Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Wannabes Forums > Interviews, jobs & sponsorship
Reload this Page >

FTE (Jerez) Grads - Who has got a Job?

Interviews, jobs & sponsorship The forum where interviews, job offers and selection criteria can be discussed and exchanged.

FTE (Jerez) Grads - Who has got a Job?

Old 20th Apr 2017, 21:53
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Wandsworth
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Great contribution. FTE would be my choice over the others if I were to think about integrated again as a safer bet for employment, for all the obvious pros of FTE plus yours above. When I've spoken to FTE I certainly find them more genuine and less of a marketing stunt than the other two with just as great opportunities, if not better.

I wish you all the best.
planesandthings is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 23:42
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by planesandthings
Sure there is an interview for EZY, you could pass it with flying colours with fantastic quality of training and whatever other requirements they state, but the requirement is the money, end of, EasyJet specify the amount for the TR and they will expect it or you're out the door.
After spending £100k on a ATPL, how easy is it to pull £30-40k out of the bag, some of it totally upfront?
It is surprising how many people fail to understand that if you don't have money in this industry you face near impossible challenges to get jobs with certain employers. I am afraid that is now the case and is never likely to change....
The interview stage isn't about your "ability to pay" for a type rating. If that is a stipulation, it will be assumed that you have already taken that into account prior to making your application. The reason that so many airlines now require successful applicants to pay for their type ratings is down to history.

Thirty odd years ago, an airline offering conditional employment to a new recruit who required training on type, did so on the presumption that the recruit would honour that investment and stay with the company long enough to provide a reasonable return on that investment. Unfortunately, in times of plentiful opportunity, a few seized their new found ratings and left the provider in the lurch as they saw better opportunities for themselves.

Twenty odd years ago, airlines responded to this concern by "bonding" recruits needing type ratings for an amortisation period (often 2-3 years). If the recruit decided to break the contract, the employer could seek recovery from the pilot for the unsatisfied element of that contract. The problem with this was that a number of pilots simply took the viewpoint "Good luck with that!" And left the employer with the time and costs of seeking recovery.

Over the last 10 years, more and more airlines have moved on and taken the viewpoint that the risk should move from themselves to the applicant. The applicant isn't actually qualified to satisfy the vacancy (without a type rating) so they are going to provide it at the applicants cost. If the applicant then decides to move on to pasteurs new the airline isn't left holding the financial can for that training.

It has taken Thirty years or so, but that is the simple reason why this situation has evolved. I have witnessed it happening first hand. Long time followers of these forums will bear witness to the cries of indignation twenty years ago when "bonding" started to become more widespread. Nowadays if companies require you to assume the cost risk of your type training, then that is a part of the overall ab-initio training programme and people would be well advised to have understood that at a very early stage.

Perhaps this brief potted history lesson will help with that "understanding" ?
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 02:47
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And over the last couple of years these two giant LCCs have realised that they can actually make money from their new employees (whether that word can be used to describe them is another matter).
There are still decent operators out there. Flybe for example, a company with comparatively minuscule profit margins, still pays for the type rating (bonded) and treats its employees like human beings.
Shamrock49 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 08:20
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moscow
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
P2F is one of the factors leading to the degradation of flight safety. This is called Commercial Pressure on the pilot. Companies are looking primarily for pilots who are able to pay (some of you support these schemes). Other pilots who are "cornered", but also want to fly - they borrow money, take loans from banks. Yes, they start to fly, but they constantly think how to get this money back. But the main thing they should think about is compliance with the SOP and be responsible for safety. People supporting P2F involved in this degradation.

Sometimes a pilot should say NO. But the psychology is that - you are pressured by what you really want. These airlines want from you only money. Stop P2F. Refuse all offers where you asked to pay for TR and LT and after some time you will see changes.
Pilot.v1 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 15:12
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But where can an applicant run nowadays without at least 500 hours on type?
Almost nowhere. So the problem is that the management is just interested in another 15-25K EUR of profit and why not make it on junior employees?
Self-sponsored Type Rating & P2F shall be forbidden by law.
Yes, but 500 hours on type is generally less than 1 years experience. An airline making this level of investment would generally be looking at a commitment level well beyond this timescale. For a commercial company providing type ratings and employment conditional on those ratings it wouldn't be looking for a "churn" rate of 9-12 months. If it were to run a significant risk of that happening it certainly makes sense to make the supply of that training profitable.

Bear in mind that without the type rating you are not an employee, since the employment contract is likely to be conditional on the aquisition of that type rating and passing induction line training. It is fairly unusual for airlines to bond long standing employees for additional training. That is because they are already on a contract of employment and because they are already likely to have demonstrated a commitment.

The reason for the evolution is as I have already described, and that is down to many companies having had their fingers burnt in the past.

P2F is one of the factors leading to the degradation of flight safety. This is called Commercial Pressure on the pilot. Companies are looking primarily for pilots who are able to pay (some of you support these schemes). Other pilots who are "cornered", but also want to fly - they borrow money, take loans from banks. Yes, they start to fly, but they constantly think how to get this money back. But the main thing they should think about is compliance with the SOP and be responsible for safety. People supporting P2F involved in this degradation.

Sometimes a pilot should say NO. But the psychology is that - you are pressured by what you really want. These airlines want from you only money. Stop P2F. Refuse all offers where you asked to pay for TR and LT and after some time you will see changes.
"Pay to Fly" is something that you do from the moment you start your PPL training. It is going to burn great big holes in your pocket until the day you become qualified and obtain a job that enables you to start amortising those training costs. The distinction here is that of "qualification." Airlines have grown to take the view that you are not "qualified" unless you already have the qualification necessary for employment. Unfortunately, that has evolved to include the "type qualification" criteria, unless you are already in possession of it, and with substantive experience to back it up. Whereas once they would have assumed that risk, no longer are many prepared to do so.

I am afraid that evidentially it doesn't lead to the degradation of flight safety. What individuals borrow from banks for flight training or car loans or mortgages or anything else, is a matter for the individual whether they are a cadet pilot or a 40 year veteran.
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 16:04
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moscow
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
About "Qualified" or not "Qualified". Some companies diesn't care if you already Type Rated and they can ask you to REDO it:

Originally Posted by Tomtomsky
I paid 15500 for my TR that is incl. CL and NG AND Hotel PLUS base training. That is something different then FR.

Then after 3,5 years CAE called me and asked what my situation was. I said well, I just obtained my 737 Rating... The friendly lady, asked me then, well are you still interested to work in FR? I said yes, but NOT when I have to REDO B737 Rating all over again for the grandstand price of 30K. I said, I HAVE TR737 rating so if they are in such a big need then they should take me on, but that was NOT possible when you dont have hrs on type. So then my answer was Thanks but NO Thanks.

Source: http://www.pprune.org/interviews-jobs-sponsorship/222538-ryanair-interview-sim-assessment-merged-362.html

... And of coarse companies are "not trying" to make profit on pilots. ... And TR is responsibility of reach pilot. Poor poor companies.
Pilot.v1 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 17:36
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Beazlebub, you seem to spend a lot of time posting long-winded justifications for airlines charging for training/type rating etc.... Do you perhaps work in the industry?

Ignoring the reasons for airlines doing what they are doing for a moment, do you agree with the practice of charging for type ratings?

While I agree that a desire "not to get their fingers burnt" played a part in airlines moving from funding training, to bonding it and then making the cadet pay it all, this does somewhat ignore the fact that many are now not only charging their but making handsome profit on top! This has nothing to do with risk and everything to do with increasing their margins.
ManUtd1999 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 18:02
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Beazlebub, you seem to spend a lot of time posting long-winded justifications for airlines charging for training/type rating etc.... Do you perhaps work in the industry?
The airline industry? Yes! The commercial flight training industry? No!

Ignoring the reasons for airlines doing what they are doing for a moment, do you agree with the practice of charging for type ratings?
No. But the point is, you cannot ignore the reasons behind the practice. By providing the history I would hope it helps with the understanding.

While I agree that a desire "not to get their fingers burnt" played a part in airlines moving from funding training, to bonding it and then making the cadet pay it all, this does somewhat ignore the fact that many are now not only charging their but making handsome profit on top! This has nothing to do with risk and everything to do with increasing their margins.
They are commercial businesses, not charities or institutions of academia. Their entire raison d'être is to make a profit. When they used to pay for this type of training it would do absolutely nothing for their margins when a few individuals availed themselves of it and then sold it on to somebody else. When they "bonded", it did nothing for their margins when a few individuals broke their contracts resulting in legal costs or fiscal write offs. The new reality in the world of "lo-co" aviation is of survival in those margins. If your competitors are making more profit than you are, then you are operating at a disadvantage that is likely to prove an existential threat eventually.

About "Qualified" or not "Qualified". Some companies diesn't care if you already Type Rated and they can ask you to REDO it:
Yes, but again this has always been something of a fallacy. An airline recruiting a type rated pilot quite reasonably expects said pilot to have significant experience to go with that rating. In other words, they expect you to have been type rated by another airline in accordance with a structured training programme leading to experience with that airline. This type of experience should result in a low input risk for the airline. This is worlds away from somebody with low experience speculatively buying a type rating with no subsequent relevant experience, and then expecting an airline to accept this without any input from the new company. Far from from being advantageous, most companies would simply regard it as a big "red flag!"
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2017, 04:27
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To add something to the 'how much is a type rating' argument I know two people who began working for easyjet in 2015/2016 employed by ctc flexicrew who both paid £30k for the type rating and a surprise £10k bond.
fenny is offline  
Old 22nd Apr 2017, 11:48
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is too much commercialism in the aviation today. Thanks to the EU & liberal idea that made privatization of state aviation enterprises all over the continent possible. It's all about money for smart business mans in private aviation companies. They want to make huge profit without risking a cent.

On the other side - we risk 100k EUR during our study, we have to maintain our licenses and why shall we risk 100-400 EUR on job interviews & additional 30-40k EUR on TR courses?! Meanwhile passengers are flying for 20 EUR with all those wonderful & innovative low-cost & ACMI carriers?

We have to change the game. The airlines wouldn't exist without pilots.
It is in our interest to require a fully paid TR through a bond & good salary.
That is why they are "commercial airlines." The clue is in the title! It is all about supply and demand. Whereas once the supply of experienced pilots to airlines was sourced from the military and other commercial operators. Those sources only provided a balanced supply at a relatively high cost. In other words relatively high wages and good ancillary terms and conditions. As you progressed further and further up the totem pole, so the rewards became greater in order to attract that "talent." In a capitalist world that isn't something unique to airlines, it is a widespread modus operandi across all businesses.

The growth of lo-cost airlines (and again the clue is in the title) sought to reduce all of their controllable input costs. That was achieved by increasing the supply such that the balance was achieved at a much lower price point. The "experience" requirements were shifted from the right seat to the left seat, and regulation changes facilitated and enabled those changes. The floodgates were opened to an entire "X factor" generation of people who no longer needed to follow traditional experience pathways to airlines, yet they (erroneously) clung on to the idea that success would be rewarded the way it always had been until that point.

The growing oversupply achieved the goal of bringing the balanced price point (wages and T&C's) way down. I would suggest it has a very long to go before the supply/demand curves reach any sort of equilibrium in the foreseeable future. By starting in the right place, it was inevitable that the lower input costs would in time spread across to the left seat, and sure enough they have.

There is an obvious paradox in these forums being awash with people who strive to reduce their own costs, yet seem perplexed that commercial airline companies would do the same. The reality of the world is that there is a great deal of experience "for sale" and the price (wages) of that experience is falling in real terms. When it comes to "inexperience" (and that is of relevance to these specific forums/threads/posts) the supply is simply huge, with no signs (at the current levels of experience requirement) of that getting any more balanced anytime soon.

I would recommend a viewpoint that assumes flight training, and houses, and cars, and boats, etc. will be "eye-wateringly" expensive in the future. Supply and demand is likely to ensure this remains the case, and competition will continue to ensure the survival of the fittest.

Anyway these are broader issues that deviate this thread off track, and perhaps it needs steering back to jobs for FTE grads as a specific issue.
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 10th May 2017, 16:42
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: N.O.Y.B.
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To try and bring the thread back on track, does anyone have an idea what the employment prospects are like at present for FTE cadets?
EZY_FR is offline  
Old 19th May 2017, 11:11
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: London
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
reasonably good. some friends i know are there at the moment and say most of the students who aren't on airline schemes have gone to Easy Jet.
SunsetSheepLandings is offline  
Old 19th May 2017, 19:21
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: earth
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
a fried of main, whom just finshed his traning with them a month ago said everyone that were self sponsered in his class including him got into EZ exept 2, 1 flank out and 1 got knocked back a class due to APTL failures and still didn't finish.
they are currently doing their TR and are close to finish and start line traning..
overall out of the 6 that finished the self sponsered with him 6 got into EZ, not bad ill say..
tryu32 is offline  
Old 10th Jun 2017, 09:20
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Spain
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good morning,
Regarding easyjet, must the cadets need to pay the tope rating on easyjet? Exist the possibility of a training loan by easy?
Jaime_astur is offline  
Old 10th Jun 2017, 11:55
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Spain
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And what is the approx price for type rating for easyjet?
Jaime_astur is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 11:18
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've heard of Aer Lingus coming in and taking self sponsored cadets recently, and giving interviews. Would that be consistent with what others have heard?
Byrne11 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2017, 23:44
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Will that be continuing into the future then?
Byrne11 is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2017, 17:40
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Spain
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
At FTE it's 6 months wether you passed or failed
pilot4life98 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.