This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-14-237 
entitled 'Aviation Workforce: Current and Future Availability of 
Aviation Engineering and Maintenance Professionals' which was released 
on February 28, 2014. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

Report to Congressional Requesters: 

February 2014: 

Aviation Workforce: 

Current and Future Availability of Aviation Engineering and 
Maintenance Professionals: 

GAO-14-237: 

GAO Highlights: 

Highlights of GAO-14-237, a report to congressional requesters. 

Why GAO Did This Study: 

Maintaining a safe and robust aviation system requires qualified 
aviation professionals-—including aerospace engineers, aircraft 
mechanics, and avionics technicians-—to design, manufacture, and 
repair more than 225,000 aircraft. Aviation stakeholders have 
expressed concerns that an insufficient supply of personnel could 
develop because of imminent retirements and a perception that fewer 
people enter these professions. 

GAO was asked to review the supply and demand of aviation 
professionals. This report discusses (1) what available data and 
forecasts reveal about the need for and potential availability of 
aerospace engineers, aircraft mechanics, and avionics technicians, and 
(2) what actions industry and the federal government are taking to 
help attract and retain these professionals. GAO (1) collected and 
analyzed data from 2000 through 2012, employment projections from 2012 
through 2022, and literature relevant to the aviation professionals' 
labor markets; (2) reviewed agency documents; and (3) interviewed 
agency officials about programs that support training. GAO also 
interviewed 10 aviation industry associations (5 representing 
employees and 5 representing employers) and selected a non-
generalizable sample of 23 private sector employers, based on size and 
location, to understand any actions used to attract their workforce. 

What GAO Found: 

GAO analysis found mixed evidence about a current or possible future 
shortage of aviation professionals. Aerospace engineers have 
experienced a low unemployment rate—the most direct measure of a labor 
shortage—and increases in employment suggesting a shortage may exist; 
however, earnings for the occupation have stayed about the same. Data 
provide less support for a shortage of aircraft mechanics; while the 
occupation has had a low unemployment rate, both employment and 
earnings have stayed about the same, suggesting that demand for this 
occupation has not outstripped supply. GAO was unable to analyze 
information on avionics technicians because of insufficient data. In 
addition, the Bureau of Labor Statistics' employment projections 
indicate slower than average or no growth for these three occupations 
over the next 10 years. Data also suggest the number of people who 
have received training related to these aviation professions is 
increasing; however, several other industries compete for these 
individuals and not all will pursue aviation careers. 

Figure: Examples of Tasks Performed by Selected Aviation Professionals: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustration] 

Avionics technicians: install, inspect, test, or repair avionics 
equipment for communication and navigation. 

Aircraft mechanics: perform routine maintenance, replace aircraft 
parts, calibrate systems, inspect aircraft components, interpret 
manuals and specifications, and determine feasibility of repairing or 
replacing components. They work on engines, brakes, landing gear, 
plumbing, and other mechanical, hydraulic, and structural components 
using hand tools and power tools. Certificated mechanics can authorize 
an aircraft's return to service. 

Aerospace engineers: design, construct, and test aircraft and aircraft 
components to ensure they function according to design. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

Industry and government are taking some actions to attract and retain 
qualified individuals in these occupations, but employers GAO 
interviewed remain concerned about future needs. GAO found that most 
of these employers had some challenges hiring personnel with the 
skills employers were seeking at the wage they offered. According to 
economic literature, employers may take several actions in response to 
a perceived labor shortage—-including increasing recruiting efforts 
and raising wages. Employers reported taking a variety of actions, but 
few were raising wages. Several agencies—-the Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) and the Departments of Defense (DOD), Education, 
Labor (DOL), and Veterans Affairs—-maintain programs that assist 
individuals interested in aviation careers. For example, in academic 
year 2011–2012, Education disbursed approximately $1.6 billion in 
federal grants to students majoring in related fields. Still, most 
employers and stakeholders stated that maintaining a qualified 
workforce will be difficult, in part because of a perception that 
fewer people are interested in aviation careers. GAO was unable to 
verify these concerns with available data. It could be expected that 
employers would continue to take actions at their disposal—such as 
adjusting wages or changing recruiting and training practices—if a 
labor shortage were to develop. While such actions would be considered 
typical market responses to a potential shortage, it does not mean 
such actions are costless or might not affect the industry. 

What GAO Recommends: 

GAO is not making recommendations. GAO received technical comments on 
this report from Education, DOL, and DOT, which were incorporated as 
appropriate. DOD did not have any comments on this report. 

View GAO-14-237. For more information, contact Gerald L. Dillingham at 
(202) 512-2834 or dillinghamg@gao.gov. 

[End of section] 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Background: 

Data and Forecasts Provide Mixed Evidence for a Current or Future 
Workforce Shortage: 

Industry and Government Are Taking Some Actions to Facilitate Entry 
into the Aviation Workforce, but Employers Remain Concerned about 
Future Needs: 

Agency Comments: 

Appendix I: Objective, Scope, and Methodology: 

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Tables: 

Table 1: Employment Levels and Salary Information for Selected 
Aviation Professions (2012): 

Table 2: Examples of Agencies' Roles and Responsibilities Regarding 
Various Aviation Professionals: 

Table 3: Unemployment, Employment, and Earnings for Selected Aviation 
Professions, 2000-2012: 

Table 4: Aircraft-Maintenance-Technician Certification Program 
Enrollments and Completions by Service, 2002-2013: 

Table 5: Number of and Amount of Aid Disbursed to Students Majoring in 
Aviation-Related Fields Receiving Federal Aid, 2011-2012: 

Table 6: Selected Employers, Location, Type of Interview, and Type of 
Employer: 

Figures: 

Figure 1: Examples of Tasks Performed by Selected Aviation 
Professionals: 

Figure 2: Number of Aerospace Engineers and Aircraft Mechanics, 2000-
2012 (in thousands): 

Figure 3: Completions in Aerospace-Engineering-Related Fields by Level 
of Degree, 2001-2012: 

Figure 4: Aircraft-Mechanic and Avionics-Maintenance-Related 
Completions, 2001-2012: 

Figure 5: Aviation Maintenance Personnel Annually Separating from the 
Military, Fiscal Years 2001-2012: 

Figure 6: The Number of New A&P Certificates Issued by Training Type, 
2000-2012: 

Abbreviations: 

A&P: airframe and power plant: 

AMT: aviation maintenance technician: 

AVSED: Office of Aviation and Space Education: 

BLS: Bureau of Labor Statistics: 

Boeing: Boeing Company: 

CIP: Classification of Instructional Programs: 

CPS: Current Population Survey: 

DOD: Department of Defense: 

DOL: Department of Labor: 

DOT: Department of Transportation: 

Education: Department of Education: 

FAA: Federal Aviation Administration: 

ICAO: International Civil Aviation Organization: 

IPEDS: Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: 

JSAMTCC: Joint Services Aviation Maintenance Technician Certification 
Council: 

Manufacturer: original equipment manufacturer: 

NASCAR: National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, Inc. 

NDAA: National Defense Authorization Act: 

NPSAS: National Postsecondary Student Aid Study: 

Repair Station: maintenance, repair, and overhaul facility: 

STEM: science, technology, engineering, and math: 

SOC: Standard Occupational Classification: 

VA: Department of Veterans Affairs: 

WIA: The Workforce Investment Act of 1998: 

[End of section] 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO:
441 G St. N.W. 
Washington, DC 20548: 

February, 28, 2014: 

Congressional Requesters: 

The aviation industry is vital to the U.S. economy, generating 
billions of dollars in revenue each year, providing employment, 
bolstering economic growth, and improving the quality of people's 
lives. In 2011, air transportation contributed almost $70 billion to 
the U.S. economy and accounted for over 450,000 jobs, according to the 
Bureau of Economic Analysis. Maintaining a safe and robust aviation 
system requires a sufficient number of qualified aviation 
professionals to design, manufacture, repair, and ensure the 
airworthiness of more than 225,000 civilian aircraft. While unforeseen 
events--including the terrorist attacks of September 2001 and the 2008 
economic downturn--contributed to a downsizing of more than 100,000 
jobs in the industry throughout the past decade, employment has 
increased in more recent years, and the industry is projecting a 
growth in demand for air travel and the number of aircraft 
manufactured. 

Aviation stakeholders have expressed concern that an insufficient 
supply of certain types of aviation professionals-aerospace engineers, 
aircraft mechanics, and avionics technicians-could develop because of 
imminent retirements and a perception that fewer people are choosing 
to enter certain aviation professions. You asked that we review the 
current and projected future status of the professional aviation 
workforce. This report examines (1) what available data and forecasts 
reveal about the need for and potential availability of aerospace 
engineers, aircraft mechanics, and avionics technicians and (2) what 
actions industry and the federal government are taking, if any, to 
help attract and retain these professionals.[Footnote 1] 

This report looks specifically at three professions in the aviation 
industry--aerospace engineers, aircraft mechanics, and avionics 
technicians--which are involved in the design, manufacture, and repair 
of aircraft and have been the subject of concerns voiced by industry 
stakeholders. To examine current labor market conditions for these 
aviation professions, we analyzed data from the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics' (BLS) Current Population Survey (CPS) for years 2000 
through 2012 on unemployment rates, employment numbers, and median 
weekly earnings (earnings)-referred to as "labor market indicators." 
We reviewed economic literature that describes how to evaluate labor 
market conditions that might indicate a labor shortage.[Footnote 2] To 
understand the available workforce, we reviewed and analyzed data from 
the Department of Education (Education) on completion rates for degree 
or certificate programs that might prepare individuals to work in 
these professions from academic years 2000-2001 through 2011-2012; 
from the Department of Defense (DOD) on service members working in 
aviation maintenance separating from the military from fiscal year 
2000 through 2012; and from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 
on mechanic certificates issued from 2000 through 2012.[Footnote 3] To 
assess the reliability of Education, DOD, and FAA data we reviewed 
documentation related to these data sources from our prior reports, 
agencies' websites, and interviewed knowledgeable government officials 
about the quality of the data. We determined the data to be 
sufficiently reliable for our purposes. We interviewed officials from 
seven select engineering, aviation maintenance technician (AMT), and 
avionics schools to understand training requirements and changes in 
demand for graduates. We selected training programs that varied based 
on location, size, and program specialty; our findings from these 
interviews should not be used to make generalizations about all 
training programs, but provide us with insights. We also reviewed 
studies that projected future demand for these professions and 
interviewed representatives of labor unions and industry associations. 
We did not verify the underlying data that these organizations 
collected and used in developing their projections of future demand. 
To understand the extent to which select employers have had difficulty 
attracting or retaining workers and any steps they have taken often to 
mitigate perceived shortages, we interviewed representatives and 
reviewed data from selected private companies that employ these 
professionals-including original equipment manufacturers 
(manufacturers); air carriers; and maintenance, repair, and overhaul 
facilities (repair stations). We selected 23 employers that ranged in 
size, geographic location, and type of work performed. Our findings 
from these interviews should not be used to make generalizations about 
all employers of these professionals, but provided us with insights. 
We also met with and reviewed documents from government officials, 
various industry groups that represent these professionals, and 
experts in labor economics to identify any actions taken or analyses 
that have been performed concerning these issues. See appendix I for 
more information about our scope and methodology and a listing of the 
employers we interviewed. 

We conducted this performance audit from February 2013 through 
February 2014 in accordance with generally accepted government 
auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform 
the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a 
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 
objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a 
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 
objectives. 

Background: 

As noted, various aviation professionals are involved in the design, 
maintenance, and repair of aircraft and aircraft components (see 
figure 1). 

Figure 1: Examples of Tasks Performed by Selected Aviation 
Professionals: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustration] 

Avionics technicians: install, inspect, test, or repair avionics 
equipment for communication and navigation. 

Aircraft mechanics: perform routine maintenance, replace aircraft 
parts, calibrate systems, inspect aircraft components, interpret 
manuals and specifications, and determine feasibility of repairing or 
replacing components. They work on engines, brakes, landing gear, 
plumbing, and other mechanical, hydraulic, and structural components 
using hand tools and power tools. Certificated mechanics can authorize 
an aircraft's return to service. 

Aerospace engineers: design, construct, and test aircraft and aircraft 
components to ensure they function according to design. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of figure] 

These professionals are commonly employed by commercial air carriers, 
corporate flight departments, repair stations, or manufacturers of 
aircraft or aircraft components. 

* Aerospace engineers working in aviation design aircraft and 
components, and test prototypes to make sure that they function 
according to design.[Footnote 4] The vast majority of aerospace 
engineers have at least a bachelor's degree, according to BLS's 
Occupational Outlook Handbook. 

* Aircraft mechanics inspect, service, and repair aircraft bodies 
(airframe) and engines (power plant). Aircraft mechanics can earn a 
mechanic certificate from FAA with either an airframe (A) rating, 
power plant (P) rating, or combined airframe and power plant (A&P) 
ratings, and are referred to as certificated mechanics. According to 
FAA data, almost all certificated mechanics (92 percent) hold A&P 
ratings. Applicants for a mechanic certificate must pass written and 
oral exams and demonstrate competence through a practical test. 
Certification is not necessary to work as an aircraft mechanic; 
however, without it, a mechanic cannot approve an aircraft for return 
to service and must be supervised by a certificated mechanic. 
Certificated mechanics that hold A&P ratings generally earn a higher 
wage and are more desirable to employers than mechanics who are not 
certificated, according to BLS. 

For an applicant to be authorized to take the mechanics examination 
for the combined A&P ratings, the applicant must either (1) complete 
an FAA-certificated AMT school; demonstrate and document relevant A&P 
work experience gained through on-the-job training, or (2) demonstrate 
and document work experience or some combination of work experience 
and education gained through the military working with airframes and 
engines.[Footnote 5] Mechanics trained at an FAA-approved AMT school 
complete, at a minimum, 1900 curriculum hours of training: 750 
curriculum hours in airframe subjects, 750 curriculum hours in power 
plant subjects, and 400 curriculum hours in general education 
subjects. Applicants seeking to take the mechanics examination for A&P 
ratings based on qualifying on-the-job training must provide 
documentary evidence of 30 months of practical experience concurrently 
performing the duties appropriate to the A&P ratings.[Footnote 6] 

* Avionics technicians test and troubleshoot aircraft instruments and 
components, install electronic components, and assemble switches or 
electrical controls. Avionics technicians receive training either 
through schooling, on the job, or in the military. Though some 
avionics technicians may hold a mechanics certificate, there is no FAA 
exam or certification specific to avionics technicians. However, some 
technicians seek certification from the Federal Communications 
Commission in the form of, for example, a General Radiotelephone 
Operator License. 

Some avionics technicians may hold an A&P certificate or an FAA-issued 
repair-person certificate.[Footnote 7] A repair-person certificate 
allows individuals to perform specific tasks at an FAA-certificated 
repair station, commercial operator, or air carrier that is authorized 
to perform those tasks.[Footnote 8] Eligibility for a repair-person 
certificate requires employment by and recommendation from the FAA-
approved employer. If an individual who holds a repair-person 
certificate leaves employment at that entity, he or she does not 
retain that certification. 

Table 1 shows the employment levels, wages, and the largest type of 
employer for the aviation professions discussed in this report, as 
reported by BLS. 

Table 1: Employment Levels and Salary Information for Selected 
Aviation Professions (2012): 
Occupation: Aerospace engineer; 
Total employment: 80,420; 
Average hourly wage rate: $50.39; 
Largest employer type: Manufacturing. 

Occupation: Aircraft mechanic; 
Total employment: 119,160; 
Average hourly wage rate: $26.78; 
Largest employer type: Air transportation support services[A]. 

Occupation: Avionics technician; 
Total employment: 16,810; 
Average hourly wage rate: $26.65; 
Largest employer type: Manufacturing. 

Source: BLS's Occupational Employment Statistics. 

[A] Air transportation support services include airport operation, 
servicing, repairing (except factory conversion and overhaul of 
aircraft), maintaining, and storing aircraft. 

[End of table] 

No single federal agency is tasked with developing the aviation 
workforce, but FAA is responsible for a variety of tasks related to 
developing and maintaining a qualified workforce. For example, FAA 
sets the minimum requirements for the academic curriculum and 
certifies and oversees AMT schools across the country.[Footnote 9] 
With regard to certification of individual mechanics, FAA developed 
and administers the written A&P mechanic examination; certifies 
instructors (known as designated mechanic examiners) to administer the 
oral and practical tests to candidates; oversees the examiners; and 
issues A&P certificates to mechanics who successfully pass the 
examination. FAA also certifies and oversees repair stations within 
and outside of the United States and oversees maintenance performed by 
air carriers.[Footnote 10] Several other federal agencies, including 
DOD, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Education, and the 
Department of Labor (DOL), play a role in developing and maintaining a 
qualified aviation professional workforce, as shown in table 2. 

Table 2: Examples of Agencies' Roles and Responsibilities Regarding 
Various Aviation Professionals: 

Agency: FAA; 
Role: FAA sets requirements and oversees the AMT schools and testing; 
issues certificates to mechanics and repair stations; and performs 
outreach on behalf of the profession. 

Agency: DOD; 
Role: DOD administers a training program meant to supplement work 
experience, which upon completion makes service members eligible to 
take the mechanic certification exam. 

Agency: VA; 
Role: VA administers several programs to provide financial assistance 
for higher education. 

Agency: DOL; 
Role: DOL-supported workforce-training programs can fund engineering, 
mechanic, or avionics training programs. 

Agency: BLS; 
Role: BLS collects employment and wage data and makes long-term 
employment projections. 

Agency: Education; 
Role: Education provides financial assistance to support training in 
aviation-related fields. 

Source: GAO analysis of government information. 

[End of table] 

The demand for air travel is highly sensitive to the state of the 
economy and to political, international, and even health-related 
events. As a result, despite periods of strong growth and earnings 
over the past decade, the industry has at times suffered substantial 
financial distress resulting in the industry contracting. For example, 
in response to the 2008 economic downturn and resulting decrease in 
demand for commercial air travel, airlines cut capacity and reduced 
their workforce. However, as demand for air travel has rebounded, the 
number of aircraft in operation and the size of the workforce are 
expected to grow. Representatives of the aviation industry are 
concerned there will not be a sufficient number of certain aviation 
professionals to support this growth--that is, the industry is 
concerned that the demand will exceed the available supply and that a 
labor shortage will result. While no agreed-upon definition for a 
labor shortage exists, it is commonly described as a sustained period 
during which the demand for workers in a geographic area exceeds the 
supply of workers available, qualified, and willing to work at a 
particular wage and under particular working conditions. 

Data and Forecasts Provide Mixed Evidence for a Current or Future 
Workforce Shortage: 

Our analyses of labor market data indicate that a shortage of 
aerospace engineers may exist, but our analysis found less support for 
a shortage of aircraft mechanics.[Footnote 11] For example, while both 
have low unemployment rates, neither employment nor earnings have 
increased for aircraft mechanics suggesting that employers' demand for 
this occupation has not outstripped supply. Stakeholders representing 
these groups also varied in their overall assessment of the labor 
market. Further, while some of these individuals will pursue other 
careers, the number of people completing degrees in these or related 
fields has increased in recent years, and BLS employment projections 
indicate slower than average or no growth through 2022. 

Evidence Is Mixed for a Current Shortage of Selected Aviation 
Professionals: 

While no single metric can be used to identify whether a labor 
shortage exists, labor market data can be used as "indicators" --in 
conjunction with observations from stakeholders.[Footnote 12] 
According to economic literature, one can look at historical 
unemployment rates, as well as trends in employment and 
earnings.[Footnote 13] If a labor shortage were to exist, one would 
expect a low unemployment rate signaling limited availability of 
workers in a profession; increases in employment due to demand for 
that occupation increasing; and increases in wages offered to draw 
more people into the industry.[Footnote 14] Of these three indicators, 
the unemployment rate provides the most direct measure of a labor 
shortage because it estimates the number of people who are unemployed 
and actively looking for work in a specific occupation.[Footnote 15] 
The other indicators can be affected by factors unrelated to a labor 
shortage; for example, wages may be determined by union contracts 
rather than market demand. Results of these indicators can be analyzed 
in relation to other occupations and by using absolute scales defined 
by benchmarks that we identified in the economic literature.[Footnote 
16] 

Two of the three labor market indicators we examined for aerospace 
engineers suggest that the profession may be experiencing a labor 
shortage (see table 3). From 2000 through 2012, the unemployment rate 
for aerospace engineers has averaged 2.3 percent--much lower than the 
economy as a whole--and employment has increased by about 50 percent. 
[Footnote 17] Both the unemployment rate and employment could be 
suggestive of a labor shortage relative to other occupations and based 
on the scale we identified in the economic literature. For example, 
over this period, aerospace engineers had the 38th (out of 295) lowest 
unemployment rate and 45th (out of 490) largest growth in 
employment.[Footnote 18] Similarly, according to the 7-point scale we 
identified in economic literature, the unemployment rate and 
employment growth would receive a 5, which is not the highest rating, 
but still provides some support for a labor shortage.[Footnote 19] 
Median earnings for aerospace engineers, however, have stayed about 
the same over that time period, a statistic that does not appear 
consistent with a labor shortage.[Footnote 20] Specifically, if 
employers were experiencing difficulty hiring aerospace engineers, one 
would expect earnings to rise to attract new workers to the industry. 
However, other factors can also account for a lack of growth in 
earnings even during a labor shortage. For example, earnings may be 
slow to adjust to other labor market trends, or certain aspects of an 
industry may prevent wages from increasing (e.g., a highly competitive 
industry with slim profit margins). Furthermore, over our analytical 
time period, wages were stagnant through much of the economy as a 
result of two economic downturns. 

Table 3: Unemployment, Employment, and Earnings for Selected Aviation 
Professions, 2000-2012: 

Occupation: Aerospace engineers; 
Unemployment: 
Rate (average): 2.3%[A]; 
Rank (total 295): 38; 
Change in full-time employment (as a percent per year): 
Rate (yearly): 4.6%[A]; 
Rank (total 490): 45; 
Change in median weekly earnings (as a percent per year): 
Rate (yearly): 0.3%; 
Rank (total 250): 60. 

Occupation: Aircraft mechanics and service technicians; 
Unemployment: 
Rate (average): 3.0%[A]; 
Rank (total 295): 70; 
Change in full-time employment (as a percent per year): 
Rate (yearly): -0.25%; 
Rank (total 490): 265; 
Change in median weekly earnings (as a percent per year): 
Rate (yearly): -0.07%; 
Rank (total 250): 127. 

Occupation: All occupations; 
Unemployment: 
Rate (average): 6.3%; 
Rank (total 295): N/A; 
Change in full-time employment (as a percent per year): 
Rate (yearly): 0.1%; 
Rank (total 490): N/A; 
Change in median weekly earnings (as a percent per year): 
Rate (yearly): 0.06%; 
Rank (total 250): N/A. 

Source: GAO analysis of BLS's CPS data. 

Notes: Data are from unpublished CPS tables. 

Average annual unemployment rates were ranked from lowest to highest. 
Yearly rates of change in full-time employment were ranked from 
highest to lowest. Yearly changes in earnings were ranked from highest 
to lowest. 

BLS adopted the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) titles in 
2010. As a result, some occupations were combined and others were 
phased out. While this did not affect the occupations relevant to our 
analysis, it affected the total number of occupations. We excluded any 
occupation for which the name changed. We also excluded occupations 
for an indicator if BLS did not report unemployment, or median weekly 
earnings, or employment for any year. We excluded avionics technicians 
since the workforce included fewer than 50,000 people and BLS did not 
report unemployment in many years. 

In the table, growth rates for the change in employment and earnings 
were calculated by fitting a time trend using a log linear regression, 
for which we computed statistical significance. As such, our 
calculations yield different larger annual changes compared to 
calculating the percent change over the same time period and 
annualizing the percent change, because our method does not include 
the effect of compounding. For example, the 51 percent change over the 
12 year period for aerospace engineers would result in a 3.6 annual 
rate of change, as opposed to the 4.6 reported in the table. This 
would be the largest difference of any numbers reported in the table. 

[A] Denotes that the indicator would be suggestive of a labor 
shortage, although not at the highest level. 

[End of table] 

Data for aircraft mechanics provide less evidence of a labor shortage. 
From 2000 through 2012, the average unemployment rate for aircraft 
mechanics has been 3 percent--about half the rate for the entire 
workforce--which could be suggestive of a labor shortage.[Footnote 21] 
However, earnings for aircraft mechanics remained static and 
employment decreased.[Footnote 22] Industry stakeholders varied in 
their assessment of the labor market. Some industry officials we spoke 
with, representing companies that employ aircraft mechanics across the 
United States, told us that the industry was currently experiencing a 
labor shortage; however, others believed that there were enough people 
to perform the work, but companies were competing to hire the most 
experienced personnel. According to one industry stakeholder we spoke, 
the major airlines are not having difficulty attracting workers. As 
another stakeholder explained, if difficulty existed attracting 
workers, smaller businesses, and general aviation--particularly in 
rural areas--would most likely be affected first. The low unemployment 
rate suggests that with few available people to hire, employers may 
have difficulty finding people with specific skill sets, 
certifications, or work experiences. 

Our analysis of labor market data has a number of limitations given 
the nature of the CPS data from BLS and the scope of our analysis. SOC 
titles are broad, and may not take into account specific requirements 
an employer seeks. For example, many employers may require employees 
to hold an A&P certificate. However, BLS's occupational classification 
for aircraft mechanics includes both certificated and non-certificated 
mechanics. As a result, labor market data may overestimate the number 
of available mechanics for certain employers. Moreover, BLS only 
publicly reports annual employment data for occupations that have at 
least 50,000 people; as a result, we were unable to analyze data for 
avionics technicians. We identified the following other limitations of 
the labor market indicators: 

* Data are collected through a household survey and are subject to 
sampling and response errors. Often, one individual will identify 
occupation, employment, and wage data for all household members; 
individuals may report incorrect or inconsistent information. 

* Survey results of unemployment rates are based on the person's last 
job, rather than the longest job held or occupation in which a person 
is trained or looking for work: the data, therefore, can miss 
individuals who are seeking work in a particular occupation. For 
example, an A&P mechanic who lost a job, worked temporarily in the 
automotive industry, and was then seeking employment as an A&P 
mechanic, would be classified as an automotive mechanic not as an A&P 
mechanic, when surveyed by BLS. 

* BLS reports data on median earnings for aviation professionals in 
all stages of their careers, so we could not examine whether starting 
earnings have increased, an examination that would be more likely to 
indicate if wages were rising to attract entry-level workers. 

* The data were collected at a national level; while not all 
indicators were consistent with a labor shortage, our analysis would 
not identify any regional shortages. 

* Research by BLS and others suggests job vacancy data as another 
potential indicator for identifying labor shortages. However, BLS does 
not collect information on job vacancies at the occupational level. 
Job vacancy data are collected by some states and private companies, 
but the data are limited. We could not obtain complete and 
sufficiently reliable occupational-level job-vacancy data from these 
sources.[Footnote 23] 

Finally, as mentioned above, no single measure can provide definitive 
evidence as to whether a labor shortage exists. Rather, these data can 
indicate the extent to which employers may have difficulty attracting 
people at the current wage rate. Moreover, even if perfect data 
existed, the term labor shortage is sometimes used to describe a 
variety of situations, some of which are generally not considered to 
be shortages.[Footnote 24] For example, during periods of economic 
recession, employers may become accustomed to hiring a high caliber of 
candidate with specific training or levels of experience at a 
prescribed wage rate. In these cases, employers can be more selective 
when hiring candidates and could, for example, look for individuals 
with niche skills or more experience. However, during an economic 
expansion, where companies may be increasing the size of their 
workforce, it is likely that the number of job applicants will shrink 
and employers may have difficulty finding the same caliber of 
candidate. Under these circumstances, the employer's challenge may 
become one of quality of available people, not necessarily quantity of 
people willing and able to do the job. 

Data Suggest That the Number of Individuals in the Selected 
Professions Is Increasing, but Several Industries Compete for These 
Workers: 

From 2000 through 2012, the number of people identifying as aerospace 
engineers and aircraft mechanics and service technicians-both 
certificated and non-certificated-has increased, according to BLS data 
(see figure 2).[Footnote 25] For example, the size of the aircraft-
mechanic and service-technician workforce in 2012 had increased 5 
percent since 2000. Moving forward, a couple stakeholders that 
represent training programs and members of the armed services noted 
that they expect an increase in the number of available mechanics due 
to an increase in the number of completions in aircraft maintenance 
related degrees and people separating from the armed services, 
respectively. 

Figure 2: Number of Aerospace Engineers and Aircraft Mechanics, 2000-
2012 (in thousands): 

[Refer to PDF for image: multiple line graph] 

Year: 2000; 
Aerospace engineers: 80,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 149,000. 

Year: 2001; 
Aerospace engineers: 91,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 161,000. 

Year: 2002; 
Aerospace engineers: 103,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 157,000. 

Year: 2003; 
Aerospace engineers: 86,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 139,000. 

Year: 2004; 
Aerospace engineers: 115,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 137,000. 

Year: 2005; 
Aerospace engineers: 91,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 144,000. 

Year: 2006; 
Aerospace engineers: 111,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 146,000. 

Year: 2007; 
Aerospace engineers: 124,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 127,000. 

Year: 2008; 
Aerospace engineers: 139,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 156,000. 

Year: 2009; 
Aerospace engineers: 138,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 146,000. 

Year: 2010; 
Aerospace engineers: 132,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 141,000. 

Year: 2011; 
Aerospace engineers: 147,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 170,000. 

Year: 2012; 
Aerospace engineers: 124,000; 
Aircraft mechanics and service technicians: 157,000. 

Source: GAO analysis of BLS's CPS data. 

Note: Data are not available for avionics technicians because the 
survey sample size is too small for data to meet the reporting 
threshold. 

[End of figure] 

The number of completions in aerospace-engineering-related fields has 
generally increased, according to data from Education.[Footnote 26] 
For example, from academic years 2000-2001 through 2011-2012, there 
has been a 39 percent increase in the number of completions (see 
figure 3). Representatives from engineering programs we spoke with 
generally suggested that the number of completions from engineering 
programs will be sufficient to meet demand given future BLS employment 
projections. Therefore, they suggested that it is unlikely that a 
labor shortage will develop in the near future. For example, one 
representative told us he would expect demand to be met given the 
increase in the number of completions combined with the projected slow 
growth in government projections for selected employment in the 
aviation field. The same stakeholder noted that the vast majority of 
engineers are getting employment offers, but are receiving, on 
average, fewer offers than in past years. A union representative we 
spoke with echoed a similar sentiment, saying that aerospace 
engineering needs will be met given the number of engineers entering 
the workforce. 

Figure 3: Completions in Aerospace-Engineering-Related Fields by Level 
of Degree, 2001-2012: 

[Refer to PDF for image: multiple line graph] 

Academic year: 2000-2001; 
Bachelor's: 28,113; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 13,437; 
Certificate or associate's: 346. 

Academic year: 2001-2002; 
Bachelor's: 28,516; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 12,976; 
Certificate or associate's: 302. 

Academic year: 2002-2003; 
Bachelor's: 30,100; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 14,423; 
Certificate or associate's: 349. 

Academic year: 2003-2004; 
Bachelor's: 31,417; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 17,386; 
Certificate or associate's: 377. 

Academic year: 2004-2005; 
Bachelor's: 32,018; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 17,565; 
Certificate or associate's: 352. 

Academic year: 2005-2006; 
Bachelor's: 33,363; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 17,152; 
Certificate or associate's: 309. 

Academic year: 2006-2007; 
Bachelor's: 33,378; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 16,689; 
Certificate or associate's: 342. 

Academic year: 2007-2008; 
Bachelor's: 33,484; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 17,938; 
Certificate or associate's: 300. 

Academic year: 2008-2009; 
Bachelor's: 32,873; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 18,745; 
Certificate or associate's: 339. 

Academic year: 2009-2010; 
Bachelor's: 33,906; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 18,395; 
Certificate or associate's: 366. 

Academic year: 2010-2011; 
Bachelor's: 34,831; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 20,632; 
Certificate or associate's: 318. 

Academic year: 2011-2012; 
Bachelor's: 37,075; 
Master's, doctorate, or post-baccalaureate certificate: 20,901; 
Certificate or associate's: 387. 

Source: GAO analysis of Education data. 

Note: Analysis includes degree programs that train individuals for 
work as aerospace engineers. 

[End of figure] 

Numbers of aerospace engineering completions, however, are not a 
direct reflection of the number of individuals entering the aviation 
workforce. According to FAA, the industry also uses civil, software, 
and chemical engineers, among others. For example, the aviation 
industry requires electrical and software engineers to design airplane 
motors or electrical circuits and design programs to make air travel 
faster, respectively. Further, other industries, such as financial 
services and information technology, compete for aerospace and other 
types of engineers and often offer less career uncertainty and more 
exciting job prospects, according to one industry stakeholder 
representing aerospace companies. Officials we spoke with both at 
engineering training programs and within industry attributed this to 
the fact that the aviation industry is highly cyclical, offering less 
job security than other industries. 

In terms of the other aviation occupations, the number of completions 
of AMT-related programs has also increased; however, the number of 
completions in avionics related programs has not.[Footnote 27] Over 
the past decade, the number of students receiving degrees in aircraft 
maintenance has increased by 48 percent (see figure 4), while the 
number of students receiving degrees in avionics has decreased by 53 
percent. However, data on degrees granted in avionics may not be a 
good indicator for the number of people gaining training to be an 
avionics technician. For example, according to officials from one 
school, a sizable portion of avionics technicians received training in 
other fields, including electronics technology or electrical 
engineering, which is not captured in these data. Similarly, some AMT 
schools offer avionics specialties; though students may go on to be 
avionics technicians, according to this data source, they are 
classified as aircraft mechanics. According to officials from a couple 
selected AMT schools, based on the number of students enrolled in 
avionics specialties in their schools, interest in avionics has 
increased in recent years. 

Figure 4: Aircraft-Mechanic and Avionics-Maintenance-Related 
Completions, 2001-2012: 

[Refer to PDF for image: multiple line graph] 

Academic year: 2000-2001; 
Aircraft mechanics: 5,602; 
Avionics technicians: 1,797. 

Academic year: 2001-2002; 
Aircraft mechanics: 4,176; 
Avionics technicians: 1,074. 

Academic year: 2002-2003; 
Aircraft mechanics: 6,298; 
Avionics technicians: 1,908. 

Academic year: 2003-2004; 
Aircraft mechanics: 4,732; 
Avionics technicians: 975. 

Academic year: 2004-2005; 
Aircraft mechanics: 6,434; 
Avionics technicians: 1,637. 

Academic year: 2005-2006; 
Aircraft mechanics: 6,624; 
Avionics technicians: 1,348. 

Academic year: 2006-2007; 
Aircraft mechanics: 6,422; 
Avionics technicians: 1,435. 

Academic year: 2007-2008; 
Aircraft mechanics: 6,710; 
Avionics technicians: 1,468. 

Academic year: 2008-2009; 
Aircraft mechanics: 6,486; 
Avionics technicians: 1,441. 

Academic year: 2009-2010; 
Aircraft mechanics: 7,578; 
Avionics technicians: 1,536. 

Academic year: 2010-2011; 
Aircraft mechanics: 8,781; 
Avionics technicians: 1,481. 

Academic year: 2011-2012; 
Aircraft mechanics: 8,282; 
Avionics technicians: 837. 

Source: GAO analysis of Education data. 

Note: Analysis includes degree programs that train individuals for 
work as aircraft mechanics or avionics technicians. 

[End of figure] 

Nevertheless, we heard from education officials at selected AMT and 
avionics schools and others that not all graduating students received 
job offers or go to work in the aviation industry upon completion. For 
example, officials at the majority of AMT schools we visited told us 
that graduates on occasion pursue other fields of work. According to 
these officials, some graduates from AMT schools pursue other 
occupations that offer higher wages or better working conditions--such 
as the industrial heating industry--or occupations that are likely 
considered more exciting such as working for amusement parks and 
NASCAR (National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, Inc.). Some 
officials suggested this could be a result of students not yet earning 
an A&P certificate. However, this also could suggest there are more 
students entering the field than jobs available in a particular 
location or that employers are hesitant to hire A&P mechanics directly 
out of school. 

Enrollments at AMT schools have generally been increasing and, if 
demand existed, AMT schools could train more people to become aircraft 
mechanics and avionics technicians. According to the Aviation 
Technician Education Council, an organization that represents more 
than 100 AMT schools, 10 of those reported that they were, on average, 
utilizing about half of their training capacity.[Footnote 28] This is 
similar to what we were told by 3 of the 5 schools we interviewed, 
which reported that they could or planned to increase capacity. 

The number of aircraft mechanics and avionics technicians separating 
from the military--another main source of supply--and entering the 
civilian workforce has stayed relatively constant since fiscal year 
2001, but will likely increase in the future, according to DOD 
officials.[Footnote 29] From fiscal year 2001 through 2012, about 
16,000 workers trained in aviation maintenance related occupations 
separated from the military annually, according to DOD data (see 
figure 5). However, it is unknown how many of these individuals stayed 
in aviation maintenance upon completion of their military service. 
Further, according to DOD officials, the vast majority of these 
individuals will not hold an A&P certificate when entering the 
civilian workforce, a factor that can make them less desirable to 
employers. Nevertheless, DOD officials told us that they expect 
separations for aviation maintenance workers to increase in the future 
given planned workforce reductions. 

Figure 5: Aviation Maintenance Personnel Annually Separating from the 
Military, Fiscal Years 2001-2012: 

[Refer to PDF for image: line graph] 

Fiscal year: 2001; 
Service members separating: 16,157. 

Fiscal year: 2002; 
Service members separating: 14,233. 

Fiscal year: 2003; 
Service members separating: 14,625. 

Fiscal year: 2004; 
Service members separating: 17,192. 

Fiscal year: 2005; 
Service members separating: 19,532. 

Fiscal year: 2006; 
Service members separating: 17,304. 

Fiscal year: 2007; 
Service members separating: 18,133. 

Fiscal year: 2008; 
Service members separating: 16,014. 

Fiscal year: 2009; 
Service members separating: 14,645. 

Fiscal year: 2010; 
Service members separating: 14,432. 

Fiscal year: 2011; 
Service members separating: 15,282. 

Fiscal year: 2012; 
Service members separating: 18,510. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOD data. 

[End of figure] 

The annual number of newly issued A&P certificates, while declining in 
the early 2000's and staying relatively constant at about 6,000 new 
certificates annually from 2003 to 2010, has increased in recent years 
(see figure 6). About 7,000 individuals were issued their certificates 
in 2012. These individuals met the requirements either through 
attending AMT schools (4,072) or through on-the-job training or 
military service training (2,824). Over this same period, the pool of 
certificated A&P mechanics has stayed roughly the same, according to 
FAA--ranging from roughly 313,000 to 338,000 individuals. In 2013, 
there were over 335,000 certificated A&P mechanics age 70 or younger. 

Figure 6: The Number of New A&P Certificates Issued by Training Type, 
2000-2012: 

[Refer to PDF for image: combined vertical bar and line graph] 

Year: 1999; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 8,593; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,733; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
4,860. 

Year: 2000; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 8,629; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 4,181; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
4,448. 

Year: 2001; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 8,100; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 4,172; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
3,928. 

Year: 2002; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 7,232; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 4,390; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,842. 

Year: 2003; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 6,222; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,838; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,384. 

Year: 2004; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 5,907; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,585; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,322. 

Year: 2005; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 5,678; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,279; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,399. 

Year: 2006; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 5,591; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,041; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,550. 

Year: 2007; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 5,891; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,166; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,725. 

Year: 2008; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 6,003; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,134; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,869. 

Year: 2009; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 5,811; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,317; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,494. 

Year: 2010; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 5,865; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,406; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,459. 

Year: 2011; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 6,388; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 3,906; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,482. 

Year: 2012; 
Total number of new A&P certificates issued: 6,896; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to FAA-approved school 
attendees: 4,072; 
Number of original A&P certificates issued to nonschool mechanics: 
2,824. 

Source: GAO analysis of FAA data. 

[End of figure] 

Projections Suggest Slower Than Average or No Growth for the Selected 
Aviation Professions: 

BLS's employment projections suggest slower than average or no growth 
for our selected professions over the next 10 years.[Footnote 30] From 
2012 to 2022, according to BLS, the U.S. economy is projected to add 
more than 15.6 million new jobs as total employment grows from nearly 
145.4 million to more than 161 million (an overall 10.8 percent growth 
rate or an annualized growth rate of 1.0 percent per year). According 
to BLS, the number of aerospace engineers employed in the United 
States is projected to increase to 89,100 by 2022, an overall 7.3 
percent increase over the 83,000 employed in 2012.[Footnote 31] 
Alternatively, employment for aircraft mechanics and service 
technicians and for avionics technicians employed in the United States 
is projected to show little or no change through 2022. Employment for 
aircraft mechanics and services technicians and avionics technicians 
is expected to increase by about 2.5 percent (or 3,000 jobs) and 2.9 
percent (or 500 jobs) over the same 10-year period, respectively. 
[Footnote 32] While air traffic is expected to increase over the 
coming decade, according to BLS, it is likely that airlines' continued 
outsourcing of maintenance overseas and the introduction of newer 
aircraft that require less maintenance will affect demand for these 
occupations. While projections show slower than average or no growth 
for these occupations, BLS also provides forecasts of the number of 
job openings to accommodate both industry growth and the replacement 
of workers leaving these jobs.[Footnote 33] According to BLS data, 
most of the demand for new workers in these three occupations will be 
to replace those retiring or leaving the profession. 

BLS's future employment demand for an industry or occupation is 
influenced by the projected demand for goods and services produced by 
an industry. For example, the projected employment of aircraft 
mechanics and service technicians is influenced by the projected 
demand for air travel and various manufacturing industries. To 
estimate future employment in the various occupations, BLS uses 
historical economic and employment data and forecasts of key economic 
factors, such as economic growth by sector of the economy, to estimate 
the number of jobs that will result in those industries. 

While BLS's projections are helpful in gaining a sense of the expected 
growth in aviation employment, developing long-term occupational 
employment projections is inherently uncertain for a variety of 
reasons. Specifically, these projections rely on a set of assumptions 
about the future, some of which may not come to fruition. For example, 
BLS's projection assumes a full-employment economy in the target year, 
but if a recession occurred, for example, projections for employment 
are likely to be overstated. That said, projecting occupational 
employment is reasonably feasible because there are often historical 
data showing employment trends that can be compared to, for example, 
economic growth and factors affecting the airline industry--including 
trends in passenger travel and the cost of key inputs, such as fuel. 
On the other hand, analyzing whether a shortage might arise in an 
occupation would require an understanding of both the supply and 
demand characteristics of the market and an ability to project each of 
these relationships independently. The factors underlying those 
relationships require information that is more detailed and likely 
difficult to develop based on past data, a challenge exacerbated when 
projecting into the future. For example, forecasting the labor supply 
requires understanding how the number of people who might choose to 
work in an occupation varies at different wage rates or working 
conditions. In the case of the three selected professions, we have 
past data on the trends in the number of degrees or certifications 
awarded--which tend to show a growing number of people entering the 
professions--but these data do not provide a forecast of future 
supply. Nonetheless, with employment growth projected to be slower 
than average or not to grow and recent trends indicating a stable or 
growing supply of personnel, there is little reason to believe that a 
significant shortage is likely to arise in the United States over the 
next several years. 

Industry and Government Are Taking Some Actions to Facilitate Entry 
into the Aviation Workforce, but Employers Remain Concerned about 
Future Needs: 

Most of the employers we interviewed reported some challenges hiring 
individuals in the selected professions; often this was not an issue 
of an insufficient number of candidates seeking employment, but rather 
an insufficient number of candidates with the experience and skills 
employers sought available to work at the wage being offered. Certain 
employers, for example those seeking niche or craft skills or those 
located far from metropolitan areas, cited particular difficulty 
attracting workers. Almost all employers we spoke with reported taking 
some actions that economists associate with responding to a labor 
shortage, but few were raising wages to attract workers. Federal 
agencies have programs in place that support training for the selected 
aviation professions, but employers of all sizes, including those that 
are not currently experiencing hiring challenges, were concerned that 
young people are losing interest in aviation careers and that future 
employment needs may go unmet. 

Employers Reported Varying Levels of Difficulty Filling Vacancies and 
Attracting Individuals in the Selected Aviation Professions: 

Most of the employers we interviewed--particularly the small and 
medium-sized firms--cited some challenges hiring individuals in the 
selected aviation professions with the skills they were seeking at the 
wage they offered. Of the 23 employers we interviewed, 16 expressed 
some degree of difficulty hiring, though often the issue was not due 
to an insufficient number of workers, but rather an insufficient 
number of workers with the experience levels employers desired. 
Employers also reported challenges hiring mechanics with certain niche 
or craft skills, such as upholstery, welding, and cabinetry--skills 
that are not unique to aviation. Similarly, employers seeking 
aerospace engineers, as well as mechanical and electrical engineers, 
reported difficulty filling vacancies. According to some employers and 
stakeholders we interviewed, attracting engineers is made difficult by 
the lack of job security that results from the cyclical nature of the 
aerospace industry and the volatility of demand for aircraft and air 
travel related to the economy. 

Certain employers also cited location as a challenge to attracting 
individuals in our selected professions. For example, employers 
located farther from metropolitan areas or those considered to be 
"aviation hubs" explained that they had difficulty attracting people 
for engineering and mechanic positions. Employers seeking to hire 
mechanics added that in more rural areas, they would have the most 
success hiring and retaining employees from the surrounding areas, but 
have found it difficult to do so if there is not a local AMT school to 
support training needs. 

Smaller employers--those with less than 100 employees--often 
considered themselves to be at a disadvantage in attracting workers 
relative to larger companies. According to 5 of these 13 employers, 
large air carriers and major manufacturers are considered more 
desirable, offering employees a sense of stability and an air of 
prestige, often at higher wages. Employment with an air carrier also 
offers attractive fringe benefits, such as the ability to fly on 
standby or for a discounted fare. One employer we interviewed, which 
is collocated at an airport with a repair station for a large 
manufacturer, said that despite its offer of comparable wages, it has 
a hard time competing with the brand-name recognition of larger 
employers. Consistent with this assessment, more than half of the 
large employers we interviewed said that they were not currently 
experiencing difficulties attracting and retaining workers. 

Employers who reported challenges hiring A&P mechanics often expressed 
a reluctance to hire recent graduates or recently certificated A&P 
mechanics. While the A&P certificate may signal an aptitude and a 
level of general knowledge, many employers felt that recent graduates 
lack on-the-job experiences to supplement their education. According 
to employers, it generally takes between 1 and 3 years to become fully 
proficient as a mechanic. As a result, according to 5 of the 23 
employers who provided their opinions, preferred employment candidates 
were generally certificated A&P mechanics with at least 2 to 5 years 
of experience working with the specific aircraft types that the 
employer maintained and repaired because these individuals could make 
an immediate contribution with limited supervision. 

While employers found the A&P curriculum to generally be well-aligned, 
overall, with their needs, some employers we interviewed said that the 
curriculum's focus is on out-dated technologies--such as aircraft 
built with dope and fabric--at the expense of more relevant topics, 
such as composite materials. We previously reported similar concerns 
from industry stakeholders in 2003.[Footnote 34] Specifically, at that 
time stakeholders indicated that the core curriculum at AMT schools 
provided mechanics with a solid understanding of basic repair 
principles, but that some parts of the curriculum were obsolete and 
covered aspects of aviation repair that are rarely needed or used by 
A&P mechanics.[Footnote 35] At least two of those areas--soldering and 
welding--have been identified by researchers as subjects that could be 
deleted or condensed because of infrequency of use. However, employers 
we interviewed indicated skills in these areas were lacking among the 
current workforce, especially recently certificated A&P mechanics. 
Given the diversity in the type and age of aircraft in the civilian 
fleet, satisfying the needs of all employers would be difficult. For 
example, while dope and fabric aircraft are less common, some 
certificated aircraft are still produced with those materials; and 
while composite materials are being used in new airframe construction, 
aluminum airframes are still the most common. 

In addition to challenges hiring workers, 7 of the 23 companies we 
interviewed reported that while they had some difficulties retaining 
employees, overall retention was not a major issue. That said, 
according to representatives of these companies, most of the employees 
who resign leave for similar positions at companies that offer higher 
wages, that are located in places with a lower cost of living, or that 
are considered to be employers that are more attractive. Nevertheless, 
some leave for other industries. According to some employers and 
stakeholders we spoke to, mechanics have relevant skills for working 
at a variety of occupations, including at amusement parks or on oil 
rigs, which were stated to be either higher paying or have 
characteristics employees found more favorable. 

Employers Are Taking a Variety of Actions to Attract and Retain 
Individuals in the Selected Aviation Professions: 

According to economic literature we reviewed, employers--who first 
identify a shortage when they encounter difficulty filling vacancies 
at the current wage rate--may take a variety of actions in response to 
a perceived labor shortage.[Footnote 36] Their actions vary in 
desirability for the employer based on resources required and their 
permanency. For example, increasing recruiting requires fewer 
resources than investing in technologies that could replace labor; 
further, recruitment efforts could be halted if labor market 
conditions changed, whereas investing in new technologies cannot be 
easily undone. Employers may also choose to take some of these actions 
for reasons other than filling vacancies--for example, to improve 
morale among current employees or to increase profitability. 

In response to difficulties filling employment vacancies, employers 
may: 

* Increase recruiting efforts. Increasing recruiting efforts includes 
such activities as increasing advertising, using public or private 
employment agencies, and paying recruiting bonuses to employees who 
refer new hires. 

* Increase the use of overtime. Employers may choose to have current 
employees work additional hours in place of hiring additional workers, 
especially if they do not expect hiring difficulties to last for a 
substantial period of time. 

* Reduce the minimum qualifications for the job. Employers may have 
set minimum qualifications higher than necessary and may choose to 
reduce those qualifications when hiring becomes difficult. Though 
employers cannot reduce the requirements for earning A&P 
certification, they may choose to hire non-certificated mechanics or 
lower required years of experience necessary for consideration for 
employment. 

* Restructure the work to use current or new employees in other 
occupations. In some cases, complex jobs can be decomposed into 
simpler tasks, allowing less-skilled and perhaps cheaper labor to be 
used in place of other occupations. For example, employers may choose 
to use less-skilled workers to begin the repair process by pulling 
panels from aircraft, freeing A&P mechanics for other tasks. 

* Substitute machinery and equipment for labor. Employers may 
sometimes be able to use machinery or equipment in place of labor. For 
example, a die-cut machine can precisely cut sheet metal, a task that 
was previously done by hand. 

* Train workers for the job. In a difficult labor market, an employer 
that traditionally relied upon colleges or vocational or trade schools 
to train its workforce may choose to offer or sponsor training. 

* Improve working conditions. Improving working conditions--such as 
changes in hours worked, equipment or facility upgrades, training, and 
job recognition efforts--may be a means to attract and retain workers. 

* Offer bonuses to new employees. Employers may offer new employees a 
"signing" bonus, such as, covering moving expenses for agreeing to 
join a company. 

* Improve wages and fringe benefits. Increasing wages will help 
increase the number of workers willing to work in a particular 
position or occupation. However, employers are reluctant to do this 
because they may be forced to raise the wages of current employees as 
well. Further, unlike some other actions, once wages are raised, it is 
unlikely that they will be reduced later if hiring becomes less 
difficult. 

* Contract out the work. If employers cannot fill vacancies for 
employees in certain occupations, it may contract out those tasks to 
another firm. 

* Turn down work. If a firm has exhausted other means to mitigate its 
hiring challenges and vacancies persist, it may choose to turn down 
work. 

Companies we interviewed took some of the above actions in direct 
response to a perceived labor shortage. For example, 10 of the 16 
companies that reported hiring difficulties increased recruiting 
efforts--including using social media and attending career fairs. Many 
companies also made use of specialty websites that advertise aviation 
jobs as well as staffing and recruiting agencies that offer short-term 
contract workers and contract-to-hire options. Almost half of the 
companies we interviewed--including those that did not cite challenges 
hiring--also developed and leveraged relationships with local schools 
as a means to recruit workers. According to one company, its location 
made attracting employees difficult and there were no local schools 
from which to recruit. In response, it built a relationship with a 
local technical college with an automotive-maintenance-training 
program and hired and trained its students--with aptitude in painting 
and certain machinery--for related aviation tasks. 

Almost all companies we interviewed reported training workers for the 
job, though few reported providing the initial training to become a 
mechanic, instead many offered A&P mechanics they employed the 
opportunity for training in areas specific to the work they were doing 
for the company. For example, 18 of the 22 companies that reported 
providing training to its employees sent employees to training courses 
specific to the make or model of aircraft that the company repaired, 
or to courses that would build company capabilities on topics such as 
composites or non-destructive testing. Only one company we interviewed 
reported hiring individuals without formal training, training them on-
the-job, and paying for their A&P testing. Another company reported 
hiring former military members and sending them for refresher courses 
to prepare them for the A&P certification exam. 

Approximately one-third of companies reported reducing their minimum 
standards for employment. For example, three companies lowered the 
number of years of experience it required of applicants and another 
said that it would like to do so in the future to expand its hiring 
pool. However, 10 of the companies we interviewed said they would not 
lower standards; they reasoned that doing so might reduce the quality 
of their work and they were not willing to expose themselves or their 
clients to those risks, or that doing so would, in the end, be more 
expensive for them because non-certificated mechanics need to be under 
the supervision of a certificated mechanic. Nine of the companies we 
interviewed that had challenges attracting workers also reported 
having to turn down work because of staffing constraints, though the 
frequency varied. According to some of these companies, turning down 
work was a last resort. In addition, in some instances, companies 
described receiving requests for services that they could not 
accommodate in the customer's desired time frames, and as a result, 
the customer went elsewhere. 

Few companies we interviewed reported raising wages, improving 
benefits, or offering bonuses to attract employees. Five of the 16 
companies that reported difficulties filling vacancies also raised 
wages. However, only one did so explicitly to attract additional 
mechanics; two did so to remain competitive with other employers, one 
did so following a multi-year pay freeze, and the last raised wages 
after it was acquired by a larger entity. Four companies that reported 
difficulties filling vacancies offered bonuses to new employees. 
Though raising wages and offering bonuses would be obvious ways to 
increase the number of workers willing to work in a particular 
occupation, doing so could have implications in the market for air 
travel or aircraft repair if those costs are passed on to the 
customer. The inability to pass those costs on was the reason that 
officials from at least one company we interviewed provided for why 
the company could not afford to raise wages; according to that 
company, its clients--air carriers--paid a fixed amount, leaving no 
margin for increased labor costs. In other situations, companies 
facing competition from repair stations abroad where labor is cheaper 
may also find it difficult to increase wages. 

Officials from many of the companies we interviewed were taking some 
of the actions we identified for reasons unrelated to difficulty 
filling vacancies. For example, 17 of the companies we interviewed 
indicated that they used overtime but not necessarily in place of 
hiring additional workers. According to those employers, the nature of 
their business is such that there are peaks and valleys in workflow. 
At times, the amount of work that must be completed is in excess of 
what can be completed in a normal workweek; however, it is not a 
sustained level of work and hiring additional employees would mean 
layoffs or having to cut hours at other points in the year. Eighteen 
companies also indicated that they improved working conditions--such 
as by improving the tools available to employees, updating safety 
mechanisms, and installing fans or lighting to making working in 
hangars more comfortable--in efforts to improve morale and retention. 

Some actions were taken largely in response to business needs. For 
example, almost all of the companies we interviewed reported 
contracting out some tasks that were more economical than building the 
capabilities to complete them internally. These tasks included non-
destructive testing and parts plating. In addition, approximately half 
of companies we interviewed discussed restructuring their work as a 
means to maximize efficiency. According to those companies, they did 
not necessarily restructure their work in an effort reduce the number 
of mechanics or engineers required in response to or because of hiring 
challenges. Instead, they sought to maximize the efficiency of their 
current workforce by using more experienced mechanics to do work that 
is more complicated. Further, while approximately one-third of the 
companies we interviewed reported introducing technologies to improve 
efficiency in the workplace--for example, automating the 
troubleshooting part of repair work--only one company substituted the 
use of machinery (a die-cut machine) for positions previously held by 
people. 

The Federal Government Maintains Several Programs and Initiatives That 
Can Help Attract People to Aviation-Related Fields: 

As mentioned previously, while no single agency is tasked with 
developing the aviation professional workforce, several maintain 
programs that help promote and train people for aviation-related 
careers. At the time of its creation in 1958, the FAA was tasked with 
regulating, promoting, encouraging, and developing civil aeronautics. 
In 1996, following criticism of its response to the ValuJet crash in 
the Florida Everglades and to address concerns about its dual role, 
FAA's mission was amended to make ensuring the safety of the national 
air-space system the agency's top priority.[Footnote 37] According to 
FAA, it remained responsible for promotional tasks, but specific 
references were deleted from its mandate. 

Currently, FAA's Office of Aviation and Space Education (AVSED) is 
tasked with increasing the public's knowledge of aviation and the key 
role air transportation plays in the U.S. economy, and serves to help 
recruit new workers into the field. AVSED collaborates with federal, 
state, and local agencies, as well as private sector entities, to 
promote aviation-related science, technology, engineering, and math 
(STEM) skills and grow the pipeline of students seeking to work in 
aerospace-related fields or aviation maintenance. To this end, AVSED 
produced a DVD and developed a brochure on aviation maintenance 
careers that it shares with college recruiters and high school 
guidance counselors and distributes at career fairs, and that has been 
shown on public television. AVSED also ran a national poster campaign 
called, "Yes I Can Do That." In partnership with other organizations, 
AVSED is involved in a variety of activities, including the Real World 
Design Challenge, a high school-level engineering competition; the 
Build-a-Plane program which provides schools with aircraft to be used 
as teaching tools; and the Walk in my Boots Program, which offers 
students the opportunity to observe aviation mechanics in the hangar 
for a day. In addition, AVSED works with the Centers of Excellence, 
which award aerospace research grants to colleges and the National 
Coalition of Certification Centers, a network of education providers 
and corporations that supports and advances technology skills in the 
aviation industry, among others, and promotes aviation-maintenance 
technical degrees and careers. Further, AVSED maintains national 
partnerships with various groups with shared interest in growing the 
aviation workforce, including the Organization of Black Aerospace 
Professionals, Women in Aviation International, Youth Aviation 
Adventure, and the Experimental Aircraft Association. 

AVSED tries to track the number of events it organizes and individuals 
who participate; however, it does not have a mechanism to evaluate the 
effectiveness of those programs or if the participants pursue an 
aviation-related career. Without a measure of effectiveness or 
feedback mechanism to determine if the materials are reaching AVSED's 
target audience and if that audience is responsive to its efforts, FAA 
may be missing opportunities to improve performance.[Footnote 38] 
However, according to AVSED officials, efforts to track program 
participation and outcomes would be difficult from a privacy 
perspective given the ages of its target audience and would be 
prohibitively costly to execute. AVSED's outreach efforts are done 
with limited funding as the office does not have a dedicated budget; 
instead, AVSED relies on transfers from other offices for its 
activities. For example, the DVD and brochures it produced were made 
with funds transferred from Flight Standards. 

Other agencies also administer programs that could encourage entry 
into aviation careers. 

* DOD trains and employs over 114,000 individuals working in 
occupations that are comparable to the aviation professional 
occupations discussed in this report. However, while in the military, 
mechanics are not mandated to hold A&P certificates. Further, their 
training may be for specific tasks or duties and, as a result, does 
not necessarily qualify them for eligibility to take the A&P exam. As 
previously mentioned, though certification is not required for 
civilian employment either, certificated A&P mechanics can command 
higher wages and have better promotion potential. 

In an effort to help separating service members find civilian 
employment and to promote a more professional military workforce, DOD 
has undertaken several actions to facilitate A&P certification of its 
members. For example, since 2002 the Community College of the Air 
Force has run the FAA-approved JSAMTCC bridge program that, upon 
completion, confers a certificate of eligibility--equivalent to a 
training program diploma--to take the A&P exam. The JSAMTCC program is 
available to members of all services who have attained minimum 
requirements in aviation maintenance--typically after 3 years of 
experience in a related position--and includes three self-paced 
courses taken online in addition to on-the-job training. According to 
DOD officials, depending on individual circumstances, the time to 
complete the program varies. According to DOD, several thousand 
service members have enrolled in the program (see table 4). However, 
the numbers who have completed the program are much smaller, likely 
because deployments and other activities interrupt coursework. Once 
eligible for the exam, service members can complete the written 
portions of the A&P exam free at testing facilities located on base. 
In addition, the Navy, for example, subsidizes the cost of the 
practical and oral exams for its members and the Army awards promotion 
points for attainment of the certification. In coordination with the 
FAA, the services have also standardized their forms to facilitate 
proving eligibility to take the exam. 

Table 4: Aircraft-Maintenance-Technician Certification Program 
Enrollments and Completions by Service, 2002-2013: 

Air Force: 
Enrolled: 5,911; 
Completions: 193. 

Army: 
Enrolled: 1,916; 
Completions: 39. 

Marine Corps: 
Enrolled: 145; 
Completions: 7. 

Navy: 
Enrolled: 1,274; 
Completions: 39. 

Coast Guard: 
Enrolled: 16.
Completions: 14. 

Source: DOD. 

[End of table] 

In the last year, DOD also completed a pilot program aimed at 
streamlining credentialing and licensing for military members that 
included aircraft mechanics.[Footnote 39] The Navy and Air Force, 
which employ the largest number of aircraft mechanics, participated by 
designing efforts to increase participation in the technician 
certification program. DOD found that though it would be ideal for 
service members to start the program early in their military careers, 
service members lacked an appreciation for the differences between the 
military and civilian requirements for aircraft mechanics, and for the 
value of FAA certification, resulting in many choosing not to 
participate.[Footnote 40] The services also found that the cost of 
taking the A&P exam--on average $1,750--was prohibitively expensive 
for some who completed the JSAMTCC program. As part of the pilot 
program, the Air Force made arrangements to pay the fee. The Navy, 
which already had a program in place to meet the cost of certification 
exams, focused on better marketing for the program. Based on the 
outcomes of their efforts, the Navy plans to continue outreach and the 
Air Force plans to pay for all exam costs, funding permitting. 

In coordination with DOL, VA, and other federal partners, DOD also 
administers the Transition Assistance Program (TAP)[Footnote 41] for 
eligible separating service members. TAP consists of a 5-day core 
curriculum with segments on translating military skills to civilian 
job requirements, financial planning, and individual counseling and 
assessment with the goal of each service member's developing an 
individual transition plan. It also includes a process that 
"crosswalks" military jobs to civilian occupations by evaluating the 
transferability of skills from the individual's military occupational 
specialty to civilian occupations. In addition, participants may 
attend one or more 2-day tracks, including tracks focused on entering 
a technical skills training program. Moving forward, DOD has said that 
it plans to shift to a Military Life Cycle Transition Model by October 
2014, a more proactive approach intended to integrate transition 
preparation--counseling, assessments, and access to resources to build 
skills or credentials--throughout the course of a service member's 
military career. Federal laws, as well as DOD policy, generally 
require that eligible transitioning service members participate in 
many components of TAP; DOD's annual goal is for 90 percent of 
eligible separating service members to attend the mandatory TAP 
components.[Footnote 42] 

* The Post 9/11 GI Bill, established in 2008 and available through VA, 
provides full tuition and fees for all public school in-state students 
and reimbursement for private institutions of higher learning for up 
to $19,198 per academic year.[Footnote 43] It is currently VA's 
largest education program. Financial support provides up to 36 months 
of education benefits, which are generally payable for 15 years 
following release from active duty. Though the program distributed 
more than $8.5 billion in tuition, housing, and other payments in 
fiscal year 2012, we have previously found that problems with its 
administration and delays in payment create financial challenges for 
student veterans.[Footnote 44] We made recommendations to VA to 
address these problems, and VA has taken steps to respond to those 
recommendations, including efforts related to educating student 
veterans about education benefits prior to enrollment and working with 
postsecondary schools to identify information to facilitate timely 
access to other sources of federal financial aid while VA benefits 
were processed. Additional benefits are also available to veterans 
with higher expenses through the "Yellow Ribbon Program." 

* Education offers grants, work-study funds, and low interest loans to 
help cover expenses such as tuition and fees, books and supplies, and 
room and board, as well as other related expenses. Schools that offer 
training in aviation-related fields are eligible for this funding. 
(See table 5 for information on the number of students majoring in 
aviation-related fields receiving aid and the total amount of aid 
received.) We did not identify any funding sources that specifically 
targeted the selected aviation professions discussed in this report. 

Table 5: Number of and Amount of Aid Disbursed to Students Majoring in 
Aviation-Related Fields Receiving Federal Aid, 2011-2012: 

Federal Grants: 
Mechanical, electrical, and aerospace engineering: 
Recipients: 90,581; 
Total Amount: $724 million; 
Aircraft mechanics and avionics: 
Recipients: 142,708; 
Total Amount: $918 million. 

Federal Work Study: 
Mechanical, electrical, and aerospace engineering: 
Recipients: 30,583; 
Total Amount: $180 million; 
Aircraft mechanics and avionics: 
Recipients: 6,438; 
Total Amount: $47 million. 

Federal Loans: 
Mechanical, electrical, and aerospace engineering: 
Recipients: 120,740; 
Total Amount: $1.6 billion; 
Aircraft mechanics and avionics: 
Recipients: 114,564; 
Total Amount: $1.3 billion. 

Source: GAO analysis of Education data. 

Notes: Federal loans do not include Plus Loans. 

Education categorizes all degree programs through a CIP code which can 
be matched to a SOC code. This relationship indicates that educational 
programs classified in the CIP category prepare individuals directly 
for jobs classified in the SOC. For this data source, the National 
Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS), only 4 of the 6 digits of the 
CIP code are used. As a result, programs may be classified at a higher 
level and include related programs. With regard to aircraft mechanics 
and avionics, the CIP code used (47.06) includes programs related to 
vehicle maintenance and repair, such as automotive mechanics and 
engine mechanics. For electrical engineering, the CIP code used 
(14.10) includes programs related to telecommunications and optical 
engineering. The CIP codes used for mechanical (14.19) and aerospace 
(14.02) engineering did not have any additional programs associated 
with them. 

[End of table] 

* DOL: Under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) administered 
by DOL[Footnote 45], training services are available to eligible 
individuals who meet requirements for services--including training to 
become an aerospace engineer, aircraft mechanic, or avionics 
technician. To be eligible for training support, individuals must 
first participate in what are considered core services--job search and 
placement assistance--and intensive services--individual employment 
and career plans. WIA does not specify an amount of time one must 
spend or the number of attempts one must make to gain employment 
before moving to the next level in the sequence of services, and the 
state-level administrators of the moneys have discretion on how much 
is spent on training relative to other services. Due to the limited 
sum of money available, WIA requires that individuals receiving 
training funds be unable to obtain grant funding from other sources to 
pay the cost of training.[Footnote 46] According to DOL, workforce 
counselors encourage those interested to seek support from other 
sources (including VA and Education) prior to seeking WIA training 
funds. WIA funds were used in whole or in part to support training in 
aviation-related fields for more than 2,000 individuals from 2010 
through 2012.[Footnote 47] 

DOL also provides grant moneys to various entities that support 
aviation-related training. For example, since 2011, through its Trade 
Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grant 
Program, DOL has provided more than $55 million to community colleges 
in California, Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, and Washington to support 
training in aviation manufacturing and machining, composites, and 
engineering technology. Through DOL's H-1B Technical Skills Training 
and Job Accelerator Innovation Challenge Grant Programs, DOL has 
provided more than $14.5 million to universities and localities to 
provide aerospace and aviation-related education, training, and job 
placement assistance directly related to high-growth occupations for 
which employers are currently using the H-1B nonimmigrant visa program 
to hire foreign workers and to support regional development. 

Despite the availability of these programs, most employers and 
stakeholders we interviewed told us that maintaining a qualified 
aviation professional workforce will be more difficult in the future 
due to changes in K-12 education, a perceived emphasis on earning a 4-
year degree, and the perceived decreased desirability for working in 
aviation, particularly aviation maintenance. Several employers cited 
the absence of vocational and "shop" classes in high school as a 
reason interest and critical knowledge in maintenance are waning. 
Several employers and stakeholders we interviewed also said that with 
parents and counselors insisting that a college degree is needed for 
every job, students may not be aware that there are well-paying 
professions that do not require a 4-year degree. FAA echoed this 
sentiment in describing the challenges of AVSED. According to AVSED, 
it can be difficult to interest students in aviation maintenance 
careers because it is mistakenly perceived to be a low paying, low 
skilled occupation. To combat this perception, according to 
stakeholders, AVSED and industry must find a means to convince parents 
and guidance counselors that not all well-paying careers require a 
bachelor's degree. Several employers and stakeholders also noted that 
aviation used to be a more "exciting" industry, which attracted people 
even though wages were often lower than other, similar industries. 
Events of the last decade--including September 2001 and airline 
bankruptcies and mergers--also have resulted in the aviation industry 
being viewed as unstable, compared to other industries. 

Employers and stakeholders we spoke with did not agree about how to 
encourage entry into aviation occupations. Some suggested that FAA 
should do more to champion the industry and increase its outreach and 
educational efforts. Others suggested that by providing subsidies or 
tax credits, government could incentivize students to enter aviation 
fields and businesses to hire them. However, others maintained that 
government should not have a role and that it was an issue for 
industry to address. One company suggested that companies could 
sponsor students in exchange for an agreement that, upon graduation, 
they would work for a specified period of time for that company. 
Aerotek, a staffing solutions company that focuses on aviation, 
recently instituted a similar program when it collaborated with two 
aviation maintenance schools in Canada to train workers. According to 
Aerotek, it participated in the curriculum design to include topics 
its clients seek and guaranteed the classes would be full. Students 
who complete the program are then guaranteed employment. Aerotek 
estimated that it trained between 600 and 700 employees in this way. 

Agency Comments: 

We provided a draft of this report to the departments of Defense 
(DOD), Education (Education), Labor (DOL), and Transportation (DOT) 
for review and comment. We received technical comments on this report 
from Education, DOL, and DOT which were incorporated as appropriate. 
DOD did have any comments on the report. 

We are sending copies to the appropriate congressional committees, the 
Secretaries of Defense, Education, Labor, Transportation, and 
interested parties. In addition, this report will be available at no 
charge on the GAO website at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 
contact me on (202) 512-2834 or at dillinghamg@gao.gov. Contact points 
for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be 
found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report 
are listed in appendix II. 

Signed by: 

Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D.
Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues: 

List of Requesters: 

The Honorable John Thune: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Bill Shuster: 
Chairman: 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable Frank A. LoBiondo: 
Chairman: 
Subcommittee on Aviation: 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable John L. Mica: 
House of Representatives: 
The Honorable Thomas Petri: 
House of Representatives: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Objective, Scope, and Methodology: 

Our report focuses on the supply of and demand for individuals in 
three selected aviation professions-aerospace engineers, aircraft 
mechanics, and avionics technicians-which are involved in the design, 
manufacture, and repair of aircraft and have been the subject of 
concerns voiced by industry stakeholders. In this report, we examined: 
(1) what available data and forecasts reveal about the need for and 
potential availability of aerospace engineers, aircrafts mechanics, 
and avionics technicians and (2) what actions industry and the federal 
government are taking, if any, to help attract and retain these 
professionals. 

To determine what available data reveal about the current need for and 
availability of these professionals, we reviewed relevant economic 
literature that describe labor market conditions,[Footnote 48] 
developed a summary of the general economic principles for evaluating 
labor market conditions, and identified relevant data sources. 
Economic literature states that no single measure exists to determine 
whether a labor shortage exists; however, one can look at multiple 
indicators--including unemployment rates, employment numbers, and 
earnings--that might converge to suggest either the presence or 
absence of a shortage.[Footnote 49] We obtained these data from the 
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Current Population Survey for years 
2000 through 2012.[Footnote 50] In 2010 BLS adopted the updated 
Standard Occupational Classifications (SOC) titles and, as a result, 
some occupation's names changed during the time period we examined. We 
used SAS, a statistical software application, to connect data for 2000-
2010 and 2011-2012 by the SOC titles and did not include occupations 
for which no exact job title match existed between the two time 
periods; this did not affect our occupations of interest.[Footnote 51] 
We analyzed how these indicators have changed over time, and whether 
these indicators suggest a labor shortage-that is, whether there 
appears to be an imbalance between the labor supply (i.e., available 
people) and demand (i.e., available jobs). We analyzed each occupation 
relative to all other occupations and using an absolute scale with 
benchmarks developed in previous economic analysis.[Footnote 52] For 
the unemployment rate we looked at the average unemployment rate for 
each occupation from 2000 through 2012.[Footnote 53] For both 
employment and earnings we analyzed any change from 2000 through 2012. 
[Footnote 54] To verify our results, we discussed them with Malcolm 
Cohen, PhD, labor economist and author of the original indicator 
analysis.[Footnote 55] We incorporated his comments as appropriate. 
Finally, we summarized limitations with the data with respect to how 
we used them. To assess the reliability of BLS's CPS data we reviewed 
documentation related to the data sources from prior GAO reports and 
BLS's technical documentation about the quality of the data. We 
determined the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our 
indicator analysis to provide context on the labor market. 

To identify future demand for, supply of, or employment projections 
for individuals in our selected aviation professions, we performed a 
literature review of scholarly material, government reports, and 
books, among others; identified any projections for aviation 
professional occupations; and analyzed results that projected demand 
in the United States (or North America) using databases that included 
ProQuest, WorldCat, and LexisNexis. We identified three studies--one 
performed by the federal government (BLS) and two performed by 
industry (the Boeing Company and the International Civil Aviation 
Organization (ICAO))-and obtained the most recent analysis for each. 
[Footnote 56] To understand these projections, we reviewed the 
processes, methodologies, and sources of information used to make the 
projections. We also discussed the projections with the staff that 
performed each study. We did not verify the data that the companies 
collected and used in making their projections. We also described, 
based on economic literature, why forecasting these factors generally 
includes a great deal of uncertainty. 

To identify trends in sources of supply for individuals in our 
selected aviation professions we obtained data through 2012 from 
sources that supply such professionals. We analyzed the Department of 
Education's (Education) data on annual completions by major since 
academic year 2000-2001; data from the Department of Defense (DOD) on 
service members separating from the military since fiscal year 2000; 
and the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) data on the number of 
people annually obtaining airframe and power plant (A&P) certificates 
since 2000.[Footnote 57] Specifically: 

* Education: To describe national trends in number of completions in 
aviation-related majors we analyzed data from Education's Integrated 
Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). We used Education's 
Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) and matched degree 
codes to our SOC codes to identify the relevant degree programs. 
Specifically, the CIP-SOC relationship indicates that programs 
classified in the CIP category prepare individuals directly for jobs 
classified in the SOC category. Our analysis of IPEDS data included 
all schools that reported enrollment data in these fields. 

* DOD: To better understand the role of the U.S. military as a source 
for our selected professions, we obtained data on service members 
separating from the armed forces (i.e., the Navy, Army, Air Force, and 
Marine Corps); the current number of aviation maintenance workers in 
the military; and forecasted rates of separation for maintenance 
workers.[Footnote 58] We also interviewed military officials at the 
Pentagon to understand how separation trends in the future might 
compare to past trends. Data for aircraft mechanics includes avionics 
technicians. DOD was unable to provide data on aerospace engineers. 

* FAA: To better understand trends in the number of new A&P 
certificates issued and age distribution of current certificate-
holders, we obtained data from FAA on A&P certificates issued from 
2000 through 2012, by the type of training the certificate-holder 
received. We also obtained data from FAA on A&P certificate-holders as 
of July 2013 and, using STATA, developed descriptive statistics, 
including the distribution of certificates held by age and the total 
number of certificates held by those age 70 or younger. The database 
in which certificate-holder information is stored maintains records on 
individuals until FAA is informed of their death. To better estimate 
the number of active A&P mechanics, we excluded individuals over the 
age of 70. 

To assess the reliability of Education, DOD, and FAA data we reviewed 
documentation related to these data sources from our prior reports, 
and agencies' websites, and interviewed knowledgeable government 
officials about the quality of the data. After analysis, we determined 
that the data were sufficiently reliable to provide general trends in 
the sources of supply of individuals in the selected aviation 
professions.[Footnote 59] We supplemented data with interviews from 
government, industry, 7 select aviation engineering, maintenance, and 
avionics training programs, and unions representing aviation 
professionals. Schools were selected to provide a range of 
perspectives in location, size, and type of program. Where possible we 
selected schools in cities where we interviewed employers. Information 
collected from these interviews is not generalizable. 

To supplement these broader trends, we selected 23 employers from 
FAA's list of certificated repair stations and air carriers--including 
original equipment manufacturers (manufacturers), air carriers, and 
maintenance, repair, and overhaul facilities (repair stations)--across 
the United States to understand the extent to which specific employers 
experienced difficulty attracting and retaining workers and any 
actions that have been taken. (For a complete list of employers, see 
table 6.) We selected companies based on consideration of several 
factors, including the total number of mechanics and repairpersons 
employed, the ratio of A&P-certificated mechanics to non-certificated 
mechanics, type of work performed, and geographic location. We limited 
our scope to employers located within the United States. To develop 
our list of actions that employers may take to mitigate labor 
shortages, we reviewed economic literature and interviewed the 
authors.[Footnote 60] Using semi-structured interviews, we asked all 
employers whether they had used each action mentioned in economic 
literature to attract and retain personnel and, if they had taken that 
action, the purpose for doing so.[Footnote 61] We also asked employers 
about the extent to which they expect hiring and retention to improve 
or become more difficult in the future. We then performed a content 
analysis of our interviews to summarize the extent to which these 
actions were taken across companies. We completed 19 of the 23 
interviews in person during site visits to 7 states--California, 
Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia. The 
findings from our interviews with selected employers should not be 
used to make generalizations about the views of all employers; 
however, employers' observations related to their ability to fill job 
vacancies are a component of analyses that seek to corroborate the 
existence of an occupational labor shortage. As such, the information 
gathered in these interviews sought to supplement analyses of national-
level labor market data with employer experiences. 

Table 6: Selected Employers, Location, Type of Interview, and Type of 
Employer: 

Employer: AAR Aircraft Services, Incorporated; 
Location selected: Indianapolis, IN; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: Phone. 

Employer: Aviation and Defense, Inc.; 
Location selected: San Bernardino, CA; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Capital Aviation Instrument Corporation; 
Location selected: Manassas, VA; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Century Flight Systems, Inc.; 
Location selected: Mineral Wells, TX; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Certified Aviation Services; 
Location selected: Ontario, CA; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Delta Airlines; 
Location selected: Atlanta, GA; 
Type of employer: Repair station and airline; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Epps Air Service; 
Location selected: Atlanta, GA; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Excel Aviation; 
Location selected: Gainesville, TX; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: FedEx Express; 
Location selected: Los Angeles, CA and Memphis, TN; 
Type of employer: Repair station and airline; 
Method of interview: Phone. 

Employer: Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation; 
Location selected: Long Beach, CA; 
Type of employer: Repair station and manufacturer; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Hawker Beechcraft; 
Location selected: Atlanta, GA; 
Type of employer: Repair station and manufacturer; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Jet Works Air Center Management, LLC; 
Location selected: Denton, TX; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: King Aerospace; 
Location selected: Ardmore, OK; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Lockheed Martin Aircraft Center; 
Location selected: Greenville, SC; 
Type of employer: Manufacturer; 
Method of interview: Phone. 

Employer: Piedmont Airlines, Inc.; 
Location selected: Salisbury, MD; 
Type of employer: Airline; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Precision Electronics; 
Location selected: Atlanta, GA; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Rockwell Collins Inc.; 
Location selected: Atlanta, GA; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Signature Flight Support; 
Location selected: Dulles, VA; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Southwest Airlines; 
Location selected: Dallas, TX; 
Type of employer: Airline; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: Texas Pneumatic Systems, Inc.; 
Location selected: Arlington, TX; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: TIMCO Aviation Services; 
Location selected: Greensboro, NC; 
Type of employer: Repair Station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Employer: The Boeing Company; 
Location selected: Renton, WA; 
Type of employer: Manufacturer; 
Method of interview: Phone. 

Employer: West Coast Aircraft Maintenance; 
Location selected: Long Beach, CA; 
Type of employer: Repair station; 
Method of interview: In person. 

Source: GAO analysis of FAA data. 

Note: Many of the companies we interviewed have repair stations in 
multiple locations. When possible, we sought to gather information 
about each of their locations or differences between locations during 
our interviews. 

[End of table] 

To understand the federal government's role, including funding 
provided for aviation-related training, and any actions government has 
taken to support the aviation industry and our selected aviation 
professions, we identified the relevant federal agencies through 
interviews with stakeholders, analysis of our prior reports, and a 
literature review. The identified agencies were: FAA, DOD, Veterans 
Affairs, and DOL. We interviewed officials to understand the programs 
each agency operates that either target the specific occupations or 
could be used to support the occupations. We also examined relevant 
programs, laws, and regulations. For DOD's aircraft-maintenance 
certification program and for DOL's Workforce Investment Act-supported 
training, the respective agencies provided us with the number of 
individuals that participated in or completed the program. To describe 
federal student aid awarded to students enrolled in aviation-related 
majors we analyzed data from Education's National Postsecondary 
Student Aid Study (NPSAS) 2011-2012-
-a survey of a nationally representative sample of students. NPSAS is 
a comprehensive study that examines how students and their families 
pay for higher education; data are based on administrative records and 
student interviews and include students who received financial aid and 
those who did not. Similar to our analysis of IPEDS data, we used 
Education's CIP categories and matched degree programs to our SOC 
codes of interest to identify the relevant degree programs. Unless 
noted, all estimates from NPSAS are within 5 percentage points. 

We conducted this performance audit from February 2013 through 
February 2014 in accordance with generally accepted government 
auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform 
the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a 
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 
objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a 
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 
objectives. 

[End of section] 

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

Gerald L. Dillingham, Ph.D., (202) 512-2834 or dillinghamg@gao.gov: 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contact named above, the following individuals made 
important contributions to this report, Andrew Von Ah, Assistant 
Director; Amy Abramowitz; Melissa Bodeau; Benjamin Bolitzer; Russ 
Burnett; Leia Dickerson; David Hooper; John Mingus; Susan Offutt; 
Joshua Ormond; Melissa Swearingen; and Jessica Wintfeld. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] GAO recently conducted similar work looking at the supply and 
demand of commercial airline pilots. See GAO, Commercial Aviation: 
Information on the Supply and Demand of Airline Pilots, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-232] (Washington, D.C: Feb. 28, 
2014). 

[2] See, for example, Malcolm Cohen, Labor Shortages as America 
Approaches the Twenty-first Century (Ann Arbor, MI: University of 
Michigan Press, July 1, 1995). 

[3] DOD could not provide data on the number of service members 
separating from all branches of the military for fiscal year 2000. To 
allow for comparisons across all years, we only reported data since 
fiscal year 2001. 

[4] In addition to aerospace engineers, mechanical and electrical 
engineers, among others, are employed by the aviation industry. 

[5] Military applicants may have supplemented work experience with 
training through the Joint Services Aviation Maintenance Technician 
Certification (JSAMTCC) program. Military applicants who have not 
completed the JSAMTCC program must be able to demonstrate experience 
in 50 percent of curriculum subject areas for the ratings sought. The 
JSAMTCC program is discussed in additional detail later in this report. 

[6] In addition to education and training requirements, individuals 
must be at least 18 years of age and be able to read, write, speak, 
and understand English to be eligible for certification. 

[7] Repair-person certificates may be issued for a variety of tasks 
including, among others, welding and painting. 

[8] Unlike an A&P certificate that is issued to an individual, a 
repair-person certificate is issued to a person through an FAA-
approved repair station and, as a result, is only valid while that 
person is performing the specific task at the issuing station. 

[9] There are no current or historical data available on the number of 
enrollees and graduates of those schools, and FAA does not require the 
schools to report this information. 

[10] FAA does not approve air carrier's maintenance programs; it 
issues carrier operations specifications that authorize the carrier to 
use a maintenance program and the air-carrier maintenance manual 
required by FAA regulations. Advisory Circular 120-16F. 

[11] We were unable to analyze information on avionics technicians 
because the sample size for the data was too small. 

[12] As mentioned, a labor shortage occurs when demand for workers for 
a particular occupation is greater than the number ("supply") of 
workers who are qualified, available, and willing to do the work at a 
certain wage rate. 

[13] All data presented in this review on the unemployment rate, 
employment, and earnings are from BLS's CPS data unless otherwise 
noted. Data from BLS on earnings have been adjusted for inflation. 

[14] Cohen, Labor Shortages. 

[15] Cohen, Labor Shortages. This assumes that unemployed individuals 
will likely seek work in the same occupation in which they were 
previously employed. 

[16] Cohen, Labor Shortages. Cohen developed an absolute scale with 
seven categories to more easily synthesize results from the 
indicators. Each indicator is assigned a numerical value from 1 to 7 
based on benchmarks that were derived by examining distributions of 
results and identifying natural groupings (e.g., distinguishing 
between positive and negative employment growth). A rating of "7" 
means than an indicator is most consistent with a labor shortage and a 
"1" means that the indicator is most consistent with a labor surplus. 

[17] For the economy overall, since 2000, the average unemployment 
rate has been 6.3 percent, earnings and employment has stayed about 
the same, according to BLS. 

[18] For this time period unemployment rates ranged from 0.6 percent 
to 22.2 percent across the different occupations. 

[19] Cohen, Labor Shortages. Growth rates for the change in 
employment, and earnings were calculated by fitting a time trend using 
a log linear regression, for which we computed statistical 
significance. As such, our calculations yield different larger annual 
changes compared to calculating the percentage change over the same 
time period and annualizing the percentage change because our method 
does not include the effect of compounding. While results show larger 
changes than an annualized analysis would, both values were within the 
range to receive a 5. Further, calculating the data this way allowed 
us to calculate the significance of any trends. 

[20] In Cohen's book, the indicator levels for earning growth are 
presented in nominal terms, without accounting for inflation. They 
were developed using years 1983-1993. In order to use them for the 
period 2000 through 2012, when inflation has been lower, we adjusted 
them using the average inflation rates for the earlier period. Based 
on the adjusted scale, both occupations would receive a 4 (out of 
seven), although the real rate of growth in wages is close to zero. 

[21] From 2000 through 2012 aircraft mechanics had the 70TH lowest 
unemployment rate (out of 295 occupations). 

[22] The growth rate for aircraft mechanics was negative and was the 
265TH highest out of 490 occupations. 

[23] BLS collects a Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey that 
provides a broad measure of job vacancies, but not by occupation. 

[24] Carolyn Veneri, "Can Occupational Labor Shortages be Identified 
Using Available Data," Monthly Labor Review (March 1999) 15-21. 

[25] Data are not available for avionics technicians because the 
workforce is too small and BLS did not publicly report data for all 
years. Further, these data for aerospace engineers and aircraft 
mechanics are from the CPS survey and represent the number of people, 
both employed and unemployed that either are or were most recently 
employed in these occupations. BLS uses the term aircraft mechanics 
and service technicians to describe individuals that repair, maintain, 
and service aircraft. 

[26] Education categorizes all degree programs through a 
Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP); each CIP code is then 
matched to the SOC. This relationship indicates that programs 
classified in the CIP category prepare individuals directly for jobs 
classified in the SOC category. For our analysis of Education data, we 
included CIP programs that prepare individuals directly to our 
occupations of interest. For aerospace engineers, this included the 
following degree programs: aerospace, aeronautical and 
astronautical/space engineering (CIP code 14.0201), mechanical 
engineering (CIP code 14.1901), and electrical and electronics 
engineering (CIP code 14.1001). 

[27] The related CIP codes for aircraft mechanic included airframe 
mechanics and aircraft maintenance technology (CIP code 47.0607), 
aircraft power-plant technology (CIP code 47.0608), and agricultural 
mechanics and equipment technology (CIP code 01.0205), whereas 
avionics technicians only included avionics maintenance 
technology/technician (CIP code 47.0609). 

[28] FAA does not require approved AMT schools to provide data on 
enrollments or graduation rates. 

[29] DOD data for aircraft mechanics include avionics technicians. DOD 
was unable to provide data for engineers. 

[30] We also reviewed two industry studies that projected maintenance 
employment within the aviation industry worldwide and by region-one 
published by The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and 
one by the Boeing Company (Boeing). The ICAO study forecasted future 
employment demand and the available supply of maintenance personnel 
based on existing training capacity, but did not produce a projected 
rate of growth. The Boeing study projected employment for personnel 
employed to maintain commercial aircraft and found that to meet future 
anticipated demand, including the effects of anticipated retirements 
and attrition, approximately 97,900 new aviation maintenance workers 
will be need to be hired in North America by 2032. We were unable to 
assess the reliability of these studies due to a lack of sufficient 
information about their methods and assumptions. For more information 
on these forecasts see the International Civil Aviation Organization, 
Global and Regional 20-year Forecasts: Pilots, Maintenance Personnel, 
and Air Traffic Controllers (2011) and the Boeing Company Current 
Market Outlook, 2013-2032. 

[31] This would result in an annualized growth rate of about 0.71 
percent per year. Employment growth in this area is relatively low 
because aerospace engineers are typically employed in manufacturing 
industries that are projected to grow slowly or decline. Demand for 
aerospace engineers will be greatest in areas related to national 
defense and the design of civilian aircraft, according to BLS. 

[32] Employment for aircraft mechanics and service technicians is 
projected to be 124,700 in 2022 (an annualized growth rate of about 
0.24), and employment of avionics technicians is projected to be 
17,600 in 2022 (an annualized growth rate of about 0.29). 

[33] Specifically, during the 2012 to 2022 timeframe, BLS estimates 
there will be 25,400 job openings for aerospace engineers, 35,600 job 
openings for aircraft mechanics and service technicians, and 4,000 job 
openings for avionics technicians. 

[34] GAO, Aviation Safety: FAA Needs to Update Curriculum and 
Certification Requirements for Aviation Mechanics, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-317] (Washington, D.C.: Mar 6, 
2003). 

[35] Partly in response to previous GAO work [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-317], FAA convened an Aviation 
Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC). In 2007, FAA assigned the ARAC a 
new task: to review and recommend revisions to certain requirements 
for operation of AMT schools. In 2009, the ARAC submitted 
recommendations to FAA that included: (1) creating a curriculum review 
board to biennially review and recommend changes and (2) changing the 
distribution of training hours between subjects to 450 hours for 
general knowledge, 800 hours for airframe, and 650 hours for power 
plant. According to FAA, it implemented the recommendation to create 
the review board, chaired by the Aviation Technical Education Council, 
which began operation in fiscal year 2014. 

[36] Burt S. Barnow, John Trutko, and Jaclyn Piatak, "Conceptual Basis 
for Identifying and Measuring Occupational Labor Shortages." In 
Occupational Labor Shortages: Concepts, Causes, Consequences, and 
Cures (Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 
2013) 1-34. 

[37] On May 11, 1996, a ValuJet DC-9 crashed into the Florida 
Everglades shortly after take-off from Miami International Airport, 
killing all 110 people aboard. Earlier that year, FAA had initiated a 
special review of the rapidly growing low, cost carrier following a 
series of incidents and non-fatal accidents. In June 1996, FAA 
announced that the carrier would cease operations pending safety 
improvements to address serious deficiencies it had found in ValuJet's 
airworthiness, maintenance, quality oversight, and engineering 
capabilities. This sparked renewed criticism of the Department of 
Transportation and FAA because it appeared to contrast with 
statements, made following the accident, assuring the public that the 
airline was safe. The next day, the Secretary of Transportation 
committed to urge Congress to make safety FAA's single primary 
mission. The change was codified in the Federal Aviation 
Reauthorization Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-264, § 401, 110 Stat. 
3213, 3255. 

[38] GAO, Managing for Results: Critical Actions for Measuring 
Performance, [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov/products/T-GGD/AIMD-95-187] (Washington, D.C.: June 
20, 1995). 

[39] Section 558 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 
Fiscal Year 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-81, 125 Stat. 1298, 1418 (2011), as 
amended by section 543 of NDAA for Fiscal Year 2013, Pub. L. No. 112-
239, 126 Stat. 1632, 1737, required DOD to carry out a pilot program 
to assess the feasibility and advisability of permitting enlisted 
members of the Armed Forces to obtain civilian credentialing or 
licensing for skills required for military occupational specialties or 
qualification for duty specialty codes. In addition to aircraft 
mechanics, the pilot included automotive mechanics, healthcare 
support, logistics and supply, and truck drivers. 

[40] As previously noted, military aircraft mechanics are not required 
to hold an A&P certification and may not understand the additional 
autonomy tasks--such as returning a plane to service--and career 
opportunities available to civilian mechanics who hold a certificate 
as compared to those who do not. 

[41] National Defense Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1991, Pub. L. No. 
101-510, § 502(a)(1), 104 Stat. 1485, 1553 (1990). 

[42] In 2011, the Administration redesigned TAP--the first major re-
design of the program since its inception over 20 years ago. As part 
of the redesign, all service members are required to meet career 
readiness standards--the completion of a set of tasks that demonstrate 
their readiness for a civilian career. In response to a congressional 
mandate, GAO is in the process of assessing DOD's implementation of 
the program redesign. Pub. L. No. 112-56, § 226, 125 Stat. 711, 719 
(2011). 

[43] Amount is for academic year 2013-2014 for individuals who are 
eligible for the full benefit level. 

[44] GAO, VA Education Benefits: VA Needs to Improve Program 
Management and Provide More Timely Information to Students, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-338] (Washington, D.C.: 
May 22, 2013). 

[45] Pub. L. No. 105-220, 112 Stat. 936 (1998). 

[46] As part of the eligibility conditions for WIA-supported training 
services, individuals must be unable to obtain grant assistance from 
other sources to pay the costs of such training, including Welfare-to-
Work, state-funded training funds, Trade Adjustment Assistance, and 
Federal Pell Grants established under title IV of the Higher Education 
Act of 1965, or require WIA assistance in addition to other sources of 
grant assistance, including Federal Pell Grants. 20 C.F.R. § 
663.310(d). DOL does not collect information on the total amount of 
WIA resources expended on training. 

[47] From 2010 through 2012, 269 individuals received funding for 
avionics technician training, 1,527 for aircraft mechanics and service 
technician training, 134 for aerospace engineering training, and 296 
for aerospace engineering and operations technician training. During 
that time, a total of 691,343 individuals with associated information 
on occupation of training received training supported, in whole or 
part, by WIA funds. 

[48] See Burt S. Barnow, John Trutko, and Jaclyn Piatak, "Conceptual 
Basis for Identifying and Measuring Occupational Labor Shortages," in 
Occupational Labor Shortages: Concepts, Causes, Consequences, and 
Cures. (Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, 
2013) 1-3;4 and Malcolm S. Cohen Labor Shortages: As America 
Approaches the Twenty-First Century (Ann Arbor, MI: University of 
Michigan Press, 1995). 

[49] In the absence of a universally agreed upon definition we have 
defined a labor shortage in the same terms that have been used in 
economic literature, including a Bureau of Labor statistics (BLS) 
publication. 

[50] The Current Population Survey, a monthly household survey 
conducted by the Bureau of the Census for the BLS, provides a 
comprehensive body of information on the employment and unemployment 
experience of the nation's population, classified by age, sex, race, 
and a variety of other characteristics. 

[51] BLS adopted the modified SOC titles in 2010 and as a result, some 
occupations were combined and others were phased out. While this did 
not affect our occupations, it affected the total number of 
occupations. We excluded those occupations for which the name changed. 
We also excluded occupations that had any years where the sample size 
was too small (i.e., under 50,000 observations) to report 
unemployment, median weekly earnings, or employment. This resulted in 
288, 490, and 250 occupations in unemployment rate, employment, and 
earnings, respectively. 

[52] Cohen developed a scale with seven categories to more easily 
synthesize results from the indictors. Each occupation's indicators 
were assigned a numerical value from 1 to 7. Categories were developed 
by looking at the distribution of the results and setting natural 
groupings (e.g. distinguishing between positive and negative 
employment growth). A rank of "7" designates the indicator is 
consistent with a labor shortage and a "1" designates the indicator is 
consistent with a labor surplus. 

[53] As part of a sensitivity analysis we also compared data since 
2003, in addition to developing a regression line for both time 
periods. Performing multiple analyses with different comparison years 
allowed us to ensure that a year with unique results would not impact 
our analysis. 

[54] Similar to the unemployment rate we also looked at data since 
2003 as well. Finally, we adjusted earnings for inflation and only 
included full-time non-farm workers. 

[55] Malcolm S. Cohen, President of Employment Research Corporation, 
received his PhD in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of 
Technology in 1967. He has directed numerous labor market research and 
forecasting studies for the U.S. Department of Labor. He testifies as 
an expert witness in various court proceedings on economic loss, 
discrimination and other employment issues. 

[56] For BLS we summarized employment projections from 2012 through 
2022. The ICAO study forecasted future employment demand and the 
available supply of maintenance personnel based on existing training 
capacity, but did not produce a projected rate of growth. The Boeing 
study projected employment for personnel employed to maintain 
commercial aircraft. We were unable to assess the reliability of these 
studies due to a lack of sufficient information about their methods 
and assumptions. For more information on these forecasts see the 
International Civil Aviation Organization, Global and Regional 20-year 
Forecasts: Pilots, Maintenance Personnel, and Air Traffic Controllers 
(2011) and the Boeing Company Current Market Outlook, 2013-2032 
(Boeing, 2013). 

[57] DOD could not provide data on the number of service members 
separating from all branches of the military before fiscal year 2000. 
To allow for comparisons across all years, we only reported data since 
fiscal year 2001. 

[58] Data from DOD are current as of June 17, 2013. 

[59] Due to concerns regarding how DOD calculates its rate of workers 
leaving the military and how rates varied across each branch we did 
not report this information. Rather we reported the number of people 
instead. 

[60] Barnow, Trutko, and Piatak, "Identifying and Measuring 
Occupational Labor Shortages." 

[61] Barnow, Trutko, and Piatak, "Identifying and Measuring 
Occupational Labor Shortages." These actions include increasing 
recruiting efforts, increasing the use of overtime, reducing the 
minimum qualifications for the job, restructuring the work to use 
current or new employees in other occupations, substituting machinery 
and equipment for labor, training workers for jobs, improving working 
conditions, offering bonuses to new employees, improving wages and 
fringe benefits, contracting out the work, and turning down work. 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the 
performance and accountability of the federal government for the 
American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates 
federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, 
and other assistance to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, 
and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is 
reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and 
reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's website [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, 
testimony, and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] and select 
"E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO's actual cost of 
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black 
and white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO's 
website, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

Connect with GAO: 

Connect with GAO on facebook, flickr, twitter, and YouTube.
Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.
Visit GAO on the web at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 
Website: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]; 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov; 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470. 

Congressional Relations: 

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, DC 20548. 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, DC 20548. 

[End of document]