Originally Posted by
Flying Bear
However, from the charter operator’s point of view it gives a good opportunity over several days to see the individual characters of the pilots as well as the obvious benefit of specific type training that is contextual to the operating environment.
You just described someone paying for a job interview.
Originally Posted by
Flying Bear
We will train it - properly - but given the length of tenure / loyalty of most first job pilots, we’d go broke if we continuously gave it away. Guess what? You CAN’T often weed out bad attitudes based on an interview or quick “check flight”.
If a company can't retain low time pilots with limited prospects that probably says more about the company than it does about the pilots.
Originally Posted by
Flying Bear
In my experience, the difference between a 200 hr pilot of good character and a 500 hr pilot is negligible (from a technical standpoint) - so the trick is to find junior pilots who actually care about putting in at work and helping their employer to sustain / grow their business.
200 hrs to 500 hrs is 4 months. I don't agree with the idea there's negligible improvement in 4 months of flying.
Originally Posted by
Flying Bear
Finally, the GA course is not marketed as a “buy a job with us” product - that is a label attached to it by the hopefuls based on the business processes of our other companies. Of itself, the course offers solid training and experience - and we genuinely hope (believe) that all who do it gain useful technical development.
I understand I've probably come off as a bit hostile (nice little dig in your last paragraph) but I do agree a training course like yours holds benefit.
What I don't agree with is that two companies that you control require potential employees to undertake a paid course from your own third company.