When does volunteering become “working for free”

[pilotads]

Volunteering for a club seems to be a common thing for both new and older professional pilots. When does it get to a point where you might be "working for free" or taking the position of a paid pilot.

[Howard Hughes]

When the type of operation requires a CPL in order to be conducted!!

If it only requires a PPL then you have no choice but to work for free, oops I mean Volunter!!:ok:

I have no problem with people gaining experience in club aircraft, ie: glider towing, parachute jumping. But if the operator is selling services to the general public (ie: tandem jumps to non club members) then surely the pilot should be getting paid and hold a CPL?:hmm:

[bushy]

"Not for profit" organisations should NEVER be issued with a charter AOC, then the problem would go away. AOC's are for commercial operations.

[Troopie]

Volunteer positions are excellent in my opinion, they keep idiots out of the paid positions. :D

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

If the owner of the aircraft or "Club" is making money ( profit ) from the operation.

Presently many parachute operations require only private licences but earn a hell of a lot of money from the aircraft, pilots deserve to be paid.

Do not think for a second that if CASA stipulates an operation "private", the pilot is any less entitled to payment.

Do not ever ever ever work for free.

[bentleg]

Do not ever ever ever work for free.

To take money you must be CPL. PPL has no choice - they can cost share the flight with the pax but cant accept money for their services :{ .

[ContactMeNow]

If a PPL engages in PJE, does the pilot have to "cost share"??? :8

If your parachute operator says they are not making money on tandems, here is the math...

Tandem $300/each

$600 revenue for the flight
0.5hrs Airswitch time for a C182 being crosshired out at around $150/hr dry
Fuel 0.5hrs @ 50L/hr @ $1.50/litre
Tandem masters pay = $40/tandem

Costs:
$75 - aircraft
$37 - Avgas
$80 - tandem masters
$15 - landing fees
$20 - Packing
$ 207 - Total COST of direct operation costs
$393 - Profit and indirect operating costs

Now if they wanted a DVD of their tandem jump add $80 ($40 of which go to the tandem masters and $5-$10 to the video mixer)

With these figures it IS POSSIBLE to have the plane go up and down with just one tandem on the C182. Sortie times will be less same with fuel costs.

Yes I do understand that advertising, Marketing, company minibus, rent, rates, etc will all add to the cots of operation, but when you think about it from "walk in to walk out" a tandem operation from 10,000' takes 60-90mins (depending if they have a video/DVD or not), multiply this by 10 tandem bookings a day (5 loads) and 10 tandems on a nice summers day is nothing! you have your self a nice $1800 plus per day operation or a C182 that is grossing $1200/hr....

Now even if you take out $30 per tandem for advertising costs etc, you still have a nice profitable operation

But your boss cant afford to pay you.....

If you want better figures send me a PM, I did them a few days into my 1st job and then showed the boss, few days later I was getting paid! Im sure they wont miss $40/hr or $20/load. It is also common for parachute operations to have the pilot stay on base or close to it, work something out with your boss about rent and wages...Most single pilot operations cant afford to have their pilot walk out on them, so the boss will treat you more like an "asset", if not im sure he can see the HUGE line at the front door for all CPLs wanting to fly for them...NOT!!!!! they all wanna get paid too....


It didnt take long for me to change the mentality of my boss, so maybe its worth having a good chat with them anyway about it......:ok:

All the best
CMN :8

[Horatio Leafblower]

Well established Aero Club I know of is currently suffering due to well-established animosity between current president (long-time preening C185 pilot) and the past president (who is the CFI and 3,500 hour ATPL holder).
Current president has decided to "help the club out" by volunteering his expertise and his C185 to show tailwheel endorsement candidates the ropes, thereby:
a) minimising the hours flown by the candidates on their tailwheel endorsement training;
b) robbing the club of 5-10 hours of revenue flying; and
c) robbing the instructors (who have all spent their own time and money, to some extent, making sure they are back-seat competent) of their quid pro quo.
What a guy! :ugh:

[Zhaadum]

Egg will be on his face when some wannabe tailwheel pilot stuffs it and his C-185 pride and joy gets trashed. KARMA!

Z.:ok:

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Bentleg, sorry, but with respect, you are wrong.

Go and read CAR 206, this is purley for the purposes of categorising the type of aviation operation ( i.e does this require an AOC ).

Industrial Relations is a whole other issue, go to their web site are test your theory against their definitions.

There are private companies moving their staff around the world in their own B737, this is categorised a private operation by CASA, these pilots do get paid.

Do not ever work for free, if you do, your resume will find its way into the round filing cabinet under any Chief Pilots desk.

[404 Titan]

Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower

bentleg is referring to the licence held by the pilot, not the class of operation. There is a big difference.

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Hi 404,

Makes no difference.

[pakeha-boy]

rockthrower...

....where have you been??? or what do you do????

...everybody works for free ,whether you like it or not.....when I show up for work,I only get paid for the hours(credit I fly) ...dont get paid for the checking the paperwork,the pre-flight,the post flight,saying gidday to the paxs as they board,walking around the airport in my uniform giving the company free advertising...the list goes on(they call it ...part of my duties,but they dont pay me for it)..........you must be one mean SOB to employ with that attitude......

...when employed by a Commercial Airline, one must do things for free ...to get paid for the things they pay you to do....

...try putting sugar on ya wheetbix mate,instead of gunpowder....PB

[pilotads]

I always wonder how CP's would know you worked for free. I worked for a small skydiving mob does that condemn me because most small skydiving mobs don't, pay do they just presume (I was paid for that job) but i've done some stuff to get clubs and schools out of a one off pickle with duty times doing comerical charters just to get some free time in bigger aircraft (i got an endorsement out of it). Is that enough to say i don't get a second look...

What gives the CP to presume the work wasn't just for freinds or paid in some other way and just those every now and again flights, thats what i'm trying to see with this post

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

PB,
Trolling through PPrune you'll frequently see pilots complaining about poor conditions, not being paid correctly, being "forced" to fly unservicable aircraft, generally being treated like crap. Have you put any thought into why this happen ?, the answer in short is because idiots with pilots licences work for free or are willing to work for ten dollars a day less than the guy before him.

"Where have I been" you ask, i work in GA in australia, i have always worked in GA. I have never ever worked for less than i'm entitled too, that has caused me to be unemployed in aviation for a period of about 18 months during the past ten years, purely because i would not work for crap.

I get paid a salary presently, as a pilot, being a pilot includes, paper work, wiping down oleo's, greeting customers etc etc, if you are stupid enough to have accepted a poor paying job, either live with it or grows some conjones and do something about it.

None of what i have said is in reference to a not for profit organisation.

Pilotads,

CP's vary, but generally they have been around the industry longer than the applicants they are vetting, so logically they have a fair idea which operations are legitimate and which are not, its not hard to look in your logbook and work it out.

Some CP's will not give a rats if you have worked for free, these guys are a minority.

An example: a few years ago i was the CP of a GA company, a young pilot rang one day to follow up a resume he emailed, i noticed on his resume where he was flying and easily worked out for who, i dressed him down about flying for free, even though this operator was making a tonne of money from his flying.

He gave me a list as long as your arm of Pathetic reasons why he was "working for free", i need the hours, it's a good aircraft to have hours in blah blah blah.

As you can guess he was told he would not be considered as his experience was not relevant and people like him cause the demise of employment conditions in Australian GA, he burst into tears, apparently i was the fourth person to tell him to sod off and working for free is the actions of a scumbag, ignore my adive if you like, welcome to the real world where people have families to feed and mortgages to pay.

[pilotads]

Thanks LRT. you obvioulsy sound like you are going to make a very good employer if you are not already. I would and I think most pilots would never take up long term hour seeking unpaid work. However I would rather do a few unpaid flights if that means i get an endorsement and don't have to pay an employer to get an endorsement. Never would it be a standing arragnement just whenever they needed a hand, also i hope never to pay ICUS on flights the provider is already making money off. Stuff like that paying for endorsements and paying for ICUS when you know the flight is already covered doesn't sit right with me but flying once in a blue moon for just a stamp in the log book seems like a good financial benefit to the pilot. I hope that makes sense especially to all the empoyers out there

[pilotads]

welcome to the real world where people have families to feed and mortgages to pay.

Oh and becuase you brought it up. This is the new generation coming through we don't have anything to morgage or spouse to help pay for endorsements and renewals.

[the wizard of auz]

My spouse cost me a fortune and couldn't help me buy a packet of tictacs. and my mortgage would be paid off years ago except I'm fighting a constant battle to keep the dollars up to her. I don't know that not having a spouse isn't such a bad idea.

[404 Titan]

Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower
While I agree totally to the jist of your posts. I too was a CP of a large all twin GA operation in FNQ before moving on to the airlines in 2000. My comment was relavent to the original question asked by pilotads. If the operation requires a CPL then a PPL can't do it. If the club operation requires an AOC and CPL pilots then a PPL again can't do it. For the life of me I can't think of one operation in Australia that because it is a private operation employs PPL's and pays them for this service. All the operations I can think of require CPL's or ATPL's.

[bentleg]

I can't think of one operation in Australia that because it is a private operation employs PPL's and pays them for this service. All the operations I can think of require CPL's or ATPL's.

Thank you 404. PPLs cant get paid. CPLs (and ATPLs) can.

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Are you exercising the privledges of a CPL or PPL if you tow gliders on the weekend, its a private operation right, parachute operations require PPL, but usually employ CPL as they are less likely to muff it, ( more training / experience ).

I have worked for a Parachute operation, i have an ATPL, but as this was a private operation i was exercising the privledges of my PPL, end of CASA's interest. I was paid for my time, a day rate infact.

Parachutist use the the aircraft as an elevator, gliders use the aircraft as a tow truck, CAT Trucks in AD used their queen air to mobilise and demobilise their staff.

Whether a company employs a CPL or PPL is not important, its what licence privledges are they exercising, is it operating on an AOC.

CAR 206 makes an interesting read.

[ContactMeNow]

A CPL/ATPL enables the pilot to receive "remuneration" for their flying duties. So where does one draw the line as to getting paid (money going into a bank account, getting super, being taxed :mad: etc) or by getting paid with an endorsement, rent, food, bills paid.

There is a thing about people having a go at jump pilots, now this is purely an observation and was not my position when I was jump flying, but many jump pilots get free rent; close to the airport, free booze, pay no bills, get to use the company phone for personal phone calls and get to drive the company bus around (free advertising for the boss)....So with this it ouwl be safe to say you have no expenses for living. Well you need to buy your food! In addition to this your getting $10-20 odd per load....

Now from experience not too many small DZs will be doing more than 5 loads a day in a SE piston aircraft...Each flight takes around 0.5-0.7hrs

5 loads x $20/load = $100 for the day
(0.5x5) x $45/hr = $112.50 for the day (also take into account rent, bills etc)

Both pay "packets" will require the pilot to be on site all day.

So what does one do when there is a rainy day or worse a rainy week? The pilot that is employed at an hourly rate earns nothing, but still needs to pay their own rent, bills, phone, fuel etc. Or the pilot that gets it all for working there at an "reduced" hourly rate (which at the end of the day is only $5 less/hour).

I know the above senario fits alot of jump pilots, so please think about what you entail as "working for free, or a reduced wage" :ok:


Food for thought
CMN :8

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

CMN,

"A CPL/ATPL enables the pilot to receive "remuneration" for their flying duties", go and read CAR 206 and CAR5.107ish ( talks about what you can do with said licence {privledges} ).

CAR 206 states what is and is not a commercial operation ( requires AOC ).

To operate within a commercial operation, as defined by CAR 206, you must hold a licence that allows you to fly for hire or reward. The Hire or Reward bit is in reference to the aircraft.

At no point does it state anything to do with pilot renumeration.

So, a parachute operation ( for example ) does not meet the criteria of CAR 206 as a " for Hire or Reward " scenario, therefore, it is private category, it is not for hire or reward ( the aircraft ).

No offence, I'm really suprised you guys know so little about the basic legislative frame work we operate within.

There has been many topics about whether parachute and towing etc etc should be charter or similiar, with the legislation in its present for it is not.

[Bendo]

Where in the CARs is the expression "hire or reward" used?

I was going to respond to your last reply on this thread and went looking for it - missing in action, as they say. There is no statutory reference to remuneration in the CARs.

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

CAR 206 (1) b i
CAR 206 (1) c
CAR 206 (1A)

CAR 5.105 (1) a thru c ( note: any type of operation, Private, Airwork, Charter, RPT).

You are quite correct, there is no statutory reference to "Renumeration", therefore there is not limitation or guidance issued by CASA, refer my earlier statement regarding Industrial Relations ( pay/renumeration is in the realm of IR, they do not care about CAR 206 ).

Wiz, Perhaps you have chosen unwisely with your spouse, why just down the road at Hay Street Kal you can apparently buy a spouse, you pay by the hour :} .

[Bendo]

A bit of Sunday afternoon pedantry:

remunerate 1. to pay, recompense, or reward for work, trouble etc. [L remuneratus, pp., given back]

Waaaaaay back when I did my exams (early 1990's) there was a reference - I think it may have been in a CAO now repealed, or in the CARs - to the privileges and limitations of a Commercial Pilots Licence. One of the privileges was to be able to operate an aeroplane "for hire or reward". This provision did not relate to the operation so much as the expectation that working pilots should have a higher level of training and experience than their amateur counterparts.

To operate within a commercial operation, as defined by CAR 206, you must hold a licence that allows you to fly for hire or reward. The Hire or Reward bit is in reference to the aircraft.

Do you have a reference for this? :confused:

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Remunerate or Renumerate, happy with the pedantics, that wy iem a pirot.

The reference is in the CAR's above.

Way back when i did my exams in the early 1990's, there was a great amount of simplicity implied in the exams, simplicity that infact does not exist, OLC has tested and tried all of these regs in some form.

To expand on the simplicity,

1) you must hold a CPL or ATPL to work in all categories of operations ( refer CAR 5.105 above ), plus,

2) an operation that uses an aircraft for hire or reward that fits into a definition as per CAR 206, is there by a commercial/AOC holding operation ( be that AWK, CHTR or RPT ).

So 1 plus 2 = in broad terms means a pilot must hold a CPL or ATPL to operate in all categories of operations whilst under the blanket of hire or reward ( as per CAR 206 ).

So water than down to dumb a$$ language, to operate an aircraft for hire or reward ( as per CAR 206 ) one must hold a CPL or ATPL. Note: never was "Remuneration" involved in this process.

If the operation is categorised IAW CAR 206 as a private operation none of the above applies.

[the wizard of auz]

Wiz, Perhaps you have chosen unwisely with your spouse, why just down the road at Hay Street Kal you can apparently buy a spouse, you pay by the hour .
YEAH, now I'm told. I'm pretty aware that my choice was flawed. :eek:

[MCKES]

Would there be a problem if you had a PPL and was doing jump flights to build hours or free, or is it only a problem if you have a cpl and are getting free hours when you are entitled to be paid?

[ContactMeNow]

How I read the regs is that an OPERATOR can receive "hire or reward" from flying in commercial operations (re:CAR 206). So your boss providing that he/she holds an AOC they can get "hire or reward" from the public using their services.

Now a pilot must hold atleast a CPL to fly for this operation, a CPL is needed for the boss to receive "hire or reward", as many of you have stated there is no reference to the PILOT receiving "hire or reward". This matter comes under the pilot award wage (see AFAP.org.au) and even then the award doesnt cover all states (last time I checked).

So yes the CASA regs state an operator can receive renumeration from its services, but nowhere does it state a pilot can receive renumeration.

Maybe CASA should add to the "privileges" of a CPL/ATPL is to be renumerated as per the award...instead of staying you can act as PIC of certain operations.....

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

MCKES,

Yes i personally think that is the root of the problem, irrespective of PPL or CPL, you are using a skill that has cost you money to have and the parachute company is making a tonne of money from you doing this, so you should be paid.

Why should your generosity keep someone out of a paid job, why should the operator you are working for have an unfair commercial advantage by having idiot Pilots working for him/her for free when his closest competitor pay his staff ?.

If a CPL or ATPL holder was doing what you are suggesting, they are only exercising the privledges of a PPL, so no different.

Remember being paid is an entitlement under the Industrial Relations ACT, it has nothing to do with CASA.

PPL or above, do not work for free.

None of the above applies to not for profit organisations.

Wow this topic just keeps going in circles, DO NOT WORK FOR FREE, PPL OR OTHERWISE.

CMN,
CASA does not care about pay/awards etc etc, its not their realm.

It will not be their realm until there is and accident that costs lives and the ATSB finds the reason the accident occured is because the PIC had to hold down three jobs to survive and was fatigued, main reason being the aviation company did not pay him to fly their paasengers around, because flying for free was the norm in our industry.

If you are stupid enough ( not you personally ) you can hold a CPL or higher and fly charter or RPT for free ( also add pay for endosements etc etc to that list ), many idiots do, there is no law within the CASA Leg about that.

[ContactMeNow]

MCKES,

Yes i personally think that is the root of the problem, irrespective of PPL or CPL, you are using a skill that has cost you money to have and the parachute company is making a tonne of money from you doing this, so you should be paid.

Why should your generosity keep someone out of a paid job, why should the operator you are working for have an unfair commercial advantage by having idiot Pilots working for him/her for free when his closest competitor pay his staff ?.

If a CPL or ATPL holder was doing what you are suggesting, they are only exercising the privledges of a PPL, so no different.

Remember being paid is an entitlement under the Industrial Relations ACT, it has nothing to do with CASA.

PPL or above, do not work for free.

None of the above applies to not for profit organisations.

Wow this topic just keeps going in circles, DO NOT WORK FOR FREE, PPL OR OTHERWISE.

CMN,
CASA does not care about pay/awards etc etc, its not their realm.

It will not be their realm until there is and accident that costs lives and the ATSB finds the reason the accident occured is because the PIC had to hold down three jobs to survive and was fatigued, main reason being the aviation company did not pay him to fly their paasengers around, because flying for free was the norm in our industry.

If you are stupid enough ( not you personally ) you can hold a CPL or higher and fly charter or RPT for free ( also add pay for endosements etc etc to that list ), many idiots do, there is no law within the CASA Leg about that.

Agree 100% mate!

Its a case of oversupply of junior CPLs and the mentality of "I will just do it for 6 weeks or so to get a few hours out of it, or until i get 300hrs TT."

I recently came across an article in my local newspaper about a certain flying school at BK advertising for new students. For starters, how can their course be AUStudy approved (dont centrelink know how much it costs to be a pilot? And if you or your family have that money, then there is no need to get help from the government??

Secondly, their main marketing point was this pilot shortage in all aspects of flying, yet they mainly focused on international airline operations.... I was actually planning on turning up to one of these open days and asking; "How long after my training do I get the phone call from all these international airlines?". Pilot shortage no, experienced pilot shortage yes.....:ugh:

anyway back on topic :E

[Xcel]

Would MAF be volunteer, charity, annoyance or the hand of god?

[Keg]

For a subtle dig to work it actually has to be true. Given that MAF actually pays the people who fly their aircraft the subtle dig is in fact just plain wrong. :E

[Xcel]

retract above statement however $9 /hr is hardly being paid, but my point is now wrong in any event...

[bushy]

One of the reasons why GA is so impoverished is that operators have to compete with organisations which get Govt handouts (tens of millions), and others that raise money from public subscription to support their commercial operations.
I know of one outfit that claimed to pay their pilots proper money, but this included the value of govt provided housing, and vehicles. Pilots were paid according to how many kids they had.

Charter AOC's should not be issued to "not for profit" organisations.

[Xcel]

or a recent event in Nt, rpt mob given govt assistance only to drive down prices and runout local operators who cant compete. then govt money dries up and the pull the pin leaving noone to take the slack... not to mention the pilots who spent hard earned dollars on a ground school and endo only to be givent he flick with no consolodation.

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Did pilots at this former NT company have to pay for their endorsements ? ( C208 - how much ? ).

People may be crtitcal of MAF, they operate on a very different ethos to the rest of us capitalists, but they seem like a happy mob. Respectfull and i haven't heard of them cutting corners and breaking rules, "making" pilots fly unservicable aircraft over weight etc etc.

Ethically i think MAF are an industry leader.

[captain high]

I know this is going to sound really petty, but this time I can't bite my toungue any longer -when is everyone going to learn that the phrases 'work for free' and 'fly for free' are not grammatically correct (drop the for!).

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

The spelling bee was last week, for your information :} .