Page 2 of 2 < 1 2 Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page |
Airline Pilot Central Forums(https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
- Military(https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/military/)
- - SkyWest refusing to count certain PIC hours(https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/military/147957-skywest-refusing-count-certain-pic-hours.html)
theoriginalturk | 08-08-2024 06:31 PM |
Originally Posted by CX500T(Post 3826687)
Skywest. No ALPA
I guess OP didn't have the bandwidth to figure that one out either.
HazyIPA | 08-08-2024 10:22 PM |
Originally Posted by theoriginalturk(Post 3827214)
I guess OP didn't have the bandwidth to figure that one out either.
I never said anything about union involvement.
My (and the affected parties') issue with this whole mess isn't so much what FAR 61.51 says about being a rated pilot and able to log PIC time, though that obviously matters if this goes to arbitration with the FAA via a ruling, letter of interpretation. etc. It doesn't affect me personally because I signed for military aircraft and flew enough on the side to well exceed the 250 PIC requirement either way.
The bigger problem is pilots corresponding with airline representatives about whether certain hours will count toward an important prerequisite, getting told yes, getting interviewed, going through indoc (by this point their logbook and hours have been reviewed multiple times), only to get to LOE and having the rug pulled out from under them. THAT'S what has folks up in arms and stinks of an ulterior motive.
60av8tor | 08-09-2024 04:21 AM |
Originally Posted by HazyIPA(Post 3827264)
The bigger problem is pilots corresponding with airline representatives about whether certain hours will count toward an important prerequisite, getting told yes, getting interviewed, going through indoc (by this point their logbook and hours have been reviewed multiple times), only to get to LOE and having the rug pulled out from under them. THAT'S what has folks up in arms and stinks of an ulterior motive.
I agree - that's a really poor position to put someone in, however I really doubt there is an ulterior motive. For many a regional is the first step into 121 and I think some people have more faith in some of those "representatives" than warranted - just out of not knowing any better and assuming certain people in certain positions actually have more experience than they actually have. Just a few examples I remember thinking were odd from my regional days were hearing that some people that would represent my regional at recruiting events hadn't even started training yet or learning that some of our seniority list sim instructors were hired directly into the position and had never flown the line.
JamesNoBrakes | 08-09-2024 06:37 AM |
Originally Posted by HazyIPA(Post 3827264)
The bigger problem is pilots corresponding with airline representatives about whether certain hours will count toward an important prerequisite, getting told yes
There's a big lesson here.
rickair7777 | 08-09-2024 12:42 PM |
Originally Posted by HazyIPA(Post 3827264)
I never said anything about union involvement.
My (and the affected parties') issue with this whole mess isn't so much what FAR 61.51 says about being a rated pilot and able to log PIC time, though that obviously matters if this goes to arbitration with the FAA via a ruling, letter of interpretation. etc. It doesn't affect me personally because I signed for military aircraft and flew enough on the side to well exceed the 250 PIC requirement either way.
The bigger problem is pilots corresponding with airline representatives about whether certain hours will count toward an important prerequisite, getting told yes, getting interviewed, going through indoc (by this point their logbook and hours have been reviewed multiple times), only to get to LOE and having the rug pulled out from under them. THAT'S what has folks up in arms and stinks of an ulterior motive.
There is no ulterior motive, why would they possibly want to pay somebody and pay for all of that training just to turn them away on checkride day? They don't.
This is not the first time that the HR ladies have had misconceptions about ATP aeronautical experience requirements and let somebody slip in, only to have it get caught by a Fed/APD on checkride day. I've seen at another regional too. Not aware of these issues at majors, but historically they mostly hire pilots who already hold an ATP.
It is possible that folks processed in the past slipped through the cracks and at some point either the CMO or a dilligent APD took a more rigorous read of the regs. They are entitled to hold folks to the letter of the rules.
HazyIPA | 08-13-2024 01:34 AM |
Motives aside, it seems this issue has been resolved. New hire at SkyWest reported the following:
"I just had my IACRA logbook screening at Skywest and they are NOW accepting T-34 hours/T-6 hours after solo. Apparently there was a big back and forth with the FAA but they now have approval to accept these hours towards total PIC. This is airline specific but as of now our hours count again."
hercretired | 08-13-2024 10:21 AM |
Originally Posted by HazyIPA(Post 3828423)
Motives aside, it seems this issue has been resolved. New hire at SkyWest reported the following:
"I just had my IACRA logbook screening at Skywest and they are NOW accepting T-34 hours/T-6 hours after solo. Apparently there was a big back and forth with the FAA but they now have approval to accept these hours towards total PIC. This is airline specific but as of now our hours count again."
Original post: Aug 5
Above post: Aug 13
looks like someone with more brains got involved and resolved this.
Back to regular programming
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:23 PM. | Page 2 of 2 < 1 2 Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page |
Website Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands