I will NOT pay for a T/R

[TheFatMan]

Scroggs,

I think it is a Cargo outfit based in Luxemburg, from what I know the Icelandic company does not charge you anything for the TR.

And yes I am with you, I will not pay for a TR!

But I believe to stop this we (the ones without a job) need a lot of help from you (the ones with a job). With the unions help you could stand up and say "we will not accept that our new colleauges will have to pay for their TR".

It is a whole lot more effective if you raise your voice than if we do. And as you said, this will in the end detoriate the whole aviation industry so we need to work togehter here.

TFM

[Flypuppy]

Scroggs,

It isn't an Icelandic company. It is one I am intimately familiar with....

[flaps to 60]

Scroggs

Old chap you have taken me wrongly or i have not stated my position clearly either way I would not support someone who wants to work for free, paid for rating or not.

But i would whole heartedly recommend a type rating and line experience paid for by an individual. You work for the hours you have paid for then move on as in the aforementioned SSTR.

Not good enough, I'm afraid. Just imagine if the same principle was to be exercised at McDonald's, or on the railways, or in the Police Force? People queuing up for jobs without pay? The various employers would be laughing - until the incumbent work forces said 'over our dead bodies!'. Such practises undermine the rights of those already in employment, and will not be accepted by any workforce - the aviation one is no different.

Disagree

This industry is different all the other jobs and most that i can think of pay for your training.

Cadetship excepting (even though your wages are lower for 5 years) we have all paid to get to where we are.

Medicals, PPL's CPL's, Exam Fees, Recurrency Training, Instrument Ratings, Instructor Ratings........Type Ratings we have paid all along the line. So why not pay to get where you want to.

Waiting around for the industry to turn your way, be aware may take some time. Time in which your skills are deminishing, You have taken a few sim rides to keep in touch or appeal to an airline, Your IR has had to be renewed several times, your medicals have to be paid for by you. It all costs so what is wrong with putting yourself at the top of the CV pile.

Once again in state catergoricaly that i do not agree with working for free and i hate FR's approach as well which i luckily escaped by being told no we dont want to employ you.......Thanks DD and MOLLY.

PUDDEN CHIEF (hail to the green one)

Im sorry i didn't reply i was off on my yearly thrashing in the sim for a couple of days and lost the plot for a while. My head is now sort of recovered.

To your points:-

1) I agree but you said it yourself its a commercial organisation and it has a responsility to its employees and its share holders (this bit i have stated on other threads is now the be all and end all of a companies policy and has gone to far as in FR et al). In my mind a company should pay for your TR but like the early 80's people dont like change and the industry is changing regardless of what we think so we have to adapt.

2) If my assumptions are correct the company insures the airframe and the stipulations are that it is crewed by a qualified and current crew with perhaps a minimum experience level for the crew in question. This is why many jobs ask for an ATPL or a 1000hrs of experience etc. As far as i am aware it has nothing to do with how you got your rating.

3) I had looked very seriously in to paying for an eaglejet course on a 737NG with 200hrs line experience. After that i would have been on the open market. As it happens i got lucky and ended up with my company paying for all my conversion costs but i stress it was no more than luck and having a mate on the inside pushing my cause (he's had a few hang overs at my happy expense). Had i not got this job then i reckon i woukld have found the money somewhere to do the 737 course.

4) No i would be having a canary plus they would have to have a very good lawyer as there are laws preventing that. Plus even though i dont like them i have Balpa for what they're worth.

Sorry for the pious comment the last time as it seems to have offended you. It was meant to convey they feeling of why do people say " i refuse to pay for a rating when the airline should be paying for me". We are all responsible for our own actions and how and when we get a job.

where is your line in the sand? At what point do you think “this really isn’t worth it?” Or in simple financial terms, when does the expenditure in ‘buying the ticket’ exceed the eventual rewards?

Im off now to experience my rewards for 4 sectors and i have yet to cross that line in the sand and in purely financial terms i would pay a hell of a lot more than the £65,000 i have already to see what i do every day.

Scroggs

Didnt your airline recently advertise for type rated A340-500/600 chaps is the bearded one not saving money doing this in order to pay for his increase in costs ie fuel and wages etc. It seems its spreading all the way to the top.

[scroggs]

F60, no the aviation industry isn't different to any other, essentially. Actually, there are a quite a few others that pay for their training in the same way we do. However, there is a point beyond which training becomes an employer's responsibility. There is nothing wrong with obtaining a speculative qualification (i.e. the TR with line training) in the hope of improving your job prospects - after all, isn't an Open University MBA much the same thing? There is a lot wrong, on the other hand, with a company employing you and then asking you to pay for the training it needs you to have!

As for Virgin's search for type-rated A340 pilots, that is quite different. Virgin is looking to poach experienced pilots from other airlines. A 747 jock who undertakes an Airbus rating speculatively and then comes to us looking for a job would not save us a lot of money (we'd probably have taken him without the rating anyway!), but an A340 pilot with some seriously significant hours on type and a good deal of other jet experience will save us time and money - and we need people on the line yesterday! However, an inexperienced wannabe who goes and spends 30k on an A340 rating is no more use to us than a chocolate teapot.

Fatman We're trying!

Scroggs

[TheFatMan]

I know you are Scroggs, and we appreciate it!

[Flypuppy]

F60,

To answer your answers (if you see what I mean)

1)Yes commercial organisations have responsibilities to their shareholders, and I have a responsibility to my shareholders (the wife and kids). An additional 25k on top of what I have already paid plus working for that additional fee is not something my shareholders are likely to agree to. I'll ask again, why should a private individual financially support a commercial organisation. If someone is paying for a type rating and line time are they employees or customers?

2)My point about hull insurance is more about when someone is paying for line time and comes back to the issue of are you then an employee or customer. It is my understanding that the crews are supposed to be employees of the airline operating the aircraft.

3) n/a

4) Well, as you said above, airlines are commercial organisations and if they can do something much cheaper then they will look at was of doing it cheaper. I have heard that this sort of practice is occuring, although more subtely at some airlines. Where F/O's who are either promoted to Captain or find a job elsewhere are not replaced by paid staff, but by paying customers. Buying 500 hrs of line equates to approx. 1 year's worth of flying at a typical charter outfit.

If not checked, I can easily see a time, not so very far away, when all airlines are going to be passing all the training costs onto pilots, and that could include your next job F60. Everytime you move company or type or do a command course you will have to foot the bill.

If I understand your answer correctly, buying line time is ok, unless it negatively affects you?

[SkidSolo]

Scroggs

I see you are a moderator on this. How many are registered on Pprune?

Would it be possible to conduct a survey on this topic and then from that a petition of some kind to be placed on BALPA's/goverment desk?

Maybe BALPA isn't the right route since there are many registered whom aren't members but it would be one way to attract them!

Seeing the mess BA got into with checkin staff for more pay etc made me wonder what sort of clout we have.

Anyway, just a thought.

Cheers
SS

[itchy kitchin]

I would like to add my voice and just simply say this:

I have spent over 50K on flight training and the banks are leaning on me already to start repayments and i havn't got my first job yet. HOW THE HELL CAN I AFFORD A TYPE RATING???

With the industry now on the upturn (oh yes, the glass is half full) and a lot of the majors hiring, there has to be a "trickle up" effect that can only benefit the little guys like us.

I'm keeping the faith. All good things and all that.

Regards from the kitchin

[Firestorm]

Maybe we should all write to our MPs. I would imagine that they have no idea that this practice exists, it's extent, and the amount of money involved.

How would the general public feel, knowing that they have shelled out for a ticket, and so has the co-pilot?

[air hog]

I'm with kitchen! Couldn't afford a type if I wanted one.

I think the only exception might be a TRSS with BMI Regional for example, but I don't know the ins and outs. That would mean asking my parents to remortgage so would have to be a certainty.

I for one am old and ugly enough (almost 30) not to want to ask for more money for a possible chance. If this is the way it's going I can see me for one having to give up on the airlines. Let's hope it's not.

Cheers

[Shanks]

Where's the line in the sand?

A major regional airline offers you a job but you have to cough up £3000 and accept a reduced salary for a while to pay towards your TR, would you take it?

A top charter airline offers you a job as a second officer, once again reduced salary for first year (just happens to equate to the cost of a TR), would you take it?

A "premier" national airline offers a bunch of low hour students jobs, once again reduced salary which is specifically stated as compensating for the cost of a TR, would you take it?

I know people in all the above circumstances. As far as I can see it's just paying for a type rating in installments. So for those of you unemployed and outraged, put yourselves in the above situations...would you take the job?

[Flypuppy]

Shanks,

All three examples you give above are different to the practices I find troubling.

In all three examples people are working and earning what I would assume to be a reasonable income. They are all employees of the respective companies - and not paying to operate the aircraft.

All those people are paying for a type rating but they have a guaranteed job, and I would assume that once they have paid the company for their training they are NOT bonded to that company.

What I find troubling is the sale of speculative type ratings and line training where people are paying to operate commercial aircraft, where their status as employee is dubious. Buying 500 hours of line time is depriving another pilot of an income for a year.

Let's face if you were running an airline and you thought you could find people to do the work that makes the company money for free, or better yet get them to pay to work What you going to do? The bean counters must be laughing all the way to the bank.

I can see, and understand, at least 3 sides to this argument, but I feel the ultimate end of the current vogue for paying to "skip the queue" will only come if there is a serious incident involving a paying to work crew member. Only then will the likes of BALPA and the CAA become involved.

[2WingsOnMyWagon]

I do not feel being bonded with your wages is any more reasonable than paying for a type rating outright and also there is no guarantee of a job at the end of any scheme.

Flypuppy, You seem to be implying that people line training but using their own finances is somehow less safe, if that is the case then its nonsense.

Students starting off with their flight training can add a type rating and still save over 20k against the cost of an integrated course. When you look at it like that, you can see how this could become the norm if things don’t improve.

The job market is currently showing an upturn and if paying for a type rating gives students a queue jump in the short term then so be it, that’s what those who can afford it will do. I think it will be interesting to see which major carriers follow the SSTR route. To be honest I'd rather see people who have completed the majority of training off their own back get jobs than those 0 - RHS cadet schemes that used to be common a few years back.

2WINGS

[2WingsOnMyWagon]

STUDI
I don’t do envy and even if I did I wouldn’t have anything to be envious about I'm afraid.

This is my personal opinion and I mean no offence to those lucky enough to get a place on these schemes (enjoy New-Zealand guys) but taking on somebody whose never even flown an aircraft when there’s so many qualified pilots without out work hardly helps matters does it? As I already stated, I would like to see the big boys offering some sort of schemes but to whose already holding CPL/IR's.

2WINGS

[High Wing Drifter]

2WINGS,

I think that there are arguments both for an against taking on experienced pilots into an ab-initio scheme. The RAF themselves state that pilots with previous flying experience are usually at first well ahead of the thier classmates, and then fallback rapidly after basic training. In a word, there is no real advantage. Given that, it is possible concieve of distinct disadvantages.

[2WingsOnMyWagon]

I agree HWD, but civil flying is less demanding then flying for her majesty so the differences would be less pronounced I would think. So why create more unemployment? Going back to the type rating argument.

If I were boss whom would I take?

Pilot A: Inexperienced (approx 300hrs) but 15-35% is on 737
Or
Pilot B: GA experienced (approx 1500 hrs) but how much is relevant to airline operation
Or
Pilot C: A little experience (approx 500 hrs) but has just passed a type rating (min hours)

I think this is the sort of choices recruitment has to make (ignoring other factors). Who would you employ? Not an easy decision but I would think Pilot B would finish last unfortunately.

2WINGS

[StudentInDebt]

Choices, choices

2 Wings

If I was an airline recruiter for a regional airline without 737s and the type not mentioned in c) then I would choose b) because he/she is less likely to disappear after 6 months when a better job offer on his/her type comes along. Indeed he will probably be so grateful for a job that he will remain with the company for the duration of his bond and may stick around long enough to be considered for command in which case his decision making skills under pressure from the, usually, single pilot world of GA may well benefit my company.

Why do airlines offer sponsorships when there are so many unemployed pilots out there? Because they want to be able to obtain a workforce that, in all probability, will demonstrate a large degree of loyalty to the sponsoring airline while being contractually and financially obliged to remain in the airlines' employ for a long time (in airline employment terms). They also get to ensure that the training of said future pilots is in keeping with their standards, they can claim back the cost of the training (possibly the full value against profits rather than just the VAT, I'm not an accountant) and they can use the scheme to a certain extent to control their demographics. Such schemes have always only been available to the select, lucky few hence the resentment that built up against them whilst their peers were seeking employment. How much resentment do you think is building inside and outside the airlines against those who pay for the privilige of line training and to a lesser extent a type rating? Why does having the cash to complete a speculative type rating course make someone more deserving of a job than someone who cannot afford it?

If every wannabe with cash stopped undertaking to pay for type ratings tomorrow and made it clear they would only accept a job if the company paid then you would see a massive change in recruitment policy overnight (well maybe Monday, it is a weekend afterall) and funnily enough - if they wanted to survive - they would pay for it. Sadly, there are a sizable minority who are intent on paying and making it difficult for the majority.

[scroggs]

Sponsorships have never provided more than a small proportion of the required supply of new pilots. While the reasons for companies offereing sponsorships are broadly as StudentinDebt has suggested, the UK industry has always relied mainly on self sponsored candidates, or what used to be known as 'hour builders', together with the output from the military.

These days the military is far less of a significant source of new pilots into the UK civil industry. The collective ranks of the RAF, RN and Army release no more than 100 pilots a year into the system, and usually far less. As sponsorships provide an even smaller number (and are unlikely ever to return in a form that the BA ex-cadet would recognise), it follows that the vast majority of new pilots will have completed speculative qualifications off their own bat.

SudentinDebt wrote: If every wannabe with cash stopped undertaking to pay for type ratings tomorrow and made it clear they would only accept a job if the company paid then you would see a massive change in recruitment policy overnight

Sorry, but it's never going to happen. Speculative qualifications are part of the process of obtaining an advantage in all job markets, not just aviation. Just look at the cornucopia of institutions offering MBAs to aspiring executives. In fact, the entire Open University is based on the principle of speculative qualification, as are most Adult Learning Centres and various other educational and vocational establishments. You're just going to have to live with it - in whatever field you choose!

The problem comes when the line between offering employment and offering a service becomes blurred, as Flypuppy suggests. There are a number of companies out there seemingly holding out the carrot of a job in return for paying for a rating and line training, when in fact they have no real intent of offering a job at all. Equally unsavoury is the Ryanair-style practise of 'employing' pilots on slave wages and asking them to pay for their qualifications. That is what we need to drive out of the industry; speculative qualifications are one, and will remain one, of the legitimate (even primary) ways of improving your employment prospects.

Scroggs

[StudentInDebt]

SudentinDebt wrote: If every wannabe with cash stopped undertaking to pay for type ratings tomorrow and made it clear they would only accept a job if the company paid then you would see a massive change in recruitment policy overnight

Sorry, but it's never going to happen. Speculative qualifications are part of the process of obtaining an advantage in all job markets, not just aviation. Just look at the cornucopia of institutions offering MBAs to aspiring executives. In fact, the entire Open University is based on the principle of speculative qualification, as are most Adult Learning Centres and various other educational and vocational establishments. You're just going to have to live with it - in whatever field you choose!

I didn't meant to suggest that it would happen Scroggs. I imagine it would result in the collapse of many airlines! Self-funded type ratings have always played an important role in keeping the "lower" end of aviation going.

Whilst there have been occasions when undertaking a speculative jet SSTR has become "popular" it always remained a small minority and, like now, it was not the magic ticket to a job in the airlines although it undoubtedly helped many of those that did it. 10 years ago the cost of undertaking a jet Type Rating was prohibitive in real terms compared with today - you could buy a decent 2 bedroom house in Exeter for the same cost, today that house is worth twice or even three times as much yet the cost of the course has remained the same. Interests rates are low so the cost of borrowing has reduced and many people have equity in their property that, with the low cost of borrowing, they are happy to release. Salaries are higher than they were 10 years ago even in the regional turboprop world, it was only 7 years or so ago that we had Gill Air demanding payment (over and above the true cost of the course perhaps) for type ratings on the Shed and ATR whilst only paying £14kpa to TP FOs. So we now have a situation where it is more affordable to undertake a speculative type rating but initially there was still resistance in the industry to large scale adoption of the idea; September 11th changed that.

Todays situation is one where, for those looking for their first job, positions are still hard to come by thanks to glut of trained, experienced pilots who flooded the market as airlines went bust around the world. It is natural, given that it is now more affordable, for more people to undertake speculative SSTRs in the hope of "jumping the queue", bypassing the dirty, smelly, noisy end of aviation altogether and getting the jet job that the marketing brochures promise. Unfortuantely, whereas once a speculative SSTR may have guaranteed you an interview, today it does not. Airlines are still looking for type-rated, experienced pilots and the zero-flight time nature of these courses does not bring with it the experience. The numbers of people undertaking speculative type ratings means that once again making your CV stand out from the pile has become more difficult. What has happened is only natural, course providers have found partner airlines who are willing to allow their graduates to gain Line-Training experience (such schemes have existed in the US for many years in the "lower" end of aviation and had a certain "stigma" attached to them in my time over there).

All the increase in the number of SSTRs has done is create a new market in turn for line training as those who have spent the money do not want to see it wasted and can you blame them? The employment situation is desperate out there today and low experience people are prepared to go to great lengths to secure employment, even if it means accepting "slave labour" wages because it is their first job, that they might have to do it again for their second one thanks to their actions does not occur to them.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

You are speaking a lot of sense there StudentInDebt.

Studi - the days of big 'national carriers' offering comprehensive cadetship schemes are quite possibly gone forever. Many would view this as a good thing.

Let everyone fund and complete their own basic training then use a professional third party selection company such as CTC run your selection and type rating with the burden of risk resting initially on the candidate.

In this way one excludes the dreamers and 'saw and advert in The Times and applied' brigade. It makes selection professional as well - something that frankly it hasn't been in the past. A couple of HR bozos and an aspiring management pilot in a suit do not a professional selection team make.

Cheers

WWW