Free First Officers!

[KATL8R26L]

pft

There is another company down in miami that does the same thing.

There deal cost 20,k you go to class you pass you ride for 200 hrs in a 727 then if they dont take you, you are out looking for a job.

i think i will just continue to fly one hour at a time, at least when im riding with an older captian , i can say i built my book by my self, it may take me a little longer , but the journey is worth the trip.

BTW check out the Peninsular Grill, the next time you fly to KCHS, THATS WHY FLYING SO GREAT IT BRINGS A WHOLE NEW MEANING TO WHATS FOR DINNER.


FLY SAFE,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[Eagleflip]

Fair vs. Unfair..An American Perspective

I see this argument in another light.

PFT represents an ethical dilemma that Americans abhor. Folks in the USA (I sure other countries feel similiarly) believe that fair play is essential in our lives.

Face it: we Americans hate cheaters. Those kids that knew they were tagged out at first base but argued their point ceaselessly were ostracized. Pete Rose is paying for his indiscretion years after the gambling episode. Heck, we even get ticked off when someone cuts in line in front of us when waiting at the bank. It was my turn!

PFT is seen as cheating. It allows those with money to advance more quickly than those without. It gives a perceived unfair advantage to the minority that have resources to gain a competitive advantage over their cohorts. Americans hate an uneven playing field--we seem to believe that we should all have the same chances at getting a job as the other guy; that personal sacrifice should gain advantages; that the aphorism "Seems like the harder I work, the luckier I get" should come true.

PFT sidesteps those arguments and allows those with resources to advance in a non-competitive way. It is an unethical (from the American context of fair play) way to get a job. "Demeaning pilots" or "disgracing the industry" has nothing to do with it. We all know pilots--having paid for their own training ad nauseum--who disgrace the industry by some action or another on the job, regardless of PFT status.

Further, the PFT evaluation process can be construed as biased; again, it seems unfair. Safe flying record notwithstanding, the impression is that anyone who pays for a program such as this may go through an easier screening system for checkrides and qualifications.

Specifically, our economic system supports this concept. Those who provide a "service" such as PFT want to continue their business. Flunking those who pay for training is therefore more problematic; if you (the check airman) are too hard on them, your track record of success may be sullied. That may well lead to inflated performances or checkride-passing improproprieties.

Just another thought in an otherwise excellent (if predictable) thread.

Best of luck to all in these trying times--and I mean it.

 

[LittleDeuce]

PFT

I know two great young Swedish guys that are starting B-737NG training today in Amster**CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** for RyanAir.

They had to pay 29,100 Euros (about $30,000) for thier training.

With 300 hours each Total Time, they will have a great career with the "Southwest" of Europe.

Is it worth it? You decide.

 

[bobbysamd]

As always, I love a good P-F-T discussion

Eagleflip wrote an excellent post.

A big concern about P-F-T should be fraud. The screening process might be easier because the bottom line is to get in you produce a check. Training might be a different concern because that playing field can potentially be tilted. P-F-T outfits are out to make money; therefore, how do you know for sure that the training, standardization and evaluation process is fair? How do you know for sure that your instructors are training you well enough to pass your checkrides? How do you know that the check airmen don't have marching orders to wash out people, no matter how well they do, to let the P-F-T company keep your deposit while showing you the door (and generating a bogus PRIA report)? Of course, you can never prove that you were busted unfairly; it's your word against the check airman's. That's what I mean about fraud.

Finally, getting a type rating in order to apply for a job is not P-F-T. That B737 type goes on your pilot certificate. It is yours. It is valid anywhere and can be marketed anywhere - given the caveat that type ratings usually don't mean much unless you have time in type. By the way, type ratings are tax-deductable.

PS-Why did the board censor Amsterdam in Little Deuce's post?

 

[LittleDeuce]

PFT

I don't know Bobby? I did not put anything objectionable on the post?

 

[wmudriver]

[
They make pilots look like a bunch of chumps. Imagine lawyers working for free or poverty level wages in order to get litigation experience so they could make it to the "major" firms and hopefully get paid the "big" bucks for a few years before being forced to retire. It wouldn't happen. They are too smart for that. There has to be some way to stop this madness! [/B]

In fact laywers do work for dirt wages. Its called public defender. Pilots infact work for dirt wages when they start out. Its called CFI, or Regional FO.

 

[Timebuilder]

Another PFT discussion without moi? Say it ain't so!

Skaz wrote:

So, my friend, what is wrong with this scenario(?)

What is wrong is that people who are paying for this "operating expereince" are fostering an environment of exploitaion and desperation. Yes, it's a shame that so many pilots in the nineties fell in with this approach. If ALL of the operators had been doing this, then there would have been no moral/ethical choice except to decide on a different line of work. I'm certain that many pilots made this decision to change careers, just as many are doing right now. As for me, if I had kids to feed, I'd be doing a morning radio show in Tennessee. "...and now here's bubba with the morning prices..."

Bobby, having been in broadcasting, knows about the "gopher" system. As a young intern-for-free, you go-for coffee, go-for cigarettes, etc. You aren't paid, but you are not performing a required function at the station. You are not paying someone so that you can say that you had a "job". Essentially, when you pay someone to act as a required crewmember, it isn't really a job at all. In a job, the company pays required labor as a "cost of doing business".

Maybe the answer is a required FAA passenger briefing: "Today, my copilot is Stuart. Say hello, Stuart. (Hi, everyone!). Stuart is hoping to fly for Delta someday, and he has hired our airline to help him learn how to operate a turboprop, and allow him to log the flight time for his resume."
(Stuart): Thanks, Bob. I'd like to express my gratitude to all of you 19 folks who chose to fly with us today. Without your help, this airplane would have been waaaay too expensive for me to rent on my own, totally. You guys are awesome!"
(Bob): "OK, Stuart. Folks, Stuart has spent a good amount of money for this, so let's all be nice to him. In the event of a depressurization, masks will come down..."

By this time, the pax are standing, and testing the opertion of the emergency exits...

Seriously, paying passengers have the right to assume that the entire crew is trained at company expense, which indicates that the company is not using the right seat as a profit center. This means that the pilots who were hired reflect the result of a competitive interview and perhaps a nominal application fee. A type rating can open a door at any company that opertes that type of aircraft. It is portable, as mentioned above.

We can continue to debate the ways "dues" are paid in this industry. Was my VFR CFI experience valuable? Yep, it was some of the most enlightening experience I have had in airplanes. Admittedly, most of my dual given was "advanced", and it was valuable, too. More to the point of this discussion is this: when I was instructing, I was a part of a system that rewards hard work, incremental learning, and the ethic of a real job that generates economic value for both the employee and the employer. PFT fails to do that, even when you are "fed back" some small portion of the money you paid up front. Unless they are paying you interest on your money, it's still PFT.

What's the value of this thread? Someone is reading about this controversial topic for the first time, and may shy away, luckily, after reading this discussion.

 

[Mrs_Boeing]

You people just do not get it do you? It's economics stupid. Just plain old economics 101, and our burning desire to fly professionally. Remember how badly we all wanted to be in the left seat of a 767 at Delta with the vest and the hat and the whole can-o-worms? We all wanted this so badly from jump street that had we been financially able to PFT we'd have done so. All of us. Period. Don't say "Not me!", yes YOU!!!! Those who say otherwise are not being honest with thenselves. The complainers and whiners didn't have the means to PFT and that's all it is. If I'd had daddy give me $50K for training I'd have done it too, instead of busting my rather large behind at a little FBO with a bunch of whiney juvinille immature jerkoffs. And I'd probably have that Delta job (lay-off?) now instead of running a 20-year old Citation all over the Southeast for $45K per year. And as for the companies that require PFT, it's just smart financially. They are in business to make money, not supply you with a job just because you paid alot of money to learn to fly and now feel you are owed a position. As long as there are people with the means and the will to pay for training, it will happen. Supply and demand. Simple isn't it? If the supply of pilots went south like in the early 60s PFT would go away for a while. Then it'd come back as the market was again flooded with pilots. The owners of these companies, and the pilots who work for them, are not out to get you personally. They are just trying to make a living.

Some of you are very bitter and you really need to take a long look at yourself and take some responsibility for your choices in life. The views here generally do not reflect the attitude of the majority of PROFESSIONAL pilots who actually fly for a living thank God. Just a vocal minority of immature, needle-dicked, egotistical whackoffs (Sorta like WO school). Please grow the hell up.

Mama B.
"Aviation Cute"

 

[Eagleflip]

PS-Why did the board censor Amsterdam in Little Deuce's post?

I guess they should have named it "Amsterdang"...

 

[Eagleflip]

Mrs. Boeing wrote:

The views here generally do not reflect the attitude of the majority of PROFESSIONAL pilots who actually fly for a living thank God. Just a vocal minority of immature, needle-dicked, egotistical whackoffs (Sorta like WO school). Please grow the hell up.

Ummm....two outta three ain't bad (in the immortal words of Meatloaf).