British Airways is currently looking to hire a wide body pilot, but not to actually fly planes. This is as niche as pilot jobs get…
In this post:
British Airways’ Chicago O’Hare ground taxi pilot job
British Airways currently has a job opening for the position of “ground taxi pilot,” to be based at Chicago O’Hare Airport (ORD), with a base salary in the range of $90K-100K per year. Here’s how it’s described:
The role:
B777 & B787 taxi pilot
You will operate as Pilot in Command or Second Pilot during ground taxi operations at Chicago O’Hare Airport
What you’ll do:
You’ll play a critical role in helping achieve On Time Performance by safely ground taxiing British Airways Boeing 777 and 787 aircraft between terminals at Chicago O’hare airport.
What you’ll bring to British Airways:
You’ll be an experienced Airline Transport Pilot (or former Airline Transport Pilot) with a solid track record of safety and a high degree of familiarity with procedures at Chicago O’Hare airport. You will operate diligently with an uncompromising regard for safety and security at all times.
Your experience:
You will have recent experience of operating the Boeing 777 or 787 as Captain or First Officer and a willingness to learn and adapt to the British Airways Standard Operating Procedures.
You must have employment authorisation to work in the United States.
I’m sure many people are thinking “wait, why does British Airways need to hire pilots to taxi planes at Chicago O’Hare?” Well, British Airways operates up to three daily flights at the airport, and there’s a bit of a quirk to the service.
The aircraft arrives at Terminal 5 (the terminal for all international arrivals), but then departs from Terminal 3 (which is primarily occupied by American). So the one crew clocks out after passengers disembark from Terminal 5, and another crew clocks in before passengers board from Terminal 3. That leaves the issue of getting the plane between the two terminals, given crew duty hour limits, etc.
What a unique and confusing “pilot” position
Keep in mind that American and United also need to get their planes out of Terminal 5 at Chicago O’Hare, though it’s my understanding that the actual taxiing of planes can be done by some specialized ground tech ops employees, and not actual pilots (or is my understanding incorrect?).
So does anyone know what’s going on here? Is the airline erring on the side of caution (as it views it), and trying to hire as experienced of a person for the role as possible? Is there some union rule that requires this to go to a pilot? Or what’s the logic here?
Some people might be surprised to learn that tugs typically aren’t used to get planes between the terminals. The reason (as I understand it) is that they’re slower, and given the maze of taxiways at O’Hare, it’s more efficient and safer to just taxi planes under their own engine power.
I do wonder how easily British Airways will find a recent 777 or 787 pilot to accept a role where they never actually fly, but instead, use their experience for a few minutes per day of taxiing.
I have to imagine most people who are passing all their medicals, not at retirement age, etc., would actually want to be flying planes, racking up hours, and making more money. But I suppose if you’re recently retired, didn’t pass a medical, etc., this could be an interesting role.
Bottom line
British Airways is looking to hire a 777 or 787 pilot. Not to be based in London and to fly around the globe, but to be based in Chicago, and to taxi for a few minutes per day. It’s an unusual role, for sure, and I’m curious what kind of a candidate ends up applying.
What do you make of this “ground taxi pilot” job, and does anyone have the background for why this is necessary?
This has been an existing set up for many years, and many of my recently retired colleagues have gone on to do this for a few years. It’s a great way to get British Airways nonrev benefits too.
If I recall correctly, they have a team of 10-15 retired AA guys that move jets 10 days a month each. Insurance requirements prohibit farming the service out to AA mechanics/move teams. Sweet retirement gig.
If i were United or American, id just pitch doing this for BA with the move teams they have on staff for $90k a year and call it a win.
Lucky, did you see the China Eastern flight 5735 NTSB report? It was requested via FOIA and was posted a few days ago.
Sounds like a lovely gig for a Chicago based pilot who wants to have a nice transition into retirement.
Might also be good for a pilot who's just started a family and wants to be around the kids while they're young and will transition back into long haul flights in a few years
They need more than one pilot because of days off, vacations, etc.
And I would have to imagine that operational disruptions would factor into the manpower needs.
I'm also surprised that BALPA would consent to this.
Why BA doesn't use tugs is beyond me and I am not sure that AA and UA don't use tugs including at ORD.
other airlines use super tugs to move airplanes around congested busy airports because they can move as fast as airplanes can taxi.
Still, it is unclear why BA needs to use pilots unless it is a union requirement.
Also, the job posting says a retired pilot with 777/787 familiarity and...
Why BA doesn't use tugs is beyond me and I am not sure that AA and UA don't use tugs including at ORD.
other airlines use super tugs to move airplanes around congested busy airports because they can move as fast as airplanes can taxi.
Still, it is unclear why BA needs to use pilots unless it is a union requirement.
Also, the job posting says a retired pilot with 777/787 familiarity and I suspect they can find retired pilots that had an ATP.
this issue does highlight how expensive and inconvenient the current setup at ORD is with a terminal change required not just for passengers and crew but also for airplanes. ORD will spend billions to fix this design that has been in existence for years - perhaps why AA and UA both have pretty small international operations at ORD compared to other hubs - but it is doubtful that the cost will really be worth it.
The irony, of course, is that US carries a far smaller share of international traffic at ORD than at any other large US carrier hub.
Littered with RJs and foreign carrier dominance of international ops, ORD is one of the least economical and inefficient hub airports in the US.
Timbits: the reason why ORD has lower international flights is because it's in the middle of the freakin' continent. Even you aren't stupid enough to improperly read a map.
Proof that Tim Dunn doesn't read or gives a uck on what other people say but only objective is to argues with rest of us.
They are looking for rated not retired pilot, Tim. And don't blame it on auto correct. You said it twice.
If you actually even read this.
Excellent idea . And also a first officer to do the radio .