Thanks everyone for all the responses. I was going to wait for some more before saying anthing else, but I'm getting too far behind so permit me to interject some more weird ideas.
To the person who said my questions where rhetorical, the answer is yes. I'm just feeling around in and effort to get a reading on the various attitudes/opinions out there in hopes that I'll learn something in the process. I already have my own opinions and won't change them easily, but I like to learn what others think and sometimes that knowledge will change my own views.
I'm not "in favor" of PFT. Neither am I a crusader against it. As a matter of fact, I'm not even sure exactly what it is. From the different opinions expressed, I gather there is considerable difference of opinion in what exactly is PFT and what is not. If I can ever figure out a precise definition, perhaps at that point I could decide to oppose or support. Basically I don't like gray when I know there is black and white somewhere. I'm searching for the B&W.
In another thread, I outlined a program that used to take place at my own airline and asked if it was PFT. The answer was yes and, I think I agree. However, the evils that I see it is supposed to create (in this thread) were, in my view, not present.
First of all the airline did NOT lower its "qualifications" for employment. They remained the same as they were before the program was instituted. As a result, we did not hire anyone who was "less qualified" because he/she paid to be trained. Hundreds of pilots were hired over several years who went through this "PFT program". I know a lot of these people personally, have flown with many of them and would compare their "quality" as airmen to anyone else.
Among their ranks are many former military pilots ranging in experience from a B-52 wing commander, to a former air boss on a super carrier, to fighter pilots, bomber pilots, and lots of army aviators from hi-tech chopper combat (some of the best in the lot) and a few coast guard types from Falcons and that neat amphibian the Albatross. Included too are civilian pilots ranging from CFI's to freight dogs to commuter airlines.
Once they became employed, they earned and worked on the same pay scale that existed before their advent. I don't accept the idea that their PFT experience had anything at all to do with the wages and benefits in the pilot contract. They didn't undercut anyone or cause the rest of us to be paid less and it happens, we have one of the best contracts and highest pay scales in our segment of the industry.
It is true that if those people had not paid their $10K for the training they got they would not have been hired. All that means is that somebody else would have paid it and been hired instead. The supply exceeded the demand. To me, it's simply about market forces.
I know a few people who said (don't know them personally) that they would not come to Comair because it was PFT and violated their principles, so they went to American Eagle instead. Well, I'm all for principles, but the fact is, the people who went to AE are hardly better off than the people that came to Comair. They are paid substantially less, have one of the worst contracts in the business and fly mostly obsolete equipment and the company hires more inexperienced people than we ever have. That's not their fault, but neither is it the fault of the guys that came to Comair. Eagle's hiring policies did not change because they were not PFT, and Comair's didn't change because we were PFT. Where does that leave us?
Now we never had anything that even resembles remotely what they do at Gulfstream. No pilot here ever paid a nickel for anything once he got hired. All the paying took place before the hiiring and it did NOT guarantee that you would be hired. However, it was guaranteed that if you didn't pay you would NOT be hired. The airline didn't establish the program so it could lower standards or hire unqualified people for less. They did it to make money and reduce training costs. That they accomplished.
At the same time we also hired quite a few pilots that came from the ab-initio program at the Comair Academy and still do. Those folks also went through the PFT program when it was in place. Today, we still hire the "best" kids from the ab-initio/instructor program but the PFT is long dead and buried. The "quality" of the new hire has not changed one way or the other.
Overall, the number of applicants has always exceeded the number of available positions and the airline has always been able to pick and choose who it wants to hire. In today's market, the competitive numbers "off the street" are higher than they used to be, but the minimums haven't changed. The truth is, that a large number of the more "experienced" (in terms of hours) people we're hiring today bring with them quite a few more "problems" than the military guys or the less experienced youngsters. There is nothing harder than trying to change the bad habits or the different habits of someone who thinks he knows a lot more than he really does.
I also don't really buy in to the "pay your dues" concept. That is also poorly defined. As I tried to point out rhetorically, I defy any one to tell me difinitevely how I can tell when you've paid enough dues or you haven't. As long as you have the required minimum hours, licenses and education, there is no need to be "paying dues" in my book.
In most airlines, the people doing the hiring are not pilots. They are Human Resources folks who know nothing about airplane driving. They are hiring a "profile" that management has determined it wants. Yes, you do have to have the licenses required, but your attitude, your degree and your ability to answer psych questions that paint your "profile" have a lot more to do with who gets hired than your flying skillls.
There really is no accurate means of determining your flying skills in a pilot interview. Many airlines, large and small, don't even put you in a simulator any more as part of the process. Others put you into some albatross of a training device that anyone who flies real airplanes would have difficulty controlling. It's a farce.
Luck is perhaps a major component of the equation and networking, particularly if you are former military, plays a major role. Many very compent pilots with thousand of hours can't even get an interview, while others with far less experience or flying skill, get the job.
What is the real difference between using a buddy that has an "in" to get you a preferential interview or spending a few bucks to buy some training to get an interview? Both give you an advantage over the guy that doesn't have either.
Based on those conditions, if you can find a way to get your foot in the door ahead of the next guy, why shouldn't you? Once you get the seniority number, the airline will teach you what they want you to know, and pay you to learn it. If you spend a few bucks to get a head start on that number, so what? Over a 35 year career at a major, 10 seniority numbers that you don't have could cost you a million dollars in real money.
Even at a small airline like Comair, 10 numbers that you don't have can cost many, many bucks lost while you're working, affect your quality of life seriously and definitely impact your retirement.
Once you get hired, I don't think you should have to pay for anything. Most real airline contracts won't let you do that anyway. IMO, and outfit like Gulfstream is not an airline. It's a scheduled air taxi/flying school where the pilots in both seats are paying to learn. Yes, its owners are taking advantage of those kids, but what do you expect? They are well known scabs.
On the "quickie upgrades" well, I have my problems with those too. The truth is (and you can flame me if you want) I don't allow my family to travel on airplanes with amateur captains, even when its "free". There are enough outfits that don't promote people with no experience that I can get around on.
I will never become expert and flying and airplane. I've done it long enough to know that. I realize that everyone has to learn and no one knows everything. I also know that a lot of young pilots do very well. A lot more are just plain lucky and you don't know about it. I just don't want to be in the back of an airplane when I'm not reasonably certain that the guys in the front are not guessing about what they do.
In most cases I realize I'm just assuming that is the case. On the other hand, if you've been in the business awhile, it's not a great big secret who has low standards and who doesn't. When a so called airline is willing to push its luck with novice pilots flying as captains, chances are it is also pushing its luck with a lot of other critical things and is probably pilot pushing to the max. I can do without those thrills.
As an example, when an airline captain briefs an approach by saying "there's no going around", prangs the machine until it nearly breaks and doesn't even know it, something is very wrong at that airline. The Lord knows we have enough difficulty without that.
I'm sure I'll catch h*ll for saying that, but it's how I feel personally. I don't ask anyone to agree.
However, if you think I'm full of it, please tell me where I've gone wrong and how I should adjust my thinking. I'll do it if you can show me a better way.
To the person who said my questions where rhetorical, the answer is yes. I'm just feeling around in and effort to get a reading on the various attitudes/opinions out there in hopes that I'll learn something in the process. I already have my own opinions and won't change them easily, but I like to learn what others think and sometimes that knowledge will change my own views.
I'm not "in favor" of PFT. Neither am I a crusader against it. As a matter of fact, I'm not even sure exactly what it is. From the different opinions expressed, I gather there is considerable difference of opinion in what exactly is PFT and what is not. If I can ever figure out a precise definition, perhaps at that point I could decide to oppose or support. Basically I don't like gray when I know there is black and white somewhere. I'm searching for the B&W.
In another thread, I outlined a program that used to take place at my own airline and asked if it was PFT. The answer was yes and, I think I agree. However, the evils that I see it is supposed to create (in this thread) were, in my view, not present.
First of all the airline did NOT lower its "qualifications" for employment. They remained the same as they were before the program was instituted. As a result, we did not hire anyone who was "less qualified" because he/she paid to be trained. Hundreds of pilots were hired over several years who went through this "PFT program". I know a lot of these people personally, have flown with many of them and would compare their "quality" as airmen to anyone else.
Among their ranks are many former military pilots ranging in experience from a B-52 wing commander, to a former air boss on a super carrier, to fighter pilots, bomber pilots, and lots of army aviators from hi-tech chopper combat (some of the best in the lot) and a few coast guard types from Falcons and that neat amphibian the Albatross. Included too are civilian pilots ranging from CFI's to freight dogs to commuter airlines.
Once they became employed, they earned and worked on the same pay scale that existed before their advent. I don't accept the idea that their PFT experience had anything at all to do with the wages and benefits in the pilot contract. They didn't undercut anyone or cause the rest of us to be paid less and it happens, we have one of the best contracts and highest pay scales in our segment of the industry.
It is true that if those people had not paid their $10K for the training they got they would not have been hired. All that means is that somebody else would have paid it and been hired instead. The supply exceeded the demand. To me, it's simply about market forces.
I know a few people who said (don't know them personally) that they would not come to Comair because it was PFT and violated their principles, so they went to American Eagle instead. Well, I'm all for principles, but the fact is, the people who went to AE are hardly better off than the people that came to Comair. They are paid substantially less, have one of the worst contracts in the business and fly mostly obsolete equipment and the company hires more inexperienced people than we ever have. That's not their fault, but neither is it the fault of the guys that came to Comair. Eagle's hiring policies did not change because they were not PFT, and Comair's didn't change because we were PFT. Where does that leave us?
Now we never had anything that even resembles remotely what they do at Gulfstream. No pilot here ever paid a nickel for anything once he got hired. All the paying took place before the hiiring and it did NOT guarantee that you would be hired. However, it was guaranteed that if you didn't pay you would NOT be hired. The airline didn't establish the program so it could lower standards or hire unqualified people for less. They did it to make money and reduce training costs. That they accomplished.
At the same time we also hired quite a few pilots that came from the ab-initio program at the Comair Academy and still do. Those folks also went through the PFT program when it was in place. Today, we still hire the "best" kids from the ab-initio/instructor program but the PFT is long dead and buried. The "quality" of the new hire has not changed one way or the other.
Overall, the number of applicants has always exceeded the number of available positions and the airline has always been able to pick and choose who it wants to hire. In today's market, the competitive numbers "off the street" are higher than they used to be, but the minimums haven't changed. The truth is, that a large number of the more "experienced" (in terms of hours) people we're hiring today bring with them quite a few more "problems" than the military guys or the less experienced youngsters. There is nothing harder than trying to change the bad habits or the different habits of someone who thinks he knows a lot more than he really does.
I also don't really buy in to the "pay your dues" concept. That is also poorly defined. As I tried to point out rhetorically, I defy any one to tell me difinitevely how I can tell when you've paid enough dues or you haven't. As long as you have the required minimum hours, licenses and education, there is no need to be "paying dues" in my book.
In most airlines, the people doing the hiring are not pilots. They are Human Resources folks who know nothing about airplane driving. They are hiring a "profile" that management has determined it wants. Yes, you do have to have the licenses required, but your attitude, your degree and your ability to answer psych questions that paint your "profile" have a lot more to do with who gets hired than your flying skillls.
There really is no accurate means of determining your flying skills in a pilot interview. Many airlines, large and small, don't even put you in a simulator any more as part of the process. Others put you into some albatross of a training device that anyone who flies real airplanes would have difficulty controlling. It's a farce.
Luck is perhaps a major component of the equation and networking, particularly if you are former military, plays a major role. Many very compent pilots with thousand of hours can't even get an interview, while others with far less experience or flying skill, get the job.
What is the real difference between using a buddy that has an "in" to get you a preferential interview or spending a few bucks to buy some training to get an interview? Both give you an advantage over the guy that doesn't have either.
Based on those conditions, if you can find a way to get your foot in the door ahead of the next guy, why shouldn't you? Once you get the seniority number, the airline will teach you what they want you to know, and pay you to learn it. If you spend a few bucks to get a head start on that number, so what? Over a 35 year career at a major, 10 seniority numbers that you don't have could cost you a million dollars in real money.
Even at a small airline like Comair, 10 numbers that you don't have can cost many, many bucks lost while you're working, affect your quality of life seriously and definitely impact your retirement.
Once you get hired, I don't think you should have to pay for anything. Most real airline contracts won't let you do that anyway. IMO, and outfit like Gulfstream is not an airline. It's a scheduled air taxi/flying school where the pilots in both seats are paying to learn. Yes, its owners are taking advantage of those kids, but what do you expect? They are well known scabs.
On the "quickie upgrades" well, I have my problems with those too. The truth is (and you can flame me if you want) I don't allow my family to travel on airplanes with amateur captains, even when its "free". There are enough outfits that don't promote people with no experience that I can get around on.
I will never become expert and flying and airplane. I've done it long enough to know that. I realize that everyone has to learn and no one knows everything. I also know that a lot of young pilots do very well. A lot more are just plain lucky and you don't know about it. I just don't want to be in the back of an airplane when I'm not reasonably certain that the guys in the front are not guessing about what they do.
In most cases I realize I'm just assuming that is the case. On the other hand, if you've been in the business awhile, it's not a great big secret who has low standards and who doesn't. When a so called airline is willing to push its luck with novice pilots flying as captains, chances are it is also pushing its luck with a lot of other critical things and is probably pilot pushing to the max. I can do without those thrills.
As an example, when an airline captain briefs an approach by saying "there's no going around", prangs the machine until it nearly breaks and doesn't even know it, something is very wrong at that airline. The Lord knows we have enough difficulty without that.
I'm sure I'll catch h*ll for saying that, but it's how I feel personally. I don't ask anyone to agree.
However, if you think I'm full of it, please tell me where I've gone wrong and how I should adjust my thinking. I'll do it if you can show me a better way.
