Can Microsoft fix the pilot shortage?

Many pilots are short. Maybe better nutrition during adolescence would have helped reduce the shortage. But would reducing the shortage be making them even shorter or is that like subtracting a negative and thus making them taller?
 
Actually they could kick in some of that sweet tech money into a fund paid to all ATPs.
 
They just need to convince Congress/ Faa to let pilots count 1200 Microsoft Flight Simulator hours towards ATP mins.
 
As an economist, I am truly fascinated by the idea that the pilot shortage is created by a lack of training tools rather than historically low pay at regionals, or multiple airlines using bankruptcy gut pensions that pilots have already earned, or airlines negotiating contracts in bad faith.

The simple fact is, with the history of worker treatment in the industry, the Unions (even with their problems) are the only thing keeping airline jobs tenable right now. The biggest threat to pilot jobs right now (in my opinion) is no automation eliminating jobs, it is the multi-decade erosion of Unions making the jobs unpleasant and possibly dangerous.

The pilot shortage was caused by the airlines, and it should be solved by the airline's treatment of employees. With some of the hijinks airlines have pulled, I can see why people don't want the jobs, more so, I can see why people would be hesitant to spend $50K+ to train for them.
 
AggieMike88 said:
... or the entire internet fixes the intelligence shortage
Click to expand...

10,000 monkeys with typewriters were supposed to give us Shakespeare. But there’s no more typewriters anymore. Just monitors and keyboards. LOL.

Somedudeintn said:
They just need to convince Congress/ Faa to let pilots count 1200 Microsoft Flight Simulator hours towards ATP mins.
Click to expand...

Have to admit, I almost got my morning coffee out of my nose when I read that. :)
 
First time I've ever seen an Economist opine in favor of artificial price supports on labor (aka Labor Unions).

<-- BA in Economics
 
Ravioli said:
First time I've ever seen an Economist opine in favor of artificial price supports on labor (aka Labor Unions).

<-- BA in Economics
Click to expand...
You need to broaden your reading. This is the academic equivalent of "it must be true, all of my friends agree with me."
 
Labor unions are not artificial price supports. They are price supports, yes, but they are a natural defense of value in a non-market economic structure.

Having said that, multiple economists have suggested artificial prices supports. The US economy is practically built upon them.
 
MarkH said:
Labor unions are not artificial price supports. They are price supports, yes, but they are a natural defense of value in a non-market economic structure.
Click to expand...
So they’re artificial price supports in an environment of artificial pricing.
 
MauleSkinner said:
So they’re artificial price supports in an environment of artificial pricing.
Click to expand...

Artificial implies that they are imposed by some force outside of the pursuit of stakeholder value, which unions are not. They are organized by stakeholders to maximize stakeholder value.

The basic tenant of economics is that every actor will act in its own best interest when faced with an industry comprised of a limited number of employers, who's best interest is to act against the employee's best interest, the natural response would be to obtain leverage to protect the employee's interests (negotiate collectively for example).

The Civil Aeronautics Board (prior to deregulation) setting fares and routes is artificial price support because the price support is not set by a stakeholder pursuing its own best interest, but an outside actor.
 
Don't have a dog in the fight, neither holding airline stock, nor being an airline pilot - but this is one tortured, illogical, and myopic take on reality. . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top