Originally Posted by
Okihara
What does a responsible instructor do when their student is sent out solo that justifies the latter to pay dual rate? Serious question.
I'm obviously not saying that any work (of value) on the instructor part should be at no cost for the student but I find that charging as much as dual rate on solo navigations is nothing short of fraud. I'd be happy to be educated to the contrary, that is.
Originally Posted by
Okihara
Aussie Bob
From the student's perspective, I honestly can't really say what warrants being charged dual rate on solo navigations. That's from my personal experience having had instructors that couldn't seem to care less. Solo navigation routes were all predefined, thus allowing little to no degree of freedom, to aerodromes that had been previously visited. Preflight briefings involved minimal input, debriefings were more proforma and often had to be deferred to the following day because said instructor was out flying with another student when I'd return. On that basis, I would
never have accepted to pay dual rate.
Don't tar all instructors and schools with the one brush. The school I work for charges first solo at the dual rate (1st solo, 1st area solo, 1st nav solo) and subsequent solos at the solo rate however still pays the supervising instructor the same rate as dual (ie the business wears the cost). Because the instructor is expected to be working when supervising.
What work you ask?
As a supervising instructor (eg for 2nd solo nav) they should check the weather and notams (often well in advance of the student), make sure the aircraft has been given its daily and is available, (again usually before the student arrives). On the basis of the weather they will have already decided what the risks are and if they think it should proceed. On arrival they will get the student to brief them on the weather and will check their flightplan before departure. It is not unknown to notice they have totally stuffed one leg with a reciprocal heading or miscalculation of wind. They will raise issues about notams the student has missed so better be sure they checked them first. They must brief the student on what is expected - eg where to land (in some cases they need to make 2 full stop landings), what issues they may encounter, to remind them about the weather conditions (if appropriate) and what options they have if they encounter problems. They will discuss the decsion to proceed and what they should do and not do, all using their professional judgement, training and experience.
After the student departs, the instructor will not be out of contact until they return, ie they cannot leave work, whether they have other students, briefings, other work *or not* in that time or are sitting in the office idle, they need to be available. They cannot just knock off and go home.
If the student calls ("I am at Dubbo and the ptt switch is not working - what do I do?", "I am at Goulburn and there seem to be lots of thunderstorms on the way home, should I stay here the night?"), they need to be available and give appropriate advice.
If the student isn't back and the instructor is concerned that they should be, the instructor is the one who is expected to call their mobile to see if all is OK. When the mobile doesn't respond and their concern is sufficient, they will be the one who will call flight service and asks if the aircraft can be raised on radio. They will also be the one who sits sweating when they hear back that flight service cannot raise them. They will be the one double checking their sartime and their calculated endurance after finding out earlier in the flight, they revised it. They will be the one ringing people they might know at any of the airports the student may have landed at.
They are the ones who silently sigh with relief when they hear the student turn up inbound. On arrival they will ask them how it went, remind them to cancel their sartime, ask them if they heard Melbourne centre calling them and ask them what frequency they were on and hear them sheepishly admit they forgot to switch from a CTAF frequency for most of the return leg and discuss any other issues they may have had or questions that arise.
They will be the one who updates their training record and makes sure it is all in order for when CASA audits the school. They will be the one who has to explain to the CFI if they are any discrepencies, and whether all requirements have been met and details completed.
They will also be the one who will be asked to explain why the student penetrated control airspace without a clearance, had they been appropriately trained and what the instructor and school will be doing to insure that doesn't happen again.
God forbid, if something nasty happens, they will be Johnny on the spot, contacting those who need to know and later they will be the ones who will be quizzed, why did the instructor judge the student capable of this flight alone? did they appropriately brief them? check their plan? train them? overlook anything? etc.
You think paying them for this work is fraud? Instructor wages are generally the lowest in the industry as it is. That is the nature of the game. Pay them more and ask students to pay more and you would find students would walk away. Pay them more and ask the school to subsidise that? Schools would fold - it is not viable. You want to instruct? It is not the gravy train end of the industry. Do it because you want to. Even if you are looking beyond instructing, do it because you want to, not because you must. There are many schools with instructors who enjoy instructing and want to offer good value to their students and employer.
Supervising solo students is a serious responsibility and I think it appropriate to recognise and reward people for it. Most other jobs pay people to be on call or to be the person in charge of ensuring a safe and successful outcome. ATC are not paid by the number of aircraft they handle or times they push the radio button on any day. Tower controllers at a GA aerodrome who spend a wet and windy monday doing little because no one is flying still get paid the same for being there. Doctors on call who aren't called will still be paid. Why not instructors assuming responsibility for a school's reputation and particularly an individual student's and aircraft's safety?
Are there some schools who do not act responsibly? Yes. You seem to have found one. That school is not all schools. Don't tar all with the same brush.
Not all schools are full of junior instructors with no love (or work ethic) for instructing and who are only hour building and see instructing (and students) as a necessary evil in their journey.
You want to find a good school? Shop around, visit schools, talk to their students, see what they offer.
Don't look just at price but at the experience level of their staff and their focus on their customers.
See what sort of training they specialise in.
See if you like their style (different schools cater for different types of students), judge if you feel they want to offer you something more than the minimum.
Sometimes good value means paying more.
Diatribe over.