EU Law to ban Airline Bonds!!
EU Law to ban Airline Bonds!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
The sooner the better, that's all I can say.
I would'nt mind signing a small bond in order to get a job but some airlines bonds are just ridiculous. Without naming names, there is one company in the UK that bonds their pilots for £18,000 for an F-27 type rating - they must be joking ! I certainly would'nt sign up to something like that.
I just hope that airlines don't start asking pilots to pay for their own type rating's to get the job - that will be the next thing ! (It does'nt bear thinking about !)
------------------
Pull back and the houses get smaller - pull back a bit more and the houses get bigger!
I would'nt mind signing a small bond in order to get a job but some airlines bonds are just ridiculous. Without naming names, there is one company in the UK that bonds their pilots for £18,000 for an F-27 type rating - they must be joking ! I certainly would'nt sign up to something like that.
I just hope that airlines don't start asking pilots to pay for their own type rating's to get the job - that will be the next thing ! (It does'nt bear thinking about !)
------------------
Pull back and the houses get smaller - pull back a bit more and the houses get bigger!
Guest
Posts: n/a
NR
Sadly its not that long ago that you had to do just that. Less than 10 years ago a company that I enquired about required you to pay for the WHOLE cost of the training up front (on a SHED) before they MIGHT give you some flying; a massive £40 per night (not even per DAY!!). As desperate as I was then to go full time, I didn't pursue it further. Fortunately there were better companies around.
Sadly its not that long ago that you had to do just that. Less than 10 years ago a company that I enquired about required you to pay for the WHOLE cost of the training up front (on a SHED) before they MIGHT give you some flying; a massive £40 per night (not even per DAY!!). As desperate as I was then to go full time, I didn't pursue it further. Fortunately there were better companies around.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mole, my furry friend
This would be good news indeed! However, I have not yet heard anything definitive on this subject.
I'm wondering whether it has anything to do with the Fourth Protocol of the European Convention, Article One of which says:
"No one shall be deprived of his liberty merely on the ground of inability to fulfil a contractual obligation."
And Article Two of which says:
"Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence."
The UK Human Rights Act 1998 did not include this Protocol for some reason. Were it to now be included, it would cast something of a different light on past decisions with respect to bonding.
If you hear any more on this I would be most interested to read your further postings. Please let us know.
This would be good news indeed! However, I have not yet heard anything definitive on this subject.
I'm wondering whether it has anything to do with the Fourth Protocol of the European Convention, Article One of which says:
"No one shall be deprived of his liberty merely on the ground of inability to fulfil a contractual obligation."
And Article Two of which says:
"Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence."
The UK Human Rights Act 1998 did not include this Protocol for some reason. Were it to now be included, it would cast something of a different light on past decisions with respect to bonding.
If you hear any more on this I would be most interested to read your further postings. Please let us know.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I think that a bond is O.K. as long as it is between the empoyee and the cimpany. Involving bankguarantees is not an option.
Just imagin the company goes bankrupt. You have to sell your house to pay the companys depts. No way, my family is to important.
Just imagin the company goes bankrupt. You have to sell your house to pay the companys depts. No way, my family is to important.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Nattracks
With the greatest of respect, and noting that you are apparently new to this website, be advised that the SUBJECT of bonding has been gnashed at on this site many times in the past, ad nauseam.
I do hope this site will focus upon the issue addressed at its inception. It is an important one to a great many of us.
Please let us not get into yet another debate on the rights and wrongs of bonding.
With the greatest of respect, and noting that you are apparently new to this website, be advised that the SUBJECT of bonding has been gnashed at on this site many times in the past, ad nauseam.
I do hope this site will focus upon the issue addressed at its inception. It is an important one to a great many of us.
Please let us not get into yet another debate on the rights and wrongs of bonding.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mole,
Is this legislation intended to cover bonds on all type training, not just the bigger airlines.
Surely if an employee were to sign an "agreement" he could be held to it.
I know of some very sharp practices going with bonds in a small ad hoc charter company in UK. For example, a guy I know, desperate to get a foot on the ladder has signed a bond for 6 grand on small turbo prop, it does NOT amortise over the 2 year period, (ie. leave within 2 years pay 6 grand)plus, in addition to this his first years salary had 3 grand deducted to cover training costs!!
Could this sort of practice would be prevented?
(edited for crucial missing word!)
[This message has been edited by Dagger-D (edited 28 May 2001).]
Is this legislation intended to cover bonds on all type training, not just the bigger airlines.
Surely if an employee were to sign an "agreement" he could be held to it.
I know of some very sharp practices going with bonds in a small ad hoc charter company in UK. For example, a guy I know, desperate to get a foot on the ladder has signed a bond for 6 grand on small turbo prop, it does NOT amortise over the 2 year period, (ie. leave within 2 years pay 6 grand)plus, in addition to this his first years salary had 3 grand deducted to cover training costs!!
Could this sort of practice would be prevented?
(edited for crucial missing word!)
[This message has been edited by Dagger-D (edited 28 May 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
I don't want to play devils advocate here but......
American Airlines don't have bonds. They just insist that pilots must arrive with a type rating. So would that work here. Well let's say that old GoRyEz Air need a bunch of pilots. So they interview and select, and then say (just as Southwest do), now off you go chaps, get your 737 rating and the job is yours. The Bank (on the strength of your contract) will probably lend you the money, and a suitable ( but probably expensive) training organisation will happily do your course. So, are you any better or worse off?
Well, who is going to pay you while you are doing your rating? Who is going to pay for your accomodation while you live in, say, Amsterdam because thats where the available Simulator is?
Don't for one minute be naive enough to believe that the airlines will just roll over and give up on this one. Now, instaed of working off your bond, you will be working to pay back the bank ( with interest).
Food for thought eh?
American Airlines don't have bonds. They just insist that pilots must arrive with a type rating. So would that work here. Well let's say that old GoRyEz Air need a bunch of pilots. So they interview and select, and then say (just as Southwest do), now off you go chaps, get your 737 rating and the job is yours. The Bank (on the strength of your contract) will probably lend you the money, and a suitable ( but probably expensive) training organisation will happily do your course. So, are you any better or worse off?
Well, who is going to pay you while you are doing your rating? Who is going to pay for your accomodation while you live in, say, Amsterdam because thats where the available Simulator is?
Don't for one minute be naive enough to believe that the airlines will just roll over and give up on this one. Now, instaed of working off your bond, you will be working to pay back the bank ( with interest).
Food for thought eh?
Guest
Posts: n/a
If the EU says that bonds are going to be made illegal, then guess what? All that's going to happen is that people will be required to enter into personal loans and/or 'advances on salary' - and if the amount is £15k or under, then it goes to small claims court and you send the bailiffs round if its not paid.
Let's face it - much as some people like Tilii might not like to hear it - that as long as airlines spend tens of thousands on getting people type rated only for them to bog off to greener pastures (and juicy sign on fees) at the first opportunity, then there will always be bonding in one shape or another - especially for the independents who can't afford to waste this sort of money.
The alternative is simple. YOU pay for your rating!!
Let's face it - much as some people like Tilii might not like to hear it - that as long as airlines spend tens of thousands on getting people type rated only for them to bog off to greener pastures (and juicy sign on fees) at the first opportunity, then there will always be bonding in one shape or another - especially for the independents who can't afford to waste this sort of money.
The alternative is simple. YOU pay for your rating!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Quite agree Guv...
Many industries use 'loans' or 'salary advances' to cover employee commitment post formal training.
It is very simple to administrate requiring an 'Agreement' not a contract and is straightforward to enforce using the County Court...running abroad will not save you as many countries now have bilateral agreements to enforce judgements abroad...
You would be amazed as to how a CCJ or Bankruptcy petition focuses people's attention on the consequences of default!
Many industries use 'loans' or 'salary advances' to cover employee commitment post formal training.
It is very simple to administrate requiring an 'Agreement' not a contract and is straightforward to enforce using the County Court...running abroad will not save you as many countries now have bilateral agreements to enforce judgements abroad...
You would be amazed as to how a CCJ or Bankruptcy petition focuses people's attention on the consequences of default!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to say that the bond is the worst posable solution to the training issue exept for the alternatives !
I joined a company and excepted a bond of aprox £20k for a jet type rating the amount due to the company fell per month over the bond time scale.
I felt that the £20k represented the real cost of the training (unlike some bonds i have seen) and garanteed the employer some return on investment.
If bonds are outlawed then you will find that you will be taking out a bank loan in your name to pay for the training and if you default the bank will come after you via the courts.
True you can walk away from the job if you dont like it but you still have to pay off the bank.
If you find yourself in the unfortunate position that the company goes bust then the bond goes with the company and you are free of obligation but with the bank loan you will have no job and the bank after you for the money.
The worst employers in this game would love to see the end of the bond because they would no longer be putting up eny money for your training.
I joined a company and excepted a bond of aprox £20k for a jet type rating the amount due to the company fell per month over the bond time scale.
I felt that the £20k represented the real cost of the training (unlike some bonds i have seen) and garanteed the employer some return on investment.
If bonds are outlawed then you will find that you will be taking out a bank loan in your name to pay for the training and if you default the bank will come after you via the courts.
True you can walk away from the job if you dont like it but you still have to pay off the bank.
If you find yourself in the unfortunate position that the company goes bust then the bond goes with the company and you are free of obligation but with the bank loan you will have no job and the bank after you for the money.
The worst employers in this game would love to see the end of the bond because they would no longer be putting up eny money for your training.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The day that this "pay for your own type rating" deal comes along is the day I will forget about Ailine Flying and become a Full-Time Flying Instructor/Examiner.
The financial arrangement's involed with joining airlines these day's are just a joke !
------------------
Pull back and the houses get smaller - pull back a bit more and the houses get bigger!
The financial arrangement's involed with joining airlines these day's are just a joke !
------------------
Pull back and the houses get smaller - pull back a bit more and the houses get bigger!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Oh well, since I seem powerless to stop this nauseous debate getting under way yet again, I may just as well re-enter the ring like The Guvnor and others choose to do.
Ignoring for just a moment the negative scaremongering above, the plain and simple facts of life are that airlines can only operate their equipment with qualified (type rated) pilots. That is the LAW.
If they will not type rate without bonding the pilots, and the pilots REFUSE to be bonded, then it is quite obvious that the more unscrupulous employers will look for an alternative means. Some may well demand that their pilots come to them already type rated.
However, if pilots REFUSE to take out large loans to pay for their own rating then the situation would rapidly become one where aircraft ceased to fly and airlines went to the wall.
Question: What do you think those airlines would do faced with this potential?
Answer: Why, the self same thing they used to do before the word "bond" entered into the scheme of things, viz. they will type rate the pilot without bonding.
There may well develop a system whereby initial salaries were depressed to accommodate this expense. I see nothing wrong with that in principle and, in any event, this would be subject to market forces.
End of theory.
Ignoring for just a moment the negative scaremongering above, the plain and simple facts of life are that airlines can only operate their equipment with qualified (type rated) pilots. That is the LAW.
If they will not type rate without bonding the pilots, and the pilots REFUSE to be bonded, then it is quite obvious that the more unscrupulous employers will look for an alternative means. Some may well demand that their pilots come to them already type rated.
However, if pilots REFUSE to take out large loans to pay for their own rating then the situation would rapidly become one where aircraft ceased to fly and airlines went to the wall.
Question: What do you think those airlines would do faced with this potential?
Answer: Why, the self same thing they used to do before the word "bond" entered into the scheme of things, viz. they will type rate the pilot without bonding.
There may well develop a system whereby initial salaries were depressed to accommodate this expense. I see nothing wrong with that in principle and, in any event, this would be subject to market forces.
End of theory.
Guest
Posts: n/a
If bonds become illegal, I think only the training companies will really benefit from it.
People will probably do a cheap type rating somewhere and the airlines hiring them will have to train them again because they have learned different procedures, etc. It would be cheaper for the airline, but who says this difference training won't be also considered as a bond ?
And what will the airlines expect next ? Self-sponsored line training ?
BTW, if type-ratings become cheaper , it wouldn't be a bad thing either.
In the end, it's maybe better that bonds remain "almost legal" than "totally illegal" ?
People will probably do a cheap type rating somewhere and the airlines hiring them will have to train them again because they have learned different procedures, etc. It would be cheaper for the airline, but who says this difference training won't be also considered as a bond ?
And what will the airlines expect next ? Self-sponsored line training ?
BTW, if type-ratings become cheaper , it wouldn't be a bad thing either.
In the end, it's maybe better that bonds remain "almost legal" than "totally illegal" ?
Guest
Posts: n/a
no bonds anymore...well done! But wait, why have they been introduced at all? Also I am not happy with the idea being "bonded" (no, I am not at present), how can airlines protect their investments?
As Guv said, there will be other means required and I guess, the ones already highlighted here will make it much more difficult for the younger generation to obtain an adequate type-rating.
Today you can still read the paper and turn it down or accept the facts, tomorrow you have to bear the costs in total. And if you took a loan on a type rating and the company goes bust within let´s say 1 year, than you run in trouble....today you just clear your bond...
As Guv said, there will be other means required and I guess, the ones already highlighted here will make it much more difficult for the younger generation to obtain an adequate type-rating.
Today you can still read the paper and turn it down or accept the facts, tomorrow you have to bear the costs in total. And if you took a loan on a type rating and the company goes bust within let´s say 1 year, than you run in trouble....today you just clear your bond...
Guest
Posts: n/a
The-Mole,
In reply to your origional question, I have not heard anything at all about this proposal/change to the law, it may have something to do with the approaching election though.
I did hear that Tony Blair did have the option to "Ban the Bond" a couple of months ago but he vitoed it !
Vote Conservative..........
------------------
Pull back and the houses get smaller - pull back a bit more and the houses get bigger!
In reply to your origional question, I have not heard anything at all about this proposal/change to the law, it may have something to do with the approaching election though.
I did hear that Tony Blair did have the option to "Ban the Bond" a couple of months ago but he vitoed it !
Vote Conservative..........
------------------
Pull back and the houses get smaller - pull back a bit more and the houses get bigger!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Strato and NightRider
Get real, gentlemen. Do you honestly think for one moment that the CAA is going to let pilots pick and choose where and how to get their type rating. My guess is that the airlines will be REQUIRED to conduct the training whether they like it or not.
So, I do hope this rumour has substance. It might see an end at last to a scurrilous and inequitable practice. To my mind, pilot bonding is close to slavery or bonded servitude and ought to be stamped out once and for all.
Get real, gentlemen. Do you honestly think for one moment that the CAA is going to let pilots pick and choose where and how to get their type rating. My guess is that the airlines will be REQUIRED to conduct the training whether they like it or not.
So, I do hope this rumour has substance. It might see an end at last to a scurrilous and inequitable practice. To my mind, pilot bonding is close to slavery or bonded servitude and ought to be stamped out once and for all.