Virgin skywest ties go deeper
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: shivering in the cold dark shadow of my own magnificence.
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kelpie, I've done the 'up north' bit plus a bit of north of up north and west and east of there.
The main beef with cadetships within these hallowed halls (pprune) seems to be the belief that adversity is a right of passage. Put simply, It's not.
If V(whatever their name) can set up a quality cadetship, then good luck to them.
If GA companies suffer as a result, then Karma's a b!tch isn't it
.
The main beef with cadetships within these hallowed halls (pprune) seems to be the belief that adversity is a right of passage. Put simply, It's not.
If V(whatever their name) can set up a quality cadetship, then good luck to them.
If GA companies suffer as a result, then Karma's a b!tch isn't it
.
Joe my good fellow,
I don't think (in my glenmorangie addled mind) that the majority believe that adversity is a rite of passage. A person only truly remembers the good things of their past, not the more abhorrent parts, with some exceptions. When the ones on here speak of 'doing the hard yards', I do not think they remember how it felt thinking they may never make it as a CPL, struggling for that first job, let alone the first twin.
What I think some take umbridge with is the payment that takes place. Most of the ladies and gents who experienced the 'adversity' you speak of, had to put themselves through flying school, whilst still supporting themselves through everyday life. Now when you compare that to a cadet scheme in which the cadet must fund it by their own means (or 'other' means) in addition to support themselves (or being supported) during the 9+ months of a fulltime cadetship, we now come to the core of the 'umbridge'. The above situation essential means a select few young hopefuls (read silvertails) are really the only candidates elligible for said cadetship. This in turn, financially excludes a great deal of what may otherwise be very good candidates.
If these programs were a fully funded scholarship situation (therefore levelling the playing field), I think the 'umbridge' would be considerably less. At present, not even Australia's national flag carrier does this.
However, the above is only in my addled mind, feel free to disregard as you see fit.
Straight home and don't spare the horses
I don't think (in my glenmorangie addled mind) that the majority believe that adversity is a rite of passage. A person only truly remembers the good things of their past, not the more abhorrent parts, with some exceptions. When the ones on here speak of 'doing the hard yards', I do not think they remember how it felt thinking they may never make it as a CPL, struggling for that first job, let alone the first twin.
What I think some take umbridge with is the payment that takes place. Most of the ladies and gents who experienced the 'adversity' you speak of, had to put themselves through flying school, whilst still supporting themselves through everyday life. Now when you compare that to a cadet scheme in which the cadet must fund it by their own means (or 'other' means) in addition to support themselves (or being supported) during the 9+ months of a fulltime cadetship, we now come to the core of the 'umbridge'. The above situation essential means a select few young hopefuls (read silvertails) are really the only candidates elligible for said cadetship. This in turn, financially excludes a great deal of what may otherwise be very good candidates.
If these programs were a fully funded scholarship situation (therefore levelling the playing field), I think the 'umbridge' would be considerably less. At present, not even Australia's national flag carrier does this.
However, the above is only in my addled mind, feel free to disregard as you see fit.
Straight home and don't spare the horses
I think by far the most serious problem with Cadetships in Australia, is we do not need them. This is not Europe. This is not Asia!
The old QF scheme, and please correct me if I'm wrong, was probably not that dissimilar to the process when applying for the RAAF. In so much as the candidate faced extremely tough competition for a most coveted apprenticeship, funded by the parent organisation, and a properly structured and lifetime career (if sucessful) was the end result. If they didn't cut the mustard, then they were culled.
Cadetships in Australia today are an abomination. They are simply there to make money, exploit the most exploitable, and in the process drive down the wages and conditions of all professional pilots (thereby making more money)!
It's been done to death of course, but if Cadetships in Australia were employed as an investment rather than as a Cash Cow, they would not exist.
Back on thread somewhat. What's the start date for these Skywest/DJ ATR's? July sometime? Pretty safe to say there won't be any Cadets in the cockpits. Anyone know who'll be crewing them?
The old QF scheme, and please correct me if I'm wrong, was probably not that dissimilar to the process when applying for the RAAF. In so much as the candidate faced extremely tough competition for a most coveted apprenticeship, funded by the parent organisation, and a properly structured and lifetime career (if sucessful) was the end result. If they didn't cut the mustard, then they were culled.
Cadetships in Australia today are an abomination. They are simply there to make money, exploit the most exploitable, and in the process drive down the wages and conditions of all professional pilots (thereby making more money)!
It's been done to death of course, but if Cadetships in Australia were employed as an investment rather than as a Cash Cow, they would not exist.
Back on thread somewhat. What's the start date for these Skywest/DJ ATR's? July sometime? Pretty safe to say there won't be any Cadets in the cockpits. Anyone know who'll be crewing them?
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Krusty
I totally agree, if done properly like the old QANTAS cadetship and in relative numbers there is nothing wrong with them. We do not need them!
The cadetships as we see them today were 'sold' to the australian airlines by Petteford of Oxford Aviation Academy given the serious funding problems in the UK that seriously threatens his business model.
Oxford have some serious safety issues (cultural and operational) and significant experienced instructor shortages at the moment. Certainly not the type of organization portrayed by their smooth talking and glossy brochures. They have a serious backlog on IFR training, 6-8 months I heard and Pettedord is still trying to drum up business. Iraqi Airways are the latest client being taught the JAR syllabus by imported instructors.
If you see someone from Oxford ask them about the recent incident involving a foreign cadet where the CFI was pressured by senior management in the UK to send him solo despite the advice from one of her grade 1 instructors who had flown with this cadet on a pre solo check 3 times and said he wasn't ready. What happened on the first solo was an accident in the making although it ended without incident thanks to the intervention of a GMH instructor that talked him down.
CFI's should not be caving into management on such issues. The CASA / ATSB report should make interesting reading if it is reported.
More to Follow
the Kelpie
Edit: just learned that the Grade 1 has left on his own volition given that he had an offer from link that was quashed after an Oxford manager of German origin had a word with Qlink and told them that if this Grade 1 left that it would cause major operational problems. His plan didn't work cause the G1 left anyway and Oxford still have operational problems....,and no sufficiently experiences king air instructors other than the CFI ( who doesn't want to instruct on it!!)
Note to instructors: working for Oxford can seriously damage and hinder your career!!
I totally agree, if done properly like the old QANTAS cadetship and in relative numbers there is nothing wrong with them. We do not need them!
The cadetships as we see them today were 'sold' to the australian airlines by Petteford of Oxford Aviation Academy given the serious funding problems in the UK that seriously threatens his business model.
Oxford have some serious safety issues (cultural and operational) and significant experienced instructor shortages at the moment. Certainly not the type of organization portrayed by their smooth talking and glossy brochures. They have a serious backlog on IFR training, 6-8 months I heard and Pettedord is still trying to drum up business. Iraqi Airways are the latest client being taught the JAR syllabus by imported instructors.
If you see someone from Oxford ask them about the recent incident involving a foreign cadet where the CFI was pressured by senior management in the UK to send him solo despite the advice from one of her grade 1 instructors who had flown with this cadet on a pre solo check 3 times and said he wasn't ready. What happened on the first solo was an accident in the making although it ended without incident thanks to the intervention of a GMH instructor that talked him down.
CFI's should not be caving into management on such issues. The CASA / ATSB report should make interesting reading if it is reported.
More to Follow
the Kelpie
Edit: just learned that the Grade 1 has left on his own volition given that he had an offer from link that was quashed after an Oxford manager of German origin had a word with Qlink and told them that if this Grade 1 left that it would cause major operational problems. His plan didn't work cause the G1 left anyway and Oxford still have operational problems....,and no sufficiently experiences king air instructors other than the CFI ( who doesn't want to instruct on it!!)
Note to instructors: working for Oxford can seriously damage and hinder your career!!
Last edited by The Kelpie; 20th Mar 2011 at 00:46.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
God it's been done to death even I can't read another word about cadets.
Whatever.
If you look right and conclude that you are baby sitting whilst in command of a machine I suggest updating your resume.
Whatever.
If you look right and conclude that you are baby sitting whilst in command of a machine I suggest updating your resume.
Can someone explain the rationale as to why a commercial enterprise (airline) shouldn't be allowed to identify a market (cadetships) and turn it into a profit centre, which provides greater shareholder return, and greater business certainty by guaranteeing a stream of appropriately trained pilots for a known distance into the future.
Surely the market will sort out if the risk/reward ratio is acceptable.
I don't have an opinion on cadets other than i have flown with plenty and found them to be good in normal ops and initially out of their depth in non normal ops.......much like every other pilot new to a big jet. Much like i was when i first started flying multi-crew aircraft.
I now have a lot of experience and i can assure you that i do not come to work with the expectation that i will need to rely on the decision making skills of an inexperienced pilot (cadet or otherwise) to provide a good outcome. There is no question i value their input, but at the end of the day, the reason i am there is because i have the experience. Isn't that how it is meant to work. I pass on my experience to the new guy (cadet or otherwise) and he or she eventually has the knowledge and experience to take my spot and continue the cycle.
On the contrary i do support the company's need to do what is best for their business, as long as it complies with labour laws and industry regs.
So i believe there is nothing wrong with cadet schemes, but there may be a problem with the way a couple of our companies seem to be trying to circumvent the laws of the land.
Surely the market will sort out if the risk/reward ratio is acceptable.
I don't have an opinion on cadets other than i have flown with plenty and found them to be good in normal ops and initially out of their depth in non normal ops.......much like every other pilot new to a big jet. Much like i was when i first started flying multi-crew aircraft.
I now have a lot of experience and i can assure you that i do not come to work with the expectation that i will need to rely on the decision making skills of an inexperienced pilot (cadet or otherwise) to provide a good outcome. There is no question i value their input, but at the end of the day, the reason i am there is because i have the experience. Isn't that how it is meant to work. I pass on my experience to the new guy (cadet or otherwise) and he or she eventually has the knowledge and experience to take my spot and continue the cycle.
On the contrary i do support the company's need to do what is best for their business, as long as it complies with labour laws and industry regs.
So i believe there is nothing wrong with cadet schemes, but there may be a problem with the way a couple of our companies seem to be trying to circumvent the laws of the land.
Last edited by virginexcess; 20th Mar 2011 at 00:00.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Perth
Age: 50
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wow all this cadet stuff makes me think you pilots shoulda been engineers
personally i am only tired of people high jacking threads to bitch about them like this and others
if you don't like it move on, its been one of our tenants for a long long time
and psycho joe hit it on the head
karma is a b!tch
personally i am only tired of people high jacking threads to bitch about them like this and others
if you don't like it move on, its been one of our tenants for a long long time
and psycho joe hit it on the head
karma is a b!tch
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good question but you also have to ask:
What is the financial cost of the constant employee vs employer battle that seems to be ever raging at the QF group. Mates that work there tell me its like nothing I've seen before as another thread suggests. They wouldn't help their company in a million years.
If you take just this forum as as an example it seems three quarters of the threads are QF group related. Its also apparent Senator Xenophon has no shortage of Q group employees quietly shoving the knife in the background.
John Borghetti must be loving it. Time will tell I suppose.
What is the financial cost of the constant employee vs employer battle that seems to be ever raging at the QF group. Mates that work there tell me its like nothing I've seen before as another thread suggests. They wouldn't help their company in a million years.
If you take just this forum as as an example it seems three quarters of the threads are QF group related. Its also apparent Senator Xenophon has no shortage of Q group employees quietly shoving the knife in the background.
John Borghetti must be loving it. Time will tell I suppose.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The above situation essential means a select few young hopefuls (read silvertails) are really the only candidates elligible for said cadetship. This in turn, financially excludes a great deal of what may otherwise be very good candidates.
Cadetships in Australia today are an abomination. They are simply there to make money, exploit the most exploitable, and in the process drive down the wages and conditions of all professional pilots (thereby making more money)!
The financial stress these cadetships place on the candidate, combined with all the other cost saving measures that airlines use when employing cadets such as: short term job placements, summer contracts, small monthly retainers combined with flight pay etc. lead to highly stressed, low experienced FO's in the flight decks of RPT airliners. They spend most of their time out of work eating pot noodles in share accommodation worrying if they are going to get called in off standby so they can make a few extra dollars to pay the bank loans, rent etc. They will work regardless of their state of health/rest as they need the money. Often they will have a second job. Spend some time in the cruise with these guys and you will hear plenty of tales along these lines.
Can someone explain the rationale as to why a commercial enterprise (airline) shouldn't be allowed to identify a market (cadetships) and turn it into a profit centre, which provides greater shareholder return, and greater business certainty by guaranteeing a stream of appropriately trained pilots for a known distance into the future.
If a company sets up a cadet scheme that manages a fair and equitable way to shoulder the financial burden and produce well trained cadet pilots who are able to focus on their primary job, then more power to them.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: In The Boondocks
Age: 44
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guy and Girls, I'm not a fan of cadets either but considering nothing has be signed yet (and not to mention its not in the Skywest EBA) can we please not let this thread get hi-jacked by 'cadet bashing.'
The EBA has provision for contract pilots, but nothing on cadetships. And how will this affect seniority? Wonder what management will be offering the pilots to re-write their EBA?
The EBA has provision for contract pilots, but nothing on cadetships. And how will this affect seniority? Wonder what management will be offering the pilots to re-write their EBA?
And that's the real issue sled_driver71.
How many type rated and experienced ATR drivers does Skywest have? Probably not many I'd say. Borgetti and Co may be casting out the Cadet line (cheaper than F50 F/O's?), but to get this puppy up and running they will need the right people, and I would hazzard to guess, need them in place now.
I know one experienced ATR Check Captain (formerly Mount Cook) now working for REX. Might be worth a look JL. That's of course if they can lure you away from the highly desirable package you're on on at the moment (insert sarcasm here).
Forget cadetships at the moment, the main game will be what the Terms and Conditions will be compared to what the current Skywest turbo-prop drivers are on. Logic says it should be more, quite a bit more! If not, then getting this thing off the ground may take more than scare tactics from management and their "clever" HR people.
Anyone heard anything yet?
How many type rated and experienced ATR drivers does Skywest have? Probably not many I'd say. Borgetti and Co may be casting out the Cadet line (cheaper than F50 F/O's?), but to get this puppy up and running they will need the right people, and I would hazzard to guess, need them in place now.
I know one experienced ATR Check Captain (formerly Mount Cook) now working for REX. Might be worth a look JL. That's of course if they can lure you away from the highly desirable package you're on on at the moment (insert sarcasm here).
Forget cadetships at the moment, the main game will be what the Terms and Conditions will be compared to what the current Skywest turbo-prop drivers are on. Logic says it should be more, quite a bit more! If not, then getting this thing off the ground may take more than scare tactics from management and their "clever" HR people.
Anyone heard anything yet?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: shivering in the cold dark shadow of my own magnificence.
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forget cadetships at the moment, the main game will be what the Terms and Conditions will be compared to what the current Skywest turbo-prop drivers are on. Logic says it should be more, quite a bit more!If not, then getting this thing off the ground may take more than scare tactics from management and their "clever" HR people.
My guess is, offer 3-5% more and people will flock (I say FLOCK) to these things. Step over their own mother they will.
I agree Joe'. but it apears (rumuor wise) that they may be planning to offer less! Hense in part, the rolling out of the cadetship boogyman.
Let's say they do offer more, but only 5%. 1st year F50 F/O at Skywest earns around $64k + O'time above 75 hours P/Month, plus allwances, etc, etc. Now add 5%. It's concievable that even a relatively junior F/O may end up earning close to $80K, and IMHO that's fair enough. What do DJ currently pay their first year E-Jet F/O's, especially after Salary sacrifice?
When I first saw the T&C's of Skywest F50 F/O's I was initially encouraged. Here's a company I thought that seems to have struck the right and equitable balance, and from what I've heard has a much lower attrition rate than most other operators. It aint' Rocket Science.
I know operationally the East coast Turbo-prop operation will be run by Skywest, but the link and synegies with DJ will be deep, and the last thing DJ want is for "their" Turbo-prop drivers to be earning close to or even more than some of the Jet drivers, as this will invariably put upwards pressure on the jet pilot's salaries.
I reckon they'll offer less money, and use the threat of a cadetship as leverage.
Let's say they do offer more, but only 5%. 1st year F50 F/O at Skywest earns around $64k + O'time above 75 hours P/Month, plus allwances, etc, etc. Now add 5%. It's concievable that even a relatively junior F/O may end up earning close to $80K, and IMHO that's fair enough. What do DJ currently pay their first year E-Jet F/O's, especially after Salary sacrifice?
When I first saw the T&C's of Skywest F50 F/O's I was initially encouraged. Here's a company I thought that seems to have struck the right and equitable balance, and from what I've heard has a much lower attrition rate than most other operators. It aint' Rocket Science.
I know operationally the East coast Turbo-prop operation will be run by Skywest, but the link and synegies with DJ will be deep, and the last thing DJ want is for "their" Turbo-prop drivers to be earning close to or even more than some of the Jet drivers, as this will invariably put upwards pressure on the jet pilot's salaries.
I reckon they'll offer less money, and use the threat of a cadetship as leverage.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all speculation for the minute, anything can happen.
It could be that cadets go via Skywest on their way to Cruise FO 777 or B737 E190 positions.
Or they could be DE to all the VB positions. The owner of Skywest was mentioned by JB so one would have to assume some sort of tie up through the ATR's.
Time will tell.
It could be that cadets go via Skywest on their way to Cruise FO 777 or B737 E190 positions.
Or they could be DE to all the VB positions. The owner of Skywest was mentioned by JB so one would have to assume some sort of tie up through the ATR's.
Time will tell.
It is speculation Mr. Hat. Seems though there was a meeting between Skywest mangement and the pilots industrial body around 2 weeks ago. Some reluctance for skywest pilots to disclose the goings on, but I'll hazard a guess that as the time (July 31) draws near, we'll see some interesting to-ing and fro-ing.
My 2 cents:
Skywest pilots, you have them over a barrel. do not waver. Do not be guiled by tales of woe (standard management ploy). The operation has been commited to, and if management were thinking of earning a few extra bucks at your expense, then many others will have to live with that legacy. Future generations of skywest pilots will not thankyou if you fall short of the mark. You have an opportunity to maintain equitable wages and conditions for you and your Families.
Don't F#ck it up!
My 2 cents:
Skywest pilots, you have them over a barrel. do not waver. Do not be guiled by tales of woe (standard management ploy). The operation has been commited to, and if management were thinking of earning a few extra bucks at your expense, then many others will have to live with that legacy. Future generations of skywest pilots will not thankyou if you fall short of the mark. You have an opportunity to maintain equitable wages and conditions for you and your Families.
Don't F#ck it up!