I agree with Three Lions. I've always said if you're settling for a much lower wage than usual its P2F. In my opinion there is no difference between paying 3K a month to the airline to fly and agreeing to be paid 3K-4K less than your counterparts in the company and around the world.

Giles, why do you continue to put RYR in this category, even after it has been made clear that they are (surprisingly) not in it? Axe to grind?

John Smith, notorious for complaining that we are all paid too much and have an easy job, now defending P2F. No real surprise there. Either a manager or just trolling, but while his argument of why management think we earn to much or why they like P2F, I fail to see why he approves of it. Oh, yes, born into wealth with no financial concerns, I seem to recall - mum and dad paid for everything.

P2F is dangerous. I have seen low paid cabin crew unable to afford to eat, hot bunking in an overfilled shared house of squalid condition. They were being poorly paid, not shelling out vast sums to the company. P2F pilots will often be ill-rested and malnourished, highly stressed and alround unfit for duty. Some might manage if they come from a background lik Smith, where mum and dad will look after them, but many don't. So, it's certainly dangerous and immoral. Criminal may be more difficult to prove, but endangering the safe conduct of a flight is a criminal offence, so creating these schemes could be regarded as criminal. The companies would use the "no pilot will report for duty if unfit" line in their Part A manual as a get out, though.

Guys your intentions are sound... But in reality what your campaigning for doesn't exist in 2015.

You are describing a perfectly 100% fair & honest world and it will just never happen...

I'm sorry I wish life was different but you should just accept the way the world is.

I would definetely call the RYR Line Training P2F... even the BRK contract stated a price for line training, but we were offered a reduced rate of 40e/sbh. Plus that you have to pay for your own hotels, meals etc. when you can be every week in a different base... I've even heard that some guys doing LT this winter had gaps of up to 2 weeks in flying (without any salary of course)

John Smith's views are broadly spot-on, albeit delivered somewhat bluntly.

I just don't understand where this utopia is that he's going to in 8 months?

@ JS
 

The big problem is that because of the cheap credit in the past, there are too many pilots with a blue collar background (and I don't mean this in an accusatory or insulting way) who have very little idea and grasp of The Big Picture. They swallow the usual propaganda of "investing in oneself" and management nonsense like "we have to stay competitive so you have to make sacrifices" like a giant blue pill because that's what their upbringing has taught them.

The "just shut up, do the work and keep a low profile" is the prevailing mentality what you see on factory floors and assembly lines all over the planet, and this is exactly what managers want, so I can understand why people accuse John Smith of being an management pilot.

They think that P2F or P4T is like the entry price in order to be in the white collar club. It's not! They will never be part of the white collar club because they decide to pay for their own white collar uniform and training and thus degrading it to a blue collar job.

Denying the deterioration in T&C's, wishful thinking that things will eventually stabilize or perhaps even improve, and thinking that as long as you don't rock the boat you can keep up the facade for the outside world (and the blue collar family members) is a foolish strategy.

56-58 stealing jobs
 

Tespanel, one of these days you might be glad to be sitting beside a 56-58 ex Legacy Carrier pilot when the :mad: hits the fan. You can't beat experience,,,,and no I don't condone paying for flying. Ryan Air do not carry out this practice. Easy Jet certainly have

I do agree with the point John Smith has raised above. Getting into UK flying now has become the remit for either the well heeled, those with means of securing loans or those from a background that can support the financial requirements. It has effectively barred anyone entering who is young and from a less affluent background. Try asking for unsecured credit when your parents can't release any equity in their little house. BA certainly have attempted to address this issue with their FPP program which I think is a good thing to recognise the financial prejudice that exists.

I certainly do not agree with the notion that "blue collar" workers have lowered the terms and conditions. Class seems no barrier in lengths of desperation people step to when determined to enter the profession.

What? BA haven't changed their spots since the days they were into flying boats.

Their cadet scheme is simply designed to get the best candidates. That's always been the case.

What spots are those? I never said at the detriment of quality did I.

As I understood it the fanancing arrangements were/are such that not coming from a well heeled background with collateral need not be a barrier. I'll admit I don't know the arrangements in detail but read their website and the point that the financial barrier exists in financing a flying career was referenced by BA themselves.

Maybe I read it wrong or misunderstood the scheme. Quite possibly.

Just to be clear RYR is not P2F

My definition of P2F is Eaglejet international out of Miami whom sell 300/400/500 hours line training completely unpaid for circa 70,000 EU

Your Ryanair & similar are not P2F at all they are just lessor terms and pay.

Any Tom dick or Harry can come up with the 70,000 and go fly a jet for 300 hours line training even if they are completely unsuitable to be an airline FO

I think it is this that gets people's backs up and is causing the problem...

I said: I was talking about the glory days of P4F during the era 2001-2008.

The same low-interest-rates-no-questions-asked policy that fueled massive housing booms in the US and Europe also significantly lowered threshold for for people who, IMHO, otherwise would never have been able to finance a start in aviation.

Nevertheless, regardless of what background people come from, what continues to baffle me is the short sightedness, the immense financial risk-taking and the huge amount of wishful thinking that is displayed in making the decision to even start a career in aviation.

I wonder what airline managers, chief pilots and authorities would think if we would display similar behavior in the sim or on the line... :rolleyes:

In WW1 you were unlikely to be able to be a pilot unless you could already fly an aircraft as the RFC did not have any ab-initio flying schools. Was that "pay to fly"?

Many shades of grey
 

Many people here state that such and such airline does not practice P2F but that another airline does. P2F has many ugly faces and takes different forms. How does one draw the line to say what one airline does is P2F and what another one does isn't ?

I must state that I work in Canada where paying for type ratings does not exist at the airline level and where P2F does not exist. Certain airlines have bonds, where you must re-imburse your training costs if you quit before working a certain amount of time for your employer, but no one pays up front for his training. In Canada and in the US, airlines do not hire low time pilots as SIC of airliners. One starts on Cessna's Beavers, Aztecs, Navajos, move up to Turbines on a Caravan, a King Air, a Pilatus, a Beech 1900, a Dash 8 and ATR-42 and smaller commercial jets before moving onto a large passenger jet on scheduled flights. There are exceptions, and some rare people sometimes skip a step or two of the ladder, but that is how it works for most.
So no 200 hour pilot in Canada or the US is going to pay a A320 or B737 type rating out of his pocket, because that will not get him hired by an airline.
No one is going to pay a type rating and 300 hours of line flying out of his pocket because no one is going to hire a 500 hours pilot who spent his 300 hours of line flying as PNF for LionAir.
My first jet was a B757. When I was hired on it, I already had about 6500 hours of flying under my belt, all of which I was paid for, except the first 250.
I have 7 type ratings on my licence. I never paid for any of them. My employers paid for them. I hope the business model that has taken root in Europe in certain other parts of the World never makes it to North America for I don't like it one bit.

Now about the different types of P2F.

Where some well established flight training facilities advertise a B-737NG type rating course for as little as $12,000 USD, what can we call it when RyanAir charges $33,000 USD for the same course, when you are not even guaranteed to be hired ? Is the training of pilots a profit center for RyanAir ? Are passengers offered cheaper flights thanks to the amount of profit the RyanAir pilot training center was able to generate on the backs of hopeful RyanAir pilots ?

At Travel Service, in the Czech Republic, I was told that new hires have to pay for their type rating. I do not know the amount they have to pay, but I think its hefty. Then, once they are hired, they are paid 660 Euros a month for the first 18 months, after which time they are paid 1200 Euros. In Canada a Beechcraft 1900 First Officer, about the cheapest scheduled flying job one can find, earns 1700 Euros a month. So when a pilot in the European Union, after being forced to pay his own type rating is stuck with flying a B737-800 full of paying passenger while getting paid 660 Euros a month for 18 months, can one consider that he is "paid to fly" or is this P2F as the others who do it more openly ?

I have heard of airlines who provide a $1000 per month salary to their pilots, but only after another contracting company, or a flight training company had charged the same pilot $50,000, or often much more, to secure that "job". Is that pilot "paid" or is it P2F ?

In the 17th and 18th century, many armies were led by officers that had not gained their military commissions through merit and experience, but paid for them. There was a price to become a Lieutenant, a Captain, a Major, a Colonel, not only to join the military, but also to get promotions once you were in. The richer people were always in command of the poor. This practice of selling military commissions has ceased in most modern countries now. Anyone care to take a wild guess on why this practice has ceased ?

With regards to the likes of Eaglejet etc it is them whom chase airlines or whomever they can get to agree to take line training on.

They then market these schemes to the pilot community

They are without doubt the root cause of P2F

Twindiling T&C's within the industry can only really stop if we are completely United which is unlikely to happen.

However if these LT providers could somehow be eliminated from existence then it could well stop conventional P2F from continuing.

P2f in its purest form in the UK hasnt existed now for over 5 years

However in its hidden form ie. over paying for a course and then starting on a salary well below the going rate, and that remains below the going rate for a number of years has been viral ever since then.

Its easy to see if you look hard enough

Sure but with so many hopefulls out there they would be insane not to take a paying job in an airline....

As I said above T&C's I personally believe cannot get better because there is not enough unity within the low time community, those guys are just going to keep on accepting what they are given, none of them will take a stand after investing 100k +

Most will probably say to themselves I will just struggle for a few years the get the 250k job in China after 3-4 years.

The way to win wars is to take out the bad guys whom are causing the biggest attack and at this time that is eagle, line training.net, skies, Baltic, MSD, CFA, etc