$100K type rating bond???
The following users liked this post:
In defence of the mob who charged up front for the TR, their starting salaries were about double what’s on offer for the J32. AFAIK, no one got stiffed on the agreed pay back terms, but the company got burned with a few epic failures who were given additional free training in an attempt to get them checked out.
What the deal is now, I have no idea.
The following users liked this post:
Do I read right?….F/O salary is $55K?
Just by way of comparison….. $1000/week is 25/hour for a 40 hour week. Basically what you’d get paid flipping burgers or stacking shelves at Bunnings.
Why would anyone want to be a pilot?
Just by way of comparison….. $1000/week is 25/hour for a 40 hour week. Basically what you’d get paid flipping burgers or stacking shelves at Bunnings.
Why would anyone want to be a pilot?
The following 3 users liked this post by lucille:
The following 2 users liked this post by bazza stub:
It is if it's your first job and you start right seat.
In the UK cadets step into A320 right seat cockpits to start their apprenticeships - on less pay than the J31 job, too.
In the UK cadets step into A320 right seat cockpits to start their apprenticeships - on less pay than the J31 job, too.
Aviation is the only industry that on the surface eats its own young. However, like most things there are two sides to a coin. I recently retired (again) from an operator that employed a dozen ex Virgin pilots. They all seemed nice blokes and I was involved in their training and induction etc. To a man they all seemed grateful for the lifeline, said they would stay and were happy. Fast forward 12 months, all went back to Virgin. Cost the company at least half a million dollars. So guess what? The company now bonds people. Pilots are once again their own worst enemies. It is a vicious circle that could be broken if pilots showed a bit of loyalty. At least give a couple of years to cover costs.
The following 6 users liked this post by By George:
Sure, $95k is a lot of money but I bet you would sit in the interview and promise them you will stay for five years.
In my experience as an employer I have noticed a few patterns:
1/. Those who say they will stay forever usually have applications in with other operators as soon as they are checked to line.
2/. Those who commit to a time frame (18 months) and stick to it usually progress faster in their careers overall.
FlyPelican is a great first airline job. They are good operators working very very hard to make a go of it. $95k over two years? As others have said, doesn't matter if you are staying for two years.
In my experience as an employer I have noticed a few patterns:
1/. Those who say they will stay forever usually have applications in with other operators as soon as they are checked to line.
2/. Those who commit to a time frame (18 months) and stick to it usually progress faster in their careers overall.
FlyPelican is a great first airline job. They are good operators working very very hard to make a go of it. $95k over two years? As others have said, doesn't matter if you are staying for two years.
The following 5 users liked this post by Horatio Leafblower:
Sure, $95k is a lot of money but I bet you would sit in the interview and promise them you will stay for five years.
In my experience as an employer I have noticed a few patterns:
1/. Those who say they will stay forever usually have applications in with other operators as soon as they are checked to line.
2/. Those who commit to a time frame (18 months) and stick to it usually progress faster in their careers overall.
FlyPelican is a great first airline job. They are good operators working very very hard to make a go of it. $95k over two years? As others have said, doesn't matter if you are staying for two years.
In my experience as an employer I have noticed a few patterns:
1/. Those who say they will stay forever usually have applications in with other operators as soon as they are checked to line.
2/. Those who commit to a time frame (18 months) and stick to it usually progress faster in their careers overall.
FlyPelican is a great first airline job. They are good operators working very very hard to make a go of it. $95k over two years? As others have said, doesn't matter if you are staying for two years.
As someone said, it appears to be their idea of a way to handcuff pilots during a perceived shortage.
Is bonding for amounts exceeding actual training costs legal?
How is such a bond secured?
To reduce pilot turnover, a smart operator would have a bond representing true training costs, and provide clarity on those costs. Terms to equal or better the Award (which is not all that generous anyway), and offer a decent end-of-contract bonus with a juicy sign-on bonus for another two years.
There was a time when conditions in the commuter airline world in the USA were pretty ordinary - low pay, big hours, minimal annual leave etc. Life on a Dash 8 or similar here was much better. Now the Yanks have seen the light, while we seem to have gone backwards.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 26th Jun 2023 at 01:43.
The following users liked this post:
The following 2 users liked this post by 172heavy:
So they charge the Training Captain salary at nearly $30k, presumably while conducting line training... or is that because he is in the classroom and conducting other non revenue work on behalf of the trainee for 10 weeks? And during line training, for 10 of those 14 weeks that the trainee's salary is regarded as an expense, is the trainee not fulfilling the role of a First Officer on revenue flights?
The claim of $1500 for loss of a revenue seat to accommodate the safety pilot I assume means that they run at 100% load factor.
It must be said that they run a tight ship...tight being the operative word.
The claim of $1500 for loss of a revenue seat to accommodate the safety pilot I assume means that they run at 100% load factor.
It must be said that they run a tight ship...tight being the operative word.
Last edited by Mach E Avelli; 26th Jun 2023 at 02:09.
The following users liked this post:
Mach
Daylight Robbery? How so? They are not asking for the money up front.
It's a cost in the training. If the candidate completes the Type Rating and quits the next day, the above statement describes how far Pelican are out of pocket.
If you quit the day after the TR, they then have to spend it all again.
...but the Candidate does not, you see. The risk is all on the Operator.
They are looking for someone who will commit to 18+ months and I don't think that's unreasonable. Any operator needs to maintain a level of experience in the organisation and a pipeline of suitable Command candidates.
You can say anything you want in the interview about how long you intend to stay (and many will just tell 'em what they want to hear).
To me there is nothing wrong with this arrangement (although the amounts for wages do seem to gild the lily somewhat, I calculate about $20k for 14 weeks). They invest in the Candidate, the candidate gets to fly some pretty decent equipment (better than a Chieftain or a Metro, anyway) and after 18-24 months they are home free.
Daylight Robbery? How so? They are not asking for the money up front.
It's a cost in the training. If the candidate completes the Type Rating and quits the next day, the above statement describes how far Pelican are out of pocket.
If you quit the day after the TR, they then have to spend it all again.
...but the Candidate does not, you see. The risk is all on the Operator.
They are looking for someone who will commit to 18+ months and I don't think that's unreasonable. Any operator needs to maintain a level of experience in the organisation and a pipeline of suitable Command candidates.
You can say anything you want in the interview about how long you intend to stay (and many will just tell 'em what they want to hear).
To me there is nothing wrong with this arrangement (although the amounts for wages do seem to gild the lily somewhat, I calculate about $20k for 14 weeks). They invest in the Candidate, the candidate gets to fly some pretty decent equipment (better than a Chieftain or a Metro, anyway) and after 18-24 months they are home free.
I understand that professional pilot salaries at the entry level are modest but that's ridiculous, considering they're unlikely to hire someone with a fresh CPL and the amount a candidate would have invested already in their training. The minimums for a non-type rated FO from the ad I could find are:
- 1000 hours of total flying experience;
- 300 hours Multi Engine IFR PIC;
- Hold an IPC (minimum 3 renewals);
- Multi-crew Cooperation Course (MCC);
The following users liked this post:
Of course the risk is on the operator, as it should be. It's known as the "cost of doing business" and applies everywhere in all other industries.
Does anyone really think that someone who has spent a fortune and years to obtain a CPL really wants to work for some pissant outfit like Aeropelican for very long. Its a use-use situation
It would be interesting to see if these people claim $97,000 trainiing costs with the ATO for each new pilot. I would love to draw attention to that scam as exposed by 172 Heavy.
I am interested to know if anyone has ever paid a bond or any part of it. From what I understand it's very rarely enforceable through the courts.
Does anyone really think that someone who has spent a fortune and years to obtain a CPL really wants to work for some pissant outfit like Aeropelican for very long. Its a use-use situation
It would be interesting to see if these people claim $97,000 trainiing costs with the ATO for each new pilot. I would love to draw attention to that scam as exposed by 172 Heavy.
I am interested to know if anyone has ever paid a bond or any part of it. From what I understand it's very rarely enforceable through the courts.
Leafy, I am not disputing the right of an operator to bond pilots for reasonable training costs. But I fail to see the ethics of charging salaries when pilots being trained or conducting training are on revenue-producing operations - as are training captains and trainees during the line training phase. The non-revenue costly bit ends at simulator or aircraft base check.
The only additional costs could be the captain's training allowance - though that is really a fixed overhead regardless, because CASA require a certain ratio of training captains to line pilots - and is usually offset by the trainee being on probation pay rate until checked to line.
I absolutely agree that pilots should serve their bond out, or pay a penalty for an early exit, but terms need to be fair.
The only additional costs could be the captain's training allowance - though that is really a fixed overhead regardless, because CASA require a certain ratio of training captains to line pilots - and is usually offset by the trainee being on probation pay rate until checked to line.
I absolutely agree that pilots should serve their bond out, or pay a penalty for an early exit, but terms need to be fair.
The following users liked this post:
Mach
Daylight Robbery? How so? They are not asking for the money up front.
It's a cost in the training. If the candidate completes the Type Rating and quits the next day, the above statement describes how far Pelican are out of pocket.
If you quit the day after the TR, they then have to spend it all again.
...but the Candidate does not, you see. The risk is all on the Operator.
They are looking for someone who will commit to 18+ months and I don't think that's unreasonable. Any operator needs to maintain a level of experience in the organisation and a pipeline of suitable Command candidates.
You can say anything you want in the interview about how long you intend to stay (and many will just tell 'em what they want to hear).
To me there is nothing wrong with this arrangement (although the amounts for wages do seem to gild the lily somewhat, I calculate about $20k for 14 weeks). They invest in the Candidate, the candidate gets to fly some pretty decent equipment (better than a Chieftain or a Metro, anyway) and after 18-24 months they are home free.
Daylight Robbery? How so? They are not asking for the money up front.
It's a cost in the training. If the candidate completes the Type Rating and quits the next day, the above statement describes how far Pelican are out of pocket.
If you quit the day after the TR, they then have to spend it all again.
...but the Candidate does not, you see. The risk is all on the Operator.
They are looking for someone who will commit to 18+ months and I don't think that's unreasonable. Any operator needs to maintain a level of experience in the organisation and a pipeline of suitable Command candidates.
You can say anything you want in the interview about how long you intend to stay (and many will just tell 'em what they want to hear).
To me there is nothing wrong with this arrangement (although the amounts for wages do seem to gild the lily somewhat, I calculate about $20k for 14 weeks). They invest in the Candidate, the candidate gets to fly some pretty decent equipment (better than a Chieftain or a Metro, anyway) and after 18-24 months they are home free.
If they'd asked you to stump up the $$ and have it repaid, or similar tot he Rex scheme, yeah, nah, hard pass. But if you aren't prepared to sign up with the company for a minimum two years given the $$ involved in recruitment, training etc, it's not an unreasonable ask that you don'tbaulk at repaying some of the training cost. I get the airlines are always in a state of flux and every new CPL and their dog want's to fly a shiny jet and would sell their grandmother to do so, but I also happen to be principled enough to not jump from job to job every 18 months if a company's given you a FT gig. Casual, perhaps, but FT in a twin turboprop gig? Nope. Maybe I'm a bit old school and out of touch though...
That being said, I do think it's a bit rich to ask you to repay your own salary if you pull the pin...
The following users liked this post:
By George well said! How are you doing by the way?