Traing Bond Opinion Question

FrankD · Post by **FrankD** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:55 am

Situation 1:

You front the moneyfor the PPC/Type rating, company pays you back monthly, company goes tits up you're hooped

Situation 2:

You sign agreement saying if you leave before "X" number of months you pay a pro rated chunk of training cost. Company pays all training costs up front. Company goes tits up, no obligation on you.

I see why people are offended by option one but option two seems pretty reasonable to me. If someone sees a problem with 2 I'd like to hear your thoughts on it.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 8:59 am

It's nice to see a brand new fresh topic on the board...thanks Frank.

FrankD · Post by **FrankD** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:08 am

Doc,

Nice to see a non bitter reply to a question!

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:18 am

I'm not bitter. At least on most topics. But this one is not a favorite of mine. Generally though I try to be helpful. You've caught me on a couple of bad days, I guess. I just dont like to see pilots getting the shaft. And, I guess, I'm not afraid to say so. That's not being bitter. That's just a fact.

godsrcrazy · Post by **godsrcrazy** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:18 am

Frank the only thing you can count on here is Doc will always be bitter about training bonds and Cat will be bitter about transport canada.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:26 am

Funny thing is, the "Doc" has never come across any kind of bond. I've always had jobs that didn't require them, or I came in with the exper they required. I'm against them for you guys. But some are bitter I feel this way...it aint for me guys! It's just that this industry is like no other. I feel for the guys who put up 30K for Jetsgo....could have been me....but nobody would lend me 30K.....lucky them! And to see all the sheep here just write cheques, when, if they all stuck together.....well, I'm not getting into it again.....'cause I gave up!

FrankD · Post by **FrankD** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:50 am

Doc,

I wasn't trying to re-hash an old topic, I agree it's been done a lot here. My only question is what problem people would have with a set up like the second situation. There is no money out your pocket unless you break a contract, so why do people find the idea so offensive?

Turkey · Post by **Turkey** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:07 pm

Possibly, the more we talk about it, the better. I suspect some young pilots didn't even realize there were two different ways of doing it. A training agreement shouldn't mean giving the company any money.

And the owners need to hear over and over again that taking money from their staff is wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

The fact that there are so many topics about this same topic, though a bit annoying, is only a sign that young pilots are starting to think about this more seriously rather than just bend over and take what the company is "offering." ... I hope....

Canoehead · Post by **Canoehead** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:24 pm

With the amount of hiring and movment going on right now, I wouldn't go near any company requiring a bond.

Then again, you gotta look out for #1.

I know that's not the point of the thread perhaps, just my 2 cents.

bcflyer · Post by **bcflyer** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 1:33 pm

The problem with #2 from a company point of view is that most of the time the agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on. I know of several people that walked away from this type of training bond and when the company tried to come after them they claimed they left for safety reasons. (total crap in both cases) The courts threw the agreements out and the pilots went on their merry way while the company was out the money.

oldncold · Post by **oldncold** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:08 pm

OPTION 3 partner ship .

spilt the cost 50/ 50 company pay the other 50percent over a year .

hey just athought. pilot get the fancy type rating and employer gets
a year.

pilots shouldnt have to pay though for a hoe ppc to freeze the jewels at -40

SplitS · Post by **SplitS** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 pm

Or the way my company does it:

1 year, non-prorated, they take out a loan - in YOUR name, you just pay the interest. The $$ is placed in a GIC. After your year is up they pay back the loan.
Leave one day before your year is up and guess what? You owe the whole wad!!

And its legal.
Nice eh?

NorthernDuck · Post by **NorthernDuck** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:34 pm

Options #1 as stated above; in my opinion, total crap.

I don't know where I've heard it, and I'm probably going to put my foot in my mouth here, but it is up to the company to provide the required training for each position. When one starts an aviation career, I don't know of many flight schools which have trained people proper procedures for working the ramp or dock, working a dispatch office, etc. Later in the career, again one must be further trained for more advanced positions such as large jets. This should be the responsibility of the employer.

With that said, I've seen new guys get their PPC and run. Of course the employer now has to protect their envestment. If you are the type of person who has no problem running with that new PPC, then you should be willing to pay out the required training costs left in the agreement. But at the same time, the employer should be asking themselves why are people wanting to run away so fast. Perhaps they should consider other ways in trying to keep experienced personnel rather than scaring them into paying if they should decide to leave.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:50 pm

If I ever run an op, you have my word as a gentleman, I will not charge you, or hold you in debt for training. You will give me your word, as a gentleman/lady, that you will remain in my employ for at least a year. If you are called by a major, I will not hold that against you, as that would be the cost of doing business. If you were to make a lateral move requireing the PPC, or trining, which you received from me, I will not give you a very good reference.
Now this is the direction I'd like to see this industry take. Perhaps it's too late. But it would be nice...this IS the way it used to be. And history is bound to repeat itself.

Wasn't Me · Post by **Wasn't Me** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:52 pm

It all comes down to honesty and integrity on both parts. In the position I;m in now I am planning a training bond with some work time. Work a few months prove reliability and split it from there.

And yes the problem is that both sides like to walk away from their obligations.

Doc don't give up yet.

Cool Rythms! · Post by **Cool Rythms!** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 9:05 pm

I've always been against bonds. But if I had no choice, I would obviously go with option 2. I will never put myself in debt for any company, no matter how much they try to spice things up and make it look good. I had friends at Jetsgo, who were constantly encouraging me to apply. And I constantly kept saying no. Where is Jetsgo now!

Oh yeah, by the way, well said Doc.

AEROMONKEY · Post by **AEROMONKEY** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 10:29 pm

I'm glad i just pump the gas

Major Bedhead · Post by **Major Bedhead** » Tue Oct 18, 2005 11:42 pm

On a par with what Doc has said ... and apologies to those who've already read this,

Two years ago I was a instructor doing multi work for a flightschool ... things happened that made me no longer want to work for this company.

One of my IFR students wound up being the owner of an agricultural application company (one of two in province) and appreciated how I treated him during the IFR, and offered me a job for the upcoming season.

I did freelance work in the meantime and then started my training.

I did a number of hours in a 7eca (citabria) dual with an experienced pilot of the company, till we got up to what the insurance company needed then was given the reins of the Pawnee for an additional period of time with heavier and heavier loads.

The time for what I flew that year was over 50 hours, and much of that was with a pilot of the company on board.

I didn't pay for anything up front, nor was anything asked for.

Needless to say I looked forward to the next year of work.

This year I flew all summer primarily for the company, but on days off or between cannery needs I still did freelance IFR work.

I did make money for my employer, however he was good enough to have given me all the training he had done, so on the basis of a gentlemans agreement I am looking forward to doing one more season with him next year.

If I am fortunate enough to pass muster with either Jazz, AC or now WJ this coming winter I have a problem ...

I have to tell the best boss I have ever had I need to leave for pastures which will hopefully be better for my new family ...

Two weeks ago my boss called me and we spoke of just this.

For a major airline, he wishes me the best and looks forward to working with me after age 60 or when I get sick of the hectic life of terminals.

Without boring everyone to death, I paid nothing up front, nor nothing during training and didn't sign a bond.

I wouldn't leave this employer for anything less than WJ nor AC ... and it's because of how he treats his employees. If they do call I wouldn't screw him with less than a months notice ... more if it was in season.

For those wondering about agricultural work, insurance is kind of harsh, I had 2300 hrs TT 2120 PIC, 495 MPIC.

I said it before and I repeat ... the reason there are good operators out there is because there are honest people who work for them.

apologies for spelling .. it's been a long day

pushyboss · Post by **pushyboss** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:25 am

With the current round of hiring going on by AC and it's connectors, training agreements are going to become more common not less. I hear lot's of whining by pilots that training is a company responsibility. They are correct. It is however an employee responsibility to "man up" to some sort of comittment for the money invested. There is no other business on the planet that invests so heavily in training on employees who have so little comittment to stay. The vast majority would jump ship in a heartbeat if a marginally heavier aircraft position were to appear on their horizon. Many pilots would jump ship to make a lateral move because they like living in Calgary better than Edmonton.

I have said it before and I'll say it again...training agreements are a result of a lack of ethical credibility by many pilots. Many company's spent thousands on training only to repeat the process 30 or 60 days later. Case in point. I went on initial Lear 35 training with an operator in the mid 90's. The fellow that I was sent with was also a new hire with the same company. We completed our sim, checkride, and circuits. Within 7 days of the completion of training, and with a brand new PPC, he quit and went to work for the competition. The company up until thay point required no training agreement, only a handshake. Guess what, training contracts were in place inside a week of his resignation. Ruined it for all who would follow.

Sorry... agreements, contracts, and bonds are hear to stay.

pushyboss · Post by **pushyboss** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:25 am

and another thing......

godsrcrazy · Post by **godsrcrazy** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:56 am

Well said Pushy Boss.
Doc I wish all people would do things your way. I do not own a company probably never will but I do now a few owners and have had a chance to discuss this issue with them. Unfortunatly until I walk a mile in their shoes how can we judge. They all seem to have the same type of story as Pushy Boss. And very few of us have the Ethics of Major Bedhead.
Just look at the post's on this forum how many are truly happy with what they do. Out of 5683 members on this forum not 10 of them would say who the best company's are to work for. If Air Canada and West Jet are so great one would think we would be flooded with responses I am sure there are a few Air Canada and West jet pilots on this site.
Let's face it we would eat our own here if it would serve our own purpose.
I am sorry for the rant here but honestly I am sick of getting things shoved down my throat because of what others in this industry do.
So now we all suffer for the price of a few. Why is it we can post the names of company's that we feel burn us but not our fellow employees.

Post by **avcanada** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:28 am

I am with you on this Doc.

I have not, nor will I ever accept a job with financial strings.

springjob · Post by **springjob** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:34 am

I just accepted a job where the boss told me" we are investing 20K on your training, we just need your word".
The last thing I will do is screwing this company since the simple fact they trust me means that they certainly respect their employees...the end of a long tunnel!

NorthernDuck · Post by **NorthernDuck** » Wed Oct 19, 2005 4:40 pm

And Springjob, that is the way it should be. One has to earn respect. If the employer shows respect to me, I'll show it back. If he is honest to me, he can count on nothing less than my word!

grouchy · Post by **grouchy** » Fri Oct 21, 2005 4:04 am

godscrazy "Out of 5683 members on this forum"
This is not intended to off track this fascinating thread, but my guess is a much lower number due to multiple,and inactive, user names.