ALPA signing new agreements with training bonds

[digits_]

At most companies that require bonds, what percentage of FOs (or captains), even bonded ones are staying longer than 2 years? Lots are likely hired with the intention of staying forever, yet the company manages to scare them off. The bond won't solve the core issue.

If bonded companies are still paying 20 to 30k less than non bonded companies, then I say that the financial arguments are pretty weak. They are implementing a bond to recoup training costs due to attrition caused by low wages in the first place.

The bonds are there because pilots are still signing them.

I've worked for quite a few aviation companies. The only ones I really wanted to leave after a few months, were -unsurprisingly- the ones where I had to sign a bond.

This reply would fit in well in a grade 10 English assignment regarding fallacies.

Just because some companies that require bonds are using bonds to try to fix retention issues does not mean that a company that requires a bond has retention issues.

Logically you're right. However my claim is that there is a correlation.

Can you name a couple of companies that have a bond and do not face retention issues?

[rookiepilot]

You’re not one of us who earned our living( in whatever capacity) flying airplanes, so bugger off.

Deleted. Not worth it.

[dontcallmeshirley]

Logically you're right. However my claim is that there is a correlation.

Can you name a couple of companies that have a bond and do not face retention issues?

On the flip side... I can name several companies that do not have a bond that face retention issues.

WestJet (mainline + Encore)
Jazz
Flair
Lynx

[accountant]

Shhh, stop making sense because people are biased towards you when you make sense and you chose not to live with a 1.5 million dollar house and 2 cottages.

If a company pays for massive training costs a training bond is 100% reasonable.

Cue all the haters referencing your van life.

For once, I am in agreement with accountant.

It sucks when you are under a training bond, but a one-year $20,000 bond is reasonable. We all know that one guy (or gal) who stayed for eight months before flipping off to another carrier thinking that they are "moving up."

Why should pilots who intend on staying with a company and contributing to it's success have to pay for those pilots who want to use it as a stepping stone? The airlines that tend to be used as a stepping stone tend to be the ones that leap-froggers affect more. Air Canada having a pilot bail soon after getting typed is a lesser relative burden overall than Lynx having the same experience.

A small bond is reasonable if they're spending significantly more on you.

[CaptDukeNukem]

At most companies that require bonds, what percentage of FOs (or captains), even bonded ones are staying longer than 2 years? Lots are likely hired with the intention of staying forever, yet the company manages to scare them off. The bond won't solve the core issue.

If bonded companies are still paying 20 to 30k less than non bonded companies, then I say that the financial arguments are pretty weak. They are implementing a bond to recoup training costs due to attrition caused by low wages in the first place.

The bonds are there because pilots are still signing them.

I've worked for quite a few aviation companies. The only ones I really wanted to leave after a few months, were -unsurprisingly- the ones where I had to sign a bond.

This reply would fit in well in a grade 10 English assignment regarding fallacies.

Just because some companies that require bonds are using bonds to try to fix retention issues does not mean that a company that requires a bond has retention issues.

Logically you're right. However my claim is that there is a correlation.

Can you name a couple of companies that have a bond and do not face retention issues?

Calm air. Generally high FO turnover, but captains mostly staying out cuz they like being home in winnipeg and the flying is decent. And as far as I’m aware they still make you sign a training agreement. I may be wrong but $25000k, first year 25% of it is erased on a month to month, second year is 75% month to month

[Blueontop]

This reply would fit in well in a grade 10 English assignment regarding fallacies.

Just because some companies that require bonds are using bonds to try to fix retention issues does not mean that a company that requires a bond has retention issues.

Logically you're right. However my claim is that there is a correlation.

Can you name a couple of companies that have a bond and do not face retention issues?

Calm air. Generally high FO turnover, but captains mostly staying out cuz they like being home in winnipeg and the flying is decent. And as far as I’m aware they still make you sign a training agreement. I may be wrong but $25000k, first year 25% of it is erased on a month to month, second year is 75% month to month

That’s complete horse shit.

[daedalusx]

Carson YLW Captains actually never had a retention issue and it’s almost surprising they listed a DEC job posting, usually it goes internal and most left seat guys there are lifers. It is actually quite a good job with a good schedule.

[55+]

You’re not one of us who earned our living( in whatever capacity) flying airplanes, so bugger off.

No Problem, Old Fella.

Make fun of one more young GA’s pilots death , along with his 5 passengers, on the accident forum as you did, I’ll see you banned from this forum.

Clear?

Sir with respect, I haven’t seen your name annotated as a site moderator which certainly indicates you do not have standing nor authority to place sanctions on any person here. Perhaps the moderator listings per sub forums are not updated or possibly hidden by site owner for whatever reason they employ, I certainly don’t know. If indeed you have moderator status , I believe it would be prudent to note such on commentary that you deem inappropriate which would lend credence on possible sanctioning you wish to utilize.

PS. I won’t debate nor respond to the specifics that raised your ire.

[rookiepilot]

PS. I won’t debate nor respond to the specifics that raised your ire.

That is your prerogative.

[dontcallmeshirley]

Sir with respect, I haven’t seen your name annotated as a site moderator which certainly indicates you do not have standing nor authority to place sanctions on any person here. Perhaps the moderator listings per sub forums are not updated or possibly hidden by site owner for whatever reason they employ, I certainly don’t know. If indeed you have moderator status , I believe it would be prudent to note such on commentary that you deem inappropriate which would lend credence on possible sanctioning you wish to utilize.

PS. I won’t debate nor respond to the specifics that raised your ire.

I like the way you insult people. It's very dignified.

I am picturing you wearing a top hat, monocle, and a pipe.

[55+]

Sir with respect, I haven’t seen your name annotated as a site moderator which certainly indicates you do not have standing nor authority to place sanctions on any person here. Perhaps the moderator listings per sub forums are not updated or possibly hidden by site owner for whatever reason they employ, I certainly don’t know. If indeed you have moderator status , I believe it would be prudent to note such on commentary that you deem inappropriate which would lend credence on possible sanctioning you wish to utilize.

PS. I won’t debate nor respond to the specifics that raised your ire.

I like the way you insult people. It's very dignified.

I am picturing you wearing a top hat, monocle, and a pipe.

Thanks for your words, no I don't insult as I see it through "The Road Not taken" ah the Robert Frost in me. To wit: the initial response from the individual I directed my post was caustic in nature with a certain undignified demeanor, I won't raise to such bait. Having said that there was a revised two word edit shortly after that was gratifying to see and appreciative. I will always give people the benefit of the doubt.

You picture me.... well I do have acquired taste in finer things that are offered aka decent clothes, quality eating, aged single malt , classified vintages, however I stay away from fast cars and younger females. Life is to be lived because it is just a one-way booking and return fares isn't an option.

PS In the course of my life time I wore a Top Hat once, never a monocle, I hate pipes but will indulge in cigars on very rare occasions. Enjoy rest of the week.

Kindest regards

[CanadaAir]

Logically you're right. However my claim is that there is a correlation.

Can you name a couple of companies that have a bond and do not face retention issues?

Calm air. Generally high FO turnover, but captains mostly staying out cuz they like being home in winnipeg and the flying is decent. And as far as I’m aware they still make you sign a training agreement. I may be wrong but $25000k, first year 25% of it is erased on a month to month, second year is 75% month to month

That’s complete horse shit.

Issue's that ALPA continues to sign off on agreements with bonds, which undercuts other unions which have used their bargaining power to eliminate them.

Shouldn't there be national agreement to not support bonds in agreements at ALPA carriers?

[CanadaAir]

ALPA signed off on allowing PAL to undercut Jazz.

Forgive me but how does locking in pilots to a bond at PAL undercut Jazz?

Issue's that ALPA continues to sign off on agreements with bonds, which undercuts other unions which have used their bargaining power to eliminate them.

Shouldn't there be national agreement to not support bonds in agreements at ALPA carriers?

PAL having a $26000 bond allows PAL operate at a lower cost than Jazz with no bond, which makes PAL more attractive to AC.

[CanadaAir]

Sounds good in theory. In reality companies will go "how about every cpt gets a 10k raise if you accept a bond for new FOs?"

It's usually FOs that are bonded. It's usually captains that have seniority and are more involved in union type things (but not always). And before FOs can make a change in policy, their bond will be up and they will care significantly less.

At PAL both capt & FO are bond.
Same at others like Wasaya.

Some ALPA agreements require a bond every time aircraft switched & for upgrades.

All the ALPA MEC which sign agreements with bonds, undercut the other ALPA members who worked to eliminate bonds.

[young grasshopper]

No bond at Canadian North.

[TeePeeCreeper]

No bond at Canadian North.

Cool story! But 7F isn’t the only one around.

It amazes me that the new commers wish to be bonded or would even accept such a notion…

TPC

[young grasshopper]

TeePeeCreeper wrote:

Cool story! But 7F isn’t the only one around.

It amazes me that the new commers wish to be bonded or would even accept such a notion…

TPC

Was just replying to someone asking if Canadian North did bonds. Forgot to quote their question. My bad.

Also, we’re now 5T




Jeff

[CanadaAir]

No bond at Canadian North.

Thanks for the update.

ALPA no bonds:

Canadian North
WestJet & Encore
Air Canada & Jazz
Flair
Morningstar

ALPA bonds:

Transat - $30,000
PAL - $26,000
Perimeter Bearskin, Wasaya, Calm, Keewatin

Unknown:

Flightcraft
Pascan
Lynx


ALPA should adopt a national standard against training bonds.

No bond at Morningstar either. There used to be one but it's gone.

Thanks for the update.

[Chaxterium]

Thanks for the update.

ALPA no bonds:

Canadian North
WestJet & Encore
Air Canada & Jazz
Flair

ALPA bonds:

Transat - $30,000
PAL - $26,000
Perimeter Bearskin, Wasaya, Calm, Keewatin

Unknown:

Flightcraft
Pascan
Lynx


ALPA should adopt a national standard against training bonds.

No bond at Morningstar either. There used to be one but it's gone.

[flyingjerry]

No bond at Canadian North.

Thanks for the update.

ALPA no bonds:

Canadian North
WestJet & Encore
Air Canada & Jazz
Flair

ALPA bonds:

Transat - $30,000
PAL - $26,000
Perimeter Bearskin, Wasaya, Calm, Keewatin

Unknown:

Flightcraft
Pascan
Lynx


ALPA should adopt a national standard against training bonds.

Great idea so in the future it's just not even on the table.

[dontcallmeshirley]

I would endorse bonds if it meant that the money saved by not having people come for type ratings and leaving went back to the pilots in salary.

[cjp]

I would endorse bonds if it meant that the money saved by not having people come for type ratings and leaving went back to the pilots in salary.

Great in theory...

[CanadaAir]

I would endorse bonds if it meant that the money saved by not having people come for type ratings and leaving went back to the pilots in salary.

Do airlines pay pilots more for saving fuel on legs, burning less than planned?

Savings go to stocks & bonuses CEO

[CanadaAir]

It apparent that there are 2 groups in this thread.

Group A that sees sub-standard pay and archaic practices such as bonds, calls it out and seeks to end this nonsense for the benefit of all pilots in Canada

Group B which just does nothing but defend sub-standard wages and bonds, even to their own detriment

What I can’t figure out is why anyone wants to defend their own crappy wages and conditions? Is out of ego, self-pride? Nobody is gonna call you out, we’re all in the same boat here and need to row together! We’ll all be better off in the end!

[CanadaAir]

ALPA should adopt a national standard against training bonds.

Great idea so in the future it's just not even on the table.

If you were a Jazz pilot, wouldn't you be upset that your same union which you paid dues to for 20 years, signed off on allowing bonds at your competitor airline PAL where the pilots have only been with ALPA paying dues for 3 years?
AC then sends more work to PAL & shrinks Jazz, since PAL has lower costs.



Over 20 years Jazz pilots with ALPA have paid $40 to $50 million in union dues. Jazz has no training bond.

Then PAL shows up to join in 2020, & ALPA signs off on a $26000 bond for both FO & Cpts flying Dash8.

The new group at PAL’s undercutting the Jazz pilots & their 20 years & $40 to $50 million in ALPA support.
ALPA signed off on allowing PAL to undercut Jazz.


Where's the national coordination with ALPA?
Working together to help other pilot groups, similar to how the US pilot groups backed WJ in recent negotiations.