Owner/Operator's perspective

This forum has been developed to discuss flight instruction/University and College programs.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister, North Shore

User avatar
cyyz
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4150
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 11:05 am
Location: Toronto

Post by cyyz »

Shiny Side Up wrote:
Well then lets pay our instructors a similar amount. For every new student
or customer they bring in they then get a percentage of the business that customer brings as opposed to their usual flying rate. What say 10%? But IRL it doesn't work that way.
LoL.. Just look harder. You must know some instructors that bring in their "friends" and train them for "free." They're usually getting paid under the table.. As you mentioned the O/O can make his money off renting he should be happy that you brought someone new and will make money off the rental fees.. Whatever you "make" training should be yours.. Just have to be smart about it...

The fact is when an instructor is out flogging the company he has no guarantee that he's going to profit from it, and secondly if you as the operator aren't willing to give him some back up - some good advertising, a deal on flying to flog, free stuff to hook a potential customer - he's going out there battling for you unarmed.
You're right some areas really have nothing the instructor could offer to sell his product. But many flight schools offer Gift certificates/FAMs usually below the cost of the aircraft and instructor usually for the sole purpose to "ring" in the clients, if the school has really excellent deals, I know some schools that will give you a 1 fam for $60/hr. That is definetly a nice thing he could sell to the people at his community groups. Or. Donate it to the school raffle or hospital or something, it's a charitable donation and you could use it as a tax deduction. Furthermore, every fam you bring in make sure you're the guy doing the flights, make an arrangement with the O/O..
You're on. As long as you also promise to pay like any other regular wage earner for the over time I work for putting in 60 or so hours a week, in other words time and a half for the 20 hours of overtime. Or why do you think most operators don't pay this way?
You're correct, excellent instructors would make a killing, I'd accept paying them the overtime and you're right most o/o's try to shy away from a base or an hourly wage because it's much cheaper to pay the $20/hr/day.
Now granted there are some lazy instructors out there, I've seen my share, but most are just trying to claw their way from the very bottom of the aviation world, spat on by all above them, they are signing on to do a thankless and hazardous job because of their love of flying.
It's usually the ones that are complaining that are the ones I'd rather see at McDonald's because they're the ones who make the hard working/excellent instructors look bad. One of our members posted how he makes $2k base plus his hourly flying wage. Imagine the smiles on the instructors faces if that's what they were all being paid. The poor rampies move from their town up north, while the instructors usual stay at home and teach. Less effort in "clawing" their way up..
Here's the bottom line. Leadership comes from the top. Whether you inspire your employees with support and encouragement, or you can take O/O's method and try to shame them into doing a better job.
Sorta, but consider the O/O as the General of the forces the guy the troops rarely see. The CFI is the Company Sgt. and the manager is the company Capt. The instructors are the grunts. They look to the CFI for inspiration and motivation and to the manager for "issues(pay, conditions, etc)" . Whether they're ramp monkies, burger flippers or instructors, they should always imo try to do their best job possible for the person who keeps them employed.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Post by Shiny Side Up »

Since I'm privy to some of the operations secrets of the school I fly for, That I can tell you. When an instructor gets charged out at his rate he gets 50% of the rate he/she is charged out at. Usually. Unless there are some mitigating circumstances - then he/she gets less. None of the cost of the airplane goes to the instructor. When a student requires solo supervision, once again no pay for the instructor. Not to mention teaching the ground school which the instructor gets a flat rate for regardless of how many students he/she might wrangle up for it. Instructors get no part of any books, headsets, maps, etc. that they also might have a part in selling - stuff which is generally required for the student to complete the licence.

Now of course our instructor here gets out of the deal valuable hours to further his career. But we must remember that instructors are pilots too and have very few needs in this world. Flying time is one of them. The others being food to eat and a place to sleep for some reason are usually (but not always) have a higher priority. Lets get down to brass tacks here. If your instructor can't feed him/herself with working for you they have to fill that need somewhere else - another job. If they have this other commitment then that means less time to work for free for you.
---------- ADS -----------
 
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!
Phlyer
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 858
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 10:46 pm

Post by Phlyer »

What do you guys think about raising the cost of flight instruction to a standard rate that would give the entrepreneur and the instructor a living wage?
All the foreign students I ever talked to were amazed at how "cheap" it was to do flight training here.
Someone should start some kind of organization - call it CAAP or something - that will provide this kind of standard.
All the people in flight training deserve to make a living wage at it - look at the investment all have initially made to do it.
:wink:
---------- ADS -----------
 
RadMan
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:11 pm
Contact:

Post by RadMan »

I have a few things to say...

I've only been in this industry for 6 years now, and aviation has taken me anywhere from Southern to Eastern to Central to Northwestern Ontario as well as Northern Manitoba. Even Québec for a short while. I've been both a bush float pilot (703) and a flight instructor. In these short 6 years I already feel like I've seen quite a lot. And these are my views as they pertain to at least making min wage...

This is not the first time I have heard a Flight School Operator "threaten" to just pay min wage. Quite frankly, if you're not working for a funded college you'd 8 times out of 10 be better off with min wage. Working 40 hrs a week in Ontario you would take home a reliable $1000+ a month. It's not a lot but it's steady and would allow you to dedicate most if not all your energies into the one job. If you work 48 hrs gross is about $1700/mo and for you guys working 60 hrs it would gross around 2200/mo (factoring in overtime). As I said, 8/10 times you'd be better off.

By the way, the Canada Labour Code does apply to aviation which means that yes pilots are intitled to statutory days off with pay, overtime, on call pay and actually are not permitted to work more than 48 hours a week (unless the employer "averages" hours, but the average is still not more than 48 hours and the employer has to get government approval)

Yes real-estate workers get commission but their commissions don't give them even close to as low as min wage. Never mind below.

It is the owner's responsibility to take the risk of financial flight or failure. Employers have no right to demand employees to invest of their time to help build the business without giving them a share of the potential net profits. An instructor shouldn't have to work for free in the hopes of earning min wage.

In return, it's the employees responsibility to do his/her job professionally. That means doing taking out the garbage, answering the phones, etc.

The rules are clear, employees have the right to be paid for their work! And no, flight time is not a form of payment. It is a reflection of experience.

Too many instructors have been promised rewards for their free time only to get shafted by the employer later.

What is the breakdown of the billing that goes to the operator vs the instructor? Frankly, until an employee is making at least min wage that is irrelevant. If you as an employer cannot afford to pay you staff min wage while at the same time keep the business afloat then quite frankly your rates are too low and/or you shouldn't be in business. Unfortunately this industry has competed itself into a hole and has been allowed to continue in unfit financial conditions (relying on free labour) on the backs of flight instructors. If you want free labour get a business partner.

Above and beyond min wage, you want to talk about comission or other funky renumerations go ahead, as long as it is no longer than 48hrs / week that's fine.

Irrespective of anything I have said above, the law (Canada Labour Code) states that the relationship between an employee's pay (whatever funky scheme you've got going) and the hours he/she is required to commit to the workplace (max 48 hrs) can be no less than min wage. Anything less is illegal. Plain and simple. End of story.

I think it's high time that the feds overhaul this industry. Will it be painful, yes. Will there be less instructor jobs by the time everything is said and done? Probably. Will fewer people be able to afford to fly recreationally? I'm sure of it.

Is losing aviation as a career by not working for free to exert my self-respect worth it? Ya damned right it is!

Canada Labour Codehttp://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/L-2/
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Post by Cat Driver »

Radman :

The reality from an owners side of this business is it is not possible to charge higher rates because your competition will just take your share of students.

One of the biggest drains on small schools is the high cost of keeping up with all the demands made by TC for ever expanding bureaucratic crap that adds zip to the improving anything except supporting more drones in TC.

Another high cost item is having to deal with a contract AMO, that can really add to cost due to the AMO also having to deal with ever increasing bureaucratic crap.

Bottom line is there soon will be no more small flight schools as the owners one by one close their doors.

Here is a suggestion, I have two Cessna's 150's left over from my last attempt to start a flight school, they are for sale so grab them and start your own school. I'll give you a real good deal as one of them is probably the nicest 150 avaliable in Canada.

Cat
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
RadMan
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:11 pm
Contact:

Post by RadMan »

Cat:

Am I to take it that you are one of the would-be operators that expect employees to work for free?

I'm very well aware of the realities. Like I said, if you can't afford to pay min wage then really you shouldn't be operating.

If you read my post carefully you'll see that I agree with most of what you just said. You're right, small schools have a real problem here, and yes I know TC has a lot to do with SOME of it. But the bigger problem is that the true cost of flight training and aircraft rentals is not being recuperated. If you're operating expenses are more due to TC or otherwise, then you should charge more. However, as long as some pilots are willing to work for less than min wage then there will always be some operators able to undercut others by digging into employee wages to make up for higher operating expenses.

Bottom line is it really isn't significantly TC's fault that some operators can undercut others. It's the fault of the pilots that will work for free and the employers that will allow/insist pilot's for free. Either way, "if I don't do it somebody else will" doesn't make it right or acceptable, whether you're a pilot or an operator.

Thanks but no thanks on the C150. I don't do full time flight instruction any longer. I'm one of those instructors that feels if your heart is no longer in it, get out. You won't be doing any favours to the students by sticking around. Besides, I'm not refering to my personal problems, but rather issues I have with the industry as a whole. If guys with experience don't stand up for the newcomers who will?

Why is it that we seem to feel that one has to keep a business alive at all costs sometimes, even if not financially viable? Isn't that what got Air Canada into the mess it's in now? Instead of asking employees to suffer the symptoms (not enough money to pay wages) and prolonging the inevitable collapse, why don't we deal with the real issue as an whole industry; today's rates are insufficient to the true cost of flight training? If it doesn't work either really fix it or let it die. The reorganizing post-death is sure to be more sustainable.

Either way, it's not the employees' fault that small schools have a tough time being sustainable. Why should they pay the price?
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Post by Cat Driver »

RadMan :

First lets address your first question.

I am not a "would be operator " I own an advanced flying training business and have two other people who fly for me.

As to what I can afford to pay that does not seem to be an issue with the two guys that work with me. They are guranteed $15,000.00 ( Canadian ) per. month plus all travelling and living expenses. Depending on the job and where we are flying the wage goes up from there.

You obviously have not identified the problems concerning TC, it is really quite simple...they over regulate with ever increasing demands and rules that only benefit them....when rules and regulations become to much of a burden on those being affected you will only get people wasting energy and time trying to avoid compliance.

Anyhow I hope that answers your question about my not paying enough.

Cat
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
RadMan
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:11 pm
Contact:

Post by RadMan »

Cat:

If you're employees earn at least min wage then my original post doesn't apply to you. I have no quarrel with employers such as yourself. To operate a small school, pay at least min wage and have the business survive is quite admirable in the current climate of this industry, in my opinion.

In regards to TC:

While I haven't identified the problems concerning TC in my post I do understand them and I agree that TC over-regulates with often no tangible benefit to operators or the public they profess to be protecting. I also agree that it is taking increasingly ridiculous amounts of resources to meet compliance.

But the extra money to deal with TC doesn't speak to some operators having an edge on others, because all schools suffer the burden of TC. It does speak to the cost the customer faces when paying the bills.
If you want TC to smarten up (and I know I sure want to see it happen) so that customers don't have to pay an arm and a leg that is one issue. An issue by the way that I feel needs serious addressing. I do buy "TC is screwing me so I can't afford to operate with what the market is willing to pay for flight training".

But operators using TC as an excuse to not pay their employees because they are not willing to pass the costs to the consumer is illegal. And using the excuse that one has to because others do to is also illegal, and very much wrong. I'm sorry but I don't buy "TC is screwing me so I won't pay my employees to make ends meet and compete with other operators".

So to summarize, my comments so far have only been trying to address paying min wage to employees. That is my beef and while there is causal connection with TC it is only because people are willing to break the law and allow that connection to be. You can't blame TC for you breaking the law.

But you CAN blame TC for making it impossible to stay afloat. Now, if you want to talk about the true value of what TC is doing in relation to the cost of the consumer faces, by all means let's talk about it.

I hope these comments make my thoughts more clear.

RadMan
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Post by Cat Driver »

I have no problem with your position RadMan, there have always been real slave owners in all facets of aviation especially in flight schools.

The TC thing is beyond you and I having any input that would change anything.

It is one thing when people in general aviation break the rules, but when TC breaks the rules as they can and do that is another matter.

Its simple..

A Canadian citizen operating an aviation company breaks the rules and are caught, they are penalized.

TC on the other hand will protect their rule breakers right to the top, they are seemingly above accountability and are not brought to task for rule breaking.

We have a few in my region who have been found breaking the rules.

They just motor right along and collect their pay and bonuses for meeting quotas.

Fu..in bunch of low life thugs.

And your Director General states that is quite sttisfactory.............

Oh well sooner or later the pendlum will swing, and when it does I have a few names of TC managers that I hope the pendlum crushes their balls.

Cat
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
RadMan
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:11 pm
Contact:

Post by RadMan »

If you're talking about actual rule breaking and not just p1ss poor policy then say so. No it is not beyond me because I'm dealing with that exact problem as we speak.

Here's hoping the pendulum swings...

RadMan
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Airtids
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 12:56 am
Location: The Rock

Post by Airtids »

Interesting discussion. O/O has brought out into the open some seriously dirty laundry, and now we are faced with addressing the age-old owner/staff dilemma. This can be a great, and healthy discussion if we can all try and remain objective, and see things from the other's perspective. As a new and relatively young owner/operator AND pilot, I may have a bit of a unique view of the situation.

Everyone posting here should pick up a copy of the Savy Flight Instructor. We make it mandatory reading for our new hires, and they can read it at home, OR at work when they're not otherwise busy. It teaches instructors how to make more money, fly more, do a better job, move on faster and happier. These should be the goals of all instructors AND all operators

Some of you guys/gals really have NO idea about how a business, especially an aviation business, actually works. That's OK, neither did I before I started one, but I DID have an appreciation of what it means to PAY YOUR DUES, which is something I understood every pilot who has 'made it' has done, unless they were spoon-fed their career through nepotism.

Now that I am the boss, many of the things that pissed me off about former employers makes a lot of sense and I see that there really is no way around some of the unpleasantries associated with being new and inexperienced in this industry. Yes, you going out and hustling work ends up making your employer more money, but you make (and log) more as well. Don't worry about your boss's profits, s/he is probably worrying enough for everyone! The only reason you may have to be upset is if the company is doing NO marketing, and is relying on your extra work EXCLUSIVELY.

By all means, if you hustle a student, and that student is given to another instructor, LEAVE. Same goes for students being given to instructors sitting in the waiting area while other instructors are vacuuming aircraft. If your boss can't see who DESERVES the extra work, you shouldn't be working for them. By the same token, you DO need to show the boss that you are more capable than merely being able to write a $30,000 cheque (no Jetsgo cracks please). Anyone can do that, and it doesn't give you the right to EXPECT anything, especially influence on someone's pride and joy of a FTU/Air Taxi business.

Shiney: Do you really think that if an instructor is billed at $45/hr and is getting paid $22, the operator gets the other $23? Who do you think pays the rent, the lights, the website, the internet, the marketing.... What kind of a margin do you think aircraft rental pays? Hardley enough to even justify doing it based on the risk associated with it.

Non-subsidized flight schools operate on margins of less than 5%. Tell that to an Owner/Operator in another industry and what kind of a reaction do you think you get?

RadMan: If those folks who are struggling to make a small aviation business work simply closed their doors, do you honestly think that would make a better environment for the plethora of young flight instructors out there? Do you think there would be more jobs available, or less. Maybe a small flight school really isn't a viable business as . has suggested, but I go the extra mile to provide an OPPORTUNITY for my staff and sacrifice a good deal of my own income to do it. Sure, I could do all the flying myself, but again, I'm trying to give the chance at advancement to others as I've already paid my dues and gotten to the point where I could go anywhere and find work.

The notion of 'wanting to fly so bad' keeps coming up. How bad? Bad enough to go the extra mile? Bad enough to wash an airplane when you're not booked for something else? Or merely bad enough to fork out $30,000? Hell, even a WJ Captain cleans snot-rags out of the seat pockets. Is he above that? Probably, but he does it anyways because it is good for the company, and without the company, he's looking elsewhere.

Flight schools operate in the realm of free-market capitalism where supply and demand are THE RULES which govern the operation. Operators are obliged to work within the constraints of these rules, whether they like it or not. Until you can change the supply and demand functions, you can't change the outcomes (such as expecting, no, NEEDING your staff to go the extra mile).
---------- ADS -----------
 
Aviation- the hardest way possible to make an easy living!
"You can bomb the world to pieces, but you can't bomb it into peace!" Michael Franti- Spearhead
"Trust everyone, but cut the cards". My Grandma.
chewsta
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 355
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 10:54 am

Post by chewsta »

Tids,

You raise several valid points. I have been in sales for 9 years now, before flying and know business inside and out. I also expect to "pay some dues" as the new guy. I also know that my legwork will result in more business for me. I think that most instructors just know that there is fine line that can be crossed between helping out and being abused. It really depends on who the employer is.

As far as WJ pilots cleaning a/c. They are above that and I can't believe that they do it. It's one thing at a small flight school. It's another thing with 100 seat jets coming and going on a regular basis.

As long as the employer is giving the new guys a fair shake I think it can be a productive environment.

Please elaborate on the savvy flight instructor. I have heard from several people that it will make you more money, but you may not have any friends or the respect of your students when you are done practising it.

And yes, we do need less flight instructors so that those who are doing it are almost exclusivly the good ones and they can make a FT living off of it. Problem is that with the surplus of pilots, 702,703 aren't hiring low time guys and they are (sometimes) "forced" into instruction to move up. If there were less pilots, it would be better for the industry. As far as increasing the cost of training, most people who really want to do it, and would be great won't be able to afford it. Catch 22 (23 for TPB fans 8) ).

And this rant about less f/i and pilots coming from a guy who dosen't even has his class 4 yet.
---------- ADS -----------
 
If you enjoy what you do, you'll never work another day in your life.
User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Post by Shiny Side Up »

Shiney: Do you really think that if an instructor is billed at $45/hr and is getting paid $22, the operator gets the other $23? Who do you think pays the rent, the lights, the website, the internet, the marketing.... What kind of a margin do you think aircraft rental pays? Hardley enough to even justify doing it based on the risk associated with it.

Non-subsidized flight schools operate on margins of less than 5%. Tell that to an Owner/Operator in another industry and what kind of a reaction do you think you get?
If you really think that the aircraft and pilot are the only things the owner operator has for income then you're mistaken. Larger operations to be viable generally have other income aside from their rates for flight instruction: Ground school, book sales, hangar rent and tie down fees, fuel sales, etc. Now if you make your instructors take care of all this income without pay - greater profit margin for you. For example: Mr O/O here obviously has a large enough operation that he hires a cleaning staff. but he's saying he wants his instructors to take part of their burden -but not pay them. Now a good fellow might just hire his instructors for the job and dispense with cleaning staff in order to give his instructors more income. But by berating the instuctors for not doing a job that he's paying someone else to do...

Now if you have a smaller operation say one pilot one airplane then one dispenses with a lot of other expenses. In this case, like rad man says, the operating costs had better be covered by the price being charged.
Flight schools operate in the realm of free-market capitalism where supply and demand are THE RULES which govern the operation. Operators are obliged to work within the constraints of these rules, whether they like it or not. Until you can change the supply and demand functions, you can't change the outcomes (such as expecting, no, NEEDING your staff to go the extra mile).
Its been said before. If you need your staff to go the extra mile for you, then you had better be prepared to go the extra mile for them. Once again you get what you pay for.
---------- ADS -----------
 
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!
RadMan
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:11 pm
Contact:

Post by RadMan »

Airtids:

If small operators can't afford to operate then yes I do believe that that would be a better environment specifically as there will be less jobs. In many cases these small operators end up dragging struggling instructors through the mud for several years until many employees decide they've had enough and change careers entirely. With less but properly paying jobs, you would give the newbies a realistic view of the state of the industry and not play on their hopes and dreams. They will have clearer minds to decide their future without the mud dragging.

I'm sure many small operators that expect something for nothing from their employees have the notion that they are giving out OPPORTUNITY to newbies, but I have yet see 1 operator struggle like the instructors do and not be able to make basic ends meet whether income comes from the operation or a well-to-do spouse or what have you.

5% or less margins are common to many industries, including computers, automotive mechanics, car body shops and others. But you don't see them as industries pay less than min wage or expect their employees to work insane hours do you?

Yes operators are obliged to operate within the realm of supply and demand, but also within the realm of labour legislation. If you can't operate according to the rules of both then according to free-market capitalism you're not viable and therefore you sink. Asking instructors to invest their time into a non-viable business is like to government pumping money into Air Canada. Time is money. You don't see the govermnent helping AC anymore, why should instructors?

Until things change you can't change the outcomes, bull, you can; don't operate.

The issue here is not whether pilots are above getting their hands dirty. It's not that they should make $20/hr cleaning toilets, etc. It's that they should at least earn what society has dictated as the minimum renumeration an individual has the right to expect. That is the self-respect I'm talking about.

Going the extra mile is doing a particularly good job, showing initiative, care for the aircraft, excellent customer service. Not working for free.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Airtids
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 12:56 am
Location: The Rock

Post by Airtids »

Chewsta: The Savvy Flight Instructor simply elaborates on some of the more valid points that have already been made here. When you go to a bar, wear an aviation cap or t-shirt. When people ask, let them know you are a flight instructor, and would love to turn them into a licensed pilot. You have been in sales, you know the gig. If they show an interest, get them out for a FAM. Simple things that don't de-humanise you and are good for your career and pocketbook. These HAVE TO BE COUPLED with marketing done by the operator. I think VIP sells it.

As far as the experienced guys being left to do it, how many of those do you think there actually are? How much do you think a PPL would cost from someone with the experience level of say, Cat Driver? UNAFFORDABLE FOR THE MASSES!! I wish more than anything that all flight instructors could make a decent living off their profession, but supply and demand rule the marketplace, no differently for pilots than for operators. Why should Joe/Jane Blow be forced to pay ridiculous amounts of money for a purely recreational PPL because one particular FTU is unable, or unwilling to take advantage of (not abuse, but take advantage) a surplus of qualified instructors? They simply go to the next one. Why do you feel that just because someone wants to be an Airline pilot, or even 703/704 pilot, they should be immune to market forces? I guess the question that has to be asked is whether you would be happy making very little, but flying, or doing something else, and making more money. I say again, how bad do you want it? How would you define 'paying your dues'?

Shiney: We're talking about an FTU here no? No hangar, no fuel sales, no bag slinging contract. Yes, there is a groundschool (hopefully more than once a year) and the supplies that go along with it. These still don't come close to covering your expenses. What do you think an ad in a national magazine costs? About the profit of two PPL. Don't even start me on how much insurance eats out of your margin. When I wrote of a 5% margin, that is for a large, established, tightly run organisation. Most work somewhere around the 2-3% range, and I don't know of too many industries where this is the NORM. I'm not saying instructors are there to be taken advantage of, all I'm saying is that we need to work together to create a profitable enterprise. Going the extra mile for your staff has got to mean more than just wages.

RadMan: I'm sorry, I disagree with you on the number of jobs issue. See above. More entry-level aviation jobs, even low paying ones, are always preferable to less jobs, from an entry-level pilots perspective. I believe that if you really do want it bad enough, you will be willing, and indeed happy, doing what you do, even if you have to scrub the odd toilet to do it. Every pilot should have the ability to make that choice for themselves. I'm the boss, and I still scrub the toilet. Why should a 250hr class iv be immune? Because they spent some money? Gimme a breaki, we all spent money. Where it needs to start is with the college programs selling a CPL as a ticket to the right seat of a 1900. Do your friggen research before you jump into this game, and find a FTU that will tell you the real deal. Less properly paying jobs is NOT the realsistic view of the industry: It is a corrupted view the result of some artificial restriction placed on FTUs.

Operators should NOT have to struggle like the newbies. Most of them have done that already. They are struggling in less noticable ways, like wondering where the next job is coming from, how are they going to pay for those two blown jugs, thinking about their business 24/7... Not to mention the fact that it was THEIR idea to start the enterprise, THEIR investment that formed the foundation for the enterprise, and THEIR unpaid time and energy that went into securing the Operating Certificates, etc. etc. Having been through it, I don't really see your point. Their risk=their reward.

Actually, labour legislation is CONTRARY to free-market capitalism. Operators are LEGALLY AND MORALLY obliged to operate within the constraints of labour legislation, but they are ABSOLUTELY obliged to work within constraints of supply and demand. Of course people need to meet the basic necessities of life, food, shelter, clothing, gas in the car, a telephone, etc. Beyond that, $$ is a matter of your circumstances. What would you have me do? Should I fire the instructor because they can't make a living at their chosen profession because some psycho flew an airplane into a building that had huge fallout to our industry? Or should I give THEM the choice? I don't know the answer to that. My instructors make a good living. At the end of the year, they've taken home pay well above what minimum wage allows for. Whether they were poorly paid flight instructors, or highly paid aircraft washers is up to them to decide. You're right, I could choose not to operate, but what's more likely is that if faced with the situation, I would choose to operate without the high-priced instructor, do the work myself, and remove the OPPORTUNITY for someone else.

I'm not trying to turn this into a pissing match. I've never advocated working for 'free', and I've never hired a pilot who said they would (although there have been plenty that have said so). I'm just trying to give some insight into the other side of an industry that most pilots don't get the opportunity to see, and hopefully shed some light on why I think we've got the situation we do now.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Aviation- the hardest way possible to make an easy living!
"You can bomb the world to pieces, but you can't bomb it into peace!" Michael Franti- Spearhead
"Trust everyone, but cut the cards". My Grandma.
RadMan
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:11 pm
Contact:

Post by RadMan »

Hey! Airtids are you not reading my posts carefully?

1. My posts have are all written in generalities, not pointing fingers at you or Cat. If I did make that clear then I'm sorry. My finger is pointing to a very specific group,

2. That group is operators that do not ensure that their employees take home min wage and insist they work more than 48 hours per week. I have no problem with instructors answering phones, cleaning planes, toilets, this that and the other!!!You name it! Hell, I've even scrubbed a freezer with a dead mouse in it! My beef is and has been in all my posts min wage and ridiculous work hours. Hey, if your employees make min wage and you hire them to sing to the customers as they come in go ahead. If they'll do it then fine. As long as they make min wage let market forces take it from there.

How can I make this any more clear?! The only thing I think instructors are above is working for less than min wage. So please, if you're going to answer my post PLEASE address what I have been talking about, "DO YOU FEEL THAT INSTRUCTORS SHOULD BE EXPECTED TO WORK FOR LESS THAN MIN WAGE, IE: NOT MAKING AT AT LEAST $7.15 (or whatever it is now in Ontario) FOR EVERY HOUR THEY COMMIT TO THE WORKPLACE?

If your answer is no, then I agree with you, if your answer is yes, then I have serious issues. If you provide a true opportunity then fine! Great! But forgive me as I have heard that statement time and time and time again and I've grown quite cynical of it.

My point is also that if one expects an instructor to commit their time to the business and not be paid at least min wage for it, then they are investing their time to build the business and they should see a share of the net profits (should that ever occur).
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Airtids
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1643
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 12:56 am
Location: The Rock

Post by Airtids »

Rad: Now, I'm the last one to bitch about typing skills, but seeing as how you're critiquing my reading abilities, give your post a proof would ya, and you don't need to yell at me. Yup, wires crossed a bit, apparently. Perhaps your generalities were a little too general. I agree that those very few owner/operators that are driving brand new $65,000 Dodge duallys at the expense of their flight instructors need to be hung out to dry (I've worked for one myself, those who know me are probably having a good chuckle about now). But, like you, I have heard time and time again, from people who have NO IDEA what it takes to make a business succeed in this industry these days, about 'those F'n owner/operators living fat choy while we all starve', and I too have grown tired of that generalisation so am perhaps a little sensitive to it. :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Aviation- the hardest way possible to make an easy living!
"You can bomb the world to pieces, but you can't bomb it into peace!" Michael Franti- Spearhead
"Trust everyone, but cut the cards". My Grandma.
RadMan
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:11 pm
Contact:

Post by RadMan »

Fair enough, ya I'm sorry but pilots being taken advantage of really boils my blood.

Sorry about that, :oops:

Radman
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Shiny Side Up
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5335
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:02 pm
Location: Group W bench

Post by Shiny Side Up »

Shiney: We're talking about an FTU here no? No hangar, no fuel sales, no bag slinging contract. Yes, there is a groundschool (hopefully more than once a year) and the supplies that go along with it. These still don't come close to covering your expenses. What do you think an ad in a national magazine costs? About the profit of two PPL. Don't even start me on how much insurance eats out of your margin. When I wrote of a 5% margin, that is for a large, established, tightly run organisation. Most work somewhere around the 2-3% range, and I don't know of too many industries where this is the NORM. I'm not saying instructors are there to be taken advantage of, all I'm saying is that we need to work together to create a profitable enterprise. Going the extra mile for your staff has got to mean more than just wages.
Lets say your running a FTU with aircraft and instructors out of the back of your van. You have your aircraft - its rental charge should be enough to cover its expenses - maintenance, fuel, oil, insurance, etc. in its hourly cost - in addition a bit of profit. If you're not making profit on your aircraft then you're not charging enough for them. Your ground school the same. its price must cover the cost of its expenses whether it be the rental of a classroom or whatever. Now your pilots. Granted they should help out with keeping the aircraft in shape and flying - its in their best interests as well as help out to make the company look good. Its part of the customer service part of their job - but they incur little or no cost on your part aside from maybe your work keeping them in line the extra you get out of their hourly rate is profit. If you're like some unscrupulous people you also them pay for any training they require and any supplies they might need. Now you're going make them put in extra time for free to polish your van or something so your company looks good? And then go out and plug hte company when they're out on their free time? Hey if I find someone who's really interested in aviation of course I tell them about getting a licence. Do I encourage everyone I know to start a licence because I think its great - hell no. Just because the Jehovahs come knocking at my door doesn't mean I going to convert, why the hell should I expect someone to suddenly want to become a pilot? I encourage interest of others I don't go actively flogging it.

Here's another point. An ad in a paper might cost the profit you make from 2 PPL licences - if you want to look at it that way. Lets look at it from the other side: what if that ad brings in five new students? Hasn't it been a profitable venture then? You've got to spend money to make money. Every sucessful venture has started off with an initial capital expenditure (every unsucessful one too for that matter). That's the problem with this side of the coin, a lot of owner operators when they wish to increase their profit margins look to cutting costs rather than increasing sales. The easiest place they usually find to do this is on the employees.

Let me tell you a story about cutting costs on employees. There was a particular oilfield company I had the misfortune to work for once upon a time. The owner decided to cut costs on us employees but downgrading our pay and telling us we were going to be not paid for certain allotments of our time. Profits were down he said and he had to stay competetive. He shortly found how competetive he was with no employees.

Moral of the story - everytime a FTU has to replace instructors or other personnel it costs them - lost business, training costs, and just plain @#$! ups which come whn you got someone new on the job. Loss of profits means they have to cut costs. Reduce employees costs and lose more people. Its a graveyard spiral that will doom any business eventually.

Basically if your business isn't making money the one who can turn it around is you. I'll repeat myself again: leadership comes from the top. You as the Owner are the one with the capital to make it happen, you started this business after all.

Lastly if your instructors really are a bunch of lazy asses, who's fault is that? YOU hired them. If you don't like them - run them off. Like I said (I repeat myself a lot 'cause no one listens ;)) if you had touble getting good ones in the first place you probably got what you paid for.
---------- ADS -----------
 
We can't stop here! This is BAT country!
shitdisturber
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2165
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:38 pm
Location: If it's Monday it's got to be somewhere shitty

Post by shitdisturber »

Now that was a brilliant idea Shiny had although I don't think he really realizes it. The next time the JW's or the Moron Tabernac Choir come knocking on my door, i'm gonna try and sell em on flying lessons!
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Flight Training”