Avantair, Alpha Flying, or Cape Air Training Contracts?

[Tatin12]

New hires to Avantair, Alpha or Capt Air -- were you required to sign a training contract or Memo of Understanding? If so, what were the details (how long, how much $)?

 

[wacoflyr]

Avantair

I just signed the contract with Avantair. I don't have the details in front of me, but it was for about twenty thousand, and prorated for a year. I was told they are serious about it, but may be willing to look the other way in true hardship cases such as a lost medical. When I signed it, I presumed that I was signing a binding contract. I'm fine with it. I liked everything I saw down there. They are a small company, growing like gangbusters, and they have one cool aircraft. I got nothing but positive vibes from everybody working there, which was like a breath of fresh air. In these times of 100.00 a barrel oil, the demand for the Piaggio Avanti can only increase. I Can't wait to start with them, and get done flying for the Beagle, where everybody is depressed, and rightfully so.

Regards, Wacoflyr

 

[Tatin12]

Thanks for a great response wacoflyr. Can anyone speak for Alpha or Cape Air?

 

[Diesel]

Why you so interested thinking about skipping out early on them?

 

[PhilatAU]

Hey folks, first post here.

I start training with Alpha soon and their MOU requires you to reimburse at least part of your training costs if you leave before 18 months. Quit on day 1, you owe it all, quit at 17 months, you owe very little.

There is also a non-compete clause that prevents you from flying a pilatus for someone else a year after leaving.

 

[Tatin12]

Alpha training cost total?

Thanks PhilatAU.

What exactly is the cost of Alpha's training? Sounds like it will be prorated but what is the total to start? $10,000? $20,000? Do they disclose an amount?

 

[glasspilot]

Hey folks, first post here.

There is also a non-compete clause that prevents you from flying a pilatus for someone else a year after leaving.

There is no way that can be legal. Non-compete clauses are designed to protect proprietary knowledge and certain ethical situations. How could Pilatus proficiency be considered proprietary?

I would not have any fear of this requirement. In fact, I'd love to have someone try to enforce that with me! I'd sue 'em for all they're worth.

Who the H#ll do they think they are?!?! Making poor pilots sign "non-compete" clauses! So when you leave you can go fly anything in the world except the plane you're most proficient in? And that protects the company how? I guarantee some numb nuts in management came up with this gem in a "how can we help our attrition numbers" session. That idea was floated and someone said, "we can't do that. It's not legal" and someone else said, "ahh, stupid pilots will never figure that out" and the rule was made.

Even astronauts in the Space Shuttle can leave, take their training elsewhere and fly a space shuttle for someone else. A silly Pilatus operator thinks their plane is so special as to warrant a non-compete clause!

Sorry, this one fired me up. I don't know weather to laugh or cry...

 

[wt219200]

Cape Air

Cape Air has you sign a letter of understanding I believe is what it is called. It's basically a written promise that you will stay for 6 months if you already have your ATP, or if they give you your ATP it's one year. No money involved, you are just not eligible for rehire if you leave early.

 

[PhilatAU]

I don't yet know what the cost of training is, I don't start for a few months so I really don't know much other than what I learned at the interview.

Regarding the non-compete: Its highly unlikely I'd be able to make more money or have a better QOL flying a pilatus for anyone else, so I really have no problem with it.

Disclaimer: I haven't actually signed or even seen the whole MOU yet, I'm just relating what I've been told so far. I may very well be forgetting a detail or two.

 

[avbug]

Some time ago I spoke with the CEO of Avantair, Steve Santo, regarding his contract. He tried to tell me he hadn't read it, and didn't know what was in it. I read it to him, and noted that (at the time), there was no pro-rating, and the language of the contract stipulated that the company had the right to retain the pilot in any capacity (janitor, even) in the event the pilot wasn't used as a pilot. The contract was eighteen thousand then, for minimal training, and no type rating.

Steve Santo is an attorney. He said the contract was written by his wife, and that he didn't put any credence in it. He went on to say that the contract would never be enforced, because he couldn't get pilots to come work for him if he did that.

Ironically I was at VNY, seated in the bar, when Mr. Santo met with several of his salesmen and managers one evening. He was asked about a pilot who had recently left the company after receiving training, and Mr. Santo said he intended to crucify the pilot in court no matter what it cost. He told those present that he would make an example out of that individual and ensure that the contract was respected.

What actually happened to the pilot, I don't know but it's hard to respect a man who can't speak the truth to your face, and who says just the opposite to others, in your presence. I found him to be a soft spoken, friendly individual, but I found his handling of the contract and the talk that surrounded it, to be disturbing.

 

[glasspilot]

Obviously the pilot being "crucified" had, in his eyes, done something to warrant such special attention.


I know of one pilot who left and did it in a way that was pretty despicable. It wasn't just, "I don't want to be here anymore, goodbye." It was a couple of lies and then a total screwing for no reason other than to make a point.

After 911 ACA hired a bunch of furloughed FAs. They were with few exceptions the WORST EVER. Nothing but attitude about flying our "little Barbie Jets" and having to do everything themselves (only 1 FA) and all. When they were called back a bunch of those whores decided to get back at the company they applied to when they were furloughed by quiting at the out stations. Now ACA had a plane stuck in the boonies full of UNITEDs passengers because the FA was mad at ACA and wanted to get back before she went back to United. The point is, ACA stopped hiring furloughed FAs as a result. I don't blame them. Sometimes the actions of the employee warrant the wrath of the company.

 

[wacoflyr]

Just to be clear, I considered my contract binding. They presented it to me this way, and I accepted it. I will honor it. I am not God's gift to ethics, I am just a human who has to look at an ugly face in the mirror each morning. It is already hard enough. Oh, and those lawyers who might be able to get me out of my obligations? They know the difference between legal and illegal, but not necessarily between right and wrong.

Greatest regards, Wacoflyr

 

[wacoflyr]

Alright, that was slightly sanctimonious. Two glasses of wine. Sorry.

Wacoflyr

 

[Hung Start]

Wacoflyr:
You might have had a couple of glasses of wine, but your statement was spot on.

You leave this life with nothing more than your reputation. If your word is worth nothing, so is your life.

Gospel according to Hung Start.


Hung

 

[glasspilot]

I agree about your word and all. If i agreed to do something I'd honor it. I've done it before and sacrificed many hundreds of seniority numbers.

What I'm talking about is a ridiculous requirement put forth by an obviously less than above board company. To require a "non-compete clause" is not industry standard. What if they offered a "Must warship our Lord Jesus" clause? Some guy needs a job and agrees, now they expect him to go to church and pay a tithe? Turns out the tithe is his entire check!

Maybe extreme, but the point is there are limits to what an employer can expect from it's employees. To not fly the type of plane they fly is way over the line! I don't fault a guy for thinking at the time of employment that it's not that big of deal, hey, he needs a job. But when you think about it it's crazy to expect you to then have to find a job flying a plane that's not the one you're most proficient in. On top of that there is zero chance this is legal in any state this side of China. It's clearly an attempt to slow attrition and that begs the question why is attrition so high? Why not just treat your folks better? If you can't do that then don't be upset when they leave your operation...to fly whatever they can.

 

[glasspilot]

God this makes me mad...

To continue:

...when it comes to training contracts it's what I owe you verses what you owe me. Typically the company owes me training and I owe them an amount of time of service. Not great, but fine. I can live with it.

Now, this whole "non-compete" thing. They give me what? Employment? Okay....I guess that's what I get. What do I give them? A degradation to MY CAREER? How is that fair? I get a JOB... and they get my reduced ability to get another JOB?!?!?!

Reality check people! Tell these people to pound sand. NO WAY IN GODS GREEN EARTH would I agree to this non-sense. Anyone who has agreed needs to have ALL of their certificates revoked on the basis of a demonstrated lack of decision making ability AND a strong suspicion of drug use.

This is almost as crazy as paying your SE Florida employer $26,000 for privilege to go to work!

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

As I understand, Alpha has had pilots leave and fly PC-12's for owner operators before. Usually for extremely generous increases in salary. I have no idea how it was handled by either side really.

I agree glass, not in a million years would that crap hold up in court. Just a way to get pilots to both think they have an "important" contract with a company and a way to intimidate them into not flying a PC-12 for people that might otherwise have to go to Alpha and request the services of a pilot thru the company.

Mr. I.

 

[phr8dawg]

The purpose of a no-compete agreement, at least at my employer, is so that a departing employee can't quit and take proprietary knowledge and clients to his next employer. A financial advisor I know recently resigned from a big firm and they locked down her files, fired her, and escorted her out of the building.
Unfortunately its a real business risk.

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

The purpose of a no-compete agreement, at least at my employer, is so that a departing employee can't quit and take proprietary knowledge and clients to his next employer. A financial advisor I know recently resigned from a big firm and they locked down her files, fired her, and escorted her out of the building.
Unfortunately its a real business risk.

True, but pilots don't have proprietary knowledge of the company, high-level management does however. That's where most non-competes are, not at a pilot level. The one being referenced is there only to keep pilots from going to other PC-12 positions that pay more $$$.

Mr. I.

 

[Takeoffroll]

I agree with phr8dawg on his points on client stealing. In addition to client stealing, other reasons that an employer may add a no compete clause include trying to limit the unscrupulous bottom feeders that will use a company to get accredited training and then prior to completing the agreed upon time at the company, they will represent themselves as a trained pilot for a position at a competitor or even a client looking to get their own aircraft.

I believe that both training and non-compete contracts were created to reduce the impact of unscrupulous pilots on companies. Unfortunately, there is a small percentage of pilots that create problems for everyone. Companies try to limit their exposure to risk. A pilots pay, benefits and training costs are all factored together, the pilot that completes training only to leave within weeks or months alters the amortized cost of the training. Not all companies have unlimited funding.

I would hate to think that the reasons given by some on here are true. If they are, then the rest of the conspiracy theories of our time may be true also. The republicans want to starve our elderly and children, the capitalists want to pollute our water and air and waste every natural resource on the planet all to bring them greater wealth and our government planned the attack of Japan and 911 to motivate the people of the us to go to war to stimulate the economy.