Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/5324

Bill Overview

Title: Aviation WORKS Act

Description: Aviation WORKS Act This bill extends through FY2028 and expands aviation workforce development programs of the Department of Transportation (DOT). Specifically, the bill directs DOT to establish an aviation manufacturing development grant program to develop the aviation manufacturing and supplier workforce. It also requires DOT to develop and support the education of workers who design or produce any aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance, or a component, part, or system thereof, that (1) is produced under a production approval issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), (2) has been issued a design approval by the FAA, or (3) has an active application for a design approval. Additionally, DOT must establish a program to provide grants for eligible projects to plan, establish, and expand workforce development partnership programs in the aviation and aerospace industry sector.

Sponsors: Sen. Kelly, Mark [D-AZ]

Target Audience

Population: People in the aviation and aerospace manufacturing and supply workforce

Estimated Size: 400000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Aerospace engineer (Seattle, WA)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think this initiative is essential because we need to maintain a strong talent pool in the aviation sector, especially with technological advancements.
  • This would provide more opportunities for professional growth and innovation within our field.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 5

Production worker (Wichita, KS)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Grants for training could open up more opportunities for me to move into skilled roles and potentially increase my salary.
  • It feels like a show of support for our industry, which is encouraging.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 4

Aerospace project manager (Huntsville, AL)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Sustainability of our workforce is a key concern, and having support for expanding educational opportunities is a strategic advantage.
  • This policy could ensure we're not short-handed going into complex projects.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Aviation maintenance technician (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 31 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This bill could really help people like me who are coming into civilian roles with military background.
  • Access to new training and development resources would be a great help.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 4

Senior aircraft designer (Dallas, TX)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This is a forward-looking policy that aligns with my own personal experiences in innovation.
  • Ensuring a well-prepared workforce is crucial for continued success.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 6

Aviation instructor (St. Louis, MO)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • With more grants and support, we could expand our curriculum to cover new manufacturing technologies.
  • Funding could help us reach more students and increase awareness in aviation careers.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 9 7
Year 5 9 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 7 5

Student in aerospace engineering (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 26 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Knowing there might be expanded opportunities and industry support upon graduation is reassuring.
  • The policy might really broaden the field and make it more competitive.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 8 4

Retired aviation engineer (Hartford, CT)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I am glad to see new generations will have better access to training and development, which was not as readily available in my early career.
  • I hope this helps the US maintain its competitive edge.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Intern in aviation design (Miami, FL)

Age: 23 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This seems like a great opportunity to help more young professionals like myself find a stable path in aviation.
  • Support for newcomers can bring fresh ideas and dynamism into the sector.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 9 5
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 9 4

Aviation supply chain manager (San Antonio, TX)

Age: 48 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm hopeful that this policy can attract more skilled workers to the industry, which can make my job easier.
  • Workforce development is key to managing and overcoming supply chain challenges.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $130000000, High: $190000000)

Year 2: $155000000 (Low: $135000000, High: $195000000)

Year 3: $160000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $200000000)

Year 5: $170000000 (Low: $150000000, High: $210000000)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations