Is there a Trend towards an Instructor shortage?
 

I was looking on a major Australian flying college website today, and in the employment, it said that there is a trend towards being a shortage of well qualified instructors throughout the world. Can anyone answer me if this is an accurate statement. IS there a shortage of career instructors?

I dont think that there is any shortage of any pilots at the moment. You place an add for an instructor in the Australian on Friday and I bet you get atleast 100 calls for that position. Sounds like they are trying to sell spots on thier next instructor course to me. Some Helicopter training schools are still using the old "most of the pilots flying now are Vietnam era and will be retiring in the next year or so and the knock on effect will really open this industry up!"
I first heard this classic around 6 years ago-still waiting for the mass recruitment to happen! I know it never will cos' the schools are pumping out far more than will ever need replacing. In saying that I would be selling my product to people using the same technqiues so I cant really blame them.
Hope I dont sound too bitter, Just trying to be realistic about the opportunities.
Cheers

It depends..
 

A shortage of pilots? Don't think so.

A shortage of suitably qualified and experienced pilots? Quite possibly.

tippathplane wroteIt's a tried and proven way of getting you to part with your readies, and I'd be very cautious about signing up based on that statement alone.

Java, you wrote "well qualified" instructors. There are a kazillion Grade 3's around. To me, "well qualified" would mean a grade 2 or 1 with IFR, multi-engine, and even aero's etc. It depends on what your prospective employer wants or needs.

At the end of the instructor school you will not be "well qualified". It means that you will have to work hard (nothing wrong with that) to build your hours in order to upgrade, then invest in getting the various approvals to make yourself "well qualified".

If you're fortunate enough to land yourself a position with a reputable organisation that values their employees, they might see your potential and facilitate your approvals. I've only worked at one such establishment.

One problem with taking the instructing path (which has been covered elsewhere in this forum), is that except in very few circumstances the career path and financial rewards are just not there in comparison to following a career with an airline in Australia:*

Don't get me wrong. I had a great time and had some of the most memorable and rewarding experiences when I instructed.

But it didn't pay the bills :rolleyes:

Good luck :O

I'm a G3 instructor in Sydney looking for a job and let me tell you there is no shortage of instructors, there is a huge excess of them!

tippathplane How about putting an ad in The Australian for a Grade One with Multi-engine training approval and three IFR renewals. Now see how many replies you get. Or even for a Grade One!

IMHO the proposed changes to the FI rating under the new CAR pt61 will go a long way to alleviating the problem of finding and keeping qualified instructors. Under the new part the 3 grades of instructor rating will be abandoned in favour of a plain simple FI rating. Additional approvals (multi, instrument etc) are then added depending on the particular bods experience. A similar concept to the current IR.

I think this solves a number of problems -

1. It should go some way to removing the current stigma of being tarred with the instructor brush (and especially the grade 1 brush).

2. It will allow pilots with industry experience to use that experience in the instructing role. For example - I held approvals under 217 to conduct IR renewals, conversion training etc as part of a company check and training system. But now, after I have left the company, because I only hold a basic grade 3 FI rating and have never been involved in ab initio training I am required to be under direct supervision for (whatever the time period is) hours and can't teach IF or do conversion training. So I'm effectively competing with 200 TT instructors. Under the proposed system my previous industry experience would be recognised and subject to any required training and/or flight check I could conduct the training. Seems logical to me!

3. If we can remove the instructing stigma we may be able to encourage a system where bare CPL holders 'go bush' for a couple of years then migrate back to the capitals to continue their careers as either instructors (passing on that well learned experience) or to continue down the multi, turbine, RPT, airline route. Under the proposed system teaching at CPL level will require 300 hours (?) of commercial experience. The present system of 200hr instructors can surely be done better!

Interested in your thoughts!

NTS Check: Some very good information there in your post.

However, none of the proposed reforms will address the industrial issues regarding remuneration and career prospects that Flying Instructors need.

That is the key to keeping suitably qualified individuals in the flying training industry.

The problem with the current situation is that instructors enjoy significantly poorer wages and conditions than unskilled workers in other industries. Mainly because they accept them. In no other industry are professionals required to work hard doing all sorts of duties at the flying school for days on end but only getting paid for your flying.

This is a particular problem in large cities, such as Sydney where the cost of living is extremely high, and it is extremely difficult to make ends meet, particularly if you have family committments. Only the yuppy kids living at home with mum and dad can really afford to live on such pitiful wages and conditions. And most of these yuppy kids have their eye on bigger and better things.

So we live in a vicious circle.....

It would enhance the industry no end if pilots instructed at the end of their careers rather than the beginning.

Unfortunately the incentives are not there.

Off Topic but imagine how difficult the pilots award will become to interperate when the new Part 61 allows for 27 different types of Instructor approvals.

Just a hypothetical.

Imagine if most of the airlines decided tommorrow that they would not count a single hour of instructing time as a part of their minimum requirements.......what would/could happen??

Anyone new 'up and coming' would instantly dismiss the instructor path as the means to an end.

Instructors would suddenly become very thin on the ground.

The only becoming instructors would be those that were genuinely interested in intructing, and they would probably finally be capable of charging the appropriate rate for their services.

the scarcity and calibre of instructors would mean a mich tighter control on the output of all grades of newly licenced pilots. This would eliminate the 'dime-a-dozen' flying school phenomenon we currently see.

Rates for learning to fly would skyrocket, making it even more of an elitists pursuit.

One problem with this scenario is that instructing qualities are an important component of airline intake, and the airlines would be doing themselves a disservice locking out this pool of applicants. (before we get all the old-school 'charter and bush time is the only way to go' crowd having a shot at me, no I am not, and never have been, an instructor)

Jenny Talia
 

Problem with that idea is that you would get all the aeroclub hanger ons wanting to become instructors and hence not neceesarily solving any problems.

I would personally like to see the minimum hours increased.
I reckon that would discourage people using it as a stepping stone and as a result increase demand for instructors, increase remuneration and down the track increase the standards.