Instructor standards falling?

[mazzy1026]

Absolutely right SAS. I suppose I am looking at my own experiences, and all the good times "I" had when I was learning, and trying to build the picture from that. Everything has it's downfalls, like you say.The only response I can give, is that I'd rather have the downfalls of that job, than any other

[VFE]

The problem with doing an hour of instructing "here or there" is that it's a sure fire way to balls a student up.

You don't get good at instructing overnight it takes time and rarely equates to how much knowledge you possess as a pilot. Forget that at the students peril.

VFE.

[mazzy1026]

Quote:"The problem with doing an hour of instructing "here or there" is that it's a sure fire way to balls a student up."I agree - I mentioned doing the trial flights...

[VFE]

That wasn't directed just to you Mazzy. Trial lessons are one area where most full-time instructors would happily see someone you describe taking up the slack.

VFE.

[mazzy1026]

I suppose even the odd renewal, experience check, or even someone to chat to for advice. Even if I had one student who flew every Saturday with me - great stuff all round I think.

[S-Works]

An interesting post Mazzy, but you are missing one vital point, that any job eventually becomes that. A job.

You are completely right SAS. One way of preventing it becoming a job is not to do it as a job but as a diversion.

I believe that I have enough experience to put something back into flying by passing back the experience that I have gained over the years. I am prepared to put back and ask nothing in return. If that makes me a monster in the eyes of those who 'just do it as a job' then so be it. But it does make a very sad reflection on the way society is these days. All about money and self gain.

[Flying Farmer]

Nope its about paying the mortgage and putting food on the table

[Say again s l o w l y]

Utter rot, Bose.

This is not about "putting something back in". That's just emotive rubbish, but since you bring that argument up.

I've put plenty into the flight training industry over the years. Money, time, effort and a whole host of other intangibles. I've earnt in reality the square root of f'all compared to the effort I've put into GA. 7 days a week, 12-15 hour days and you reckon because you're doing the odd free flight you are "putting something back". Don't make me laugh.

So, is it wrong to expect to get something/anything back?

Is it ****. I'll ask you a question. If you had all your money and your Porsche taken off you tomorrow, would you still teach for nothing?

I doubt it. So don't get sanctimonious, you are lucky, you don't have to get paid. The vast majority of FI's aren't as lucky as you or I and need to earn from their profession.

Without FI's the industry dies, it's already in a parlous state with falling student take ups and an atrocious record of keeping people on board once qualified.

Why make it even more difficult for FI's to stay in the industry. How is flying for free helping anyone apart from the PPL's you fly with who most likely could afford to pay you easily?

Of those thousands of hours and hundreds of types are you telling me that none of these private owners can afford to stump up £30/hr for an FI?

In what way are you "putting something back" by not charging people wealthy enough to own their own a/c?

If you were helping out struggling students who couldn't otherwise finish their training, or doing something like air cadets or young Eagles, then you could use the argument you are "putting something back".

What you are doing is using your own wealth to compete with other FI's in an unfair manner.

What's next, someone offering to split the costs so that they can get another type in the logbook, even though they are performing a job?

Oh hang on, that's already happened in the airline world. Really worked well for everyone didn't it? If your name happens to be O'Leary then yes it did, but for the rest of us? Nope.

[Fuji Abound]

Without FI's the industry dies, it's already in a parlous state with falling student take ups and an atrocious record of keeping people on board once qualified.

SAS

Ok, to be provocative, why is it a job for which you should get paid well or at all?

If a pilot does a FI course and wishes to teach for nothing is his teaching by definition any better or worse than yours?

If he has invested his own capital in a "nice" aircraft which he is willing to use for training, is the student getting a better deal than going to some crumby school?

Which of these students is more likely to stay on board once qualified?

In a capitalist economy you dont get paid by right for anything - you either get paid because the legislation protects your profession from every other Tom Dick and Harry who thinks they can set themselves up in the same business or because no one else is prepared to do the job, or you do it better than most.

There are lots of Tom, Dick and Harrys who at least think they can teach people to fly, and their are lots willing to do it for nothing because they think they will enjoy it, so the only thing that keeps the business going is the regulatory framework which protects even those who do it badly but have the right bits of paper.

If the regulatory framework changes so will the industry - dramatically - for the better - well who knows!

[Say again s l o w l y]

Why should you get paid for any job? Just because I enjoy flying doesn't change anything. I'm lucky because I enjoy my job. I'll be damned if anyone is going to tell me that just because a job is "fun" you shouldn't recieve any pay for it.

Go tell that to Lewis Hamilton. Sorry fella, you enjoy racing too much. I'm afraid you are going to have to do it for free....

Payment has nothing to do with competence. I make absolutely no judgement on Boses abilities based on the fact he doesn't charge, that isn't the thrust of the argument and frankly I wouldn't know as we've never worked or flown together.


Supply and demand controls the market rate in our economy, but it gets sent skew whiff when someone comes in and does it for nothing because they don't need the money.

If PPL's are allowed to teach (obviously I understand that they already can....) but not get renumerated, that completely changes the economics of the business and obviously wages will be depressed by more people competing for a smaller slice of the pie.

My argument is that this will actually damage the whole industry long term. You cannot have the same control over staff who only do a job "for a bit of fun" so standards will slip. I've seen it with my own baby blues.

At one place I worked we had a bunch of PPL FI's at weekends and Frozen ATPL FI's during the week. It was chaos. There was no team atmosphere, everyone taught different things in different ways and looking back on it, it just wasn't good enough. I was a sprog at the time and didn't know any better so I thought this was normal.

If someone invests their hard earned into a nice aircraft and sets up an RF and all the gumph that goes with it, then good luck to them. They won't last 5 minutes with just one machine and one FI no matter what they charge, but good luck anyway.

You are also making the very wrong assumption that people who get paid ie CPL holders with an FI ticket do a worse job than a PPL FI would.

Seriously, that is a laughable suggestion. Some might be good, but I know lots and lots of PPL's, some of whom I even count as friends but there aren't many who I'd employ as FI's without significant re-training.

They are safe and competent pilots and have even done things like fly to other countries (shock horror!) or fly "past the fold in the map" (gasp!) but most haven't got the groundschool or the currency to become FI's without a long and expensive process, that the current FI rating wouldn't really cope with.

This is before we start going into issues like bad habits, which we can all suffer from. In fact the ones who seem most immune from the bad habit issue are the 250hr wet behind the ears mob. They are also used to learning at a phenomenal rate and are usually as keen as mustard. Exactly what I would want in any new and inexperienced employee. No matter what the industry.

[Fuji Abound]

You are also making the very wrong assumption that people who get paid ie CPL holders with an FI ticket do a worse job than a PPL FI would.

No, I am seriously not. My point was that whether an instructor gets paid or not every instructor is (or should be) trained to the same standard. That is what the FIs qualification, as any qualification, seeks to achieve.

Why should you get paid for any job? Just because I enjoy flying doesn't change anything. I'm lucky because I enjoy my job. I'll be damned if anyone is going to tell me that just because a job is "fun" you shouldn't recieve any pay for it.

And

Supply and demand controls the market

You see this is the point. You have chosen to do something a lot of people will do for little or no pay. Most jobs involve significant elements of grind and that is why there is a shortage of people willing to work for nothing. Moreover most jobs require a degree of continuity - for example, you don’t want to talk to a different solicitor every time you ‘phone. However many think that they can do a bit of teaching when it suites them (while the normal day job pays the mortgauge) and they are probably right. Does the student care if you are there when he ‘phones up on a Friday - almost certainly not, as long as you are there for his lessons every Wednesday. We pay people because in many cases it causes them to turn up in the morning and spend at least some of their time doing something they would prefer not to be doing!

My best instructor ran a bedroom furniture shop - it provided him with a good income, he taught three afternoons a week, his students knew when he was on “duty” and he was never short of a booking. He was hugely enthusiastic about his flying (perhaps the more so because only teaching three days a week he looked forward to each teaching day) and he was very good at what he did. As it happens he was paid.

If I started a club which invested substantially in new aircraft and was staffed by PPL FIs or whatever new animal EASA might throw up I would probably get plenty of volunteers and I might even run a successful business. Alternatively I might find by paying my instructors they were more committed and turned up more reliably. I wonder.

[S-Works]

Utter rot, Bose.

This is not about "putting something back in".

As you wish. I think we have to agree to disagree on this. You are clearly driven by a financial need to extract money from aviation. I am not. When I teach I am committed and I think you will struggle to find anyone who has not been satisfied with the quality of my teaching. Many of them on this forum.

Whether I choose to charge or not is my concern and just because more often than not I choose not to believing my reward comes in other ways is my prerogative.

Getting bitter and twisted because you perceive that I might be better off than you just displays a green eyed monster that I would not have expected of you.

[Say again s l o w l y]

So, none of your comments actually say that an unpaid or PPL FI is "better" than a paid or CPL holder?

If you put your money where your mouth is and invested wads of cash in a flying school, then you would be utterly nuts to entrust your investment into the hands of unpaid volunteers, who are less accountable than paid staff.

Volunteer management is totally different from managing paid staff. The rules are totally different. I wonder if anyone has actually thought of that?

People are not paid only because they are doing something they don't like. Or to just turn up. If that is how you work, then you are in the wrong job.

In teaching flying you are paid to impart knowledge and because you have demonstrated the ability to do this by passing an FI Course. You are aslo being paid for the responsibility you take.

Turning up is a given, not something you are paid for.

That's like trying to argue that you deserve a pay rise simply because you do your job well. That's what you are paid to do in the first place! You don't deserve more money just for doing what you are contracted for.

All FI's who teach to the same level should be trained in the same way, but standards will always be variable. FI's are all different, schools are all different and students are all different and need different approaches.

You mention the example of a student who comes in once a week. That's OK, but what about the students who come for an intensive course who want to be there 5 days a week or even more? Many, many students do their courses in that manner, so you need a range of people to keep continuity of training.

You cannot expect someone to be there full time and not get paid. What about on the rubbish weather days when there is no chance of flying. Who is going to chat to the walk in customers. Do you just shut up shop on poor days? Could you really expect someone who's a volunteer to sit there bored out of their mind from 9-5 during the long and very boring winter months?

It just isn't practical without full time paid staff available every day.

Bose, your financial status means as much to me as what the pope had for breakfast, but to set your mind at ease I'm in the lucky situation of not having to work if I don't need to.
I don't NEED to extract cash from aviation and you make it sound like a grubby and distasteful act just because I believe in a fair days wage, for a fair days work.

This is why I used this phrase "The vast majority of FI's aren't as lucky as you or I and need to earn from their profession."


It is not I who has the wierd attitude to working and getting rewarded financially, but then again, as professional pilot who holds an FI rating, I can charge for my services, so I do.

After having invested >£50K in my own training, then why the hell not?

[S-Works]

So, none of your comments actually say that an unpaid or PPL FI is "better" than a paid or CPL holder?

I don't seem to recall saying that remuneration had anything to do with the quality of the Instructor. In fact the entire vein of my comments throughout this has to been to campaign to have Instructors treat as the professionals that I believe that they are and be remunerated appropriately.

However seeing the mudslinging aimed at me over the fact that I more often than not I choose not to charge (and I am in a very very tiny minority) makes me wonder if I am giving Instructors more credit than they deserve when it comes to my view about the level of professionalism.......

[Say again s l o w l y]

That comment wasn't aimed at you Bose.

[Contacttower]

(and I am in a very very tiny minority)

I wouldn't be so sure about that, I know of a few people who do instructor for free and to be honest I have mixed feelings about it....

On the one hand why should bose or indeed anyone else conform to someone else's notion of how the flight training industry should operate....or feel they have a 'right' to be paid because they themselves have invested a lot of money in their training....or indeed try and impose their notion of 'fairness' (whatever that might be) on other people.

But more realistically the essential argument that people who instruct for free undermines wages does stand up to scrutiny and for that reason if I ever decided to start instructing I would charge even though I wouldn't need to.

[Fuji Abound]

So, none of your comments actually say that an unpaid or PPL FI is "better" than a paid or CPL holder?

Correct.

unpaid volunteers, who are less accountable than paid staff.

I am not sure because you pay someone they are more accountable. In what way do you imagine this to be so?

You cannot expect someone to be there full time and not get paid.

Agreed. Almost always true unless they are retired.

Who is going to chat to the walk in customers. Do you just shut up shop on poor days? Could you really expect someone who's a volunteer to sit there bored out of their mind from 9-5 during the long and very boring winter months?

.. .. .. but how many flying schools pay their staff when they are not working?

How many flying schools pay their staff a living wage? I dont mean a wage that they can live on when they are 20, but a wage that makes it a worth while career when they have a mortgauge to pay and a family to look after. What type of instructor does that encourage?

When I did my BSAC course it was done in a first class club enviroment. The instructors were excellent. They enjoyed passing on their skills, they enjoyed teaching. They accepted significant responsibility - at least as much as a FI. They were paid their expenses. The club produced excellent divers. When I "qualified" as an instructor I didnt expect to get paid for the instruction I gave because I enjoyed it, and I felt it was an opportunity of returning the time others had put into my training. It worked because it was a club enviroment. Most flying schools are not clubs, but if I startyed a flying school staffed by "volunteers" (at least in so far as the FIs were concerned) I suspect it might do as well as conventional schools. Such a school would offer a different "product" and therefore whether or not it would undermine traditional schools I am less certain. I suspect there are plenty of enthusiastic pilots who would enjoy a bit of instruction for expenses only.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Volunteer management is something I know a little bit about since my wife used to run a Volunteer centre and now spends her life running about the Government putting volunteering onto the political map. So by a process of sublimation I've learnt a bit about how it works.

Volunteers cannot be "told" to do anything unlike a paid member of staff, basically you generally have to suit the role to the individual not the other way around. You have to have a code of conduct and the volunteers have no recourse in law for employment rights

The definition of a volunteers is they are working for the benefit of a third party, not for your own benefit. There is an incredibly fine line between a volunteers role and job replacement.

How is working for free benefitting society in the case of an FI?

One of the big problems with how FI's are paid, is that just because you aren't in the air you are still working. Answering 'phones, dealing with potential customers etc.

Unless you are an FI you don't really have any idea of how hard the job can actually be.

BSAC instructors aren't often full time divers, but if you want an example, how about you go and tell the divers in Aberdeen who are working and earning other people money that they should be happy to spend weeks in a diving bell and do it for free.

The fact is that we are losing FI's because of pay. Life has been getting better pay wise thanks to a fairly dire shortage of FI's, so in this case the laws of supply and demand are now skewed towards the FI and especially the experienced FI who can teach more than just the basics.

I know of a certain school who have been trying to attract an experienced CPL FI, but even for a salary of over £30k, there haven't exactly been many takers.

[bjornhall]

Regarding those who are opposed to free instructing due to reduce their income... I suppose those people never use free software, don't visit a free website if there is a commercial alternative, only use flight planning software that they paid for rather than something freely given away, and of course would never lend anyone anything that could instead be bought in a store... And so on.

[Whirlygig]

As someone who bought a Pprune PT, your analogy is irrelevant and doesn't apply.

There's no such thing as free software just as there's no such thing as a free lunch! The software is paid for, either through previous sales when it was the latest version, advertising etc. Same for websites.

Lending and borrowing are a totally different concepts.

Cheers

Whirls