We should be thankful. If people only ran flying schools on the basis of a sound business case there'd be a lot less instructor jobs out there.

:confused:

:confused::confused:

If most flying schools had sound business plans and looked at the numbers, then there would be far less failing on a regular basis.
How can companies running on tiny margins and often at a loss, so therefore no inward investment is ever going to happen, be good for anything??

Sorry but ALL business should be run on the basis of a sound financial planning and control, that goes for charities aswell as multi-national corporations. Flying schools should berun to make a profit. it doesn't matter if they are non profit making organisations, that just means the money goes back into the business rather than ending up in someone's pocket.

Madam Breakneck I'm afraid your comment doesn't stack up IMO.

Ah, but was it meant to? The theory is that flying instructors don't need a viable business to work for, just one that's still operating . Students ideally need one which will last long enough for them to achieve whatever licence or rating they're after. Somebody will have sold the school an aircraft or two and as long as they are paid for, they don't care about the school's business model.
So, instructors get work, second hand aircraft have a sales channel, students get flying at less than true cost, and the business operator runs on hope for as long as the money lasts. Seems reasonable to me, hence the old joke - how do you make a small fortune in aviation? Start with... :oh:
MadamB
:hmm:

FI salary
 

I hear that £18k has been offered for a newly q'd FI(R) north of hadrians wall! db16

Yes that is how it's been for a long time, but how does that lead to a stronger, larger industry?

Businesses that make profit can advertise, therefore more students, more students means lower running costs as the costs are shared by more people, more people mean a more stable business so investment is less of a risk, which means you can buy better/newer a/c, which in turn brings in more people. Etc.etc.etc.etc.

I would rather work for a stable company with less chance of closing the doors one night and just not reopening them. Leaving students in the lurch and me without wages. I don't work for free. Should I be asking for my pay at the end of each flying day?

So again, the current system works does it?

Hmm do I detect the hint of sarcasm in your posts!

I would advise all 'self employed' instructors to agree terms this must include:

(a) Invoice at the end of each week (Sunday), payment within 5 days by bacs(Friday) or 3 days by cheque (Wednesday). Remember the student pays, usually, after each sortie, so if the school can't pay, there probably insolvent. This was a great bit of advice from a solicitor friend a number of years ago.

(b) Insist on be paid for solo authorisations, if the student is paying dual for solo flying, while not qualified, you should be paid the full instructional rate.

(c) Agree, a fee for handling cash or credit card payments on behalf of students, Barclaycard charges 2%, so you should ask for the same cut.

(d) You could ask to be paid for refueling on say a 2% basis.

(c) Ensure that any briefings or training other than preflight briefing (>15 mins) should be charged for.

Finally, for those who are using instructing as a means to progress onto the airlines. Remember airlines are looking for people who can negotiate and are assertive. So at your airline interview you might need to explain, as a 'self employed' instructor, how you negotiated business terms with you flying school. An airline is not going to be impressed by someone who couldn't negotiate better than the minimum wage.

An excellent way to find yourself out on your ear, athonite.

Charging 2% to help refuelling, indeed.

Sure a school could meet your 'terms'. All you have to do is to find some students happy enough to pay the extra needed to meet your 'negotiated' demands.

It isn't going to happen.

Can't agree with any of that Athonite.

There are certain jobs which may not be seen as flying instruction, but are part of the role. Briefings are cerrtainly part of the job though.

At most decent schools you should have support to help the program run smoothly. If you have to refuel, you aren't being efficient, if you have to process a payment, you aren't being efficient.

So a well run school shouldn't need you to do any of this, but if you do on the odd occasion, remember a school is a team and we all need to muck in doing a range of tasks to keep the show on the road.

That is what airlines are looking for, not some bolshy person who works to rule. Not my job guv'.

The point I was trying to make, was that an instructor should be paid 'quatum meruit' (as much as the job is worth). In other words to be paid for all tasks related to the job, including briefing, fueling, administration, pre-flight checks, de-icing and flight instruction. Not just for flight instruction.

The best solution is for the instructor to be paid an hourly rate for the time he/she spends on duty. The hourly rate should reflect the non flying duties, so if the school does not have admin support or a refueller that is replected in the pay. This is easier from an invoicing and payment perpective.

My experience is that students are prepared to pay for a four hour block training session (morning/afternoon/evening) at a fixed hourly rate, regardless of if we are airbourne.

My understanding is that at some schools in the States charge the student from when he/she walks through the door. Perhaps someone from over the pond can clarify this?

That I do agree with. It is ridiculous really that an FI is only paid whilst airbourne, since to the job properly takes a lot more than just the flying.

I have lost count of the hours I've spent sitting in briefing rooms or answering the bl***y phones or just doing general administrative duties. Briefing pre and post flight is fine, but sending hours explaining the intricacies of met or another subject and not getting a penny for doing it?.....

It would be far fairer to pay an houry rate from turn up time to leaving time, but most schools will never do it. Why, because they can't afford it, so see my earlier points about why it's rubbish working for the vast majority of schools in the UK.

There are good schools out there, they are just in the minority.

From the HMRC http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/employment-status/index.htm


As a general guide as to whether a worker is an employee or self-employed; if the answer is 'Yes' to all of the following questions, then the worker is probably an employee:

* Do they have to do the work themselves?
* Can someone tell them at any time what to do, where to carry out the work or when and how to do it?
* Can they work a set amount of hours?
* Can someone move them from task to task?
* Are they paid by the hour, week, or month?
* Can they get overtime pay or bonus payment?

If the answer is 'Yes' to all of the following questions, it will usually mean that the worker is self-employed:
* Can they hire someone to do the work or engage helpers at their own expense?
* Do they risk their own money?
* Do they provide the main items of equipment they need to do their job, not just the small tools that many employees provide for themselves?
* Do they agree to do a job for a fixed price regardless of how long the job may take?
* Can they decide what work to do, how and when to do the work and where to provide the services?
* Do they regularly work for a number of different people?
* Do they have to correct unsatisfactory work in their own time and at their own expense?

Most flying instructors are in reality employed.

In that case we are all employed really!

Just want to say that my current school is very good, i get paid a fair flying wage and a decent retainer, my school is also so busy they are turning away students so i'm kept very busy, the only problem is the weather which is why i'm dreading the winter, retainer is good, but it isn't that good!

To be honest, i'd rather earn less, but have a guaranteed wage, then its a lot easier to work my finances.

In that case we are all employed really!

Well I'm self-employed. I negotiate the rate I am to be paid with each company I work for, and this is not always the same as they pay others. If other people want to work for less, then thats fine by me, but I never seem short of work. I also charge VAT. I quote a vat exclusive price to flying schools, but I quote a vat inclusive price to my own students. Oh, and I decide when and where I work, but once I have agreed to fly for someone on a particular day, I never let them down.

It can be done. I think the mistake many instructors make is not believing in themselves and so lacking the confidence to ask for and expect a sensible rate. If you don't ask, you won't get, or in other words, if you seem happy working for peanuts, why should anyone offer you more?

QNH1013, have you ever actually been formally audited for IR35 compliance?
I would say that as an FI(R) it is impossible to legally self employed.



When I was a engineering contractor and enquired if my part time instructional work could be invoiced though my umbrella company then the answer was no.

As an FI it is possible to be self employed, but check your paperwork carefully.

Several individuals have worked on a self employed or Ltd basis for several years, only five years later find themselves facing an audit to confirm the self employed status and find themselves facing a bill for additional tax.

Portsharbourflyer,

Several individuals have worked on a self employed or Ltd basis for several years, only five years later find themselves facing an audit to confirm the self employed status and find themselves facing a bill for additional tax

If you are operating as a Ltd company then you are not self-employed. You are an employee of the Ltd company.

My phrasesology was imprecise;


But just becasue you have set up a limited company offering instructional services does not necessarily mean you are fully IR35 compliant.

To charge for refuelling and handling cash is taking things a little too far. No instructor expects to be paid for breathing at the school but a balance that is better than the current state of affairs at many schools is called for and with the much publicised shortage of instructors one hopes this will soon be the case. I am apid a daily retainer and an hourly rate when airbourne. I am quite happy with this arrangement however when I first qualified I was being paid an hourly rate whilst airbourne and no retainer. This was a practically useless arrangement during the winter months because some flyable days were missed as I was not willing to take the gamble of driving the considerable distance to work when the weather was a 50/50 day. That didn't work for the school or me so as I say - a balance is required.

I personally would not wish for the extra hassle that would follow such a clear defined arrangement as the one Athonite describes as it's bound to lead to disagreements and tension. Far better to be more mature about it with an employer who has an ounce of common sense enough to recognise the role is varied and non-standard in general terms therefore a retainer + flight pay is the only way if a salaried position is not possible.

VFE.

Recent editions of FI and FTN make for interesting reading regarding the FI shortage.

The "Industry" as a whole has engineered as that fellow in the FI article put it - "the only thing you need to get into the RHS of a jet these days is a mastercard". The airlines discovered the "pay for your type rating" route was a good little way of saving money in the era of "budget airline". No longer do you need to have gained flying experience as an FI/Air Taxi pilot to get that first job with the airlines.

The flying schools have to take blame too. FI wages have been kept low for a long time - the £15 per flying hour wage has been around too long. The result is now we have an FI shortage the increase in wages required represents a significant increase in the cost of learning to fly.

Add on top of that the regulatory authorities introducing the requirement to hold a CPL to paid for instruction and you further reduce the numbers of people who consider taking up Flying Instruction. I just read a recent edition of FTN where somebody quite rightly questioned why you had to know how to navigate a 747 over the Atlantic and how many fire extinguishers it needed in order to teach someone for a PPL in a 152. The problem will only get worse once the Multi Crew License comes to fruition. You will have even more pilots unable to go down the FI route.

The answer is complex and is probably going to result in the next generation of trainee pilots having to spend more to achieve their dream.

1. The regulators need to re-introduce the old BCPL to enable people to be paid to teach PPL without a full CPL/fATPL.
2. Flying Schools need to pay Instructors a fair wage so people can make a living from it.
3. The airlines need to adopt some sort of quota systems for recruitment to ensure that in the long run the are able to meet recruitment requirements. Take on such a percentage of people with a Multi Crew License, a percentage of experienced on type, a percentage of low hours integrated paid for type rating sorts and a percentage of modular people who have gone down the FI/Air Taxi route. At the moment the Integrated/Type rating route seems to be the preferred option of the airlines so thats the way people are going.

At the busy airfield I instruct part time at I am the youngest FI on the airfield - I am age 30. Of the 8 Instructors on my clubs board 4 are BCPL holders. 5 are over age 50 and one is over age 70. These fellows aren't going to be around much longer and there replacements arent on the horizon.

So will/can instructor wages increase? The only way it seems possible is if flying schools put customer prices up - maybe that's the only way they'll get dedicated career instructors too? One thing is for certain - if I could earn a reasonable living from what I love doing (instructing) I would continue doing so until retirement because my own moral assessment of the airline game these days is that they can farkin' shove it up their arrogant greedy bums!

VFE.