PFT'er damages A-320

[135wannabe]

PFT'er is a poor description. Ab Initio "prodigy" is more fitting.

I'm looking for a job and willing to do anything for it. I heard that Gulfstream Airlines in FL likes to hire low time pilots but the pay is very low.

 

[T-prop]

I'm looking for a job and willing to do anything for it. I heard that Gulfstream Airlines in FL likes to hire low time pilots but the pay is very low.

lol, go for it! At least as a Gulfstream product, you'll have more than 200 hours TT hours before you even taxi behind an A320 let alone fly one.

 

[Flyer1015]

Times are tough now, management could easily start up PFT again. There is always someone wiling to pay, after all, if they sold someone on how they can get ahead(like chickensled thought) they will get a ton of suckers to cough up the money.

Whatever. I'm out of this argument now. To each his own. But everyone ends up paying in some sense to get to where they are.


As far as your management requiring pilots to pay comment, SWA requires all its pilot potentials to drop several large Gs in order to obtain employment at the airline. Yet, the line of people wanting to work there (and willing to drop large Gs) for SWA is miles and miles long.

Oh well, to each his own.

 

[Nindiri]

But herein lies the problem with that.

That gets into "ME ME ME" Syndrome, that sure you are getting to cut ahead of others, but at what cost?

Look at the world besides just yourself, and at the industry as a whole. Would your actions be an example for others to follow to make the industry better? Or if everyone did not and refused to PFT, refused to accept low pay, result in a better industry for pilots?

I want what I do, or at least how I go about it, to be an good example of what to do, and pilots who refuse to PFT, are an good example to others also. I dont think you can argue that paying to jump ahead, is something good for the industry or pilots as a whole, but just only a selfish act about the industry and "ME". And it helps to screw others too.

Our industry would be better if NO ONE did PFT. Sure its easy to beat up on PCL over it, but I am sure there are LOTS of others on Flightinfo who paid for regional jobs too. Their explanation is "Oh, well thats just the way it was". It was only the way it was, because pilots were willing to put up with it.

You do make some good points.

First, though, I think the "jumping ahead" thing is a non-issue. It's neither fair or unfair, it's just a fact of life that opportunities are not equal for everyone. you might as well accuse a pilot who studied full-time and got his ratings in 8 months of unfairly jumping ahead of the pilot who had to work and study part-time and took 2 years. Furthermore, if I work hard all my life saving my money and I want to spend it helping my children get ahead in their chosen profession, you can be sure I will feel no guilt whatsoever.

I do think your point about PFT and management is quite valid, though. I don't like PFT anymore than you do, but it's not some boogeyman, it's just one more factor I would consider. If I had to choose between a 10K PFT job that paid 30K the second year, and a non-PFT that paid 18K the second year, I'm going to choose the PFT. It's simple math; the PFT pays more money overall.

 

[MJ42]

You do make some good points.

First, though, I think the "jumping ahead" thing is a non-issue. It's neither fair or unfair, it's just a fact of life that opportunities are not equal for everyone. you might as well accuse a pilot who studied full-time and got his ratings in 8 months of unfairly jumping ahead of the pilot who had to work and study part-time and took 2 years. Furthermore, if I work hard all my life saving my money and I want to spend it helping my children get ahead in their chosen profession, you can be sure I will feel no guilt whatsoever.

I do think your point about PFT and management is quite valid, though. I don't like PFT anymore than you do, but it's not some boogeyman, it's just one more factor I would consider. If I had to choose between a 10K PFT job that paid 30K the second year, and a non-PFT that paid 18K the second year, I'm going to choose the PFT. It's simple math; the PFT pays more money overall.

What job is this? Where, in your math, is the PFT accounted for? Are you saying 30K the second year minus the 10K PFT which = 20K 2nd year? That's pathetic! PFT jobs (at least in the U.S.)are the lowest paying out there! What PFT job pays 30K 2nd year? You don't seem to have a good understanding of how PFT worked, who it hurt, how it hurt them and why it's bad for the industry.

First, you're wrong, it IS a fair or unfair issue between pilots. It's just another way management has you brainwashed. Back in the mid 90's there were guys with 3000 or more hours of flight instructing who deserved the opportunity but could not even get an interview flying 19 seat turboprops. Why couldn't they get the interview??? Because 200 hour wonders with some money were willing to do anything to throw their future "brothers" under the bus. Management saw there were suckers out there and took advantage of it!

It's scary you think this practice is okay. Why do you think PCL now condemns PFT? BECAUSE IT'S WRONG, takes advantage of new(and inexperienced) pilots, hurts pilots that are paying their dues the right way and it's DANGEROUS(initial post is a good example of how dangerous). Would you want to put your family on an aircraft flown by some 300 hour F/O who can't land?

This is just one of many reasons there is no unity in this profession. I've been hard on PCL in the past, I'm sure he's a good guy. But I get pissed on how opinionated he is and then criticizes and lectures others about unity. And, like I said earlier, PFTer JoeM is the same way. Except he is still trying to grab seniority by lecturing about the stupid RJDC. These guys did it once(screwing fellow pilots) , I think they'd do it again if given the opportunity.

 

[Nindiri]

Blah blah blah...

You don't even have a clue what the point was, you just recite the standard mantra of "NO PFT" like a pilot reciting a checklist by memory. Your attitude is management's dream.

 

[MJ42]

Blah blah blah...

You don't even have a clue what the point was, you just recite the standard mantra of "NO PFT" like a pilot reciting a checklist by memory. Your attitude is management's dream.

I lived it jacka$$, I was one of those affected. I chose to flight instruct, then 135 then ANG therefore bypassing all those PFT idiots. YOU'RE THE ONE WITHOUT A CLUE! I did things the right way!

 

[Nindiri]

I lived it jacka$$, I was one of those affected. I chose to flight instruct, then 135 then ANG therefore bypassing all those PFT idiots. YOU'RE THE ONE WITHOUT A CLUE! I did things the right way!

Well, then, you were stupid. That's fine, it was your decision, but you shouldn't demand that everyone else make the same mistakes you did.

 

[414Flyer]

you might as well accuse a pilot who studied full-time and got his ratings in 8 months of unfairly jumping ahead of the pilot who had to work and study part-time and took 2 years.

I do not agree with that comparison though. If someone works hard and does their training fast, that is perfectly fine.

It does not make it harder for other pilots to succeed, it would be perfectly fine if all pilots worked hard to succeed. They are not paying for a job or getting in with less hours any experience, solely because they are handing over money to an employer.

When someone hands over money for a job, it helps create an environment and expectation where companies start thinking they should just charge pilots to work, and pilots start thinking the way to a job is to pay money to work.

The only way someone can make PFT work for them to get ahead, is as long as there are pilots who are not willing to PFT. If everyone did (managements wet dream), then it would be the same competitive mins as if nobody did. Basically someone who pays for a job, is able to jump ahead of because others are not willing to pay for their jobs.

But if nobody did pay for jobs, pilots as a whole, and would be better off. And I look at it as being about US, and not ME.

I have a similar issue with pilots who tell other up and coming low time pilots to not worry about pay at all, and to just get experience. That causes downward pressure on wages and instills a bad example that moving up means more than getting compensated fairly.

 

[Nindiri]

I do not agree with that comparison though. If someone works hard and does their training fast, that is perfectly fine.

But they are taking "unfair" advantage of the fact that they had more money than the pilot who had to work full-time to afford flight training.