Would you settle for this offer

[avicon]

Hi all

I want you to tell me whether this job offer sounds reasonable. If you were a CPL holder with no other flying experience under your belt, but had the money to pursue further ratings to make would you consider signing up for this offer.

Here's the requirement from the company.

The company is based in India.
YOu need an Indian CPL with 20 hours Multi time, IR and RTR/COP.
Total time required 500hrs. 300 hrs line training on A320
A320 TR certificate and current.
Class 1 DGCA medical.

(The line training and A320TR) to be self-sponsored by candidate)

The company guarantees job as FO with this qualification but no pay for the first 18 months. At completion of 18 months, company will induct you as FO with full pay scale.

Does this sound reasonable considering the tough economic times we are in.

[wiggy]

Lets get this right:

You pay for the line training and the A320 TR and also no pay for the first 18 months?

[Bealzebub]

So you pay them for 300 hours of line training (6 months+ if they have a training captain constantly available?). How much is that?
You then "work" for them for 18 months for free?
They then "guarantee" you a job as a salaried First Officer? What salary? Can they actually do that if you are not a national of that Country? How do you qualify for a work permit?

Only you can decide, but if it's of any interest, I have a bridge for sale in New York, that I can do a very good deal on.

[avicon]

The information provided is correct. I know it sounds crazy but it is not.

This is open only to Indian nationals. EXpats are not allowed to join.

The line training can be done with them, or can be purchased from any other company. The only thing that matters to them is that you have 300hr on type.

And yes, no pay for initial 18 months.

[Bealzebub]

No not crazy at all. In fact if I owned a company and could convince the authorities to let me have inexperienced pilots in the right hand seat who will not only pay my company for being permitted to operate there, but also to agree to work for nothing for the following year and a half, I would jump at the chance. Could this be extended to Captains as well, so that you get promoted upon payment of an additional fee for the command course, and then pay for the command line training, and agree to operate in the left seat for 2 years for nothing?

With such a massive reduction in costs we could cut our fares and completely undercut the market. The passengers pay less, the pilots pay more. I wonder if the cabin crew and engineers would be tempted by a similar offer?

Vanity publishing has nothing on this. Provided nothing goes wrong and the passengers are blissfully unaware, I can't see the problem at all.

In all honesty I would go for it!

[Kerosine]

In fact if I owned a company and could convince the authorities to let me have inexperienced pilots in the right hand seat who will not only pay my company for being permitted to operate there, but also to agree to work for nothing for the following year and a half, I would jump at the chance.With such a massive reduction in costs we could cut our fares and completely undercut the market. The passengers pay less, the pilots pay more.Well thank **** you don't own a company then! :p
The brutal truth I suppose is yes, it works as a short term business model for minimising staff costs, but is that sustainable?? Hope not.

To the OP, the offer certainly leaves a bitter taste in the mouth even in this dire economic mess. I'd say this company were completely taking advantage of desperate 200-hour fATPLs...

If you go for the job you will IMO financially be worse off than when you started. Apart from remaining current and having a few hundred extra hours you will be [further] in debt, under some kind of bonded scheme (one would assume) working for free. In 18 months we may even be able to see the light at the end of the tunnel that is economic growth after a year or two (take cover optimists...) so better offers may be available for the picking.

Tough call, depends how desperate your circumstances are... :bored:

[Bealzebub]

Well thank **** you don't own a company then!
I think that is a bit unfair. If this company can do it why shouldn't my theoretical company be allowed to compete on the same level playing field? ;)

Once there is an accident where this type of practice is cited as either a causal or casual factor, you can bet your life the relevant authorities will put a stop to, or severely curtail the practice, so the author might as well take advantage of the situation whilst he still can.

Paying for 300 hours of line training on an A320 does sound rather expensive, but at the end of it I suppose you do have 300 hours of A320 time in your log book? If the company then allows you to carry on working for them without you having to pay them a penny, what a bargain compared to the previous experience of working for them, where you paid handsomely for the privilige. You can always do another job in your free time to make ends meet, or tap up an understanding relative or something. In the meantime the airline only has to pay one salary so everybody is happy. What could possibly be wrong with that?

The only other question I have is what happens at the point the airline has to start paying you as a salaried First Officer under the terms of its guarantee? Perhaps I am being sceptical, but won't they be slightly more interested in the new people who will be paying them hard cash for line training, and the "graduates" who will then work for free? Why would you need to start paying a salary? Unless they promise to stop this practice after a certain number of people have signed up, or the pyramid can only get bigger? :hmm:

I think I would want to run this "guarantee" through a lawyer myself, if I was relying on it for any meaningful purpose.

[Kerosine]

The only other question I have is what happens at the point the airline has to start paying you as a salaried First Officer under the terms of its guarantee? Perhaps I am being sceptical, but won't they be slightly more interested in the new people who will be paying them hard cash for line training, and the "graduates" who will then work for free? Why would you need to start paying a salary? Unless they promise to stop this practice after a certain number of people have signed up, or the pyramid can only get bigger?

Bealzebub, agree with above sentiments; more holes than swiss cheese...

I think that is a bit unfair. If this company can do it why shouldn't my theoretical company be allowed to compete on the same level playing field?
Because you're on our side, not theirs! :ok:

[BigNumber]

There might be one possible advantge with this scheme.

Having completed 300 hrs Line Training at least you can remain current and build experience whilst looking for a 'real job'. It's easier to move from a job to a job.

I'm sure very few folks would choose to tough it out for 18 months in order to win the prize of an Indian Local Salary. You can dive out the door once employment is secured.

[Finals19]

There's only one word required here....regulation

It seems ridiculous that these low life companies are beyond legal recourse whereby they ask people to work for them for free (although equally the pilot is as culpable!!) I have seen this sort of rubbish before, and in fact in one instance the company were taken to task by the department of employment for not paying employees at least minimum legal wage. The pertinent word here is EMPLOYEE. This said, there are always going to be areas of the world where immoral and unethical things like this happen.

Its bad enough that people are being made to pay for their own training / TR. That to me indicates no commitment at all from the employer, which in itself breeds a very bad, intrinsically dangerous attitude. To take it further and work for free for 18 months in a so called professional airline operation is just plain nuts and is diluting future terms and conditions for all of us.

Its a totally short termist view and personally I wouldn't do it.

[Deano777]

If you're prepared to be raped & pillaged by this company then go ahead.
Nobody should be so desperate that they are prepared to work for free. Why would you even consider it? What's wrong with you people? :ugh:

[Bealzebub]

"Real Job" ? Are you suggesting this isn't a real job? Ok I know I you are paying them initially, but to be fair they are going to let you "work" on their airplane, so it must be a "real" job? They still let you work even though you stop paying them, so still a job. Then they "guarantee" to pay you a salary of still vague quantity, so most definetaly a real job.

If you are unhappy with this arrangement you can always jump ship to where? Not "my company" matey as I have adopted the same practice in order to stay competitive and my low experienced pilots are happy to pay me and then work for free. You can always try down the road, unless they too have decided they need to remain competitive with me and them and so on and so on.

This is what happened 20 years ago with bonding. One company decided it was a money saver and before you know it, most everybody else had decided on the same thing. Now it is almost impossible to find a company that doesn't bond in one form or another. Lately it is paying for your own type rating. Next, it seems you pay for your line training. Then you work for nothing for 18 months...24 months.....36 months?

That is why I say do it. Get in before the pyramid crumbles. The problem is that 2 years down the road there may be even less demand for 1000 hour First officers (who aren't prepared to pay us, or work for free), than there is now.

[BigNumber]

People are willing to engage in these schemes because they can see no way ahead. A dormant frozen ATPL with a MEP rating sat on their side board is hardly what they sat out to achieve!

They believe that IF they can get 500 - 1000 hours on a commercial type there might be a job. They are probably right if you give it some time.

I'm not sure that they are an 'employee' but more a private individual on a 'training scheme'. I don't think employment law can therefore be applied.

Remember: half the don't pay to fly gang on here are the first to be running down this track armed with daddy's fat wallet!!!:}

[Bealzebub]

Bignumber,

I understand that completely. Although some might have to punch their way through my veneer of sarcasm, I really don't blame individuals for being attracted to, or signing up to these schemes. To some extent I don't blame the operators for offering these schemes either. If the regulator and the insurance companies and the travelling public are happy with it, who am I to criticise?

The problem is that eventually it becomes self defeating. Like all pyramids it needs to keep enticing new blood to succeed. What use is a First Officer with 1000 hours experience on type, if all the airlines want is 250 hour folk who are willing to rent the seat for any number of months. When they then work for free, they are not quite as attractive as the "payers", but none the less far better than actually having to pay someone to sit there. Unchecked, I can see these pages in 10 years time being filled with threads saying "what use is 1000 hours on an airbus, when the airlines won't pay me and only want renters in the right hand seat?" Perhaps the next generation of 4000 hour captains will also need to pay their way into the job. It only takes enough people willing to do it, to procure their advantage and voila you have a market. Hopefully that won't happen, but you are seeing the early shoots now.

As for daddies and their thick wallets, I think I need to take a stand in defence of daddies. Firstly those thick wallets are getting a lot thinner these days. There seems to be a general perception that us daddies happily pander to any whim our offspring present us with, and that we will abandon all common sense and caution and sign away our homes and savings in an attempt to make the fruit of our loins look like Leonardo de Caprio in that film where he was draped in wall to wall stewardesses. Popular misconception I am afraid. Those thick wallets were not amassed by our collective stupidity. More so, our offspring have only recently stopped their 5 year campaign of targetted hatred against us, for having the sheer affrontery to bring them forth into this world. Although we are naturally relieved and bemused by this new found desire and ambition on their part, and we are reticent to do anything to discourage this single minded doggedness, we still retain a healthy suspicion, scepticism and sense of proportion for the most part. Alas, whilst we may be happy to lend them proceeds from the treasury, they will not be given the keys to the kingdom just yet.

Parents will rightly do all they can to help their children achieve a goal (whatever it might be,) but the idea that they will sacrifice themselves in the process, is a tad old fashioned these days. It might have been true up to the age of 13, but we have had to develop a sense of preservation during the subsequent 5 years, so that both we and the offspring actually survived each day! :suspect:

[abhi88]

Is it Go air? If so,dont...:} If not,then just go ahead and take the offer..Dont forget that there are a couple of thousand unemployed CPLs in the country...If you got the money just do it,even if this particular airline does not hire you,there are many others who will be willing to take you in after 18months..

[G SXTY]

More so, our offspring have only recently stopped their 5 year campaign of targetted hatred against us, for having the sheer affrontery to bring them forth into this world.

Love it! Next time the missus is feeling broody, I'll get her to read your wise words. :ok:

[BigNumber]

Hi Bealzebub,

Yep, flying certainly wouldn't pass 'due diligence' as an investment would it!

I feel rather cheated on the glamour part of my gig. They didn't film Captain Leonardo cleaning / unblocking the loo on his Citation Jet in North Africa having operated 'privately' for 20 hours did they.

[Reluctant737]

Bloody hell, if ever I smelt grudgery so sweet I cannot remember it!

To the OP, it's your decision, and uninformed replies from uninformed posters on an internet forum can never help you reach that.

Are there any other jobs that will actually pay you to fly?

If not, and if you can afford it, go for it... And regarding people considering this immoral to experienced pilots, India's a :mad: up country anyway, might as well treat it as a playground until the economy kills it completely...

Ad

[disco87]

I don't know Reluctant, I do find myself agreeing with you on here quite a lot, but I still think that this place is the source of some good advice. I can see the arguement in paying for a TR, but working for free just seems to be ridiculous. Even if I was looking for a job i'm not sure that I would take this.

[BelArgUSA]

Might be applicable to increase some of such airlines cabin capacity (Available Revenue Seats) by 1 extra seat - the F/O seat... Hopefully, these F/O will also receive "miles" if these airlines are member of "One World" - or "Star Allaince"... Will they get free catering, or pay for the Coca Cola...?
xxx
:}
Happy contrails

[Flintstone]

Bloody hell, if ever I smelt grudgery so sweet I cannot remember it!

1. No such word as 'grudgery'.

2. Sweet grudgery? Oh dear, and we blame the Americans for mangling our language.

3. Either way you're wrong. What you are reading are comments from people who (rightly) blame those who have eroded the terms and conditions in this industry. The first step was SSTR's and we are now creeping toward the inevitable conclusion, idiots who pay to fly over an extended period.They've ruined it for all you wanabees who will find it increasingly difficult to get ahead in aviation without a big bag of money.

[Reluctant737]

Indeed but I got my point across, and it isn't half boring reading the same old phrases over and over again... plus a word (or phrase) must be used first before it is a word (or phrase), so you could really use that argument against any word in the English language! And if we're going to be picky, I did not say 'sweet grudgery', I said 'if ever I smelt grudgery so sweet', which is perfectly acceptable if you have an ounce of creativity within you. And I guarantee, had I used the same phrase whilst talking to you face to face, you either wouldn't have picked up on it, or accepted it because as humans it is not the technicalities of communication which are important to us, it is the ease with which we understand a channel of communication. But that's being picky.

Unless, you're not one of the 'Oxford/Collins dictionary is my Bible' types are you? :ooh:

Either way, in response to your literary accusations against me, I should like to defend my case with a saying very close to my heart, "Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools." Otherwise we would live in a dreadfully mundane existence :(

And in response to your opinion regarding the destruction of T+Cs, I stand by my original argument - India's economy and aviation industry is already FUBAR, so there's not a lot to be said for looking after it. Have you ever looked at the payscales in that part of the world?

Plus, I wouldn't regard these people as 'idiots' - you could use the same argument about anyone, for any person who claims never to have contributed to the degradation of anything is talking out their bumhole. Didn't you ever chase the girls round at school and ruin their day? Oh, that might have just been me...

Like I said, the 250hr pilot's playground :ok:

edited to say - plus, it's not the 250 hr guys who are ruining it for everybody else - they are trapped within a vicious circle, created by each other, airline management, politicians and others in so called positions of power. Ambition is a terribly powerful thing and will drive the otherwise sane indivudual to actions of insanity (paying for line training). So really, the blame lies with the guys already in the coorporation - they are the ones who have the power to prevent this, they are the ones with access to BALPA, they are the ones who hold a responsibility for the new guys. I do my best to maintain moral within my company - whenever I meet a skipper with a grudge I'll try to work it out with him, and whereever possible I respond to all correspondence from my company with an input from myself.

I personally feel that the blame is 50/50.

But that's a different discussion, the guy just wants to know what we think about the deal offered to him, not to rip him to shreds for what he's considering. Now that is wrong.

Ad

[Flintstone]

Reluctant.

If you just want to mess about playing devil's advocate or more accurately, troll, you're wasting your time. As you're clearly a fan of quotes you'll know the one about it being better to have others think you a fool than to open ones mouth and confirm it.

It so happens I do know a little about the Indian market thanks. Just because it's a mess you're telling the OP it's alright to make it worse? A rather immature thing to write.

So the experienced pilots (who didn't pay for their own type ratings) are responsible for that idea? You really are way off the mark, aren't you? If the wannabees refuse to pay how long before the companies have to change their ways? It's the wannabees problem created by wannabees so they should sort it out. Don't try pointing the finger at those of us who never contributed to the SSTR disease. Physician, heal thyself.

As for berating the OP for considering this, why not? Any wannabee who hopes to see a return to sanity would do so. Anyone else has another agenda or (like myself) is not going to have to consider bribing their way into a job.

[Reluctant737]

I'm not going to be drawn into a debate about it - you have your opinion, I have mine.

And for clarification, I'm not blaming you, or anybody else, and top hat to the guys who made it on merit.

But we all have a hand in it, and pointing the finger at one group of people is wrong. The wannabes are the fuel that create the fire, but fire cannot be created on fuel alone. We have a right to help each other, but sometimes that control is taken from us by the powers that be. Perhaps one positive point to manifest itself out of this economic state is that less people will have the means to 'fuel' this fire.

Ad

[Flintstone]

Why are you finding it so hard to see where the blame lies? Bias induced by having paid for your own TR perhaps?

Try this. Company 'A' offers SSTR's. Experienced pilots already working do nothing and so the situation remains unchanged. Wannabee #1 then takes the bait, buys a type rating and a bean counter in Company 'A' says "Eureka!".

Now, you tell me. Where in that scenario did it all go wrong?

[Reluctant737]

But don't you see? Where the majority of the blame lies is irrelevant - it affects all of us in this industry and therefore it is the responsibility of all to do all we can to prevent it happening.

To clarify what I think, imagine a group of kids having fun at the local playing field. Now, if another, smaller group of kids come strolling up and does something that makes what the original lads are doing less enjoyable, it is their fault initially. But once that problem has been noticed, if the original group of kids don't do anything about it, then they are then also to blame for not taking control of the situation.

I think we are all in one big bed - this industry is full of problems, and the 250 hr self-paid line training cadet is just one of them. But once these problems intrude upon us as individuals and threaten our jobs, we are also to blame if we do nothing about it.

I don't disagree with you - if everybody just stopped paying for type ratings/line training etc, as soon as a few Captains dropped off the end of the corporate cliff, the problem begins to resolve itself.

But is that really feasible? Don't get me wrong, I don't condone this in the slightest, and I think we have reached a fork where decisions have to be made. But unfortunately, the better of the two roads to now be taken would require the coordination and compliance of thousands of new cadets refusing any schemes such as this. And we all know how many bigshots are out there, so is that really a possibility?

Or do we wait, let it happen (the older guys are lucky, they'll be out of all this soon), then make the best out of the future? Personally, I have every intention of working my way up in whatever airline I join in the future to a point where I can have an impact on decisions made - after all, it's my generation who will be in control of this industry in twenty or thirty years, that's the natural way of it. I can identify where you're coming from, and it's commendable, and I want the best for the industry I work in, of course I do, like everybody else!

I wouldn't have a problem if these 'schemes' were confined to the rung of the ladder at the very bottom, where guys are trying to take their first steps onboard. But yes, once it spreads upwards and jeapordises people's jobs that are well earnt, it does become a problem.

But what do we do?

[Flintstone]

Stop. Buying. Jobs. It really is that simple.

Ever seen what happens when a pondful of tadpoles doesn't have enough food? They turn cannibal. Know what the RYR FO's are complaining about these days? Lack of flying because it's all being given to the newbies who (guess what?) bought their jobs. "Great" say the newbies as they fly around in their big shiny jet. Until they hit 500 hours and the next wave of job-buyers starts appearing in the crew room.

Never mind telling 'us' that we need to help. You stitched your colleagues up when you bought your own TR's and you'll be stitched up by the next generation. Karma.

I don't see how I can explain it in any simpler terms.

[Reluctant737]

I did what I had to do to get a job, it really is that simple. I never claimed to be something different, but I had to take what I was offered.

I care for this industry as much as anybody, if not more, and my passion for flying is unquestionable - Ryanair have one of the toughest assessments going, and it's easy to combat that statement with, "Well explain how so many people are walking through their doors!" It's because they have nowhere else to go - I should imagine 70% of pilots who have been furloughed in recent months have had a crack at FR, and when you consider how many that is, the pass rate suddenly doesn't seem so high.

So regardless of other people's opinions, I am proud to work for the company I do.

I must say, however, I breached the 500 hour mark a few months back - December saw me fly 74 hours, and last month I flew upwards of 80, which aint bad going considering the times. Sure, our load factors are down, but there are less than a handful of routes down by 50%. I would estimate we're seeing on average about 75-80% what we did last Summer.

As a company, we continue to expand, and the view you put forward above is very untrue but a common misconception of RYR. We're set for a busy year, and we need people to fill the new seats that are arriving. I'd bet money that none of those aeroplanes will need to be put into storage, and I remain convinced that everybody will have enough work to tie them down, at least until the Winter.

But we cannot blame the new guys purely for this - Ryanair's been offering this scheme for years without any problems.

If you really want somebody to blame, turn on the TV :ok:

[Flintstone]

Reluctant. In the words of the Egyptian washerwoman's friend you're in denial. Having spent £100,000 on your licence, rating, uniform, medical and whatever else you have to buy to go and fly for RYR I suppose that should come as no surprise especially as in your own words you're now not even certain if it's what you want to do. No surprise either that you try to shift the blame elsewhere. If I'd wasted £100,000 I'd be feeling pretty sheepish too.

From another thread (started by you):
at least an actual bus driver can afford to pay the bills! Who designed this system anyway? Oh errrr sorry, it's people like me innit

I rest my case.

Economics 101. Supply and demand. If nobody buys these schemes then the likes of MOL won't be able to sell them.

[Reluctant737]

Things were a little tough some months ago, that's to say the least! But even back then I was referring to how easy it is to point the blame at somebody else. I find it ironic how you're lecturing somebody else about this when in fact you are guilty of your own accusations.

You feel very strongly about your opinion, that's respectable, but now let me ask you this - through this two hour rant against my beliefs in this thread, what problems in this industry have been solved?

I rest my case.

Politics 101 - How do you convince tens of thousands of people to follow one line of action without causing uproar, mass protest, and without the odd fish slipping through the net?

And that's a question to you, on the basis of what proposition you've put forward.

p.s. £100,000 wasted? I am an airline pilot, am I not. That's fundamental :ok:

[disco87]

I would have to say that you can't just blame wannabes. When things started to go it was down to people already in the system to take issue with it, however as things have gone wannabes are sometimes left with no choice but to pay for things. They are not going to spend 70,000 training then stop because of a moral arguement.

It's a 50/50 thing where all of the blame isn't with one party.

But then what do I know, I'm not really in either camp. But hey, I'm just offering my opinion.

[Reluctant737]

Indeed - the thing is, I've heard it all before - flying for RYR, I probably have this conversation once a week, if not more, albeit within a more pleasant aura. My generation of pilots have a responsibility in the future to lay the bricks of stability that the current generations are failing with. I'm not referring to pilots, we're mere pawns. I'm talking about management, but again, most people who enter airline management will succumb to the temptations of making a quick buck, which in this industry is usually at somebody else's expense.

It's not difficult, the whole thing's a vicious cycle, and everybody has their part to play in maintaining equilibrium. And with everything being such a mess, opinions will be varied and infinitely divided.

Flintstone, old mate, I'd love to debate this further, but I really don't see it going anywhere, so I'm going to have a couple of drinks and retire to bed, I have the delights of a few days worth of earlies coming my way.

I'd shake your hand if I could, but seeing as that's not possible, I'll leave it with a c'est la vie, and fly safe :ok:

Ad

[Flintstone]

Disco.

50/50 where? How do the pilots already working earn any of the blame? They can't.

Can you blame the companies? Yes, to a degree but who accepts the offer and hands over the cash thereby rendering these schemes workable for the companies?

There are companies who will pay for your TR and bond you. I've worked for those and turned down the others. I could have bought my jobs but didn't. If I can take the moral high ground (as have thousands of others) why should we be expected to take any of the blame for this mess?

We all have choices. What defines us is how we behave when our choices come back to haunt us and affect others.


Reluctant.

Rant? Hardly. A quick flick through your posts however does seem to reveal a propensity toward insults and the profane on your part. Well done on not reverting to type thus far. A sign of emerging maturity that perhaps, if it continues, will one day allow to to see that the 'buy a job' brigade really are major contributors to this state of affairs.

Clearly you were not "referring to how easy it is to point the blame at somebody else". You quite clearly stated that you were now (then) unsure if you'd gone the right way. If you perceive my voicing an opinion as "lecturing" though perhaps you've not come as far along the maturity road as I first thought.

Why have I bothered to point all this out to you? Because at some time in the future people will search these threads. They'll see that some of us managed to work our way up through the ranks and they'll see others who bought their way in and by doing so weakened our standing as a profession. Now too they'll also see that even after £100,000 it isn't always rosy and if just one of them chooses not to buy their way in it's been worth it.

I get it, others get it but some (those receiving bank loan balance statements in six figures once a month) pretend not to.

[Reluctant737]

Flintstone,

I see as well as anybody else - it is you who fail to see that in me. As it transpires, I took the correct action - I am happy now. And I was displaying a natural reaction to somebody who'd just put a huge pile of books on their head and was still working out whether they could handle the balance. In the end I could, and the decision was right for me. No pain, no gain, that's what they say.

And you should be happy to, I forfeit, you win :ok:

Life, if you can't beat it, make the best of it,

Ad

[Bealzebub]

Bloody hell, if ever I smelt grudgery so sweet I cannot remember it!

Perhaps nobody was begrudging the authors potential actions, but simply sounding a cautionary note? I am not sure about the olfactory response to a grudge. The cliche collectors might say "revenge is sweet," although I have never heard begrudge described in quite the same way? In any event, a lot of the opinion proferred on these forums might well smell similar to a bovine enclosure on a hot summers day, if such a comparison was needed.

If there is an opportunity out there and it works for you, then I say go for it. However that should be tempered with great care and an understanding of the possible consequences. It is the latter that is often difficult and neglected.

If you are hungry, you won't care where your food comes from. However the following year when you are trying to eek out a living growing grain, your efforts will be destoyed by the free sacks of the stuff raining out of the back of C130's overhead. So you can't earn a living and you can't buy the seed for next years crop.

Likewise if you pay to gain work experience with a company, where will that work sustain you if other companies also satisfy their labour requirements from those behind you who are also willing to pay? I suppose you need to hope that you can run faster than the tide is coming in?

As an unchecked trend, it would seem inevitable that the soon to be "1000 hour experience type rated pilot" will be no better off than todays "250 hour wannabe". Nevertheless, if somebody can profit from this scheme before it negates the end goal, then good luck to them. Success will be hoping than you continue to stay one step ahead of the advancing tide.

[Flintstone]

Reluctant.

It's not about winning. It's about recognising the mistakes of the past for what they are and avoiding a repetition.

Like tattoos ;)

[disco87]

Perhaps when pilots saw these schemes coming in there could have been some action on their part to stop them being implemented, strikes etc. Thats what i was trying to say.

I dont know if this was possible, I was just trying to put the point out there thats all.

[WindSheer]

I see you are from Aus!
Have you ever been to India? 18 months would be a challenge!

[Adios]

There's a very good reason they won't take expats. It's because they would have to go through international courts to get their teeth into them when they walked out after getting 500 hours. An Indian company can sink their teeth into an Indian citizen quite easily, but an expat could tell them to take their 18 month contract and shove it where the sun doesn't shine as soon as they feel they have enough experience to be competitive elsewhere.

[Flintstone]

:O Disco, I don't know why I'm laughing here. Maybe it's the thought of a relatively complicated solution being mooted when a very, very simple one was available all along.

Scenario 1. Airline announces a buy-your-job scam. Pilots approach their union. Union approach management. Negotiations drag on for months. Strike occurs. Passengers inconvenienced. Non-flying staff can't work, lose pay etc. Industrial relations suffer plus a load of knock-on effects like disgruntled passengers going elsewhere, reduced revenue resulting in job losses. That sort of stuff.

Scenario 2. Airline announces a 'buy-your-job' scam. Wannabees say "No thanks. We'll wait until you need us enough to pay our type ratings".

Those who agreed to buy their jobs brought this on. Why should those who didn't pay their way in risk their jobs to protect those who will gladly bend over? Nobody forced them to go that route, just like Reluctant 737 said he (they) chose to. I'm tired of the whining and demands for me to stand up when I never contributed to the problem and in fact have been warning against it for years.

Actually, why not ask Reluctant and his colleagues to strike in favour of the next wave of wannabees? Reluctant? What about it? How many of you guys and girls will tell MOR you're not working unless he starts giving out free type ratings?

[Bealzebub]

Perhaps when pilots saw these schemes coming in there could have been some action on their part to stop them being implemented, strikes etc. Thats what i was trying to say

Why?

As you will discover, pilots are no different from anybody else. We like to whinge and moan in the collective, but we are quite happy to jump at opportunities that benefit us as individuals. We all naturally pay lip service to the greater good and all that, but we all still have an overriding responsiblity to our families and ourselves. Just as can been be evidenced in this and many other threads, we are instinctively selfish and motivated by inducements. Certainly when we feel threatened we are happy to wrap ourselves in morality and the protection that our community either affords, or gives the illusion of affording.

When we are not personally threatened, there is little motivation to put ourselves, our families welfare, or our jobs in serious jeopardy, or indeed in any form of jeopardy, so naturally we don't. It wasn't that these deteriorations in the terms and conditions were not evident years ago. They were, it was just that it didn't affect us and wasn't likely to affect us on a balance of probabilities. The companies were not stupid. They didn't impose a radical shakeup. They took a medium to long term view, that by introducing new working practices at the entry level, they would complete the metamorphosis over maybe 10 to 15 years. It was a clever strategy. The incumbents didn't seriously object as they were unaffected. The new joiners accepted the new terms in the often misguided belief that after a period of time the terms would somehow revert back to those that existed previously. They didn't. In fact there was no motivator for improvement because too many people were snapping at the new joiners heels to take up those jobs if they didn't want them. The would be "hoppers" or career climbers who sought to use one company as a a stepping stone to another, often discovered that their aspirational target adopted similiar practices making the move less practical, less desirable and often less possible.

These new practices then moved further down the chain, and manifested themselves in the forms of pay for training, pay for uniforms, pay for car parking and other forms of previously included administration costs. Much of what happened, not only eroded the basic T&C's but shifted the employment risk largely from the employer to the employee. The salary structures (often attractively packaged,) evolved so that a much greater element only became payable if the employee worked a very high number of hours to achieve it. Forget about sickness, you wouldn't be able to afford it any more!

Now the basic training structure is reinventing itself so as to place the entire risk burden on the applicant. Indeed the structure has become a new profit center, offering things that an individual can pursue that might never have been a consideration in the past. This thread is but one example. The current exceptionally weak economy has only served to accelerate the process that had already been started some time ago.

This is the new reality, and it is probably very naive to think that it will change for the better in the short to medium term (10 to 15 years). Certainly the economy will evolve for the better or worse, but as long as there are enough people willing to accept the new realities there is unlikely to be any radical change. Without doubt there is clearly a great deal of denial in the marketplace, many wannabes believing that things will revert to a previous point in history if only they accept the current status quo?

Given the dynamics and inherent uncertainties of any market, and couple that with the ever present laws of supply and demand, the optimistic outlook is that eventually more and more people will not view flying as a sufficiently attractive career. The smart money will move elsewhere and the supply side will weaken. An increase in demand at some future point will then probably cause T&C's generally to improve, but I think that it will be many years in coming. One of the wild cards is the perception of status that this job still elicits. That will distort in favour of supply and in itself delay the normal onset of any improvement.

The answer I am afraid as always lies with the buyer, you! If and when you stop buying the product, the seller will have to adjust the offer. As long as you are still queing up to put down your money, they will find ever more imaginitive ways to relieve you of more of it. It has always been easy to sell a dream. The reality of ownership may be much more onerous, particularly if the golden goose stops laying those golden eggs, or you can't sell those golden eggs because every other Tom, Dick and Harriets expensively purchased goose is laying them to?

[Flintstone]

Actually, why not ask Reluctant and his colleagues to strike in favour of the next wave of wannabees? Reluctant? What about it? How many of you guys and girls will tell MOR you're not working unless he starts giving out free type ratings?


We're still waiting for the answer on this one aren't we?

Solidarity among the SSTR-ers. Is there any?






Edit. Having read this thread I think I have an answer. For some of them anyway http://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment/361217-ryanair-rated-pilots-holding-pool-2.html