Unfair Bonding - need advice pls!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, it appears that the concerned poster who started this thread certainly didn't like the replies received, so I would suspect he/she will not do well in the airline world.
I've seen a few of these over the years, always going against the grain with management.
They never prevail.
I've seen a few of these over the years, always going against the grain with management.
They never prevail.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: ME
Posts: 5,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look on the bright side, the bond is only 5 years.... look at Malaysian...
All cadet pilots will have to repay the cost of training through monthly deductions over a period of fifteen years commencing from the time they are employed as Second Officers. In addition, all cadet pilots have to sign a training bond..
The time to argue a bond is before you sign it, the airline can argue that they sold you a training scheme for E50k and you agreed to pay for it. Why should they have to justify the cost!
Mutt
All cadet pilots will have to repay the cost of training through monthly deductions over a period of fifteen years commencing from the time they are employed as Second Officers. In addition, all cadet pilots have to sign a training bond..
The time to argue a bond is before you sign it, the airline can argue that they sold you a training scheme for E50k and you agreed to pay for it. Why should they have to justify the cost!
Mutt
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: England
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think Mikepops is coming back!!!
Sorry Mike,
If you are still bothering to follow your post, I am another who must virtually kick your butt
It is 5 years..........that's all..........5 years. At the end of it as a Captain you'll be able to name your place and price. The family issue shouldn't be a problem. If the other half was with you through the training, then surely the familly can move to where you are.
And if you think having to move with the job is harsh, think of the Service men and women who move about regularly, and to much less hospitable places than you are no doubt. And some of them will be returning in a box.
It is a harsh life, and the reality is that the airlines are still able to pull the ropes. At least you have that first and perhaps most important job, and I for one would trade places with you now (and I am married with sprats too!).
Last point! As a supposedly more intelligent person (as pilots are assumed to be), why the hell did you ask the question on a public forum. Did you not consider speaking to the Legal Gods!
If you are still bothering to follow your post, I am another who must virtually kick your butt
It is 5 years..........that's all..........5 years. At the end of it as a Captain you'll be able to name your place and price. The family issue shouldn't be a problem. If the other half was with you through the training, then surely the familly can move to where you are.
And if you think having to move with the job is harsh, think of the Service men and women who move about regularly, and to much less hospitable places than you are no doubt. And some of them will be returning in a box.
It is a harsh life, and the reality is that the airlines are still able to pull the ropes. At least you have that first and perhaps most important job, and I for one would trade places with you now (and I am married with sprats too!).
Last point! As a supposedly more intelligent person (as pilots are assumed to be), why the hell did you ask the question on a public forum. Did you not consider speaking to the Legal Gods!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under the sea
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Different country but you get the point...
SUBMISSION TO THE FEDERAL LABOUR STANDARDS REVIEW COMMISSION
BY
THE AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, INTERNATIONAL (ALPA)
RESPECTING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
THE CANADA LABOUR CODE, PART III
Summary:
The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) raises two legislative gaps particularly affecting pilots:
Protection against training bonds and particularly against training bonds whose terms are
overreaching and exploitative, and
Hours of work amendments that are tailored to societal norms and to the aviation
industry.
ALPA recommends:
That training bonds be prohibited. Alternatively, if training bonds are to be permitted,
that they be subject to limitations reflecting only legitimate needs of the employer, and
providing employee relief in the event of employer bankruptcy. To this end, ALPA puts
forward recommendations already endorsed by the International Federation of Air Line Pilots Associations.
That Labour Canada confers with aviation industry stakeholders to develop maximum
hours of work protections as it has done for other transportation sectors.
- 2
Background/Implications:
ALPA is a trade union representing the interests of pilots. ALPA represents over 2,000 pilots employed by five carriers in Canada. Internationally, ALPA represents 64,000 pilots at 41 airlines in the U.S. and Canada, and is a member of the International Federation of Air Line Pilots Associations (IFALPA). ALPA represents pilots in their employment relations, and is a key player in articulating policy concerns arising from this stewardship.
ALPA is concerned that the employment relationship and terms and conditions of employment embody public policy representing minimum standards, safety, and pilot professionalism.
In this brief, ALPA argues that the Canada Labour Code, Part III, lacks appropriate mechanisms to regulate and protect pilots in two key areas:
Training bonds
Hours of work
ALPA is further concerned that the absence of such protections undermines larger public policy goals set out in all three parts of the Canada Labour Code (free and effective rights to be
represented by a trade union, minimum standards, and safety), and in the Canadian Aviation
Regulations.
Issues:
Training Bonds:
1. The 2004 bankruptcy of JetsGo left large numbers of its pilots personally responsible for the
payment of “training bonds” effectively imposed on them as a condition of employment and
advancement.
2. “Training bonds” are performance bonds which commit pilots to forfeit a sum money—
usually substantial--alleged to represent the cost of their training, where the pilot ceases to be
employed for a minimum period of time.
3. Training bonds are common in Canada among smaller carriers and carriers whose employees
lack union representation. They are a clear example of unequal terms of employment
imposed on the most vulnerable members of the profession: typically young pilots, new
hires, and those without representation.
4. The amounts at issue can be stunningly huge, the equivalent of a small mortgage. Media
reports indicate that in the case of JetsGo, substantial numbers of pilots found themselves
liable for sums of $30,000 or more. This at a time when they were thrown out of work.
5. The frank purpose of training bonds is coercion against employment mobility. Pilots subject
to training bonds escape forfeiture only where they remain employed for a minimum period
of time, often years. In effect, they create a form of indentured service.
- 3
6. Training bonds are typically required by employers at a time when the pilot is most
vulnerable: young, inexperienced, and new in the profession. They are entered into in
conditions in which bargaining power is most unequal: at the pre-employment phase as a
condition of hire, and in companies whose employees lack effective representation.
7. The training bond arrangement typically requires a prospective new-hire to put up a sum of
money subject to full or partial repayment where employment does not last a minimum
period of time. Usually, this is in the form of a bank loan arranged by the employer prior to
and as a condition of employment. Typically, the employer will make payments on the bond
for its duration. However, where the pilot’s employment ends prior to the time-frame of the
bond, he or she is individually liable to the bank for the balance.
8. The terms of training bonds are unilaterally set as a condition of hire. Because they are not
negotiated, the terms are usually one-sided and often go beyond the legitimate needs and
interests of employers. For example, the sums and duration of the bond may not reflect the
employer’s actual training expenditure. And they may offload all of the risk of employment interruption onto the pilot, so that he or she remains liable even where wrongfully dismissed, laid off, or terminated as the consequence of a bankruptcy.
9. The existence of training bonds further tilts the employment relationship in the employer’s
favour for their duration. Pilots under threat of forfeiture are less likely to take risks
associated with incurring employer displeasure. They may be less likely to hold employers
accountable for safety, putting the travelling public at risk. They may feel constrained in
their free choice to seek union representation. In both these ways, training bonds generate
effects contrary to the public interest.
10. It is generally understood that employees unhappy with their terms and conditions of
employment have two options: “exit” (seeking alternate employment with more favourable
terms) or “voice” (seeking mechanisms to articulate their interests, such as union
representation). Effectively, pilots subject to training bonds have neither the real option of
“exit” or “voice”.
11. Effectively, training bonds undermine the interests articulated in the Canada Labour Code,
Part III. They typically contain terms which no employee would willingly enter into.
Further, they perpetuate this dynamic for the duration of the bond.
12. Training bonds undermine the interests articulated in the Canada Labour Code, Part II: the
fundamental freedom to seek representation by a trade union.
13. Finally, training bonds represent a check on the exercise of professional rights and
obligations associated with safety under the Canadian Aviation Regulations.
14. ALPA argues that employers could realize the same goal of employment longevity through
alternate strategies more in tune with the public interest: terms and conditions of
employment (including seniority protections) which reward and encourage long service.
- 4
15. ALPA is opposed to training bonds for the reasons set out above. Our primary
recommendation is that training bonds should be legislatively prohibited.
16. In the alternative, where employees or unions are compelled to negotiate training bonds with
employers, the following protections should be applicable.
Any training bond:
a) should apply only to initial type conversion of new entry pilots not already licensed on
type;
b) should not exceed the actual direct cost incurred by the employer, proof of which should
be provided by the employer;
c) should be amortized over a period of not more than three years with the bond reducing to
zero at the end of the agreed period, which period should commence at the beginning of
training;
d) should not be payable by a pilot who is furloughed, retrenched (retrenchment to include
transfer to another company at the behest of the employer as part of any retrenchment or
restructuring process and/or any operational reasons including liquidation), dismissed
from the company or retired from the company, whether it be normal retirement or retirement on medical grounds;
e) where it becomes payable, should be paid over a negotiated period with interest, where
applicable, not exceeding prime lending rate, and should, if possible, be paid in a tax
efficient manner;
f) should be cancelled and regarded as null and void in the event of the company breaching
the terms and conditions of employment.
Hours of Work:
17. Maximum hours of work for labour standards purposes are regulated in Division I, Part III of
the Canada Labour Code. In addition, work in the form of flight and duty time limits are
regulated by the provisions of the Canadian Aviation Regulations made pursuant to the
Aeronautics Act for the purposes of safety.
18. Special regulations have been made under the Canada Labour Code to address the specific
conditions of the trucking, rail transport, and shipping industries. No comparable regulation
addresses the needs and conditions of the air line industry and the pilot profession.
19. Pilot work typically includes periods of layover between flights during which the pilot,
although not “actively” at work, is nevertheless under the control and direction of the
employer and subject to rules of conduct, dress, and behaviour. The pilot is not at home and
cannot freely dispose of his or her time. As a strict matter of law, this time should be
included as “work” for the purposes of Part III of the Code. In addition, pilots typically are
under the control and direction of the employer in a variety of scenarios (commuting,
training, non-flying duties) which receive different valuations for pay purposes. As a strict
matter of law, all such time should be considered “work” for the purposes of the Code.
- 5
20. Pilots are required to work long hours over extensive periods. For example, the current
Canadian Aviation Regulations allow for airline pilot flight duty time periods in excess of
eighty hours per week that, essentially, can only be tempered by the Labour Code averaging
provisions or by a collective agreement. The situation for commercial pilots in air taxi and
aerial work operations is even worse. For pilots, especially in seasonal operations, this
results in long hours of work that far exceed what is deemed reasonable in Canadian society.
ALPA submits that neither the provisions of the Canadian Aviation Regulations, nor the time
averaging provisions of the Canada Labour Code, Part III, reflect societal norms. ALPA
recommends that Labour Canada confer with aviation industry stakeholders to develop
maximum hours of work protections that reflect the norms of Canadian society.
SUBMISSION TO THE FEDERAL LABOUR STANDARDS REVIEW COMMISSION
BY
THE AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, INTERNATIONAL (ALPA)
RESPECTING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO
THE CANADA LABOUR CODE, PART III
Summary:
The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) raises two legislative gaps particularly affecting pilots:
Protection against training bonds and particularly against training bonds whose terms are
overreaching and exploitative, and
Hours of work amendments that are tailored to societal norms and to the aviation
industry.
ALPA recommends:
That training bonds be prohibited. Alternatively, if training bonds are to be permitted,
that they be subject to limitations reflecting only legitimate needs of the employer, and
providing employee relief in the event of employer bankruptcy. To this end, ALPA puts
forward recommendations already endorsed by the International Federation of Air Line Pilots Associations.
That Labour Canada confers with aviation industry stakeholders to develop maximum
hours of work protections as it has done for other transportation sectors.
- 2
Background/Implications:
ALPA is a trade union representing the interests of pilots. ALPA represents over 2,000 pilots employed by five carriers in Canada. Internationally, ALPA represents 64,000 pilots at 41 airlines in the U.S. and Canada, and is a member of the International Federation of Air Line Pilots Associations (IFALPA). ALPA represents pilots in their employment relations, and is a key player in articulating policy concerns arising from this stewardship.
ALPA is concerned that the employment relationship and terms and conditions of employment embody public policy representing minimum standards, safety, and pilot professionalism.
In this brief, ALPA argues that the Canada Labour Code, Part III, lacks appropriate mechanisms to regulate and protect pilots in two key areas:
Training bonds
Hours of work
ALPA is further concerned that the absence of such protections undermines larger public policy goals set out in all three parts of the Canada Labour Code (free and effective rights to be
represented by a trade union, minimum standards, and safety), and in the Canadian Aviation
Regulations.
Issues:
Training Bonds:
1. The 2004 bankruptcy of JetsGo left large numbers of its pilots personally responsible for the
payment of “training bonds” effectively imposed on them as a condition of employment and
advancement.
2. “Training bonds” are performance bonds which commit pilots to forfeit a sum money—
usually substantial--alleged to represent the cost of their training, where the pilot ceases to be
employed for a minimum period of time.
3. Training bonds are common in Canada among smaller carriers and carriers whose employees
lack union representation. They are a clear example of unequal terms of employment
imposed on the most vulnerable members of the profession: typically young pilots, new
hires, and those without representation.
4. The amounts at issue can be stunningly huge, the equivalent of a small mortgage. Media
reports indicate that in the case of JetsGo, substantial numbers of pilots found themselves
liable for sums of $30,000 or more. This at a time when they were thrown out of work.
5. The frank purpose of training bonds is coercion against employment mobility. Pilots subject
to training bonds escape forfeiture only where they remain employed for a minimum period
of time, often years. In effect, they create a form of indentured service.
- 3
6. Training bonds are typically required by employers at a time when the pilot is most
vulnerable: young, inexperienced, and new in the profession. They are entered into in
conditions in which bargaining power is most unequal: at the pre-employment phase as a
condition of hire, and in companies whose employees lack effective representation.
7. The training bond arrangement typically requires a prospective new-hire to put up a sum of
money subject to full or partial repayment where employment does not last a minimum
period of time. Usually, this is in the form of a bank loan arranged by the employer prior to
and as a condition of employment. Typically, the employer will make payments on the bond
for its duration. However, where the pilot’s employment ends prior to the time-frame of the
bond, he or she is individually liable to the bank for the balance.
8. The terms of training bonds are unilaterally set as a condition of hire. Because they are not
negotiated, the terms are usually one-sided and often go beyond the legitimate needs and
interests of employers. For example, the sums and duration of the bond may not reflect the
employer’s actual training expenditure. And they may offload all of the risk of employment interruption onto the pilot, so that he or she remains liable even where wrongfully dismissed, laid off, or terminated as the consequence of a bankruptcy.
9. The existence of training bonds further tilts the employment relationship in the employer’s
favour for their duration. Pilots under threat of forfeiture are less likely to take risks
associated with incurring employer displeasure. They may be less likely to hold employers
accountable for safety, putting the travelling public at risk. They may feel constrained in
their free choice to seek union representation. In both these ways, training bonds generate
effects contrary to the public interest.
10. It is generally understood that employees unhappy with their terms and conditions of
employment have two options: “exit” (seeking alternate employment with more favourable
terms) or “voice” (seeking mechanisms to articulate their interests, such as union
representation). Effectively, pilots subject to training bonds have neither the real option of
“exit” or “voice”.
11. Effectively, training bonds undermine the interests articulated in the Canada Labour Code,
Part III. They typically contain terms which no employee would willingly enter into.
Further, they perpetuate this dynamic for the duration of the bond.
12. Training bonds undermine the interests articulated in the Canada Labour Code, Part II: the
fundamental freedom to seek representation by a trade union.
13. Finally, training bonds represent a check on the exercise of professional rights and
obligations associated with safety under the Canadian Aviation Regulations.
14. ALPA argues that employers could realize the same goal of employment longevity through
alternate strategies more in tune with the public interest: terms and conditions of
employment (including seniority protections) which reward and encourage long service.
- 4
15. ALPA is opposed to training bonds for the reasons set out above. Our primary
recommendation is that training bonds should be legislatively prohibited.
16. In the alternative, where employees or unions are compelled to negotiate training bonds with
employers, the following protections should be applicable.
Any training bond:
a) should apply only to initial type conversion of new entry pilots not already licensed on
type;
b) should not exceed the actual direct cost incurred by the employer, proof of which should
be provided by the employer;
c) should be amortized over a period of not more than three years with the bond reducing to
zero at the end of the agreed period, which period should commence at the beginning of
training;
d) should not be payable by a pilot who is furloughed, retrenched (retrenchment to include
transfer to another company at the behest of the employer as part of any retrenchment or
restructuring process and/or any operational reasons including liquidation), dismissed
from the company or retired from the company, whether it be normal retirement or retirement on medical grounds;
e) where it becomes payable, should be paid over a negotiated period with interest, where
applicable, not exceeding prime lending rate, and should, if possible, be paid in a tax
efficient manner;
f) should be cancelled and regarded as null and void in the event of the company breaching
the terms and conditions of employment.
Hours of Work:
17. Maximum hours of work for labour standards purposes are regulated in Division I, Part III of
the Canada Labour Code. In addition, work in the form of flight and duty time limits are
regulated by the provisions of the Canadian Aviation Regulations made pursuant to the
Aeronautics Act for the purposes of safety.
18. Special regulations have been made under the Canada Labour Code to address the specific
conditions of the trucking, rail transport, and shipping industries. No comparable regulation
addresses the needs and conditions of the air line industry and the pilot profession.
19. Pilot work typically includes periods of layover between flights during which the pilot,
although not “actively” at work, is nevertheless under the control and direction of the
employer and subject to rules of conduct, dress, and behaviour. The pilot is not at home and
cannot freely dispose of his or her time. As a strict matter of law, this time should be
included as “work” for the purposes of Part III of the Code. In addition, pilots typically are
under the control and direction of the employer in a variety of scenarios (commuting,
training, non-flying duties) which receive different valuations for pay purposes. As a strict
matter of law, all such time should be considered “work” for the purposes of the Code.
- 5
20. Pilots are required to work long hours over extensive periods. For example, the current
Canadian Aviation Regulations allow for airline pilot flight duty time periods in excess of
eighty hours per week that, essentially, can only be tempered by the Labour Code averaging
provisions or by a collective agreement. The situation for commercial pilots in air taxi and
aerial work operations is even worse. For pilots, especially in seasonal operations, this
results in long hours of work that far exceed what is deemed reasonable in Canadian society.
ALPA submits that neither the provisions of the Canadian Aviation Regulations, nor the time
averaging provisions of the Canada Labour Code, Part III, reflect societal norms. ALPA
recommends that Labour Canada confer with aviation industry stakeholders to develop
maximum hours of work protections that reflect the norms of Canadian society.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
Mikepops states that this thread has descended into a slanging match and people who don't agree with him should 'get lost'. Why did he bother asking a question if he was going to slag off anyone who disagreed with him??
Mikeypops, someone who tells you that they think you should honour your contract are NOT spineless you foolish boy. They have something that you should admire..... INTEGRITY. Something sadly lacking in modern me me me society.
I know that I am a bit of an old f*rt, but I am stuck flying police helicopters because I am not prepared to sign one of those 5 year bonds myself.
Mikeypops, someone who tells you that they think you should honour your contract are NOT spineless you foolish boy. They have something that you should admire..... INTEGRITY. Something sadly lacking in modern me me me society.
I know that I am a bit of an old f*rt, but I am stuck flying police helicopters because I am not prepared to sign one of those 5 year bonds myself.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: OFFSHORE
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MP.
to be blunt. If you had concerns about the contract before signing, you should have had legal help. If the company imposes them after contract then get legal help. otherwise no matter what, pay your bill if you have to, walk away if not wth legal advice. Put on the big boy pants and do whats best. it realy is a small industry! and from your first thread did you do your home work when you took your "first job"! I worked for a regional on metros that had a cadet scheme that charged close to $70kUS for a type, ATP and 12 months of work. Not that airline but I did 6 then stayed 11, It was the military though but I would not be flying a Global Express now if I hadn't. 5 yrs if you stay is nothing, you could be chief Pilot by then!
Big Boy Pants!! put them on.
GL.
to be blunt. If you had concerns about the contract before signing, you should have had legal help. If the company imposes them after contract then get legal help. otherwise no matter what, pay your bill if you have to, walk away if not wth legal advice. Put on the big boy pants and do whats best. it realy is a small industry! and from your first thread did you do your home work when you took your "first job"! I worked for a regional on metros that had a cadet scheme that charged close to $70kUS for a type, ATP and 12 months of work. Not that airline but I did 6 then stayed 11, It was the military though but I would not be flying a Global Express now if I hadn't. 5 yrs if you stay is nothing, you could be chief Pilot by then!
Big Boy Pants!! put them on.
GL.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: London
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am only reading in between the lines here, but the location is shown as UK, and the bond is described in Euro, and I assume therefore that the contract is between an UK national and an airline based on mainland Europe.
Whilst the unfair contract terms legislation and the bank charges rulings are not totally irrelevant they are based on UK law, and the contract is more than likely subject to the legal jurisdiction of whichever European country is home to the airline.
Unless an appeal is going to be based on European Community wide legislation then advice on whether the contract can be enforced is needed from a lawyer with experience in contract law in that state, anything else might be misleading.
Whilst the unfair contract terms legislation and the bank charges rulings are not totally irrelevant they are based on UK law, and the contract is more than likely subject to the legal jurisdiction of whichever European country is home to the airline.
Unless an appeal is going to be based on European Community wide legislation then advice on whether the contract can be enforced is needed from a lawyer with experience in contract law in that state, anything else might be misleading.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't necessarily think you need to question someones integrity if they walk away mid bond. The contract says, you can leave whenever you like but if it's before the end of the bond you must pay £XX. So providing said person pays his dues he has honoured his side of the deal.
It was in the early nineties, well before my time, but my union was involved. 737-400 rated captain signed a 110 000 DM (about 55 000€) bond for 737-200 conversion. After a while, better opportunity presents itself, but our capt haven't finished the bonding period yet and has no means to pay the bond off.
So he tries to get rid of the bond through the court by claiming that the trainning costs were exaggerated and his current employer took unfair advantage of him as he was unemployed and had familly to support. The judge wholehartedly agreed with capt, but dismissed the case as the bond represents a contract and real values or capt's circumstances are legally irellevant. Only what's written and signed matters.
So the 10 K$ water bottle might be morally reproachable but it's legally OK, unless the water vendor runs some kind of water monopolly, but don't expect anyone to act fast enough in breaking up this monopolly to save you from death by dehydration.
So he tries to get rid of the bond through the court by claiming that the trainning costs were exaggerated and his current employer took unfair advantage of him as he was unemployed and had familly to support. The judge wholehartedly agreed with capt, but dismissed the case as the bond represents a contract and real values or capt's circumstances are legally irellevant. Only what's written and signed matters.
So the 10 K$ water bottle might be morally reproachable but it's legally OK, unless the water vendor runs some kind of water monopolly, but don't expect anyone to act fast enough in breaking up this monopolly to save you from death by dehydration.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear, it's very simple.
Pay up, or serve out the bonding period...your choice.
Now, if guys wish to go to another company...that's fine, and more power to 'em, so long as they adhere to their bonding agreement.
Do a runner?
You WILL be caught, not perhaps for the bond, but for a reference from the original company.
Chief Pilots DO communicate between one another.
Make NO mistake.
Pay up, or serve out the bonding period...your choice.
Now, if guys wish to go to another company...that's fine, and more power to 'em, so long as they adhere to their bonding agreement.
Do a runner?
You WILL be caught, not perhaps for the bond, but for a reference from the original company.
Chief Pilots DO communicate between one another.
Make NO mistake.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
What a daft comparison! If you don't have water, you die. If you don't sign a bond, you get a job without a bond. McDonalds don't make you sign one, do they?
Simple supply and demand, as long as people are prepared to sign, it will never change. I never said bonding was right, I hate it. I signed a 2 year bond with no pay-out clause. It was the best of the worst on offer.
Simple supply and demand, as long as people are prepared to sign, it will never change. I never said bonding was right, I hate it. I signed a 2 year bond with no pay-out clause. It was the best of the worst on offer.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,097
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am now wondering if the CP of an ATR 42 opertion in Europe, who bond their new comers for Euro50,000 and know they have a recent joiner who is separated from their family have spotted this thread. Anybody any idea how big the field is?
Mikepops may want to drag his horns in a little bit?
Mikepops may want to drag his horns in a little bit?
