Mr Blair, I believe you are right. I cannot comment on your statistics, but my reading of the situation is this:
The airlines who sponsor (or at least to) have a huge number of applicants to choose from and put them through pretty stiff selection. As a result, they get a high pass rate and, even after 911, those cadets generally got employed straight onto jet or decent airline turboprop jobs. Before 911 there were probably a little under 200 cadet places in the UK.
The flight training industry had much more appetite for business than 200 places per year, and there were all those disappointed applicants, including many career changers who were too old for the sponsorship schemes. So the flight training industry convince anyone with the money that
A) “we can train you to get a licence” and
B) “you will be able to get a job when you have a licence” (with some help from us, nudge, wink)
I know; I’ve shopped around the entire flight school industry as have many wannabies on here.
The reality is that the training is tough, especially for someone who has failed the airline aptitude tests, and there were always fewer jobs than desperate new licence holders. The unscrupulous took, and take, advantage of the desire of the naive.
Some of us are lucky in that we have had the rose tinted specs taken off before we get fleeced (so from now on it’s stupidity rather than naivety). Some wake up part way through and go back to reality. Some soldier on and become very disappointed and bitter. Some make it through and deserve every stoke of luck their hard work and persistence earns them.
Is it satisfactory? You bet it ain’t! Are there schools that rise above this and only train people who are suited and there are jobs for; none that I have detected!
I suspect your ratios are about right. But it gets worse, cause of those 35% who are successful, few will get the job of their desires in the timescale they need, even during hiring booms.
