# Air Force Bending on Medical Requirements to Deal with Pilot Shortage



## s2184 (3 Jan 2014)

Happy New Year 2014! 

+++

I have found the following news item on Google News from National Post. 

I don't know about the accuracy of the information that is provided in this article. 

Probably, experts here could explain them.  :



> http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/01/03/canadian-air-force-bending-on-medical-requirements-to-deal-with-experienced-pilot-shortage/


----------



## Journeyman (3 Jan 2014)

s2184 said:
			
		

> *News Article (Airforce)*


That's a pretty informative thread title; it'll be awesomely useful for anyone searching for it later.  :not-again:


----------



## s2184 (3 Jan 2014)

Sorry Journeyman about my title. 

I didn't like the title of what is in the National Post, and also any other suitable title didn't come into my thoughts.  :-\


----------



## john10 (5 Jan 2014)

s2184 said:
			
		

> Happy New Year 2014!
> 
> +++
> 
> ...



If you don't know about the accuracy, why are you making a whiny face?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (5 Jan 2014)

john10 said:
			
		

> If you don't know about the accuracy, why are you making a whiny face?



Lighten up, Francis.


----------



## xo31@711ret (5 Jan 2014)

I dunno; I did recruit applicant medicals out of Gagetown & Fredericton from 02 until 06; then at NCSM JOLLIET, Sept-Iles, with the reserves from 06 until 010; 75% most of the applicants I talked with always wanted to be a pilot...


----------



## PMedMoe (5 Jan 2014)

Upon reading the article, I'm of the opinion that the CF is "bending" very minor regs to recruit _experienced_ pilots.



> In one particular instance, air force officials asked that a former RCAF helicopter pilot who had retired after 37 years in the military be allowed to rejoin despite failing an unspecified yet required medical standard.



Unspecified?  Probably the PT test.


----------



## bradley247 (5 Jan 2014)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Unspecified?  Probably the PT test.



It says in the article that all pilots must still meet universality of service requirements, so likely not the PT test. 

The article mentions hearing and vision. Makes sense too, since pilots have higher medical standards than the common CF standard, these are likely pilots who meet the common CF medical requirements but not those for pilot and are just getting waivers.


----------



## PMedMoe (5 Jan 2014)

bradley247 said:
			
		

> It says in the article that all pilots must still meet universality of service requirements, so likely not the PT test.



People can fail a PT test and still meet universality of service.  They'd just get retested.


----------



## Ostrozac (5 Jan 2014)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> People can fail a PT test and still meet universality of service.  They'd just get retested.



But the member in question (the 37-year veteran) is applying for a waiver in order to be enrolled. Since we aren't PT testing people prior to enrolment, then he would not yet have the opportunity to fail a PT test. I'll second that he likely has a Medcat number off from the standard for the Pilot MOSID. 

If the member rejoined and keeps failing PT tests, that's a different story, but he wouldn't need an enrolment waiver -- he'd already be enrolled. His career shop would instead bring up his scarce and valuable experience at his Administrative Review.


----------



## PMedMoe (5 Jan 2014)

Anyway....

I'm sure the waivers are not for serious medical issues.  Even the article stated one was for citizenship.

And:



> Hood justified the moves by arguing that the “million-dollar cost” of pilot training “warrants the high initial medical standard” to which recruits are held.
> 
> “Skilled pilot re-enrollees do not incur these upfront costs and therefore represent a valuable commodity while the pilot occupation remains significantly (undermanned),” Hood concluded.



The title for this thread should have mirrored the title for the news article: "Canadian air force bending on medical requirements to deal with *experienced* pilot shortage"

Much ado about nothing.


----------



## AirDet (21 Jan 2014)

A very interesting article. What it doesn't address is the critical shortages in many other trades and professions. Pilots always get the attention but they aren't the end all and be all they think they are. Let's face it, you can train a monkey to ride a bike but you can't train him to fix it.


----------



## Loachman (21 Jan 2014)

So long as you feel better now.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (21 Jan 2014)

AirDet said:
			
		

> Pilots always get the attention but they aren't the end all and be all they think they are.



I know lots of pilots.  Maybe some think they are "the be all, end all" but I met guys like that who were blackhat Master Jacks too.  



> Let's face it, you can train a monkey to ride a bike but you can't train him to fix it.



 :    Yup, that's the mentality to pass on to your apprentice and journeymen 500 series guys and gals.  *golf clap*


----------



## matthew1786 (21 Jan 2014)

Thanks for sharing the article. I guess this means that (as a pilot applicant), there's a good chance that any or all of my future instructors will be carrying a Euro accident.  :blotto:


----------



## Journeyman (21 Jan 2014)

matthew1786 said:
			
		

> .....there's a good chance that any or all of my future instructors will be carrying a Euro accident.  :blotto:


And riding bicycles like monkeys...apparently.  :dunno:


----------



## AirDet (21 Jan 2014)

Don't get me wrong, I have many close friends who are MSEOp (Air). I'm just jokingly pointing out that many CF MOCs are experiencing exactly the same challenges but the pilots seem to have a better union rep.


----------



## DAA (21 Jan 2014)

I think PMedMoe was fairly accurate in that this applies more towards "experienced" pilots who are already qualified in some way, so I can't see any changes to "new" applicants without any experience.



			
				AirDet said:
			
		

> Don't get me wrong, I have many close friends who are MSEOp (Air). I'm just jokingly pointing out that many CF MOCs are experiencing exactly the same challenges but the pilots seem to have a better union rep.



The Pilot Occupation is NO different than any other occupation, except for the fact that they don't have a problem using a big stick to achieve their Manning goals/requirements.


----------



## AirDet (21 Jan 2014)

> The Pilot Occupation is NO different than any other occupation, except for the fact that they don't have a problem using a big stick to achieve their Manning goals/requirements.



So true. Like I said, the have a good union rep.


----------



## DAA (21 Jan 2014)

AirDet said:
			
		

> So true. Like I said, the have a good union rep.



A bit more complicated than that but at the end of the day, (1) their voice was heard  (2) the message was conveyed and (3) the message was further reinforced.

Regretably, some occupations just never get past step (2).


----------



## dapaterson (21 Jan 2014)

It's also significantly easier to make up an MSE Op shortfall than a pilot shortfall; increasing output at CFLTC by laying on additional serials is feasible; pilot training is a longer and much more expensive proposition.  The savings in getting one pilot this way would pay the training of for dozens of MSE Ops.


----------

