If the standards and quality in WA schools really are higher than in ordinary non-WA schools, we might reasonably expect that some schools will have applied to join WA and been rejected. Potential customers might like to ask if this has ever happened?
I'd be more concerned if there is a territorial aspect to schools being excluded.
Rejected by whom, and on what grounds?
Has there been a behind the scenes auction for inclusion on the list of WA "approved" schools, which by the very listing and internet suggestion like yours, are not as good / up to the same standard.
On the basis that the CAA conduct impartial reviews, I thought that if an ATO is authorised by the CAA, then it is good enough. Better is surely a subjective term.
Alliance is a friendly word; clique or cartel, conjure up an image of not such a warm cuddly description of what might be the same thing.
What is the closed shop of WA "Approved" schools doing for/to the students of other non affiliated schools. Surely, in fairness, if the industry is going to portray the membership of WA as being the hallmark of excellence and connected progress, then there has to be transparency and independent verification of how the suitability of member schools is being verified.
I think it's a stretch to say that just because they have (presumably) signed up to be in this alliance, they are better than schools not admitted or not applying to join the fold. Looking at the list, I'm curious as to how there can be a verified "standard" covering schools in England, Scotland, Greece, France, Poland & Jordan.
What was the criteria that led to such a list; Evaluation, Historical placement success or a Joining fee?
WA must be getting revenue from someone, and that must be either schools taking a smaller cut (not in my tea leaves) or students paying more.
Alex Whittingham of Bristol Groundschool, a Founder Member of Wings Alliance, explained, “This is a unique high quality training route, the first of its kind in the world. Through our members we can offer a real high value alternative for aspiring commercial pilots who are seeking a direct route to airline employment.”
He added, “Modular training through the Wings Alliance will cost substantially less than the equivalent integrated course. Our Members do not have big company overheads associated with big Flight Schools and the Alliance itself is run as a not-for-profit organisation. Training with the Wings Alliance will give pilots approximately 25% more training time at, typically, 70% of the cost.”
Can the big integrated schools really be so inefficient in terms of costs? Are we to accept that somebody at BG suddenly found a way to get a gallon out of a litre pot, and decided to sell it for the price of a pint?
I know some people who were very happy with Tayside's training, and ability to place the guys in front of the right people at Loganair in order to get them jobs leading to Captaincy in a reasonable time frame. Without the need to be part of a wider alliance. I also know people who have secured jobs without needing to go to Tayside.
Please tell me this is not a case of "Join our club and pay your fees, or we will say that since you are not in our club, then you must be ****."
There is such a small list of schools, covering a huge geographic area, things don't add up.