Pay for Time or Training?

[utahpilot]

ends and means

yes, I believe the question here is 'does the end justify the means?'

myself and many others have heard these kind of comments from everyone:

"Seniority is everything-your lifestyle, pay, schedule, etc. Everyday that goes by that you don't establish it is a day someone else will. Get your time and get your spot as fast as you can."

"Quality of time is most important. Get the most ME turbine time you can."

I could go on, and I should clarify I'm not defending anything. I don't have the cash to buy my hours, but I can't help feeling cheated that what matters in an interview and what will pay off in the end (seniority) doesn't always jive with the value judgements that are made.

For me, I'll keep instructing to build time, probably have to end up buying lots of ME time because I can't get enough students to build it, and show up to interview someday hoping like everyone else. I'd just hate to be sitting reserve for a year and run into one of my co-horts and hear him/her say "I did the time build thing, and it got me here faster and with better experience."

your well thought out answers are appreciated..

UP

 

[TangoIndiaMike]

My 1st and ONLY Post on PFT

Here it is...not that it matters, but this is my view of PFT (be it training, or flight hours). I am posting it once, so that people may see another angle on it...Good, Bad, or Ugly...

I am assuming that the person's goal is to make it to a 121 Major...This is the economic perspective behind a smart person's decision to go the PFT route.

1. No matter who we are, we all have one thing in common...limited time. We each have only 24 hours per day on this earth. Time is the ONLY limiting variable that is constant for each person.

2. Therefore, every person should be working to reach their own personal goals by maximizing their use of their own time.

3. So if someone has money and can bypass 1-3 YEARS of CFI/Traffic-Watch/Cargo, get a lower seniority number, and be on the path to make more money, then it only makes sense that they do it.

This is an investment that will pay for itself in: higher salary sooner, 'better job', additional 1-2 years at 74/76 payscale on the backside of your career, etc.

4. People will (and should) trade $, etc, in order to maximize their time.

**PFT may not be fair to the people without money, but from the perspective of someone that has resources, and wants to minimize their time at the bottom of the ladder, it makes sense.

Maybe the people who PFT are 'weaker' or less driven to achieving their goal? Or maybe they understand the value of time? Or maybe neither...maybe their Daddy made them do it?

Disclaimer...I am CFI flying about 10 hours/week, with no ties to PFT, 121, 135, or even Banner Towing. I understand why people PFT, but it is not for me.

 

[Timebuilder]

Just as with the RJ debate, few will become convinced to change the perspective that they currently value. The hope here is to share the range of opinions on these topics, particularly where a younger pilot is concerned.

The opinion that you need to get the seniority number ASAP has some merit, but it is endemic in our modern culture to seek goals in a framework of "instant gratification". If it were otherwise, we wouldn't see ads that promise to take you from zero time to the right seat in "x" number of months.

The debate revolves around whether the PFT pilot is as experienced as those who took the more "traditional" route of instruction and freight flying, or if the PFT pilot simply has found a way to trade money for some numbers on a paper. The ethics are in the eye of the beholder, and the beholder may be a hiring captain who worked his way up through the ranks. Is the benefit worth the risk?

May the Buyer Beware.

 

[canadflyau]

my first post on this PFT stuff

Well as I see it (am furloughed- trained on the DHC-8, given over 500 hrs of dual, 150 of which was as an MEI, and only 900TT, earned my private went to 4 yr college got instrument & commercial, then paid for my CFI while I co-oped at Delta and only paid through CFI) That is my perspective.

I just wonder what all these people have to say about programs that I have come across where you drop 40 grand and you come out the other side as a CFI working for the company whom you paid the money to for your training, and in the process you bought turbine time, included in the training. Or Tab Express where after your private almost all your training is in a King Air (by the way I think it cost almost $75K to go to this school)

For some of these responses I have read, I think the only way that person could be the most ethical person during their training is to have the majority of it paid for... and I think for those people the only route I know that will do that is the military.

Here comes my .02, I am furloughed and can't get ACA to even glance in my direction why? My total time is low. Even though I clawed my way to get that 121 job w/out dropping a dime. Would I love to flight instruct somemore? YOU BET!!! Can I? NO... Every flight school (and I have made multiple visits to every one within 60 miles) that I have walked into to hand my resume has handed it right back, because there is not enough students and a flood of flight instructors. What it used to be (pre 9/11) was a catch 22, if you had 500 hrs you couldn't get a Instructing job because you were going to get hired and leave the school to quickly. I don't think I can fault those guys for trying to find alternate ways to get the credentials they need while getting practical experience and needed flight time.. and to those of you who feel its a blanket opinion that HR doesn't like to see PFT (Alpine Air) I was told the exact opposite by one of the CP's who interviews pilots at ASA. WHAT I FIND DISCONCERTING is the programs that are out there (San Juan Program) and I qoute from their web-site "Upon completion of the program, successful graduates go through the Mesa hiring process. Those who are hired then go directly into the right seat as First Officers. Average flight time at the point of hire is 300 hours! "

I personally find this to be more of a threat, encouraging pilots to pay big bucks and come out with ABSOLUTELY NO PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE flying a jet .80 mach and with 50 people on board down to mins in rain. Just ask most MESA captains for their opinion. Paying for additional training to be ready when preperation meets opportunity versus paying for training so to get a airline job effortlessly without gaining practical experience (ie good hard IMC, CFIing) that is the injustice to our profession in my opinion.

I personally am thinking of joining a flying club for the time being, while I answer calls in a cubical to support my family.

 

[de727ups]

Rolling eyes saying "here we go again"..

"My question was, (taken from his statements) aren't 300 turbine hours flying cargo in weather and in a real world ATC environment more similar to the 121 job he seeks? Doesn't that, therefore, make for better experience for someone trying to improve his skills in order to move on from instructing to the airlines? Doesn't the experience gained in the Beech far outweigh the experience one could get splitting hood time with a buddy in a light twin?"

I would answer all your questions with a YES. Yet, you say he was a required crewmember and he paid for it? To that I say he's one small step above a scab and that far outweights all the benefits of the program. These programs take advantage of pilots by making the right seat a profit center and by taking away what would traditionally be a paying job. Sure...it wouldn't pay much but that's not the point. The only way to stop these programs is for guys to quit going there.

So an interviewer at COEX thought it was a great idea. Any management puke or pro-management line guy interviewer is gonna say that. How about the vast majority of hard working line guys you gotta live with. Few fights will start over PFT on the line....but inside, most guys who came up the hard way (the vast majority) are going to look down on PFT.

I'd feel less strongly about it if the PFTer was NOT a required crewmember and taking away a job.

 

[cvsfly]

People (in this country) are free do whatever they want with their money - by time, PFT or whatever. The airlines in a free market are free to pay or be paid for their crews. We as professional pilots are free to organize against practices that will deteriorate our profession in just compensation. We as consumers are free to determine who we fly with. Are you comfortable putting your family on an aircraft crewed by an overworked, low-paid captain and an inexperienced low time pilot who is there because he can pay to be there? In the end, being a pilot is just another job. We are all trying to support our families, our selves, and (in the case of those suffering from Aviation Induced Divorce Sydrome) all the above. Don't buy into the hype that this is a dream job and you would do anything to get to that great airline job in the sky. (Yes it can be pretty good - keep it a secret, but there are plenty of sacrifices too. I would hope all of us would be able to get other jobs if flying did not work out. It is not everybodys right to make it in this business. Pilots are a small segment of the aviation picture. There are costs and benefits to all segments. Those operators who can manage all cost and benefits in a reasonable way have a good chance of surviving and lasting long enough to employ the next generation of bus drivers. Those that don't may not have a right to continue to exist. Shed a few tears if you want, but move on.

 

[Ty Webb]

T-I-M:

PFT doesn't guarantee anything. Anyone who has been in this industry for any period of time can tell you that. Eastern and Pan Am were some of the proudest names in the industry. With a seniority number from either of them, and a bus ticket, you can ride the bus.

When I hired on at AirTran, most of my class were guys from Midway. Most of them had been Captains, and most of them thought that they would be there for life. Now, they're starting over, in the right seat, and hoping that this will be a job through retirement.

If life were simply about making money quickly, then, yes, PFT would be the way to go. However, most people enter this industry because they love to fly. When you get to fly the big stuff, you realize that it isn't "flying" as you knew it and loved it. It has its own challenges, and some days are beautiful and fun, and others are long days plagued with delays and frustrations. It is a j-o-b, pure and simple. It's a better job for me than most, but it is most definitely a job.

In other words, don't be in such a stampede to the flight deck, get here when it is time, and enjoy all of the steps along the way. It'll give you things to remember and think about, when you're droning along on your third 2.5 hour leg, watching the little white airplane track the magenta course line . . . . .

 

[Timebuilder]

>> cadadflyay wrote:For some of these responses I have read, I think the only way that person could be the most ethical person during their training is to have the majority of it paid for... and I think for those people the only route I know that will do that is the military.

The PFT debate isn't about getting your initial training paid for you. People pay to learn all kinds of things. I was on the Dean's list at college, and I was offered ZERO scholarships because of my gender and ethnic background, although I made little money. I had to pay full price for all of my courses, while those with poorer quality work and lower admission grades and SAT scores paid little or nothing, because they wre "preferred" students. End of that speech.

PFT is about paying someone to allow you to work as a crewmember where you would have otherwise been hired and trained at your employer's expense. Usually this only buys you a limited amount of time as the crewmember, at which point you are replaced by the next "crewmember", the one who is ready to write this "employer" a check. This displaces a qualified pilot who is in need of a job. The employer takes advantage of these paying pilots, who want to get their seniority number at any cost.

I hope that gives you a clearer picture of this ongoing discussion. Using the search function will uncover many opinions and facts surrounding this issue.

Good observations, Ty. I spend a lot of time looking at that little white airplane....

 

[canadflyau]

Please correct me if I am wrong

I am unfamiliar with the Alpine Air, Eagle Aviation (I believe I heard they do this) operations... but aren't these companies flying their a/c as single pilot on their operating certficate? So therefore them offering a training program on the side isn't taking anyones job, but just an additional source of income for these companies. (Again I am speculating and asking, not stating!! lol!) but in order for these guys/gals to sit up front and log time they have to do a SIC check, right? but aren't a required crewmember..

 

[Timebuilder]

Whether or not they need an SIC check isn't what I would be wondering about. If this is a single pilot operation, not under part 91, how would they be able to log ANY of the time? What would be the point? That sounds like their insurance company wants a second pilot.

I sat as a PAID pilot in the right seat of a Navajo, but logged none of that time. Instead, I logged the part 61 PIC time as sole manipulator on the part 91 dead legs. For me, that made the whole deal worthwhile.

 

[canadflyau]

Timebuilder-
What I am getting at with that statement was, everyone draws there own ethical line in the sand.. Some guys call the All ATPS and these other companies "pilot factories" and say the training isn't worth anything with the CFI logging in the back seat, a safety pilot in the right seat and someone under the hood in the left. What I am saying is that everyone is getting to the job in their own way, and to say that my route that is different than what someone else is taking is wrong.. I just don't buy it.

Here is a specific example. When my dad was FO on the F-100 at AMR he flew with a captain who was a multi-millionaire from ATL. His family owns a little company called Georgia Pacific. Since he basically set the company up to run itself he was bored. He got very involved in his companies corp aviation department. He then decided to do "whatever it takes to get to the big iron." and I quote him. Now, I am unable to get to where he is the way he is. I don't believe he did anything wrong by buying his own little jet to get the flight time he needed to get on with American in the shortest amount of time.

However, I do believe if it is damaging to our profession (taking steps back not forward) then our Union, who should be overseeing out entire profession should be fighting it to protect the unknowing individual. Until I hear that this Alpine Air is required by the FAA to have a qualified SIC on-board, I am not going to cast a blanket against a pilot who feels that way is his/her fastest route to realizing their dream until I hear differently. But even then its ALPA I believe that should step up and address the situation (am I a dreamer or what, LOL!!)

 

[canadflyau]

Good question timebuilder

I think (but personally have no 135 experience) that on a 135 flight you must have a 135 SIC checkride to serve as an SIC, then and only then you can log the flight time regardless of the certification (single pilot) of the airplane.. however an SIC would not be required for the operation but you could have one... please correct me?

 

[Timebuilder]

>>What I am getting at with that statement was, everyone draws there own ethical line in the sand.. Some guys call the All ATPS and these other companies "pilot factories" and say the training isn't worth anything with the CFI logging in the back seat, a safety pilot in the right seat and someone under the hood in the left. What I am saying is that everyone is getting to the job in their own way, and to say that my route that is different than what someone else is taking is wrong.. I just don't buy it.

True. Ethics, as a discipline, has come to embrace a more "situational" approach in recent decades. An ethical decision is on its most solid ground when it is based on the best standards of a society as a whole, such as a support for life and happiness. In the context of aviation, a personal decision which compromises the business as a whole, and working pilots in particular, needs additional scrutiny. The individual needs to consider if the ends are really able to justify the means, taking the Big Picture into the decision.

Pilot factories, and according to my info, ALL ATPS, don't give AMEL instruction from the back seat. Some operators do this, and it too is frowned upon my most MEI's. I know I don't feel like I would be fulfilling my responsibilities for the safety of the flight if I was unable to take the flight controls in an emergency.

If the instruction is simply multiengine instrument, and both pilots are multi certified, that is a different matter. Even the safety pilot can learn from the ATC conversations and instructor verbal guidance. While unconventional, this doesn't approach the questions surrounding PFT.

Others may correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that having passed an SIC checkride makes the time loggable as SIC time, unless the SIC requirements such as 61.51 f (1) and (2) are met. I'm not sure how the FAA views all of the nuances of the phrase "the regulations under which the flight is being conducted". My guess is that holding the SIC paperwork doesn't in itself fulfill that requirement.

 

[canadflyau]

A difference

Timebuilder:"Pilot factories, and according to my info, ALL ATPS, don't give AMEL instruction from the back seat. Some operators do this, and it too is frowned upon my most MEI's. I know I don't feel like I would be fulfilling my responsibilities for the safety of the flight if I was unable to take the flight controls in an emergency.
If the instruction is simply multiengine instrument, and both pilots are multi certified, that is a different matter. Even the safety pilot can learn from the ATC conversations and instructor verbal guidance. While unconventional, this doesn't approach the questions surrounding PFT."

The 135 logging issue.. seems like we are all unclear. I simply feel that if they have set up a program to train that is not preventing a required qualified applicant from sitting in the right seat and being paid, go for it! What great experience.

However, the three people in the cockpit logging time (and its not a 727) is a perfect example (and I wasn't picking on All ATP's) but just using "pilot factories" as they are called as a similar debate. I personally have no problem with these so called pilot factories. I instructed with one of their products and he was great. However, there are some people who refuse to fly with someone who chose that style of training. They unfoundedly claim this pilot "bought his ratings."

The debate of 3 people logging time, call your FSDO you'll get differing views from them. This serves as a perfect example of our pilot mentalities, one of us would have to be right or wrong and be debated until blue in the face, just like this PFT debate. My personal view is it is not acceptable, so I personally would not do it when teaching any of my students. (Call me a control freak,LOL!)

The basic question.. is it pay for a job or pay for training. Paying for a job, clearly wrong in my mind and I feel ALPA should do their best to rid these practices for the best of our profession.

"Ethics, as a discipline, has come to embrace a more "situational" approach in recent decades"
I couldn't agree with statement anymore! Thats why I write the line is in the sand.. changing with every situation. Bravo Timebuilder!

Later!

 

[Timebuilder]

>>The 135 logging issue.. seems like we are all unclear. I simply feel that if they have set up a program to train that is not preventing a required qualified applicant from sitting in the right seat and being paid, go for it! What great experience.

The logging of SIC time is set out in the aforementioned part of 14CFR. The actual answer will vary from carrier to carrier, as some company's have clearly been granted two-crew status in what would normally be single pilot aircraft, and AirNet is a good example. Do a great many companies have this regulatory status? I doubt it.

The PFT issue comes into play whenever someone is paying to be occupying a seat in a cockpit for a revenue generating flight. If that were not so, the carrier would have to hire and pay a qualified pilot, just as I was for the Navajo copilot job I once had. Setting up a training program by a school is one thing. Taking money from a pilot in order to advance the safety of your operation where you would otherwise have to hire a pilot is the other.

 

[bobbysamd]

Situational ethics

I appreciate Timebuilder touching on "situational ethics." Whatever is right in the situation. The end justifies the means.

Let me give you an example of situational ethics. Let's say you have no money and haven't eaten in three days. You're in a grocery store. You are in the produce aisle and no one is around and you see no TV camera lenses poking out from the ceiling. Do you take an apple and eat it? Once again, you have no money. Many people would do just that because (1) they figure the store won't miss one apple and/or (2) they're hungry and that is more important than being a thief, so that makes it all right to rip off an apple from the grocery store. Well, maybe the grocery store won't miss the apple and you're not hungry, but how does that affect society as a whole? Maybe you don't care, but others do.

So, let's say I'm a pilot and am qualified for the commuters. I am not out of work but want to go to work very badly for a commuter. However, jobs are tight and I cannot interest a commuter in my quals and experience. In fact, people with lesser quals are being hired. I really could care less about seniority because flying for a regional is all I ever set out to do in aviation. If I drop $7K to SleazeAir, I will get an interview, training and a job. I have the bread, so going into debt is not an issue. Do I pay the $7K and buy the job?

I guess I would ask myself if any job is worth paying for. I would ask myself how I would feel about knowing that I am as qualified if not more so than other applicants who've been hired for free and I paid for my job. I was confronted with such questions ten years ago. The commuters were paying just as lousy as they do know. I asked myself if it was worth sacrifcing my self esteem and values to pay for what might be a cool but a poorly-paying job. I asked myself if I would do the same if I were still in radio. Bottom line, it was a job, a cool job, maybe, but still, just a job. I thought to myself, there's nothing the matter with me. I have worth. I am capable and hard-working and can contribute to any employer. Paying for a job is tantamount to groveling and I don't need to grovel for what boils down to be a very poorly-paying job, at least at the beginning and for some time thereafter. That's how I analyzed P-F-T. Maybe others don't mind if they grovel to get that job, but what kind of message does that send to generally anti-pilot management? Think about it.

I also asked myself, how I would feel if I encountered someone who bought his job or was otherwise unqualified but got the job. I faced that situation many times when I was in radio. I found that I always resented people who were less-qualified than me when they were hired. I always wondered how they got a job that I had to struggle to get.

I realize there will always be people who get jobs because their parents are neighbors of the chief pilot, or because Dad sees the CEO at the country club. That's not entirely fair, either, but not much can be done about that. Still, it is not fair that the size of one's wallet might be the sole qualifier of getting a job. Believe me, others will know and will resent it and resent you.

Good luck with your choice.

 

[canadflyau]

Paying for training vs. Paying for a job

Timebuilder, where did you find a job as co-pilot in a Navajo? Did they have you to lower the insurance premiums? Was the PIC limited on his/her lic?

I need a job like that!! That would beat the heck out of my cubical!

 

[Ned]

Drop it

Boy has this topic been beat to death. The issue is not is PFT bad, but how low is it ok to stoop. I find it annoying that you people will take a regional job for 20K a year. If no one took the job then they might pay a reasonable wage. But you guys take the jobs, the pay stinks, and it is what it is. So lay off those guys who PFT, sure they are stooping lower than you would, but there are lots of people who find any regional FO just as guilty of lowering industry standards.

Keeping my desk job and wishing it were a lot harder to get a pilot's license!

 

[Timebuilder]

I was hired by some folks who knew me as a student several years ago, at another airport.

The chief pilot was my DE for my private, and the PIC had been my multi instructor.

My presence in the airplane was by customer request, for which they paid an extra fee. I imagine the insurance company saw me as an asset: experienced multi and instrument instructor, second pair of eyes, radio operator to free up the flying pilot for greater concentration.

While the 135 legs were not loggable, I enjoyed the extra pay and the class B experience. The part 91 dead legs were a teriffic plus. The insurance company only specified that the PIC fly in the left seat. As an MEI, I was already comfortable in the right seat, so it worked out well. I feel it helps me in the Lear, too.

To summarize, this isn't a job you get by faxing an app. It was a matter of networking. In the case of the Lear, I had a captain's name to mention in my cover letter.

Talk with people. Be friendly. Ask questions that allow others to share their positive job qualities with you. Let them know that you would love to have a job like that. In this case, unfortunately, the Navajos have been sold.

 

[Timebuilder]

Since new pilots join our ranks, not to mention this webite, on a dialy basis we will probably review this topic regularly, along with ALPA, security, scope, equipment, accidents, regulations, etc.

When you tire of a topic, do what I do.

Don't click.