The underwriter's/insurers approach will be that, if the airline is a properly regulated carrier, operating to the satisfaction of a recognised regulating authority, CAA/FAA/JADA etc. then that will be good enough for them and no pilot warranty** will be invoked. Insurance is an industry, not a profession.
** Insurers may call for a pilot warranty with single aircraft operations, new operations with no track record, (light to medium aircraft) and will specify minimum hours required, possibly including hours on type etc. When an operator has demonstrated a satisfactory safety record warranties may be removed but more likely the rate will be reduced. From the insurance point of view it hinges entirely around the confidence the underwriters have in the operation.
A bond, in the flying sense, is usually an agreement to give a specified period as return of service after receiving a training course, the bond has a monetary value but provided the return of service period is completed then no money changes hands.
P2F is simply a commercial contract to receive/provide training where money definitely does change hands. I suspect the word 'bond' has been hijacked by the providers to make the whole squalid arrangement sound more acceptable.
BOND:
1.A binding agreement; a covenant.
2.A duty, promise, or other obligation by which one is bound.
Last edited by parabellum; 23rd Apr 2013 at 20:58.