Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Wannabes Forums > Interviews, jobs & sponsorship
Reload this Page >

FTE (Jerez) Grads - Who has got a Job?

Interviews, jobs & sponsorship The forum where interviews, job offers and selection criteria can be discussed and exchanged.

FTE (Jerez) Grads - Who has got a Job?

Old 19th Apr 2017, 18:05
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by momo95 View Post
I don't get your point though, he is right, the easyJet TR is £39,000.
As far as I'm aware it's priced below 40,000 EUR, not GBP.
Integrated is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2017, 18:08
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by AA757 View Post
Yeah it pisses me off when I see those insta-kids sharing pictures of them doing a type rating when daddy paid nearly 150 000 Pounds for the entire training and TR.
Again, these sweeping generalisations do nothing but to make yourself look bitter. I haven't used a dime of my parents money, nor do I intend to. I had my life working hard and spending my own money just like a large majority of people on my course. To merely state they are beneficiaries of the bank of mum and dad is to be honest just disrespectful to some of the personal struggles and battles I know that many current students have gone through to get to where they are.
Integrated is offline  
Old 19th Apr 2017, 18:18
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Farnborough
Age: 33
Posts: 44
I'am only talking about those few kids who paid nothing and end up posting pictures of themselves in a cockpit after their dad gave them 150K GBP. I'm not talking about the cadets who worked hard and had to make huge sacrifices to succeed.
AA757 is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 10:17
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moscow
Posts: 5
The airlines should evaluate the personal qualities of the pilot, as well as his ability and quality of training, rather than the amount of money he has (even earned by hard working).
Supporting P2F will lead to big problems in aviation industry.

Last edited by Pilot.v1; 20th Apr 2017 at 13:49.
Pilot.v1 is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 14:58
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,307
They do! That process starts at the interview stage. You just need to ensure that your quality of training and satisfaction of their other specified requirements gets you that offer of an interview in the first place. They aren't interested in the amount of money you have. It is surprising how many people fail to understand the airlines specified requirements and think they should simply be altered to fit their own set of circumstances. I am afraid that has never been the case, and never likely to be.
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 19:13
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by momo95 View Post
I don't get your point though, he is right, the easyJet TR is £39,000.
No, it isn't. It is €35.000 EUR ... not even remotely close to £40k GBP. It's whole £11k GBP less than what you and WCA seem to think it is. Confirmed by a student who just graduated, passed the easyJet job selection process, and currently in the type rating now (having obviously, just paid).
Integrated is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 19:18
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Wandsworth
Posts: 175
Originally Posted by Bealzebub View Post
They do! That process starts at the interview stage. You just need to ensure that your quality of training and satisfaction of their other specified requirements gets you that offer of an interview in the first place. They aren't interested in the amount of money you have. It is surprising how many people fail to understand the airlines specified requirements and think they should simply be altered to fit their own set of circumstances. I am afraid that has never been the case, and never likely to be.
Sure there is an interview for EZY, you could pass it with flying colours with fantastic quality of training and whatever other requirements they state, but the requirement is the money, end of, EasyJet specify the amount for the TR and they will expect it or you're out the door.
After spending £100k on a ATPL, how easy is it to pull £30-40k out of the bag, some of it totally upfront?
It is surprising how many people fail to understand that if you don't have money in this industry you face near impossible challenges to get jobs with certain employers. I am afraid that is now the case and is never likely to change....
planesandthings is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 19:41
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 98
I really don't understand where you guys are pulling this £40,000 GBP from? That equates to €48,000 EUR. To be clear, it's €35,000 EUR, which is approximately £29,000 GBP.
Integrated is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 19:51
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: England
Posts: 88
To be fair I think it's the principle which is being argued about here rather than the precise amount and exchange rate!
Thegreenmachine is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 19:55
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 98
planesandthings, I note you have edited your post from the original quoted in my reply to you. Thank you.

Well, that I can understand. I completely agree the type rating should not have to be a cost borne by those who are seeking a career as a pilot, but, sadly that is the way it is. That being said, you're not going to convince me (or others) who have strived to achieve their ATPL training to just sit back and be unemployed for the sake of a principle that is not likely to change any time soon. I hope to see airlines paying for type ratings, but right now, those type of opportunities are very rare.
Integrated is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 20:08
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Wandsworth
Posts: 175
I agree we are where we are unfortunately, however even £30k is a cash cow, with a certain Irish low cost carrier I've seen 24k. What makes EZY so expensive? Or is it pure profiteering by school and airline?

I presume the type rating after FTE ends up with a contract with EasyJet, not some sort of "Flexi-Crew" arrangement like a certain Southampton based school has where you're not really a proper employee. It seems there's enough cadets flying EasyJet aeroplanes this way, another scandal after the scandal of £30k (Plus whatever additional sundry expenses are incurred)!
planesandthings is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 20:41
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Yes, it's still a cash cow. I don't know what makes it so expensive, I can only speculate! And yes, you join as a full-time first officer, there is no "Flexi-Crew" arrangement with regards to easyJet. As to whether its profiteering by the school and airline, I couldn't say. I'm not privy as to what the deal is between the school and the airline, but what I can say is that in this instance it's largely irrelevant. Allow me to explain...

I was accepted into a number of schools, including CTC as you mention, but I was never fully convinced that the after-graduation "care" existed. I met the HoT of FTE a while before I even knew the school existed and decided I wanted to check the place out based purely on our rapport. I checked the place out, and without hesitation - I joined the next month after I passed selection.

While I've been here, I've had ups and downs, trials and tribulations, just like many others - but ultimately I'm very happy to be here. It comes down to the fact that, genuinely, every member of staff knows your name, whether they teach you or not, they will help you, whether it's in hours or not, they will do anything they can to make you a better pilot, not just to pass the ATPL exams. The HoT, knows everyone and I often see him go out of his way to help people - some of whom may not even be at the school anymore! The CTKI and Deputy CTKI will always, ALWAYS, have the time to talk to you about any queries and will go out of their way to assist in any way they can. This isn't just empty pleasantries, I've had testing situations where I've genuinely needed help and they've always been both honest and helpful. The teaching faculty itself are genuinely from their heart excited to see the students passing and moving on into our chosen career paths. And I'm talking just about ground school!

Ultimately, the point of this thread was to assess the school (out of 10 as the original poster worded it) and to gauge the employment prospects of its' students post-graduation. Perhaps we got derailed from that fact, so to clarify a couple of things. This is a great school to go to. I'm very happy I commenced my training here. There are ups and downs like I said, but it's a 10/10 for me. I've probably needed more support than most in the learning curve (being slightly older than the rest), but got there in the end thanks to the aspects of the school you don't see in the shiny brochure. A prime example of this is the teachers who readily and happily met with me after school hours (time for which they are not on duty, or being paid extra for) purely to help me get my head around a problem that I could not seem to understand earlier in class.

The employment prospects after graduation are just as good. Most courses are often fully employed before they even leave the gates of the school. The school prepare you not just to pass ATPL's, CPL, IR and MCC, they constantly remind you and show you, how to be a good pilot, both in the way you think and in the way you present yourself. Nobody here just walks into a job because of merely being an FTE student, we must pass interviews, group testing, technical interviews, or sim tests, the same as any other. It's simply that the school better prepares you for that, and that's why they do so well with placement.

Either way, type rating costs high or not, it's not really the issue. That is a problem but it is not something that is going away any time soon. As far as the threads original purpose of ascertaining what FTE is like and its' employment prospects after the fact, I think my posts have more than answered this.

I'm 3 months away from graduation, with only the MCC left to complete after that. Am I happy that I came to FTE? 100%.
Integrated is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 21:53
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Wandsworth
Posts: 175
Great contribution. FTE would be my choice over the others if I were to think about integrated again as a safer bet for employment, for all the obvious pros of FTE plus yours above. When I've spoken to FTE I certainly find them more genuine and less of a marketing stunt than the other two with just as great opportunities, if not better.

I wish you all the best.
planesandthings is offline  
Old 20th Apr 2017, 23:42
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,307
Originally Posted by planesandthings View Post
Sure there is an interview for EZY, you could pass it with flying colours with fantastic quality of training and whatever other requirements they state, but the requirement is the money, end of, EasyJet specify the amount for the TR and they will expect it or you're out the door.
After spending £100k on a ATPL, how easy is it to pull £30-40k out of the bag, some of it totally upfront?
It is surprising how many people fail to understand that if you don't have money in this industry you face near impossible challenges to get jobs with certain employers. I am afraid that is now the case and is never likely to change....
The interview stage isn't about your "ability to pay" for a type rating. If that is a stipulation, it will be assumed that you have already taken that into account prior to making your application. The reason that so many airlines now require successful applicants to pay for their type ratings is down to history.

Thirty odd years ago, an airline offering conditional employment to a new recruit who required training on type, did so on the presumption that the recruit would honour that investment and stay with the company long enough to provide a reasonable return on that investment. Unfortunately, in times of plentiful opportunity, a few seized their new found ratings and left the provider in the lurch as they saw better opportunities for themselves.

Twenty odd years ago, airlines responded to this concern by "bonding" recruits needing type ratings for an amortisation period (often 2-3 years). If the recruit decided to break the contract, the employer could seek recovery from the pilot for the unsatisfied element of that contract. The problem with this was that a number of pilots simply took the viewpoint "Good luck with that!" And left the employer with the time and costs of seeking recovery.

Over the last 10 years, more and more airlines have moved on and taken the viewpoint that the risk should move from themselves to the applicant. The applicant isn't actually qualified to satisfy the vacancy (without a type rating) so they are going to provide it at the applicants cost. If the applicant then decides to move on to pasteurs new the airline isn't left holding the financial can for that training.

It has taken Thirty years or so, but that is the simple reason why this situation has evolved. I have witnessed it happening first hand. Long time followers of these forums will bear witness to the cries of indignation twenty years ago when "bonding" started to become more widespread. Nowadays if companies require you to assume the cost risk of your type training, then that is a part of the overall ab-initio training programme and people would be well advised to have understood that at a very early stage.

Perhaps this brief potted history lesson will help with that "understanding" ?
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 02:47
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 7
And over the last couple of years these two giant LCCs have realised that they can actually make money from their new employees (whether that word can be used to describe them is another matter).
There are still decent operators out there. Flybe for example, a company with comparatively minuscule profit margins, still pays for the type rating (bonded) and treats its employees like human beings.
Shamrock49 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 08:20
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moscow
Posts: 5
P2F is one of the factors leading to the degradation of flight safety. This is called Commercial Pressure on the pilot. Companies are looking primarily for pilots who are able to pay (some of you support these schemes). Other pilots who are "cornered", but also want to fly - they borrow money, take loans from banks. Yes, they start to fly, but they constantly think how to get this money back. But the main thing they should think about is compliance with the SOP and be responsible for safety. People supporting P2F involved in this degradation.

Sometimes a pilot should say NO. But the psychology is that - you are pressured by what you really want. These airlines want from you only money. Stop P2F. Refuse all offers where you asked to pay for TR and LT and after some time you will see changes.
Pilot.v1 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 15:12
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,307
But where can an applicant run nowadays without at least 500 hours on type?
Almost nowhere. So the problem is that the management is just interested in another 15-25K EUR of profit and why not make it on junior employees?
Self-sponsored Type Rating & P2F shall be forbidden by law.
Yes, but 500 hours on type is generally less than 1 years experience. An airline making this level of investment would generally be looking at a commitment level well beyond this timescale. For a commercial company providing type ratings and employment conditional on those ratings it wouldn't be looking for a "churn" rate of 9-12 months. If it were to run a significant risk of that happening it certainly makes sense to make the supply of that training profitable.

Bear in mind that without the type rating you are not an employee, since the employment contract is likely to be conditional on the aquisition of that type rating and passing induction line training. It is fairly unusual for airlines to bond long standing employees for additional training. That is because they are already on a contract of employment and because they are already likely to have demonstrated a commitment.

The reason for the evolution is as I have already described, and that is down to many companies having had their fingers burnt in the past.

P2F is one of the factors leading to the degradation of flight safety. This is called Commercial Pressure on the pilot. Companies are looking primarily for pilots who are able to pay (some of you support these schemes). Other pilots who are "cornered", but also want to fly - they borrow money, take loans from banks. Yes, they start to fly, but they constantly think how to get this money back. But the main thing they should think about is compliance with the SOP and be responsible for safety. People supporting P2F involved in this degradation.

Sometimes a pilot should say NO. But the psychology is that - you are pressured by what you really want. These airlines want from you only money. Stop P2F. Refuse all offers where you asked to pay for TR and LT and after some time you will see changes.
"Pay to Fly" is something that you do from the moment you start your PPL training. It is going to burn great big holes in your pocket until the day you become qualified and obtain a job that enables you to start amortising those training costs. The distinction here is that of "qualification." Airlines have grown to take the view that you are not "qualified" unless you already have the qualification necessary for employment. Unfortunately, that has evolved to include the "type qualification" criteria, unless you are already in possession of it, and with substantive experience to back it up. Whereas once they would have assumed that risk, no longer are many prepared to do so.

I am afraid that evidentially it doesn't lead to the degradation of flight safety. What individuals borrow from banks for flight training or car loans or mortgages or anything else, is a matter for the individual whether they are a cadet pilot or a 40 year veteran.
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 16:04
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moscow
Posts: 5
About "Qualified" or not "Qualified". Some companies diesn't care if you already Type Rated and they can ask you to REDO it:

Originally Posted by Tomtomsky
I paid 15500 for my TR that is incl. CL and NG AND Hotel PLUS base training. That is something different then FR.

Then after 3,5 years CAE called me and asked what my situation was. I said well, I just obtained my 737 Rating... The friendly lady, asked me then, well are you still interested to work in FR? I said yes, but NOT when I have to REDO B737 Rating all over again for the grandstand price of 30K. I said, I HAVE TR737 rating so if they are in such a big need then they should take me on, but that was NOT possible when you dont have hrs on type. So then my answer was Thanks but NO Thanks.

Source: http://www.pprune.org/interviews-jobs-sponsorship/222538-ryanair-interview-sim-assessment-merged-362.html

... And of coarse companies are "not trying" to make profit on pilots. ... And TR is responsibility of reach pilot. Poor poor companies.
Pilot.v1 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 17:36
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 283
Beazlebub, you seem to spend a lot of time posting long-winded justifications for airlines charging for training/type rating etc.... Do you perhaps work in the industry?

Ignoring the reasons for airlines doing what they are doing for a moment, do you agree with the practice of charging for type ratings?

While I agree that a desire "not to get their fingers burnt" played a part in airlines moving from funding training, to bonding it and then making the cadet pay it all, this does somewhat ignore the fact that many are now not only charging their but making handsome profit on top! This has nothing to do with risk and everything to do with increasing their margins.
ManUtd1999 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2017, 18:02
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,307
Beazlebub, you seem to spend a lot of time posting long-winded justifications for airlines charging for training/type rating etc.... Do you perhaps work in the industry?
The airline industry? Yes! The commercial flight training industry? No!

Ignoring the reasons for airlines doing what they are doing for a moment, do you agree with the practice of charging for type ratings?
No. But the point is, you cannot ignore the reasons behind the practice. By providing the history I would hope it helps with the understanding.

While I agree that a desire "not to get their fingers burnt" played a part in airlines moving from funding training, to bonding it and then making the cadet pay it all, this does somewhat ignore the fact that many are now not only charging their but making handsome profit on top! This has nothing to do with risk and everything to do with increasing their margins.
They are commercial businesses, not charities or institutions of academia. Their entire raison d'être is to make a profit. When they used to pay for this type of training it would do absolutely nothing for their margins when a few individuals availed themselves of it and then sold it on to somebody else. When they "bonded", it did nothing for their margins when a few individuals broke their contracts resulting in legal costs or fiscal write offs. The new reality in the world of "lo-co" aviation is of survival in those margins. If your competitors are making more profit than you are, then you are operating at a disadvantage that is likely to prove an existential threat eventually.

About "Qualified" or not "Qualified". Some companies diesn't care if you already Type Rated and they can ask you to REDO it:
Yes, but again this has always been something of a fallacy. An airline recruiting a type rated pilot quite reasonably expects said pilot to have significant experience to go with that rating. In other words, they expect you to have been type rated by another airline in accordance with a structured training programme leading to experience with that airline. This type of experience should result in a low input risk for the airline. This is worlds away from somebody with low experience speculatively buying a type rating with no subsequent relevant experience, and then expecting an airline to accept this without any input from the new company. Far from from being advantageous, most companies would simply regard it as a big "red flag!"
Bealzebub is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.