Pay To Fly threads (Merged)

[Kelly Hopper]

My understanding of employment laws in Europe, although they vary from one country to another, is that there is a minimum wage of around €8 per hour. This is designed to protect the employee to some extent. Any employer also must comply with a miriad of other legal requirements such as having employee liability insurance and is bound to provide a "duty of care" to workers.

How then can anyone paying to occupy the R/H seat in an airliner be legal? He is not getting the legal minimum wage yet he must hold a professional certificate to be there and at the same time denying the position to other, trained and experienced pilots, trying to earn a living from being there. What contract are these guys on? Surely if they are paying the airline then they are the employer employing the services of a crew, an airframe and pax? They have chartered the flight?

The flightdeck is a place of work and he must be a worker! If not what is he? What "duty of care" is there when the employer is charging the employee instead of paying him?
If he is NOT an employee then surely this has legal ramifications? The aircraft insurance covers professional crews who are employees of the airline, not "pleasure flyers!"

Note definition of professional:

A professional is a member of a vocation founded upon specialised educational training.

The word professional traditionally means a person who has obtained a degree in a professional field. The term professional is used more generally to denote a white collar working person, or a person who performs commercially in a field typically reserved for hobbyists or amateurs.

In western nations, such as the United States, the term commonly describes highly educated, mostly salaried workers, who enjoy considerable work autonomy, a comfortable salary, and are commonly engaged in creative and intellectually challenging work.[1][2][3][4] Less technically, it may also refer to a person having impressive competence in a particular activity.[5]

Because of the personal and confidential nature of many professional services and thus the necessity to place a great deal of trust in them, most professionals are held up to strict ethical and moral regulations.

So what if our wannabe has an accident in the workplace? Who would be liable? What if he caused an accident? Could he be held personably liable?

I am sure the airlines in question have lawyers who have cleared the practice but I feel it really should be tested in a court of law?

[fly_antonov]

As I found out recently, not all EU countries have minimum wage regulations but free work is not allowed unless it is part of an internship agreement, as a volunteer for a NPO or similar, which is not the case for P2F, simply because they pay to do work. Basically it is illegal.

In most countries, all of these still need to cover the volunteers for "on the job" accidents.

To pay to work has been unheard of until now. Slavery has a "work against one' s will" factor, P2F is a voluntary sacrifice.
The idea is that it' s a crime if someone kills you but it' s not if you kill yourself.

If they can clear insurance and liability hurdles through paperwork, they can not clear ethical, moral and labour law issues.

[Ronand]

Well the operator sees it as line training, in his eyes you pay for training.... You are not employed by the company so therefor it is not called work.
So they don't break any law by this. It's as simple as that.
Yeah the situation sucks, but it is legal....
Let's take Windjet for an example, You pay 60k for T/R then get a 1 year contract with a low salary, then most likely your contract will not be renewed after 1 year and abt 600h on A320.
They can ask any price they want for the T/R if people are willing to pay.... They actually have a long que waiting for this deal, It wouldn't be surprising if they start asking 80k for the T/R soon... they are not breaking any law by this. It's just simple economics... it's all about supply and demand like anything else in this world. If Windjet was my company I would probably ask for 100k and there will still be more than enough willing to pay.... LOL:D

[al446]

I am roughly with Ronand's take on this but more tomorrow.

[fly_antonov]

Windjet got their thing "right".
Not only do you have to pay maffia rates, if you don' t know anyone on the inside I hear that you don' t get in.

An employer may not charge its employees any training fees to work for them. Airlines that receive commissions through TRTO' s to cover it up, are doing the same, indirectly.

SSTR' s are legal as far as the employing airline do not receive any direct or indirect compensation. Paying for line training or hours on type is illegal because you are an active crew on duty, an employee. It would be legal if you' d do it only on non-revenue flights, as a form of aircraft rental, not otherwise.

The problem is that no one can challenge these schemes but the CAA' s and labour courts. The not so mentally gifted cadets will not consider themselves victims and will let go. The unions aren' t doing anything about it.

[Ronand]

@fly Antonov
Not sure If you're right on this one mate.... Take fly Niki for example a small austrian airline operating a few A320's. They are offering self funded typeratings and line training with their own TTRO. That means you pay them direct.. I really don't think this is illegal as they make no secret out of it and are advertising it on their own website!

[BoeingMEL]

..and for what it's worth, I respect your contempt for certain airline practices.

However:

1 In European legislation, duty of care and minimum legal wage are two distinct (and unconnected) statutes.

2 Safety: What evidence do you have to support the suggestion that P2F crew are less safe?

3 Those who agree to bonding and/or repayment of training costs sign binding contracts. All plain and clear...with eyes wide open. There is no arm-twisting and if they don't like the terms they don't have to accept them.

4 Asking existing employees to recommend appropriate candidates for future employment is a longstanding and well-proven practice.... not just in the airline profession/industry.

Life can be harsh but these are the facts of life. Good luck all the same. bm.

[mikehammer]

BoeingMEL

A question (not a challenge to your argument, just a question) if I may:

Purely theoretically, and to help me understand European employment law, why isn't half of your point number one (let's leave aside the other half about duty of care as it is a distinct statute) relating to minimum wage legislation a factor likely to overide your point number 3? I am assuming that if a Pay2fly candidate was to take action (as I say a theoretical question) and demand the minimum wage, then the charges an employer makes would be contrary to the statute on minimum remuneration for workers?

At the moment I am inclined to agree with the freelance argument, that is to say, those who pay to fly are not workers (presumably this is the successful argument made by the (non) employer, and therefore the legislation does not apply. However I would be interested to see an (just for the sake of example) Eastern European migrant worker come to the UK and pay to gain experience in a kitchen or harvesting fruit on a farm, before being elligible for proper employment - would the lobbying be more intense? I think it would.

[BoeingMEL]

Mike, according to the information I received from employment experts, the crux of the matter relates to contract terms (are you really employed?), permanence (length of agreement) and bonding/training terms.

18 months ago a considerable amount of research was carried out for interested parties and the terms and conditions of 2 UK LC carriers and 1 holiday/charter airline were scrutinised.

I have to say that (according to EU employment-law experts) no breach of the (then) legislation could be identified.

As for taking action against one's airline-employer, IMHO that would be curious way of making one's self persona non grata in the profession!

Hope this helps, I had the great pleasure of being in this game in happier times for almost 25 years and feel greatly for young men and women now joining the party. Good luck to them all. bm

[fly_antonov]

I think that the principle of paying to assume responsibility and liability can not exist. I' m not a lawyer nor a judge but this defies any logic.
It is a moral and ethical issue.

Boeing MEL, let me respond to your points.

1. I did not suggest that the 2 are connected. I commented on the thread starter about the minimum wage status, which does not apply everywhere.
I added that even anyone working for free under approved status must usually be protected for on the job accidents.

2. I think that a large percentage of P2F represent an imminent danger. There have been numerous reports on this. I question their judgement and decision-making skills unless they can easily afford it and they' re good pilots. Even then, I wouldn' t question their great spirit of selflessness.

I mentionned the CAA' s because they usually cover all aspects related to civil aviation regulations, not only safety (though that is their major activity)

3. Just because you sign a contract doesn' t make it legal. A court can rule the content of the contract illegal if it does not respect laws and rights. Bonding is a legal practice since the company receives no monetary compensation, only guarrantees.

4. If the P2F is a candidate-sponsored selection process, then it should take place on non-revenue flights.


Ronand, I believe that most airlines will not hide it until one of them gets a big fine or loses big on a lawsuit. I believe that they are thinking that it' s legal and until they' re proven wrong, no one will stop them.

I think that we should split the two legal cases of the self-employed P2F and the employee P2F.

I believe that the labour laws we' re discussing here is "rights to pay", one of the basic employment rights. Even in countries where there is no minimum wage regulations, any salary must be paid out.
Salary sacrifice schemes must usually be precisely pre-approved programs.
Illegal deductions like paying for company training is not allowed.

If you' re self-employed, like Ronan says, it should be legal because all the labour and employment rights don' t apply and I believe that that is how Ryanair are covering their *ss.
I would add that there is a condition: your tax office or whoever delivers you the permit to practice self-employment need to allow you to start your practice on an insolvent balance sheet or low/negative net-worth (unless rich enough to pay the P2F cash). In some EU countries, this is not possible.

It would be nice to get some law-people to join the discussion.

[Kelly Hopper]

The inland revenue will also not grant self employed status if there is only one employer. There needs to be multiple employers.
Really the whole industry is ducking and diving around laws and getting away with it only because it is spread across multiple jurisdictions. Perhaps the reason P2F doesn't exist (yet) in the USA is because it is all under one jurisdiction???
Like I began, it needs a test case in court.

[Kelly Hopper]

'Just noticed a big ad at the top of the page advertising pay2fly courses in the UK.
Come on you guys at pprune. You are supposed to be supporting the industry, not actively engaging in it's destruction.
Or is it ultimately every pilot really is a prostitute?

[Sciolistes]

All the ANO says about PT and aerial work is that it is when flying for "valuable consideration". It would indeed be a strange world if flying hours themselves were considered "valuable", just think of the ramifications for the PPLers out there :\

[mikehammer]

BoeingMEL

Thanks for the reply. Yes you are indeed quite right:


As for taking action against one's airline-employer, IMHO that would be curious way of making one's self persona non grata in the profession!



Just a purely theoretical question to help my ignorance. :ok:

[potkettleblack]

Even if the line training TRTOs were required by law to pay the minimum applicable hourly rate all that would happen is that it would be front loaded onto the course cost anyway. A 30k 500hr training cost on an A320 would just go up to 34k. Actually probably a little bit more than that to cover for the "administration" expenses of putting the trainee onto the companies books.

And you can guess that this added cost will in no way deter the canon fodder.

[beachbud]

We are looking for specific details of all pay to fly schemes please.

This is fast becoming a threat to safety as airlines become aviation academies with passengers onboard.

This is not an idle post, straight facts please. I would be happy to be contacted directly. (ps, not media but this information will go where it matters and has been requested.)

[email protected]

[FrankAbagnale]

lol...yeah mate, youre lukin to do it yourself :P
do your own research :P

[flaphandlemover]

hope it helps..

Ryanair and Easyjet are offering such products....

Gulfstream Aviation in Florida as well...

[beachbud]

Thanks, we know which companies are doing it.
It's the details we need and perhaps a line to anyone who has been through it and got burned.
Again,
[email protected].

PS. I am PIC and CCQ on A320/A330, and so applied for a job advertised. They stated "A320 CCQ A330" just before Christmas. I applied just just to see and was told I was too qualified. They wanted only not type rated pilots. Another form of pay to fly, lock the pilot into a contract scheme. It was to stop pilots leaving after six months. Only one years work was guaranteed though...

[6000PIC]

Nobody , bar a tragedy , will stop these schemes as long as there are wannabes in the world with daddy`s money and a destructive attitude to jump the queue of experience and skill. Both parties , operators and their clients , should be named and shamed in the meantime. It`s amazing how ego and fantasy preceed reality and common sense. The sad thing is people will die in the future because of actions of companies and individuals in these pay to fly schemes. Good luck on your endeavour but you are 5 years too late.

[Cloud Bunny]

Hmmm, good luck. It would be a dream come true if these schemes were to cease and we could get back to something approaching respectability both in terms of the image of the profession and our pay and conditions. However, as you said you are after facts then i should point out that Ryanair dont run a pay to fly scheme. I dont think Easy do either, its just the pay is utter ****e!

[LIMA OR ALPHA JUNK]

Good luck beachbud,

These schemes are an abhorrance and my fear is it will take an accident before something is done about them. With all the unemployed pilots around due to the demise of XL, Zoom, Globespan etc there is no reason for these scams to exist. Anyone who does know the terms and conditions of this disgusting exploitation should furnish you with what you need :ok:

[ei-flyer]

flaphandlemover,

Not wishing to start an argument, but Ryanair offers no such scheme.

Couldn't possibly comment on easyJet.

[beachbud]

Ryanair don't? What do they do pls?

[tigermagicjohn]

Yes we all agree it is not right, however they are no better or worse than any other low houred pilot being trained by airlines in the past with low hours, only difference is that the airlines used to pay training, TR and bond them.
The only difference from paying and not paying, is that when paying you have a chance to jump the que of people/pilots who can not afford to pay for TR or line training.
(It is wrong, I agree, but their skill level is as good as anyone else - so that is not a valid argument unfortunately) When selected, trained and operative, they are as good as a pilot who would have been sponsored by the airline themselves! :=

[tigermagicjohn]

"flyprototype" If you can afford the Pay to Fly, I doubt you have a major problem with money, it's more likely only those with more money then sense can afford such "programs" - so I doubt they will actually cause any accidents due to this. This is more wishfull thinking by those "wannabes" who can not afford such schemes.
Nothing apparantly indicates that "these" pilots are less able, more tired than others.
I could do such program if I wanted eventually, and I would not be tired because of lack of money, personally I wouldn't do it because I think it is an own goal, even though I admit I was tempted in the past.
But given a chance with secure job, would I pay for a TR to get myself an advantage, sure I would. Number one first!:ok:

[Dreamshiner]

Eaglejet facilitate paying for hours and a TR if you need it. They are unashamedly a commercial company and take a cut as the middle man.

Another element to this is flight schools selling these schemes to their current student body or using it as a marketing tool to those new to the industry who are blinkered to the glamorous lifestyle we all lead ......

The link takes you to my post on thread concerning OAA and their role in this sorry mess.

Link to an earlier post on OAA P2F Thread (http://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment/399371-more-easyjet-pilot-slavery-deals-oxford-aviation-academy.html#post5389812)

However I would add I don't think its just the schools and companies such as Eaglejet who are fully responsible (they do take the lions share). I commented on another thread and gave a list of who I think are culpable in this sorry state of affairs.

Link outlining villains in the P2F story (http://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment/405544-hope-new-guys-first-shoots-2.html#post5527202)

[fly_antonov]

It' s a long queue of jobless pilots at the Space Mountain in Disneyland and there' s a bunch of clowns selling them fast-track lane passes.

[tigermagicjohn]

Well the point is, the comedians who do pay those 500 hours + TR, will be in front of the ones with minimum hours on a PA 28/Cessna, it is all about being prepared and ready for the career ahead.
But it's all about getting your timing right, if wrong, yeah, then you screwed with a TR and 500 hours on type, better than 250 hours in a PA 28 though!

[tigermagicjohn]

Most people knocking it, is because they are envious they can not afford it themselves! And they are afraid they even get further back in the que!

Normal human reaction, but the reality of the world, is that everyone will look after number one first, somebody will win and somebody will loose, that's the law of capitalism. If you can't afford to loose your money, don't go to the casino and gamble with it!
Similar situation as with this, it's a huge gamble, and depends do you have the stomach to raise the stakes? At the moment the odds are still probably better at the casinos.

But mostly, get down and get real, start at the bottom and work upwards!:ugh: Lay the foundations!

[A340rider]

Well said Tigermagicjohn....I agree...

If bloody Airlines did not ask for such high total hour and hours on jet and gave low hour wanabes a chance then these hour building scams/companies woodnt exist...YOURE FAULT!!!!YOU CHANGED AVIATION..NOT WANNABEE....:*.....Greedy tight sods

P.S. You old schools pilot dont rattle on abaout the bloody turbo prob job and air taxi job root you did as there is bearly none around and tehy want more experience tahn Jet jobs...:ugh:

Thing has changed....so shoulde you lot...:D

[punk666]

Wow well said TMJ,

Fact is do you honestly think these wannabes want to pay another £36K on top of their £60K+ debt ??? The answer is NO.

But they do it to boost there chances and fact is it will when the timing is right, a TR + 500 hours will stick out like a soar thumb compared to 250 hours in a C-150 unfortunately.

500 hours on type right now wont get you a job but in about another year or so it will, and to gain 500 hours it will take about a year minimum, so you will be finished with 500 hours and have recently flown the plane (some companies require you to have flown the type within 3 months).

But someone please explain to me how can a PTF scheme with royal air maroc affect TC's in the UK? Shouldnt people be happy that PTF is not in europe (eventhough it is) but in a 3rd world country helping them develope, plus alot of airlines would have gone bust if it wasnt for pay cuts and pay to fly.

[beachbud]

Many thanks for all your replies. Looking for some detail.

[theshed]

Some amazing thoughts coming out here and well, it's pretty obvious why companies are 1) doing these schemes and 2) getting away with it.

I can assure you 500 hours on a jet or even 500 just + hours on a jet will not make you stick out like a sore thumb. Companies will have no desire to give you a job. First point - the 500 hours that people are gaining in the UK are gained over the summer season and on some schemes there is no guarantee of getting 500 hours. So, at the end of the season you're not wanted anymore and therefore have no employment. The next season comes along, you apply for a full-time job but surprise surprise there is an other crop of your compatriots ready and willing to pay up leaving you with no job, your no longer operationally current (you may well pour more money into keeping your rating current in the sim) and the cycle begins.

How can you people not see what is happening. Airlines now see this as a way of making money and as a side effect, filling their summer/seasonal employment gap. What on this earth makes you think that once you have 500 hours on type the airlines are going to look at you over the near one thousand experienced guys out there in the market that are current on type, or the guys coming through the 'old school' way of turbo props etc and more importantly the guys fresh out of the schools that they can send through their current training schemes and utilize their fresh flying skills and, as has become normal, have them pay for their rating. To pick up the point of high hour requirements for airline entry can you not see all this is going to do is drive them higher as airlines will soon only want to hire high hour experienced Capts./TRI/TREs to sit beside the never ending flow of Line Training FO's sat in the right seat for their summer hols.

I don't unfortunately have the answer but guys please don't fool yourselves, be smart look at what's happening and make informed decisions don't be driven/blinded by the somewhat childish dream that lives inside us all.

PS guys my english/grammar teacher at school had a hand full with me but come on, in the age of computers - spell check. It shouldn't be this bad should it??

[copywrite33]

Under the minimum wage legislation, a person must be paid if they are doing genuine and productive work.

The only exception is when someone is classified as a volunteer, which means they do not have set hours, and they are free to be absent whenever they wish.


Does the statement in bold not prove that this is illegal? Or are you a volunteer on P2F schemes?

On a side note, if people on P2F contracts are "self employed" are they not, by law, required to carry the appropriate insurance (public liability etc)??
I work as a self employed rigger and am required to show my insurance certificate to any new employer or venue i work for. I pay an arm and a leg and the worst that could happen is something I hang falling down (this isn't a flippant remark), i would love to know how much it would cost to be a "Freelance Pilot".

When i eventually get into flying i won't P2F, firstly because it is ruining the industry and secondly I don't see why i should pay a company for me to do a job for them, kind of counter intuitive really!!

Look forward to opinions.

[perceval]

P2F does exist in the USA .It actually started there . But it's generally limited to smaller companies , Night light cargo ops and such ,but there's also a few regional airlines using similar schemes , although a bit more hidden .(like paying your entire training 0-ATPL in a Flying school including 3-500 hours LT with their sister company as part of the 1500h total required , with a 'guaranteed' interview at the end ) .same stories really .
Regarding the comment on P2F in Morocco ('helping a 3rd world country develop ????? ' ) .How does stealing paid employment from local as well as expat aircrew and lowering the potential expected income of our Moroccan colleagues help develop ANYTHING ?
Basically it all p.......s me off , because it makes my (and YOUR) chances to get a decent job that much more difficult .

[manxcat]

BBC News - Interns 'exploited by employers', says TUC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8565287.stm)

More and more graduates are accepting so-called internships, or extended work experience programmes, which carry no salary.

Some were so desperate to get the experience, they were even prepared to pay for it, the TUC said.

In some cases that could cost thousands of pounds.

Is this P2F?

It seems airlines are not the only companies to have adopted this.:=

[Superpilot]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Pay2Fly schemes are unlawful according to British Employment Laws. However, I can see why it would be difficult for lawyers to spot the illegality. It's due to ignorance of how pilots obtain their qualifications and are licensed.

Lets remind us, in order for an airliner to fly from A to B it must be crewed by two ______ pilots (I will simply refer to them as pilots for now). Ignoring the fact that airlines use agencies to mask the truth, assuming the two pilots are direct employees. Ordinarily they both have to be paid a mimimum wage.

However, in the P2F scenario, the inexperienced pilot is not paid at all. Instead he is charged a heavy sum with the airline claiming that they are providing "training" at a cost and that too to another company (the TRTO) who decide to send their own "trainees". This assures that the outsider sees the whole affair as a wholly commercial transaction.

Here's where they have managed to delude people within employment law who might have otherwise spotted the illegality of it all... Most lawyers would assume that if it is training then the airline is within right to receive payment. However what they fail to see is that "training" is for the unqualified. As a type rated pilot one is fully qualified to do a job and requires no further training according to the regulatory body's rules and regulations. Sure they require supervision but that's not the same thing.

Clearly then, line "training" cannot be used as an excuse for an airline to say that they are providing training services. It is not a form of "training", it is the airline selling right hand seat time for the individual pilot to build experience and avoiding the need to therefore hire a fully paid employee who they would have to otherwise pay a minimum wage.

If the airline claims they are truly providing "training" then the new pilot is not qualified and shouldn't be operating a large aircraft with fare paying passengers.

[FlightDetent]

Superpilot: Quite interesting train of thought. :ok: Perhaps there's light at the end of the tunnel after all?

FD (the un-real)

[tigermagicjohn]

First "Superpilot" - I think the issue is a bit more complicated then you seem to dream of. Also most of the airlines are non UK based as far as I know, so UK and even EU law would not even apply.

Your belief that being Type Rated makes you qualified is a bit utopic, yes you have proven you are can hand the beast, but your experience level on the machine is equal a little BLIP in time.

But if you think about it, at least for the Boeing, what is the price for the TR alone?
For £25000 or £29000 you get 300 or 500 hours included with your TR! :8
Viewed from a financial point, that is not a bad deal, to be honest I am not sure how accurate these offers really are. You are actually paying £60 - £85 per hour, and you are getting an experience which 100 times more usefull then flying around in a PA 28 or C152!

Now I instead of choosing to spend £80.000 to go to Oxford, but go modular - I can for less then Oxford price, get full package + 500 hours on a 737, incl type.
So if someone chooses a different path for a career then Oxford, maybe in the end same money going out, but you will actually have gained a major advantage, and skipped the que by a few thousands of pilots currently today instructing or freshly out with CPL/IR.

I am playing devils advocat here, if someone has the funds, and have the will to want to take it that far, does that mean he is a bad pilot? Who is not qualified?
Doubt so, furthermore being illegal, how? It is up to each indivudal to accept private agreements and contracts.
I am not defending these kind of operations, its just the way it is now for few.

[fly_antonov]

Tigermagicjohn, P2F comes on top of your TR.
TR costs mentionned are estimated minimum costs.

The problem is the principle, not the price.

[Superpilot]

No. No. You have failed to understand the point I'm making. First of all I am of course only referring to British Airlines who participate in P2F schemes, I am aware of: Astreaus, TCX, First Choice, BMI, EZ (the ATP P2F scheme). I'm not an idiot, I know this is going to cure this disease world wide.

Secondly, regarding Type Ratings and Utopia. How can you read what I just wrote and say that? I know that a type rating alone is somewhat meaningless without time on type but when looking at an issue in light of the law one must determine and state facts that are correct according to definition. Otherwise the whole affair is open to pure abuse, 150 hours, 300 hours, 500 hours and even 1000 hours on type are being sold now! It's out of control.

[tigermagicjohn]

I agree the principle is wrong, but the way it is being attacked does not have any foundation.
Main arguments are:
a: The pilots are less skilled because they pay.
b: Or it must be illegal to pay for work training.

Regardless from any angle, besides the moral wrongs, it seems that as long as there are to many pilots, supply and demand, we are locked in this problem.

Some will take a short cut, nothing we can do with that is it? Of course if the tide turns, with regards to supply and demand, they will have wasted all that time and money, however if it still rains in another 2 years, they will at least have some more skills then the rest of us. Each and everyone has to decide what risk they are willing to take.
We all know the morally rights and wrongs, maybe they airlines in the past was giving to good terms and conditions, and that they are not able to use the same business model as before. Many airlines have been having to much expenses, and this has been a way for them to survive. Maybe the alternative would have been them being able to employ less people, and there would have been less jobs, and of course less profits, they are not a charity shop!

The market forces dictates what is possible and not, when traveling how many of you have been standing in a queue while someone arriving late with a priority boarding just walks passed everyone and gets one first, he paid a little more, and he might get lucky and wait a little shorter then the rest, but it has cost them more!

Not defending the system, it is just the way the world works - just like on Saturday night in London, if you not on the list, you might not even get in that night until they close, because you have to stand in the longest queue!
Is it fair?:E

[tigermagicjohn]

"Superpilot (http://www.pprune.org/members/32074-superpilot)" The airline dictates what they consider is a qualified pilot. That might be 500, 1000,1500 or 2000 hours on MJRT, a TR rarely qualifies you for any job - the TR is just your basic skill.

Requirements for job might be 500 hours on type or similar, that means if you have a TR and 500 hours on a PA 28, you are not qualified to get the job, that's why they call it training.
Before airlines paid you for the training, now these airlines are going down the drain, they do not have enough money it seems to do this, or they have found out they might get the pilots to pay for their own training, if this means you can with low hours make a direct entry as an FO, avoiding spending 3 - 5 years instructing and getting hours by all other means, this might not be a bad alternative.

Face it, if you pay part of your training directly with the airline you will get a job with after, you are all setup, within a certain time you will have the minimum experience required to get jobs with most airlines. Alternative you run around instructing few years, in C152, PA28 - or whatever, you get 1000 hours SEP, most of it trough instructing- it is a great experience, but you will still start with the airline, but maybe few years later. I doubt instructing brings in that much money either.
So make those calculations versus each other, only difference you might be 3 - 4 years ahead of the one instructing C152's, because you already inside with the company, and they do expect you make captaincy sooner or later. Of course this is regarding companies where line training is associated with a job.

Of course line training alone, without a job is risky, still you will be ahead in the queue, even if it will cost you your families house!

[RexBanner]

On the flipside the guys who are crazy enough to do the easyjet scheme upon being ditched at the end of their placement time will inevitably be in so much debt that they wont be able to afford to do any more flying. Which takes them out of the competition pool. Silver lining to every cloud and all that. It will have to stop at some point, its like Islamic terrorism, unpleasant and abhorrent but will burn itself out eventually.

[tigermagicjohn]

Firstly I don't believe they think that they always will be kept on with this airline that they do the line training with, that is just an added bonus.
However you get the analogy, if they don't do, then someone else will.

Regardless of the moral dilemma, you will still be 500 hours closer to the RHS, then a pilot who does not even have a TR, or only has SEP.
So obviously, in these bad times, you have increased your chances to get a job.

If they do not have the money, well tough luck on them, if they lend up until their ears - if they are that dumb, they should not even be in the cockpit, due to their personal emotional condition, intelligence and the stress such huge amount of debt would put on a normal human being, if he is unable to handle it.

There also lies the nature of the beast, these "people" will if the do not get a job afterwards, and if they have spent more than they can afford, they will suffer the consquence of this. You can't blame the idea, you must blame the idiots who can't afford to do this, but still do it!

Eventually the worst ones will never recover, and this will mean one less to compete with, unfortunately that is called capitalism, for someone to win, someone has to loose!
I have said before, the ones who cry of all the debts they have put themselves in to get into this business, I do not have on inch of sympathy for, I do not feel sorry for them, I would rather say good riddance! If you do not have the capability to make the research, and progress into training with a plan of how you will finance your training in an affordable way, well you have then played roulette with your life, with maybe your families life, you get what you deserve!

Lack of planning is probably the biggest mistake before training starts, sometimes it might taking one or two steps backwards, to be able to take the step forward. However many get blinded by cheap sales pitches, and flashy video shows and big shiny jet cockpit!
Fact is, that will most no likely be you until another 5 to 10 years have passed, do you have the stomach to battle it out until you get where you want?
For every newbie pilot with huge amounts of debts, embarks on the line training, finsihes without a job. If he does not get a job within certain amount of time, his TR will expire, he will still have the hours on line though. But if he can not manage to handle his debts, well he will be another casuality to debts, and more then likely will not be current on type after some time.
This is his risk, and if he looses, well good riddance, his aviation adventure might be over for a very long time.

You must expect every person to have some reasonable intelligence, that they do have responsability for their own life, some will win, many will loose!
Regardless not a tear is shed from me, when students complain over their huge amounts of debts after training, and there is no work, you should have known the before hand, and made contigencies for that situation. Same goes for Line training and TR, get over it.

Would I pay if I had a firm job offer with, you bet I would! But without, no way. Still personally I have other plans and directions I want to explore.

If you have the cash, sure why not, if it makes you happy. None here will sacrifice themselves for someone else to get a job, it will always be Number One first, you get a job - means I dont get a job, does not need to be fair, its just the luck of the draw for some + hard work. Right place at the right time.

Word of advice though, the pain of the debts afterwards, will far outweigh the pleasure of those 500 hours line training. So if you do go that way, without having enough money available, enjoy it while you can, because afterwards your life will be hell, and you do not deserve any sympathy, you laid your bed yourself! :D

[tigermagicjohn]

"Rexbanner" Well said, I was thinking that myself too. There will be one less, when grass gets greener!:}

[Avenger]

well we may agree with the principle or the process but it is a fact and things aren't about to change. We have just taken on 18 guys that paid to fly as part of an integrated TR course. Now you could dress it up and say the TR element was XX and the Flying is YY or the whole lot is XXYY, of interest is the original TR course price included 100hrs on type, or hours to a line check. These guys have just started on type and been given a 12 month paid contract from day one..No other guys were even interviewed and they all came through same process.
It's a sign of the times, BTW average age 20yrs old, average hrs less than 200TT.
When these guys finish in 2011 they will be back on the market and another lot come in.

[flyprototype]

I got an email asking me if I am interested by an A320 program.
I am sure I have to pay.

I don't think this is legal under the UK law. FLying alone is one thing, flying with 150 souls on board in a commercial operation and Paying a "school", it's in my point of view totally illegal.

by EU law, if I am not paid, I have the right to leave the work place anytime I want . I wonder what passagengers would think if I say I want go back home when we are halfway of our flight.

"Captain, I order you to return back to Gatwick now, I am tired!"

I am not going to give any of my money to a bunch of idiots who will ask me to wake up at 3 am for their first 0530 am flight...

[Prophead]

I really dont understand why Balpa are not getting involved in this. They are the only people I can see making any kind of legal challenge to the P2F rules.

[bananaman2]

A mate of mine who got his fingers burnt with P2F, said BALPA were interested in Cadet exploitation and were investigating - he contacted them. Know nothing more than that, however, what I would say, is that seeing as these schemes exist and have done for a couple of years or so now - I would think (point raised many times before) that there is a legal loophole that allows airlines to get away with it - maybe Balpa are well aware of this and feel they can only pressurize an airline to do the right thing but not force them. That said there is nothing stopping someone naming and shaming such airlines and schemes in the press - in fact I can imagine a nice dispatches programme about it all.