College of Pilots?

[Dust Devil]

Dust Devil,

perhaps you haven't contacted the college via their facebook page or aren't willing to wait for them to add a contact link to their website so you can ask them any question you may have?

http://www.facebook.com/?ref=home#!/gro ... 8544762222

http://www.collegeofpilots.ca/index.html

maybe you could even volunteer your time and resources to help them get this thing off the ground?

Truthfully if I felt I had the time to dedicate to something like this I would absolutely take part. Running your own Air Operation takes up considerable time and I think it would be unfair to the organization if I could not devote the time to it. Besides as an owner I may not even be welcome.

As for the Facebook group what keeps me from joining it is the perception by some that I may support it by clicking that little join button. It seems trivial but it just rubs me the wrong way to see my name joined any group that I don't necessarily support published.

As for contacting them directly. I think it does a huge disservice to the other aviators out there and is a very inefficient way to communicate. Answering one question at a time while others may have the same question doesn't sound very efficient and it also closes the option of dialog. Right or wrong these guys should be standing up in front of their peers.

I think the College could do good things. I see it as an avenue to do things like getting rid of PPC's which is a major cause of these guys who buy their jobs. Or at least make a PPC company specific. (anyway this isn't about PPC's just using an example) All I want to see is some acknowledgment that they will be accountable to the people the represent. They do seem to have it right when it comes to opposing the passenger bill of rights for example. They do however need to come forward and say what other goals they have and how they plan to complete those goals.

What blows my mind is they were offered the opportunity to have an article in the safety letter published by TC and basically turned their back on it. I can't fathom the reasoning for that. Maybe there is something going on in the background but the perception is they want no part of it at this time. It is probably the largest aviation publication in the country and best way to get the message out that they even exist.

I'm not saying I'll never support them, but right off the bat they seem to be doing some fundamentals wrong. I don't know if others share these concerns. It doesn't seem so to tell you the truth. Maybe that is what they are counting on.

[Cat Driver]

6. I am always wary when someone seeks to limit the freedom to negotiate my own terms with the purported aim of protecting my best interests when: they haven’t asked me what my best interests are, the initial framework is formulated without the broad participation of the people it professes to serve, the rules and scope are settled by the time I learn of them, and I am compelled to join without having an initial vote on the concept. Some form of representation may be appropriate to a situation, but one should be directly involved in that decision.

I offer these points purely as a licenced flight crew member employed in this country; please do not assume that I have one position or another on the matter. However, as it is currently presented, such an organization seems to be strictly a balance-of-power exercise that would likely only replace one unaccountable task-master with another.

[mattedfred]

respectfully Dust Devil,

you have been able to find the time to participate in the avcanada community on a regular basis.

how do you know you don't have the time to help out the college when you haven't even asked if they need any help?

why not let the college decide which method of communication is more efficient for them instead of assuming you know what is best for them by not contacting them?

perhaps the college is working very hard to draft a clear and concise message that they will relay to our industry as they see fit. perhaps the creation of a very basic webpage and facebook page is the first step in their communication strategy.

respectfully, it sounds like too many of the detractors of such an initiative take more pleasure in nay saying and stirring the pot rather than actually contacting those involved and submitting constructive criticism and offering tangible solutions.

i'm perplexed that many of the long time and regular posters on avcanada have not beaten down a path to the college door with offers to help improve our industry

perhaps i misunderstood them when they insinuated that their posts were intended to improve our industry or perhaps they do not recognize this as an opportunity to do so

[Dust Devil]

respectfully Dust Devil,

you have been able to find the time to participate in the avcanada community on a regular basis.

how do you know you don't have the time to help out the college when you haven't even asked if they need any help?

why not let the college decide which method of communication is more efficient for them instead of assuming you know what is best for them by not contacting them?

perhaps the college is working very hard to draft a clear and concise message that they will relay to our industry as they see fit. perhaps the creation of a very basic webpage and facebook page is the first step in their communication strategy.

respectfully, it sounds like too many of the detractors of such an initiative take more pleasure in nay saying and stirring the pot rather than actually contacting those involved and submitting constructive criticism and offering tangible solutions.

i'm perplexed that many of the long time and regular posters on avcanada have not beaten down a path to the college door with offers to help improve our industry

perhaps i misunderstood them when they insinuated that their posts were intended to improve our industry or perhaps they do not recognize this as an opportunity to do so

Well trolling away on a message board is hardly the time commitment that this organization would require. If you take my concerns as simply taking pleasure in nay saying and stirring the pot you are very mistaken. I have offered solutions such as the TC safety letter they just go ignored and unanswered.

[Cat Driver]

Dust Devil mattedfred has me on his ignore list because I am not up to his vision of what a real pilot should be, so can you ask him a simple question for me?

What active part does he have directly with this planned college and can he share his inside knowledge with us?

[Dust Devil]

Dust Devil mattedfred has me on his ignore list because I am not up to his vision of what a real pilot should be, so can you ask him a simple question for me?

What active part does he have directly with this planned college and can he share his inside knowledge with us?

There ya are buddy

[Ogee]

Some observations:

1. To have an adversarial approach is to guarantee that you will find an adversary. Not everyone that disagrees is an adversary, nor is it wise or productive to take disagreement as a personal attack.

2. An enterprise that seeks to represent everyone usually ends up representing no one well. An enterprise that begins with too many unclearly stated goals usually does not serve any goal well. These two taken together usually end up making things worse.

3. The reason that someone is at your door usually has more to do with their needs than yours.

4. Line pilots will not in general be compensated or employed in the same way as doctors or lawyers in Canada as long as the seniority system exists in aviation, or conversely it is absent from the legal and medical professions. Doctors and lawyers have almost complete mobility to offer their services to any interested client. They negotiate positions, terms and pay according to demonstrated ability and experience, and are most certainly not always forced into the most junior lowest-paying position when joining a firm. When they move from firm to firm they tend to take their clients with them, and usually retain at least their previous pay and standing; they do not give their highest paying clients to less experienced practitioners at the new firm and take on clerking/interning duties at the commensurate lower pay rate. Further, many doctors and lawyers are individual incorporated entities responsible for getting their own clients and paying their own expenses and costs; they are also usually paid directly by the clients or a government agency, rather than being employees of a profit-seeking company. Pilots in Canada are employed according to a system that bears little resemblance to this method. One system is not necessarily better than the other, but they are not fundamentally compatible.

5. Within, or beyond, existing employment standards laws, a disinterested third-party cannot tell an employer who to hire or fire, and how much to pay them. Restricting an otherwise qualified person’s ability to obtain or maintain employment of their choice, because they do not meet some arbitrary standard not based in regulation, opens the door to legal action and Charter challenges.

6. I am always wary when someone seeks to limit the freedom to negotiate my own terms with the purported aim of protecting my best interests when: they haven’t asked me what my best interests are, the initial framework is formulated without the broad participation of the people it professes to serve, the rules and scope are settled by the time I learn of them, and I am compelled to join without having an initial vote on the concept. Some form of representation may be appropriate to a situation, but one should be directly involved in that decision.

I offer these points purely as a licenced flight crew member employed in this country; please do not assume that I have one position or another on the matter. However, as it is currently presented, such an organization seems to be strictly a balance-of-power exercise that would likely only replace one unaccountable task-master with another.

One of the best posts I've ever seen on AvCanada, George.

I finally went to the site. Don't like what I see, for the reasons you have stated so well.

[george sugar]

mattedfred

How can it be that it is required of the members of the electorate to grovel at the candidate’s door to find out what is being proposed on their behalf? Shouldn’t the candidate communicate in a way that is most effective and convenient for the voter, rather than the other way around, to gain support for the proposals? Is this an indication of how the organization will conduct itself in other matters?

Maybe the fact that people aren’t beating down the door indicates that they do not feel that this is the best or only vehicle to promote safety, or that the method is correct but the implementation is unsound. Silence, or a lack of unsolicited offers to work for free in the cause, may mean something other than not wanting to promote safety at all.

Having some meetings of like-minded people and building a website is hardly sufficient to become the presumptive authority on every aspect of every facet of aviation as it concerns pilots, but that seems to be what is happening here. There seems to be a posture of “either you’re with us or you’re against us” in place, and that does not bode well.

For such an organization, the work should first be completed on the pilot’s bill of rights before a position is taken on the passenger’s bill of rights, one would think. And one of those rights should be the ability to easily, openly and frankly communicate with those that claim to represent them.

[Ogee]

I'm not saying I'll never support them, but right off the bat they seem to be doing some fundamentals wrong. I don't know if others share these concerns. It doesn't seem so to tell you the truth. Maybe that is what they are counting on.

No, lots of people share these concerns DD.

I'm relatively satisfied that this is never going to become law. I think that's the first concern, that compulsion and exclusion replace free market forces. There is a very high degree of presumptiousness in the whole thing.

I'm also leery of what involvement Transport Canada has in it to date and what level of legitimacy TC affords to the communications that are clearly going on behind our backs. There's an argument that can be made that TC would support this as it reduces their responsibilities even further.

[Cat Driver]

Just a short while ago a new face appeared on television and promised to fundamentally change how America is governed.

The public lapped up his slick delivery that had zero information on how he was going to fundamentally change America and voted him in to a position to try and make his changes.

I wonder how it will all play out?

[Doc]

I'm just going to sit back and wait for world peace...

[mattedfred]

Dust Devil mattedfred has me on his ignore list because I am not up to his vision of what a real pilot should be, so can you ask him a simple question for me?

What active part does he have directly with this planned college and can he share his inside knowledge with us?

There ya are buddy

For clarification, I added Cat Driver to my ignore list as he requested that we ignore one another. I'm perplexed by his comment.

I have no direct involvement with the college but some of my fellow ALPA members do volunteer for the college and have provided their fellow ALPA members with updates on their progress.

[Widow]

Due to the fact that various members of AvCanada were aware of the College initiative almost from the time of inception, we have been privy to discussion and information in advance of just about anyone other than those directly involved. It makes absolutely no sense for the College to send information in the ASL until such a time as they are prepared to receive membership applications. Mr. Bechtel was courteous enough to attempt to answer some questions here, but how can you be surprised that he ceased participation when there were so many unprofessional responses to his posts? I hope he'll be back, but we've seen a lot of long time posters disappear - or take time out - because some of you are unable to maintain decorum. Enough about that.

CD's post above should serve as a reminder of one of Mr. Bechtel's statements:

On the issue of licencing, this began when the government introduced legislation {bill C6} that would have permitted the outsourcing of the licensing function of TC. Never clearly defined, this was a cause for great concern. A certain industry trade group along with a well known training provider expressed great interest, and frankly had probably lobbied for the changes behind the scenes in Ottawa. We are of the view, I am sure shared by almost all commercial pilots, that having these types of groups in charge of issuing and defining our professional qualifications is a non-starter.

Threads in the maintenance forum have indicated CAMC is putting in a bid to take over AME licensing, and no one in there seems to be too happy about it. Since they are also doing an Human Resource Study of Commercial Pilots in Canada, it would indicate that Mr. Bechtel was correct in his assertion that "a certain industry trade group"is also bidding to take over pilots. Of course, he could have been referring to yet another group, but ...

If both CAMC and the CPPC are making this bid (of which TCCA must be aware), who is best suited for the job? If you don't like either, or you don't like the idea of TC handing over accreditation at all, then you (that is a general "you" and not directed at any particular person) best do something 'cause it sure seems likely to happen unless there is a concerted effort to stop it.

[Doc]

mattedfred, we've bantered back and forth on this subject for a while now. Both on the open forums and by PM's. I respect your opinion, but you just nailed the one reason I find to disagree with you. ALPA. ALPA members don't NEED a "college". It's the non-unionized pilots that really need some form of protection. 703/704 non-unionized grunts could really use something. I see NO indication the "college" is headed anywhere in that direction?
Cheers

[mattedfred]

perhaps i need to simplify my statements:

FACTS:

i have not volunteered for the college
i am not a member of the college or it's executive or BOD
i have not supported the college financially
the college does not currently have a single member other than the executive and BOD
the college does not currently have any jurisdiction over any pilot
anyone has the ability to contact the college with their concerns, questions and solutions

OPINION:

TC wishes to offload commercial pilot licensing
Commercial carriers or advocates of commercial carriers could possibly assume this responsibility in the absence of any other interested party
the college intends to assume this responsibility with a BOD, Executive and membership made up of pilots instead of commercial carriers or their advocates

QUESTION:

would you prefer that your employer was responsible for your license or would you prefer that a college that you helped create and are a member of were responsible for your license?

do you think that licensing standards would increase or decrease if commercial carriers were responsible for them?

how about if a college made up of pilots were responsible?

[mattedfred]

mattedfred, we've bantered back and forth on this subject for a while now. Both on the open forums and by PM's. I respect your opinion, but you just nailed the one reason I find to disagree with you. ALPA. ALPA members don't NEED a "college". It's the non-unionized pilots that really need some form of protection. 703/704 non-unionized grunts could really use something. I see NO indication the "college" is headed anywhere in that direction?
Cheers

I fear that you either misunderstood or have misinterpreted the intended responsibilities of this college. It is not a union. It will not set WAWCON for any pilot group. It hopes to be responsible for licensing, something which every pilot (ALPA member or not) relies on.

I have observed that ALPA kindly sticks it's nose in anywhere it sees fit if it improves the safety and security of our profession. In my opinion, ALPA's interventions often affect positive change for the entire industry rather than solely for ALPA members. If it weren't for ALPA, where would initiatives such as this turn to for resources? Would you provide the start-up capitol for such an initiative even before you knew what the heck they would do with it?

[Doc]

Due to the fact that various members of AvCanada were aware of the College initiative almost from the time of inception, we have been privy to discussion and information in advance of just about anyone other than those directly involved. It makes absolutely no sense for the College to send information in the ASL until such a time as they are prepared to receive membership applications. Mr. Bechtel was courteous enough to attempt to answer some questions here, but how can you be surprised that he ceased participation when there were so many unprofessional responses to his posts? I hope he'll be back, but we've seen a lot of long time posters disappear - or take time out - because some of you are unable to maintain decorum. Enough about that.

What an absolute and utter sack of shit! "unprofessional responses to his posts..." Pretty thin skinned. He'll do well.

"because some of you are unable to maintain decorum...." Oh, booo bloody hooooo!

"Makes no sense to send out information.....until they are prepared to receive membership applications..." Where DO we all sign up??? I for one will be rushing to the front of the line to join a group that has NO interest (disagree?? SHOW ME!) in the little guy, 704/705 operators, and who are made up of unionized airline employees.

George Sugar summed it up well in this remark"

2. An enterprise that seeks to represent everyone usually ends up representing no one well. An enterprise that begins with too many unclearly stated goals usually does not serve any goal well. These two taken together usually end up making things worse.

[Cat Driver]

If it weren't for ALPA, where would initiatives such as this turn to for resources? Would you provide the start-up capitol for such an initiative even before you knew what the heck they would do with it?

This college that is trying to get approved is funded by ALPA now?

[Dust Devil]

because some of you are unable to maintain decorum. Enough about that.

Can you point to the posts? I thought all questions directed to Colin were quite well done actually. Maybe I missed something. Or maybe your comment is directed at myself or others who had the gall to ask questions.

[Ogee]

I wonder how it will all play out?

How it will play out depends on your politics and whether you see that face as half black or half white.

[Ogee]

perhaps i need to simplify my statements:

FACTS:

i have not volunteered for the college
i am not a member of the college or it's executive or BOD
i have not supported the college financially
the college does not currently have a single member other than the executive and BOD
the college does not currently have any jurisdiction over any pilot but seeks to have such jurisdiction without consent by lobbying for legislative change
anyone has the ability to contact the college with their concerns, questions and solutions and if we don't, we will be considered to be in agreement

OPINION:

TC wishes to offload commercial pilot licensing Does it? Where did you hear that? Are you sure that TC doesn't have international responsibilities to make licensing a government, rather than a private, function?
Commercial carriers or advocates of commercial carriers could possibly assume this responsibility in the absence of any other interested party. Hmmmm, this assumes that TC has become a disinterested party does it? And how transportable a license would we have if it was based on a curriculum and standards tailored to certain commercial carriers?the college intends to assume this responsibility with a BOD, Executive and membership made up of pilots instead of commercial carriers or their advocates So its the lesser evil then?
QUESTION:

would you prefer that your employer was responsible for your license or would you prefer that a college that you helped create and are a member of were responsible for your license? Actually, I'd prefer that a government body responsible to the electorate and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was responsible for my license. I wouldn't mind if a private organization offered voluntary certification beyond core licensing standards and if consumer choice of carrier became heavily weighted towards carriers that employ pilots who went the extra mile to gain those additional certifications.

do you think that licensing standards would increase or decrease if commercial carriers were responsible for them? Commercial carriers aren't going to be responsible for them. There is as much chance of that happening as me becoming the next Pope. But its a good scare tactic.
how about if a college made up of pilots were responsible? I'd expect they'd do as every other self regulating body does. Create manufactured complexity and barriers to entry to the profession in order to reduce supply and increase their own income. And they, like lawyers, would say that to allow those who don't meet their standards is dangerous.

[snoopy]

The only agency I want in charge of my federal, and internationally recognized documents - is the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!

I maintain that this WASP, elitist group of airline pilots is slithering around behind the scenes, with their own interests and hidden agendas as their priority - they do not in any way represent the masses.

Any legitimate group truly concerned with improving the industry to everyone's benefit would be transparent, accountable and demographically representative of the groups they seek to benefit. Again, this is not the case with this College.

And don't hand me this crap about some of the founders having once been in 703/704. The fact that some, like most in the airline industry, had to briefly step into the repugnant quagmire of the bush flying industry because it was a required right of passage in their quest to don their silk scarf and shiny jet is simply false assurance that they are "one of us". The truth is they left the scene so fast the mosquitoes and black flies didn't even get a chance to suck some DNA out of them.

The airlines are only a very small part of the aviation industry - how about fire-fighting, air ambulance, search and rescue, surveillance, airborne research, survey, skydiving, air traffic reporting, ag-flying, police service, business and corporate aviation - to name a few. Not to mention the helicopter industry which aside from being largely represented in the above examples, encompasses so many other specialty areas it would take a whole page to list them all. Pilots in these airline-alternate categories often make a career in their specific area of interest.

With respect to bush flying - whether it be general charter work in the north, or the various commuter operations - many people enjoy the flying and make a career out of it. Those that do generally have a far different priorities than those who briefly passed through because they had to.

End rant.

Kirsten B.

[Cat Driver]

I maintain that this WASP, elitist group of airline pilots is slithering around behind the scenes, with their own interests and hidden agendas as their priority - they do not in any way represent the masses.

What more do you need as proof that their agenda is elitist than reading their own goals?

Open Jump-seat travel (RAIC holder privileges)

I'm betting that is just the tip of the iceberg, and the very fact they brazenly put that forth shows their contempt for the average person in aviation in my opinion.

[snoopy]

And for the record, in case somebody thinks I have something against airline pilots - I have nothing but the greatest respect for those that make their careers flying the big jets - the same as I would respect anyone else employed in the aviation industry. I just resent what seems to be going on with this particular group of gentlemen.

It doesn't matter what area of the sky you ply, as long as you uphold high standards of professionalism, airmanship, safety, and ethics.

Cheers,
Kirsten B.

[florch]

Some observations:

1. To have an adversarial approach is to guarantee that you will find an adversary. Not everyone that disagrees is an adversary, nor is it wise or productive to take disagreement as a personal attack.

Agreed

2. An enterprise that seeks to represent everyone usually ends up representing no one well. An enterprise that begins with too many unclearly stated goals usually does not serve any goal well. These two taken together usually end up making things worse.

Those who would oppose an enterprise of this nature are highly organized. Maybe it is prudent to be in position before revealing one's goal so it isn't scotched in the egg.

3. The reason that someone is at your door usually has more to do with their needs than yours.

And most that come to my door are sent packing, but now and then you get a really good deal on a vacuum or set of encyclopedias. Not to come across as Socratic, but the best leader is not the one that desires power, but who feels that if he does not take power something worse will happen.

4. Line pilots will not in general be compensated or employed in the same way as doctors or lawyers in Canada as long as the seniority system exists in aviation, or conversely it is absent from the legal and medical professions. Doctors and lawyers have almost complete mobility to offer their services to any interested client. They negotiate positions, terms and pay according to demonstrated ability and experience, and are most certainly not always forced into the most junior lowest-paying position when joining a firm. When they move from firm to firm they tend to take their clients with them, and usually retain at least their previous pay and standing; they do not give their highest paying clients to less experienced practitioners at the new firm and take on clerking/interning duties at the commensurate lower pay rate. Further, many doctors and lawyers are individual incorporated entities responsible for getting their own clients and paying their own expenses and costs; they are also usually paid directly by the clients or a government agency, rather than being employees of a profit-seeking company. Pilots in Canada are employed according to a system that bears little resemblance to this method. One system is not necessarily better than the other, but they are not fundamentally compatible.

I agree entirely. In fact, I believe that if the seniority system isn't an industry invention, industry is certainly responsible for its gleeful proliferation and extension into Captain's lists. It has a lot to do with the cost of capital - out of reach of individuals to start an aviation enterprise - $100's of millions, vs a law or medical office - $100's of thousands. So, necessarily, he who controls the golden type rating, controls the rules.
That said, just because one part of a system doesn't fit a model, does not mean that a model is without benefit.

5. Within, or beyond, existing employment standards laws, a disinterested third-party cannot tell an employer who to hire or fire, and how much to pay them. Restricting an otherwise qualified person’s ability to obtain or maintain employment of their choice, because they do not meet some arbitrary standard not based in regulation, opens the door to legal action and Charter challenges.

The opportunity for professionals to have a seat at the table where decisions that affect their livelihood are made seems like a given. Professional pilots should have some say in aviation regulation, period. Transport is an IATA puppet.

6. I am always wary when someone seeks to limit the freedom to negotiate my own terms with the purported aim of protecting my best interests when: they haven’t asked me what my best interests are, the initial framework is formulated without the broad participation of the people it professes to serve, the rules and scope are settled by the time I learn of them, and I am compelled to join without having an initial vote on the concept. Some form of representation may be appropriate to a situation, but one should be directly involved in that decision.

Pilots currently have no freedom to negotiate the terms of their own employment. Reference:Jetsgo, starting wage at almost any airline. With any enterprise an initial direction must be set to define the purpose. Democracy can only follow.

I offer these points purely as a licenced flight crew member employed in this country; please do not assume that I have one position or another on the matter. However, as it is currently presented, such an organization seems to be strictly a balance-of-power exercise that would likely only replace one unaccountable task-master with another.

I appreciate you sharing your view George. Your intelligent argument raises the level of discussion. My counterpoints are off the cuff and represent only my own views, which I nonetheless feel are valid. In its most base form, even balance of power is not an unjust goal. Companies have management, pilots have unions. Industry has IATA, our profession deserves a seat at the table. We are the eyes and ears and muscle that makes aviation work, why would we continue to be ignored?