REPLY TO TAYSIDE AVIATION RUMOUR

[Lovat Fraser]

I have been following the comments and opinions in the PPRuNe
Bulletin board, particularly as Tayside Aviation has been
mentioned and misrepresented on a number of occasions. I
appreciate the opportunity to reply and particulary to put the record
straight by presenting facts instead of fiction.

Neither Tayside Aviation nor I are being "dragged through the
courts" as Morepower would have people believe, and indeed
even if there is a contravention of the National Minimum Wage
(NMW), which has yet to be established, court action would not
apply. The ultimate sanction is an industrial tribunal at which both
parties would have an opportunity to put their points of view.

Tayside Aviation was the subject of an inspection by
representatives of the NMW Compliance Unit, and having
examined all departments of the company including engineering,
restaurant and admin staff, it was pointed out that it is essential for
flying instructors to book in and out in order that the number of
hours in attendance, rather than just flying hours, can be
measured.

As I have always been opposed to any employee clocking on or
off duty, which implies an elememt of mistrust, such a system did
not exist within Tayside Aviation.

A booking in and out system has now been introduced which
unfortunately is not proving popular with some of the instructors
because it can restricts their freedom to leave the premises if they
are not booked to fly, and will prevent them studying whilst on the
premises for exams which are not relevant to their current
employment (eg ATPLs or Perf A). They will now have to clock off
and study at home with the possibility of missing ad hoc flights.

Over the past few years instructors at Tayside Aviation have been
offered continuous employment over the quiet Winter months to
ensure there were sufficient instructors available to cope with the
frantic Summer months, but this policy will need to be reviewed
and some lay offs at the end of each season may now be
necessary.

It will be some time before the results of the NMWCU inspection
are concluded, but there is now no suggestion that the law on this
matter has been flouted.

Mr BTupp was originally very critical of the management of
Tayside Aviation and as Managing Director I took that personally. I
appreciate that Mr BTupp has apologised but I would still like to
put on record that I wrote him a glowing report which contributed
significantly to him receiving a GAPAN scholarship worth £5,500
to pay for his flying instructor course. He was delighted (his word)
to be included in the Tayside Aviation Sponsorship Scheme which
has been responsible for countless aspiring aviators achieving
their dreams of being a commercial airline pilot. I supported
wholeheartedly his attempt to obtain acceptable council housing
when he was evicted by the council from his caravan at Fife
Airport. Tayside Aviation also paid £800 in professional fees to
fight this eviction order on behalf of Mr BTupp. I have never had a
cross word with Mr BTupp, although I have asked him on several
occasions why his flying hours were always significantly lower than
other comparable instructors.

MorePower also has a short memory as he approached me when
he could not find employment with the airlines, and asked for
instructor training and employment to let him build the valuable
hours which most airlines expect before employing first officers.
He said he could not afford to pay for the instructor course and
asked about sponsorship. I agreed he could pay half the cost of
the course when he started and the balance would be treated as
an interest free loan to be paid when he left - he left in September
and is still arguing about a portion of this debt, as he does about
most things.

On the broader issue of instructor remuneration, without
organisations such as Tayside Aviation, one of the few avenues to
commercial pilot employment would not exist, and to acquire the
essential hours that airlines require would mean that candidates
would have to pay for them.

Comments have been made about the demise of the self improver
route, and although that may in essence be correct, the fact
remains that, airlines are not interested in low hours frozen ATPLs
and the regionals are recruiting candidates with around 1000
hours who they can fast track to be Captains who are a relatively
scarce commodity. Quite a few former Tayside instructors have
gained their command with Loganair and ScotAirways within a
year joining the company and therefore the training and
experience they receive from Tayside Aviation must be of some
value. The regional airlines seem very keen to recruit experienced
Tayside Aviation instructors.

Although some people might think that a frozen ATPL is an open
sesame to airline flying, the time spent instructing provides more
than just flying experience, as instructors develop people handling
skills as well as practical experience of airmanship and captaincy.

Career instructors are paid significantly more than short term
hours builders but even during the early 1990s when Tayside
Aviation commercial career instructors were being paid as much
as £27,000 per annum, the one ingredient that was missing was
loyalty.


A group of Tayside Aviation instructors set up a rival company
during their employment with this company and then left taking
£150,000 of potential business with them. Needless to say this
new venture failed within months.

Frequently I accept days rather than the normal weeks or months
notice to help instructors get their first airline job. One instructor
asked on Thursday to leave on Friday to join BRA on the ATP fleet
and I released him without hesitation.

It is understandable that young bloods, who have spent a great
deal of money on their training, believe that the world of aviation
owes them a living and some of them seem to be hell bent on
putting the world to rights, but the reason they are flying
instructors in the first instance is to gain the experience levels
which the airlines demand. It is said that there is no substitute for
experience and they might wish to bear in mind that Tayside
Aviation has 33 years of flying training experience, has seen many
other FTOs, charter companies and even airlines come and go in
that time. Aviation is full of dreamers but the difficult bit is turning
dreams into reality and that applies to aspiring airline pilots as well
as organisations.

Tayside Aviation has employed and sponsored many excellent
instructors most of whom achieved a high standard during their
check flights with the RAF Central Flying School examiners, and
this company will continue to offer opportunities to well motivated
aspiring airline pilots. I have no doubt that the flying instructor
route will remain an important way of achieving entry to the
airlines, and although it is disappointing to read some of the
churlish comments on PPRuNe by a few bad apples, it would be a
shame to let them spoil the whole barrel.

If anyone has any doubts about the high standards of flying and
instructor training provided by Tayside Aviation, I would be only
too pleased to show them RAF CFS and CAA inspection visit
reports.

I have no doubt that there are many airline pilots who would be
pleased to admit that Tayside Aviation opened the door to a
professional flying career, and perhaps they would like to add a bit
of balance and realism to this debate.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Mr Fraser. Thank you for that robust, thorough and reasoned response. They usually work so much better than the flame thrower technique.

I have no knowledge of your operation whatsoever. However, the negative threads aired here recently did not seem, to my mind, to contain much actual scandal. Mud slinging was my first impression.

All flying schools are having to grapple with minimum wage and other Labour government employment legislations issues. A tax audit in itself is a routine event. Questioning the safety operation of a CFS approved school long long established in the industry seemed dubious.

Flying school owners are usually painted in a terrible light by instructors. I have had cause to do so myself on occasion and often it is deserving. It is refreshing - in this instance - to see the other side of the coin.

Kindest Regards,

WWW

[MorePower]

LF
Firstly, I respect the content of the above posting. It is very good of you to put forward a company view.

Tayside Aviation, and you yourself, have definately helped many people break into aviation. For that you deserve credit, and never have I ever said that you have not helped people. I do not think it necessary for you to go to the lengths of discussing personal business of an ex-instructor (to the extent of council houses and caravans!) to prove this. As I said, I donot believe anyone has critisised you for not helping people.

Remember though, that this debate started with Comm Jam asking for any info on Tayside being "dragged through the courts" and not me. I did however respond to it with the knowledge that I had. As I said, I had been called by the Inland Revenue, who asked me for information relating to payment and hours worked while I was employed by Tayside Aviation. They also asked me if I was prepared to go to court on the matter. This is fact. I am not disputing what you have said, quite the contrary, it has been over 2 weeks since I have heard anything from the inland revenue. At this stage, it is important to remember that PPrune deals with RUMOURS. That is why it is called "Professional Pilots RUMOUR Network". Nowhere does the words "official or factual" appear in the title!

I am saddned to hear of "winter lay'offs". I am sure that this will have a detrimental effect upon staff morale, and sincerely hope that students do not suffer through lack of instructor continuity if they are forced to fly with someone else as their instructor has been laid off for 6 months.

I cannot agree with the statement that you made quoting "flying instructors exist to gain the experience required by airlines". This is absolute rubbish! You yourself are a flying instructor. Does this mean you are only doing it until you get an airline job? I do not think so! There are many people who enjoy instructing, and are either uninterested in the flying that airlines have to offer, or like myself are in no hurry to join an airline. Granted the bulk of young instructors only wish to hour build for airlines, and I have previously recommended Tayside Aviation to these types. However, do you really think that retaining an instructor for only 6 months to a year is of benefit to either the company or to the student? Surely if you made the instructors job more rewarding, then this trend would change.

On a personal note, I must point out that the information that you have voiced on me is incorrect. The fact is that I never came to you for a job because I "could not get an airline job". The fact is, I never applied for any, as I came to you with no CPL! At this stage in the game, I am more than happy instructing, and have not sought employment within the airlines. Yes, I did the BCPL and Instructors course with you. I paid over half the balance to you, not because I could not afford to pay the full amount (I hardly think you are the best person to accurately discuss my financial position), but because I warned by previous (and current)instructors that there was a possibility of being "stung" by Tayside. A warning, that I have found to be true! As you know, I have endevoured to settle my outstanding account with you, having written no fewer that 4 letters over a 5 month period. However, I have only received one reply from Tayside. i am still trying very hard to settle this. Not because I cannot afford it (it is a very small sum), but because the amount is in dispute.

I also must point out that I do not argue about most things. I simply stand up for my rights, and will not allow myself to be walked over.

AS LF has said above, Tayside Aviation does set high instructing standards. They must, as they are inspected regularly by CFS. Tayside is also a great place to hour build, and Central Scotland has to be one of the most scenically attractive places to fly in the UK.

As for the careers instructor package, I requested this deal almost 2 years ago, only to be told that I would be seeking airline positions soon. Well, I am still instructing! (through choice!).

What angered me most, as I have previously said, and as I said to you on numerous occassions, is that I objected to being paid the same salary as a junior instructor, when they were acting under my supervision, and I was teaching both IMC and Night without extra pay. However, I also remember staying for over 2 weeks extra notice to help out at your request. I could have quite easliy walked out the door there and then. You mention that you quite happily allow people to leave after giving no notice. this is very true to my knowledge, however I worked for tayside for over one year, and was never given a contract. Therefore, no notice period legally applies!

As I have said, many instructors have really enjoyed working at Tayside. I enjoyed the vast part of it. The other instructors are great fun to work with, and although the money is not great, you can live on it.

Finally, I have never tried to imply anything about Tayside Aviation, or Lovat Fraser. I am simply voicing MY OPINION on the experiences I had while working for Tayside. I would never expect anyone to prejudge a company or person on what they have read on PPrune. Judge them first hand from your own experiences. In other words, go work somewhere, and if you dont like it, then leave!

[invalid entry]

Mr Fraser,
My Flying career began in 1985 with an RAF Flying scholarship at Tayside aviation, which catapulted me to a career which now sees me flying a 777 to worldwide destinations. I for one have very fond memories of TA, the instructors and of you during that time.
Thank you

[Sandy Wings]

I completed an RAF Flying Scholarship and PPL at Tayside Aviation and this encouraged me to apply for sponsorship and become one of their first sponsored QFI's. I worked there for two and a half years and then went onto light charter work before joining the RAF as a fast jet pilot and instuctor. I have seen many flying organisations both civilian and military and I rate Tayside Aviation as one of the best. If it was not for the foresight of the management I may well have taken a different career path THANK YOU TAYSIDE AVIATION

[This message has been edited by Sandy Wings (edited 24 January 2001).]

[JSMYTHE17]

1. WWW you disappoint me. I am not sure if your attitude has changed since leaving Wannabees. The MD of the organisation referred to here is a similar character to your / our unmentionable friends in a well known school in Florida

2. The fact that the CAA has 'approved' this organisation is alarming and disappoints me significantly. The organistion which the CAA has approved has generated considerable stress amongst its professional flying staff yet is approved by the CAA. Looking at the MD's email above I can identify several stress factors as follows :

Loss of job 47
Change to different type of work 36
Trouble with boss 23
Inability to escape from incompatible colleagues 11
Financial worries 17
Inability to disentangle work from home life 11
Change of residence 20
Change of work respoonsibility 29
Bank loan 17

The numbers refer to a scale for stress levels - if you pass a total of 100 you are a danger to yourself and others

Who would want to go flying with a person under those stress levels. Where's their lookout

Come on CAA - don't let such an organisation demean your own previously high standards

3. The organisation above surviveson a government contract. Is there no stipulation in such a contract that you must pay a living wage. It is such a contradiction that a Government organisation is having to investigate a contract given out by another Government organisation - even more so with a Labour government in power. I urge all staff members to write to their MP's to sort it out

As a taxpayer I am also bothered by the use of my tax dues being used to create a low pay underclass

4. This organisation (TA) has been peddling the 'airline' carrot for years. It is an unproven thesis that experience gained in such a manner is relevant to the airline world. The airlines need to abandon the 1000 hour rule - it creates too much animosity all round : low pay, frigged log books, huge amount of envrionmental damage etc...

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Hey, I´´ve been instructing for something like 6 years now. I will allways be on the sid eof the Instructor vs Flying School Owner.

However, the Tayside deal is long established and the rules pre entry are clear. No point signing up and then moaning later.

As I said - I know nothing about the operation myself. But there probably are two sides to the story.

My attitude has not changed. I have not left Wannabes.

Cheers

WWW

[ComJam]

RUMOUR has it that the Government contract in question may well expire at the end of this year. Interesting to see what happens if it does.

[JSMYTHE17]

MorePower : I forgot to mention that I was impressed that you abandoned this organisation - a very professional thing to do and bodes well for your future career. You recognised the key features of CRM and drew a line - well done !

invalid Entry : You are pathetic. You walked on an aviation professional to get to your 'nirvana' and seem proud to boast abour it. The route you took into the airlines is now looking increasingly embarassing and judging by the share price of your company over the last few years your future is not very bright. I dread to think of the career ahead for a BA cadet - all those lonely noghts away - I'd rather be home every evening by 23.45

[eyeinthesky]

I did not follow the original story to which this thread refers, but it touches a chord which I'm sure many instructors would feel. The point is that the flying industry, and instructing in particular, has been taking people for a ride for years. Just because someone has ambitions to fly for an airline doesn't give you the right to treat him like a slave while he builds hours. He (and she, of course) is an asset to your business without which that business would not operate, and there should be more recognition of the mutual benefits to both parties. Irrespective of NMW considerations (which, by the way, some people think don't apply to flying as it is in the transport industry), it is inexcusable to expect people to attend work for upwards of 8 hours per day on a small retainer (or not) and the possibility of, say, £10 per flying hour, nothing of course if they don't fly. The parallel is a factory production line where you don't get paid if the conveyor stops. Can't see that lasting very long in the real world.

In addition, many instructors have paid large sums to obtain their CPL/FI and need some way of living to support themselves and maybe help pay off loans. It is no good saying that they will recoup it all when they join airlines, why should they take all the burdens? The flying school sells a service for which it is not rewarding the main tools which permit it to do that. I refuse to believe that a flying school which hires old C152s (aren't they all?!) for £135 an hour dual can't afford to pay its instructors more than £10 per hour. The customers would be / are horrified to learn how little of their dosh goes to the guy who is helping them realise their interest.

In terms of loyalty, also, I feel sure that flying clubs would get a lot more out of their instructors if they were happy and rewarded in their jobs, rather than sitting out the time until they get the I/R an 1000 hours they need.

The problem, of course, is inertia, and until clubs sort their attitude out and instructors collectively stand up for their rights they will continue to be taken for a ride.

I do not know anything about Tayside Aviation, but it would be heartening if it was to be seen to be leading they way in ensuring that its instructors are rewarded in the way they deserve. It should not take an investigation into NMW compliance at this or any other club to achieve this. :rolleyes:

------------------
"Take-off is optional, Landing is mandatory"

[Luke SkyToddler]

As a current Tayside instructor, I said it in the original thread and I'll say it again - I walked into this with my eyes open and I have no complaints now. Of course I'd like to be paid more - if there was an across-the-board wage increase for instructors in this country I'd be the first to applaud, but why oh why is Tayside being picked on here? The pay structure here is a damn sight better than many, many PPL flying schools in this country and a few of the so called professional ones as well. The hours you can log at Tayside in the summertime are truly astonishing and the RAF cadets are a breeze to instruct.

Now if we're gonna go pointing fingers and mudslinging, what about you Cabair instructors - who, RUMOUR has it, just got a 20% pay CUT the other week? By my calculations, I reckon Taysiders are a damn sight better off. The silence is deafening ...

[pitotheat]

There are several points raised in this thread.

Just because JAR has closed the door on the hours building route to the CPL does not mean the airlines will be falling over themselves for a newly qualified pilot with less than 200 hours experience.

Time spent instructing is invaluable in preparation as a commercial pilot. As an instructor you are constantly monitoring the other pilot's actions, developing communication skills across the flightdeck and increasing your capacity. Many airlines know this and will still look for these same qualities. In addition, not all those leaving training will get a commercial job straight away so it may be the only option to them.

More specifically, TA has been unfairly targetted when in fact they were only doing what all other training organisations were doing at the time.

The dilemna is that as student PPLs we want the cheapest, highest quality, most flexible, best equipped outfit to train with. As instructors we want all of the same except we want to swap cheapest for best paid. Well life can not always deliver all of our expectations. What other profession is put at the disadvantage of pilots? Whilst your peers are receiving grants, loans and other Government assistance to help them with their training costs would-be pilots get nothing to help them. VAT is payable on all training costs, the NVQ scheme has long gone; both the individual and training organisation get no relief from mounting costs.

I was fortunate to complete my BCPL and FIC with TA. I found that the staff were very able and professional. They delivered exactly what I wanted, they were not the cheapest but the extra cost was, in my mind, money well spent. Since then I completed my IR training with one of the big training schools who were dreadful. Much time was wasted because of over-stretched instructors and knackered aircraft that could not cope with the student numbers. In comparison TA stood head and shoulders over the 'big boys'.

I may add that I have never worked for TA and never intend to as I am now flying for a scheduled airline. I have instructed and managed at a flying club for a couple of years so feel I have seen both sides of the argument.

The bottom line is any change in the present system, without significant help from government, can only drastically increase the cost to the next generation of pilots.

Alas, I think we have passed the point of no return. If TA and other similar organisations close due to this action it would be a great pity and can not be in the best interests of aviation at all levels in the UK.

[JimNich]

Just for the record,

Did my FI course at TA last autumn over a period of four weeks. When I was finished and had to go back to work (Nimrod FE) I was GUTTED. I enjoyed my time there so much that had I been offered a job and had I been in a position to accept it I would have bit their hand of.

It would be a tradgedy if one of the best training establishments in this country was to meet its demise because of some bullish government inquiry.

[YouNeverStopLearning]

I notice that LF didn't comment on, defend or deny his breaching of the Working Time
Directive in my post.

[This message has been edited by YouNeverStopLearning (edited 09 March 2001).]

[Capt Homesick]

I did a large propertion of my training with Tayside, from Flying Scholarship and PPL, through BCPL (after a larger, more "professional" South Coast school took my monet, did a partial course, then announced I would have to wait six months for an examiner to become available! Later, I completed my FIC course at Dundee, and worked there as an instructor for three years.
I never asked to remain in full time employment over the winter- I preferred to work weekends only then, and use the week for studying. Yes, more money would have been nice, but you have to add a lot to the hourly rate to make instructing a livelihood. As a 509 instructor (in my next job) I worked it out as £50 per hour, at 500 hours per year, to make £25k pa. You can charge that for Commercial courses, but I suspect that many PPL students would opt for the microlight route if their bills went up that much...
As for instructing standards, I can vouch for them; they are excellent. After leaving Tayside, I became a CAP509 instructor at a very large FTO. When I was tested by CAAFU, I taught the sample lesson in the way Tayside taught me- I passed the approval at the first attempt, this was relatively unusual at the time.
I now fly jets for a living. The plan worked, I have fond memories of my time at Tayside, and I would encourage any wannabe to look at them as an option. Yes, you will earn very little as an instructor- the living is reasonable in the summer, but the winter is a THIN time. But it is worth it!
And while I am on the subject, I would like to thank Tayside, and Mr Fraser- we each delivered our part of the bargain, I hope he continues to provide a first flying job to enthusiasts.