Training Requirements Keep Our Skies Safe

The System is Working: Cutting Training Hours Is a Recipe for Disaster

U.S. air safety regulations are the gold standard worldwide for a reason

The latest: Some airlines are pushing to drastically cut the training and qualification requirements that keep our skies safe, claiming that regulations responsible for making U.S. air safety the gold standard worldwide are too onerous, costly and time-consuming.

  • Why? A false narrative at the heart of the argument: These airlines are citing a fake “pilot shortage” to argue current high training standards are slowing the pipeline of pilots. This claim ignores the fact that there are more than enough pilots to meet the current demand.

Why this is wrong: The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010, which strengthened training requirements and qualifications, is the most effective aviation safety law of this century. Weakening it is a recipe for disaster.

The danger: Airline fatalities used to be far higher. The tragic 2009 crash of Colgan Air Flight 3407 killed 50 people and spurred U.S. lawmakers to overhaul training requirements for airline pilots.

  • The “1,500-hour rule.” Under the law, to earn an Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) certificate — which is required to fly commercial airliners — pilots must meet a series of safety requirements including hours of flight time, rigorous training and stringent qualification standards. The law also allows the FAA to credit experience in military aviation and two- and four-year aviation-related degrees.
  • ‘Learning on the job’: At a recent congressional hearing, ALPA President Capt. Jason Ambrosi talked about his personal experience as a captain at a regional airline before Congress’ establishment of the 1,500-flight hour requirement for commercial flights, recalling how pilots with fewer hours of training were essentially “learning on the job.”

What’s really going on: Some airlines’ push to change the rules is simply the latest attempt to cut costs to maximize profits — and they’re willing to risk passenger safety in order to do so.

The bottom line: Regulations that have led to the industry’s exemplary safety record should never be eroded just to put more money in the pockets of airline executives.