyone who meets their qualification to fly it, and that person has the same training footprint as someone with previous Airbus time

Thank-you for all of your replies. Zondaracer, your answers have been particularly helpful and informative. The above quote from NuGuy seems like an appropriate summary to my initial question.

It does sound like there is definitely some serious movement in the industry at the moment and how that will affect the job market in the next 5 - 10 years is anyones guess. But I get the impression it generally positive for the foreseeable future?

All your answers have definitely given me food for though about my career path. Obviously everything could change once I've qualified. I might discover a love for bush flying in Peru and never look at an airline job again. However, I feel having a certain sense of direction and end goal is useful and knowing the different steps to get there will help to plan my future and make decisions.

[bafanguy]

" Two regionals have tried to get expats and both were unsuccessful. "

Z,

I'm familiar with Republic's admitted, and failed, attempt to get some Brazilians to fly for them (think I posted that somewhere on here).

Who was the other regional that made an overt, targeted attempt at expats ? I mentioned one company to you in a PM but that's just sorta/kinda scuttlebutt and may not qualify as a formal, dedicated try to solicit expats.

I agree that there's no actual "shortage" of pilots here...just not enough in some spots...under some circumstances...at some times. Just plug the holes with expats. :-)))

[NuGuy]

Nu,

"One can fuss and fume, but its not going to change any time in the foreseeable future."

Agree. I'm just a little surprised some regional, in particular, hasn't made more of an overt, serious effort to get access to expats...if it's all as dire as alleged. Perhaps it isn't ?

It isn't. There are tons of pilots...some doing Part 135 charter, some doing corporate work, some are ex-pats looking to return home. But a lot of these guys aren't going to do it for $35k a year, or even $45k/yr.


The regional business has been living off the coat-tails of the major airlines for decades, dependent on their pay/benefits/quality of life to draw people into the pipeline. Even during times of massive turnover (late 80s, late 90s), their minimums were always at or near ATP minimums. The 1,500 hour rule would have been, for the vast majority of history, completely redundant, since the regionals themselves had minimums at or above 1,500 hours anyway.


But when did the pipeline supposedly collapse? During times of massive turnover? No, it didn't...the drop in minimums happened in 2005-07, when the industry was mostly stagnant, and turnover was at a low ebb.


But what did happen in right before that (2004) was the massive retrenchment of pay, benefits and QoL at the major airlines. Once people saw that the pot of gold had turned to the pot of lead, they saw that there were vastly better opportunities to pursue that didn't' involve $100k of debt and a very restrictive lifestyle.


You might disagree with some of the things that ALPA says or does, but in this they're right on the mark. It's not a pilot shortage, but a pay shortage, at all levels of the industry.


The pre-2004 pay/benefits package of the majors included, roughly, 50% more pay, paid health care, and fully funded defined benefit retirement plans (that required no contribution). Work rules were excellent and advancement was predictable, if a bit uneven at times. Some might call that the halcyon days, or even unsustainable, but I would say that was the package that was required to put butts in the seats...throughout the entire industry, not just at the majors.


If the long term compensation of the industry isn't sufficient, then people are just going to do something else. It shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone.


Nu

[Warmair]

Hi All,

................

I'm a British citizen married to an American, ...........


Many airlines require US Citizenship. The above will lead to a Green Card, assuming you have applied. Then need 3 years married and 18 months physically in the US as Green Card holder before you can apply for Citizenship - application processing can take up to one year.

[zondaracer]

Which airlines require citizenship?

[am111]

Many airlines require US Citizenship. The above will lead to a Green Card, assuming you have applied. Then need 3 years married and 18 months physically in the US as Green Card holder before you can apply for Citizenship - application processing can take up to one year.

I have looked at job sites already to see if there was any such requirement and all the ones I came across just specified the right to live and work in the US which I will have as a spouse and maybe also a US driving licence which seems bizarre to me but would be straight forward to get.

[flyhayes]

Most airlines that I know of only require the right to live and work.

[NEDude]

Every U.S. airline I have worked for only required the right to live and work in the U.S. When I was at VX we had several Canadian, UK and Irish nationals work for us.

As for your university degree from the UK, it should most definitely be respected and honoured in the States. Everyone knows the UK (as well as most of Europe, Canada and Australia) has top notch universities.

[NEDude]

Double Post