* AvCanada's Home Page * Photo Gallery * Directory * Topsites *Weather *Enter Chat * Media Kit
It is currently Thu Jun 20, 2013 1:52 am

View unanswered posts | View active topics




Board index » Employment » Employment Forum

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is chatting
Who is chatting
Enter Chat




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 22 posts ] 
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
Doc
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:11 am 
Offline
Top Poster
Top Poster

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:28 pm
Posts: 8699
Only hiring pilots with current PPC's? Call it what it is. Head Hunting. The very reason pilots are being screwed by companies into paying huge sums of money for jobs, and signing unrealistic bonds. It's not because the pilots screw the companies who trained them, it's companies like North Cariboo, advertising for "current PPC's" doing the screwing here. NCA....really piss poor show.
Now before I get flamed by some of you with comments like...."they can hire anybody they want.....etc...", of course they can. The question is, should they? With all the horse shit pissing and moaning about pilots screwing companies and bringing these "bonds" on themselves, one must ask.....are they really?


Top
 Profile  
 
Sea2Sky
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:34 am 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:00 am
Posts: 94
Location: Floating
Come on, now! You're making excuses for pilots who make their own decisions. Don't blame a company who's fishing for somebody who may be unhappy or ready to move on. Sure, some a-holes will take the money and run, but this sort of head hunting is what keeps other companies honest. I suppose, though, if we can blame McDonald's for making coffee too hot when it spills on a driver's crotch, we may as well blame a company for seeking a current PPC.

If nobody were to leave with time left on a PPC, wouldn't we in effect be signing 2 year contracts at the time of training? What about somebody who has put a number of years into a company, earned their training, but decides to move on with their life? A PPC is a tool, and there's nothing wrong with using it if it was earned.


Top
 Profile  
 
trey kule
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:09 pm 
Offline
Rank 11
Rank 11

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 3:09 am
Posts: 3158
Well, I am going to play the devil's advocate here. I have had some experience with NCA in the past, and unless the very senior management has changed they are a reputable company.
It is October. And the busy oil season is just gearing up, so if they are short a few pilots, they might just be trying to shorten the window to get them online before the winter boom hits.
At least I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt.

As to people jumping ship, I know of one slime ball that walked from their company to Jazz two weeks after he got his Dash 8 PPC...and no bond.

Anyway, if that is not the case here that this is a time thing, I guess it means the bar is dropping. Not sure I would invest any money into anyone who applied for a job with less than about 6 months on their current PPC. If they did it to their last employer, it is reasonable to expect them to do it to you.


Top
 Profile  
 
godsrcrazy
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:54 pm 
Offline
Rank 6
Rank 6

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 499
There is 1 simple solution. It’s called non-transferable PPC. The only thing that would then count is if you had time on type. Then all companies would still have to suffer the required training costs.


Top
 Profile  
 
Big Pistons Forever
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:00 pm 
Online
Rank 11
Rank 11

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 3:17 am
Posts: 3129
Location: West Coast
If you arrive with a current PPC why do you they make you sign a 1 year bond ?


Top
 Profile  
 
iflyforpie
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:01 pm 
Offline
Top Poster
Top Poster
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:25 pm
Posts: 5698
Location: The Misty Mountains...
Big Pistons Forever wrote:
If you arrive with a current PPC why do you they make you sign a 1 year bond ?


:lol:

No, they stick you on the ramp. :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
Double Wasp
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:24 pm 
Online
Rank 3
Rank 3

Joined: Sun Feb 29, 2004 8:08 am
Posts: 136
godsrcrazy wrote:
There is 1 simple solution. It’s called non-transferable PPC. The only thing that would then count is if you had time on type. Then all companies would still have to suffer the required training costs.



Gods while I do not agree with everything you post I agree with this. It would solve a lot of problems from both the pilot's and the employer's point of view.

Cheers
DW


Top
 Profile  
 
Sea2Sky
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:56 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:00 am
Posts: 94
Location: Floating
godsrcrazy wrote:
There is 1 simple solution. It’s called non-transferable PPC. The only thing that would then count is if you had time on type. Then all companies would still have to suffer the required training costs.


I'm not sure I see the point. Okay, so companies stop asking for valid PPCs and now have to pay for a new hire to get PPCd.

1) The company that loses a pilot with time on type still has to retrain a replacement;
2) The hiring company now has higher training costs, which have to come from somewhere. This is going to lead to more bonds/promissary notes/contractual obligations

So, unless company-specific contracts actually reduce the number of people jumping ship, it will only serve to cost everybody more (double-dip effect: the balance of the PPC is effectively being paid for twice).


Top
 Profile  
 
whiteguy
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 6:43 pm 
Offline
Rank 8
Rank 8

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:33 pm
Posts: 919
Location: YYC
Doc wrote:
Only hiring pilots with current PPC's? Call it what it is. Head Hunting. The very reason pilots are being screwed by companies into paying huge sums of money for jobs, and signing unrealistic bonds. It's not because the pilots screw the companies who trained them, it's companies like North Cariboo, advertising for "current PPC's" doing the screwing here. NCA....really piss poor show.
Now before I get flamed by some of you with comments like...."they can hire anybody they want.....etc...", of course they can. The question is, should they? With all the horse shit pissing and moaning about pilots screwing companies and bringing these "bonds" on themselves, one must ask.....are they really?



Due to experienced guys leaving and contrail requirements for time on type. Usually guys with a ppc on type are required.

Not saying it's right but that's why.

There are people being hired without a ppc to!


Top
 Profile  
 
Doc
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:13 pm 
Offline
Top Poster
Top Poster

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:28 pm
Posts: 8699
whiteguy wrote:
Doc wrote:
Only hiring pilots with current PPC's? Call it what it is. Head Hunting. The very reason pilots are being screwed by companies into paying huge sums of money for jobs, and signing unrealistic bonds. It's not because the pilots screw the companies who trained them, it's companies like North Cariboo, advertising for "current PPC's" doing the screwing here. NCA....really piss poor show.
Now before I get flamed by some of you with comments like...."they can hire anybody they want.....etc...", of course they can. The question is, should they? With all the horse shit pissing and moaning about pilots screwing companies and bringing these "bonds" on themselves, one must ask.....are they really?



Due to experienced guys leaving and contrail requirements for time on type. Usually guys with a ppc on type are required.

Not saying it's right but that's why.

There are people being hired without a ppc to!


I keep forgetting about bloody Contrail. Sure glad we don't let third parties call the shots in our neck of the woods. The airline, not the customer's hired guns decide who shall fly what, to where. As it should be. Contrail is like a bad smell. It's easier to live with than to take the steps required to make it go away.
My vote would be to abolish the whole PPC fiasco. While we're on the subject of bad smells.....


Top
 Profile  
 
cdnpilot77
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:22 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 2:24 am
Posts: 1406
Doc wrote:
While we're on the subject of bad smells.....



Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Hoov
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:34 pm 
Offline
Rank 5
Rank 5
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:35 pm
Posts: 389
That picture is hilarious!


Top
 Profile  
 
Sea2Sky
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:08 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:00 am
Posts: 94
Location: Floating
I don't even want to know where one finds a picture like that... hilarious!


Top
 Profile  
 
Doc
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:17 pm 
Offline
Top Poster
Top Poster

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:28 pm
Posts: 8699
His mom took it of him as a kid......he really loved that dog.....


Top
 Profile  
 
wallypilot
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:34 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 5:59 am
Posts: 1462
Location: The Best Coast
Doc wrote:

I keep forgetting about bloody Contrail. Sure glad we don't let third parties call the shots in our neck of the woods. The airline, not the customer's hired guns decide who shall fly what, to where. As it should be. Contrail is like a bad smell. It's easier to live with than to take the steps required to make it go away.
My vote would be to abolish the whole PPC fiasco. While we're on the subject of bad smells.....


I know people have mixed feelings about Contrail, but it's nothing new. Flight departments have been audited by 3rd party "experts" for decades by large companies that are procuring charter services. I don't know much about Contrail and how "expert" this organization is, but if I am a large company and have my people flown around by a an outside aviation provider, and I don't know much about aviation, then I will hire a third party to advise me. It's just smart business. And Doc, I'm not sure where your neck of the woods is, but I am sure that somewhere, sometime, probably within a few hundred clicks from you, there are third parties auditing charter companies in your region of this vast country. But I digress...

The non transferable PPC is an answer, as long as Type ratings remain transferrable. But as a previous poster said, it will drive up costs, and I am sure we would be the ones to pay the price.


Top
 Profile  
 
whiteguy
PostPosted: Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:14 pm 
Offline
Rank 8
Rank 8

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:33 pm
Posts: 919
Location: YYC
Doc wrote:
whiteguy wrote:
Doc wrote:
Only hiring pilots with current PPC's? Call it what it is. Head Hunting. The very reason pilots are being screwed by companies into paying huge sums of money for jobs, and signing unrealistic bonds. It's not because the pilots screw the companies who trained them, it's companies like North Cariboo, advertising for "current PPC's" doing the screwing here. NCA....really piss poor show.
Now before I get flamed by some of you with comments like...."they can hire anybody they want.....etc...", of course they can. The question is, should they? With all the horse shit pissing and moaning about pilots screwing companies and bringing these "bonds" on themselves, one must ask.....are they really?



Due to experienced guys leaving and contrail requirements for time on type. Usually guys with a ppc on type are required.

Not saying it's right but that's why.

There are people being hired without a ppc to!


I keep forgetting about bloody Contrail. Sure glad we don't let third parties call the shots in our neck of the woods. The airline, not the customer's hired guns decide who shall fly what, to where. As it should be. Contrail is like a bad smell. It's easier to live with than to take the steps required to make it go away.
My vote would be to abolish the whole PPC fiasco. While we're on the subject of bad smells.....



It's also good to note if you look at the ads, they are requirements for Devon. A lot of companies are now coming up with their own hour requirements which are higher than Contrail.

It is frustrating to see these requirements when hours in the logbook sometimes mean nothing if you can't fly a plane. It has been proven before!


Top
 Profile  
 
Anthropomorphized
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:16 am 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:17 pm
Posts: 2
The bonds can be blamed equally on the companies that use them and the pilots that are affected by them. Its no secret that most aviation companies blame the pilots for leaving even though they provide poor pay, treatment, schedule etc. and are pretty much holding the door open pushing the crews away. At the same time pilots apply at these companies accept the jobs then start sending out resumes cause they got a type rating now and want a better job.

In any case, I wouldn't be so quick to hang NCA. There is nothing wrong with hiring PPC`d (experienced) people. Its not like they are wheeling in to the other company's parking lot in a full size van blaring Master of Puppets and kidnapping their typed pilot. They can only hire the people who apply, so maybe that person should be scrutinized a little more. If no one applies then they might have to resort to initial training, which I'm sure they would have no problem doing.

I think the overlying issue with bonds is a general lack of morality in both parties concerned, and can be contributed in lager part to a society that is getting far too self serving.

That's it.


Top
 Profile  
 
Pandy
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:28 am 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 8:13 pm
Posts: 10
Location: Vancouver
godsrcrazy wrote:
There is 1 simple solution. It’s called non-transferable PPC. The only thing that would then count is if you had time on type. Then all companies would still have to suffer the required training costs.

+1


Top
 Profile  
 
Wacko
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:15 pm 
Offline
Rank 8
Rank 8
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:39 am
Posts: 757
whiteguy wrote:
It's also good to note if you look at the ads, they are requirements for Devon. A lot of companies are now coming up with their own hour requirements which are higher than Contrail.

It is frustrating to see these requirements when hours in the logbook sometimes mean nothing if you can't fly a plane. It has been proven before!


WTF is Devon? Anyone have a scale to post?

TIA


Top
 Profile  
 
Zapp Brannigan
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:01 pm 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 8:00 pm
Posts: 141
Location: bridge of the nimbus
Devon is an oil company. Contrail has just become a term to describe the hour requirements set up by a consulting company that no longer exists from what I have heard. The requirements have stuck with most oil and gas companies charter.

I can see why whoever charter demands certain hrs for pilots. The problem is we are getting drained at the charter level. I can't blame anyone for leaving for the airlines or other non-hour-required jobs as upgrades will never happen for most guys unless you fly a king air.

And hrs in a logbook mean nothing about a pilots ability or experience for that matter. The PIC from instructing goes a lot further than the co-pilot time on a dash if you want to fly a KA as captain for an oilfield charter company.


Top
 Profile  
 
xsbank
PostPosted: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:44 pm 
Offline
Top Poster
Top Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2004 12:00 am
Posts: 5060
Location: ex-West Coast
Good first post Anthro, welcome.


Top
 Profile  
 
co-joe
PostPosted: Mon Oct 31, 2011 12:52 am 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 10:33 am
Posts: 2301
Location: YYC 230 degree radial at about 10 DME
Funny they'd even care about a PPC when they're asking for 2500 Multi PIC to fly a 200! :lol: and I thought Shell minimums were retarded. As far as contrail goes, you could Captain a Lear 55 with those hours...just sayin.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 1
  [ 22 posts ] 


Board index » Employment » Employment Forum

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cap'n Tripps, M. Essaie and 42 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Advertisements by Advertisement Management
 
For questions/comments please send them to
webmaster@avcanada.ca

AvCanada Topsites List
AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com
While the administrators and moderators of this  forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as  quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. If you feel a  topic or post is inappropriate email us at support@avcanada.ca .  By reading these forums you acknowledge that  all posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author and  not the administrators, moderators or webmaster (except for posts by these  people) and hence will not be held liable. This website is not responsible or liable in any way for any false or misleading messages or job ads placed at our site.   

Use AvCanada's information at your own risk!

We reserve the right to remove any messages that we deem unacceptable.
  When you post a message, your IP is logged and may be provided to concerned parties where unethical or illegal  behavior is apparent. All rights reserved.