UK Type rating bond
 

What is the current uk rotary wing company position with regards to bonding for an enforced type change? I’m hearing, it is the industry norm to bond for every type change, but also hearing, bond the first type and not for subsequent types.

for the first type rating as a new joiner... bonds are very much the norm for any 'proper' salaried job and even for ad hoc onshore freelance work

bonds are generally not used for subsequent type ratings for permanent salaried staff, but given the dysfunctional uk helicopter industry nothing would surprise me these days.

are they legally enforceable? probably not.
​​

Pretty standard to be bonded for any complex types by UK onshore sector as the small companies can’t take the risk on the cost of the rating without some guarantee. Some of them are pretty eye watering (I was recently told an H160 rating is around £80k :ooh: but that may not be accurate and could be crew room gossip).

Offshore it varies. Most bond for a first type. Some bond for a subsequent type.

a few years ago a price of a AW139 rating was around £60,000, probably more now

In Germany there's onshore operators who want to bond their pilots for R22, R44 or 206 ratings even if it's an ATR :ugh:

Onshore operators often dish out free type ratings to the chief pilot's mates, but everyone else gets the "opportunity" to buy one at full retail cost (+ VAT of course)

Yep - seen that too. Obviously so ‘trusted’ they won’t leave :cool:.

Not sure of many operators making you pay up-front these days, perhaps some of the portacabin ones. I knew a few onshore companies who offered a salary sacrifice, or number of shifts worked for free to repay the type, but this was usually on the types where the rating is sub £10k (AS350, B206 etc). I remember paying for my 206 and 500 ratings in cash to work for people :ouch: thankfully things have changed.

Personally I’ve never thought it unreasonable to offer an employer some security that I won’t leave if they are going to invest the equivalent of a nearly new Porsche in me. I certainly wouldn’t spend £80k of my money on someone without some guarantee, even if it is only for somewhere between 3-4 years. The bonds I’ve signed have been for a lot less than actual transition costs and I’ve not had to spend a penny on my own training in about 20 years, thankfully.

Makes me glad I'm in the U.S.A. My understanding is that one can't be held accountable for type-training costs for a position here. Employers may posture and talk mean...

would you take that stance as an employer?

If you are planning on taking the training and running, then a bond is a nuisance.. but otherwise an operator is less inclined to fire you and lose their “investment” if you plan on sticking around for at least the 24months a bond typically lasts.

Just dont let them “rebond” for every recurrent/checkride every 6-12 months.. thats not a company worth working for..

ps, training bonds are not enforcable in EU law either..

I don't believe that is correct - what's your source?

Isn't bond a contract? And as such, if it's spelled within, how come you are not on the hook if you ditch?
Reading posts like these here and we wonder that we are required to pay for our own type ratings?

Where do you get such bitter rhetoric? The nature of business demands that pilots are to some greater or lesser degree, responsible for the type ratings they takes form Operators. The Bond in place does not appear to be enforceable. Ala the Bristow's saga in the early 2000s where the ECHR ruled that training taken to undertake revenue earning activity for a Company is at the costs to the Company.

However, I feel the truth lies somewhere between. If someone takes a TR and is Bonded, Sure they can walk and refuse to pay........but would anyone else want to employ such a person OR risk spending their money on a Type Rating for them? In the end its reputation in a small industry.

If a person is unwilling or reluctant to Bond for a TR......what message does that give the Employer!

DB

​​​​​​​Often not appreciated!

Quite. We all want better terms, more pay, more time off etc etc, and often it’s well deserved, but when someone wants to spend vast sums on our training and asks some common decency by way of commitment in return it’s too much to ask? I’ve always seen it as a reason for my employer to keep hold of me… paying for own ratings, been there, done that, no thanx.

Edit - I’ve always thought it’s important to pick your employers wisely. No one wants to be bonded to crooks for 3 years who will try and stuff you given any opportunity, but if they are reputable and offer a good job, what’s the issue? If you don’t want the job don’t take the rating.

Yes. I don't want slaves.
Careful, thoughtful interviews are worth every penny.
As posted elsewhere, I expect a commitment by a potential pilot employee to be relied upon. If that commitment is not honored, I don't want that pilot.

Agree, but I also don't want someone to take my hard earned money.

Under typical UK bonding agreements they won’t, unless you choose to leave before the bond has ended. They are not usually salary sacrifice.

I was talking from employer's perspective. I don't want to invest my money (sometimes quite a lot of it) into someone who will jump ship the moment someone offers slightly better terms.
Interview is a tool, but by no means an infallible one. And if bonds are not enforceable, we get "pay for your own rating" situation.