BALPA - UK facing shortage of pilots
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Age: 43
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
White Knight/Snoop
It's not about who's a 'real pilot' or who's a 'real professional' that is just pilot willy waving again!
When the airlines once again appreciate the experiences you and I have then I think P2F will be consigned to the history books BUT until then it's an alternative, ableit a distasteful one!
However, it completely ludicrous to suggest everyone MUST live in a caravan, fly for peanuts and live on chips and curry sauce while gaining experience!
This may be fine IF you are single but what if you have a wife and kids? It is then completely and utterly impractical and probably a waste of time especially in the current market where such skills and experience are NOT appreciated by airlines.
It's not about who's a 'real pilot' or who's a 'real professional' that is just pilot willy waving again!
When the airlines once again appreciate the experiences you and I have then I think P2F will be consigned to the history books BUT until then it's an alternative, ableit a distasteful one!
However, it completely ludicrous to suggest everyone MUST live in a caravan, fly for peanuts and live on chips and curry sauce while gaining experience!
This may be fine IF you are single but what if you have a wife and kids? It is then completely and utterly impractical and probably a waste of time especially in the current market where such skills and experience are NOT appreciated by airlines.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KyleRB,
thank you, however, it is more than just quirks of our systems, it is an endemic failure of our regulatory and legislative processes to think more than a couple of years ahead and to consider potential outcomes and anticipate reactive practices.
To be honest, who knows if it will be implemented, that rather depends on the argument being put forward at the time and the benefits to the party putting forward that argument.
Quite simply, the UK does not have the GA traffic to accommodate the required numbers of new hires required to even sustain current numbers, let alone industry growth. Heck the larger FTO's in the UK send their pilots overseas for the flight portion of training, which again further reduces the capacity for UK based instructing jobs.
... So for the future instructors looking at building time up, the option is going to be 'Sleepy Backwater Flight School", where they may get a couple of hundred hours in a year in a 152, and thats about it, which is of little interest to an operator, as the schools getting the twin rating students, the IR students and the CPL students are going to to be the bigger schools, which send their student base overseas.
Now if we consider the legislation of a minimum 1500 hours and 'x' time on a 27,000kg, multi crew operation aircraft, how exactly is the UK pilot base going to gain the requisite time to move into such a position?
simply it is not, so the resultant factor would be, to recruit overseas pilots that have those imposed requirements...
... or FTO's sell right seat time to candidates because there is no way they are going to gain anywhere near the experience they need to apply for a position, unless they pay for it. And that has just cemented the P2F route in place ad infinitum. Go figure !
We sit here and see cadets blaming experienced crews for letting this happen, experienced crews blaming cadets for buying into it, all the meanwhile everybody's T&C and job security goes swirling around the plughole. What could easily have been anticipated and prevented with a little foresight happens because fingers are pointed and nothing gets resolved and the regulatory and legislative processes are not representing the UK pilot base, because there is no coordinated representative base fighting their corner as whole.
thank you, however, it is more than just quirks of our systems, it is an endemic failure of our regulatory and legislative processes to think more than a couple of years ahead and to consider potential outcomes and anticipate reactive practices.
The 1500 hours rule makes sense but will it ever be implemented here in the UK who knows!? In principle it is a good idea, especially above a certain aeroplane weight. However, the major FTO/TRTOs like OAA and CTC may have something not very nice to say about it!
Quite simply, the UK does not have the GA traffic to accommodate the required numbers of new hires required to even sustain current numbers, let alone industry growth. Heck the larger FTO's in the UK send their pilots overseas for the flight portion of training, which again further reduces the capacity for UK based instructing jobs.
... So for the future instructors looking at building time up, the option is going to be 'Sleepy Backwater Flight School", where they may get a couple of hundred hours in a year in a 152, and thats about it, which is of little interest to an operator, as the schools getting the twin rating students, the IR students and the CPL students are going to to be the bigger schools, which send their student base overseas.
Now if we consider the legislation of a minimum 1500 hours and 'x' time on a 27,000kg, multi crew operation aircraft, how exactly is the UK pilot base going to gain the requisite time to move into such a position?
simply it is not, so the resultant factor would be, to recruit overseas pilots that have those imposed requirements...
... or FTO's sell right seat time to candidates because there is no way they are going to gain anywhere near the experience they need to apply for a position, unless they pay for it. And that has just cemented the P2F route in place ad infinitum. Go figure !
We sit here and see cadets blaming experienced crews for letting this happen, experienced crews blaming cadets for buying into it, all the meanwhile everybody's T&C and job security goes swirling around the plughole. What could easily have been anticipated and prevented with a little foresight happens because fingers are pointed and nothing gets resolved and the regulatory and legislative processes are not representing the UK pilot base, because there is no coordinated representative base fighting their corner as whole.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Age: 43
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stuckgear
An excellent post which highlights why we are in this mess - I agree with everything you have written. I suppose this is why the MPL was introduced in the first place....................
An excellent post which highlights why we are in this mess - I agree with everything you have written. I suppose this is why the MPL was introduced in the first place....................
Join Date: May 2005
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK Pilot Shortage : Really !!!
Once again BALPA stricks its crass insensitive foot in it !!!
1000s of British pilots are scattered around the globe working 1000' s of miles from home often unaccompanied by their family, in what could be described as "hard duty stations".
The reason for this BALPA please take note are that their are next to no pilot job vacancies in the UK.
So BALPA your talking complete dribble about a UK pilot shortage. Infact there is about as much chance of their being pilot shortage as there is me suffering a cash surplus.
In the off chance that there ever is a recovery in the UK job situation there will be thosands of British pilots looking to get back to the UK closer to home.
There really is no need to fret that the £100K training fee putting people of joining a what has become an awful lifestyle.
Infact anything that can trim the oversupply of new pilots the better.
1000s of British pilots are scattered around the globe working 1000' s of miles from home often unaccompanied by their family, in what could be described as "hard duty stations".
The reason for this BALPA please take note are that their are next to no pilot job vacancies in the UK.
So BALPA your talking complete dribble about a UK pilot shortage. Infact there is about as much chance of their being pilot shortage as there is me suffering a cash surplus.
In the off chance that there ever is a recovery in the UK job situation there will be thosands of British pilots looking to get back to the UK closer to home.
There really is no need to fret that the £100K training fee putting people of joining a what has become an awful lifestyle.
Infact anything that can trim the oversupply of new pilots the better.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: ...
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot shortage in the UK? No way will that happen anytime soon!
There are hundreds, if not thousands of experienced European pilots that are holding out in some sideline country, somewhere in the world, wanting to be closer to home... and I'm guessing that more than half are P2F "graduates" who would have accepted FI or TP jobs if there were any at the time they left flight school.
The old career path has changed, and will continue to change. Sentiment, ethics or regulation is not going to stop that. Globalization is a mixed bag of flavors for any industry.
There are hundreds, if not thousands of experienced European pilots that are holding out in some sideline country, somewhere in the world, wanting to be closer to home... and I'm guessing that more than half are P2F "graduates" who would have accepted FI or TP jobs if there were any at the time they left flight school.
The old career path has changed, and will continue to change. Sentiment, ethics or regulation is not going to stop that. Globalization is a mixed bag of flavors for any industry.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MainDude,
I agree, with your comment
and would like to add to
That there's hundreds more pilots out there, with line experience and time on type that have had to take alternative employment away from the aviation industry due to the lack of available jobs and the desperate need to pay the mortgage/bills etc. Let alone the cost of remaining current while actively looking for a position commensurate with their experience. Those guys and gals would happily jump ship from what ever they are doing for a flight deck position.
while i agree in part with your comment:
yes the old career path has changed and that sentiment, ethics or regulation will not change that, regulation that protects the industry within a state will countermand the the further degradation of the industry.
Globalization, it to some extent a misnomer. The phrase was first coined in the late 1800's and became more widely recognized around the 1930's. The Chicago Convention of 1944, sought to address international conventions and to establish bilateral agreements between contracting states.
However, we see in this industry some degree of protectionism from certain contracting states, like for example the restriction in issuance of working visa to non nationals,, or the requirement for the fluency in the native language, yet take for example the UK, which does not.
Another example would be say a UK regional operator using crews from an overseas FTO/carrier to fly the line and build time before being return to their native country with the requisite experience. All the while that is taking available positions out of the market for UK nationals.
I've addressed some of the contributing factors in other posts already and do not wish to re-hash them, but while sentiment, is nothing to base regulation on, regulation that protects and benefits the industry and those that work in it is necessary for its continuance. The failure to consider potential areas of defect, or ignoring future decline due to inaction is negligent.
For BALPA to even consider, let alone publicly release a statement such as it has is not only factually incorrect, but also negligent in terms of the body it is paid, by it's membership base to represent, both in the short term and the long term.
I agree, with your comment
Pilot shortage in the UK? No way will that happen anytime soon!
There are hundreds, if not thousands of experienced European pilots that are holding out in some sideline country, somewhere in the world, wanting to be closer to home... and I'm guessing that more than half are P2F "graduates" who would have accepted FI or TP jobs if there were any at the time they left flight school.
while i agree in part with your comment:
The old career path has changed, and will continue to change. Sentiment, ethics or regulation is not going to stop that. Globalization is a mixed bag of flavors for any industry.
Globalization, it to some extent a misnomer. The phrase was first coined in the late 1800's and became more widely recognized around the 1930's. The Chicago Convention of 1944, sought to address international conventions and to establish bilateral agreements between contracting states.
However, we see in this industry some degree of protectionism from certain contracting states, like for example the restriction in issuance of working visa to non nationals,, or the requirement for the fluency in the native language, yet take for example the UK, which does not.
Another example would be say a UK regional operator using crews from an overseas FTO/carrier to fly the line and build time before being return to their native country with the requisite experience. All the while that is taking available positions out of the market for UK nationals.
I've addressed some of the contributing factors in other posts already and do not wish to re-hash them, but while sentiment, is nothing to base regulation on, regulation that protects and benefits the industry and those that work in it is necessary for its continuance. The failure to consider potential areas of defect, or ignoring future decline due to inaction is negligent.
For BALPA to even consider, let alone publicly release a statement such as it has is not only factually incorrect, but also negligent in terms of the body it is paid, by it's membership base to represent, both in the short term and the long term.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Terra firma
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the original news story:
Obviously that statement is correct but lobbying the airlines to voluntarily pay to train cadets is never going to produce results.
Also bringing in mandated by law minimum hours will not fix anything as the airlines will just recruit pilots from elsewhere.
So about the only alternative may be to set up an academy which is paid for by some sort of fee to which all airlines are forced to contribute and in return may then draft a number of recruits proportional to their payment.
A Balpa campaign is pressing individual airlines to shoulder more of the responsibility for training.
The union says it is now almost impossible for young people from middle and low-income families to get into the profession.
The union says it is now almost impossible for young people from middle and low-income families to get into the profession.
Also bringing in mandated by law minimum hours will not fix anything as the airlines will just recruit pilots from elsewhere.
So about the only alternative may be to set up an academy which is paid for by some sort of fee to which all airlines are forced to contribute and in return may then draft a number of recruits proportional to their payment.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Where the sun always shines
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let the market decide
Looking at the cost of training + UK wages + the increasing tax bill from Osborne + cost of living it is no longer worthwhile financially to be a pilot in the UK.
Furthemore the easy credit tap has dried, meaning that only the wealthier part of population is able to access the profession. Now considering the ever degrading Terms and Conditions the job offers it doesn't really make sense to pay such an amount of money for little return.
After all studying for a management, accounting or any other business degree isn't any riskier than getting a CPL/IR + Type rating.
My point is: If terms and conditions don't improve there will be a shortage of inexperienced British pilots in the UK market. I have noticed that CTC has started doing roadshows all over the country lately, is the intake of inspiring cadets drying up?
Now, will Joe Blogg from Poland, Ireland, France or anywhere else step in ? Hard to tell........
We might well be at that stage where the wind is turning in favour of us, pilots, for a change !
Furthemore the easy credit tap has dried, meaning that only the wealthier part of population is able to access the profession. Now considering the ever degrading Terms and Conditions the job offers it doesn't really make sense to pay such an amount of money for little return.
After all studying for a management, accounting or any other business degree isn't any riskier than getting a CPL/IR + Type rating.
My point is: If terms and conditions don't improve there will be a shortage of inexperienced British pilots in the UK market. I have noticed that CTC has started doing roadshows all over the country lately, is the intake of inspiring cadets drying up?
Now, will Joe Blogg from Poland, Ireland, France or anywhere else step in ? Hard to tell........
We might well be at that stage where the wind is turning in favour of us, pilots, for a change !
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Uh... Where was I?
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great post, Stuckgear!
Brilliant, indeed.
It's my opinion that the root cause of the actual situation is the FTOs. Their fight for survival is killing us. It's as if in a war, private soldier training organizations wanted to keep the bussiness and training soldiers at the same rate during peace time after the war. Where the hell would those soldiers go?
You are right: the choice a wannabe makes when he decides for a given FTO will restrict his career totally.
I wonder if there could be such thing as a "natural seleccion" so that only a few FTOs (those with agreements with airlines) would survive. I think that "conventional" flight schools are doomed since the "from zero to hero"
schemes are much more attractive.
Do you think that we could reach a point at which each airline would have its own FTO?
What would happen then?
It's my opinion that the root cause of the actual situation is the FTOs. Their fight for survival is killing us. It's as if in a war, private soldier training organizations wanted to keep the bussiness and training soldiers at the same rate during peace time after the war. Where the hell would those soldiers go?
You are right: the choice a wannabe makes when he decides for a given FTO will restrict his career totally.
I wonder if there could be such thing as a "natural seleccion" so that only a few FTOs (those with agreements with airlines) would survive. I think that "conventional" flight schools are doomed since the "from zero to hero"
schemes are much more attractive.
Do you think that we could reach a point at which each airline would have its own FTO?
What would happen then?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Uh... Where was I?
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hahaha
I already know of an airline which still hasn't gone bankrupt because the first officers are in fact paying the salaries of the rest of the crew. Otherwise they would be broke long time ago.
Who need customers to fly in their airplanes, anymore?
Why to compete with the other airlines for the bussiness travelers or the tourists, of inmigrants?
fight for the richest wannabes instead!
I already know of an airline which still hasn't gone bankrupt because the first officers are in fact paying the salaries of the rest of the crew. Otherwise they would be broke long time ago.
Who need customers to fly in their airplanes, anymore?
Why to compete with the other airlines for the bussiness travelers or the tourists, of inmigrants?
fight for the richest wannabes instead!
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: leeds
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can totally sympathise with this BBC news topic.. After many years of grabbing hours towards my training when finances became available yet really getting no where at all. At 26 I just last month passed selection and gained a place with the Pilot Training College on their Integrated Airline Pilot Training Program. Yet my dream and ambition has once again hit a massive brick wall as I have no equity in any property or otherwise to secure my training funding.. So as of right now, although my dream seems so close after passing selection and gaining a place on the course.. It most likely is never going to happen for me as I just cant raise the near £70,000 to complete my training.. 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SE Asia
Age: 39
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sit tight .... its turning slowly ....by next spring there will be a LOT of folks wishing they were in your shoes (£70 k better off than them) 26 ? whats the big rush ? chill !
there will be a LOT of folks wishing they were in your shoes (£70 k better off than them) 26 ? whats the big rush ? chill !
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Microburst, et al.
Thank you for your comments.
In view of some of the other posts and questions raised:
To a degree, of course. When an FTO starts doing roadshows to recruit candidates, who's money is needed for survival, when there are so few in the market place, compared with the quantity of 'would-be' pilots, it would indicate a problem in the numbers required to sustain the overheads.
The problem is not of course potential candidates, but potential candidates with the liquidity, or capacity to raise the liquidity to fund such a course.
Don't believe it for a start. What will invariably happen is that airlines will look to recruit flight crews from countries with lower living costs. With the capability now to employ pan-European, why would a pilot that requires 'X' salary to survive, be a consideration, when a JAA rated pilot, that needs 'Y' to survive (Y being considerably less than X) can provide the same function.
Again, it's simple economics. The resultant factor being that once the full effects of pilots without the liquidity required, and/or requiring a higher salary to service the debts incurred as well as living expenses has exhausted the candidate base, then the supply route will change.
Of course, the resultant of this will be a demise of the UK based FTO's along with the UK based crew availability. After all, what would the purpose serve in paying a vastly overpriced fATPL, when the employers are now seeking crews from 'cheaper' countries that have the same paperwork.
well to a degree, we're already seeing that. with certain FTO's aligned to certain airlines.
As for the Airline owning an FTO, look at OAA. It is owned by Star Capital Partners...
Unfortunately, there are some very, very simple methods that could be implemented to prevent, maybe even reverse the damage done to the industry, for example:
1. If an aircraft operator presents that the candidate be in possession of a self funded TR, then that TR may be provided by any TR provider authorized by the national regulator of the carrier.
This would then place the TR's required into the open market, rather than hog-tie the candidate to having a TR provided at three times the market rate. IE. if a UK carrier wants a candidate to have TR, then a TR provided by a CAA regulated training provider should be deemed acceptable.
This then places type specific training into the open market, not into a monopolized provider.
2. Any vacancies an operator has, even if they source their crews through an aligned FTO, must be open to all suitably rated candidates. Removing the capability of an FTO to restrict cadet positions to their own students.
Again, this would place the recruitment into the open market and prevent FTO's providing a portfolio of cadet, basically, with nowhere else to go and removes the employment capacity from a monopolized provider.
In short, if a UK carrier has available openings, they should be open to all candidates with CAA tickets, not be restricted because the opening is with a carrier that has a loose affiliation with another FTO.
Simply, if the carrier wants to employ pilots trained specifically to their methodology, then they need to take the investment and start their own training schools again, solely for providing candidates for their own operation and none other.
Both of these simple issues would open up the market substantially and allow pilots not to be restricted because they selected one FTO at the start of their training over another.
It would, like i said previously open the market up to recruitment on a fair an equitable basis, meaning that carriers would have to provide a 'living wage' as their recruitment base is no longer restricted to a portfolio of pilots that have no other choice, with the terms and conditions being dictated by a third party that has an interest in providing the pilots that will accept the worst.
Of course, this is what BALPA should be lobbying for; Equality and open recruitment of pilots that are suitably rated by the authority, not making crass, inaccurate and misleading press releases about pilot shortages, which will invariably only feed the FTO's future and the further degradation of the industry.
Thank you for your comments.
In view of some of the other posts and questions raised:
I have noticed that CTC has started doing roadshows all over the country lately, is the intake of inspiring cadets drying up?
The problem is not of course potential candidates, but potential candidates with the liquidity, or capacity to raise the liquidity to fund such a course.
Now, will Joe Blogg from Poland, Ireland, France or anywhere else step in ? Hard to tell........
We might well be at that stage where the wind is turning in favour of us, pilots, for a change !
We might well be at that stage where the wind is turning in favour of us, pilots, for a change !
Again, it's simple economics. The resultant factor being that once the full effects of pilots without the liquidity required, and/or requiring a higher salary to service the debts incurred as well as living expenses has exhausted the candidate base, then the supply route will change.
Of course, the resultant of this will be a demise of the UK based FTO's along with the UK based crew availability. After all, what would the purpose serve in paying a vastly overpriced fATPL, when the employers are now seeking crews from 'cheaper' countries that have the same paperwork.
Do you think that we could reach a point at which each airline would have its own FTO?
As for the Airline owning an FTO, look at OAA. It is owned by Star Capital Partners...
STAR is an independent investment fund manager with over €1 billion of equity funds under management
Star Capital Partners
Star Capital Partners
1. If an aircraft operator presents that the candidate be in possession of a self funded TR, then that TR may be provided by any TR provider authorized by the national regulator of the carrier.
This would then place the TR's required into the open market, rather than hog-tie the candidate to having a TR provided at three times the market rate. IE. if a UK carrier wants a candidate to have TR, then a TR provided by a CAA regulated training provider should be deemed acceptable.
This then places type specific training into the open market, not into a monopolized provider.
2. Any vacancies an operator has, even if they source their crews through an aligned FTO, must be open to all suitably rated candidates. Removing the capability of an FTO to restrict cadet positions to their own students.
Again, this would place the recruitment into the open market and prevent FTO's providing a portfolio of cadet, basically, with nowhere else to go and removes the employment capacity from a monopolized provider.
In short, if a UK carrier has available openings, they should be open to all candidates with CAA tickets, not be restricted because the opening is with a carrier that has a loose affiliation with another FTO.
Simply, if the carrier wants to employ pilots trained specifically to their methodology, then they need to take the investment and start their own training schools again, solely for providing candidates for their own operation and none other.
Both of these simple issues would open up the market substantially and allow pilots not to be restricted because they selected one FTO at the start of their training over another.
It would, like i said previously open the market up to recruitment on a fair an equitable basis, meaning that carriers would have to provide a 'living wage' as their recruitment base is no longer restricted to a portfolio of pilots that have no other choice, with the terms and conditions being dictated by a third party that has an interest in providing the pilots that will accept the worst.
Of course, this is what BALPA should be lobbying for; Equality and open recruitment of pilots that are suitably rated by the authority, not making crass, inaccurate and misleading press releases about pilot shortages, which will invariably only feed the FTO's future and the further degradation of the industry.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ganzic, of course not. When I commenced pilot training in 1969, there was an impending worldwide pilot shortage. There was not. By 1979, forecasters (mainly pilot training schools) were forecasting such a tremendous shortage that airline growth was likely to be inhibited. Didn't happen.When I retired, after some 40 odd years, FTO's are still predicting the shortage and coaxing funds from any source. But to be fair, in 1970, my mortgage broker promised that when my endowment policy matured in 1995, it would repay my mortgage & leave me with a healthy fund left over. It didn't.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Humboldtianum Basin
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point well made...
I'm somewhere in Africa, 1000s of miles from my family, 13 years on from getting that CPL and it has been a nightmare of a job and Industry. I know I am working in someone elses Country, but why is it I can't get a job back in the UK? Anyone?
The US not much better, I could get a job there and earn $23 a flying hour...
Not cool man...
I'm somewhere in Africa, 1000s of miles from my family, 13 years on from getting that CPL and it has been a nightmare of a job and Industry. I know I am working in someone elses Country, but why is it I can't get a job back in the UK? Anyone?
The US not much better, I could get a job there and earn $23 a flying hour...
Not cool man...
Guest
Posts: n/a
LSM
Spandex, (I'm picking you, only because you've probably had the most input from your side in this debate - and strongly promote your opinion - which I wish was the case)..
I agree with the premise of what you say, that P2F is a cancer within the industry. It is the single biggest driver of Ts and Cs, at least in Europe, and it's spreading.
That said, I don't believe that berating or blaming those outside looking in is the answer. It is merely ambition. Yes, they are naive. Yes, they are pulling the rugs out from under those who have been on the self-improver route, and yes, yes, yes.... The list goes on. These are just folks trying like you and I did, to get on the ladder. The tall ladder, no less.
The issue, however, stems from within the industry. WE are the ones who need to make it stop. We let it happen. We are responsible for protecting ourselves and our industry, not outsiders looking in. That's just the reality of it. By the time someone has broken out the back of OAA with a blue book and surveyed what's available, it's too late.
Riddle me this:
Let's pretend we have 2 integrated course graduates. 23 years of age. Both 70K in debt. Both very capable and diligent, and graduate with their blue books without issue. One pays for an FI rating, lets call it 8K. The other pays 20K for a TR and 500 hours.
The FI works for peanuts, cleans aircraft, slowly builds up time in an SEP, and a year later, flies MEP in Ghana. Same crap wage. Adventure, romance, etc.
At 1800 hours, call it 3 years post OAA, he snags an interview for FlyBe. He's certainly driven, able, and the job is his. He now earns 25k a year, inching up into the 30s, for many years. A command will eventually come up. Money is mediocre at best, and the prospects of a jet job for TP operators is slim. The demand just isn't there. Let's say 8 years at FlyBe. Then year one at Monarch. Well played, ambition achieved, and the prospect of decent professional money is upon him. At this point, realistically, 12 years have passed since day one at OAA.
Number 2 pays 20k to land himself a jet job. RYR/Tiger/Wizz or whatever else. He's 12k lighter than number one. Worst case, he makes similar to a FlyBe FO. Best case, he makes more. Conditions and morale are rubbish, but the experience is good. 2 years later, he's interviewed at BA, fails, but 18 months later he's off to Emirates/Virgin/Monarch.
Now, being in the industry, I know that this is a great simplification. But, when you're a capable FATPL holder, heavily indebted, this is probably not a million miles away from one's thought process. The time scales listed in both scenarios are equally viable. To that end, can you blame anyone from wanting to generate the best return on their investment, even if it means spending more?
It's all well and good getting all Tex Johnson about the romance of having a ****e job in the Congo for a while, but you and I are both acutely aware of the investment needed to get qualified, and the need to firstly generate a return on it; and secondly get on a seniority list of a career platform. Regretfully, most companies only want jet time. A crying shame, I'll grant you, but that's the way the world has gone. The guy with the jet time has a great many more options than the TP operator.
One option is going to cost you 8 grand, and 10+ years. The other 20 grand, and 2+ years. I'm no Galileo, but I can probably work out that conservatively, the ROE on number 2 over the course of a career, is hundreds of thousands better than number one.
This, kind sir, is why FATPL holders will continue to shell out hand-over-fist for a shot on a jet. I don't agree with it, and I dislike how narrow the career path has become, but it is the reality. We cannot berate or misunderstand people who take the plunge with more debt. It isn't their doing. We allowed it to happen. These guys are merely conceding that with 70k of debt hanging over them, they may as well bet the farm and take out a bit more; statistically, they are more likely to recover it all far more quickly than the guy 'with principles'.
I know this hasn't really tackled the P2F issue, more the SSTR. Ultimately, though, P2F is merely another stretching/embellishing of already hideous industry practices - again, which we failed to stop.
I wish I knew what the answer was. I think a start is unity amongst us. It's our mess, but nobody else is going to look over us.
I agree with the premise of what you say, that P2F is a cancer within the industry. It is the single biggest driver of Ts and Cs, at least in Europe, and it's spreading.
That said, I don't believe that berating or blaming those outside looking in is the answer. It is merely ambition. Yes, they are naive. Yes, they are pulling the rugs out from under those who have been on the self-improver route, and yes, yes, yes.... The list goes on. These are just folks trying like you and I did, to get on the ladder. The tall ladder, no less.
The issue, however, stems from within the industry. WE are the ones who need to make it stop. We let it happen. We are responsible for protecting ourselves and our industry, not outsiders looking in. That's just the reality of it. By the time someone has broken out the back of OAA with a blue book and surveyed what's available, it's too late.
Riddle me this:
Let's pretend we have 2 integrated course graduates. 23 years of age. Both 70K in debt. Both very capable and diligent, and graduate with their blue books without issue. One pays for an FI rating, lets call it 8K. The other pays 20K for a TR and 500 hours.
The FI works for peanuts, cleans aircraft, slowly builds up time in an SEP, and a year later, flies MEP in Ghana. Same crap wage. Adventure, romance, etc.
At 1800 hours, call it 3 years post OAA, he snags an interview for FlyBe. He's certainly driven, able, and the job is his. He now earns 25k a year, inching up into the 30s, for many years. A command will eventually come up. Money is mediocre at best, and the prospects of a jet job for TP operators is slim. The demand just isn't there. Let's say 8 years at FlyBe. Then year one at Monarch. Well played, ambition achieved, and the prospect of decent professional money is upon him. At this point, realistically, 12 years have passed since day one at OAA.
Number 2 pays 20k to land himself a jet job. RYR/Tiger/Wizz or whatever else. He's 12k lighter than number one. Worst case, he makes similar to a FlyBe FO. Best case, he makes more. Conditions and morale are rubbish, but the experience is good. 2 years later, he's interviewed at BA, fails, but 18 months later he's off to Emirates/Virgin/Monarch.
Now, being in the industry, I know that this is a great simplification. But, when you're a capable FATPL holder, heavily indebted, this is probably not a million miles away from one's thought process. The time scales listed in both scenarios are equally viable. To that end, can you blame anyone from wanting to generate the best return on their investment, even if it means spending more?
It's all well and good getting all Tex Johnson about the romance of having a ****e job in the Congo for a while, but you and I are both acutely aware of the investment needed to get qualified, and the need to firstly generate a return on it; and secondly get on a seniority list of a career platform. Regretfully, most companies only want jet time. A crying shame, I'll grant you, but that's the way the world has gone. The guy with the jet time has a great many more options than the TP operator.
One option is going to cost you 8 grand, and 10+ years. The other 20 grand, and 2+ years. I'm no Galileo, but I can probably work out that conservatively, the ROE on number 2 over the course of a career, is hundreds of thousands better than number one.
This, kind sir, is why FATPL holders will continue to shell out hand-over-fist for a shot on a jet. I don't agree with it, and I dislike how narrow the career path has become, but it is the reality. We cannot berate or misunderstand people who take the plunge with more debt. It isn't their doing. We allowed it to happen. These guys are merely conceding that with 70k of debt hanging over them, they may as well bet the farm and take out a bit more; statistically, they are more likely to recover it all far more quickly than the guy 'with principles'.
I know this hasn't really tackled the P2F issue, more the SSTR. Ultimately, though, P2F is merely another stretching/embellishing of already hideous industry practices - again, which we failed to stop.
I wish I knew what the answer was. I think a start is unity amongst us. It's our mess, but nobody else is going to look over us.