L3 Harris, the final shafting
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disgusting behaviour by L3, although I can't say as I am particularly surprised. As an organisation they have been at the forefront of increasing costs and barriers to entry into aviation for 10+ years, this is just the latest low point.
To put it into context, these cadets need circa 100 hours flight training to 'upgrade' to a CPL. Pre-covid rates at local flying schools would be 150-200 GBP per hour, slightly more maybe for the multi-engine phases. L3 has decided to charge 600+ GBP her hour, a 300% markup.......
I would like to think this may finally cause enough of a reaction to shame L3 into doing something. Certainly if the pressure can continue to build on social media to drown out their usual "living the dream" nonsense then something might have to give.
However, I have long since argued that all integrated flight training should be fully-funded by airlines. This is the only way to ensure selection is based on merit. However, in the long-term do we really think this is going to change? Cadets being shafted suits the airlines, it suits the flight schools and it suits a select group of wealthy individuals who can afford to pay. There are simply not enough people prepared to break out of the "I'm alright Jack" mentality.
To put it into context, these cadets need circa 100 hours flight training to 'upgrade' to a CPL. Pre-covid rates at local flying schools would be 150-200 GBP per hour, slightly more maybe for the multi-engine phases. L3 has decided to charge 600+ GBP her hour, a 300% markup.......
I would like to think this may finally cause enough of a reaction to shame L3 into doing something. Certainly if the pressure can continue to build on social media to drown out their usual "living the dream" nonsense then something might have to give.
However, I have long since argued that all integrated flight training should be fully-funded by airlines. This is the only way to ensure selection is based on merit. However, in the long-term do we really think this is going to change? Cadets being shafted suits the airlines, it suits the flight schools and it suits a select group of wealthy individuals who can afford to pay. There are simply not enough people prepared to break out of the "I'm alright Jack" mentality.
Surely it's time to change the way the MPL works. Why does it need to be tied to a specific airline just because it uses their SOPs? In the real world someone can leave one airline for another and learn new SOPs. The regulator should test people and either trust them to fly... Or not.
These guys have paid for an MPL, so why can't they finish it?
These guys have paid for an MPL, so why can't they finish it?
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Uk
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe these were EasyJet MPLs but I have heard the BA MPLs are in the same situation. BA have withdrawn offer of employment leaving them at the mercy of L3. The current L3 cadets many of whom have already paid for most of their course are hoping L3 survive long enough for them to complete their training. It would be a disaster for them if L3 went under with their £100,000+.
de minimus non curat lex
I don’t think there is any Regulatory reason why simulator type rating cannot be completed.
The base training for MPL is twelve take-offs & landings which is usually conducted over two days (6/6).
[Why 12 and not the usual 6 still remains a complete mystery to me]
Normally they would become an employee just before the base training commenced. Insurance purposes etc.
When FLYBE had their previous hiccup probably 8 years ago(?), eventually with BALPA involved, as “non permanent employees” their cadets were issued with the MPL.
It simply requires the present cadet airline(s) to carry out the training for licence issue.
The base training for MPL is twelve take-offs & landings which is usually conducted over two days (6/6).
[Why 12 and not the usual 6 still remains a complete mystery to me]
Normally they would become an employee just before the base training commenced. Insurance purposes etc.
When FLYBE had their previous hiccup probably 8 years ago(?), eventually with BALPA involved, as “non permanent employees” their cadets were issued with the MPL.
It simply requires the present cadet airline(s) to carry out the training for licence issue.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: galway ireland
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes Cabair- students who paid a top-up lost that as well as their training fees- worth googling to remind people what can happen- the internet may not forget but people certainly can
A few more to jog the internet's memory.
CAPT, Flagler FL
Pilot Training College, Ireland and FL
Jet University, Fort Lauderdale FL
Tab Express, DeLand FL
Silver State Helicopters, Las Vegas NV
Mazzei Flying Service, Fresno CA
American School of Aviation, Atwater CA
Euro American School of Aviation (Ormond Beach Aviation), Ormond Beach FL
National Pilot Academy, Cedar City UT
Airline Training International, Toronto ON
Aldergrove Flight Training Centre, Northern Ireland
Top Fly, Sabadell and Huesca Spain
Stinson Air Center, San Antonio TX
Airline Training Academy, Orlando FL
CAPT, Flagler FL
Pilot Training College, Ireland and FL
Jet University, Fort Lauderdale FL
Tab Express, DeLand FL
Silver State Helicopters, Las Vegas NV
Mazzei Flying Service, Fresno CA
American School of Aviation, Atwater CA
Euro American School of Aviation (Ormond Beach Aviation), Ormond Beach FL
National Pilot Academy, Cedar City UT
Airline Training International, Toronto ON
Aldergrove Flight Training Centre, Northern Ireland
Top Fly, Sabadell and Huesca Spain
Stinson Air Center, San Antonio TX
Airline Training Academy, Orlando FL
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Palm Beach
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Between this thread started by Alex W and several of my previous threads, I hope the integrated v modular debate is finally over - we shall see! Maybe the STICKY needs to go and we can start fresh?
Word of caution however, is this Forum influential enough today?... maybe? ,any opinions from those who have posted thousands of times over many years?
Oh and don't forget, many people have very short memories.
Word of caution however, is this Forum influential enough today?... maybe? ,any opinions from those who have posted thousands of times over many years?
Oh and don't forget, many people have very short memories.
de minimus non curat lex
Interesting, as BA Cityflyers (as were FLYBE) were required to complete twelve for MPL base training.
There were discussions/proposals to reduce to six ~ perhaps that came through?
There were discussions/proposals to reduce to six ~ perhaps that came through?
Last edited by parkfell; 28th Sep 2020 at 09:02. Reason: insert FLYBE
"Are all of the 80 hours aeroplanes credited against a CPL/IR with a frozen ATPL? Or only a proportion of those hours counted?"
I might be wrong but as far as I understand it from my team, there is no "conversion" between MPL and ATPL... so there is no credit for those flight hours
Would love to hear I am wrong and explaining how the credit can be done
I might be wrong but as far as I understand it from my team, there is no "conversion" between MPL and ATPL... so there is no credit for those flight hours
Would love to hear I am wrong and explaining how the credit can be done
Before exercising the privileges of a CPL(A), the holder of an MPL shall have completed in aeroplanes:
(a) 70 hours of flight time:
(1) as PIC; or
(2) made up of at least 10 hours as PIC and the additional flight time as PIC under supervision (PICUS).
Of these 70 hours, 20 shall be of VFR cross-country flight time as PIC, or cross-country flight time made up of at least 10 hours as PIC and 10 hours as PICUS. This shall include a VFR cross-country flight of at least 540 km (300 NM) in the course of which full-stop landings at two different aerodromes shall be flown as PIC;
(a) 70 hours of flight time:
(1) as PIC; or
(2) made up of at least 10 hours as PIC and the additional flight time as PIC under supervision (PICUS).
Of these 70 hours, 20 shall be of VFR cross-country flight time as PIC, or cross-country flight time made up of at least 10 hours as PIC and 10 hours as PICUS. This shall include a VFR cross-country flight of at least 540 km (300 NM) in the course of which full-stop landings at two different aerodromes shall be flown as PIC;
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Ireland
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstream alpha
Basically the program is suspended indefinitely, they were given the option to continue training as self sponsored in a standard ATPL program with Aer Lingus contributing about 40% of the cost and a slight discount on the course from FTE. If they don't take this option they have been told they will be trained when the cadet scheme returns. The ones who do convert to ATPL have been given some sort of promise that they will be recruited ahead of others when recruitment eventually restarts
Basically the program is suspended indefinitely, they were given the option to continue training as self sponsored in a standard ATPL program with Aer Lingus contributing about 40% of the cost and a slight discount on the course from FTE. If they don't take this option they have been told they will be trained when the cadet scheme returns. The ones who do convert to ATPL have been given some sort of promise that they will be recruited ahead of others when recruitment eventually restarts
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ that is how a proper organisation treats people, despite the difficult circumstances.
It also raises the point that EZY and BA (if it is also their MPL cadets who are affected?) are not blameless here either. As an airline they have significant leverage to pressurize L3 to offer a discounted ATPL conversion. Maybe they did, but judging by the results they didn't try very hard.....
It also raises the point that EZY and BA (if it is also their MPL cadets who are affected?) are not blameless here either. As an airline they have significant leverage to pressurize L3 to offer a discounted ATPL conversion. Maybe they did, but judging by the results they didn't try very hard.....
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Bristol, England
Age: 65
Posts: 1,801
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only 70 flight hours on an MPL, the rest in simulators. One MCC/APS operator was offering a state-of-the-art fixed base NG sim at £80 an hour dry recently. The margins in an MPL are huge, that's why the big ATOs like them. L3 should have recognised what FTE clearly did, that reputation has a value. Mind you, FTE would have acted decently even if no-one was watching. As it is, who would go to L3 for anything now? The moral for megacorps is choose the managers of your subsidiaries carefully.
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Uk
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ManUtd1999
It is EZY and BA MPLs. BA have also withdrawn the offer of employment for their ATPL cadets who are still some way off completing the course. Originally BA had stated they would be kept in a hold pool for up to 4 years until jobs became available this offer has been withdrawn. Apparently when and if BA start recruiting these cadets will have to go through BA selection process all over again. They will receive no preferential treatment despite having being selected by BA to commence training.
It is EZY and BA MPLs. BA have also withdrawn the offer of employment for their ATPL cadets who are still some way off completing the course. Originally BA had stated they would be kept in a hold pool for up to 4 years until jobs became available this offer has been withdrawn. Apparently when and if BA start recruiting these cadets will have to go through BA selection process all over again. They will receive no preferential treatment despite having being selected by BA to commence training.
de minimus non curat lex
One of the many advantages FTE have over L3, is that the CEO / Owner is on site, and is able to make rapid decisions as was the case in March with the unfortunate AerLingus cadets.
