Companies that do not require Training bonds

Got a hot employment or interview tip to help a fellow aviator find a job or looking for a little job advice place your posting here.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, North Shore

Message
Author
chu me
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#76 Post by chu me » Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:25 am

Added. Thanks wallypilot !
---------- ADS -----------

bomber44
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 11:18 am

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#77 Post by bomber44 » Mon Sep 22, 2008 3:42 pm

pacific coastal airlines is a promissory note
---------- ADS -----------

wallypilot
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1592
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 9:59 pm
Location: The Best Coast

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#78 Post by wallypilot » Mon Sep 22, 2008 5:08 pm

I haven't read every post in this thread, but if we are talking about companies WITHOUT any bond at all, then you have to take Carson Air off the list. They have a formal bond program that is adhered to quite strictly unless you come type rated and with a current PPC. Bond is quite high, and longer than other companies such as Borek. If carson stays on the list, then you have to add almost every company out there that uses bonds, and hence the list would be useless. Let's keep it to companies that honestly have no bond.

The reason is following:

NO bond often implies better working conditions, happier employees, and a better overall employment experience(not always, of course)...after all, isn't that indirectly the point of this thread?

Anyways, you can also add Sander Geophysics to the list of NO BOND WHATSOEVER.
---------- ADS -----------

HighBypass
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 11:36 am
Location: YZF

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#79 Post by HighBypass » Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:59 pm

Arctic Sunwest Requires training bonds.
---------- ADS -----------

Phileas Fogg
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:37 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#80 Post by Phileas Fogg » Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:07 pm

:(
---------- ADS -----------
Last edited by Phileas Fogg on Sat Oct 18, 2008 11:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Apache64_
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 8:07 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#81 Post by Apache64_ » Sun Oct 05, 2008 12:21 pm

Regional 1 definitely has no bond.
---------- ADS -----------

mattedfred
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#82 Post by mattedfred » Sun Oct 05, 2008 1:50 pm

where's the sticky so i can see the whole list?

i'm a complete idiot when it comes to computers
---------- ADS -----------

chu me
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#83 Post by chu me » Mon Oct 06, 2008 4:51 pm

Hi Everyone;

First of all, thanks for all the posts. To the ones that have been listed as having training bonds ( Carson , Artic Sunwest , Borek ) if someone can post or PM me to back up these claims then I will remove them.
Mattedfred the list is tacked on to the first post in this thread.

Thanks everyone
---------- ADS -----------

JerryRig
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 10:25 am

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#84 Post by JerryRig » Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:58 am

chu me wrote:Hi Everyone;

First of all, thanks for all the posts. To the ones that have been listed as having training bonds ( Carson , Artic Sunwest , Borek ) if someone can post or PM me to back up these claims then I will remove them.
Mattedfred the list is tacked on to the first post in this thread.

Thanks everyone
Borek has a "promisary note" (contract). No money upfront, but require a year commitment, reduced fractionally starting on month 7.
---------- ADS -----------

Niodatchi
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:58 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#85 Post by Niodatchi » Mon Oct 13, 2008 8:46 am

No training bonds with Transat on any type. If not already posted, Nio
---------- ADS -----------

Phileas Fogg
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 5:37 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#86 Post by Phileas Fogg » Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:01 pm

JerryRig wrote:
chu me wrote:Hi Everyone;

First of all, thanks for all the posts. To the ones that have been listed as having training bonds ( Carson , Artic Sunwest , Borek ) if someone can post or PM me to back up these claims then I will remove them.
Mattedfred the list is tacked on to the first post in this thread.

Thanks everyone
Borek has a "promisary note" (contract). No money upfront, but require a year commitment, reduced fractionally starting on month 7.

contract...promisary note...bond......whatever you call it put them on the list.
---------- ADS -----------

User avatar
flying4dollars
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 8:56 am

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#87 Post by flying4dollars » Sat Nov 15, 2008 7:52 pm

A lot of those companies in post 1 require bonds
---------- ADS -----------

'effin hippie
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Further..further...ok, too far...

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#88 Post by 'effin hippie » Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:59 am

Slow up for a second here. We need to agree on what we are listing.

Not all bonds are created equal. There are some outfits with a promisory note or employment agreement that doesn't require any money up front etc etc.

Maybe they should remain on the list with a comment to the effect that you do sign something.

Or if we want this list to be 100% bond free, then yah , there's quite a few that have to go. Including, for my money, some pretty decent employers.

Borek has a 1 year, pro-rated, 6K per type employment agreement. Not required for renewals, but it is for initial upgrades I believe. I still have my old copy.

Since we probably can't agree on what if anything, constitutes an 'acceptable bond', maybe the list should be only totally bond free companies.

ef
---------- ADS -----------

tsgas
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 342
Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 12:53 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#89 Post by tsgas » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:09 pm

Chu me a lot of the companies on your list are bogus.
They charge $ for a job and that's not right.
---------- ADS -----------

mattedfred
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:36 am

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#90 Post by mattedfred » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:54 pm

tsgas wrote:Chu me a lot of the companies on your list are bogus.
They charge $ for a job and that's not right.
can you tell us which ones?
---------- ADS -----------

bbb
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:36 pm
Location: Ontario

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#91 Post by bbb » Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:47 pm

KFC has a "training agreement", or no-money-up-front bond (promissary note). You sign it at the end of initial groundschool. It is 2yrs for initial (S/O) and again on an upgrade (not recurrent, upgrade as in S/O to F/O, F/O to Capt). I believe it was $7,000. Its pro-rated, you stay the entire time, no cost; you leave before your commitment ends, pro-rated cost. Also, they are in process of a new union agreement, and don't know if/how the bond is affected.
---------- ADS -----------
"oh, I have slipped.." into what, we're not sure

Switchfoot
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 1:46 pm
Location: Twenty-four oceans, twenty-four skies.

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#92 Post by Switchfoot » Fri Feb 06, 2009 1:50 pm

chu me wrote:First of all, thanks for all the posts. To the ones that have been listed as having training bonds ( Carson , Artic Sunwest , Borek ) if someone can post or PM me to back up these claims then I will remove them.
Yes, Carson Air does have a bond...for both the 350 and the Metro's. Not sure how much it is for the Metroliner but it's steep for the King Air.

Bottom line is: if you don't sign, you don't fly or work there.


Switchfoot.
---------- ADS -----------

timexd
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#93 Post by timexd » Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:06 am

Nor-Alta Aviation in Fort Vermilion and High Level AB have no bonds. Just a training agreement pro-rated over 12 months.
---------- ADS -----------

chopsticks
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 10:42 am

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#94 Post by chopsticks » Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:12 am

Yeah this post IS funny. Why do some of the companies that have training bonds have shitty chief pilots and shitty pay? Respect is a two way street and money up front is a disgraceful practice that should be abolished.
---------- ADS -----------

chu me
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:48 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#95 Post by chu me » Wed Jul 01, 2009 1:04 pm

To pile driver;

I can't see any reason not to have any post you like. Maybe you should start those threads.This thread was not meant to discuss the pro and cons of bonds, there are lots of other threads for that.
The reason I started this thread was to give people a place to post positive things about the companies they have worked for. I did this because I was tired of the negative bashing that was going on. So if you find this thread funny ( in a sacastic way )then I suggest you read and post on your own threads about dead beat pilots and such,...... oh wait a minute... there are no threads like that.

Sincerely

Chu me

P.S.This thread is to include all companies that do not require money up front and/ or have excellent working conditions. Training agreements or contracts are common, ( in all industries ) where employees have to sign on for a specified period of time and face a financial penalty if they do not stay for that period of time. Therefore I think these companies should be included as long as they are decent to work for.

P.P.S. to all you other posters thanks again for the info I will try to keep up

Deleted Pile Drivers post as it is off topic. Keep up the good work Chu.
Bandaid.
---------- ADS -----------

dick whoreswaggon
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#96 Post by dick whoreswaggon » Thu Nov 26, 2009 8:47 pm

ORNGE has none
---------- ADS -----------

'effin hippie
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 308
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Further..further...ok, too far...

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#97 Post by 'effin hippie » Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:00 am

Great River Air

Whitehorse/Dawson City. YT

NO bond.
---------- ADS -----------

0lancer0
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:16 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#98 Post by 0lancer0 » Mon Jan 18, 2010 4:02 pm

This is a great post! Thanks chu and everyone who is contributing. Keeps aspiring pilots like myself a reason to continue flying in Canada!
---------- ADS -----------

302sc
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:40 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#99 Post by 302sc » Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:38 pm

Buffalo air does not require a bond either you just work hard non stop .
---------- ADS -----------

c182rgt
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:46 pm

Re: Companies that do not require Training bonds

#100 Post by c182rgt » Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:34 pm

chu me,

Wasaya shouldn't be on that list. They require money up front for all positions except f/o PC12.
---------- ADS -----------

Post Reply

Return to “Employment Forum”