Didn't want to hijack the King Air thread, and it reminded me of a discussion I had the other day.
A friend said to me, when someone offers to buy a PPC in order to get a job afterwards, this is generally looked down upon by everyone and that person would take on heavy criticism.
Then he asked, when someone offers to buy an instructor rating in order to get a job with that flight school afterwards, why is this very common and generally accepted?
I didn't really have a come back. I'm not a fan of the PPC buying trend either, but when you put these two things side by side... I have to admit they are very similar. Both flight training in order to get job.
What do you think?
Paying for PPC cont'd
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister, North Shore
Most schools would prefer to hire an instructor that their class one has trained. This way they already have completed 25 hours of ground and 30 hours of flight with this person so they have a pretty good idea of how this person is going to act with your customers. Very rarely do flight schools ever guarntee a job upon completion to a student ( I dont promise anything to instructor Candidates). I have found that when you interview instructors that you did not train they can interview well but then are nothing but a pain in the ass when they start work (resistant to change). So the accepted practice is to hire one's own trainees since you can control quality and you only take people who will work well in your operation. Unfortanatly if you sell a job you have to take the person. An Instructor rating is just a rating it should never guarntee a job.
Bobcat, you are correct....bobcat18 wrote:I have found that when you interview instructors that you did not train they can interview well but then are nothing but a pain in the ass when they start work (resistant to change). So the accepted practice is to hire one's own trainees since you can control quality and you only take people who will work well in your operation. Unfortanatly if you sell a job you have to take the person. An Instructor rating is just a rating it should never guarntee a job.
But with the logic of "training" your own, wouldn't it make more sense to have someone pay for their PPC then to steal a PPC'd guy from the competitor? But, I guess it works well with the ramp too, since you'll see how they work and if you should put them on the line...
and DHQ, who can the instructor piss off? Other instructors, and that's about it. The funny thing is that many of these schools will put him on dispatch for a period of time anyways before he's allowed to get students or what have you. So, sure they bought a job, but they still end up "paying their dues," some time...
-
PilotFlying
- Rank 3
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 8:29 pm
- Location: As close to home as the # gets me...
An instructor rating is just that - a rating, which is an addition to the qualifications on your licence, as is a night rating, multi rating, or instrument rating - all of which I'm sure noone disputes paying for on your own.
True, a PPC also adds a qualification to your licence. But it is a very specialized qualification that is usually particular to the operator. Sure, you are now qualified on that type for any airline of your choosing, but the transferability is still more limited than a rating.
In my mind, any expansion of your licence in the form of a higher licence or rating is justified on your own tab. And training specific to the equipment operated by your employer should be on your employer's tab.
Regards,
True, a PPC also adds a qualification to your licence. But it is a very specialized qualification that is usually particular to the operator. Sure, you are now qualified on that type for any airline of your choosing, but the transferability is still more limited than a rating.
In my mind, any expansion of your licence in the form of a higher licence or rating is justified on your own tab. And training specific to the equipment operated by your employer should be on your employer's tab.
Regards,
Don't like it? Don't read it.
I think the difference is fundamentally this.
A person with a commercial license possessess the necessary (if minimum) experience to become an instructor.
The person with a bare commercial license who thinks they can jump into a king air or whatever is out of touch with reality. No one mentions to those that sign up for the first officer programs that they will pretty much be first officers for the rest of their career. Any charter operator will tell you about the resumes they see with 2000TT, and 200 PIC....the appicant willing to 'step down' to get the required PIC time. do they come with an attitude? Will they just get their PIC time and then quit? Maybe, maybe not, but there are enough pilots in the pool who have demonstrated a much more realistic understanding of experience and therefore, from an operator's standpoint, why take a chance.
You only have to speak to a few of the captains from the larger charter outfits to confirm how many career co-pilots who wanted to jump start their career are now leaving because they have hit the wall.
Experience is much more than a log book entry. It doesnt really take all that much ability to start the engines and get most planes up and down, but when a few things go sideways they will eat the inexperience pilot (and his unsuspecting pax) alive.
Sorry about the sermon, but I feel a great deal of the accidents we are seeing result from this, I can fly anything with wings attitude.
A person with a commercial license possessess the necessary (if minimum) experience to become an instructor.
The person with a bare commercial license who thinks they can jump into a king air or whatever is out of touch with reality. No one mentions to those that sign up for the first officer programs that they will pretty much be first officers for the rest of their career. Any charter operator will tell you about the resumes they see with 2000TT, and 200 PIC....the appicant willing to 'step down' to get the required PIC time. do they come with an attitude? Will they just get their PIC time and then quit? Maybe, maybe not, but there are enough pilots in the pool who have demonstrated a much more realistic understanding of experience and therefore, from an operator's standpoint, why take a chance.
You only have to speak to a few of the captains from the larger charter outfits to confirm how many career co-pilots who wanted to jump start their career are now leaving because they have hit the wall.
Experience is much more than a log book entry. It doesnt really take all that much ability to start the engines and get most planes up and down, but when a few things go sideways they will eat the inexperience pilot (and his unsuspecting pax) alive.
Sorry about the sermon, but I feel a great deal of the accidents we are seeing result from this, I can fly anything with wings attitude.
Never been to Europe or Asia have you? They're flying Heavies with their CPLs...trey kule wrote: The person with a bare commercial license who thinks they can jump into a king air or whatever is out of touch with reality.
It's just an attitude, that people have who think working the ramp is the morale thing to do, why would the operators argue with that, and then you have "smarter" operators, who say "screw the ramp and give me cash and you can fly."
All these people "complain" about PPC purchasing, and ass kissing and most of the time they're all guilty of the very same thing... Go read the articles/threads about the regency crash, "scared to fly unsafe machines, just building time to get to a safer place, paid for training, not paid to fly" they're the first to say "never work for regency" in the mean time they're working have worked or are applying to regency....
-
Over the Horn
- Rank 5
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 5:28 pm
- Contact:
This is the reality of the situation we get alot of resume's in our mail from guy's that work at reputable larger outfits that have only 200hrs pic & 2-3000hrs tt, most operators I know are reluctant to hire them because they know that in a year they'll be looking for another pilot.No one mentions to those that sign up for the first officer programs that they will pretty much be first officers for the rest of their career. Any charter operator will tell you about the resumes they see with 2000TT, and 200 PIC....the appicant willing to 'step down' to get the required PIC time. do they come with an attitude? Will they just get their PIC time and then quit? Maybe, maybe not, but there are enough pilots in the pool who have demonstrated a much more realistic understanding of experience and therefore, from an operator's standpoint, why take a chance.
yeah there's alot of hypocracy in this industry everyone seams to look at their own past with rose coloured glassesAll these people "complain" about PPC purchasing, and ass kissing and most of the time they're all guilty of the very same thing... Go read the articles/threads about the regency crash, "scared to fly unsafe machines, just building time to get to a safer place, paid for training, not paid to fly" they're the first to say "never work for regency" in the mean time they're working have worked or are applying to regency....
-
2close4missiles
- Rank 0
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 12:50 am
- Location: mainland... for now
I think buying a PPC is going to be the way of the future. Why hire a time builder, pay to train them and then say goodbye when bigger and better things come along? Regency had problems worse than the fact that they didn't pay for your PPC. But other reputable companies work under the same principals (about buying the PPC part). Better yet others work with a training bond. Ultimately it's about insurance (not literally) for the company and with the past and still semi-current state of the industry companies need to protect themselves. Once again it comes back to the pilot. If they get a job, good for them. If they're stuck with a $5000 - $10000 PPC and pumpin gas then they probably should've thought it through a little more. Sorry if this hits a nerve but it's just my thought
***switching to guns***
TK wrote
"Experience is much more than a log book entry. It doesnt really take all that much ability to start the engines and get most planes up and down, but when a few things go sideways they will eat the inexperience pilot (and his unsuspecting pax) alive.
Sorry about the sermon, but I feel a great deal of the accidents we are seeing result from this, I can fly anything with wings attitude."
_______________________________________________
First of all I know I can't fly anything with wings and I want to be able to learn from the experienced.
So are you saying that a 200 hour guy should fly PIC initially (while carrying passengers or a student) to learn the ropes rather than fly Right Seat learning from an experienced Captain? Is there not a reasonable route for an FO without a lot of PIC to transition to the left seat? Don't companies have a way of letting FOs get supervised PIC on dead legs?
"Experience is much more than a log book entry. It doesnt really take all that much ability to start the engines and get most planes up and down, but when a few things go sideways they will eat the inexperience pilot (and his unsuspecting pax) alive.
Sorry about the sermon, but I feel a great deal of the accidents we are seeing result from this, I can fly anything with wings attitude."
_______________________________________________
First of all I know I can't fly anything with wings and I want to be able to learn from the experienced.
So are you saying that a 200 hour guy should fly PIC initially (while carrying passengers or a student) to learn the ropes rather than fly Right Seat learning from an experienced Captain? Is there not a reasonable route for an FO without a lot of PIC to transition to the left seat? Don't companies have a way of letting FOs get supervised PIC on dead legs?
Well if people didnt pay to get an instructor rating, we would have no instructors. However if people didnt pay for a PPC then employers would be forced to pay for the PPC as a reward for someone's hard work on the ramp/dock like most operators do.
I carry my crucifix
Under my deathlist
Forward my mail to me in hell
Liars and the martyrs
Lost faith in The Father
Long lost in the wishing well
Wild side
Under my deathlist
Forward my mail to me in hell
Liars and the martyrs
Lost faith in The Father
Long lost in the wishing well
Wild side
-
Over the Horn
- Rank 5
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 5:28 pm
- Contact:
-
Otter envy
- Rank 2
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:11 am
PPCs and the cost to the pilot
Hey,
on the subjust of companys charging pilots for ppcs, I am of the mind that if companys want to hire a pilot thay should invest in the future of the pilot. By this I mean they should hire on the merrits of the pilot, not on the merrits that they will teach and then charge a premium for. For a pilot to extend themself even farther on the off chance that they may be hired, stacks the cards to high on the side of the employer. The value of the training that the pilot has recieved is being put in question by the companys simply seeking money. I say hire the pilot subject to his abilities as a pilot and on his character. The ppc is too muct to ask from a monitary point of view. Hire on a training bond and let the pilot work for what he/she has recieved.
Thanks.
Stay alert, watch for other airplanes.[/b][/i]
on the subjust of companys charging pilots for ppcs, I am of the mind that if companys want to hire a pilot thay should invest in the future of the pilot. By this I mean they should hire on the merrits of the pilot, not on the merrits that they will teach and then charge a premium for. For a pilot to extend themself even farther on the off chance that they may be hired, stacks the cards to high on the side of the employer. The value of the training that the pilot has recieved is being put in question by the companys simply seeking money. I say hire the pilot subject to his abilities as a pilot and on his character. The ppc is too muct to ask from a monitary point of view. Hire on a training bond and let the pilot work for what he/she has recieved.
Thanks.
Stay alert, watch for other airplanes.[/b][/i]
It's funny how somepeople think it's easy to train for a PPC and then have it walk out after a few months because a better job comes around. If someone can come up with a better plan that doesn't rely on the pilot keeping his/her word let me know . I will be hiring in the next few months and have just this problem to solve.
I wish I could spell
-
Otter envy
- Rank 2
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:11 am
Well if you can't trust anyone to keep their word, why would you want to hire them at all? Ethics have to play a roll in the hireing process. If not stop asking if they are bondable or if they have a criminal record.
Do me and the rest of the world a favour and look up the word bond.
Do me and the rest of the world a favour and look up the word bond.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
Otter envy:
Far to many pilots have taken training then cut and run at the first better offer from another company.
In short, pilots only have other pilots to blame for this situation.
Cat
Far to many pilots have taken training then cut and run at the first better offer from another company.
In short, pilots only have other pilots to blame for this situation.
Cat
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.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
I'll give you a pint of blood?? Who you hiring for good sir?Wasn't Me wrote:It's funny how somepeople think it's easy to train for a PPC and then have it walk out after a few months because a better job comes around. If someone can come up with a better plan that doesn't rely on the pilot keeping his/her word let me know . I will be hiring in the next few months and have just this problem to solve.
-
Otter envy
- Rank 2
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:11 am
I know that is the way things go, and I'm not saying that the operator shouldn't protect themselfs, quite the contrary. I think that if the pilot takes the ppc and runs, he should by contract be made to pay for it. Only and investment by the operator will be rewarded by loyality from the pilot. I am also aware that this is the way of things and that change will not come from the small operators. Change from on high will have to be the way of it. I suppose I am a bit of a utopian.
-
Justwannafly
- Rank 8
- Posts: 896
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:12 am
- Location: Cyberspace
Mr. Jones asked:
Again, rather than argue, get on the phone and check it out.
What I am suggesting is that a new commericail pilot should gain some experience in decision making in a simpler aircraft that flys much closer to the way the ones he learned in. then make the steps up to different engines, systems etc under the experience of a captain. to jump immediately in the right seat , despite all you feelings about it will pretty much mean you become a career co-pilot. Rather than get into a debate here, take some time and check around with the Charter outfits and airlines. You wont advance far without PIC and if you start low time in the right seat you will be lucky to get the opportunity to gain PIC.So are you saying that a 200 hour guy should fly PIC initially (while carrying passengers or a student) to learn the ropes rather than fly Right Seat learning from an experienced
Again, rather than argue, get on the phone and check it out.
trey kule wrote: to jump immediately in the right seat , despite all you feelings about it will pretty much mean you become a career co-pilot. Rather than get into a debate here, take some time and check around with the Charter outfits and airlines. You wont advance far without PIC and if you start low time in the right seat you will be lucky to get the opportunity to gain PIC.
Again, rather than argue, get on the phone and check it out.
Ummm, so the guy working the ramp is going to go left seat vs the guy who bought his PPC???
PIC is important, but the guys paying for the right seat with cash and those paying with sweat are all gonna be screwed... And frankly, if we're all gonna get screwed we should stop paying for PPCs and stop working the ramp.
I would argue that a person with a commercial license possesses the necessary (if minimum) experience to become FO on a King Air. Especially since a King Air FO can learn from the Captain, whereas the instructor is doing the teaching!trey kule wrote:A person with a commercial license possessess the necessary (if minimum) experience to become an instructor.
I don't believe that.hoov wrote:Well if people didnt pay to get an instructor rating, we would have no instructors
Magdrop, I agree that no transferable PPCs is a solid idea.
Pilotflying, I agree that training specific to an operator should be on their tab. So, could you say that a float rating is specific to a float operation? Much like a King Air PPC is specific to a King Air Operation?
Just to be clear, I'm with the rest of you on not paying for PPCs, just in the mood for a bit of discussion.
Cheers.
Otter envy
I'm quit familar with the word "Bond" i wonder if you are. Do you realize that if a real bond was used most of the start up pilots wouldn'r qualify because a credit check and available credit would fail. Most of the time on this site a bond implies a contract to pay for certain conditions but in real life it means someone can collect when conditions are met from an insurance company or bond provider. As for not hiring people who will back out on their word , my bullshit meter is good but not perfect and I still find a few who get by.
I am thinking of spliting the direct cost with the candidate with a return of all his funds at the end of a period of time. which brings us to what to do about renewals , it's a catch 22. I'm thinking of hiring only old guy, you know the kind that cann't get a job with an airline. That way they will not be leaving in the short term. What you think.
I can see it now - For hire pilot over 50 must have poor job oportunities and be qualified up the wazu - work for peanuts but you'll get to fly a great twin airplane
I wonder how good someones word is when The airline calls and you have 50 thousand in loans to pay off.
I'm quit familar with the word "Bond" i wonder if you are. Do you realize that if a real bond was used most of the start up pilots wouldn'r qualify because a credit check and available credit would fail. Most of the time on this site a bond implies a contract to pay for certain conditions but in real life it means someone can collect when conditions are met from an insurance company or bond provider. As for not hiring people who will back out on their word , my bullshit meter is good but not perfect and I still find a few who get by.
I am thinking of spliting the direct cost with the candidate with a return of all his funds at the end of a period of time. which brings us to what to do about renewals , it's a catch 22. I'm thinking of hiring only old guy, you know the kind that cann't get a job with an airline. That way they will not be leaving in the short term. What you think.
I can see it now - For hire pilot over 50 must have poor job oportunities and be qualified up the wazu - work for peanuts but you'll get to fly a great twin airplane
I wonder how good someones word is when The airline calls and you have 50 thousand in loans to pay off.
Last edited by Wasn't Me on Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I wish I could spell
Heres a thought. If my info is correct. If not someone correct me.
But take an officer on a submarine. Generally most sub classes are all pretty large. I don't believe there is a requirement to have had a command to get a command. You work your way up through position and rank. So the executive officer will get a command without having been commander. He learns by seeing the operation on the fly gradually through the months/years. Much the same way maybe a 5000 hr co-pilot (all on a king air for arguments sake) should be able to go captain flying the King air on similar "missions". There is a lot of shit to learn on subs too. And if my info is correct everyone on board must know how to perform every single other job, making it quite demanding.
I can see the parallels here. And it works for the Navy.
(Playing devils advocate here. But flame away anyway)
But take an officer on a submarine. Generally most sub classes are all pretty large. I don't believe there is a requirement to have had a command to get a command. You work your way up through position and rank. So the executive officer will get a command without having been commander. He learns by seeing the operation on the fly gradually through the months/years. Much the same way maybe a 5000 hr co-pilot (all on a king air for arguments sake) should be able to go captain flying the King air on similar "missions". There is a lot of shit to learn on subs too. And if my info is correct everyone on board must know how to perform every single other job, making it quite demanding.
I can see the parallels here. And it works for the Navy.
(Playing devils advocate here. But flame away anyway)
DHQ:
I am not in complete disagreement that a 200CPL could become, with some training and supervision, a capable FO on a kIng Air. What I was trying to make a point of is that they will remain in the right seat forever, until they get some PIC.
someone mentioned Europe and Asa. I have flown in Europe and Africa.
Yes there are low time first officers. And a banned list of 80 companies in Europe. Lufthansa, for example, had a two year training program for their FO's and they still found problems with ever promoting them to Captain.
I know what I say is not popular but it is the truth.
I am not in complete disagreement that a 200CPL could become, with some training and supervision, a capable FO on a kIng Air. What I was trying to make a point of is that they will remain in the right seat forever, until they get some PIC.
someone mentioned Europe and Asa. I have flown in Europe and Africa.
Yes there are low time first officers. And a banned list of 80 companies in Europe. Lufthansa, for example, had a two year training program for their FO's and they still found problems with ever promoting them to Captain.
I know what I say is not popular but it is the truth.
Whooaa! Back up Trey,
During the last significant period of hiring in Canada (late 70's), Air Canada hired a number of pilots with bare bones licences and minimal time.
With better training and better equipment today, I find it hard to believe a low time entry can't be promoted to the left seat. If you are implying it won't happen, what did AC do with all those guys??
I am not saying it is ideal but it can be done and done successfully.
During the last significant period of hiring in Canada (late 70's), Air Canada hired a number of pilots with bare bones licences and minimal time.
With better training and better equipment today, I find it hard to believe a low time entry can't be promoted to the left seat. If you are implying it won't happen, what did AC do with all those guys??
I am not saying it is ideal but it can be done and done successfully.
