Will Generation Y Be Pilots?

[Don Hudson]

The website, "General Aviation News" has an interesting articleon this topic. Given that the airlines are going to need hundreds of thousands of pilots over the next two decades the prospects aren't good that they'll get them though. The article is a good read but the 82 or so comments that follow the article are important reading for airline executives, especially flight operations people.

We pilots were often reminded that "the market" will dictate our working conditions, salaries, benefits and pensions and that we were far too greedy and expensive. Thousands have lost their pensions in the US and young people have been taking note. Some comments discuss young peoples' commitment to the hard, steady work and the huge expenses for poor pay; some discuss the "distractions" that make aviation "dull" and unattractive by comparison. For partly obvious reasons and for some ones I hadn't heard or thought of before, young people are giving aviation a miss and the veteran pilots are laughing at "the pilot shortage" story.

Years ago I gave up Career Day talks because, in the words of one commentator, "it's cruel to 'inspire' a high school student to become a professional pilot these days." Strong words, sad words, but true in my view. Yet every time professional associations try to improve the lot of pilots they have zero support from all quarters. The recent disgusting mess and threats of legislation and calls for pilots to give up even more, broadcast beyond those currently in the profession. Here's one example of one young person's thinking:

• Matt•a month ago
  

Hello, I am one of those Generation Y people, a teenager who is currently just beginning his flight lessons (4 hours logged). Besides the high costs of flight training, my big question in my mind is what to with my PPL when I achieve it.

1. Do I fly with an airline for a living? That is sounding like a poor option. First I have to work as a CFI for years to build my hours, now up to 1500. Then I have to work another 5 to 10 years making at or below poverty level. And finally I will be away from home constantly, long hours.

2. Do I fly as a hobby? This seems like a slightly more resonable option. If I work towards a higher paying career, say a lawyer, doctor or dentist, then I could make enough to have more "hobby" time. But then again, it would still be a costly hobby with gas, rental, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I love airplanes. My shelves are covered in models and I've built my own model airport, but with the uncertain future in this field, I ask myself every day if this is a career worth pursuing

The College isn't a panacea but rozar s'macco's insights are worth listening to especially by the airlines but also by finance people who may still believe that people will come. How airlines are going to attract young people into the profession is a wide-open question and it isn't just about money any more.

From my pov it's certainly sad to see but as I've said many times, there's a clear flight safety aspect to this as well, best put by Captain Sullenberger in his speech to Congress in February 2009:

While airline pilots are by no means alone in our financial struggles – and I want to acknowledge how difficult it is for everyone right now – it is important to underscore that the terms of our employment have changed dramatically from when I began my career, leading to an untenable financial situation for pilots and their families. When my company offered pilots who had been laid off the chance to return to work, 60% refused. Members, I attempt to speak accurately and plainly, so please do not think I exaggerate when I say that I do not know a single professional airline pilot who wants his or her children to follow in their footsteps.

I am worried that the airline piloting profession will not be able to continue to attract the best and the brightest. The current experience and skills of our country’s professional airline pilots come from investments made years ago when we were able to attract the ambitious, talented people who now frequently seek lucrative professional careers. That past investment was an indispensible element in our commercial aviation infrastructure, vital to safe air travel and our country’s economy and security. If we do not sufficiently value the airline piloting profession and future pilots are less experienced and less skilled, it logically follows that we will see negative consequences to the flying public – and to our country.

STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN CHESLEY B. SULLENBERGER, III

CAPTAIN, US AIRWAYS FLIGHT 1549

BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 24, 2009

Don

[dagger]

A fascinating topic, but my opening question to you would be, What else do you expect young people to do? There aren't a lot of avenues open to good jobs, and if someone is inclined towards flying, it's still a better living than a lot of other industries offer.

[Dropzone]

As Captain Sully put it.......no one in their right mind would pick this career anymore. The best and the brightest are going someplace else.

[Don Hudson]

Thanks for your comment dagger. Yes, a fascinating topic and certainly more challenging to discuss than my couple of comments!

Our oldest is a mortgage broker earning low six figures, our daughter is an emergency nurse at a local hospital, with two degrees earning high five figures, her husband is an engineer earning about the same and our youngest has returned to university to complete an engineering degree after running a software company for four years - he's not earning yet but he's working his butt off and certainly not waiting for a handout. (I think they would have made great pilots but none expressed a desire). I don't think these outcomes are unusual in today's young people - I know members here have similar success stories of their children.

As with all discussions regarding "left vs right", we tend to focus on the (sometimes shocking) outliers to make our point. Here however, the unattractiveness of aviation is no longer an outlier it is a trend. That has been my point for a very long time. It wasn't difficult to predict of course. Sully made the point extremely well and in front of the most powerful American political body our profession could have access to.

Claiming that "flying is still a better living than a lot of other industries offer", even in Canada, is saying quite a bit; it's a disaster in the United States where airlines have turned the profession into a McJob with little promise for improvement against the substantial investments made by young people in their degrees, pilot licences and who endure terrible wages and working conditions, which, by comparison with remuneration for young people in their late 20's to late 30's who have taken up a profession elsewhere, are disproportionately, chronically low.

For some this is a "winnowing" process to be sure. But young people these days are very smart and the social media dialogue provides one large room for young people to discuss these things and find out early, what's good and what's not.

Everyone has their "apprenticeship" wages and rudimentary conditions, pilots included but by the time they're flying for a regional or even mainline (legacy or lo-cost) carrier they are no longer apprenticing, no longer interning. No other profession pays so horribly at these comparable stages in one's career development and young people are voting with their career decisions. It is up to aviation to come to terms with the trends

I'm not making an argument or a case and have no other agenda than the one I've always advanced. I'm just observing the trend and saying why I think it is occurring. I think this isn't just another discouraging economic reality for our young people, I think this is a flight safety matter.

For those qualified, with disciplined, hard work the good paying jobs are there - not for everybody I know but I haven't been discussing everyone's prospects, I've been discussing my profession's.

The losses for our profession are the direct results of the effects of decades of participating in the race-to-the-bottom brought about by two things - neoliberal economic policies, which spawned a de-regulated, speculative economy, all of which began in the early '70s, and which have merely been exacerbated by the most recent economic disaster. Yes!...big topic!

As I've said many times here and elsewhere, those with the talent, the discipline, the intelligence and the deep desire to fly are seeking their careers and professions elsewhere, and that's a flight safety problem in my view, (the solutions to which many non-aviation people see as more automation! - even the FAA is taking note). That's been my point for more than a decade. I remember negots 2000 very well, and where it has gone since and although relatively speaking it's good in Canada, like all middle-class conditions, for sure it isn't what it used to be!

Thanks again, dagger. I know very well how difficult it is to turn something like this around. But I've been watching aviation, its leadership and its struggles now for fourty-five years and while many struggles are familiar, the way pilots and the profession are valued in our society in these present times is something new.

Regards,

Don

[GDR]

A fascinating topic, but my opening question to you would be, What else do you expect young people to do? There aren't a lot of avenues open to good jobs, and if someone is inclined towards flying, it's still a better living than a lot of other industries offer.

They can make more money, put down roots, have greater job security, have more time with their family, and be home for Christmas, kid's hockey games and other family events as a plumber, All this without having to spend a $100,000.00 to be trained to a basic level.

[Johnny]

You can earn more as a TTC Bus Driver, than you can as a Pilot in Canada. Not to mention the career's that are offered in Municipal Fire and Police Departments in every major center in Canada. Hitting 80K / year within the first few years, with 100K easily within reach.

Plus, you can retire in your late 40's, early 50's on an Indexed Pension. Spending the next 30 plus years playing Golf (longer than you worked,) enjoying Indexation.

All three of these "Jobs" have zero prerequisites, 18 years old with a High School Diploma to join the Fire / Police in my Municipality. TTC Bus Driver requirements - Pulse.

Compare that to the investment (and lack of return,) to become a Pilot.

Then there is Nav Canada, now there is a story. You could have never told me in the 70's that being an Air Traffic Controller would be a better career than a Major Airline Pilot.

Another career choice, with "zero" prerequisites and an indexed pension.

I fly every day with Pilots in their late 40's, Professional Pilots for 25 years and have never seen a T4 for 100K / year - pathetic - thanks to the Government Imposed Work Rules.

Young Pilots can still have a good career, it just will not be in North America.

http://www.operationorange.org/

Maybe one day we'll see the light and shut the system down?

[Don Hudson]

Johnny;

Maybe one day we'll see the light and shut the system down?

Perhaps that "free market" we hear so much about will address the coming severe shortages around the world, who knows. I can certainly point to statements from the financial people for us to "suck it up" and to get on with the new reality. Many of us saw where that "reality" was going, and said so, and we're now there. We all know in our own professions that "competency" is much more than "qualified".

The problem is, whereas there was a fairly steady source of applicants up until the turn of the century, a generational gap is developing in the stream of qualified candidates and it can't be addressed in a short period of time.

9/11 tragically taught us that anyone can be taught to manipulate the controls of an aircraft to make it turn, go up and go down. The mistake non-aviation people make all the time is in believing that this is all there is to being a pilot, and now the autopilot "does it all" so why pay well?

A 200hr MCPL pilot may be "legally qualified" and some newbie pilots will even do exceptionally well and never be a problem but those kind of guys and gals are rare. This business requires "time in" and that takes....time.

I don't think it is going to be any kind of widespread, unified "shutting the system down" that is going to change things. If what the aviation organizations and the air carriers say about the coming pilot shortage eventually comes true, what is going to change things is the fact that there won't be the pilots in the system to fly the airplanes in the first place.

Frankly, if the potential for expansion is what is claimed and it's either staffed by the third or fourth line or isn't staffed at all, then that's a bad outcome for everyone, not just pilots.

Don

[CD]

Years ago I gave up Career Day talks because, in the words of one commentator, "it's cruel to 'inspire' a high school student to become a professional pilot these days." Strong words, sad words, but true in my view.

I learned that particular lesson back in 1985... At the time, I was involved with the air cadet program and had the opportunity for a familiarization flight on an Austin Airways BE99 "Airliner" . Anyway, while I was sitting in YQK with the crew waiting for the next leg, the captain asked me what I wanted to do as a career and I told him that I basically wanted his job. They both replied that I was essentially crazy to want to get into a career with long hours and lousy pay and that I should consider anything other than becoming a pilot if I wanted to make a decent living. That was a conversation that I've never forgotten and, essentially, nothing has changed in the intervening years.

The College isn't a panacea but rozar s'macco's insights are worth listening to especially by the airlines but also by finance people who may still believe that people will come. How airlines are going to attract young people into the profession is a wide-open question and it isn't just about money any more.

I'm not certain that money has ever been a signficant factor in getting individuals into the career - but it certainly was for keeping them there. However, I've attended a number of briefings over the years that have made it clear that the younger generation are, to generalize, not interested in a "traditional career". They are seeking forms of gratification, recognition and remuneration that tend to be far different from earlier generations. It has become clear that most are not willing to invest significant time or effort into a single career path - rather, they are far more willing to change paths multiple times, holding no particular loyalty to either employers or industries. This is a generational shift and is having an impact in all areas... I feel that the organizations that that are able figure out what motivates the next generation and how to identify and fulfill their needs will be successful.

[Johnny]

AC has made it clear what they think of their Pilots. It is only a matter of time until the MCPL / Cadet program comes to Canada, it is how AC will get Pilots for the pathetic wages they are intent on paying.

Jazz does it on a modified basis, putting 250 hour Pilots in the Right Seat of a RJ. At least the Jazz F/O is qualified to rent a C-150, unlike the MCPL Pilot.

[Don Hudson]

CD, thanks, really an interesting perspective. Being willing and even planning to readily change employers and maintaining no loyalties to one organization or another is what corporations taught their future employees to do and today's young people make an art of it. It used to be called "piecemeal work" and "contract work" before becoming "normal"!

The problem is that for the organization, both history and experience are lost in such a mobile workforce. Not a new problem! When NASA was downsized after the moon landing program was finished thousands of experienced engineers were let go and the mentality of "can do" with a commercial shuttle program gradually changed how NASA did business. We know the rest of the story.

Because working conditions and airplanes, time off and those important family days all play a greater-than-usual role in the profession, I don't know how you'd be able to have a free-wheeling labour market of pilots where they just change companies every three to five years. In small companies it can be done more easily. The usual solutions have been on a rotational basis.

Johnny;

The top guy (seniority by marks) in our 1973 DC8 course was 20, had two years' college and 250hrs...fabulous pilot, great thinker all the way through his career. It can be done and so can the MCPL, but not for everyone because after you get the mult-crew restricted licence on a B737 or A320 you still have to absorb tons of information from the employer and the daily ops about how the airline works as well as fly well, do weather, do CRM, pass the sim rides etc. Even at a thousand hours, the captain can be left on his own with something serious and that's where the problem arises. The scenario is not just a theoretical concern.

Don

[Johnny]

1985 - bad year for Aviation in Canada. Furloughed Pilots from CP and PW, Wardair hired and cancelled courses, our good friends at EPA were dealing with that piece of work Harry Steele.

I flew with early 70's, 250 hour Pilots, who saw quick upgrades to the Left Seat. There are still a handful kicking around, frankly (it has been a long time,) but you could usually tell.

Interesting debate, as my experience with Pilots who "Learn to Fly" at the Big Airline, is not particularly great. There are (two I can think of) exceptions to the rule.

The laws of "supply and demand" were in place in the early 70's, today it is the law of corporate greed.

There is no shortage of experienced Pilots in Canada and they should be paid accordingly, we seem to PFO many of them.

[Guest rozar s'macco]

I'm starting to feel like an NHL player myself. Typical fan reaction is, "you make millions, why argue about it?" and yet, the real problems are ones not of the players, or pilots', making. They're just the low hanging fruit, in terms of driving that number below the line into the black. The most dogmatic managers always, always counter with something to the effect of 'every teaspoon counts', and in that way of thinking your labour cost is no different from your structural, intrinsic faults; both will be addressed in time, it's just that labour is easier, so they always do that one first. Problem is, by the time it comes to sell the rest of the transformation plan to the talent, there is no credibility left and it dies on the vine. Golden parachute, new boss (same as the old boss), repeat.

Notwithstanding the forthcoming pilot shortage, the risk I see a couple of decades hence is the probability of pilotless transport aircraft. The working conditions, investment of time and money, and the probability of success going into piloting is one concern for today's teenagers, but the overriding one I think is the feeling that this is a dying profession. Will there be any growth for human piloted aircraft beyond the next generation of airplanes? With that in mind, if I'm 16 I'd rather not spend 30 years getting to the gravy only to discover that the next Boeing circa 2040 doesn't even have a seat for me.

Best focus efforts elsewhere, in profitable, growth-oriented sectors. Air transportation? Regulated to death, increasingly going offshore, taxed like crazy, subject to evey single world socio-political event, hostile to labour, and on top of that the leading technology companies are working their hardest to make you, the pilot, redundant? Back away, sons and daughters.

[mo32a]

"Another career choice, with "zero" prerequisites"

Johnny - to start as a pilot also has "zero" prerequisites.

[Innuendo]

"competency" is much more than "qualified"

+1

[boestar]

All of the "Zero Pre requisite" jobs listed do have some requirements. Police and fire personnel must be able to pass the PARE tests which is a PHYSICAL prerequisite where many candidates wash out. Nav Canada as ATC must pass a series of tests and panel interviews with and 80% washout rate.

Fire and police also come with an inherent risk FAR ABOVE that of almost any other career. Where a pilot may face disaster once in his Career and police officer or FirePerson my face that risk daily or weekly. ATC is know as one of the highest stress jobs out there with the resultant issues that accompany stress.

PreRequisite to become a pilot is to pass a CAT 3 medical and a PSTAR. Then you just need to be able to fly the airplane. Mind you to become a COMMERCIAL pilot you need to have the Prerequisite of the PPL and losts of hours plus Instrument and Multi engine but it is a progression.

[Seeker]

Fire and police also come with an inherent risk FAR ABOVE that of almost any other career. Where a pilot may face disaster once in his Career and police officer or FirePerson my face that risk daily or weekly.

http://www.thedailyb...obs.html#slide1

and

http://money.cnn.com.../jobs_jeopardy/

and

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2011-02-14/finance/30779498_1_bus-drivers-civilian-workers-occupational-injuries

...need I go on?

[Seeker]

Seeker the stats you quote are mostly based on the US and include (despite the title of commercial Pilots), pilots from all types of flight eg. the most recent one quoted recent tragedy: This week, a former stunt pilot and stunt pilot teacher died after the single-engine plane they were flying in tilted while descending and hit a lake in Texas, sinking upon impact.

Oh yeah I know this but I'd be very surprised if the rates in Canada would show pilots lower than the US and police officers higher - if anything it would be the opposite.

[Guest rozar s'macco]

Risk is something that attracts competitive, intelligent, aggressive people to certain lines of work. Hypothesizing that only jobs that are risk-free or low-risk are attractive and risky ones must then pay a premium utterly disregards human nature, our desire for excitement, risk-taking and fulfillment. Risky jobs are more rewarding, in fact might be the only jobs that are rewarding to certain personality types. That is partly why he above "risky" jobs will always have more applicants than positions and will remain in perpetuity in a state of surplus. The problem is the actual competency level of the applicants. If I look back to pilot school, many of the wannabe's were shockingly er, dumb. They would certainly count as "applicants" in the numerical sense, but in terms of quality, very low.

The pay, to me, is more about attracting quality (over quantity), while also recognizing the value of the assets that are put at risk in the person's hands. A pilot earns (should earn) their pay due to the revenue generated, and also the replacement value of the things that would be lost should he mess up. Human life, millions of dollars in equipment, assets, often the entire company rests on the fate of a single aircraft accident. So a high standard is required. As with police and fire, they are responsible for life, property, and on a deeper level the economic success of the city or municipality indirectly depends on the rule is law and the safety of the citizens and property that reside there. It's not that they are "risky" per se, it is that the consequences of failure are expensive, and therefore competent, intelligent, educated, experienced people must be attracted and retained. That takes money.

[Johnny]

and the day you put your life into jeopardy every time you are at work as do our fire and police personnel, then you can compare their wages to yours!!!!

Malcolm:

If I remember correctly you are not a Pilot? A 250 Hour (General Aviation) Pilot in Canada has a far greater chance of being Killed, than any Police/Fire Officer. Saying goes; "Five in Five," you will know five Pilots who lose their life, in your first 5 years in the business. Most Pilots I know can easily name five deceased Pilots killed flying Airplanes. Of my Cop friends, none of them have lost any co-workers. Of course it is a dangerous job, but so is living through General Aviation in Canada.

I have yet to meet a Ticket Agent, Lawyer or CEO that have lost any friends in their respective line of work.

Mo32a:

To start as a Pilot and fly for a Major Airline are grossly different quantities. You can 1st Solo at 16, followed by $100,000 of further Flight Training and Mandatory Post Secondary (at least at Air Canada.)

Compared to; no post secondary, 6 - 8 week of paid training, no financial investment and you're a Police / Fire Officer. Yes, during that few weeks of paid training you have to prove your physical ability. Then it is off to T-Ho's to fatten up....relax, that's a joke.

No disrespect to Police or Fire, but it is not even in the same league as the requirements to be an Airline Pilot.

It always surprises me how "non-Pilot" Airline employees, have such gross misconceptions of the requirements and sacrifices Pilots make to get where they are.

[Johnny]

Johnny

You now bring in the risks of a 250hr pilot but you did talk about wages for a commercial pilot vs those for the police or firefighter. If you compare apples to apples, commercial pilot in Canada / USA vs the firstline police officer / fireman, you will find the risk factor is much lower for the commercial pilot thus my statement stands. Not sure why you are dragging in the other categories of airline employee though. As far as not being a pilot, what the hell does that have to do with the facts?????

Well Malcolm, the title of the thread is "Will generation Y be Pilots." So the question is; is it worth starting from scratch and attempting to make it into a career. You have to get to the Airline first Malcolm. At the present time that is roughly 10 years of experience before AC or WJ will consider you. Which translates to 10 risky years gaining experience in General (or Military) Aviation.

It is a simple comparison of possible career choices. In particular ones that do not have any prerequisites in the form of Post Secondary or very expensive training that have perversly become a better career choice.

As far as you not being a Pilot simply means you have little (to no) knowledge of sacrifices required to make it a career. But like most Airline Employees, no shortage of opinions about Pilots.

[DEFCON]

"the day you put your life into jeopardy every time you are at work as do our fire and police personnel, then you can compare their wages to yours!!!!"

Malcolm

I've done both & I disagree with your position.

For the first five years of my flying career I do believe my life was being subtly and sometimes directly challenged with almost every single flight. A good part of the problem was directly related to my own inexperience, but a lot of the danger was associated with operating sub-par aircraft and of course, the corporate pressure to ‘keep the mail moving’ regardless. Fear was a relatively common cockpit companion in those days and while policing does have its inherent risks, the exposure to personal risk isn’t even remotely close to that which is commensurate with being a ‘solo rookie’ pilot.

BTW; others here suggest there’s little involved in becoming a base level competent cop. At least in my own case, which was almost forty years ago, the initial training was continuous, five months long and both mentally and physically challenging. It was much like doing a very compressed three year university program, but all without the opportunity to ‘party’. There was also a one week annual recurrent training course and lots of oversight. Becoming a cop really isn’t an easy thing and staying with a career that immerses you on a daily basis in the filth that is humanity does require a degree of personal fortitude and integrity that the vast majority just don’t possess.

[chockalicious]

To the initial thread starting question I think that there will always be a supply of people who want to be pilots. Like the aircraft being flown, the profession has evolved however people will still go where there are jobs. If there is a glut of airline flying jobs you can bet that people will gravitate towards them.

I disagree with the assertion that firefighting and police are walk in off the street jobs. Because these careers are generally sought after there is usually some form of prerequesite whether it is a degree, working with youth, a trade or some good life/job experience. There are not too many people walking in to fire and police at 20 years old unless they have some experience to impress the recruiters.

[Don Hudson]

Pilotless flight has been a reality for a number of years. Notwithstanding the sinister aspects of both backyard surveillance of private citizens and proxy warfare in foreign countries flown by both private and government organizations, drones are a reality even if they crash a lot. I think we'd be foolish to claim that technical problems are barriers to pilotless flight by airliners.

The nature and character of sources of accidents may be change but human error is as human error does, whether in a control room or a cockpit, software/hardware-related or cable-pulley-pushrod-bellcrank related. Accidents are first, human-based; they are not mistakes by mechanical devices. In badly-designed systems the causal pathway is moved upstream from the operator.

We have TCAS, EGPWS, FANS, GPS/RNAV, Autoflight systems, better weather prediction and reporting, communications systems all of which address traditional navigational problems. What remain a challenge are human factors in increasingly complex systems. "Pilotless" flight just means "Software engineer" and/or "Drone Pilot" flight. The present argument is, "Would you rather have a pilot or software engineers up front?", but that is in the category of a technical question because it does not accomodate the reality of human factors.

Who knows how these problems will be addressed. We once would never get in an elevator without an operator. We may construct electronic "rails" so our airplanes are "smart, like streetcar", and we may even defeat all weather issues. I think it's possible.

Perhaps before all that, we'll be present as holographs whereever we need or want to be. How satisfying that "proxy" solution is, is left to the imagination.

Don

[Don Hudson]

Cheers!

[mo32a]

Mo32a:

To start as a Pilot and fly for a Major Airline are grossly different quantities. You can 1st Solo at 16, followed by $100,000 of further Flight Training and Mandatory Post Secondary (at least at Air Canada.)

To start as an ATC and working at a busy TCU are grossly different quantities as well.