Instructor bashers your wish has come true

[Big Pistons Forever]

Happy days the production of those pesky incompetent troublemaker Class 4's seems to be at an all time low. With the continuous huge hiring at all the regional airlines using a stint of instructing as the start to a flying career is rapidly becoming optional as new CPL's are now going straight to the right seat.

As a result production of new Class 4's appears to be at an all time low.

[trey kule]

Indeed, happy days.
We may hopefully, see only those who wish to become instructors as a destination take that route.
And we may see the end of the " we pay you only when you bill" days behind us.
It is time FtU's took some risk when hiring instructors.

And that too, is good news.

[fixedpitch]

Hi BPF

Do you have any stats on that? Just curious if that's anecdotal or if you have TC numbers?

[Cat Driver]

The market will determine where this goes.

Maybe the pay will rise above starvation wages and attract those who want to instruct rather than use it as time building.

[rookiepilot]

The market will determine where this goes..

Free market at work.

Edit.

Agree with below. Does that change at class 3?

[Cat Driver]

One of the biggest drawbacks to flight training in Canada is unlike in the USA where a licensed flight instructor can teach ab-inito students without needing to have a FTU-OC, in Canada it is not allowed.

T.C. issues a license then does not allow the person to use it.

So we don't really have a free market in flight training in Canada, so I guess I was wrong about my market forces having any real effect.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Hi BPF

Do you have any stats on that? Just curious if that's anecdotal or if you have TC numbers?

Anecdotal at the moment but it sure seems that TC in my region is doing a lots less Class 4 initial rides lately. I have also never seen so many FTU's advertising for instructors.

[CpnCrunch]

One of the biggest drawbacks to flight training in Canada is unlike in the USA where a licensed flight instructor can teach ab-inito students without needing to have a FTU-OC, in Canada it is not allowed.

T.C. issues a license then does not allow the person to use it.

So we don't really have a free market in flight training in Canada, so I guess I was wrong about my market forces having any real effect.

I have to agree with this. I much prefer using freelance instructors. FTU instructors tend to be very hit and miss. TC could solve the instructor shortage by letting instructors use their own planes. As long as their planes are commercially maintained, I don't see the problem. There's a lot of freelance instructors out there that have given up due to lack of revenue

[photofly]

It's not possible for an aircraft to be commercially registered unless the registrant has an OC. And "commercial" maintenance means using only the AMO that is specified in the TC approved paperwork. AMOs are far between and extremely expensive, not least because of the extra paperwork they have to keep. Achieving commercial maintenance standards is actually about 80% of the difficulty and cost of running an FTU. (We can discuss the other 80% later.)

The US requirement is for 100 hour inspections but they can still be done by individual A&P/IA mechanics.

[Cat Driver]

Bottom line is the USA is far more business friendly than Canada.

For the last part of my working life I operated under FAA part 91 and never had a problem, not to mention I did not have a large chunk of my earnings extorted to feed the socialist parasites in Canada.

[trey kule]

And "commercial" maintenance means using only the AMO that is specified in the TC approved paperwork. AMOs are far between and extremely expensive

I am certainly not current on the regulations, so I stand to be corrected, but we used to be able to get " any TC approved AMO" written into out MCM. It came about when TC began demanding a PRM.

But yes, maintenance is an issue.I cannot see a change because TC is not going to initiate it, and neither are the FTU's who would suffer if we went to a US system. Maybe COPA?? The rwo tiered instruction system in the US , I thought is a good idea, if not super well implemented.

[CpnCrunch]

It's not possible for an aircraft to be commercially registered unless the registrant has an OC.

Yes, that's the problem. I'm saying that TC should not require an OC.

And "commercial" maintenance means using only the AMO that is specified in the TC approved paperwork.

I meant just maintaining to commercial standards (e.g. 50 hour checks, on condition, etc), or perhaps going to any AMO as TK suggests. An AMO is more expensive, but not prohibitively so, as long as you make sure you know what work they're planning to do so they don't suddenly spring you with bill for a $10k annual.

The US requirement is for 100 hour inspections but they can still be done by individual A&P/IA mechanics.

Perhaps that would suffice. I was just suggesting commercial maintenance to keep TC happy. Presumably they would want some reassurance that freelance instructors aren't going to be dropping out of the sky with poorly maintained planes if they're going to allow them to operate without an OC.

[Cat Driver]

I have taken a lot of flight training in the USA and the quality of instruction was excellent.

By a lot I mean two complete licenses from start to finish.

A commercial helicopter pilot license and a commercial gyroplane pilot license which was more difficult to get in my opinion.

[photofly]

I think the AMO requirement is a problem: most fields don't have one, so if you're a lone instructor in, say, Owen Sound, and only an AMO is allowed to change your flat tire, you're down until you truck someone in.

The details need some work, but yes, some relaxation of the maintenance requirement would make a huge difference.

[marakii]

Happy days the production of those pesky incompetent troublemaker Class 4's seems to be at an all time low. With the continuous huge hiring at all the regional airlines using a stint of instructing as the start to a flying career is rapidly becoming optional as new CPL's are now going straight to the right seat.

As a result production of new Class 4's appears to be at an all time low.

It doesn't matter schools will still try and use you and pay you crappy wages. I always wondered why are instructors hired as "contract pilots " and not as employees of the school, so they can let you go on the spot if you're not doing well?

[Broken Slinky]

Hi BPF

Do you have any stats on that? Just curious if that's anecdotal or if you have TC numbers?

Anecdotal at the moment but it sure seems that TC in my region is doing a lots less Class 4 initial rides lately. I have also never seen so many FTU's advertising for instructors.

We're seeing a drain on instructors as well. "Fresh" commercial pilots are being scooped up with less hours than their predecessors. Instructors that we do have tend to be with us for a shorter time before moving on. Talking with the folks at ATAC, they're hearing the same story across Canada.

[photofly]

I always wondered why are instructors hired as "contract pilots " and not as employees of the school, so they can let you go on the spot if you're not doing well?

It's cheaper: they don't need to provide benefits or pay insurance.

It's not obvious what not doing "well", as an instructor, is, from the FTUs point of view.. For instance being a poor instructor taking extra hours to train a student earns them more money.

It's part of a huge contradiction at the heart of the flight training business: the faster you train your students the less money the school earns from you and the less valuable you are. There are things that should correct for that, like paying higher prices for "quicker" instructors, but in practice that doesn't seem to happen. Almost all students seem to focus on the per-hour price when it comes to picking a flight school. Hours flown is a simple metric and that seems to translate heads of students that learning to fly is ONLY a matter of logging enough hours, and therefore the cheaper those hours are the better.

[MarkyMark90]

For instance being a poor instructor taking extra hours to train a student earns them more money.

It's part of a huge contradiction at the heart of the flight training business: the faster you train your students the less money the school earns from you and the less valuable you are.

We also see the opposite situation, which is more dangerous... FTUs with students from foreign countries (like China) are pushing the instructors to send their students to flight tests and written exams even if the instructor thinks his student is not ready. I've had many instructors coming to me and talk about how hard it is for them do to their job based on the fact that the FTU isn't respecting the learning curve of each student. Contracts with Chinese airlines are based on a fixed rate and the less hours it takes to bring them to fully mature pilots, the most money the FTU will make.

[5x5]

Like any business, running a flight school is much more complicated than simple, singular proclamations like "pay more and only hire career instructors". However, as the internet doesn't lend itself to lengthy discussions I just want to add a few things to this thread.

The US average for a Private licence is in the 60-75 hours range (AOPA website) which interestingly sounds a whole lot like Canada. And from what I read and see, most flight training in the US is provided by schools very similar in structure to Canadian schools.

Lowest cost is not the only factor new students consider. Look at any airport or city where there are more than 1 school and the cheapest hourly rate school is not by default the busiest. Many students pick schools by reputation or from a recommendation from an existing pilot they know - relative, friend, or some sort of other personal connection. So doing a good job is important just like any other business.

As for the pay more thing, well I haven't seen many school owners living the life of the rich and famous. I would be interested to know if any of the other members here know of an actual person who has become wealthy running a small, private flight school.

Since flight training is typically a business where students pay by the hour, instructors get paid the same way. Costs have to be managed on a similar basis to income. The college style programs where students pay tuition up front which guarantees revenue, have instructors that are paid a salary and usually have more benefits. But the student also pays more for an equivalent licence and takes longer to complete.

[trey kule]

]Since flight training is typically a business where students pay by the hour, instructors get paid the same way. Costs have to be managed on a similar basis to income

I love the logic here. When my car is being worked on, I pay by the hour. When I call a plumber I pay by the hour,
These businesses manage costs by making sure their employees are kept busy.
fTUs, on the other hand, keep a few instructors more than they need, because it costs them nothing. They dont have to be efficient.
An employee limits there potential in exchange for a guarantee from the company. Contract employees need to charge some 2.5 to 3x what they need to earn.. Paying an instructor $15 an hour as a contract employee equates to. About $5.00 an hour. And demanding they do free work like cleaning and polishing is disgusting.
It will change as instructors grow scarce

Btw. In California this pay only for billable hours is illegal. Instructors are paid a salary for " duty time".
They make pretty decent salaries, and the schools bust their chops to get the schedule filled so instructors are not sitting around...there are restrictions on sending them home as well.

[rookiepilot]

As for the pay more thing, well I haven't seen many school owners living the life of the rich and famous. I would be interested to know if any of the other members here know of an actual person who has become wealthy running a small, private flight school..

I couldn't ever see putting capital into an FTU. Far, far too many headaches for my taste, and far too skinny margins. But to each his own, if you love it enough, suppose that's worth something.

My response to anyone criticizing how businesses are being run is always the same:

Start your own, and do it better.

You can never, ever regulate business to give every single dime to the employees, the taxman, suppliers, and leaving behind no return for those who've invested their capital and sweat equity.

Try, as different governments do, push too hard, and one of two things will happen. The businesses will shut down, or they will move. Businesses simply won't stay open , and provide jobs, unless it makes sense. That can't be socialized, though we've seen many Govts try.

[maturepilot83]

.

[Cat Driver]

I couldn't ever see putting capital into an FTU. Far, far too many headaches for my taste,

I have owned and managed a lot of different businesses during my lifetime but nothing even comes close to the utter frustration of owning a flight school.

Dealing with Transport Canada has to be experienced to be believed.

Sometimes you get really good people to deal with, and then the next one is stupid beyond belief and no matter how bizarre their interpretation of the rules is their superiors will back them up almost every time.

Some of the people that are on their pay roll are impossible for a normal business owner to deal with.

But at least they are a place for someone who just can not make it flying in commercial aviation to retire without having to produce anything of value to society....kind of a professional welfare position.

[Black_Tusk]

Bottom line is the USA is far more business friendly than Canada.

For the last part of my working life I operated under FAA part 91 and never had a problem, not to mention I did not have a large chunk of my earnings extorted to feed the socialist parasites in Canada.

I still wonder why you are in Canada if you hate it so much.

[Cat Driver]

I still wonder why you are in Canada if you hate it so much.

Well I will try and explain it to you.

My parents moved to Canada in 1943 as landed immigrants and became citizens in 1949 which made me a Canadian citizen.

I lived and worked in Canada up until 1996 when I started working in other countries and managed to earn enough money as a pilot to retire in relative comfort in 2005.

I have a pile of passports with working visas in many, many countries and some of those countries were really nice places to live and for a time I was thinking of moving to one of them, however my wife was not willing to move because all our family live in Canada.

I do not hate Canada, I live quite comfortably here but I have lived in enough countries to understand that Canada is a socialist country and as such there are a lot of things that could be better.

Time passes and we as humans tend to stick to that which we have grown up with.

For me time is running out and I am content to stay here until time for me ends.

When I want to go to another country all I have to do is decide which one and make arrangements to go and where to stay, at the moment we are thinking of going to either Belize or Costa Rica sometime in November.

So that basically is my answer as to why I choose to stay in Canada.

Aviation was a good career for me as I chose specialised kinds of flying which paid really well, one of my last contracts paid me as much in two weeks as some pilots make in a year.

There does that clear up your question Black_Tusk?