Think this rules out most of us.

"Candidate Requirements:Respected, qualified Pilots with a current UK TRE (or transferable) authorisation"

sidthesexist,

A bit "play the man rather than the ball", don't you think? That's what I was gently objecting to in post 337. My head is not in the sand. I work for a company whose Operations Director is known to think training captains an inconvenient cost, nothing more. I think these schemes are immoral and dishonourable and as one who had to attempt to train some "pay to fly types" in a simulator in 2008 I am in no doubt that pure "pay to fly" is no way to recruit pilots for the airline industry. I found two of them so lacking in basic piloting skills I was appalled that they had even managed to gain CPLs. It is well known that a MyTravel A320 main landing gear was bent in July 2007 by a "pay to fly" trainee.

A colleague whose judgement and opinion I respect has been interviewing some of the OAA applicants. He tells me that the calibre of them is high and it is clear that some selection has been done. The OAA 20 have been in the pipeline for a couple of years so embarked on their courses before the present difficulties struck. That should be borne in mind, I feel. I also know, from another source, that the number of applicants for class 1 medicals has fallen significantly in recent times. It would appear that the flow is dwindling. Soon it may be little more than a dribble.

During my time in aviation I have seen some poor terms and conditions. They didn't last long when the market turned as it surely will. Instead of ranting here and simply asserting what you believe, why don't you write as I suggested, presenting a reasoned, coherent argument against the CTC/OAA schemes.

If we must talk in cliches then it really does depend what game we are playing doesn't it? This is a contact sport - play the 'man' or in the case of the Oxford 20 play the little boys who need their bottoms wiped.

When you "retired" from the other thread, I doubt if your vitriol (usually personally directed) was missed.
It seems that your objections hinge not on what these "20" are contributing to the downfall of the profession as a whole, but what their actions do to frustrate your personal aspirations.
Even if you object to their "solution" (and I cannot embrace it either BTW) it seems to me that you are as guilty of the blinkered "look after No1" attitude as you accuse them of.
Strikes me your objections are more self-centred than philanthropic towards the pilot community as a whole.
These "20", embraced a different (and perhaps arguably misguided) solution to their situation than you, but, I would temper, your motivation to complain so bitterly is not so different to what they are displaying by their actions.

Ok then Sigmund Freud.

'Good afternoon Ladies and Gentleman, this is the captain speaking, my name is playstation and I like to state the obvious......'

Of course my motivation is a personal one. Of course the reason I am interested and have the feelings I have is because of how it effects me. If the industry is no good then it effects me because I have spunked a load of MY money into it. I therefore wish to change it for MY benefit as does everyone else. If it improves, it's good for EVERYONE. These little chumps are not helping matters.

Stop being 'fair' to the Oxford 20, they are not 'misguided' as you put it - you sound like a social worker. They are deliberately getting their rocks off at their parents and all of our careers expense. Why does that annoy me? Because it effects me. It also effects all of you. And no this will not benefit their careers in the long run so do not come back with that rebuttal - we are not on the same page.

Which is exactly what these Oxford people are doing. Just because they have spent (or borrowed) more money than you doesn't make you any better.

Just think if nobody paid for their own basic training the airlines would have to run sponsorship courses.

It doesn't make me a better pilot no but if I have earned my money and they have imprisoned their parents in high risk debt then it does make me better in that sense. If I have a high paid career to fall back on - that does make me better - it puts me in a postion of power - it shows I have thought ahead.

Wooden tit be wonderful.

What they are doing is hellishly reckless. Sure if their parents are very rich then it's their luxury to afford their children the lives they want - just like buying a Ferrari or a house in the Carribean. But I know that some of these people are doing it to parents/ wives that can not afford to lose this money. I don't know how they sleep at night - it is not a calculated risk - the outcome is a foregone conclusion - if you can't see it you are in deepest, darkest denial.

Beak,
I believe it is you who is in denial. Who made you the arbiter of their lives.

Pot Kettle Black

Like you said, you too spunked a large chunk of your own money, methinks you are just a teensy-weensy bit p1ssed off because you either can't, won't, and understandbly object to, paying another chunk to do the same as them :hmm:

When the previous poster said "you are no better than them", he wasn't saying anything relating to being a better pilot, he was questioning why you come on here moralising, when indeed you, like any of us who spent a cent on our own training costs, are just as guilty of "prostituting" yourself as the next man.
Apart from fully sponsored Cadets from the BEA/BOAC era, and officers of the Queens Flying Club, we are all guilty as charged.
Nobody likes having to pay, but where is your high moral ground, if you have paid up for a licence, to tell the others at which stage to stop paying ?
If their parents/wives support this lunacy, is it really up to you to start dictating what/what not others should do, if they misguidedly (yes it is, and that is not an apology for them) decide to press ahead regardless of what YOU think.
This one man crusade is unlikely to change anyones mind, maybe better for your mental health just to accept that others disagree with you, be they right or wrong. :rolleyes:

Wingswinger - didn't realise my post came over as a rant - blunt definitely, but a rant? I had hoped not and on re-reading would politely contend that it is not.

I'm trying to keep things as simple as possible. My understanding of your analogy is that the 'ball' is this type of exploitative deal whereby the tyro pilot is expected to shoulder an unfairly high proportion of the training costs and/or worse still, effectively pay to get RHS time.

Based on that being a correct understanding, well I don't need to make a 'coherent' argument to justify why such schemes are morally indefensible. Isn't it painfully obvious?

So, if we can agree that said 'ball' is an extremely harmful cancer, does it not follow if less 'men' (boys perhaps?) were willing to play the 'ball' then perhaps the cancer wouldn't spread so quickly?

I really hope you are merely playing devil's advocate here Wingswinger. Unfortunately, I suspect not...........possibly due to some sort of personal or financial involvent.....I do not know - I can only speculate.

So, in conclusion, I'll reiterate that the folks who succumb and sign on the dotted line WRT these schemes are SHAFTING THEMSELVES, THE INDUSTRY and the rest of US.

Beak,
First off I actually agree with you that these type schemes are ruinous to the career over all. I agree that it effects me in that it's a career I have pumped a lot of cash into in order to join and I want - nay NEED - reasonable conditions to be available to me if I make it there.

However. Do you know any single one of the 20 OAA cadets? I'd bet good money almost certainly not. Therefore how do you know ANY of them are using mummy and daddys money, let alone all of them, as opposed to their own. Or is it that you find it impossible to conceive that they may have made the money themselves. Like you have. Or I have.

Oh, that's right, you don't know if they're using anyone elses money or not. You're assuming. What is it they say about assumption? It's the mother of all.....good decisions? no, that's not it....the mother of all correct inferences perhaps..no, no.....

In any case, why is using the fortune of relatives or friends completely out of order to you, yet being given a job at "your mates investment company" - without undergoing proper selection, presumably, is perfectly acceptable? Alright that last one would never stand up in a court of law as it's conjecture and hearsay, but it pretty much fits with what you display. Do you really not get it? You didn't get your high paying job on merit, you got it through friends and relatives...not SO very different from borrowing from "mummy and daddy" now, is it. Of course I await the obligatory outraged response, where you'll probably insult me and say that you definitely, absolutely got your job on your own merits and it's nothing to do with being done a favour by someone you knew. Of course it is.

The fact is that neither you or I have any right to determine how, when or where someone should spend the finances available to them. Personally I did not - and do not - think this is the "right" opportunity, but that's by the by. It's not MY money those candidates are spending.

Your entire spiteful, vitriolic problem with the OAA guys/gals seems to stem from the fact that "they weren't selected". But they were. You've been told the minimum selection criteria by someone that KNOWS what it was. You've been told by an easy TC that the interviews were conducted as normal and the standard was high. You seem to gloss over that. Yet, you [say you] have no problem with the CTC cadets getting marginally less shafted....a very curious stance....both are paying to fly, both are "destroying industry Ts and Cs" - one could even argue that the CTC guys/gals were LESS selected, as THEIR selection was before their training and therefore is less current to their skills. Hence your argument seems to fall down repeatedly and seems to be nothing more than an attack on OAA itself, which is why you keep being accused of being bitter and perhaps failing an OAA assessment.

There's an old saying I once got told - like most such old proverbs it's trite, but a lot of truth within. "If one man tells you you're ill and you feel fine, ignore them. If ten men tell you you're ill, lie down".

Beak - go have a nice lie down. There's a good chap.

Ok, slightly off topic but from reading the posts, I would just like to point out something.

When something is changing your wellbeing you use the word affect not effect. So this situation really affects me for example.

Sorry, got it off my chest now. Argument may continue.

sid,

Yes, blunt to the point of rudeness I felt.

Your understanding of the clichéd analogy is correct. It may be painfully obvious to us who work in the industry but, I can assure you, it is not to those on the outside. You would have to explain slowly in words of one syllable. I tried it on my daughter who is a Ph.D looking for an academic post and neither thick nor slow on the uptake. Her response: So what. If you think terms for these youngsters are poor (and they are), you should try pay and conditions in tertiary education.

I'd be intrigued to know on what grounds you suspect that I have some sort of personal or financial involvement other than simply being employed as a TC, a fact which I have not hidden.

It depends on those 10 mens experiences that lead them to that conclusion doesn't it Clanger, if they too have paid to fly then they are hardly the fairest of judges as to who is 'ill'. That aside I think I have made my point more than clearly and beyond that we will cover the same ground, go around in circles and reiterate. The thread is becoming a touch boring and incredibly pointless as the 20 will be on their type rating now.

As for my role as broker, believe me people couldn't afford to keep you on if you weren't any good - regardless of how much they liked you. It is a meritocracy - the way it should be.

Though irrelevant, a worthy point made by Pilotho!

Wingswinger

The reason for my suspicion, is your apparent reluctance (perhaps I need to scrutinise your posts more thoroughly) to accept that these folks (signing up for these exploitative deals) are in anyway responsible, by the act of signing, for their continued existence!!!!!!!!!!

Of course, we all bemoan the state of the industry yadedadeda etc ad nausium, but to deny their responsiblity in all this is quite frankly, ludicrous.

I cannot believe I am still on here trying to pursuade intelligent folk of the validity of this point. Quite frankly, I give up.

sid,

I don't think anyone has denied anything. It's rather like blaming people for high house prices and unmanageable debt, isn't it? If only we could stop pesky folks from taking the loans on offer and bidding the prices others ask then everyone could afford his/her own roof over his/her head.

How do you propose to stop tyro pilots swallowing commercial bs and signing up to an exploitative deal? I'll lay money they've all looked at the threads here and yet they've still done it. Human nature is a wierd thing isn't it? You and I know they shouldn't do it but they think otherwise. Let them find out the hard way. On the other hand, they could be calling it right and be in an excellent position when the market turns. Only time will tell.

Having people pay for a TR and line training is not good. MyTravel paid the real price in 2007 and it could have been worse. I don't think sensible airlines will do it any more. Having people selected to pay for a TR and line training is marginally better from the aptitude and ability point of view and that is what is happening now. The real objection is on moral, safety and security grounds. The public and legislators have to be interested in what is going on. At the moment they're not. Try writing to the national press, your MP and the Transport Select Committee at the House of Commons.

Regarding Wingswinger, I completely back his views. The Beak, during the course of his unfortunate rants, has not grasped some critical details. The first is that the OAA guys, love them or hate them, have gone through a selection procedure that is as rigorous as any in easyJet's history. By any critieria they have made the grade and are bona fide applicants to join easyJet. I realise the same could not be said of last year's ATP scheme but that is now gone. That is not to take away from any individual who got through the scheme, but the success rate was way too low compared with that from a group of traditionally selected pilots. The top end of the scale was fine but the bottom end was not - as the success rate showed. I believe that easyJet has learnt its lesson and will not go through such a system again. These OAA guys have been recruited in a totally different way, so it is not true to say they are sub-standard. Whether they are wise or not is another matter. Also, the financial arrangements are such that the scheme massively disadvantages those from less well-off backgrounds.

Also sidtheesexist, I can again only agree with Wingswinger and not apportion blame to the individuals. We all did what we had to do in order to get a start in flying - they can hardly be blamed for doing so. This is not a moral issue from the cadet's perspective - but the same could not be said from the company's.

Finally, just to clear up any doubt, Wingswinger is not management but is a highly-respected senior Training Captain at easyJet with a level of experience most of the contributors here could only dream of. I personally find his arguments very persuasive. Whether you like his thoughts or not, they do come from someone who seriously knows his stuff and I would recommend listening to him.

I actually agree with Beak that this thread has pretty much run it's course. I also have to hang my head in shame, for as Pilotho has pointed out, in a frenzy of keyboard activity I was indeed using the incorrect word. effect. blimey. What was I thinking.

Anyway. At risk of then prolonging the thread, I just had a couple more points.
1. Beak. So, just so we're absolutely clear here - and to make sure I've understood you correctly:

• You have absolutely no problem with people avoiding proper selection and being helped out by family and friends, as long as you're the beneficiary. If anyone else does it, then they're spoiled little mummy and daddys boys?
• It's ok to be helped out, as long as you can cut the mustard once you're in position, but the OAA cadets are definitely all going to underperform AND be kept on
• It's ok for the CTC cadets to accept this rumping and indeed they are deserving of sympathy, because they were selected (probably 2+ years ago), whereas the OAA cadets ONLY had to pass the OAA 2 day selection process, achieve more than 85% and first time passes in all ATPL exams, had to pass their CPL and IR with first series passes and then had to pass the interviews. Alright - if you want to argue the OAA selection process isn't perhaps the final word in flight crew selection, I wouldn't argue...but there are PLENTY of people who fail it...
• The OAA cadets are entirely to blame for daring to have the money to pay for this scheme. eJ would NOT have done it if the OAA cadets weren't willing to pay. The CTC scheme is TOTALLY different and in no way are those guys actually doing exactly the same thing.
• This scheme would be perfectly acceptable if only eJ had advertised it in the back of Flight to anyone that wanted to apply...you can't blame eJ for the obvious taking avantage can you?

I'm not actually having a go here, but I think you have missed half the detail of the OAA scheme (Although you think you haven't). I think in missing the detail, you are blaming the wrong people - and given you don't know any of these people you are being exceptionally vicious for no reason. I'm guessing that you don't actually think this scheme would be acceptable if advertised to all in Flight - so then surely the point is that the offerance of the scheme itself is wrong, NOT that the actual people that have taken it up came from OAA. A valid point, however, is that whoever does take these schemes up is contributing to their continued presence. That is a different argument altogether.
You say it depends who the ten men are? Well let's take a look....an easy TC, a Freight dog captain with >20000 hours and 35 years experience, someone that turned down the scheme because they thought it was wrong, but at least knows the offer that was made? yes, worth ignoring...


Sid - watching your discussion with Wingswinger with interest. You're both right. "If only" all cadets would stop doing these schemes, then yes, they WOULD disappear. However, in the five years I've been researching, training and qualified things have only got worse - and this off the back of a hiring boom! The vast majority do NOT - through conscience, principles or simple lack of finance -do these schemes, yet there is always some that can - and that small few provide enough demand to continue the trend. Indeed to WORSEN the conditions of the schemes, for it's no longer just "pay your type rating and have a job....we're now at "pay your type rating AND your initial line hours AND have a temporary job not employed by us directly AND on crap money".

These few don't care, they see that conditions are worsening and decide to jump before it becomes first "pay for your line training", then "pay for first 500 hours" then what? "pay for 1500 hours", "pay for command"? As a newbie, it's difficult to see any point where it will stop. Would you blame someone right now if they paid for their TR and it had a permanent job attached? I'd guess not....but that just illustrates how bad it's got and WHY people like me feel obliged to act or see the career disappear forever (because, the sad truth is, if we know if WE don't take that SSTR spot, someone else will - and the next opportunity will be x% worse for us)

To use Wingswingers analogy of the housing market, it's kind of like being a first time buyer who can just afford something right now, but thinks prices are mad. How long do you sit there and wait for the house price crash you're sure is coming whilst watching prices go up and up and up before you take the plunge? You've sat and watched as the two bed terrace you COULD have bought at the start (if only you'd gone for it) goes out of reach and before you know it, your only choice is a one bed bedsit (if that's not tautological!) or nothing. And yet you're still sure it's mad, it's wrong...but it's NOT abating, house prices continue to spiral away from you. So act, or forget it. Would you blame someone for buying that bedsit?

People have to realise that yes, PTF is ruining the industry and that yes, if only people would stop buying their way onto the flight deck it would stop. But you also have to realise that you will never, ever, ever consolidate every single FTO graduate into a cohesive unit that will act in a manner that would produce the best outcome for both them AND the longterm future of the industry. Why should they? The industry itself won't do this - even now when it's about as bad as anyone thought it could get, people still won't act - and do anything to help them out.

There's no point crying about what "should" be but never will be. Regulation is the way out of this mire and as Wingswinger points out, that's where attention needs to be focussed - how we change regualtion. IMHO, of course. Force the airlines to have two qualified and fully, directly employed pilots on the FD for every single revenue earning flight and see what happens then....I'll tell you...the PTF will die very, very quickly, because there's no benefit.

Apologies for the lengthy post
-

Beak, what are you doing to keep your hand in these days since you seem to have all the answers??

This is what I hate about these threads - they easily come off topic and get personal - though not necessarily in a particularly nasty way in this instance - it's completely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. I am flying aeroplanes TRon and beyond that it is on a need to know basis and you don't need to know.

I fully retire from these Easyjet threads, they are well and truly boring now and completely directionless. Absolutely pointless.

Clanger if you want a response to your questions by all means PM me.

Self sponsoring is quite old, now. Most of the new generation pilots are self sponsored to a lesser or greater extent.

But flying in an airline as a FO withoug getting paid as any other copilot in the airline is unacceptable for the normal copilots who get paid. It is robbing someone else's money and turning it into training, which is in turn paid to the airline.

What wiil easyjet FOs say if they start having summer FOs working without being paid? Are they happy with that? With others doing their job for free?

If they are so crazy, which I don't believe...
Are they willing to pay their command course when they are "offered" to do it? (that is the natural next step in this spiral dive we are in)

Many of you, readers of this post (thanks for reading, btw) are captains who think these issues are battles in the lower layers of the pilot community, like the third class in the Titanic.

But what would you think if durring a given month you fly 50 hours less because there is a self sponsored training captain flying those hours?
What would you think if your airline goes bankrupt and you cannot find a job in any other airline because they prefer self sponsored first command captains instead of experienced captains?
Then many will think quite differently.

Many things in life are good, not so good, bad or very bad, depending on the degree. Self sponsoring is one.

Others are totally good or totally bad, no matter the degree. Doing someone else's job for free is one.

Whatever scheme EZY does, it should include a standard permanent contract at the end of the training (after the first flight without a training captain, at the latest).

Beak,

You sound remarkably like a guy a friend of mine went on one date with in Dec.

He was 'waiting to join BA in Jan' (we all know that must be a total lie!). But was parachute dropping at the moment...Had a glass appartment in London, DB9 and was working at a friends hedge fund every now and again....The DB9 had been 'smashed up' (or sold to fund training..)

Apparently, kept sounding off about just this subject to her..

I don't know, you sound remarkably similar.

@ Tron

ha ha ha pmsl... I know EXACTLY who you are talking about! He's a fantasy guy but is planning on buying his way into Ryanair so unlikely to be our friend Beak imo.

Well the apparetment, DB9 and hedge fund are true...Just the flying Job isn't ;)

Getting back to the topic a little.
What is the selection pass rates nowdays for OAA and CTC. I remember years ago the selection at CTC was only about 1%. Nowdays it seems like the only question in selection is "how are you going to pay".

Excuse me?

There were a lot more but they began to repeat themselves, and frankly I got bored looking for them. You have an intense and bitter loathing for these people - regardless of their financial positions - which you refuse to explain.

Despite your claims of being a professional pilot, having seen the content of your posts I would argue that you are a far more dangerous person to have on a flight deck than any Oxford or CTC cadet.

And the sum total of what you have offered is diddly sqwat. You are OAA management. Your chosing of a name containing the word evil is not by chance given the person you are copying is called Evel. Go away and bore someone else.

Oh and look 'evil' you are the subject of my post number 666! How apt.

In post 362 above, Beaker retires fully from EZ jet threads, but as we see, all it takes is someone quoting his own vitriolic hatred towards others to bring on more of it.

Oh no. I've gone and fed the troll again and now I must prepare for incoming flames, venom and toys flying out of the pram/bird cage.

Getting ever so slightly back on topic, don't Ryanair charge for command courses? When will EasyJet start this, when they fill those Training Manager vacancies?

OOPS! Off topic again.

Those OAA and CTC numpties are a:mad:s and narcissistic little tw:mad:s who are wrecking the world. The poor economy and imbalanced supply and demand market forces that brokers play on every day as they trade stocks have nothing to do with erosion of airline T&Cs, it's just these deluded berks doing it. There now, back on topic. Think I'll go have a lie down.

I may be mistaken, but I don't think Air Micko charges for the course, but you do have to find somewhere to sleep at your own expense, & ,if you live in the YOOKAY ,you have to find your own way to EMA (or should it be NEMA?) bit naff, I agree, and will no doubt become a revenue source in due course.

The Beak ? well, a bit like the Black Knight or whatever he was called in Monty Python, even if all the limbs are cut off he can't help rolling the torso back in the stadium for another go. He said he was gone :hmm: but well, he knows how much we miss him :yuk:
Wasting his time, prefers personal attack to adressing the problem, refuses to see what is the real problem, best ignored really, unlikely to contribute a viable solution as it is indeed much easier to blame those (who are not so far removed from his own situation) in preference to thinking how to change things.
Full of vitriol , but no realistic solutions.

Beak - does retirement not mean you do not participate any more?

EZY Do in a way charge for command, 90% Capt. salary for the first 6 month to cover 'training costs'.. Amounts to around 4k..

Most people either took 10% more fuel. Or worked 90%....

Don't Feed The Troll

I don't know TheBeak, I've not lived in the UK for almost a decade, and I don't always agree with his/her language, however I think the general gist of his arguments are in essence what we all feel - more and more company specific training costs are being transferred to the pilot and the selection criteria is increasingly becoming a solely a financial criterion. Whilst we bicker and squabble amongst ourselves, we're ineffective at improving our collective lot - regardless of your opinion on culpability.

Exactly, Journey Man

But what are we going to do? and When?

and... What do easyjet FOs think about the issue? Are they happy with it?

This deal is up and running again (or maybe it never stopped...), just heard Oxford are supplying 10 cadets for them

another 10 guys who will be replaced...:E

slavery is back and running.
spiting at face of people is considered smart these days.

spit to the face of your employer, of your politician, and your bank...
they spit to your face, so do the same!:E

I spat to the face of Balpa, I retrieved my membership years ago and I invite you to do the same.

Balpa, CAA, EASA, all a bunch of crooks! they look at pilots fighting like dogs, and they all laugh from their nice and comfy offices.

This whole affair pretty much proves that BALPA are useless considering this is quite a large degradation of T+C's from the current and future FO base within EZY, the very people they represent. No wonder they were made a fool of by RYR, as much as I would've liked to have seen a layer of protection introduced between employee/employer.

Understand, that easyJet isn't in the habit of training people then replacing them with new ones (even if they wanted to, they don't have the training capacity).

In the past, if any lay-offs have been made, those to be laid off were the first back.

This time round it's an extra grand @ £35K.

And you needed to have graduated within the last 9 months to apply.

correct, but since these guys have already experience and have a type rating, they don't interest easyjet anymore.

I know a few guys who expect to fly during summer for easyjet, they may fly 500-800h within 2 years, but after 1000hours, I think they are not called anymore and they are probably looking for a job somewhere else, they will have to compete with guys who have thousand hours as well.It's going to be tough for them to find a new job.

in the opposite direction, you ave fresh Oxford pilots with 30'000 euro or more and higly desperate , ready to kill grandmom to buy a rating on the 320 which is certainly 50% more expensive than waht it would cost to easyjet.
After a nice tour of carousel , they are out ,with no money, and a little hope to get a job at Mac Donald to pay their 150'000 euro debts! :{


These airlines have turn their operation as a flight school which is not authorized by their certificate of operation.
Airlines are (by law) not here to train pilots, then kick them out( they can train pilot for 100h line training and should keep them, that's the goal of the line training).This is why I strongly believe some people at the CAA get some "commissions" (under table)so airlines and flight schools can continue to do their dirty business.

as long as these practices exist,unemployment will stay high and we risk now a double recession that our politician could avoid, but easy money and corruption are sadly the winners in this nasty game when recession hits.