scraglad, If I am correct (which can be quite a rarity), your topic was concerned with pilots willing to pay for an initial type rating, or an initial job with an airline. There have been part-sponsorships, reduced initial payscales and training bonds for "newhires" around for a long time.
What this issue is about is a number of pilots, already employed by the company, being asked to pay for a training course, and being bonded - in extremely vague terms - to the company for the privilege of paying for your training course, and being asked to accept a change in their terms and conditions and above all, be thankful for this golden opportunity (!)
Think about it, if one worked in an office and a new computer system is to be installed for use by the employees, is it reasonable to expect the employees to pay for the required training course just so they get to keep their job? Or is it reasonable to invest in those same employees so that they become more productive as a result of their training and new equipment, driving efficiencies etc etc?
Is the FR scenario considered normal industry practice?
Back to the real issue: IALPA/IMPACT have not made a claim on behalf of FR pilots. There is no threat of industrial action. Why is MOL so reluctant to issue the terms and conditions to all of his pilots (if they are so good?)
Whatever happens, the best plan is for the FR pilots to stay united.