Anyone has training contract and what type!

[Rick1128]

Training contracts are a sore note on this site. I have signed one and fulfilled my obligations under it. It got me to where I wanted to go in this industry. I have refused to sign others.

Unfortunately, it has been my experience that a majority of the companies that require training contracts do so to lock an employee in. The companies that require a contract for recurrent IMHO are total lowlifes. The regs require recurrent training and therefore it is a cost of doing business. You can bet they are taking it off their taxes. I wouldn't sign a contract that would not pro-rate. As you get closer to your contract completion, the less you should owe. After all the company has gotten some value for their money. It has also been my experience that many of these companies will lie to get you to sign and will then tell you the cold hard truth after you are locked in. Especially regarding pay and benefits.

The one that really bugs me is the company that inists that you sign a contract even though you are already typed in their aircraft. Real winners here.

While I do understand why companies do require a contract, too many of them are way too one-sided. They need to be reasonably balanced.

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

However unless the leadership leads and provides vision people will use their feet. As far contracts to make people stay ... hardly fair. Yea, yea I know if you do like do not apply....Like I said it take leadership and vision to run a sucessful company. Just ask Herb.

Don't know about 'Herb', but I keep hearing those on the sidelines making statements on how people will walk, and these low-life companies, etc.

I work for one of the largest management and charter companies in the world. We have to commit to training contracts. It surprises me how everyone thinks they know how to identify the 'bottom feeders'. Alot of what I hear about this subject is pure opinion. Why don't we all look at the facts.

Does anyone have examples of these things:

1. Companies that require training contracts have bad QOL.
2. Companies that have training contracts have high turn-over ("people will use their feet")
3. Companies that have training contracts are run by bad managers.

It was explained to me at my company that the recurrents are just as much of an issue as the types. Do the math, I did. If a company has 50 pilots and they all stay an average of 5 years, and the pilots leave right after the company buys a full service recurrent as opposed to leaving at the end of that recurrent period, it costs a bunch of money. GV full service = $40,000 time 50 = 2 million dollars. Divide that by 5 years, and it still = $400,000 EXTRA expense per year. Contrary to what everyone here says, I think its the bigger companies that really have the need to have these contracts if they want to be good managers and do what's best for the company and the pilots.

Bottom line, if you don't like the contract, don't go to work there, although you might be passing up a great gig like the one I have.

Ace

 

[RedBehren]

Don't know about 'Herb', but I keep hearing those on the sidelines making statements on how people will walk, and these low-life companies, etc.

I work for one of the largest management and charter companies in the world. We have to commit to training contracts. It surprises me how everyone thinks they know how to identify the 'bottom feeders'. Alot of what I hear about this subject is pure opinion. Why don't we all look at the facts.

Does anyone have examples of these things:

1. Companies that require training contracts have bad QOL.
2. Companies that have training contracts have high turn-over ("people will use their feet")
3. Companies that have training contracts are run by bad managers.

It was explained to me at my company that the recurrents are just as much of an issue as the types. Do the math, I did. If a company has 50 pilots and they all stay an average of 5 years, and the pilots leave right after the company buys a full service recurrent as opposed to leaving at the end of that recurrent period, it costs a bunch of money. GV full service = $40,000 time 50 = 2 million dollars. Divide that by 5 years, and it still = $400,000 EXTRA expense per year. Contrary to what everyone here says, I think its the bigger companies that really have the need to have these contracts if they want to be good managers and do what's best for the company and the pilots.

Bottom line, if you don't like the contract, don't go to work there, although you might be passing up a great gig like the one I have.

Ace

Precisely my point, Ace. Thank you. I guess I was not articulating clearly, now that I re-read my posts.

Our management - while certainly not Southwest Airlines - is very fair about the contract they make us sign. Regardless of our tenure, we sign a 1 year on an initial training for a new type and a 6 month on a recurrent. Hasn't really been a major problem for any of us.

To date, nobody has complained too heavily becasue we recognize that they are esentially "buying" one year or six months of usage via that training. If after 6 months you want to bail, they dont care - they got their "return on investment".

 

[mobie]

Training Contract

Ace,

You forgot that full service is transferable to any pilot, any operator should know this cost happens every 6 months. There is also an obligation to the employer to uphold working conditions and pay, sometime that just does not happen.

Recurrent training is a cost of doing busuness just like engine overhaul. You must have a good deal with 9999 hrs. and only two types.

Mobie

 

[TimsKeeper]

QOL is not automatically bad at companies that make you sign contracts. My current job has better than average QOL with better than average equipment. Obviously I would prefer not to, but 1 year prorated is not the worst thing in the world. If someone drops 20 grand on you I don't see the problem with guaranteeing some time or paying some back if you don't.

You don't like contracts go apply to American Eagle and wait 6 to 8 years for a type rating and make just above the poverty level for a few years.

 

[TimsKeeper]

Also like said previously, don't automatically think it's unenforceable because that is not the case. It depends on a few factors, but it has been enforced at a previous company that I worked for.

 

[G100driver]

I actually had to work, sorry I missed the discussion.

Let me clarify new hire training contract .... OK
Recurrent .... BAD.

Owners buys new G-IV wants pilots to sign contract ... why is that my fault? You hired me. No need to penalize me for getting new equiptment. We are on our 2nd aircraft type ... no training contract.

You do not want guys to quit, well then PAY up. It is at simple as that. If you can afford a G you can afford to train and pay your pilots. When was the last time a REAL flight department asked there senior guys to sign a ridiculous training bond to go recurrent or for a new equiptment upgrade.

Sheese you guys had been beaten so badly that you think this kind management/empoyee relationship is justified. Mobie hit the nail on the head. Recurrent is simply a cost of business.

We have yet to loose anyone is our small fight department. But then again we pay an industry standard wage and provide QOL. Oh, well, I guess some people like to beaten down.

 

[G100driver]

You, business owner, are going to add a GIV. "Joe Pilot" seems like a great candidate. You're going to drop $30k+ on that training.

Here's the question: What do you do? Ask "Joe" to sign a ONE YEAR contract or not?

Your business sense is on the line here, G100....what do you do?

Hint: It's really tough to "lead" out of BK.

This happened to us 6 months ago. Nearly $3k/month is a lot of raises for the rest of us.

Did you pay Joe pilot below industry wage? After you typed Joe did you send him away for 25 days a month?

If you answered yes to either or these questions well it sounds like Joe did what was best .... got a better job.

If a charter operator is going to dabble in heavy iron then it must expect this. Either that or it must properly staff and subsiquently pay crews. Failure to that is a failure in a business plan. Aviation is expesive. Do not make it any tougher on YOURSELF and your other pilots. Cannot afford it, do not play.

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

Owners buys new G-IV wants pilots to sign contract ... why is that my fault? You hired me. No need to penalize me for getting new equiptment. We are on our 2nd aircraft type ... no training contract.

You do not want guys to quit, well then PAY up. It is at simple as that. If you can afford a G you can afford to train and pay your pilots. When was the last time a REAL flight department asked there senior guys to sign a ridiculous training bond to go recurrent or for a new equiptment upgrade.

Mobie hit the nail on the head. Recurrent is simply a cost of business.

Hmmmm, ok, let me break it down.

You are my little Astra pilot and I get a nice new G550. Don't need to have you sign a contract? yup, also don't need to upgrade you. You're UNDERQUALIFIED. Why would I get someone with NO time in a Gulfstream to fly my nice shiny new one. Oh yeah, now I remember, you are gods gift to aviation, and even though you've never flown a long-range heavy jet, here is comes, we've all heard it before, IT'S JUST A JET. BFD that Ace and his buddies have been flying these things around the world for years, send me to school, I can do that! Now that being said, my employers have always paid for my types and not hired around me. I, in turn, have had NO problem signing any commitment they want. And lets see how that's hurt my life. Hmmm.

Now, G100, I like you, but I must say on this one, if you're over 30 years old and you're not flying an intercontinental ultra long-range jet making over 200K and working an average of 12 days per month, that maybe, just maybe, your theories are not suiting you so well (this description is not of me, but of my co-captain). And with all of your wisdom about the 'right' way to run and manage a company, what are you doing just flying? Get out there and put your money where your mouth is. Santulli mad a cool 750 million bucks with his great ideas.

So for all of you newbie pilots that are reading this thread, you may want to look at who is giving the info. If they aint at the top of the heap, you may want to stop listening. And when they tell you their story about how they love flying their little jet for their little company because of the QOL or the days off, or whatever excuses they have for not progressing further in their careers, just smile and walk away. Take it from a 'beaten down' guy like me who's had a blessed career.

As for Mobie, he's actually wrong. A full service contract at FSI is only transferable for the unused event and only under specific criteria.

Ace

 

[mobie]

Ace

As for Mobie, he's actually wrong. A full service contract at FSI is only transferable for the unused event and only under specific criteria.(quote)

Was not saying that there was a look-back training entilement, just credit for the next training. Most large new aircraft purchase will give you 4 pilots and 2 mx training included.

Any contract should give protection to both parties, not something I have seen in most 135 and some 91.

This is not my first BBQ and I have flown for the good, bad and the ugly.

Sign your life away for some management company and miss the next big wave, it may come.

Mobie