Page 1 of 5

Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:18 pm
by chu me
Instead of always bashing companies that require pilots to pay or sign a training bond, I thought we could do a more positive thread about companies that don't require bonds. Also if you have had positive experiences with companies that treat their pilots well.

I'll start with two 1). Commercial Aviation based in Hearst, Ont. as far as I know, have never charged a bond, also good A/C that are well maintained.
2). Clearwater Aviation based in La Loche , SK. great company with good A/C ,does not require bonds.

I would encourage pilots to apply to these companies as you would have a good experience.
If the young pilots had an alternative to the sh#tty companies out there, they might not apply to the crappy ones. Maybe if the supply of pilots starts to dry up for these sh@tty companies they will change their policies. If anyone else has a company please post it here.

I have edited this post on Sept 17/08 in order to add the list to the first post, so people do not have to go looking for it. I will continue to read this thread in order to add to the list.

Aries Aviation
Pro-Flight Ltd
Great River Air
Air Saguenay
Arctic Sunwest
Summit Air
Canadian North
Fugro
Gilliam Air
Air Georgian
Air Labrador,
Provincial Airlines
Strait Air
Grenfell Health Corporation
Skyjet
Exactair ( we are not sure about this one, so if someone out there knows for sure, PM or post please)
Air North
Fort Francis Air
First Air
Clearwater Aviation
Commercial Aviation
Walsten Air
MNR
Airborne energy
Alberta Central Airways
Qjets
Villers Air Service. Ft Nelson BC
Wolverine Air. Ft Simpson NWT
Simpson Air. Ft Simpson NWT
Alkan Air. Whitehorse YK
Perimeter Aviation, Manitoba (2 years on the ramp)
North Cariboo Air, BC+AB (12,500 below no bond)
CargoJet
Air Canada
WestJet
Jazz
CMA (except Do328)
Kelowna Flight Craft
Air Spray
ConAir
Borek
Calm Air (working Bond)
Transwest Air
Buffalo Air
Air Tindi
Integra Air Inc.
Pacific Sky Aviation
Nor-Alta Aviation
Sander Geophysics
Regional 1
Transat
Pro-Flight Ltd

I'm sure there are more out there, it doesn't matter how big or how small the company is,( Clearwater only has one aircraft) nor what type of aircraft they fly. For all you young guys or maybe just pilots looking for a change here is where you should send your resumes. Please keep the posts coming and keep this list growing. Good luck and safe flying.

Sincerely

Chu me

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Sat Aug 02, 2008 9:03 pm
by Lost Lake
Hey Good start to the thread. PLEASE posters, positive threads only. If you post anything negative here, moderators should ban you. We don't have to read about the bad, we all ready know :roll:

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:09 pm
by chu me
Well, thanks for the post Lost Lake. It is pretty much as I suspected ,if I had posted a gripe about training bonds the thread would be full of negative posts by now. However here it is well over two days and nobody cares to post positive things about good companies to help out young pilots. Doc , Cat , Xsbank, 4930's,The Other Kind ,Conquest Driver ,Wacko, Phileas Fogg, Strega, Square_tires, North Sky, Broken Wing, Tsgas, .,V1Rotate,Ozone..........Anybody!!!!!!!!!! You guys are all the ones that bitch about training bonds. I don't agree with them( bonds ) either, so I started this thread.

Surely there has to be more than two companies in this entire country that do not require training bonds. And if there is only two, it's no wonder these young pilots are " buying jobs ". Thanks for the help all you whiners out there,... now I know you just like to bitch.. and when it comes time to help out, you guys quietly vanish into the background. ( not directed at anybody in particular)

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:22 pm
by Adam Oke
Deleted.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:03 pm
by chu me
Dear Adam;
What I am suggesting is....,that they like to bitch about how young pilots are morons for "buying a job". Hundreds of posts about how evil the training bond is. Not one post from these guys about where young pilots can go, to get a job with a company that doesn't require bonds. Surely if they are such "giants" in the industry they would know a few companies. Maybe even list a few they have worked for (since those companies obviously do not have training bonds!!!). If they wanted to help out they could post these companies here, as I have done. I thought that was clear in my posts and topic title, I'm sorry if it wasn't. (The above names were taken directly from several topics about the subject and they were the most frequent negative posters on these subjects.)

This was not a troll, nor was it intended to be negative. I just thought I could give everyone a positive outlet for their frustrations about training bonds. Apparently I was wrong!!!! However, feel free to post any companies you may have worked for or have heard about.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:21 pm
by Adam Oke
Deleted.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:13 am
by Fatass
In response to the original topic, Air North and Alkan Air do not use training bonds. I don't think First Air does either. They all pay well. And none of them are really used as stepping stones to the Big Show. (with exception to 7f and there low timers)

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 5:47 am
by chu me
Thanks Fatass I appreciate the post and the young guys will probably appreciate the tip.
Well done!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 6:45 am
by just curious
Dunno about some of the ones you mentioned,but Doc and XS work for companies that they have been with for half of their adult lives. Bonds aren't really a factor in their lives,except that it makes their blood boil to hear of them.

Borek uses a promissory note,versus a bond for what that's worth.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 6:54 am
by chu me
Thanks J.C.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 7:26 am
by Cat Driver
chu me, I am unable to recommend any Canadian companies that do not require payment for the pleasure of working for them for the simple fact I have not worked in Canadian aviation since 1996.....in fact my first flight in many years in Canadian airspace was last week when I did my five take offs and landings solo to comply with TCCA's recency requirements so I could fly my friend to Oshkosh in his new Husky.

However there are many young keeners on here who will tell you that in the background I go out of my way to try and help them, even though I am not good enough to work in your socialistic country where your regulator is run by thugs that would be the envy of Robert Mugabe..

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 9:59 am
by Doc
chu me. Good thread. On that note, we've hired two very low time guys in the past couple of years. One with 4-500 hours. One had around 700 when he started. Give or take. Both have worked out so well, I'd be pretty surprised if we don't follow that trend in the future. We're a small operation with great people. Everybody gets along. The flying is easy and the airplanes run well. Everybody gets a PPC. And, so far, nobody has flown the coop. Why would they?
No Bonds.
No Promissory Notes.
NO MONEY UP FRONT.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:03 am
by Scuba_Steve
Well from my experience, Walsten Air Service has no bonds.

North Cariboo has no bonds on the under 12,500 Turbo Props

MNR has no bonds either :)

Cheers

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:04 am
by Koizie1
Just Curious, what exactly is the difference between a promissory note and a training bond (one you don't actually stump up the cash for)?

I have a training bond where I agree to stay for a minimum of one year if the company sends me to a sim, no money changed hands. Its pro-rated daily. Is this a training bond or a promissory note?

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 12:13 pm
by just curious
Got me Kozie,
I got here when giving one's word was enough. Lot's of people burnt bridges since then I suppose. A promissory note is one in which you agree to pay a said amount if you depart before meeting contract obligations. For what it is worth it is pro-rated.
JC

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:14 pm
by xsbank
I don't actually disagree with a bond (JCs promissory note) as long as no money changes hands and it does not affect your salary - work and get fairly paid for your work, what a concept. As you get older, you will find that stability and planning make sense and job-hopping does not, so a 2-year commitment is a doddle. Wolfie and her beau are moving rapidly into this phase, eh Wolfie?

Some training is expensive - to get a type on the ac I fly is about $55,000 and every 6 months it costs $20,000 for recurrent plus fire-fighting, dinghy drill, RVSM, International Procedures, upset training, defibrillator training etc. etc. For those numbers, my company wants you to agree to work here for 2 years. If you leave early, your 'bond' is pro-rated, divided by 24 months, (and what you sign for is usually less than what it actually costs). The average stay here is 5 - 10 years, so it is rarely an issue, but some guys have gone on to other things and they, or their new employers, pay.

You all know my attitude to pay-up-front.

Happy now, Chu Me? Make you want to fall down and squirt?

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 3:29 am
by chu me
Thanks Doc , Xsbank,Scuba Steve everyone else. Yes I,m starting to be happy thanks this is way more positive than bashing. Now the younger pilots have some idea of where to apply where there is no bonds or upfront cash. This also gives kudos to those companies that treat their pilots well, I also hope it will help these companies continue to have a pool of pilots when things pick up. Thanks again everyone!!!!!

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 8:20 am
by chu me
Catdriver;

In response to your post, I publicly apologized yesterday, but it appears as though my post didn't make it or was deleted for some reason. So let me say I'm sorry to have included you in the above posts ( I was not aware that you did not fly in Canada.) If you hear of any companies please post them here it would be a great help.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:45 am
by Too Cool
Thats funny Cat can not coment but he can on the ones that have bonds.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 1:45 pm
by Cat Driver
Thats funny Cat can not coment but he can on the ones that have bonds.
It is really elementary Too Cool and should even be within the mental grasp of most pilots, however you seem to be an exception so allow me to explain it for you.

I am able to comment on the subject of pilots paying to work, however I am not in the loop regarding what companies in Canada do not require pilots to pay for the privilege of working for them.

I hope that clears that up for you.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 2:36 pm
by ScudRunner
Chu Me, go @#$! yourself I will cage fight you anytime. :mrgreen: Oh wait no negativity aloud dammit, I didnt find this thread until today so here goes.

I think if you have read any of my previous posts regarding bonds you would know that I disagree with companies that require you to front Cash for a job. Companies that require a working bond that has you working off XX amount of money I have no issue with them.


Villers Air Service. Ft Nelson BC
Wolverine Air. Ft Simpson NWT
Simpson Air. Ft Simpson NWT
Alkan Air. Whitehorse YK
Perimeter Aviation, Manitoba (2 years on the ramp)
North Cariboo Air, BC+AB (12,500 below no bond)
Wasaya, Ont ( I think its just a working bond)
CargoJet
Air Canada
WestJet
Jazz
CMA (except Do328)
KFC
Air Spray
ConAir
Borek
Missinipi Air
Calm Air (working Bond)


Anyway the list is long and as stated above, some require a working bond (read above) As for working condidtions thats another story all together.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 3:00 pm
by Grey_Wolf
Wasaya doesn't have a working bond, but then again it's about perspective.

You hand over a chunk of change, and they pay it back over 12 months.

Technically, from some folks POV, you're paying yourself over those months, but lose out if you decide to pack up and leave.

Call it "false" or "bought" loyalty to a company, and others will call it job security.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:12 pm
by Doc
Grey_Wolf, Wasaya wants a "chunk" of cash up front?? Is this new? If that's true, it's really piss poor. Wasaya can afford to absorb the cost of training pilots better than most. We do know where their money comes from, after all.
If a company wants you to hand them money....well, you're buying a job. Simple.

Even I have no problem with the "bond" described by Just Curious. A "working" bond.

But, it's NOT a matter of "perspective" at all. It's simply a matter of having no sense of self worth. Oh, and having your head up your ass.

Children....don't pay for your jobs.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 6:45 pm
by Lost Lake
[quote Children....don't pay for your jobs.[/quote]

Hey Doc, the children don't pay for their jobs, their parents do.

End of negative comments, this thread is about conpanies that DON'T ask for money to work for them.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 7:56 pm
by Cap'n P8
Doc...you knew that Wasaya had a bond, we have personally argued back and forth over this issue several times. (Maybe you're getting senile in your old age!) :wink:

As for lost lake, I may (but I don't think so) be an idiot for working for a company that had a bond with cash up front. But daddy didn't pay for it for me. I made an informed decision about what I was doing. If I had to do it all over again, I would without hesitation. Sorry to burst everyone's bubble, but this came into being a long time ago and it's not going away. One only has to look past our own backyard to realize that is the reality of the industry world wide. Look at the states for example, comair, etc. At least for example at Wasaya you can be making upwards and over $75000.00 and the bond is paid back monthly on top of salary. With full benefits and travel on Air Canada, Jazz and Bearskin. How can that be worse than going to Jazz for example. One more thing about the bonds at Wasaya, it is for the initial trg on a new a/c not recurrent trg. Also, it is for the first two types only, unless you stay for three years with the company, in which case there are no bonds on any aircraft. If you are bonded on a second a/c the bond is less. They will also pay out the bond fully if they ask (and you accept) training on new equipment. As a disclaimer, I might add that I am almost one year removed from Wasaya, but to the best of my knowledge the terms are still the same.

Look, I can understand the concept of, "If no one took these jobs then the practice would end!" It's a great theory, BUT IT"S NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!!! The majority of people who are stuck on the outside without a seat don't have the luxury of waiting for a job. Let's also not forget that as good as the industry can ever get (and it's already on the down slide) there will always be more pilots than jobs.