Training Bond

[snoogle]

Anyone out there been bonded for the training they have received?

I am looking at going for a job where the company is stating that there is a 3 year bond for between £11000 and £14000 for the type conversion/line training etc:eek:
Also, no reduction over the period. They would still want the full amount after 2 years and 364 days:ouch:

Is this legal:confused:
Would I be expected to sign a separate agreement over and above the 'standard' contract?

All sounds a bit scary.

Anyone been stung on this or managed to avoid it if they have left a job early?

[ThomasTheTankEngine]

Its not ilegal but it doesn't sound fair.

What are they rating you on for £14,000?

A fair bonding would run over a period of years decreasing by a fractional amount every month (2 years decreasing by 1/24 each month or 3 years decreasing by 1/36 each month etc)

[snoogle]

It's an EC135T2 in the police role.

Totally agree with you on the reduction over time. But, they are definately requesting the full amount if you leave at any point within 3 years.

[paco]

And is it a fair price for the conversion, or are they ripping you off on that as well?

I'd be wary of that one - maybe get a bank loan with better terms?

Phil

[gnow]

In the outfit where I work we have to sign a 5 years bond for a 5 hr simulator currency. The simulator training is only valid for 1 year. You go again and sign another 5 years. The previous bonding is considered null and void . Most pilots who leave will eventually pay something back to the sim time (on a sliding scale)!:

[ThomasTheTankEngine]

Hi Snoogle

I think a few questions you need to ask your self are.

Will this further your career or do you already have a position where you can gain the type of experience you would in this role?

Is the money a lot better than your present position?

Is it close to where you live in comparision to your present job?

Are you going to stick it out for 3 years?

Still sounds unfair to me but if you did stay for 3 years it wouldn't realy matter.

Good luck.

[Impress to inflate]

I seem to remember Bristows bonding some new blokes for a type rating and they left early, Bristows tried to get there money back but it ended up in court. The short of it all, if my memory is correct (know doubt someone in pprune will correct me if I'm wrong) is that you cannot be bonded for a type conversion if the company need you to fly there a/c, they can only bond you if they have paid for your initial license. Worth looking into ITI. Any Bristow or ex Bristow blokes (or birds) care to comment.

[fudpucker]

Bonding is legal. What is a little doubtful is the legality of a non-reducing bond. There is another thread about this (I forget which one) but I'd take a legal opinion myself. On the other hand, if it's the job you want and you aren't planning on leaving for pastures greener.....?

[Brilliant Stuff]

I know of someone who was bonded by Bristows for 6 years and this was only for type conversion onto the Puma and IR.

In '99 Bond was bonding you for 3 years with a reducing bond.

snoogle I think I know which company you are talking about, I can only imagine they have been burned by people getting a conversion and then leaving .

I guess if one was paid a more handsome salary one would not contemplate of leaving or even think about joining.

Is it a horses for courses question?

[Whirlygig]

From my basic knowledge of general employment law, it would suggest that a new employee signing a new contract will be legally enforceable whatever it says. However, an existing employee, made to sign a bond that isn't in their contract may well have grounds for not having it enforced.

Cheers

Whirls

[Helinut]

There may well be those with more legal knowledge than me (quite likely really) but in discussions with others I have been lead to believe/hope that there are limits to what you can be bonded for and how much. New qualifications (ratings etc) are one thing but surely it cannot be right and hopefully not legal to bond someone for a currency check. If it only costs say £5K for a type rating surely it cannot be reasonable to bond you for more than the cost.

[Hedski]

Why would the accounts department request you to declare hours of type training before the end of March? Surely training is not tax deductable!!!:eek:
Would such bonds not then be companies taking complete advantage of the competition for places. Those new cojo's, they'll sign anything we put in front of 'em!!!!!!!!!:E :E :E :E
Oooops, said the quiet part loud and the loud part quiet.......:uhoh:

[flyer43]

You might want to compare some of the responses to an earlier thread:

Training Bonds (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=227597&highlight=training)

[R1Tamer]

snoogle,

I believe these are called "Square bonds" and are becoming the norm in the FW world. A colleague of mine has recently been 'pooled' for 'flybe' with a very similar bonding system.

As to the legality - I know two folks who bailed out on bonds - one assures me he got away with it scot free - the other one was right royally stuffed.

I guess you signs your bond and takes your chance.

Given the figures you've quoted this must be for more than just an EC type rating - what's the rest of the story!

R1

[Letsby Avenue]

It should really reduce by one over thirty six pro-rata to be fair. I would get a good brief to look at the contract, if he say's it's complete tosh then sign up...

[FloaterNorthWest]

If this is the company I am thinking of they are also bonding you for your line training. Most of the line training can be carried out during operational flying with a training captain so it costs the company nothing.

I know one person who has challenged it on leaving and not paid anything. The company wanted to sign his bond on leaving and pay then! Hence the introduction of this bond.

FNW

[Lenticular]

The company I work for gave me a medium twin type and an initial IR. The bond was for three years on a reducing scale. All very fair I think. I am still with them after 9 years so it was a bit academic really.
All the best

[munchkins]

The ex-chief pilot for a Middle East helicopter company signed a training bond 6 months after he had been to the AB139 ground school course in Italy and was duly licensed on the aircraft. Rumour has it the bond (2 years non pro-rata) was presented to him with "either sign it or good-bye". Believe it or not this was after he had been with the company for more more than 22 years. Sort of sucks, but then again the company he USED to work for does too. Seek legal advice and take it from there. Good luck.
Munch Munch

[winkle]

just come on to this thread even though i am a fw jet jock. with regards to a reducing bond which i have which is over 5 years. i am with a uk operator but am looking to finish with aviation possibly for good before my time is up. what would my chances of coming to an amicable agreement over repayment terms. ie not pay anything. looking to leave aviation and pursue another career due stress related problems and would rather be poor and healthy than wealthy and dead. but with all things in life would not want to burn my bridges. any one know of ways to take a sabatical for 1-2 years, may even be the answer to my problems.

[Merlin75]

Hello everyone, and sorry for resurrecting an old thread!

I was wondering what sort of bonds people in the UK are currently serving, and/or what people think is acceptable?

I ask because I have now learned that my bond is somewhat more onerous than other employees in the same company, for the same training :(

I would like to know what people think is acceptable bonding for a type rating (not an IR), mainly with regard to duration?

Many thanks
:)

[Hedski]

If its type rating only it should be 3 years and no more, thats the norm for the larger types. Not sure about small to medium like 76 or 155.

[Rushes]

Merlin,

I guess it depends what size company your working for and how many employees they are worried about losing out to. However, a few years back I was working for a smallish on-shore operator and was bonded pro-rata for 2 years for types and an IR. Both parties were very happy with this.

I do get the impression that 3 seems nearer the norm on a pro rata basis, but trends can change quickly in this industry.

Rushes

[ShyTorque]

In a previous job I was bonded for £30K for two years. I accepted it at the time, so as far as I was concerned it was legal and stood. I did the two years and forgot all about it.

A bond is only relevent and unreasonable if you want to leave before the bonding period is up and want to use the rating/training as a stepping stone.

[bondu]

Just to put the cat amongst the pigeons.....:E

I understand that the EU court have ruled that training bonds are a 'restrictive practice' and therefore they are illegal.

Would like to hear from someone with a legal background to see if this is true!
Flying Lawyer????

bondu :ok:

[DeltaFree]

I know companies spend money on training and people leave. But if a company is putting a huge bond on you, ask yourself why. If it is because they have been stung in the past, why did those people leave? It strikes me a "good employer" should not suffer much churn, so training costs are not excessive, and huge bonds are not necessary. If on the other hand....well you know what I am saying.
Stuck with a poor employer for 5yrs with a huge financial commitment is not a good place to be, if it is a last resort then take it, but remember there is a shortage of helo pilots and there is a choice. The more we accept poor conditions the worse they will get. It can be difficult to start but it is getting better.

[R1Tamer]

controller,


Piloting helicopters is the same as any other industry, whether it be vets, doctors or plumbers. From time to time they will all suffer a shortage of suitably qualified people just as is the case now with helo pilots. Whether you can see it or not there clearly is a shortage and demand is high for qualified people.

There is no 'worthwhile' industry in the world where demand is high for newbies. As with any of the above professions if some half baked fool thinks just because s/he's got a law degree or a corgi registration or a CPL(H) s/he's going to walk right into a top-line job that's their own dumb lookout. Any employer wants the person who fought hard to get their first rung on the ladder not the arrogant jerk who feels s/he's just going to walk right in.

If there are people out there who go and sign up for a CPL(H) purely on the strength that someone once said there is a shortage of pilots they deserve to be right royally taken for a ride. I would like to hope anyone smart enough to pass the CPL exams is smart enough to research what they're commiting to and how in the long run they plan to get there.

Your comments made me think of all those signs you see across the US advising people not to lick metal ski lifts in winter or put fingers in the toaster. Do we really need to protect people from themselves even here on a chat forum

R1tamer

[sarbee]

Totally agree with the 'bonding prevents pilots leaving' comments, but what if the company agree to bond you for one thing, then change their minds and use the bond to force you into accepting a posting you never wanted?

Just a thought. The EU ruling does exist, and now has a 'precedent' status - will be ending up in a court sometime soon myself over this, will post the outcome to all!

Safe skies, happy homes!

[albi421]

Hi
I was wondering if anyone has ever paid for a training bond, just leaving the company before the expiry date.

[asianrotorhunter]

speaking from personal, and recent, experience. training bonds are not worth the paper there're written on!!!

if a company wants to bond you they are admitting they are not providing the conditions and pay to make you stay of your own accord. so they force you to stay.

If a company says 'we need you to do a job on a particular aircraft' then the decision is on them to provide you with the appropriate training to conduct the job they require of you. the days of feeling guilty from receiving an aircraft rating are over.

if an accountant received training to operate a new computer system would there be a training bond... i think not.

i'm working for a company who is changing fleet type. it wasn't my decision to change, if they want to get a new type then they need to provide the training!!

some of you newbies need to know your worth!!!

nuff sed!

[Errol Sinclair]

What about the case where you signed a bond and are happily doing your time on the type. The company then decides to re-fleet and re-bonds you from scratch?
Basically you don't have a choice do you? Well thats whats happening to us.
Would you sign? :confused:

[HillerBee]

In the current economic climate? YES

[Sir Niall Dementia]

We bond for three years on a reducing scale for the first type we put you on. After that any extra types are because the company needs you on that type and we don't bond for them. We started bonding after being used as a free source of type ratings by a couple of unscrupulous pilots. I've never heard a pilot complain about the bonding system we use, then again I've never known one leave during the bond period.

I've heard the so called "square bond" is rearing it's ugly head again, and I doubt the legality of such bonds. I've spoken to an employment expert in the last few minutes about this subject and she tells me that it is very difficult to make any bond stand up in court and a "square bond" almost impossible.

Aviation is one of very few industries to use bonding, and from what I have seen the system is more used to b***er up the futures of people who just walk out. The phone call between chief pilots, "Yes he's a lovely chap, but he left and still owes his bond." will always leave a doubt over the head of anyone who just leaves.

As for the training cost on the 135, about £ 15 000 is pretty accurate, but should be factored at £ 417 per month over the three years. Still having to pay the full amount after 35 months strikes me as mighty unfair.

[AlfonsoBonzo]

In my experience the bonding contract in worth nothing. I have had colleges leave and never pay anything back to the company. The company has not even chased them up for it...

[parabellum]

Legal or not if you break a bond and bugger off you are a marked man and the industry, being fairly small, will know all about it.

It is people accepting a course of training and leaving before giving a fair return of service that have caused bonds to be introduced in the first place.

The next step after bonding is being asked to pay for your type rating and line training as a condition of employment, also a 'restrictive practice' I would have thought but it happens, so I wouldn't be banking too much on a claim of restrictive practice to get me out of repaying a bond that I had agreed to in the first place and signed a contract to that effect.

Better to go into the office and discuss it, make an offer, offer instalments etc. I worked for a company that aggressively pursued bond breakers but gave some very good terms to a couple of guys who made settlement offers. Another chap with strong compassionate grounds was allowed to walk away for free, owing nearly four years of bond.

Remember, if you break a bond not only are you screwing it up for everyone else but you will probably find it will come back to bite you later in your working life, a career, as such, may not be possible.

[timex]

Look on the up side, you are also "guaranteed" 3 or 4 yrs work giving you time to build up your type experience.

[Pandalet]

Just a thought from another industry, but it's not just aviation that does this. I work in embedded systems / electronics, for a company involved in consumer electronics and silicon IP - if none of this makes sense, call it 'high tech' - where qualified people are not easy to find. The standard expectation is that people will be well educated before they get to us, although we do take on fresh-out-of-training folk and build them up, so not entirely like aviation. The company is a mid-size multi-national corporate.

If the company sends us on a course, which they pay for (generally something required for us to do our jobs), you enter into an agreement with the company to reimburse them if you leave within a certain period afterwards. The exact period varies depending on the cost, and reduces over time, and you agree that the company can recover the monies from your final paycheck. This is not unusual in this industry.

Of course, the average course doesn't run much more than a few £k, and the average monthly salary here is at least that, so there's actually some chance of the company being able to collect. It's probably a bit different when the amounts are up in the tens of thousands...

[avnrisk]

Snoogle, Northwest floater is correct, have same experience. Also will your career stand still over the Bond period? Will you have the opportunity for further courses, I/R, TRI/TRE etc. or will you be expected to remain at your current status and position without progression?

Try and avoid the Bonds and take a bank loan, keeps your modus-operandi entirely flexible....hope thats useful..

[avnrisk]

Have experience of this pm me...

[Eng AW139]

Most labor laws state that training that make profit for a company is unbondable.

However training for personnal grow could be.

More over a company that I have worked for get around this they offered pilot's type training if they sign a personnal loan over a 2 year period which decreases monthly. That way if the pilot left before 2 years they got some money back if he stayed they got him for 2 years. It seems fair:hmm:

[Medhawkdriver_25]

Hello All,

Does anyone have any experience with training contracts for Part 135 helicopter operators in the US?

I have just started with a company who sort of "surprised" me with one which was not part of the initial offer. I am now trying to gather some information.

My plan is NOT to leave the company anytime soon, and certainly not within the year they are concerned about, but I would still like to know what I can about the legalities, or illegalities of such a thing.

Thanks for your posts. Fly safely.

Scott

[spinwing]

Mmmm ...

This HAS in the past been covered on this forum in some detail .... try using the search function!

Having said that ... I would imagine that if the subject of a training contract was not mentioned as a condition of your employment offer being accepted AND you were effectively ambushed with one after accepting employment then the company has left itself in a rather sticky situation.

If you now reject the requirement to bond yourself and they then try to take some action against you they surely would be leaving themselves open to legal action.

This may depend on State employment law in the state you work in ... Federal law may also be applicable ... you should get professional advice.

Good luck. :hmm:

[js0987]

In practice, enforcing such a contract is extremely difficult, so companies don't spend much effort to collect from someone they know doesn't have the money. Usually what happens is, if you leave before the contract terms are met, they will withhold your final paycheck, citing the contract, and dare you to try and collect it.

[Trans Lift]

I was bonded on a contract by a school in Florida (that does JAA CPL(H) courses...ahem). Fair enough but I was bonded for 5 months past the end date of my via on the chance that I might get a green card in time. I didn't.

They promised me my job back but when it came to it, I didn't get it back. I'd love to know the legalities of this!!

[Medhawkdriver_25]

...for moving my post to an appropriate topic. Believe it or not, this one didn't appear on my search for "training contracts" as I was not aware to look for the term "training bond". Maybe we need a search Thesaurus function? Anyway, thanks for the help as always.

[chopperthedeer]

Hello
Does anyone could give me information about type rating bond ?
How does it work?Conditions etc.?

[Dash8driver1312]

Which type rating? With which company? Training agency? Some more information please.

[evergreen139]

:( "type rating bond" think carefully when you sign it)
Generally: Let's suppose you've found a nice company, and they offer you a "777 type rating bond" :E . Of course you agree even if your salary is 3 peanuts). 1 year later you managed to find some other companies with salary of 6-8 peanuts:E, and you meet all the requirements, but... But now you'll start reading the contract. It says : ...(blah-blah-blah)... you HAVE TO work within this company 3(or even more) years! If you leave before that, you MUST pay the money for type rating(. and if you are not a millionaire, you'll keep on working for 3 peanuts))).

P.S. but on the other side: if you really wish to fly that helicopter and become experienced on it, you WILL sign it. You can call "type rating bond" investment to your own future, because once you end that "3 peanuts contract" you'll be free to choose the better companies with more peanuts,better roaster,accomodation etc...
Anyway think twice:hmm:

[chopperthedeer]

i would just some example (preferably helicopter) to understand how the company weight my job.
I would understand the ratio between: type rating value / lenght of the bond

[Thomas coupling]

What has happened over the years is that contracts are becoming leaner and leaner with less profit available. Contractors are looking for ever more 'clever' ways of ramping up the bottom line by charging for extraneous items, not limited to:
training new pilots, additional qualifications for employees, and so on.

Examples where prices have gone ballistic:

Bonding and Training. Example

New employees of the SAR contract with Bristow are now paying £30k for the privilege of joining them onto a new type with IR.
EasyJet who are shareholders of the training school @ Oxford are charging extortionate fees for their budding pilots to go through their courses there and bonding them to it when or IF they go onto flying @ Easyjet.
Almost all employers now use bonding tactics to get away with not having to pay for enrolling their new employees.

Accountants rule....................................

[SimonK]

Not sure anyone is 'paying' £30k to Bristow to get onto SAR. My company bonds you £30k for three years for a S92 TR but no money changes hands unless you leave before that time.

[chopperthedeer]

so the TR cost is (e.g) 70-80k but they bond you only for 30k, and they consider that 3years of work refund this bond?and during this period your pay is normal, right?
How many hrs of flight could be 3years of contract ?

[FC80]

Bristow getting people to pay £30K for type ratings TC? What a load of dreck.

:ugh:

[HFM]

Recent over Bristow 30k bonding period 3 years. Bristow pays the bill!

[helimutt]

CHC in the UK bond new-hire pilots for £50k and 5yrs on a 139. They say 5 yrs but if you read the contract it says £50k over 5 yrs but at the end of yr 5 you still owe £10k so that to me is 6 yrs. ??

CHC Helicopter Services will Bond new hires too, but the reason is to prevent new-hires just going along and getting the type rating then leaving a few weeks/months later. Good business sense to me, but why not give the new type ratings to present staff with seniority??

[Hot_LZ]

Bonds must have changed recently in the UK. Last I heard:

Bristow £30k over 3 years
CHC £30k over 3 years
Bond £50k over 5 years

And that is regardless of type.

LZ

[Nescafe]

So, on day 1 you owe £50000.
End yr 1 £40000
End yr 2 £30000
End yr 3 £20000
End yr 4 £10000
End yr 5 £0

Simples.

[GoodGrief]

...new-hires just going along and getting the type rating then leaving a few weeks/months later...

I had two of those spineless bastids not too long ago...it hurts a small company.:=

[helimutt]

GG it would hurt any company.

Hot_Lz, the CHC one is correct, £50k (139 rating) over 5 yrs

Nescafe, at the end of yr 5 you owe 10k. :-

Period from start date……….Repayment amount
less than 1yrs service……….£50k
completion of yr2……………...£40k
completion of yr3……………...£30k
completion of yr4……………...£20k
completion of yr5……………...£10k
completion of yr6……………….Nil

So maybe Im reading it wrong but surely owing £10k at the end of yr5 means im bonded for another yr?

[Bravo73]

Nescafe, at the end of yr 5 you owe 10k. :-

Period from start date……….Repayment amount
less than 1yrs service……….£50k
completion of yr2……………...£40k
completion of yr3……………...£30k
completion of yr4……………...£20k
completion of yr5……………...£10k
completion of yr6……………….Nil

So maybe Im reading it wrong but surely owing £10k at the end of yr5 means im bonded for another yr?

Nescafe's version is a 5 year bond. Your's is a 6 year bond.

And some company bonds even 'pay off' on an monthly basis, not annually.

[Garfs]

Just curious what other people have been bonded for EC225 Type ratings.

Mine was just under €20k but I have a feeling that was a mistake (in my favour)

Course was in ABZ

Anyone get charged the same for 225?

[Brilliant Stuff]

You could always look after your employees and that way they the turnover is low and therefore overall costs much lower....simples.

But hey what do I know..

[helimutt]

Brilliant Stuff, there's a novel idea. Its never going to happen in a large helicopter company. Management dont like pilots remember. :E

If only Richard Branson had an offshore helicopter company, he'd have the happiest pilots, and no-one would ever leave!! :D


Bravo73, that Bond above is sold as a 5 yr bond. !!!!

[lowfat]

You are all concentrating on the monetary value of the bond.What about the fact the you are entering in to a commitment giving your WORD to stay for X amount of time.
I find that people who lie about there intentions knowingly intentending to foxtrot Oscar once the training is complete shows a lack of integrity that doesn't belong in a profession such ours .
Quite rightly walk from your bond and suffer the consequences.

Funnily enough the individuals that I have meet that have walked from bonds without paying the outstanding sum have all been the first out of the Taxi and last one in the Bar.

[GoodGrief]

If you don't run off with the company's silver spoons your bond is pretty much a job (and income) guarantee for 5 (or six :E) years.

That is not to be neglected in our line of work.
If some other company wants you badly tell them to find the dough and buy you out. Just like football clubs do.
Be a man.

By the way, one of them spineless ones used to be a friend of mine. I have since cancelled that relationship for good...

[pilot and apprentice]

It's not a job guarantee, it is indentured servitude.

LOWFAT: I agree completely, if you sign it honor it (both sides of course). For myself, I don't need a piece of paper for that. I also expect integrity to come from the other side of the table as well.

The first bond I flatly refused to sign was for a company I had already been working for, and they approached me about the endorsement. Even as young as I was, I saw the red flags and told them, verbally, I'd stay 2 years. Sure enough, once in the new job, they found ways to renege on the offered payscale, time off was non existent as the phone was constantly ringing to 'cover' a shift, and getting a taxi ride reimbursed meant camping out in the base manager's office! Even the a/c had no spares, but if you refused to accept it at shift start, big trouble, sad.

I left after less than a year. On the way out I explained why I felt I could not stay. Did they address the pay issues? No. A/C parts and serviceability? No. Staffing levels? No. They did threaten to send lawyers after me to collect on their bond. I had to remind them to check the file, I did not sign one.

Later, new company, we had a young pilot approach us, asking questions but not quite asking for work. After talking to him we discovered he had signed a bond the previous year, but his 'employer' had suffered a slowdown and had sent him home, no work (that is correct, no pay but not quite laid off). They had carefully reminded him that his 'bond' prevented him from seeking another job. We hired him, and sent our own lawyers to sort that issue!

Even recently, one of the [ahem] 'big' offshore operators decided to present us with a bond after the training for the Puma had already started (it was replacing the 61 on the base and all staff were moving over). "Oh, by the way, just sign this" ?!?! $80,000 bond! Utter lack of integrity. Didn't sign that either, didn't leave right away, but didn't sign!

Even now, my current employer (another name that is supposedly a pillar of the industry) feels that if I am sent away for a 76D conversion, not even an endorsement this one, that I am only entitled to 2/3 pay because it is really to my benefit. So this isn't a bond, just $7000 out of my pocket.

Bonds, as I have seen them, are either a crutch for an operation that lacks integrity or a reaction, in fear, to punish those that follow the guilty.

I'm sure I'll sign one some day, when it is presented by a company that is acting above board and with integrity, and when it is written with both parties in mind. I don't argue the enforceability, or lack thereof, because I, like you, feel that my signature is more than a little bit of ink, like my word is more than just a passing breath.

[parabellum]

Bonds, as I have seen them, are either a crutch for an operation that lacks integrity or a reaction, in fear, to punish those that follow the guiltyAs you have seen them, possibly Pilot & Apprentice but generally pilots only have themselves to blame for bonds, usually brought about because people have taken an endorsement and scooted off!
What bond-jumpers don't always take on board is that they are a marked man in a relatively small market place and companies do talk to each other, even that is not always necessary, just a glance through the log book will tell its own story! :)

[nowherespecial]

P&A,

Are you kidding?
It's not a job guarantee, it is indentured servitude.

Lets not beat around the bush here, if you have up to $80k of your own for a type rating you can be free of all of this.
If you don't you are asking a potential or current employer to invest hugely in YOUR career with no guarantee you will stick around. That's what the bond is for, it's return on investment. You are both getting something out of this, it's just that the operator is also financing a huge cost as well.

You are an example of the reason they exist. As GG pointed out earlier on, it hurts a company. Even to a big operator $80k per pilot is a huge amount of money.

HeliMutt also asked a question about why not give type ratings for current staff. Simple answer is that you're then paying for 2 type ratings, one for your current pilot to change types and one to hire a new guy to back fill that newly opened slot. It's nothing personal, it's just cheaper that way.

[cockney steve]

As an outsider, I think NOWHERE SPECIAL has cut to the heart of the matter.
The employer is being asked to financeyourcareer and personal "saleability" in the job-market.

A bit of "grown up" thinking, instead of the "them V us" attitude redolent of cloth-caps and Red Robbo, would make you realise the initial investment and risk is allon the employer's tab.....he even assesses you for suitability, thus saving the unsuitable from going down an employment "blind-alley"

As a youth, I had a motorcycle license and it covered 3-wheelers. I duly traded the wet, cold sidecar outfit for a "plastic rat" shortly thereafter, I moved house and changed employers. After some weeks, the foreman enquired as to my driving license and indicated that a car-license would make me of greater value to the company.
I was allowed unpaid time off for lessons at my own expense. They lost the productivity of my area of the factory-floor, during that time.

After I passed the test, I earned much overtime thrashing a new estate -car or the works van, around the country.

Paid to learn the UK geography, paid to eat out at their expense, paid to learn how to handle various motors..
When I left that firm, I had a Company car, expense account, telephone paid for.....went to work in a suit and tie , no time-clock, no regular hours.

Employer got my loyalty, hard work and a new profit-centre for the business (mobile servicing)

Nearly 50 years later, I still benefit from that initial investment
It never occurred to me to think that *they* should finance my personal development.

It seems with the big money in the Rotary world, it's not prudent or viable to rely on integrity, trust and honour.
A bond to cover outstanding debt to an employer,is really little different from an apprenticeship or traineeship....low wages in return for their investment in training As "time-served" status approaches. the employees' skill-level rises and training costs drop. both parties win,

[500e]

Give me £80k to better my chance of earning a higher wage but don't try to make me keep my word as to the length of time I stay in your employ.
Go to the bank & borrow the money, you will not walk out without signing a lot of paper work including second mortgage, & agreeing to hand over wife & children if in default (I know some would think this was a bonus) & paying a lot more than £80k, thats if they bother to listen to start with.

What a strange thread.:sad:

[parabellum]

500e - believe it or not but there are people out there who think the world owes them a living! ;)

[pilot and apprentice]

P&A,

Are you kidding?
It's not a job guarantee, it is indentured servitude.

Lets not beat around the bush here, if you have up to $80k of your own for a type rating you can be free of all of this.
If you don't you are asking a potential or current employer to invest hugely in YOUR career with no guarantee you will stick around. That's what the bond is for, it's return on investment. You are both getting something out of this, it's just that the operator is also financing a huge cost as well.

You are an example of the reason they exist. Really? By expecting that the terms agreed to ahead of time are honored. The only time I have left early was when the agreed payscale was not paid. After trying to address the issue for a year, was there any integrity on their end? None! Any agreement is therefore null and void! As GG pointed out earlier on, it hurts a company. Even to a big operator $80k per pilot is a huge amount of money.

HeliMutt also asked a question about why not give type ratings for current staff. Simple answer is that you're then paying for 2 type ratings, one for your current pilot to change types and one to hire a new guy to back fill that newly opened slot. It's nothing personal, it's just cheaper that way. And the situation that results is C*C G****l, where word is out that the only way to get a type is quit and come back, or threaten to quit, to get onto a new type. Attrition was through the roof!

I have asked for a type only once, and in that case I was willing to accept their terms (and it was a quality operator so the terms were much more realistic that what I see now!). Because of circumstance I have been on jobs where the type the customer was using changed, or I have been approached to move to a new type so that the company could take advantage of the ratings I had acquired (on my own). Usually the concept of a bond is broached late in the game, when both parties are committed, as more subtle coercion.

I reiterate my point, bonds are used primarily as an attempt to enforce employment when the company lacks the ability to screen the candidates or the attractiveness to retain staff. Exceptions exist I'm sure.

A VP for a former employer (one of the better) answered my question about bonds by saying (I'll get it as close as I can remember): We don't use bonds. The difference between recurrent and an endorsement isn't worth it. Retention isn't an issue for us.

[nowherespecial]

P&A,

I understand the argument but I just don't think it holds much water. The global market place means that pilots are a tradeable commodity for companies and licenses are going more and more global too.

If I give you something for free (ie at no $ cost to you) and you are able to leave for more money elsewhere, you'd be a fool not to leave.

I'll give you an example close to my heart:

Global operator looks at ex mil pilots: lots of twin hours, quite a few offshore, atpl (H) frozen or CPL (H) and IR on something nice like a 206 or even a Dauphin. Tick, very good please come in and have a free type rating on a 139 (the world ticket right now, or so it seems). We'll pay for it but not bond you because you seem like a nice chap.

Pilot A says "thanks CHC/ Bond/ Bristow for my free training and £60k a year but if it's ok with you I'm going to work for Weststar instead for $200k tax free in Morocco" or wherever else they are starting up and offering top dollar.

I know which option I'd take if I was presented with a type rating and no bond. It's human nature. Trust has to work both ways. When you can't guarantee it, stick a contract in there instead. At least it's up front and transparent.

I'd love to live in a world where pilots (and employers) are loyal but it's business for both parties. If you and your employer can get away without them then all the very best. I don;t resent them, I just think it's good business sense.

To be fair to CHC Global (might as well fill in the blanks eh?), the new touring pay deal will mean a lot less moaning about the primary T&C (ie pay) and will do more to bring them in to line globally on $ compensation so I suspect churn in touring pilots will decline over the next 3 years anyway. Fair point though.

[lamanated]

In Canada it is indeed indentured employment, Only way it has weight I heard is before you start there. then if you wanted out, you showed u late a few times , scared someone or something like that , and they can you, you walk free as well.
this indenturing,was one of British Colombia biggest files. when I was there.
there is an article in one of the trade mags about it by a Lawyer/IFR driver.