airlines who ask pilots to pay to fly !

[JJflyer]

Dear Captjns

I wont be drawn into a meaningless discussion about the experience levels of pilots in different accidents and incidents. Just to remind you, it was you Sir, who brought up the lack of accidents or rather that you don't recall any and you where corrected on the matter.

Further, you are somewhat mistaken on the subject or at the least interpreted my post wrong either by mistake or on purpose.

This thread is NOT about low time pilots but about those who pay their own ratings in order to get a job.

If you read my post again, you might find that my comments where about the latter group. You might also find that the low time pilots "Selected" by airlines where screened carefully for their aptitude (Not to say that HR garbage departments got it right all the time) and not for their financial ability or the size of wallet daddy has. These days, especially with the worsening economical situation, the financial ability seems to be much more important to some low cost operators than suitability of the candidate.

There are however situations that one could consider paying a rating. Lets take a 10000h pilot flying large commercial jets and wanting to move to VIP flying. He or she gets an offer saying that if you are rated on a G550, here's your job and you are on salary now. That could be a tempting proposition especially if the type rating cost is tax deductable partially or the salary covers the incurred cost in a short time. However for a low time pilot with 200 something hours, it is a huge gamble. Personally I could not recommend if there was no guarantee of a well paid job. These days it is unlikely to get a job such as that and more like it they will end up paying for sim assesments, line training and their own upkeep during and after release.

Edited to fit what I really wanted to say.

[captjns]

JJ says... I was just going to point Captjns to the Thomas Cook incident.

JJ further says... I wont be drawn into a meaningless discussion about the experience levels of pilots in different accidents and incidents as it is not relevant about the subject.

Well???

[JJflyer]

Since you insist. I have now corrected my post.

[wobble2plank]

Sadly it doesn't come down to skill levels or ability to fly. It comes down to the bottom line of some faceless pencil pushing (read Excel bashing) accountant who can entice people to pay for a Type Rating or, even better, Line Training with a scant whiff of the promise of a job at the end of it.

Once there the whiff disappears into the morning mist and the next paying TR applicant sits in the still warm seat.

With the current state of affairs, coupled with FTO's seeming to continue to see the fabled 'pilot shortage' on the horizon and have the ability to sell that better than an East London car salesman in a sheepskin coat can sell a knackered car, there will always be applicants. They feel that paying will give them the 'edge'. Who can tell, maybe in a few years time it will.

This won't change. The airlines have got hold of the bone and it will take a lot to let them drop it. Airline flying is not the most demanding of flying. In fact, after many years flying various types, I have to say it can be downright dull. It does however, in the correct airline, pay the bills well. That will be enticement enough for lots of applicants.

[captjns]

Since you insist. I have now corrected my post.

Never insisted... just wanted to know you views.

Lets take a 10000h pilot flying large commercial jets and wanting to move to VIP flying. He or she gets an offer saying that if you are rated on a G550, here's your job and you are on salary now.

Apples and oranges... new tryo paying for a type rating on a 737 or Airbus, versus a current qualified captain on the 737 or airbus.

Not going to happen JJ. Insurance companies and corporate flight departments won't permit it do to no time on type (check the job boards)... and the cost of the type rating won't permit it... and why would a B737 type rated pilot pay for a type rating on a Gulfstream, or any other jet whilst there are BBJ jobs available?

[757_Driver]

[quote] This is perhaps one of the only industries that depends on your own or your parents bank balance, rather than skill.[\quote]

rubbish, utter rubbish.

If you don't understand why then I can't be bothered to point it out.
Some of you obviously have a massive chip on your shoulder about low hour FO's and I must say many of the arguments in this thread are very inventive. Utter crap, but inventive nonetheless.

I suggest you all go and try your arm at another career, as you can obviously just walk into to everything else with no cost, no risk and no training.

[wobble2plank]

He or she gets an offer saying that if you are rated on a G550, here's your job and you are on salary now. That could be a tempting proposition especially if the type rating cost is tax deductable partially or the salary covers the incurred cost in a short time.

If I wanted to move from the Airbus to a G550 with an established VIP company then, to be honest, if they wanted me to pay for a type rating, I wouldn't even contemplate the employer. Type rating costs are tax deductible to the employer. Add to that that an employer with 'in house' training facilities can offset training costs against aircraft operating costs as they can ensure the 'trainee' has been trained to specific company SOP's.

As captjns has already alluded to, a pilot in that position is not necessarily taking his piloting ability to the new company but his experience as an aircraft operator and, with that many hours, as a Captain. This experience will directly affect the operating costs of the aircraft via reduced insurance premiums based upon the aircraft commander experience. It doesn't have to mean experience on type at this stage in a career, unlike at the start of a pilots career.

There are an awful lot of factors that govern who may do what in the cockpit of large jets. The CAA govern many with regard to heavy crews, rest and who may be relief Captain. The bean counters through the insurance companies dictate what limits may be flown by whom in what aircraft to keep the insurance costs down. If an operator wishes to make money out of RHS ab-initio training then those costs have to be very carefully juggled against the increased insurance risk of conducting training for a pilot who may not then join the company. One prang lasts a lifetime in the memory of the company that has to pay for it.

Rest assured, if the insurance costs start to outweigh the monies paid by the trainees then either the system stops or the trainees pay more. Only time will tell.

[JJflyer]

Well I certainly moved from one type to another and had absolutely ZERO time in the type I moved to. No insurance hassle what so ever. Comparable experience in a larger type more than compensated for my lack of experience in the type I now fly. Mind you I did not pay for my rating though. It was paid for by the company.

[wobble2plank]

JJFlyer,

Erm, that was exactly my point. If you have experience then zero time for another aircraft isn't a problem.

If you are ab-initio then it certainly is as the insurance policy for the aircraft often dictates the bottom line for experience.

[JJflyer]

Check PM Wobble. My last post was meant for captjns

[fade to grey]

here we go again,

Is it not about time this forum was restricted to professional pilots, not PPLs, not spotters etc...

[Boing7117]

I am going to get flamed, but... This is perhaps one of the only industries that depends on your own or your parents bank balance, rather than skill.

Well of course you need money to get through the training - regardless of which way you go about getting the training.

You see, the "skill" element you're talking about here shouldn't just refer to the skill required to fly a plane. It should be extended to include the skill required in thinking ahead about your future aspirations - what you want to do and how you're going to do it. That's the skill. As you say, people like yourself get too many years down the line and can't past a PPL - wishing they'd only had the foresight to do it all a bit earlier (or had the finances earlier).

Too many people on this forum have a long and lengthy habit of shooting down those who've stumped up the cash to get into flight training.

I had to find the cash from somewhere - but my parents didn't have tens of thousands available for me to help myself to. But I also started out on this journey when I was 14 years old. I had to plan my education - whether I was going to go to university or not - thinking ahead - knowing the cost of flight training - weighted up against the cost of university.

I had to get a job after I left school - earn the cash - save it all up. Then ten years later I was able to afford to learn to fly.

Back to the original point - airlines are always going to find ways of cutting costs - paying to fly is just a natural extension of the already-in-existence system of joining an airline on a reduced salary or with a bond. It'll continue to develop and expand as long as it makes the airline money.

..but those who've been in the industry a long while and keep piping up that it's the "new" generation of qualified pilots that are reducing pilot salaries and diluting the industry are living in cloud-cuckoo-land. What do you expect new pilots to do exactly? Insist on NOT paying for their TR? I tried that - but even when I joined my airline, clearly it was evident that I was paying for my TR - albeit over a number of years with a reduced salary / bond. It's the world we live in - it's the nature of the industry - and rather than blame newly qualified pilots about dumbing down T'c & C's - take a long hard look at yourselves.

Try asking yourselves - how did we let it get to this stage...?

[Bealzebub]

A few days ago I asked:

I wonder how long it will be before a way is found to get the left seat to generate revenue in a similar way? I expect it is being seriously thought about.

Not long it would seem.

[African Drunk]

I am a senior pilot at a large biz jet operator. I am and have always been vocally anti pilots paying type ratings. The problem is that we have so many people offering and more importantly many of our competitors do get pilots to pay. This makes it impossible to construct a case with our MD that we should operate in a highly competitive market £100,000 down on our competition.

[Imperator1300]

If they knew (and they don't), I wonder how paying passengers would truly feel about an inexperienced and 'yet-to-be' professional flying them home on a stormy winter evening?

Perhaps the same way they may feel about a 'yet-to-be' professional dentist with the drill in his hand?

Imperator1300

[SW1]

"Perhaps the same way they may feel about a 'yet-to-be' professional dentist with the drill in his hand"

Go down to to the dental department at Guys St Thomas' in London and see 4th year dental students working on Joe public, who's looking to get free dental treatment- the booths are full to the brim.

[Imperator1300]

..or 'yet-to-be' hairdressers (as we used to do whilst at Naval college many years ago). There were risks, but we knew and these were balanced against a free haircut (like your Dentists in London, but unlike the pax).

Imperator1300

P.S. There were also benefits to meeting 'yet-to-be' hairdressers

[clanger32]

Whilst I fully accept that Joe Public may not be entirely happy about someone who has offered to pay to be in the pointy end, there are two things that I think worthy of note here:

1/ A pilot who has paid for a type rating necessarily HAS the qualification to show that they are safe to fly commercially. The comparison with a trainee dentist, therefore falls apart, because one HAS the professional qualification, the other is working towards it. Further, as has been pointed out - and ignored - endlessly, there is no such thing as a truly "paid for" rating any more. Either you stump up the readies out of your own pocket up front (a la Ryanair) and get a reasonable wage, or the employer pays the TR, but you get a reduced wage for x many years, a la BA. In neither case is the TR "free" - you're paying for it, it's just how.

2/ There is a deeply unpleasant implication in these posts that anyone who has paid for a TR themselves is -defacto- an unsafe pilot, whereas anyone whose company has paid their initial TR is a safe pilot. The flaws in this logic are huge and obvious. If you can't see the elephant in the room of this argument, there is little hope for any of us. A 200 hour graduate is a 200 hour graduate and liable to make the same mistakes regardless of whether they can pay for a rating or not.

Granted, there is an argument that says perhaps those with the cash to pay a rating are able to steal a march on those who are more able, but less cash rich, but then it's equally true to say that the most competent of pilots may be able to afford a TR and the monkey who took 15 attempts to pass CPL can't afford it (especially if they had to pay for those extra 15 attempts!). All of this of course, is based on paying your TR to land a job. The world of line training schemes is a different beast altogether - and a loathsome one at that. But, then - who is to blame for the rise of these?

[White Knight]

I think most of you have forgotten "bonding" whereby the airline type rates you and you're bonded a certain amount that degrades pro rata with the months until after a certain time you no longer owe the airline any money if you then resign.. No lower salary either!!

I've never paid for a type rating and I've collected a few now

[clanger32]

White Knight - I quite agree. EXCEPT that newbies nowadays (if you can find an airline who will pay the TR at all) are expected to accept the bond AND the lower salary. BA being the obvious example I can think of - as a low hour (i.e. no previous type rating) pilot you can expect your starting salary to be £31k, whereas if you enter having already had a TR you start on £48,500. Figures from PPJN, here: British Airways jobs, payscales and entry requirements.

The story is roughly similar at other airlines....if the operator pays the TR at all, the newbie will summarily drop their pants on salary for a defined number of years in addition to the bond. Not necessarily UNfair - but you can see that for your first TR nowadays, you WILL pay for it - by hook or by crook. The only "choice" is whether you'd prefer the hit upfront, or over four/five years....

Admittedly, once you're past that illusive first job (and I say illusive, as I'm busy trying desperately hard to get that break) the bond is the way forward