View Poll Results: Are you for or against the idea of SSTR's?
I have a fATPL but no airline jet experience and I am against SSTR's
111
20.07%
I have a fATPL but no airline jet experience and I am for SSTR's
34
6.15%
I am an experienced professional pilot with no jet airline experience and I am against SSTR's
73
13.20%
I am an experienced professional pilot with no airline jet experienced and I am for SSTR's
11
1.99%
I am a pilot with airline jet experience and I am against SSTR's
207
37.43%
I am a pilot with airline jet experience and I am for SSTR's
44
7.96%
I do not hold a professional pilot licence and I am against SSTR's
53
9.58%
I do not hold a professional pilot licence and I am for SSTR's
7
1.27%
I have no idea what an SSTR is and am just voting because I can
13
2.35%
Voters: 553. This poll is closed
Self Funded Type Ratings
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wondering, Thanks for your comments and highlighting my blatant error.
Jet2. One of the most sensible posts I have read here.
I would happily go to BALPA with more than just the option of banning SSTRs if people thought that would help. Those of us against the practice of SSTRs have come up with a few ideas that could help. All I can get out of the other side of your camp is "you're wasting your time"!!
I hear what you say about companies having to absorb costs elsewhere if SSTRS are banned. I however think that when you can buy a TR for £25K incl VAT the cost to the company would at least be VAT free and when numerous TRs are bought by a company or done in house, the cost would drop considerably, especially when you use your own aircraft for the base check.
Just as a thought, if pilots could actually work together to get a ban on SSTRs then surely maintaing Ts and Cs would be easier considering they are already working together.
Leveling the uneven playing field as you put it is actually what I was hoping to achieve. Thanks for your comments.
OSOP
Jet2. One of the most sensible posts I have read here.
I would happily go to BALPA with more than just the option of banning SSTRs if people thought that would help. Those of us against the practice of SSTRs have come up with a few ideas that could help. All I can get out of the other side of your camp is "you're wasting your time"!!
I hear what you say about companies having to absorb costs elsewhere if SSTRS are banned. I however think that when you can buy a TR for £25K incl VAT the cost to the company would at least be VAT free and when numerous TRs are bought by a company or done in house, the cost would drop considerably, especially when you use your own aircraft for the base check.
Just as a thought, if pilots could actually work together to get a ban on SSTRs then surely maintaing Ts and Cs would be easier considering they are already working together.
Leveling the uneven playing field as you put it is actually what I was hoping to achieve. Thanks for your comments.
OSOP
Last edited by On speed on profile; 11th Apr 2006 at 14:23.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>>Just as a thought, if pilots could actually work together to get a ban on SSTRs then surely maintaing Ts and Cs would....<<
You folks can work together 'til the cows come home, and the net result will be that NOTHING can be 'Banned'.
You are totally waisting you time.
Some folks work hard to save the cash for a rating (rather than being wealthy to begin with) so it is sour grapes from those that can't/won't.
No more, no less.
If you don't like the way the conditions of pay/service are in you're present carrier, move on to somewhere else, just like many others before have done.
In other words, make your OWN luck, if you have the fortitude.
I suspect many won't, so all they do is bit@h and moan, and the net result is...zero.
You folks can work together 'til the cows come home, and the net result will be that NOTHING can be 'Banned'.
You are totally waisting you time.
Some folks work hard to save the cash for a rating (rather than being wealthy to begin with) so it is sour grapes from those that can't/won't.
No more, no less.
If you don't like the way the conditions of pay/service are in you're present carrier, move on to somewhere else, just like many others before have done.
In other words, make your OWN luck, if you have the fortitude.
I suspect many won't, so all they do is bit@h and moan, and the net result is...zero.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bravo 411A, well said.
The reality is (thankfully) that in any open society economically you have the right to 'manage' your money and/or investments as you so choose. This silly crusade to ban something is what politicians do when scared that someone or something is getting close to the truth (aka New Labour
). However as students or qualified professionals we have the legal and ethical right to get the type rating.
If the chap down our street can't afford to send his daughter to one of the better engineering universities then should all engineering faculities (spelling) stop taking students. There is in my eyes no such thing as being poor all the time, you may have a couple of low points in your life but once you get up and going again you'll get the income and with some sacrifices save some money too. In this manner you can facilitate further study or training, if nothing else it makes you a better person!
Employers of all industries have constantly complained about how their bottom line was eroded due to garduates from training organisations, institutes, universities, etc are sub standard and require further training when in the work place. It's not unique to aviation other than this industry having been too insulated for far too many years. In those days the BAs of this world could what they wanted, whenever they chose. But look at the detriment of that situation where 99.9% of wannabes didn't even get a chance compared to todays system where everyone has a crack at the whip.
There is no perfect system and banning things are done in the school confines by the headmaster and not by French style silliness and snobbery.
The money I pay is hard earned and I know that when I have little or nothing left but I am responsible for my own actions and I'm a big boy that can take it. Maybe that's the true fear here of people wanting assurances before they go ahead, this is no fairy tale.
The reality is (thankfully) that in any open society economically you have the right to 'manage' your money and/or investments as you so choose. This silly crusade to ban something is what politicians do when scared that someone or something is getting close to the truth (aka New Labour
). However as students or qualified professionals we have the legal and ethical right to get the type rating. If the chap down our street can't afford to send his daughter to one of the better engineering universities then should all engineering faculities (spelling) stop taking students. There is in my eyes no such thing as being poor all the time, you may have a couple of low points in your life but once you get up and going again you'll get the income and with some sacrifices save some money too. In this manner you can facilitate further study or training, if nothing else it makes you a better person!
Employers of all industries have constantly complained about how their bottom line was eroded due to garduates from training organisations, institutes, universities, etc are sub standard and require further training when in the work place. It's not unique to aviation other than this industry having been too insulated for far too many years. In those days the BAs of this world could what they wanted, whenever they chose. But look at the detriment of that situation where 99.9% of wannabes didn't even get a chance compared to todays system where everyone has a crack at the whip.
There is no perfect system and banning things are done in the school confines by the headmaster and not by French style silliness and snobbery.
The money I pay is hard earned and I know that when I have little or nothing left but I am responsible for my own actions and I'm a big boy that can take it. Maybe that's the true fear here of people wanting assurances before they go ahead, this is no fairy tale.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by On speed on profile
Wondering, Thanks for your comments and highlighting my blatant error.
Jet2. One of the most sensible posts I have read here.
I would happily go to BALPA with more than just the option of banning SSTRs if people thought that would help. Those of us against the practice of SSTRs have come up with a few ideas that could help. All I can get out of the other side of your camp is "you're wasting your time"!!
I hear what you say about companies having to absorb costs elsewhere if SSTRS are banned. I however think that when you can buy a TR for £25K incl VAT the cost to the company would at least be VAT free and when numerous TRs are bought by a company or done in house, the cost would drop considerably, especially when you use your own aircraft for the base check.
Just as a thought, if pilots could actually work together to get a ban on SSTRs then surely maintaing Ts and Cs would be easier considering they are already working together.
Leveling the uneven playing field as you put it is actually what I was hoping to achieve. Thanks for your comments.
OSOP
Jet2. One of the most sensible posts I have read here.
I would happily go to BALPA with more than just the option of banning SSTRs if people thought that would help. Those of us against the practice of SSTRs have come up with a few ideas that could help. All I can get out of the other side of your camp is "you're wasting your time"!!
I hear what you say about companies having to absorb costs elsewhere if SSTRS are banned. I however think that when you can buy a TR for £25K incl VAT the cost to the company would at least be VAT free and when numerous TRs are bought by a company or done in house, the cost would drop considerably, especially when you use your own aircraft for the base check.
Just as a thought, if pilots could actually work together to get a ban on SSTRs then surely maintaing Ts and Cs would be easier considering they are already working together.
Leveling the uneven playing field as you put it is actually what I was hoping to achieve. Thanks for your comments.
OSOP
It won't work any other way.....trust me.
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
The thread vote is a bit misleading, in that I voted that I am against SSTR but I am about to apply to Easy and hopefully pay my way. The alternative is to give up because I can't afford to take a lower paid job. The reason? My 4500 helicopter hours are worthless.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At one time a university graduate was held in very high regard and esteem not necessarily due to his/her course of study but because they had gone through a form of 'elevated teaching'. That was enough in it's day to enable almost all graduates to get an interview if not a job. Fast forward today and I am waiting for the graduation certificate in 'Agriculture during the Eqyptian Period" for my dog I realise that anyone and everyone has a degree and no one seems to care. Therefore in order to distinguish oneself alot of graduates are doing a Masters or additional professional studies at their own expense, time and effort. Would you want to ban them?
I love to run and train HARD for races but get beaten by people who trained even harder, what should I do ban them from entering races. Complain to the local athletics club or sporting association that everytime I enter a race I don't win the London Marathon!
No one has the remit or right to ban type ratings and even if that fantastic fantasy was to be become reality pilots would still tread that path via USA, Canada, China.
If you can't do it, fine
If you can't afford it, fine
If you can't make the sacrifices, fine
If you are used to things being served on a silver tray, fine.
But what isn't fine is someone closing down a training/education option for others just because they don't like it.
I realise that anyone and everyone has a degree and no one seems to care. Therefore in order to distinguish oneself alot of graduates are doing a Masters or additional professional studies at their own expense, time and effort. Would you want to ban them? I love to run and train HARD for races but get beaten by people who trained even harder, what should I do ban them from entering races. Complain to the local athletics club or sporting association that everytime I enter a race I don't win the London Marathon!
No one has the remit or right to ban type ratings and even if that fantastic fantasy was to be become reality pilots would still tread that path via USA, Canada, China.
If you can't do it, fine
If you can't afford it, fine
If you can't make the sacrifices, fine
If you are used to things being served on a silver tray, fine.
But what isn't fine is someone closing down a training/education option for others just because they don't like it.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Arakis
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
self funded type rating
for what its worth i believe the airlines should organise their own type rating scheme and not expect individuals to self fund rating. a type rating done under the guidance of the airlines own sop's and jet type is a proper and quality way to do training. It integrates the simulator training, sop's of the airline including base training on type and all of these are done over a reasonable short period of time so that there are no gaps between simulator-base-and line training.
Self funded ratings are a bunch of hours in a simulator and a rubber stamp at the end of it with no reflection on specific airline sop's or route familarity. Once the simulator training is complete the individual is waiting for a job with an airline which could take months or even years as may be the case for some individuals.This in my view is to say the least a botched job way of doing things and the airlines should no better!
Personally i think that the likes of ryan air who go this route as an airline is disgraceful it gives the impression of low cost airline, low cost pilot training etc. Self funded type ratings, self funded application sterling £50 or is it Euro's anyway i woulden't even give it time of day!
My message to those young new pilots out there is be patient dont self fund your own type rating let the airline do a proper job. Dont panic there are plenty of jobs out there.
Pilot recruitment has never been so buoyant with all the middle east carriers recruiting, India and far east having a shortage of pilots the future indeed looks good so lets not drop our standards.
Self funded ratings are a bunch of hours in a simulator and a rubber stamp at the end of it with no reflection on specific airline sop's or route familarity. Once the simulator training is complete the individual is waiting for a job with an airline which could take months or even years as may be the case for some individuals.This in my view is to say the least a botched job way of doing things and the airlines should no better!
Personally i think that the likes of ryan air who go this route as an airline is disgraceful it gives the impression of low cost airline, low cost pilot training etc. Self funded type ratings, self funded application sterling £50 or is it Euro's anyway i woulden't even give it time of day!
My message to those young new pilots out there is be patient dont self fund your own type rating let the airline do a proper job. Dont panic there are plenty of jobs out there.
Pilot recruitment has never been so buoyant with all the middle east carriers recruiting, India and far east having a shortage of pilots the future indeed looks good so lets not drop our standards.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That last post by GTAflyer was a prayer. A company's SOP and other forms of integrated training would help optimise training but that isn't possible in practical terms. Besides pilots are professionals and can or indeed should be able to adapt to a new or different situation. Airlines are a business and not a training college nor are they part of a government social programme to help make the lives of a few people better.
The fact that this thread started with reference to the pprune poll should direct us to accept what the results were and not do a Belusconni (did I spell that right) and dismiss the outcome. Okay so many are opposed to a TR, that's fine. I don't go into a restaurant and ask what's everyone else ordering tonight? I just choose what I prefer.
Indeed we should scrutinise the pprune results but not argue how they are flawed or artificially inflated/deflated or even get thrown out into a separate yet parallel argument about TRs.
Okay rant over, be cool.
The fact that this thread started with reference to the pprune poll should direct us to accept what the results were and not do a Belusconni (did I spell that right) and dismiss the outcome. Okay so many are opposed to a TR, that's fine. I don't go into a restaurant and ask what's everyone else ordering tonight? I just choose what I prefer.
Indeed we should scrutinise the pprune results but not argue how they are flawed or artificially inflated/deflated or even get thrown out into a separate yet parallel argument about TRs.
Okay rant over, be cool.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Easyjet TRSS BYCOTT
Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later. Ryanair have now realised that they can no longer attract experienced professional Pilots who are prepared to pay thousands upon thousands of pounds for a qualification, upon which they can firstly, only exercise the benifit of that qualification to said company and secondly, within their specific working environment .
This raises the question, "How much longer can Easyjet hold out?" Surely Easyjet are now starting to feel the strain. My question to fellow experienced professional pilots is this:
If Easyjet decided to abandon their immoral TRSS scheme and replace it with a bond, would you be inclined to apply? YES or NO ?
Before anyone asks, no, I am not part of an Easyjet management task team, although it may seem like it from the theme of the post.
My personal answer is YES. I would consider it. I believe I have paid enough money to get to the stage where I am at (a mere 1500 hours I know, but mostly on Jet ) and feel my family and I deserve to be able to apply for positions which do not require me to pay any more money.
Thoughts anyone?
Ps. If you are a wannabe, don't bother replying, this post is not meant for you, as you are in a completely different situation.
This raises the question, "How much longer can Easyjet hold out?" Surely Easyjet are now starting to feel the strain. My question to fellow experienced professional pilots is this:
If Easyjet decided to abandon their immoral TRSS scheme and replace it with a bond, would you be inclined to apply? YES or NO ?
Before anyone asks, no, I am not part of an Easyjet management task team, although it may seem like it from the theme of the post.
My personal answer is YES. I would consider it. I believe I have paid enough money to get to the stage where I am at (a mere 1500 hours I know, but mostly on Jet ) and feel my family and I deserve to be able to apply for positions which do not require me to pay any more money.
Thoughts anyone?
Ps. If you are a wannabe, don't bother replying, this post is not meant for you, as you are in a completely different situation.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devokeuk - by the sound of things you aspire to become an easyJet pilot but do not like the look of TRSS. Frankly, given the nature of your post, you would be extremely fortunate to get anywhere near being offered a place on TRSS. Being able to spell is a pre-requisite for most airline jobs. If you are going to be credible, you may want to change 'bycott' to 'boycott' - it makes you look like you have not been to school! And by the way, 'benifit' is spelt 'benefit'. You say in your post you "feel my family and I deserve to be able to apply for positions which do not require me to pay any more money." I am sorry to be so picky but if you are presenting yourself as a professional pilot who should be employed by a 'proper' airline, it would be reasonable to expect you to demonstrate basic spelling skills. And by the way, 1500 hours does not constitute being an 'experienced' pilot. You seem to be under the impression that the airline industry in general ,and easyJet in particular, has sadly missed out on the pleasure of your company - a bit of humility as to the true nature of your position would probably lead you to reassess the situation.
Originally Posted by devokeuk
I believe I have paid enough money to get to the stage where I am at etc etc etc moan, table bang
Of course, eJ will continue to stick to TRSS until the pool of suitable and willing candidates dries up. Is that day close (it might be, especially since we need 100 FOs right now)? I would advise going through the application and interview process, shining in every respect, and then declining the job offer until they remove the TRSS element.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: planet igloo
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norman.....most of your posts Ive read recently have found a receptive audience in myself. However your response to this chap I'm afraid to say has come off in my opinion sounding pious and a little sniffy. Sure this fellow could do with learning how to use spell check, and perhaps work on his sentence construction..it does not however take away from thoughts that he has expressed. I for one tend to agree with the basic premise of his comments relating to the length of time the TRSS scheme can continue to be implemented as the supply of suitable candidates continues to dry up.
Your assertion that this chap is not compatible with joining your merry band of orange boys and girls based on one post on a website is a bit rich really.
Your assertion that this chap is not compatible with joining your merry band of orange boys and girls based on one post on a website is a bit rich really.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wow,
Well, I was not asking for a spelling lesson chaps. I just wanted to know other peoples opinions. I feel that there are Pilots out there who would apply for jobs if they knew that they did not have to pay more cash.
Had a few glasses of wine last night, hence the spelling mistakes, for that I am truly sorry.
Cheers.
PS : PLANESHIPCAR, have a look on Flight Internationals job website. Reference to Ryanairs bond for First Officers is there.
Well, I was not asking for a spelling lesson chaps. I just wanted to know other peoples opinions. I feel that there are Pilots out there who would apply for jobs if they knew that they did not have to pay more cash.
Had a few glasses of wine last night, hence the spelling mistakes, for that I am truly sorry.
Cheers.
PS : PLANESHIPCAR, have a look on Flight Internationals job website. Reference to Ryanairs bond for First Officers is there.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: On the Camel's back
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NSF, I must agree here with 757manipulator. Whilst you tend to talk a lot of sense, and I particularly admire your stance re BALPA, that post was harsh.
There's a world of difference between what many would write on prune and the attention they would put into an application. The guy talks sense, I fully agree he should not have to fork out more money for the "privilege" of flying Easy's, or anybody elses, Boeingbuses.
1500 hours is obviously not a high experience level; however if it's mostly on jets, as he says, he is going to be a LOT less of a training risk than a low time guy, and as, such could fairly be described as RELATIVELY experienced in relation to many of the people that I imagine are applying.
planeshipcar, FR has indeed advertised in Flight for 1500hr+ FOs with training provided. Said FO's will be bonded. Needless for me to say, as many threads have already said so, this "deal" does not in any way make FR an attractive place to work. Be careful, very careful. There will no doubt be horrendous strings attached.
There's a world of difference between what many would write on prune and the attention they would put into an application. The guy talks sense, I fully agree he should not have to fork out more money for the "privilege" of flying Easy's, or anybody elses, Boeingbuses.
1500 hours is obviously not a high experience level; however if it's mostly on jets, as he says, he is going to be a LOT less of a training risk than a low time guy, and as, such could fairly be described as RELATIVELY experienced in relation to many of the people that I imagine are applying.
planeshipcar, FR has indeed advertised in Flight for 1500hr+ FOs with training provided. Said FO's will be bonded. Needless for me to say, as many threads have already said so, this "deal" does not in any way make FR an attractive place to work. Be careful, very careful. There will no doubt be horrendous strings attached.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Essex
Age: 39
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devokeuk.
That's some good news - a shame not of cadets. I find it very tedious when reading through the threads having skip pages of crap about spelling and immature insults to get to the continuation of what the question on the thread is really about - so I have sympathy for you there.
Good luck with your dreams
That's some good news - a shame not of cadets. I find it very tedious when reading through the threads having skip pages of crap about spelling and immature insults to get to the continuation of what the question on the thread is really about - so I have sympathy for you there.
Good luck with your dreams
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
devokeuk: Lets hope what you say is what is happening at FR will happen to all SSTR providers. It would be nice to know that that is the case. It may mean I dont have to present anything to BALPA. On that note......
If we were fortunate enough to be in that situation. Does anyone have any ideas on how could we can keep it that way, if at all. It may be a different approach that I could take.
411A, Flopsie, Boogie-Nicely: I am probably very naive with my views on this industry however I have never claimed to have a huge amount of experience. I am however, genuinely concerned that my Ts and Cs later on in life will be at a lower level than those experienced by most airline pilots at the moment. Without the support of fellow pilots such as yourselves, it is going to be hard to action any change or at the very least, keep us at the same inflation adjusted level. While I hold these concerns, my views will not change, no matter how hard you tell me I am wrong!
Flopsie, what are your motives? I am sure you will agree that from a pilots point of view, if they dont have to pay for a type rating, that is a good thing. Are you actually a pilot because your attitude is very strongly against my plans for someone who would benefit directly from my success! What is your agenda?? You know what mine is! Why is an airbus pilot so dead against the removal of SSTRs.
Boogie-Nicely: I dont personally care if an SSTR company goes bust or a training option is closed down becasue of my actions. I am not targeting any one SSTR company,just the notion of SSTRs. They dont care about the pilots futures they influence by selling SSTRs so why should I care about the futures of the management or owners. You dont hear any SSTR companies saying 'Our main worry is how the pilot community will do while we sell type ratings' they are only out to make money so you are naturally not going to hear pilots saying 'I hope that SSTR organisation that is costing me money will remain financially viable'. Infact, most SSTR companies publicly dont gaurantee work or job placements! Its a dog eat dog world out there, especially in aviation and if my plans mean an SSTR company goes under, thats business and whoever started it made the wrong business decision, they always have the option to diversify and there would be no reason why they could become a company integrated TRTO. Its not personal and for them, it would be exactly the same as a pilot, buying a TR and then not getting a job and all the while owing thousands to the bank, they dont care once your out the door as long as there is someone to take your place!
For the record...... I have not been 'burnt' by any company or training organisation and this isnt a personal crusade against any one SSTR provider! I have genuine concerns about the overall future of the aviation industry I want to work in. Your arguments hold no weight with me!!
OSOP
If we were fortunate enough to be in that situation. Does anyone have any ideas on how could we can keep it that way, if at all. It may be a different approach that I could take.
411A, Flopsie, Boogie-Nicely: I am probably very naive with my views on this industry however I have never claimed to have a huge amount of experience. I am however, genuinely concerned that my Ts and Cs later on in life will be at a lower level than those experienced by most airline pilots at the moment. Without the support of fellow pilots such as yourselves, it is going to be hard to action any change or at the very least, keep us at the same inflation adjusted level. While I hold these concerns, my views will not change, no matter how hard you tell me I am wrong!
Flopsie, what are your motives? I am sure you will agree that from a pilots point of view, if they dont have to pay for a type rating, that is a good thing. Are you actually a pilot because your attitude is very strongly against my plans for someone who would benefit directly from my success! What is your agenda?? You know what mine is! Why is an airbus pilot so dead against the removal of SSTRs.
Boogie-Nicely: I dont personally care if an SSTR company goes bust or a training option is closed down becasue of my actions. I am not targeting any one SSTR company,just the notion of SSTRs. They dont care about the pilots futures they influence by selling SSTRs so why should I care about the futures of the management or owners. You dont hear any SSTR companies saying 'Our main worry is how the pilot community will do while we sell type ratings' they are only out to make money so you are naturally not going to hear pilots saying 'I hope that SSTR organisation that is costing me money will remain financially viable'. Infact, most SSTR companies publicly dont gaurantee work or job placements! Its a dog eat dog world out there, especially in aviation and if my plans mean an SSTR company goes under, thats business and whoever started it made the wrong business decision, they always have the option to diversify and there would be no reason why they could become a company integrated TRTO. Its not personal and for them, it would be exactly the same as a pilot, buying a TR and then not getting a job and all the while owing thousands to the bank, they dont care once your out the door as long as there is someone to take your place!
For the record...... I have not been 'burnt' by any company or training organisation and this isnt a personal crusade against any one SSTR provider! I have genuine concerns about the overall future of the aviation industry I want to work in. Your arguments hold no weight with me!!
OSOP
Last edited by On speed on profile; 19th Apr 2006 at 09:11.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm all for free markets and free decisions so I too am not concerned with the financial welfare of these SSTR companies they are big boys and have to take it on the chin. Though I advocate the pursuit of SSTR it doesn't exempt me from being a caring personality, after all I am a geuine team player in the greater scheme of things and would be dismyed with the degradation of my fellow pilots T&Cs in future. However I just don't feel that the blame can be put on the doorstep of those who wish to sacrifice most, train hardest whilst be openly responsible for their own actions. This is like blaming the recent Peugeot car plant closure on the immigrants. Aviation is a complex game with an equally complex array of variables so a single source of activity cannot be solely responsible for the wave of change running through the industry in recent years. I have always felt that in the past aviation was a closed door to many and that those on the right side of that door were more than looked after compared to the pleb working as a clerk in some dusty office somewhere.
If it's difficult to identify the specifics of this 'wave of change' then at least we can ascertain what direction it appears to be coming from. That would most certainly be the LCC which is now a global phenomena and long may it continue. We have to ask ourselves what else are we prepared to do in order to justify better T&Cs, do we speak multiple languages, have the potential to leave the cockpit with a path to management (effective and practical not old boys club)? How many pilots turn up for employment with a solid degree and perhaps a Masters in Aerospace Engineering, Astro Physics, Mathematics?
As naturally conservative persons we are starting to sound more like whinging trade unions by the day. We should dispense with this self appointed attitude that we are special and we "deserve it", market forces will decide what the level shall be. Aviation is not a flying club there for our benefit it is at the end of the day a business and though in the past it has been shielded by governments from the harsh realities of corporate culture, airlines are now very atuned to the harsh climes of the business world. Not so easy to fog off hard nosed business men in the city with fuddy-duddy CAA type illusions. The business world are the ones that have turned up the screw on an unfit and at times obese industry,
If it's difficult to identify the specifics of this 'wave of change' then at least we can ascertain what direction it appears to be coming from. That would most certainly be the LCC which is now a global phenomena and long may it continue. We have to ask ourselves what else are we prepared to do in order to justify better T&Cs, do we speak multiple languages, have the potential to leave the cockpit with a path to management (effective and practical not old boys club)? How many pilots turn up for employment with a solid degree and perhaps a Masters in Aerospace Engineering, Astro Physics, Mathematics?
As naturally conservative persons we are starting to sound more like whinging trade unions by the day. We should dispense with this self appointed attitude that we are special and we "deserve it", market forces will decide what the level shall be. Aviation is not a flying club there for our benefit it is at the end of the day a business and though in the past it has been shielded by governments from the harsh realities of corporate culture, airlines are now very atuned to the harsh climes of the business world. Not so easy to fog off hard nosed business men in the city with fuddy-duddy CAA type illusions. The business world are the ones that have turned up the screw on an unfit and at times obese industry,
Last edited by boogie-nicey; 20th Apr 2006 at 14:23.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boogie-Nicey, I echo 20Drivers comments.
It has been very hard to get any alternatives to my ideas (which I am openly asking for) from those who wish to see SSTRs remain as a part of the industry with the exception of "you dont know what you are doing" and "it cant be done" with no solid justifying reasons. I still think however that it is possible for those that... " sacrifice most, train hardest whilst be openly responsible for their own actions " ... to get into aviation without having to buy a SSTR. It would mean that aviation would be open to those who had the ability, perserverance and personality to get through as opposed to those that have the money or those that are prepared to spend ludicrous amounts of money (not theirs) to obtain employment.
Aviation as I see it is definately moving to the opposite side, where the door is closing to those who cant afford it, regardless of their aspirations, ability or hardwork. Bonding seems to be the obvious middle ground after you get selected based on your ability. We are at the point where we can hold onto the balance of risk between company and pilot,maybe swing it back in our favour but it shouldnt be totally lumped on the pilot and if the company bears some of the risk of training, then that gives pilots more of a leverage when it comes to securing Ts and Cs. Im not saying I want to be paid £100k as a lo-co f/o but we have the choice to let it go one way or the other, I personally dont want to see the burden put squarely on the pilots and I definately dont want to get screwed by management. SSTRs are a tool that helps management, not pilots. If a pilot has the skills, personality and desire, they will get a rating without a SSTR regardless if they have the money to pay for one or not, they can then negotiate based on ability and dedication to the company. If a company knows its pilots have lots of money or are in debt due to their SSTR and are desperate for the job, they can flex more muscle than they otherwise could when it comes to negotiations of Ts and Cs.
You sum up my case beautifully with the following quote:
This is how we should make ourselves stand out, not the size of our wallet (or loan)! The thing I am trying to prevent is the 'old boys club' (which incidently is not as it was now the industry is so big) turning into the 'rich boys club'. We need to be in the middle, free from SSTRs.
OSOP.
It has been very hard to get any alternatives to my ideas (which I am openly asking for) from those who wish to see SSTRs remain as a part of the industry with the exception of "you dont know what you are doing" and "it cant be done" with no solid justifying reasons. I still think however that it is possible for those that... " sacrifice most, train hardest whilst be openly responsible for their own actions " ... to get into aviation without having to buy a SSTR. It would mean that aviation would be open to those who had the ability, perserverance and personality to get through as opposed to those that have the money or those that are prepared to spend ludicrous amounts of money (not theirs) to obtain employment.
Aviation as I see it is definately moving to the opposite side, where the door is closing to those who cant afford it, regardless of their aspirations, ability or hardwork. Bonding seems to be the obvious middle ground after you get selected based on your ability. We are at the point where we can hold onto the balance of risk between company and pilot,maybe swing it back in our favour but it shouldnt be totally lumped on the pilot and if the company bears some of the risk of training, then that gives pilots more of a leverage when it comes to securing Ts and Cs. Im not saying I want to be paid £100k as a lo-co f/o but we have the choice to let it go one way or the other, I personally dont want to see the burden put squarely on the pilots and I definately dont want to get screwed by management. SSTRs are a tool that helps management, not pilots. If a pilot has the skills, personality and desire, they will get a rating without a SSTR regardless if they have the money to pay for one or not, they can then negotiate based on ability and dedication to the company. If a company knows its pilots have lots of money or are in debt due to their SSTR and are desperate for the job, they can flex more muscle than they otherwise could when it comes to negotiations of Ts and Cs.
You sum up my case beautifully with the following quote:
We have to ask ourselves what else are we prepared to do in order to justify better T&Cs, do we speak multiple languages, have the potential to leave the cockpit with a path to management (effective and practical not old boys club)? How many pilots turn up for employment with a solid degree and perhaps a Masters in Aerospace Engineering, Astro Physics, Mathematics?
OSOP.