What I personally don't understand is where the line is supposed to be drawn. For the loud voices opposed to all the SSTR schemes out there, did you not pay for your MCC course yourselves? What is there to say that this requirement should not be funded by the employer as well? In fact, on that line of thought why shouldn't the airline be paying for ALL of your training? I think the industry as a whole is progressing towards a situation where all crew are selected from thousands of applicants, handpicked for the airline and trained in-house to their standards. It's being done today, and it will continue to spread at least that's my guess. Airlines don't want the hassle of evaluating people with such varying training backgrounds and experiences, they want a predictable polished product young enough to give them a good number of years of service.
I may be crazy, but I just fail to see the distinction here. Why is is worse for a guy to pay for his rating to make himself attractive on the market than it is to pay for your own Certificate/MCC?
You know, back in the day day, all airline pilots where basically ex-military which I'm guessing would rule out most of you on here. Personally I'm happy to be living in a day and age where it's possible at all for me to become an airline pilot and thrilled that my personal circumstances coincide with my dream.
Just my thoughts here, I'm not happy about the state of the european industry either but the whole burn-the-sstr-guys-at-the-stake thing is wrong to me.
What I will say as far as money goes is that the door swings the other way as well, regarding where to draw the line. I don't think it's right to work for next to nothing or worse, to pay to work once you're hired. If you're a FO then you should get the FO salary no question about it because that's what you are.
That's is for me... and cheer us dudes, it's christmas!
