Excellent letter superpilot!
 

Please see slightly amended version taking on some of the suggestions.

Also, here are the addresses is sequence so you can copy and paste straight onto your e-mail:

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]



Anybody have any contacts in the media?? I could see the Sun/News of the World etc. loving some of this......



Dear Sir / Madam,

Rt Hon Sadiq Khan MP, Minister of State for Transport
Rt Hon Lord Andrew Adonis, Secretary of State for Transport
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Vice President EU Transport Commission

I write to you regarding a morally disturbing trend within the world of aviation. This specifically affects Airline Pilots and more specifically those who have recently graduated and carry a mountain of debt (frequently upwards of £70,000). An increasingly number of airlines through their agencies, instead of employing graduates, are charging vast sums of money for new pilots to build up their flying experience. Ordinarily a pilot would be building time on a small single engine aircraft. However it has gone unnoticed in the world of politics and regulation that airlines are literally selling off the right hand seats of flight decks! Yes, pilots can now build up their experience by flying a 150 passenger carrying jet. This phenomena is known as Pay2Fly or (P2F) and costs individual pilots in the region of £25,000 per 150 hours.

Lets remind us, under the rules and regulations of the UK CAA, in order for a UK registered airliner to fly from A to B it must be crewed by two fully qualified pilots. Ordinarily, as the employees of a large UK organisation, they both have to be paid a minimum wage according to British Employment Laws.

However, in the P2F scenario, the inexperienced pilot is not paid at all. Instead he is charged vast sums with the airline claiming that they are providing "training" at a cost and that too to another company (the Training Organisation) who decide to send their own "trainees". This assures that the outsider and accountants sees the whole affair as a wholly commercial transaction.

Here's where they have managed to delude the public, who might have otherwise spotted the illegality of it all... Most people would assume that if it is training then the airline is within right to receive payment. However what they fail to see is that "training" is for the unqualified.

In order to be a co-pilot of a passenger jet such as the Airbus A320, a pilot must under go further training after his graduation. This to gain what is known as a ‘Type Rating’. As a type rated pilot one is fully qualified (but inexperienced) to fly a specific type of aircraft and requires no further training according to the regulatory body's (UK CAA) rules and regulations in order to do so. Sure they require supervision for the first hundred hours but that's not the same thing.

Clearly then, line "training" cannot be used as an excuse for an airline to say that they are providing training services. Especially when they have no desire to employ the person. It is not a form of "training", it is the airline selling right hand seat time for the individual pilot to build experience and therefore avoiding the need to hire a fully paid employee who they would have to otherwise pay a minimum wage. This is happening at the British Carrier BMI who continues this practice despite announcing pilot redundancies. This practice also exists at several UK airlines.

If the airline claims they are truly providing "training" then the new pilot is not qualified and should not be operating a large aircraft with fare paying passengers. There are lots of wrongs with this practice. In my opinion it is wrong from an employment law perspective and also a safety risk. Pilots carry a huge responsibility. Yet airlines and their shareholders seem not to care less if their employees are on a daily basis making their debt situation worse by not earning money whilst entrusted with lives. The industry suffers from poor regulation at the Personnel Licensing level with regulators not having the desire or funds to pursue this great wrong. Experienced pilots are being furloughed whilst inexperienced ones are being offered “work” if they pay. This cannot be right.

The Air Accident Investigation Branch has cited poor aircraft handling skills of such a pay-to-fly cadet as a partial cause of the 5th July 2007 accident to airliner Airbus A320 G-DHJZ at Kos. From his training records released in the accident report, it would appear unlikely that this pay to fly cadet would be occupying a pilot’s seat were he not paying to be there.

I urge you to comment and act on this situation in order to protect jobs and in the interest of safety.

Kind regards,

Great letters chaps, has anyone actually sent one though? I have to say I am disappointed by BALPA's lack of action on this issue.

Regards P.

I agree with an earlier poster that the way to stop this is to make the general fare paying public aware of the P2F schemes.

BALPA, Ministers etc. Already know about it and choose to do nothing. What it needs is for people to actually stop using certain airlines because they are crewed by someone who has paid to be there. Im really suprised one of the big newspapers hasn't picked it up already. I only hope it doesnt take an accident to happen before this comes out.:(

What really suprises me though is the fact that none of the airlines that choose not to use P2F pilots isn't using it as a marketing tool to discredit the airlines that are.

Super Pilot!
 

Please find a list of media contacts:

Superpilot, why not send your letter to them all!

Newspapers:
Editorial Photographers UK | Newspaper email addresses


If you dont mind me (us) using your letter then I'll send it........

How about a No10 petition
 

Yes the ministers are away over Easter but we can do this in a week or so:

Create a new petition | Number10.gov.uk

Go ahead, the more the merrier.

The combination of press and political lobbying will be very powerful. Where do i sign the petition? May i suggest that any approach be based on the safety aspect with supportable evidence/experiences of incidents?

And whilst I see BALPA are indirectly supporting the PTF line then perhaps their opposite number, the IPA/IPF, might be a little more inclined to highlight our cause. They have an AGM on the 21st May 2010, 1830 @ Ditchling Golf Club. If you cant make it then write to them.

And if they do feel inclined to help, which as an organisation of integrity I am sure they will, then vote with your feet. BALPA might just stop and appraise the situation a little differently. :}

Happy to get together (virtually or otherwise) and form some kind of committee. This thing just needs some momentum to fly... :cool:

I wrote to BALPA abut this subject in 2002, then spoke to Chris Darke personally about it. Sadly, my concerns were not taken seriously, as were my warnings on PPRuNe that if a stand were not taken then, this practice would be the norm and ingrained in the aviation industry. The IPA magazine actually ran an article asking for members to recommend the best P2F suppliers.

Pilots only have themselves to blame for this situation.

FlyPuppy,

Youre absolutely on the money when you said 'pilots are to blame for this' I find that as a group with a common interest in aviation, the new low of P2F just goes to show/prove how low individuals will go just to enter a profession they profess to love. Its what Capt Sully said to the house in USA regarding this profession, that were no longer attracting the best to the industry with the degrading of T and Cs, it might be my two cents but dont you think no self respecting individual would P2F ? it takes the whole cookie jar! I hope it gets addressed before we desend below DH without Visual.

Cheers

VK

it's not when it will happen, but where? where the plane will crash? maybe over london!, then it will be worldwide in the news...and politicians will have to blame them selves!

look at these P2F guys who can not even take off a cessna 172 in cross wind, you can expect the worst! (I don't talk about the landing...)

stay away from easyjet! (with BA at least I feel safe!)

I'm sorry, flyhelico but that is a crass, ill-informed remark. I'm an easyJet TRE, an ex BA captain (retired just before the retirement age went up) and further back an ex-RAF instructor. Let me assure you and anyone else that doubts it that easyJet training standards are at least as good as BA's and are held up by the CAA as a standard that other companies should aim for. None, I repeat, NONE of these P2F trainees will fly without a safety pilot or be cleared for line operations if he/she does not meet the standard expected. I trust myself and I trust my TC colleagues at EZY to see to that.

Well then i'm sorry but i aint flying easyjet ever again!!!!!

I think you will find a BMI Pilot on the other thread about this said words to the effect that a full time employee has the right to a day off OR he may turn up, ride the jump seat and be paid his allowances for the day.

If Easyjet has such a bloody wonderful training department.......... why dont they stick to training full time employees? If you sir are training these wannabees with a fat wallet or a credit rating...... you are directy contributing to this cancer. Maybe when they have 120 hours they can go somewhere, get a 320TRE rating and come back and replace you for minimum wage!!!!!

With regards to the letter, the first 2 lines, although pertinent, do make this sound like whinge.

I think the very first lines should shout about lack of safety and the increased danger the travelling public are exposed to by any airline operating these schemes............The papers will pick up on that for sure.

As i stated on the other thread, theres a statistic that i think came out of the current log magazine and it goes something like

The Regionals in the USA are responsible for 75% of the flying and 100% of the fatal accidents in the USA last year.

Now, due to the mountain of debt that some pilots have incurred, they are having to work 2 jobs..... obviously safety standards are being eroded due to the lack of experience of the people in the flight deck.

Whilst wanting to write a letter to the above mentioned is a great idea and i think we should send it to the press, regularly and often........

i think we should all boycott those airlines that we know participate in the scheme. After all, what is the point of conducting a media campaign if your argument then collapses in a pile of s**t by paying good money to travel on the airlines you are deriding.

If you are not prepared to do this, there is no point in even beginning to bang on about it. I would much prefer to pay £250 to go to Paris (for example) on BA than £50 on an airline that is an extension of a second rate training organisation!!!!!!

I am a great believer in P2F, any time I go on holiday I do it. have tried sneaking in via the U/c bay but I am allways caught. Tried hiding in the toilets , every time I just seem to get caught. So guys cough up and pay your money.:ok:

And you can choose where you sit depending on your budget. Starting with economy at the back, then moving forwards through business class up to first class near the front.

Oh wait a minute there is a new one now, its expensive but you actually get to sit in the cockpit and operate the aircraft, they call that being an FO.:ugh:

GW,

Because, my friend, it does what it is told to do by the board of directors. If any training manager or training captain refused to do the work he/she would be out of a job. There are plenty of potential replacements. You wish us to make that sacrifice? Don't be silly.

I am not directly contributing to the cancer and I resent your remark. I deplore it but I am powerless to stop it as is everyone in the industry apart from the directors and the regulators.

I did read it. It is not the same as requiring a safety pilot to be on the flight deck. No-one has the right to absent themselves from a rostered safety pilot duty unless released by the TC concerned or replaced by the company. Without a safety pilot (if one is required) the flight cannot take place. I would have thought you would have understood that.

When i fly on BA.......... they DONT NEED A SAFETY PILOT :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

Yes, of course the BA cadets go straight from the simcheck to fly on the line. Because they get paid a better wage they must be better and don't need a safety pilot on linetraining. Maybe don't need linetraining at all.

P2F can only be stopped from within the companies.

They are better because they have passed the relevant selection process, not because they are paid better.

I have no problem with cadets flying jet aircraft. But it should be based on their ability to fly not on their ability to pay.

It would require pilots to stand side by side and refuse to fly with PTF cadets. To make it work every LTC would have to refuse to train, whether it be a PTF cadet, a CU, a line check - whatever. This type of action will cause management to stand up and take note. However would every LTC in EZY, BMI, TCX etc be willing to do that? Will BALPA stand up and say we will support you in doing so? It is all very well in balloting action where a decision to act is formed. However like the BA CC strike, how many that said 'yes' to a walk out turned up for duties on the first day of the strike? When it comes down to it, the environment that we are currently faced with, people who may have appeared to be coerced in to action will simply come to a conclusion on the eleventh hour. They will not risk their status or position within the airline for fear of reprisal. For action to work you require strength in numbers and thats something that the pilot group historically has been pretty poor at.

For PTF to stop it needs to be stopped by the regulators. The CAA, DofT etc. And for these guys to act it has to be on the grounds of safety. I think the battle against PTF would be won or lost by directing our concerns to these authorities. BALPA should be at the forefront of this campaign, however for some reason or other they prefer to hide from it.