BEWARE $30,000 BOND FOR 3 YRS

[renelevesque]

So just so we are clear...Transat pilots are happy being the Pirates of the Atlantic?

If you get your ATPL you could apply and find out.

Don't need it...this pilot doesn't fly for peanuts

I got my FAA ATP. See you on the NAT Tracks, Ahoy Matey!

[CaptDukeNukem]

So just so we are clear...Transat pilots are happy being the Pirates of the Atlantic?

If you get your ATPL you could apply and find out.

You misspelled PPL

Lol. Are you sure you’re not confusing the flair zero time to 737 with a requirement of a PSTAR. Or is that part of the $150k

[330heavy]

Really sad that certain individuals from a certain larger airline, guilty of setting the low wage standard, come here with a holier than thou attitude. Rather than working together, helping eachother while now in the same union; they rather take the toxic, unproductive road because that's who they are. I really hope AC up's the psyc eval qualifications for those types of losers... they aren't as anonymous as they think they are! Thankfully, most at AC are very bright and know what needs to be done and how to go about it, I have many friends there, and I'll be there to support them if it goes to the picket line. So I ask those posting here with their hypocrisy, would you do the same in return? Are you a team player or just a solo wanker?

[1000tolevel]

[quote=DanWEC post_id=1276559 time=1694741399 user_id=28109]
A small handful of these guys who sport more usernames than pubes have degraded this forum to dust. It's a real shame.

I've been on here for somewhere around 15 years. Got my first job through a member. The arguments and debates then were epic and relevant, and between people with 20k hours about TC, procedures, etc, people looking for tips on their first float jobs. Now look at this garbage. Honestly people, if you have to blow off steam, go to the gym or watch some German porn.

I'm not joking when I say there is a diagnosable personality disorder that manifests itself in garnering negative attention online. But on the plus side for Transat it's clear none of these guys work here, proving what we already know, that we've got a great group of people!
[/quote]

With all due respect DanWEC, from a colleague, you are partly responsible for this 6-pages long river of Neanderthal replies. Stop feeding the trolls. If you removed yourself from this thread, it would be 3-pages shorter. And probably even shorter since the trolls would have nothing to reply to.

Edit #1: Apparently I don’t know how to put the quote in quotation.

[goldeneagle]

A 30 000 bond for 3 years is excessive and goes way past the 'saving training costs if you leave sooner'.

To determine a fair value of a bond for initial training, comparing the training cost of an initial training vs a recurrent training would be a good start, while keeping in mind how long the training is valid.
705 ops have 6 month training events, which some stuff happening yearly. Let's be generous and focus on a 1 year period.

First year costs:
Initial training cost:
- initial GS
- initial sim
- line indoc
6 months recurrent training
year 1 salary

Second year costs:
2 x 6 months recurrent training
year 2 salary

Somebody with more inside knowledge could likely put some numbers on this. Does the difference between these costs exceed 30 000?


If initial training is valued at 30 000 by the company, does that mean people who already have passed the initial training, make 30 000 more than those who haven't?

It's not terribly difficult to quantify those costs, but I dont think you are considering all the costs of on-boarding a new employee correctly.

An airbus type rating from a puppy mill type rating place runs 10 grand us, so call that 15cdn. Reference here:-
https://atpflightschool.com/type-rating ... ating.html

That is quoted as a 10 day course, so it's pretty minimal. If you look at the Flitesafety site, it quotes significantly more time for a course, 4 to 5 weeks., and almost twice as much time in the simulator. Cant imagine that would be less than 20cdn.

For the sake of some numbers assume a month from 'date of hire' till ' done the course'. So I'm sure the candidate expects to get a paycheque over that time, add a month wages to that cost. Depending on the airline, the gross on that will vary, then ofc the hidden payroll costs that employees dont see which tally up various remittances to CRA etc over and above the deductions you see on the stub. Call that 5 grand by the time the employee has been paid and all remittances have been forwarded, which is about what the number is for a new hire at AC on flat pay.

Most candidates will expect to have lodging provided, and per diems while taking the course, assuming it isn't out of home base. So add in some weeks in a hotel.

then ofc there are a bunch more incidental costs involved in on-boarding a new employee. Should make some allowances for the expenses of the hiring process from application thru till offer letter. That'll tie up a significant amount of time for various employees along the way, which is something that costs the company money. Over and above the course for the airplane, there will be things like company indoctrination etc etc. Somebody is being paid for their time while calling references as just one of those hidden cost examples, there are many more.

I dont think it's unrealistic at all for a company to have invested 30,000 into the employee by the time they reach line status.

As for the ongoing renewals etc, red herring, not relevant, all pilots on the line incur those costs, it's part of the cost of doing business. But it is realistic for a company to expect a return on investment for the initial investment in the employee, and 3 years is not an unrealistic timeframe for amortizing an investment of that magnitude.

A training agreement is a method a company can use to protect an investment, yet still allows them to on board new employees that dont have the means to self finance things like expensive type ratings. The alternative would be to move to the European model where flying becomes a rich kids game because the type rating is required before application, rather than acquire after hiring.

If you have ever paid the bills for a trip to Flitesafety on a much smaller aircraft, including the travel and lodging etc, you would not find 30K at all out of line for the cost of putting somebody thru for an airliner, and you may even question 'can they do it that cheap?'

[digits_]

As for the ongoing renewals etc, red herring, not relevant, all pilots on the line incur those costs, it's part of the cost of doing business. But it is realistic for a company to expect a return on investment for the initial investment in the employee, and 3 years is not an unrealistic timeframe for amortizing an investment of that magnitude.

That's exactly why it's extremely relevant! The initial costs include one 'renewal' so to speak.

If an initial cost would be 30k, and a renewal would also cost 30k, then there is no 'initial' extra cost to a new employee, and there's no amount to bond.

If an initial cost would be 60k and a renewal would cost 30k, then the cost of hiring a new employee is 60k-30k = 30k in direct training costs.

If you want to bond for the initial costs, and claim that it's done to secure initial investments, then it's important to look at what it costs (initial training event) minus what it saves (a recurrent training event).

If you have ever paid the bills for a trip to Flitesafety on a much smaller aircraft, including the travel and lodging etc, you would not find 30K at all out of line for the cost of putting somebody thru for an airliner, and you may even question 'can they do it that cheap?'

Agreed, but the question should be 'does the initial training cost 30k more than a renewal training'. And I don't think that it does, definitely not the Flightsafety part.

[cdnavater]

A 30 000 bond for 3 years is excessive and goes way past the 'saving training costs if you leave sooner'.

To determine a fair value of a bond for initial training, comparing the training cost of an initial training vs a recurrent training would be a good start, while keeping in mind how long the training is valid.
705 ops have 6 month training events, which some stuff happening yearly. Let's be generous and focus on a 1 year period.

First year costs:
Initial training cost:
- initial GS
- initial sim
- line indoc
6 months recurrent training
year 1 salary

Second year costs:
2 x 6 months recurrent training
year 2 salary

Somebody with more inside knowledge could likely put some numbers on this. Does the difference between these costs exceed 30 000?


If initial training is valued at 30 000 by the company, does that mean people who already have passed the initial training, make 30 000 more than those who haven't?

It's not terribly difficult to quantify those costs, but I dont think you are considering all the costs of on-boarding a new employee correctly.

An airbus type rating from a puppy mill type rating place runs 10 grand us, so call that 15cdn. Reference here:-
https://atpflightschool.com/type-rating ... ating.html

That is quoted as a 10 day course, so it's pretty minimal. If you look at the Flitesafety site, it quotes significantly more time for a course, 4 to 5 weeks., and almost twice as much time in the simulator. Cant imagine that would be less than 20cdn.

For the sake of some numbers assume a month from 'date of hire' till ' done the course'. So I'm sure the candidate expects to get a paycheque over that time, add a month wages to that cost. Depending on the airline, the gross on that will vary, then ofc the hidden payroll costs that employees dont see which tally up various remittances to CRA etc over and above the deductions you see on the stub. Call that 5 grand by the time the employee has been paid and all remittances have been forwarded, which is about what the number is for a new hire at AC on flat pay.

Most candidates will expect to have lodging provided, and per diems while taking the course, assuming it isn't out of home base. So add in some weeks in a hotel.

then ofc there are a bunch more incidental costs involved in on-boarding a new employee. Should make some allowances for the expenses of the hiring process from application thru till offer letter. That'll tie up a significant amount of time for various employees along the way, which is something that costs the company money. Over and above the course for the airplane, there will be things like company indoctrination etc etc. Somebody is being paid for their time while calling references as just one of those hidden cost examples, there are many more.

I dont think it's unrealistic at all for a company to have invested 30,000 into the employee by the time they reach line status.

As for the ongoing renewals etc, red herring, not relevant, all pilots on the line incur those costs, it's part of the cost of doing business. But it is realistic for a company to expect a return on investment for the initial investment in the employee, and 3 years is not an unrealistic timeframe for amortizing an investment of that magnitude.

A training agreement is a method a company can use to protect an investment, yet still allows them to on board new employees that dont have the means to self finance things like expensive type ratings. The alternative would be to move to the European model where flying becomes a rich kids game because the type rating is required before application, rather than acquire after hiring.

If you have ever paid the bills for a trip to Flitesafety on a much smaller aircraft, including the travel and lodging etc, you would not find 30K at all out of line for the cost of putting somebody thru for an airliner, and you may even question 'can they do it that cheap?'

For the sake of argument, I will forget that without initial training the plane doesn’t fly, so unless a candidate shows up with a current type rating this cost must be incurred.
This means it IS A COST OF DOING BUSINESS, sorry for yelling but I find this ROI as absolutely ridiculous because the company is not returning the favour. 65,000 is about 43,000 in 2004ish accounting for inflation, Is that what I pilot is worth today with a bond of indentured servitude. If they want to bond then the starting wage should reflect that, 85,000 minimum and then they both get a return on investment, without a decent starting wage it strictly favours the company. Which in return they get pilots leaving during initial training, whether or not they would stay if the starting wages was higher is not easily quantified, you’d have to try it to see.
The argument has always been, the AC starting wage is so low as a form of a bond, that was originally only two years and expanded to four but that was the argument, so you can’t have both.

[ikarus]

The bond should not be a surprise to you because they disclose this to you in the interview.

My question is what is someone already has a type rating with time on type? Should you be bonded for that (full amount) again?

[Yogi21]

Does the bond amount increase in 2024 due to inflation???????

[Romain]

45k 5years

[Babar350]

45k 5years

Interesting

[Romain]

45k 5years

Interesting

Was a joke btw

[Babar350]

45k 5years

Interesting

Was a joke btw

Who knows ...

[Localizer]

FYI - The training bond is no longer .. it’s done, gone, finito!

[digits_]

FYI - The training bond is no longer .. it’s done, gone, finito!

[2112]

FYI - The training bond is no longer .. it’s done, gone, finito!

Nice, the scales are tipping. Wake me up when we start seeing 6 figure signing bonuses.

[RoAF-Mig21]

Does anyone have an up to date pay scale for Transat first year F/Os?

[TFTMB heavy]

Does anyone have an up to date pay scale for Transat first year F/Os?

Search the forum.

[RoAF-Mig21]

Does anyone have an up to date pay scale for Transat first year F/Os?

Search the forum.

I found a post with that YouTube video of that guy I don't care to watch. There are a few links online to "Collective Agreements" but they seem to be out of date. I'll keep looking.

[cdnavater]

Does anyone have an up to date pay scale for Transat first year F/Os?

https://pilotcareercenter.com/Air-Carri ... ir-Transat
I believe this is current

[rudder]

FYI - The training bond is no longer .. it’s done, gone, finito!

It is a seller’s market. This isn’t too much of a surprise.

Now TS will have to get used to some pilots that treat their tenure at TS as a brief stay. That is the nature of the industry.

Pay more. Offer a descent work/life balance. Treat pension benefits with respect, not as simply a detail in a CBA. This formula applies to EVERY CDN 705 carrier that does not want to run short of pilots and as a result fail to execute the commercial schedule.

[RoAF-Mig21]

Does anyone have an up to date pay scale for Transat first year F/Os?

https://pilotcareercenter.com/Air-Carri ... ir-Transat
I believe this is current

Thank you cdnavater.

[TFTMB heavy]

FYI - The training bond is no longer .. it’s done, gone, finito!

It is a seller’s market. This isn’t too much of a surprise.

Now TS will have to get used to some pilots that treat their tenure at TS as a brief stay. That is the nature of the industry.

Pay more. Offer a descent work/life balance. Treat pension benefits with respect, not as simply a detail in a CBA. This formula applies to EVERY CDN 705 carrier that does not want to run short of pilots and as a result fail to execute the commercial schedule.

The short tenure was already an issue. Some were staying because of the bond. They want to attract more pilots but they will also loose a bunch and I don't see this as being a break even situation. Porter will get a few more applications from the training bond being revoked. All this being said it's the right thing to do.

[kiaszceski]

But no pay raise to help people stay?
What's the strategy here?

[cdnavater]

But no pay raise to help people stay?
What's the strategy here?

Baby steps