Good or bad idea for airlines?

[OBK!]

I have just been thinking about minimum requirements that airlines ask. Most people have something to argue about the minmum requirements such as age limits, specific education requirements, hours in your log book etc. Most people also think that it should all boil down to how devoted you are to becoming a pilot.

A few months ago Britannia offered sponsorship and they had some requirements that sparked off some debate. They wanted something like a maximum of 15 hrs flying experience, preferably none, and ideally a degree. Many would question "what does this proove about the ideal canidate". He or she might not even know whether they like flying should they have no experience. He/she might not bit fit enough to pass a medical etc etc.

Anyway, to the point, I have been thinking of an idea which airlines could use...see what you think.

Should an airline come to offer sponsorship, they are obviously sunk under a lot of applications. Many from those who just think "ahh well, I have the minimum requirements, might aswell give it a go". My method I think will immediately reduce those piles of applications into one...."committed applicants".

Basically, why not have minimum requirements like the following:

- aged 18 - 30 on application
- holder of a JAA/UK PPL with maximum of 200 hrs total time
- Passed all JAA ATPL exams

Now the airline knows that all those that have applied have chipped in there own money for the studies, and are all academically fit for the job. Instead of receiving loads of applications from people who might not fit a pilots personality etc etc. The airline actually actually knows that all these applicants are comitted, and it is only a small fortune for the applicant, say £3,000 for ATPL exams (£6,000 at Oxford blah blah blah)...quite a lot cheaper than a uni degree?

What do you guys think? It's only a suggestion so don't start a flame please!

[Luke SkyToddler]

Well it's hardly that controversial OBK, you've just described the Buzz and BE sponsorship and the rest of the Cabair-affiliated sponsorship schemes.

Here's a better idea though ...

Hold a FATPL, IR, and MCC

... and anybody that was offering anything resembling 'sponsorship' would still have thousands of applications!

Classic current example is Easyjet's so called 'sponsorship' for a type rating which I'll bet is absolutely snowed under with 500+ hour, self funded pilots queueing up to throw 23 grand at the chance of a 737 rating.

If they wanted to, I reckon a crowd like BA could easily take fully self funded FATPL holders, bond them for the same breathtaking amount as their ab initio cadets and still get loads of applications. Sh!t I'd do it in a flash, I'm a hairs breadth away from 2,000 hours now with 500 multi and I'd still be better off on a BA cadet's package than what I could get at most regionals or turboprop operators.

Come to think of it, hey Rod Eddington are you reading this??

[+7-5G]

"Classic current example is Easyjet's so called 'sponsorship' for a type rating which I'll bet is absolutely snowed under with 500+ hour, self funded pilots queueing up to throw 23 grand at the chance of a 737 rating."

Out of interest, does anybody have stats on how many holders of a FATPL, IR, and MCC are out there looking for airline work?

[Flypuppy]

I dont believe there are any recoreded figures for out of work pilots. Last "rule of thumb" figures I heard were approx 2000 qualified pilots looking for work of which approx 500 were experienced type rated people.

That could of course be just a load of old bollocks.

[Northern Highflyer]

Why restrict it to 30 ?

Are we past it over that age ?

Many wannabes on this site are over 30 and have much to offer. They are also more certain of what they want out of a career than many 18 year olds too.

Is ageism replacing sexism and racism now ?

Ok I am over 30 so do have a bias on it but I am far from past my useful working life at 33 and have many years to offer the right airline.

[OBK!]

You have to understand tho that my ideas where related to sponsorship. Making it 35, adds another coouple of hundred applications. Also, the upper age limit of 30 justifies quite a lot of things about an applicant. If you can say that at 33, wanting to apply for a sponsorship scheme along the lines of my idea, that you have only got 200hrs in your logbook, and are seeking SPONSORSHIP....then the airline may be led to think "why has it taken them 10+ years to get a PPL with 200hrs". You may argue that since 17 you wanted to be a pilot, but this means that for 16 years, it's taken you this long to get to the stage of applying to sponsorship?

I dunno, I am just trying to anticipate what real airlines would think to my idea. In an ideal world for a wannabe, it would be great to have "age limit for application 50" or whatever, and then just have a recruitment selection where by everyone who applied (and meets criteria) gets to jump in the 767/757 sim (or whateva), fly around for 30mins, do a few tech quizies, personality quiz, and bobs your unckle...the one with most potential to be a pilot wins. Airline puts £80,000 in your back sky.....but we all know it isn't like that.

Thanks for your participation in the thread tho

[Andy_R]

then the airline may be led to think "why has it taken them 10+ years to get a PPL with 200hrs". You may argue that since 17 you wanted to be a pilot, but this means that for 16 years, it's taken you this long to get to the stage of applying to sponsorship?

Have you not thought that the older ones amongst us may well have wanted to fly since we were 2 years old, but have been unable to afford to do so?
Not every one has the means to be able to learn to fly at 18 years old.
Some have to wait until they have worked long enough to climb up the ladder to the point of actually being able to pay their own way.
Not all parents are well off enough to be able to help either, and as many people have found, banks are very unwilling to lend unsecured funds to anyone who walks in off the street without a very good case for being able to pay that money back to them.

And in your thirties you are far more mature and level headed and indeed more grateful at being given a chance to prove yourself. Indeed, loyalty will have been proved to be higher amongst older employees by case study after case study.

[OBK!]

Some have to wait until they have worked long enough to climb up the ladder to the point of actually being able to pay their own way.

I agree, I had to work about a year, doing weekends packing fruit and vegetables, 8 hrs per day sat/sun, whilst during the week I was at secondary school. After 1 year at college, I decided I had had enough, and instead of continuing, and going to university, I might aswell spend a small fortune doing my ATPLs, rather then on a degree....at the end of which i would be in debt...no money for flying, not many sponsorships kicking around and stuck in another low paid boring job saving up enough money to do my ATPL's...then at the age of around 30, I would be doing so. But at the moment, I am 17, about to take mod 1 exams, and saving up all the time to get (f)ATPL, but I must admit, my father loves my ambition and is keen to help. But don't think I wouldn't be back in that factory working 6am-6pm during weekdays, and 8 hrs sat/sun, should my father not be backing me up.

And in your thirties you are far more mature and level headed and indeed more grateful at being given a chance to prove yourself. Indeed, loyalty will have been proved to be higher amongst older employees by case study after case study.

And at 30, you'll maybe have wife? kids? mortage? a few loans? money going out each month? a lot of stress at home to deal with? How are you going to justify to an airline that for 18 months you can go without barely seeing your family? and pay off all those bills/loans without work for those 18 months?

In the end tho, I am not the airline. If I was, I would love to see every wannabe through the oppurtunity to become a pilot but there's not enough fortune for us all to share. I just thought, with regards to sponsorship, my idea would be more "friendly" to those with a burning, committed approach to becoming an airline pilot.

[Northern Highflyer]

I can see both sides here but have to agree with cloud.

I wanted to be a pilot since I was 4 but RAF wouldn't have me when I looked into it at 16. Back then there was no Internet as such, so I assumed (wrongly) that my flying ambitions were over.

Maturity is a great thing. When I was refused by the RAF I was devastated and went into computing. I could kick myself for not looking further into it and considering airlines but hindsight is a great thing. Then again I couldn't have afforded the bus fare to Sherburn back then never mind any lessons.

Yes I met a girl and got a mortgage. Then I found myself single so I looked into it again a few years ago. No wife or kids so I am in a better position to do it now than I have ever been. Now got PPL (at Sherburn) and in a position to achieve my life ambition starting later this year. The house can act as security with the bank to help fund it. My financial position is now more stable and I would be even willing to part fund a sponsorship but alas I am not eligible.

My parents have never been in a position to help so I have had to do it "the hard way". If I was 45 I could understand the concern regarding large investment for little return from the Airlines point of view regarding how many years they can get put of a new pilot, but I have minimum 20 good years to offer.

Maybe sponsorship should be offered to anyone with a PPL. A PPL at any age shows more committment than no experience at all.

OBK
Maybe we should meet in the lounge for a chat some time.

regards

NH

[OBK!]

Northern, I agree with you all the way, and if I was 30+, I would object to any remark about age limitations should they insult my ability to perform. I guess I was trying to be realistic specifically regarding sponsorship, I don't know if i am tho! I have never worked for an airline and have never been in a job to do with recruitment so wouldn't know the key facts behind recruiting people. (I don't think Id want to be in recruitment job either! all those applications!).

It's always good to see another "Sherburner". I would love to meet up sometime. I should be at the airfield this weekend in YO. I'll only be around for a while as I'm flying down to take some relatives for a spin in RX at Nottingham.

Are you buy any chance with Bristol? I am due to take mod 1 exams in April, I'm on the March brushup.

Revsigin "Airframce icing" as we speak!

[Touch'n'oops]

I'm on the course with the "Choosen few" from Britannia.

Half of them have a PPL and over 50 hours. So Britannia was not really worried about flying experience.

Oh! Before I forget all but one of the 7 have a degree in Aeronautical engineering. So you can kinda work out what Britannia is after!!!!

[OBK!]

You where one of the *lucky* seven out of what? hundreds? maybe thousands?

Britannia could have asked for anything they wanted. However, it wasn't really Britannia's choice, BAE systems have set a minima for training and requires there students to have A levels and the ability to compelte a science based degree.

Will you seriously use all you have learnt from an aeronautical engineering degree by plugging a few digits into an FMC and pressing the little "CMD A" button....oh, and a bit of flying? Most pilots come out of groundschool and ditch what they have learnt, except maybe about 5% of it. I have about 9 good GCSE's, and 3 AS Levels (not A Levels, I quit college after one year) and I am doing ATPLs and it all seems pretty straight forward, mostly GCSE stuff, trig etc. I am sure a little bit of A Level physics will crop up but I have looked at Mod 2 and still...seems pretty straight forward.

I sincerely hope that Britannia doesn't base it's selection on whether the applicant has an aeronautical engineering degree or not, but like I say, they can ask for anything, afterall, you must be academically able if you got a degree

[Northern Highflyer]

OBK

Hope to start with Bristol later this year when I have completed my HND. I am not in too big a rush to start with the current job market, so long as I start this year I will be happy.

One point to consider is that you cannot drive for a living, i.e. HGV, buses or taxis until you are 21 but the Airlines will happily take you on a sponsorship at 18 (maybe younger ??) There are many sides to this debate. As well as the "too old for sponsorship" argument I think there is also one for the "too young" as well.

Might be there on Saturday, might see you there, and good luck with the exams.

Touch

Well done on getting with Britannia, wish I was there too.

[OBK!]

Looks like SBL is all booked up for the weekend!, plus I am working at awkward times. I am there deffinatley in YO on Monday, all morning.

[witchdoctor]

I hate to further provoke a thread that has covered ground done to death many times before, but on the whole age issue, one of the major plusses for "older" pilots is something which OBK highlighted as a potential negative, i.e the whole wife, kids, mortgage thing.

For any airline to part with the vast sums of money required for sponsorship, there are many things they want to see which have already been covered. Another one is long term stability. This is why so many airlines require bonds. The "older" pilot already has a more stable lifestyle and is more likely to remain on a long term basis than a younger, single pilot (in general - everybody is different and I don't pretend otherwise). We can't afford to take the gamble of chasing around from one job to another once you have other people to consider in the equation.

All recruiters want to find the ideal candidate, but often have to compromise. With young pilots, it is the risk they will up sticks and leave for another company/career, with older pilots it is the shorter remaining length of service.

[BoeingMEL]

Good Idea or Bad Idea for the Airlines?

Sorry OBK...but you've no chance of getting a job with Britannia if you can't learn to spell "definitely, its, candidate, minimum, their, revising, couple, quizzes, prove etc etc" Is this a measure of your preparation and review skills?

[OBK!]

Ok BoeingMEL, Ok

[akshaym84]

Well, while the majority agree that the requirements should include some flying time or a licence even, you do seem to forget the younger people with ambitions to fly. Learning to fly is an expensive affair, and many young people (such as myself) are in full-time education and lack the funds to pay for the training. Sponsorships are the best and often the only way we can learn to fly, and the lack of restrictions reflects the obstacles facing cash-strapped students. Getting a job after a degree and using the money to pay to learn to fly is an option, but one that takes many years, often spent in a job that I would rather not be doing. I hope for my sake at least that the industry recovers from the recession and sponsorship schemes become available once again. After all, it seems that it is the only way I will be able to learn to fly!

[OBK!]

akshaym84,

There are about 3 airlines sponsorsing at the moment I believe. Send me a PM and i'd be happy to give links to them.