B737 job at Global Aviation Solutions?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: US
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B737 job at Global Aviation Solutions?
Hy every one,
Is any body known about Global Aviation Solutions?
For the one who is ready to pay the big £, it looks can interesting.
Getting a jet job that's what I am looking for... but is it too simple to be true? Any advice, comments are welcome.
Happy flying to all.
Here is there email:
Candidates that successfully complete the selection procedure will be further evaluated for the amount of training required and the contract employer most suited to the personality of the individual.
Inexperienced candidates will receive enhanced jet type rating training. Their programme will comprise an integrated jet orientation course, including MCC, a full type rating and initial line training. Candidates with relevant experience will receive abbreviated training commensurate with that experience, the most experienced pilots receiving only the minimum JAR approved training.
The type rating will be charged at a minimum of £12,500 for the most experienced pilots to a maximum of £15,500 for those requiring the full enhanced training course. Following successful completion of a type rating, candidates will undergo aircraft base training (circuits and landings in the aircraft without passengers), safety and emergency procedure training (SEP), CRM instruction, wet drills and type specific doors and slides training; this part of the programme costs £3,500. For an additional £1,500 pilots will receive a rating on all series B737, including NG. To enhance employment prospects this additional rating is highly recommended.
The final phase will be initial line training, a minimum of 12 sectors at a cost of £100 per sector with a partner airline before being made available to one of Storm Aviations customer airlines.
A salary will be paid when the pilot is fully trained and placed under contract with an airline.
Is any body known about Global Aviation Solutions?
For the one who is ready to pay the big £, it looks can interesting.
Getting a jet job that's what I am looking for... but is it too simple to be true? Any advice, comments are welcome.
Happy flying to all.
Here is there email:
Candidates that successfully complete the selection procedure will be further evaluated for the amount of training required and the contract employer most suited to the personality of the individual.
Inexperienced candidates will receive enhanced jet type rating training. Their programme will comprise an integrated jet orientation course, including MCC, a full type rating and initial line training. Candidates with relevant experience will receive abbreviated training commensurate with that experience, the most experienced pilots receiving only the minimum JAR approved training.
The type rating will be charged at a minimum of £12,500 for the most experienced pilots to a maximum of £15,500 for those requiring the full enhanced training course. Following successful completion of a type rating, candidates will undergo aircraft base training (circuits and landings in the aircraft without passengers), safety and emergency procedure training (SEP), CRM instruction, wet drills and type specific doors and slides training; this part of the programme costs £3,500. For an additional £1,500 pilots will receive a rating on all series B737, including NG. To enhance employment prospects this additional rating is highly recommended.
The final phase will be initial line training, a minimum of 12 sectors at a cost of £100 per sector with a partner airline before being made available to one of Storm Aviations customer airlines.
A salary will be paid when the pilot is fully trained and placed under contract with an airline.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A long way from here.
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intersesting stuff, thanks Pierre!
£21700 for all the stuff listed below isn't the worse offer in the marketplace for this sort of thing.
And no, this is neither the time nor the place to re-open the self-funded type rating debate!
The big unanswered (perhaps unanswerable?) question now is- will you get a job for this investment?
Cheerio!
CC
£21700 for all the stuff listed below isn't the worse offer in the marketplace for this sort of thing.
And no, this is neither the time nor the place to re-open the self-funded type rating debate!
The big unanswered (perhaps unanswerable?) question now is- will you get a job for this investment?
Cheerio!
CC
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Global Aviation Solutions.
Hmmmm.... That is the question.
PLUS........ the selection day costs £850 ... refundable when you pay for the 737 type rating (IF) you are selected.
So you drum up 850 bucks......
you might get selected.....
You then dig deep for the 737 type rating
You might get a job?
Any ideas?
PLUS........ the selection day costs £850 ... refundable when you pay for the 737 type rating (IF) you are selected.
So you drum up 850 bucks......
you might get selected.....
You then dig deep for the 737 type rating
You might get a job?
Any ideas?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Blue Skies
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There has been lots of different opinios about this type of training around. Before you make an investment this big, it could be a good idea to talk with those companies that would be your prospective employers, like Ryan, Easy and Sterling. Those are the ones who are doing the absolute majority of 737 Classic / NG hiring at this moment and near future.
I'm sure that they will be able to tell you what kind of chances (if any) you would have with your investment to actually get a job. After all, it is a considerable sum of money that could maybe help you some other place instead...!?
I'm sure that they will be able to tell you what kind of chances (if any) you would have with your investment to actually get a job. After all, it is a considerable sum of money that could maybe help you some other place instead...!?
Last edited by Aviate378; 7th Nov 2003 at 23:58.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: europe
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excuse me for stating the obvious but this is aviation we are talking about is it not? Have you all forgotten about the 2 Gulf wars, 9/11, missile attacks in Mombasa etc. etc. etc.
Whether it be a low cost carrier with an order of 120 aircraft, CTC or in this instance Global Aviation, anyone that suggests that a job is guaranteed is either being economic with the truth or a downright liar!
It would appear that Global Aviation are being openly honest in saying that whilst there is an extremely high opportunity of a job, nothing is guaranteed.
Whether it be a low cost carrier with an order of 120 aircraft, CTC or in this instance Global Aviation, anyone that suggests that a job is guaranteed is either being economic with the truth or a downright liar!
It would appear that Global Aviation are being openly honest in saying that whilst there is an extremely high opportunity of a job, nothing is guaranteed.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Blue Skies
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
opsmaneurope
May I ask where do you live? Cos I have an old car I would like to sell especially to a guy like You! After you have paid it, in advance of course, I'll take it over. And while there is an extremely high probability that it will run, still remeber: nothing is guaranteed!
May I ask where do you live? Cos I have an old car I would like to sell especially to a guy like You! After you have paid it, in advance of course, I'll take it over. And while there is an extremely high probability that it will run, still remeber: nothing is guaranteed!
Last edited by Aviate378; 8th Nov 2003 at 19:38.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: europe
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Arfur Daley,
Before advertising for sale one's car one could give it a full and professional mechanical service, check the tyres, give it a good valet etc. and then one could advertise a quality product.
But still there would be no guarantee that the engine wouldn't blow on the first outing!
Before advertising for sale one's car one could give it a full and professional mechanical service, check the tyres, give it a good valet etc. and then one could advertise a quality product.
But still there would be no guarantee that the engine wouldn't blow on the first outing!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A long way from here.
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentlemen!
Within a few short months, debates such as this will be forgotten!
A cursory glance through the back end of Flight is enough to see the pendulum swinging back our way. Every week there are more jobs advertised (albeit with a fair few for engineers etc- but that's a good sign, too) and every week we are closer to getting to a better pilot-supply-demand balance.
The market forces that tempted CH4 to embark on his scheme to lighten our wallets will soon vanish, and we will be training for proper type-ratings with proper aircraft operators..... and being paid for it!
Hold tight, don't give them any encouragement!
CC
Within a few short months, debates such as this will be forgotten!
A cursory glance through the back end of Flight is enough to see the pendulum swinging back our way. Every week there are more jobs advertised (albeit with a fair few for engineers etc- but that's a good sign, too) and every week we are closer to getting to a better pilot-supply-demand balance.
The market forces that tempted CH4 to embark on his scheme to lighten our wallets will soon vanish, and we will be training for proper type-ratings with proper aircraft operators..... and being paid for it!
Hold tight, don't give them any encouragement!
CC
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Monrovia / Liberia
Age: 63
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuffer me old son, w.r.t. 'training for proper type-ratings' would you care to ellucidate on just what is a proper type-rating - surely a type-rating is a type-rating is a type-rating ?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A long way from here.
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OKC
Okey dokey- there's no inference here that there might be such a thing as an improper type-rating, but it strikes me that while one is training a pilot on type, one may as well include company SOPs and ethos at the same time.
As my South-Western friends might say- proper job!
Ciao!
CC
Okey dokey- there's no inference here that there might be such a thing as an improper type-rating, but it strikes me that while one is training a pilot on type, one may as well include company SOPs and ethos at the same time.
As my South-Western friends might say- proper job!
Ciao!
CC
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: EU
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi again Chuffer, we do seem to keep meeting here
I'm not trying to 'lighten your wallet'; just the opposite, in fact, but that's a different debate.
My point in replying is that, yes, generally we are flexible enough to be able to train pilots 'in the same footprint', concerning SOP's and company ethos, normally. Why is this so? Well, unlike most training organisations, we actually have a pretty good idea, where the pilot is ultimately destined to go to and we can match that footprint; i.e. we can train explicitly to that airline's SOP's, which is something you will not normally get from an 'off the shelf type rating organisation'.
One thing you will find is that most operators generally follow the aircraft manufacturers' SOP's in the most. They may have 'small, but important differences' that can easily be introduced to a student that will not be a major difficulty. Generally, these differences are to allow an airline operating different types of aircraft some general company standards across different aircraft fleets.
Good examples of this are;
1. Airlines that insist that the Captain carries out an RTO. Both Boeing and Airbus will teach that handling pilot initiates RTO. No big deal, only difference is that Capt places hands over thrust levers after pilot flying has set T/O thrust. (Biggest difference is what you call the levers and the take off power!)
2. British Airways. They have a very complicated (to the uninitiated) set of procedures that dictates who is 'handling pilot' and who is 'non handling pilot' and the whole process during a flight would appear to be that whoever did the last thing reverts to the one that didn't do the last thing, and so it goes on. Many a funny joke to be found on this philosophy, although maybe there is some sound logic there somewhere! (escapes me however! BA would probably say they don't crash airplanes, so it works!)
My point is that 'differences' are not generally significant and can easily be incorporated in a type rating.
More importantly however is; 'are you being trained by someone who actually operates the aircraft on a day to day basis for real? Is it someone that can impart the information that is not included in FCOM or Boeing Manuals? That is very relevant'
I did my Boeing course at Boeing in Seattle. Excellent Instructor, ex Air Force pilot, but rigid Boeing SOP's, differences came later, not a problem.
Instructor on Airbus, at an independant training organisation however was way behind the 'drag curve'; never operated aircraft, hadn't bothered to learn specific company SOP's and I ended up educating him about aircraft and SOP's, not because I was more clever; I had done my homework.
That's the way it goes in aviation, and my original assertion stands; we will deliver a better pilot who is more readily acceptable to airlines than what is generally available in the market place in Europe.
Tall order you might say; but generally one that I believe we can deliver. The process has already started and I belive the results will be forthcoming shortly.
Friendly greetings,
CH4
I'm not trying to 'lighten your wallet'; just the opposite, in fact, but that's a different debate.
My point in replying is that, yes, generally we are flexible enough to be able to train pilots 'in the same footprint', concerning SOP's and company ethos, normally. Why is this so? Well, unlike most training organisations, we actually have a pretty good idea, where the pilot is ultimately destined to go to and we can match that footprint; i.e. we can train explicitly to that airline's SOP's, which is something you will not normally get from an 'off the shelf type rating organisation'.
One thing you will find is that most operators generally follow the aircraft manufacturers' SOP's in the most. They may have 'small, but important differences' that can easily be introduced to a student that will not be a major difficulty. Generally, these differences are to allow an airline operating different types of aircraft some general company standards across different aircraft fleets.
Good examples of this are;
1. Airlines that insist that the Captain carries out an RTO. Both Boeing and Airbus will teach that handling pilot initiates RTO. No big deal, only difference is that Capt places hands over thrust levers after pilot flying has set T/O thrust. (Biggest difference is what you call the levers and the take off power!)
2. British Airways. They have a very complicated (to the uninitiated) set of procedures that dictates who is 'handling pilot' and who is 'non handling pilot' and the whole process during a flight would appear to be that whoever did the last thing reverts to the one that didn't do the last thing, and so it goes on. Many a funny joke to be found on this philosophy, although maybe there is some sound logic there somewhere! (escapes me however! BA would probably say they don't crash airplanes, so it works!)
My point is that 'differences' are not generally significant and can easily be incorporated in a type rating.
More importantly however is; 'are you being trained by someone who actually operates the aircraft on a day to day basis for real? Is it someone that can impart the information that is not included in FCOM or Boeing Manuals? That is very relevant'
I did my Boeing course at Boeing in Seattle. Excellent Instructor, ex Air Force pilot, but rigid Boeing SOP's, differences came later, not a problem.
Instructor on Airbus, at an independant training organisation however was way behind the 'drag curve'; never operated aircraft, hadn't bothered to learn specific company SOP's and I ended up educating him about aircraft and SOP's, not because I was more clever; I had done my homework.
That's the way it goes in aviation, and my original assertion stands; we will deliver a better pilot who is more readily acceptable to airlines than what is generally available in the market place in Europe.
Tall order you might say; but generally one that I believe we can deliver. The process has already started and I belive the results will be forthcoming shortly.
Friendly greetings,
CH4
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A long way from here.
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CH4
Good to see you back here!
I do not doubt for one moment the quality of training that you are offering. In fact, my remark about 'proper type ratings' was perhaps not the best phraseology I could have chosen.
On the subject of SOPs- it's time for me to admit that I actually know b@gger all about real airline SOPs. Just what I have heard from sources here and elsewhere, that there are real differences, and these can cause problems.
Anyway- that's not the real issue. Shurely the pilot that will be most 'readily acceptable' to any given airline is one that has been trained in-house? How can it be otherwise? And this being the case, it will naturally come about that we will not be paying up front for TRs.
Fair enough, I will not change your mind. I have said my piece and have pretty much reached the limit of my knowledge. Thus I retire to my corner, considering CC's contribution to the debate complete.
By the way- the bit about lightening wallets- you ARE trying to take money off us, so that comment stands!
Respectfully
Chuffer Chadley
Good to see you back here!
I do not doubt for one moment the quality of training that you are offering. In fact, my remark about 'proper type ratings' was perhaps not the best phraseology I could have chosen.
On the subject of SOPs- it's time for me to admit that I actually know b@gger all about real airline SOPs. Just what I have heard from sources here and elsewhere, that there are real differences, and these can cause problems.
Anyway- that's not the real issue. Shurely the pilot that will be most 'readily acceptable' to any given airline is one that has been trained in-house? How can it be otherwise? And this being the case, it will naturally come about that we will not be paying up front for TRs.
Fair enough, I will not change your mind. I have said my piece and have pretty much reached the limit of my knowledge. Thus I retire to my corner, considering CC's contribution to the debate complete.
By the way- the bit about lightening wallets- you ARE trying to take money off us, so that comment stands!
Respectfully
Chuffer Chadley
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: EU
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LOL Chuffer; you are probably the kind of guy we are looking for; someone that will 'stand up' and make his point, even when the cards are stacked 'against him'. I admire your ability to hold your hand up and say, 'stop, maybe I don't have the experience or knowledge here, but am prepared to learn.'You are the kind of guy that we can 'mould', that is willing to accept that you can learn, but however someone that will 'question' what he is being told, rather than someone that will mundanely do as they are told'.
From what I've seen so far, I'm quite impressed with you and would challenge you to submit to our assessment. If you pass, then I reckon you are the kind of guy we are looking for. Don't worry, we will 'knock off and smooth those rough edges' that you have demonstrated here. That's what we are good at!
That is meant in a positive feedback manner, according to all of the good CRM principles! So, don't flame me, OK?
Yours affectionately
CH4
Do we give good value for money, is the real question? Go ask the other training providers what they charge and you will find that we are very considerably cheaper! That's the point!
Should we do it for nothing? Hell, maybe when I retire, maybe we will! But not until then.
CH4
Last edited by CH4; 12th Nov 2003 at 12:31.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A long way from here.
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CH4
And I find myself posting back here yet again...
Flattery will get you nowhere, sir! The challenge of applying is not what puts me off- the £20k+ is! The thing is, you see, CH4- the cards may be stacked against me this week, but next week they may not be.
I stand by my commitment to myself that I will not pay for a type-rating.. at least not without a firm, written, dated job offer.
Sorry, old bean.
Cheerio!
Chuffer Chadley
And I find myself posting back here yet again...
Flattery will get you nowhere, sir! The challenge of applying is not what puts me off- the £20k+ is! The thing is, you see, CH4- the cards may be stacked against me this week, but next week they may not be.
I stand by my commitment to myself that I will not pay for a type-rating.. at least not without a firm, written, dated job offer.
Sorry, old bean.
Cheerio!
Chuffer Chadley
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: EU
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Chuffer
OK, I hear what you say, but deny any flattery on my part. So, here is a challege to you. This is a 'one-off offer' to you alone. If you care to come to LGW I will set aside some time to sit down 'face to face' with you and answer all of the questions that you would like to ask me. I will give you honest and objective answers and hopefully be able to demonstrate to you the 'genuineness' (not sure if that word exists) of what we are doing and the likelihood of being able to place you, if successful.
I'm not being arrogant when I say that I would have to 'find' some time to talk to you; we really are that busy in securing jobs for pilots and placing them in contracts. I'm hoping that we will be able to report our first placement next month, following completion of our training and placement programme. My problem at the moment is getting the pilot concerned trained in time for when I need him!
Now, if you tell me you won't invest the cost of the petrol involved to come from from Bournemouth to LGW then there is little more I can do for you.
You have made an impression from what you said, so take my challenge! If not, don't knock it but let others take the opportunities out there.
Can I be fairer than that? Send me a PM if you accept the challenge.
CH4
OK, I hear what you say, but deny any flattery on my part. So, here is a challege to you. This is a 'one-off offer' to you alone. If you care to come to LGW I will set aside some time to sit down 'face to face' with you and answer all of the questions that you would like to ask me. I will give you honest and objective answers and hopefully be able to demonstrate to you the 'genuineness' (not sure if that word exists) of what we are doing and the likelihood of being able to place you, if successful.
I'm not being arrogant when I say that I would have to 'find' some time to talk to you; we really are that busy in securing jobs for pilots and placing them in contracts. I'm hoping that we will be able to report our first placement next month, following completion of our training and placement programme. My problem at the moment is getting the pilot concerned trained in time for when I need him!
Now, if you tell me you won't invest the cost of the petrol involved to come from from Bournemouth to LGW then there is little more I can do for you.
You have made an impression from what you said, so take my challenge! If not, don't knock it but let others take the opportunities out there.
Can I be fairer than that? Send me a PM if you accept the challenge.
CH4
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Guys
I have a question for CH4. I do not wish to enter the argument as wether to "pay" or "not to pay" as it has already been done to death on this forum and I think most of us are aware of the pros & cons. For me it comes down to "do you feel lucky punk" with 20 grand that you don't have. I personally know people who have done the rating with Astraeus some have jobs some don't. What I would like to know is how you can justify charging £850 for a selection day. The sim should not cost more than 260£/hr leaving £590 (around) for the psychometric testing. You've got to be joking, this smells of a money making exercise and I believe would cause some to wonder how honest you are in assessing the candidates. It would be different if you had a proven reputation, but it appears you do not.
I have a question for CH4. I do not wish to enter the argument as wether to "pay" or "not to pay" as it has already been done to death on this forum and I think most of us are aware of the pros & cons. For me it comes down to "do you feel lucky punk" with 20 grand that you don't have. I personally know people who have done the rating with Astraeus some have jobs some don't. What I would like to know is how you can justify charging £850 for a selection day. The sim should not cost more than 260£/hr leaving £590 (around) for the psychometric testing. You've got to be joking, this smells of a money making exercise and I believe would cause some to wonder how honest you are in assessing the candidates. It would be different if you had a proven reputation, but it appears you do not.
Last edited by bigbob; 13th Nov 2003 at 22:13.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: EU
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bigbob
I'll answer your questions as best I can. As always, there is more to the 'bigger picture than first meets the eye';
In addition to the cost of the simulator time and the hire of the classrooms neccesary add to our costs each assessment day;
1. Minimum 2, most often 3 admin staff that administer tests, check licences, passports, medicals etc and then mark and appraise test results the following day.
2. 2 very senior TRE's; these guys really are at the 'high end of the food chain' and are paid 'top notch' salaries in the business.
3. Normally a director of one of the respective companies.
4. We pay a lot of money for the test materials. I do not have the exact price to hand, but each answer sheet costs us nearly £4 a throw. Times that by 2 for each candidate and you see how the costs mount up.
Now add up all of the above and then deduct the £850 fee for those that are successful, because they get a full refund, then you arrive at a more realistic figure.
I do not know how many will be successful, but to date there is a higher percentage that have been than I imagined would be. That's great news for them and I'm happy about that. I want as many as possible to be successful. The price is designed to at least break even and hopefully make a small profit, but the suggestion that it makes huge amounts of profit is not true, as hopefully you will now see.
Who doesn't have a proven reputation? Storm? I think we do; We have been assessing pilots for major airlines for 6 years now ( go read earlier postings). We are also a major crew leasing company in Europe; one of the biggest.
Bond/Astraeus? That might be a relatively new airline and TRTO, but the people involved have held very senior positions in major airlines in the EU for a long time. Chairman was MD of Cityflyer, MD was FD of Air Europe, Ops Dir was Chief Pilot at GO, Training Director was Training Manager at GO; do I need to continue? Maybe a relatively new company, but one that has a wealth of experience, compared to most.
This is a small industry of ours, where very experienced and renowned individuals will pop up again and again in many different situations. to suggest that they are unproven is rather naive, I think.
I hope that helps.
CH4
I'll answer your questions as best I can. As always, there is more to the 'bigger picture than first meets the eye';
In addition to the cost of the simulator time and the hire of the classrooms neccesary add to our costs each assessment day;
1. Minimum 2, most often 3 admin staff that administer tests, check licences, passports, medicals etc and then mark and appraise test results the following day.
2. 2 very senior TRE's; these guys really are at the 'high end of the food chain' and are paid 'top notch' salaries in the business.
3. Normally a director of one of the respective companies.
4. We pay a lot of money for the test materials. I do not have the exact price to hand, but each answer sheet costs us nearly £4 a throw. Times that by 2 for each candidate and you see how the costs mount up.
Now add up all of the above and then deduct the £850 fee for those that are successful, because they get a full refund, then you arrive at a more realistic figure.
I do not know how many will be successful, but to date there is a higher percentage that have been than I imagined would be. That's great news for them and I'm happy about that. I want as many as possible to be successful. The price is designed to at least break even and hopefully make a small profit, but the suggestion that it makes huge amounts of profit is not true, as hopefully you will now see.
Who doesn't have a proven reputation? Storm? I think we do; We have been assessing pilots for major airlines for 6 years now ( go read earlier postings). We are also a major crew leasing company in Europe; one of the biggest.
Bond/Astraeus? That might be a relatively new airline and TRTO, but the people involved have held very senior positions in major airlines in the EU for a long time. Chairman was MD of Cityflyer, MD was FD of Air Europe, Ops Dir was Chief Pilot at GO, Training Director was Training Manager at GO; do I need to continue? Maybe a relatively new company, but one that has a wealth of experience, compared to most.
This is a small industry of ours, where very experienced and renowned individuals will pop up again and again in many different situations. to suggest that they are unproven is rather naive, I think.
I hope that helps.
CH4
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: England
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry old chap, but I refuse to enter into petty name calling. Where on your website does it provide an employee breakdown or state where your company spawned from. You can hardly suggest that one is naieve for not being aware of information that you have failed to provide. My statement still stands as to Global Aviation Solution's reputation being unproven with regard to placement which is what it all comes down to. You have admitted that you make a profit from candidates who fail the selection however small which in my opinion is a conflict of interest. I don't know of any airlines that charge for a selection procedure, why should you?
This is not aimed as a personal attack but this is an important question that many of your potential customers are asking concerned that schemes like yours are taking advantage of low houred pilot's level of desperation given the current climate.
Regards,
Bigbob.
This is not aimed as a personal attack but this is an important question that many of your potential customers are asking concerned that schemes like yours are taking advantage of low houred pilot's level of desperation given the current climate.
Regards,
Bigbob.