The additional cost of a SSTR effectively killed my aspirations to become a commercial pilot. I had started out on the road to fATPL before Sept 11th 2001 and the idea of paying for type rating at that point was something only rich kids did who couldn't a job any other way. In fact prior to 11/9/01 there were heated debates on this very bulletin board about the evils of bonding. These days bonding seems all fair and nice in comparison to SSTR's. I am sure there are many here people who are defending SSTR's as they have either bought them themselves or work for organisations that sell them.
It is a funny industry really, a few years ago airlines would fork out for the cost of an IR, that then became a de facto requirement before anyone could apply for a job, then it was the MCC, now it is the requirement to pay for a Type Rating. It seems to be a constant set of sliding goalposts.
If we compare and contrast pilots with another safety critical industry whose training costs are similar and governed by government legislation, that of train drivers. The cost of training a driver to the point where they a legally allowed to drive a train and earn money for the company is approx. €90,000 (or £60,000 in old money). As far as I am aware there are no preserved railways offering to teach anyone to drive a train and then go off to try and get a job as a train driver with Virgin EWS or Scotrail. One of the main reasons for this is that the unions would never allow it. The first sniff of that happening and the railway workers in the UK would be on strike in a flash. I had this discussion with one of the senior union reps at Scotrail just last week. He was amazed that pilots have to pay so much for their training themselves, and that companies would effectively charge the employee to be able to work. How many UK companies are currently charging for Line Training & Line Time on type?
The argument that paying for the likes of a Bandit type rating is similar to todays climate I cannot accept. £3,000 for a Bandit type rating where, if I remember correctly, part could be funded by government grants similar to career development loans, is not the same sort of financial risk being run today. £25,000+ for 737/A320 type rating with no financial assitance available I cannot see being comparable. The cost of a type rating has risen exponentially with increasing legislation and the expansion of the numbers of investors expecting to reap a return out of the unfortunates who buy the training. The job market declined so far and so quickly that many people offered to prostitute themselves with the notion of gaining experience 'for free' (i.e. working without being paid), and it's now becoming the norm. Unfortunately there will always be those who will have the ability to spend their way into a job, not necessarily because they have talent ability or personality but because they have deeper pockets than others.
I am sure the whory old chestnut of the airline industry doesnt owe you a living will be trotted out, but that is just bollocks. If someone has worked hard and spent waht is to many "normal" people a fortune to get the necessary bit of paper, then it is a cynical and calculating employeer that requires the prospective employee to have to pay further for company specific training, be it a type rating or differences training.
The question is, where is the line in the sand? Pay for moving types within a company? Pay for a command course? A reduction in salary as hours on type are an asset to the pilot?
It really does come as a surprise to me that none of the pilot unions have sought to counter the rise of SSTRs. The practise of self-sponsoring type ratings will not be solved by pressure from those at the bottom of the system, it will only be successfully addressed by those at the top, under economic and union pressure. However, it is a reality and it will take time to eliminate it.
I'm now out of the running for gaining emplyment as a commercial pilot, and the primary reason for that is the rise of the SSTR. I could not justify to myself or my family spending another 25-30k on the possibility of employment.