“This approval marks a critical milestone in Sterling’s strategic expansion and reinforces its commitment to delivering exceptional aviation education across multiple locations,” flight school officials said in a statement.

Benefits of Part 141 Programs

Having an FAA Part 141 certification enables the Tallahassee campus to offer a more structured curriculum, “designed to provide an accelerated path to a professional pilot career, meeting the highest standards of safety and efficiency,” according to the company.

“The FAA’s approval of our Tallahassee location for Part 141 training is a testament to our unwavering commitment to excellence in aviation education,” said Wayne Heller, CEO of Sterling Flight Training. “This expansion not only strengthens our ability to train the next generation of pilots but also enhances our capacity to serve the aviation needs of the Tallahassee community and beyond.”

School officials said the 141 program at the new location is designed to complement Sterling Flight Training’s Jacksonville, Florida, operation, which has been providing both recreational and career-oriented flight training for years. Certificate options include remote pilot (drones) through college degree programs and airline careers.

The post Sterling Flight Training Receives Part 141 Certification appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Students from American Aviation Flight School, including Thida Aung, reached out to local news station WTTG-TV (FOX 5 DC) seeking help.

According to FOX 5, Aung had paid the flight school $100,000 up front for the school’s “Career Pilot Package,” which includes training sessions. However, Aung reported that the school’s owner, Kevin Rychlik, allegedly informed her that no refunds would be issued.

FOX 5 obtained an email from the school to its students stating: “After reflection and exploring every possible scenario, we have come to the conclusion there is no viable path forward.” The email also mentioned several health issues the owner has faced over the past year.

The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) reported that Rychlik filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy on August 6, citing business debts between $10 million and $50 million as the main cause.

Students are considering legal action to address the situation.

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on AVweb.

The post Virginia Flight School Closure Leaves Students Stranded appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

There are many types of pilot jobs throughout the country, and some of them offer higher earning potential than others. Here are the best paying pilot jobs:  

Major Airlines

The “big three” in the United States—American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, and United Airlines—have all recently had significant pay increases for their pilots. While airline pilot pay depends on seniority and aircraft type, the most senior widebody captains at these airlines can make upward of $500,000 per year.

Other large carriers—such as Alaska Airlines, Frontier Airlines, and Spirit Airlines—also pay very well. The salary scales at these airlines are generally competitive with their largest counterparts, but the maximum earning potential for pilots is typically lower since they do not operate widebody aircraft.

A new first officer at a major carrier can expect to make between $90,000 and $110,000 per year, depending on the airline. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that  airline pilots had an average salary of $250,050 in 2023.

Regional Airlines

A few short years ago, new pilots at regional airlines were relatively poorly compensated. A new first officer—often still saddled with debt from flight school—would sometimes make less than $50,000 a year.  

However, increased demand for pilots at regional airlines have increased salaries, with many companies even offering hiring bonuses. The starting pay for a first officer at a regional airline is now typically within the range of $80,000 to $110,000 per year, and senior captains can command an annual salary of over $200,000.

Cargo

The salaries at large cargo airlines are competitive with that of their passenger counterparts. While FedEx and UPS pilots have a slightly lower starting salary than those at airlines like American Airlines or Southwest Airlines, their more experienced pilots have comparable pay scales.

However, pilots at cargo airlines that fly smaller regional aircraft are paid less. At some of these airlines, the pay is comparable to that of passenger regional carriers, but others have lower salaries for their pilots.

Business and Corporate

The schedule and lifestyle of a business or corporate pilot can vary greatly depending on their employer. Salaries therefore also differ significantly between individual pilots.

While some pilots work lots of flights on very short notice, others only fly long trips that are scheduled well in advance. Corporate pilots also fly a variety of aircraft, ranging from smaller propeller planes to large business jets.

Salaries for corporate and business pilots can start as low as $40,000 to $50,000, while the top-earning captains can earn upward of $300,000 per year.

Government

The federal government hires pilots for a variety of roles, including passenger and cargo transportation, law enforcement, and firefighting.

Pilots typically fall on the GS-12 to GS-14 federal government pay grades. In 2024, this means that their salaries range from $74,441 to $135,987.

Local and state governments also hire pilots for similar roles. The pay for these pilots is typically comparable to what the federal government offers.

Are Pilots Paid Well?

The salary of a pilot can vary greatly depending on their experience, schedule, and employer. Although early career jobs may not be very well-compensated, more experienced pilots—and particularly those at major airlines—have very high earning potential. 

The post The Best Paying Pilot Jobs appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Despite strong membership divisions, there appears to be greater unity within the Air Line Pilots Association’s (ALPA) Master Executive Council as a new guard begins to exert control. And internal communiques obtained by FreightWaves also indicate that council members, including long-serving incumbents, share the view that FedEx (NYSE: FDX) is stringing out the labor dispute.

“Whether you are of the opinion that we should have waited longer or that we’ve waited long enough, we MUST embrace the imperative that we all work together. We are ONE TEAM on this side of the table, ready to negotiate a deal that recognizes our value to OUR corporation, and a deal that the corporation can easily afford,” the MEC said in a note to members that was signed by all 14 council representatives. “On the other side of the table is the other team, intent on dividing and conquering us. You need to decide if you’re on OUR team or THEIR team. There are no other choices, no neutral sideline or fence to stand or sit on. We stand together, or we all fail.”

ALPA last week asked the National Mediation Board to end bridge-making efforts and allow the parties to resolve differences through arbitration—a move designed to open the door to a possible strike since neither side is likely to agree to a binding decision from an arbitrator. The letter was sent after an 8-6 vote by the MEC that some complained was engineered behind closed doors, rushed through without adequate consideration and taken without waiting for FedEx’s response to the union’s latest demands. 

The bad blood got so bad that some council representatives said they were essentially ambushed by plotters seeking to hijack the negotiations, FreightWaves reported. In a separate correspondence to crew members, a top FedEx official said the union’s shifting stances because of the internal divisions has made it difficult to come to an agreement because it doesn’t know what demands to take seriously. 

ALPA on Thursday blamed FedEx for trying to undermine union solidarity by sowing “inflammatory information and unsubstantiated allegations” in the media, notwithstanding the fact that the internal tensions were clearly spelled out in the organization’s own documents.

“Contrary to attempts to divide our governing body and pilot group, we want to reaffirm that FedEx pilot leadership stands united in its pursuit of a contract that reflects the hard work and dedication of our members. The decision to request a release from the National Mediation Board was not taken lightly, but was made in the best interest of ensuring that a resolution to our contract negotiations was completed in a timely and constructive manner,” the union said in response to the article.

It is unclear when the pilots union made its latest proposal to FedEx, but Wednesday’s membership update from the MEC and an official who was subsequently contacted implied that it happened on Feb. 27, the first day of three mediated sessions in a row. The MEC said it was angered that FedEx failed to give an answer on Feb. 29 and instead said it needed two more weeks before it could address retirement issues.

“A hallmark of the company’s behavior in negotiations has been stall, drag feet and delay. With only two days of meetings scheduled in the month of March, and only one week set aside to meet in April, we simply could not play along with the delay game any longer,” the board said. 

The parties have been negotiating for nearly three years on an updated pilot contract and have been in federal mediation since October 2022. 

The leaders said the delay solidified the view that FedEx had no intention of making improvements to the tentative agreement pilots rejected last summer. A majority of FedEx pilots were displeased with the agreement’s level of job protections, back pay, pension options and quality-of-life considerations and the fact that pay increases were below those recently achieved by passenger-airline counterparts. 

FreightWaves previously reported that FedEx did not plan to increase the value of the rejected deal in the new round of mediated talks. The MEC letter characterized management’s insignificant changes so far as “insulting.” 

Scope Clause

Of particular concern, according to the correspondence, is the company is not addressing pilot concerns that more flying will be outsourced, which would reduce their earnings. ALPA wants to improve clauses in the existing contract that define what type of flying can be done by pilots that aren’t employed by the airline. 

Last year’s tentative agreement would have allowed FedEx Express to place more work during surge periods with third-party airlines without paying a higher penalty. But many pilots were concerned that language prohibiting outsourcing if FedEx reduces flight hours or furlough pilots wasn’t strong enough. Under the existing scope arrangement, FedEx pays a financial penalty to the union that gets distributed to pilots if the company goes above the agreed cap on shipment volume that can be given to charter airlines. Opponents feared FedEx might simply not replace older pilots as they retire and then claim a need to hire partner carriers to meet demand.

The latest union proposal trades smaller monetary penalties for using contractors in exchange for more job protection. The memo accused management of rejecting most of the offer and deferring discussions about reduced crew operations into the future. 

Much of the tension centers on the extent to which FedEx intends to reduce the pilot workforce as it reengineers the air network to reduce structural expenses in response to shifting e-commerce patterns, which have resulted in weaker overnight express volumes. Company executives have outlined a “Tricolor” strategy that would shift a greater percentage of the fleet towards transporting deferred freight, which would be concentrated during the daytime. They have also publicly acknowledged the need to reduce the ranks by several hundred from the current level of 5,800 pilots. 

“By definition, the Orange network is FedEx planes and FedEx pilots, just retimed to go into day sorts versus tighter night sort windows. We discussed that on our Q2 call, and have been unequivocally clear about this in all company communications around Tricolor,” said FedEx spokesperson Caitlin Adams Maier.

The MEC said it wants FedEx to put in writing that FedEx pilots will be used to fly that freight. 

“When you add their scope [suggestion] to their pitifully low pay rate offer and their shuffling of retirement benefits and throw in their insistence on including concessions” on guaranteed flight hours for training or vacation that overlaps with normal downtime “what we’ve been offered from the company is a recipe for another failed tentative agreement,” the MEC told members.

The tenor of the messages reflects recent changes within the MEC. Most of the representatives who endorsed the failed tentative agreement have been recalled and replaced. Initially, only a few representatives were recalled after the failed tentative deal and the new representatives were in the minority. Now they appear to have gained the majority. 

The MEC is looking to fill a vacancy for chairman of the negotiating committee, according to the member update.

Late Thursday, the MEC voted chairman Billy Wilson out of office, an action he predicted last week would happen because of the power struggle and disagreement over the NMB letter’s timing.

“Our request to be released [from NMB oversight] should demonstrate to the company and investors that we will not settle for a subpar tentative agreement nor allow the process to be delayed any further,” the MEC wrote. “The trajectory plotted by the company would never yield a tentative agreement that we as a MEC could endorse, much less one that the membership could overwhelmingly ratify.”

The union has consistently criticized FedEx for citing lower profits as reason for caution on a new pilot contract, noting that the company in December announced a $1 billion accelerated share buyback program. 

During a special in-person meeting at the MEC’s Memphis, Tennessee headquarters on Wednesday, Southwest Airlines Pilots Association president Casey Murray described how a deal was reached in January that would raise pilot pay about 50 percent over five years. The FedEx deal shot down last summer included a 30 percent pay increase over 4.5 years. Murray said the agreements reached at Delta Air Lines and United Airlines set a pattern for a successful outcome with Southwest. 

The MEC plans to conduct an informational picket on Wall Street when FedEx releases quarterly results next Thursday in hopes that investors will convince management to speed up negotiations.  

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on FreightWaves.

The post FedEx Pilots Take Harder Line as Contract Dispute Drags appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

• READ MORE: Financing the Pro Pilot Dream…Without Getting Scammed

The post How Professional Pilots Can Survive Probationary Periods appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

“We are deeply saddened by the passing of Capt. David E. Harris, a trailblazer in aviation who became the first Black commercial airline pilot when he was hired by American Airlines in 1964. [Captain] Harris opened the doors and inspired countless Black pilots to pursue their dreams to fly,” said American CEO Robert Isom in a statement. “We will honor his legacy by ensuring we continue to create access and opportunities for careers in aviation for those who otherwise might not know it’s possible.”

Prior to joining the airline industry, Harris served in the U.S. Air Force as a second lieutenant where he flew the B-47 Stratojet and B-52s. While a student at Ohio State University, he was rejected from the Air Force’s advanced ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) program twice on racial grounds, according to NBC DFW.

After leaving the military in 1964, Harris joined American’s ranks after being denied by several other airlines. He flew the Boeing 747, Boeing 727, Boeing 767, Airbus A300, Douglas DC-6, BAC One-Eleven, and the McDonnell Douglas MD-11 during his tenure at the airline.

Harris flew for 30 years at American before his retirement in 1994 as a captain.

Harris also achieved the distinction of becoming the first African American captain for a major U.S. commercial airline. No cause of death has been made public.

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on AirlineGeeks.com.

The post Pioneering Aviator Captain David Harris Dies at 89 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Fingers have pointed at the “pilot shortage,” as a major factor.  In that regard, on July 25, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) introduced the “Let Experienced Pilots Fly Act,” which would increase the mandatory airline pilot retirement age from 65 to 67.

The legislation seems to be a knee-jerk reaction in response to justifiably frustrated constituents. Although the premise of the act is intended as a solution, it may actually create more problems. Why? Setting aside the debate of age 67 being an arbitrary number, older airline pilots experience more medical issues that don’t necessarily challenge their daily lives but may keep them out of the cockpit. Cardiac irregularities, blood pressure, or orthopedic surgeries are examples.  

According to Capt. Dennis Tajer, spokesperson for American Airlines’ (NASDAQ: AAL) Allied Pilots Association, approximately 4,000 pilots are awaiting FAA reviews for disqualifying medical conditions that are allowed but only through a special approval process. Some pilots have been waiting a year for such approvals.

In an interview on CNBC, the CEO of United Airlines (NASDAQ: UAL), Scott Kirby, stated that 36 percent of his 64-year-old pilots were remaining out of the cockpit—temporarily or permanently—because of medical issues. Stretch the mandatory retirement age to 67 and the percentage will go higher.  

In addition, with most retiree medical benefits no longer available or cost prohibitive, older pilots tend to utilize their better-quality employment benefits for elective procedures before leaving the airline, i.e., knee replacements, shoulder surgery, etc. And based on minimal incentives to do otherwise, leaving a large amount of unused sick time on the table just prior to retirement is not usually a pilot’s choice.

Another challenge to raising the mandatory retirement age is the fact that only about nine other countries allow Part 121 air carrier pilots to fly beyond 65. Although ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) is not a regulatory agency with enforcement capabilities, age 65 is a limit among the many countries that abide by its rules—the U.S. being one of them. This rule does not allow over-65 pilots to fly internationally, which opens a new can of worms.  

How? With most U.S. airlines scheduling a blend of international and domestic flights for pilots, changing the trip pairings would be problematic. Carriers had found it more efficient, and thus more economical, to qualify crews for both international and domestic flying, mixing the two categories within a given trip.  

Do the airlines now construct separate, domestic-only trip pairings for the over 65 pilots? And with a seniority-based system initiated in the Lindbergh era for all things airline pilot, are the over 65-ers given special bidding privileges because of the international restriction?

More times than not, a 65-year-old pilot has the seniority to fly widebody airplanes, which are almost exclusively flown on international routes. A domestic-only restriction could potentially exclude that pilot from piloting a widebody airplane. An age 65-plus pilot would be confronted with the only choice of bidding back to narrow-body equipment so as to remain domestic.  

Or from another angle, a senior pilot considers that extending his retirement from age 65 to 67 might afford him the opportunity to fly a widebody airplane, but it won’t be possible because of the domestic restriction.  

Big deal? Aside from a bruised ego, perhaps a bid backwards would trigger a pay cut, notwithstanding a potentially less desirable schedule among other intrinsic problems that a more senior pilot would not normally incur. So, the incentive would be to retire early—exactly the opposite of the intended effect of retaining experienced pilots. 

Some of you might be thinking, “Well, why not pay them the same as if the domestic restriction didn’t exist for the widebody airplane they were once flying?” Good luck convincing the airline of that, especially since the empty seats left by the 65-ers will also trigger training costs for the next senior pilots in line.

Speaking of training costs, if the age 65-plus pilots are forced to transition backwards, a domino effect occurs whereupon they must be trained on the narrow-body airplane while the next senior pilots are trained to fill the vacated seats on the widebody airplane.  

In addition, junior pilots on narrow-body equipment may be displaced off the bottom of the list to other airplanes that will also require transition training. The airline academies are already dealing with a bottleneck because their current training infrastructure hasn’t caught up with the demand.

Tajer blamed the airlines for failing to anticipate what should have been a predictable, post-pandemic schedule demand. He indicated that it was a wise move for the U.S. government to grant $54 billion worth of bailout money.  The airlines managed the bailout well, keeping Chapter 11 behind a closed door, but the recovery strategy has been woefully deficient.

For the moment, the pilot experience shortage has not quite reached the major airlines because of their source of qualified applicants from the regional carriers. That could change as the hiring faucet from the regionals begins to drip. Tajer said he believes that the long-term solution lies with providing a bridge between a new pilot’s training completion and the experience required to qualify as a pilot for the airlines.

Considering the challenges involved, raising the mandatory retirement to age 67 may not even qualify as a Band-Aid, especially if it infects the wound further.

The post Would Allowing Airline Pilots To Fly Until 67 Be a Mistake? appeared first on FLYING Magazine.