Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : 2 year training contracts


zyttocs
02-18-2019, 06:25 PM
Iím doing a little research dealing with industry perspectives regarding requiring a new hire pilot to sign a TWO year training reimbursement contract.

I have my own opinion, but I would appreciate any constructive thoughts and comments regarding personal experience or perspective taking into account the changing pilot demands in the industry, along with your thoughts as to how common two year term training contracts are.


captjns
02-18-2019, 06:28 PM
Iím doing a little research dealing with industry perspectives regarding requiring a new hire pilot to sign a TWO year training reimbursement contract.

I have my own opinion, but I would appreciate any constructive thoughts and comments regarding personal experience or perspective taking into account the changing pilot demands in the industry, along with your thoughts as to how common two year term training contracts are.

Whatís your opinion?

JohnBurke
02-18-2019, 10:05 PM
Where training contracts are found, the industry standard leans toward 12 months if a type rating is given (in other words, the full type rating course), and six months for a recurrent.

It's also assumed by many that reputable employers don't need a training contract, if paying well enough and treating employees adequately. I don't entirely agree with that, as there are ample pilots who will take the money and run.

I can say I would agree to a 2 year term unless it were a particularly attractive offer, but the contract would require the means to be released if the company wasn't holding up its end. Simply paying for the type rating or the training is not enough; the company cannot be pushing the pilot in terms of duty, rest, flight time, or insufficient notice, or creating an undesirable or unworkable environment. Lay the cards on the table, and if the job isn't what was provided in the cards, then the contract needs to allow for release; it keeps the employer honest, as well as the employee.

Most employers stack the contract in their favor. 100% in their favor. It needs to be equitable for everyone, or it shouldn't be signed.

You may find that unless you're seeking out the low hanging fruit and the very inexperienced, there are enough jobs out there that pilots don't need to prostitute themselves to a two year bond when they can go elsewhere. If you're concerned about pilots skipping town, look at the reasons why before you try to tie them down with a two-year rope.

Personally, I'll make agreements, but over a handshake. If it's not sufficient, you probably don't want me, and I don't want to work for you. The street goes both ways. If a pilot doesn't want to be there, do you really want to insist he stay? Focus on helping him want to stay. Prisons without bars are a whole lot more like home.


captjns
02-19-2019, 06:39 AM
There has no be reasonableness, regarding training contracts, or training bonds, for those sitting on both side of the table.

Many a new first officers will receive a Second in Command (SIC) rating rather than a full type rating, if required.

The liability to the new employee, IMO, should be limited solely to direct expenses incurred by the company, such as, for the type rating, excluding hotels, compensation, per Diem in-house training, transportation etc.

Prospective employees are entitled to a breakdown of costs, related to flight training, only, to which they may be responsible for underhe contract. Expenses attributed to flight training should be annexed to the contract. For example: Dry lease for the Full Flight Simulator (FFS), using company employees to conduct simulator training. Company instructors are on the payroll whether conducting training or sitting in their offices. In some cases where there are no FFSs available, actual aircraft training is involved.

The cost of the type rating or SIC rating, if conducted under a 142 training program, using the training facilities instructors (more expensive)

IOE is not to be included as an expense, as the company is making money on revenue flights.

Now... the plan that will be equitable to both parties...

Pro-rate the exposure to the employee over a reasonable period of time. Deduct the prorated amount from pay which would be deposited into an interest bearing an escrow account. The funds, after the stipulated term, would be distributed to the employee. Care on behalf of the employee must be exercised, so as they are not taxed on the deductions. A taxable event to the employee would take place upon distribution of the funds.

Unfortunately many employers prey upon the wannabes, with a ďTake it or Leave itĒ, plan. ďSign the contract if you want to fly here! The old days where, ďThey wonít chase me down to collect the reimbursement.Ē are over. Law firms, and collection agencies, have far long reaching arms. And yes... it will be included on the background check... affect the FICO score... credit rating, etc, and not being hired by that Legacy Airline of oneís dreams

Bottom line... consumer beware!

TiredSoul
02-19-2019, 06:49 AM
Some type ratings are hideously expensive.
Like some of the Gís are in the $50k range.
Just playing devils advocate here and using made up examples:

The employer could get away with $35k first year pay 5-6 years ago.
Now they need to offer $50k first year pay. Which means they need to write off their training cost over a longer period of time.

In the end itís coming out of your left pocket (initial pay) or your right pocket (training bond) or a little of both.

Donít forget to thank the dude that brags about three type ratings in a year.

JohnBurke
02-19-2019, 09:25 AM
Donít forget to thank the dude that brags about three type ratings in a year.

I met a guy like that last year, ironically at a ground school. He bragged about having 9 type ratings, but from his speech it was clear that he had very little experience. I asked, and he said he had something like 2200 hours. He went from company to company, taking the training, and running. Guys like that are a cancer on the industry.

billsaw
02-20-2019, 01:41 AM
Iím doing a little research dealing with industry perspectives regarding requiring a new hire pilot to sign a TWO year training reimbursement contract.

I have my own opinion, but I would appreciate any constructive thoughts and comments regarding personal experience or perspective taking into account the changing pilot demands in the industry, along with your thoughts as to how common two year term training contracts are.

Any place that wants you to sign a one year training contract is somewhere you do not want to work.

Anywhere that wants you to sign a two year training contract.... Hahahahaha...... If anyone needs to be told to run from a place like that I would seriously question their ability to fly an airplane and make judgement calls.

Let that sink in.

PotatoChip
02-20-2019, 04:31 AM
Doesnít Delta Private Jets require a two year promissory note??

rickair7777
02-20-2019, 09:17 AM
If you KNOW beyond any shadow of a doubt that you want to work at a certain place (good employer, schedules work for you), and that you plan on staying for the full length of the contract anyway, sure go ahead and sign, I would.

If you're planning on staying, it doesn't cost anything other than loss of flexibility in the even of unforeseen circumstances.

But a contract should be a big red flag in that you need to do your homework before committing to anything.

SrfNFly227
02-21-2019, 03:08 PM
Any place that wants you to sign a one year training contract is somewhere you do not want to work

I disagree. Executive Jet Management requires 1 year training contracts. They are widely considered as a great employer on the private side.

Whether we like it or not, training contracts are going to be getting more prevalent. Pilots can jump ship entirely too easily in this market and companies (even the good ones) need to protect themselves and the aircraft owners.

Dhood84
02-22-2019, 01:42 AM
We are our own worst enemies. Pilots demand better QOL all while taking $50-100k type ratings and running. Had a friend of mine (treats his pilots well in all aspects) hire a guy, send him to G650 initial then the guy bailed on the first trip, in the middle of it. They were in Australia and the guy had his company card, keys and phone in a envelope at the desk of the hotel for my buddy. This was after he booked first class back home to the states on the company card. So in essence, companies are scared of getting burned as well, itís a double edge sword in todayís pilot market.

Like others have said, if itís a good company and everything lines up for YOU, then a one year is nothing, anyone can stick it out a year.

DH

Mink
02-22-2019, 08:14 AM
Whether we like it or not, training contracts are going to be getting more prevalent. Pilots can jump ship entirely too easily in this market and companies (even the good ones) need to protect themselves and the aircraft owners.

By the same token, one could argue that with training contracts generally being seen as a negative, even at "the good" companies, those companies that are sticking to them will have a harder time attracting people.

Why not just offer a good salary, good benefits, and some QOL enhancements, and retain your people in that manner?

Mink
02-22-2019, 08:19 AM
We are our own worst enemies. Pilots demand better QOL all while taking $50-100k type ratings and running. Had a friend of mine (treats his pilots well in all aspects) hire a guy, send him to G650 initial then the guy bailed on the first trip, in the middle of it. They were in Australia and the guy had his company card, keys and phone in a envelope at the desk of the hotel for my buddy. This was after he booked first class back home to the states on the company card. So in essence, companies are scared of getting burned as well, itís a double edge sword in todayís pilot market.



There will always be 10%ers out there. Actions like that ^^ burn bridges, and what goes around comes around. But, in general, providing a good salary, good benefits and some QOL enhancements should be the tool used to retain talent - not a set of handcuffs like a training contract.

Red Forman
02-22-2019, 10:25 AM
I would only sign a two year contract if my pay and benefits were guaranteed for two years.

billsaw
02-23-2019, 03:55 PM
We are our own worst enemies. Pilots demand better QOL all while taking $50-100k type ratings and running. Had a friend of mine (treats his pilots well in all aspects) hire a guy, send him to G650 initial then the guy bailed on the first trip, in the middle of it. They were in Australia and the guy had his company card, keys and phone in a envelope at the desk of the hotel for my buddy. This was after he booked first class back home to the states on the company card. So in essence, companies are scared of getting burned as well, itís a double edge sword in todayís pilot market.

Like others have said, if itís a good company and everything lines up for YOU, then a one year is nothing, anyone can stick it out a year.

DH

Obviously your buddy doesn't "treat them well in all aspects" for the experience level/pay/work required. If you fly a King Air and someone offers you 150k a year to galavant around the world in a G650 with no time off that may look appealing. But to those of us with the experience under our belt it's horrible. Not saying that was his deal there just that it's all relative based on your perspective.

Everyone has their own expectations on what they should be paid and management has their own on what should be paid. Capitalism then steps in and sorts it out.

At the moment that figure is getting larger and better QOL for the pilots and management/owners are struggling to accept that. Nobody, and I mean nobody with a half a brain is gonna quit a "good/great" (according to your buddies perspective on standards) job like that on the first trip in the middle of a trip with no notice. If they do it's one of two things. One your buddy isn't taking care of people as well as he thinks or they have mental issues. Then that speaks more toward your buddies (or his companies) discretion in hiring someone to operate a 65 million dollar jet with a billionaire onboard and dropping 100+ on a type up front.

Lets face it they need to be paying experienced pilots in the neighborhood of 250-300k and them working a hard time off schedule not some mickey mouse schedule where your off until your not kinda deal. And by schedule I mean half the time off. Like 1 week on 1 week off or 2 weeks on 2 weeks off not we will give you 8 days off a month..... When wee feel like it. And the sky is blue. And we see pigs flying. And oh you will know your schedule 2 weeks in advance until you don't.... That don't fly no more. At least for any pilots that are actual qualified to do that job and have any self respect. If they don't wanna do that I would be calling Flight Safety trying to get the volume discount cause that's what they will need.

Just think if you buddy treats his guys "well in all aspects" how "well" the pilot is being treated now that would cause him to do what he did. Unless of course he is crazy in which case they should look into people more.

It's kinda funny. All the time I hear of job offers being asked of me and my fellow coworkers. "Hey come work for us". Ok what does it pay and what's the schedule are the two main questions? Those answers most of the time are laughable but sometimes get close to reasonable. So when you politely say no then at some point they ask well what do you want? So I tell them. It is to much for one reason or another and the owner or company "will never do that". Yea it's those same people that instead of spending the money on a good qualified pilot they will blow money on training and turnover. Their choice.

billsaw
02-23-2019, 03:55 PM
I would only sign a two year contract if my pay and benefits were guaranteed for two years.

Exactly. Put it in escrow.....

billsaw
02-23-2019, 04:01 PM
I disagree. Executive Jet Management requires 1 year training contracts. They are widely considered as a great employer on the private side.

Whether we like it or not, training contracts are going to be getting more prevalent. Pilots can jump ship entirely too easily in this market and companies (even the good ones) need to protect themselves and the aircraft owners.

It's like the chicken or the egg. If EJM didn't have any turnover they wouldn't need that. But yet they have it. What can we deduce from that. Fact is EJM can be a very very good place to work. Depends on your owner.

I would have to argue also that training contracts are not going to get more prevalent. Maybe for a rookie with 500 hours trying to get into a Lear but those have been there for a long time.

Nobody I know that has experience is about to sign one. Haven't yet. Don't see it happening anytime soon. Why would you? If they are paying you enough and treating you well enough you won't want to leave...

Dhood84
02-23-2019, 04:38 PM
Obviously your buddy doesn't "treat them well in all aspects" for the experience level/pay/work required. If you fly a King Air and someone offers you 150k a year to galavant around the world in a G650 with no time off that may look appealing. But to those of us with the experience under our belt it's horrible. Not saying that was his deal there just that it's all relative based on your perspective.

Everyone has their own expectations on what they should be paid and management has their own on what should be paid. Capitalism then steps in and sorts it out.

At the moment that figure is getting larger and better QOL for the pilots and management/owners are struggling to accept that. Nobody, and I mean nobody with a half a brain is gonna quit a "good/great" (according to your buddies perspective on standards) job like that on the first trip in the middle of a trip with no notice. If they do it's one of two things. One your buddy isn't taking care of people as well as he thinks or they have mental issues. Then that speaks more toward your buddies (or his companies) discretion in hiring someone to operate a 65 million dollar jet with a billionaire onboard and dropping 100+ on a type up front.

Lets face it they need to be paying experienced pilots in the neighborhood of 250-300k and them working a hard time off schedule not some mickey mouse schedule where your off until your not kinda deal. And by schedule I mean half the time off. Like 1 week on 1 week off or 2 weeks on 2 weeks off not we will give you 8 days off a month..... When wee feel like it. And the sky is blue. And we see pigs flying. And oh you will know your schedule 2 weeks in advance until you don't.... That don't fly no more. At least for any pilots that are actual qualified to do that job and have any self respect. If they don't wanna do that I would be calling Flight Safety trying to get the volume discount cause that's what they will need.

Just think if you buddy treats his guys "well in all aspects" how "well" the pilot is being treated now that would cause him to do what he did. Unless of course he is crazy in which case they should look into people more.

It's kinda funny. All the time I hear of job offers being asked of me and my fellow coworkers. "Hey come work for us". Ok what does it pay and what's the schedule are the two main questions? Those answers most of the time are laughable but sometimes get close to reasonable. So when you politely say no then at some point they ask well what do you want? So I tell them. It is to much for one reason or another and the owner or company "will never do that". Yea it's those same people that instead of spending the money on a good qualified pilot they will blow money on training and turnover. Their choice.

I appreciate the post, but respectfully disagree with your assumption of my friends practices. The schedule, pay and bennies are in the top 5% for that airframe, nowhere near ďaverageĒ. Just because I didnít say ďexcellent / stellarĒ doesnít imply anything. As far as your point of hiring the right people, even the craziest and most disrupting individual can get through the cracks. I was on the hiring board for one of my companies and interviewed hundreds of candidates. Letís just say this, people are great actors when they want to be and sometimes itís very hard to decipher the bull****.

DH

captjns
02-23-2019, 09:00 PM
I was on the hiring board for one of my companies and interviewed hundreds of candidates. Letís just say this, people are great actors when they want to be and sometimes itís very hard to decipher the bull****.DH

At the end of the day a CV is nothing more than a worthless 8 1/2 by 11 piece of paper with alpha numerics until you have a face to face interview with the candidate. A trained interviewer has the tools to verify the information on their CV is legitimate. Skype is the best to get the ball rolling. I ask questions including, but not limited about previous aircraft flown.

billsaw
02-24-2019, 10:10 AM
I appreciate the post, but respectfully disagree with your assumption of my friends practices. The schedule, pay and bennies are in the top 5% for that airframe, nowhere near “average”. Just because I didn’t say “excellent / stellar” doesn’t imply anything. As far as your point of hiring the right people, even the craziest and most disrupting individual can get through the cracks. I was on the hiring board for one of my companies and interviewed hundreds of candidates. Let’s just say this, people are great actors when they want to be and sometimes it’s very hard to decipher the bull****.

DH

I understand what you may think. But lets look at this from a different angle.

Either the guy was a whack job and slipped through the cracks. Or the compensation levels aren't what you think.

In my experience when a whack job slips through the cracks (at a good place of employment) 9 times out of 10 you have to fire him kicking and screaming out the door because they know they got a good deal going and do not want to lose it.

Now when a whack job gets hired at a fly by night sorta operation they are the ones that do exactly what you describe. Keys and phone at the front desk and CYA. Seen that a hundred times.

So if you wanna say he slipped through the cracks I can totally believe that. I 100% agree with you people can be great actors. I have flown with guys for 6 months until they let their true colors shine. But I have a hard time believing he left his keys and phone at the front desk mid trip at a top 5% job willingly. Those are the ones you have to fire then have conversations with the unemployment office about. Multiple times...
Just ask yourself who leaves a top 5% G650 job like that? Especially the crazies that know they won't be so lucky the next go round.


Unless of course what you and your friend may assume is top 5% really isn't. I am not looking at these gimmick salary surveys for my numbers.

You can post up what his basic package was and I'll tell you what I think (my opinion of course) but top 5% on a G650 is gonna be "at least" 250k+, business class international travel, only working half the time on a hard schedule. No on call. And that pay number could fluctuate up or down depending on a few other factors but not really down unless there are big bonuses and 401k type stuff involved.

Anyhow if your buddy is truly top 5 he will have no problems replacing that guy and I am sure it won't happen again. :)

Xx1616
02-24-2019, 09:29 PM
I appreciate the post, but respectfully disagree with your assumption of my friends practices. The schedule, pay and bennies are in the top 5% for that airframe, nowhere near ďaverageĒ. Just because I didnít say ďexcellent / stellarĒ doesnít imply anything. As far as your point of hiring the right people, even the craziest and most disrupting individual can get through the cracks. I was on the hiring board for one of my companies and interviewed hundreds of candidates. Letís just say this, people are great actors when they want to be and sometimes itís very hard to decipher the bull****.

DH
Any chance your buddy is still looking for someone? Sounds like a pretty killer gig to me

BPWI
02-25-2019, 05:32 AM
Unless of course what you and your friend may assume is top 5% really isn't. I am not looking at these gimmick salary surveys for my numbers.


This. Top 5% (NE) for a 90K+ aircraft is hovering between 300-350K in total compensation. Combine that with a week on/week off schedule and at least 6%+ match on retirement. Leaving mid trip on your first week for that? Doesn't make sense, financially or otherwise.

Dhood84
02-25-2019, 06:16 AM
This was two years ago gents and yes the guy was replaced and is still there of course. I was just stating a fact that there is fluky **** out there and because of that, employers have been burned before as well, hence the two year contracts at some shops.

DH

billsaw
02-25-2019, 09:31 AM
This was two years ago gents and yes the guy was replaced and is still there of course. I was just stating a fact that there is fluky **** out there and because of that, employers have been burned before as well, hence the two year contracts at some shops.

DH

To summarize my point 90% of employers that get burned aren't in fact the best employers. I doubt it if the top 5% of employers hardly ever get burned except for when it's their fault for hiring a bad apple and having to fire the guy. But that's at least a little shared responsibility.

99% that want training contracts are not places anyone wants to work for one minute longer than it takes to get a better job.

Just how it works...

billsaw
02-25-2019, 09:41 AM
This. Top 5% (NE) for a 90K+ aircraft is hovering between 300-350K in total compensation. Combine that with a week on/week off schedule and at least 6%+ match on retirement. Leaving mid trip on your first week for that? Doesn't make sense, financially or otherwise.

Exactly. Everybody has their own opinion on what good pay is.

The market (capitalism) sorts it out.

I had one guy who had very specific requirements which I met offer me a job. Pretty much all the same except a little less than 2/3 the pay. Kept telling me what a great job it was. And it was. All except the pay. But to him it was great.

However the best was I had another guy talk to me about a job. Same type I fly now. Now I work 2 weeks on/off. He was offering literally half what I make now and NO time off except vacation. I had to use all my willpower not to laugh in his face. I mean I thought it was a joke at first.

Point is some people are stuck in 2010 and in 2010 these would have been acceptable to many without jobs.

Now to use someone else's quote I read a while ago.

Back then pilots were looking for planes to fly.

Now planes are looking for pilots.

Times have changed.

galaxy flyer
02-25-2019, 07:42 PM
Depends on what the contract is for. A type rating in a Global or G650 is justifiably with a contract, especially if itís a big step up. If itís for a Lear 45 or for required recurrent, itís ridiculous. I signed one but two valuable type ratings, the job was a great resume improvement, and it opened doors. I figured I needed a yearís experience in type anyway.

GF

Captain Thomas
02-27-2019, 09:13 AM
I understand FlightSafety International also uses a two-year new hire training contract. I think they don't want to train people to instruct their ground schools and simulators... just to see them run off to a better job a few months later. I am not keen on locking into a two-year contract. Delta Air Lines never had this... of course they are the golden ring job!

SpaceManX
02-28-2019, 08:59 AM
I also believe that many of these 135's are not trusting of any pilots who walk through their doors. I was offered a few 135 gigs, however one was paying $57K and another was paying $65K but they both required a training agreement, loan agreement and non-disclosure. I feel that this taking advantage of pilots because you are also paying back interest on a $20,000 loan. I think that with today's market, one should not have to sign any type of agreement as this could be considered indentured servitude.

billsaw
02-28-2019, 09:32 AM
I understand FlightSafety International also uses a two-year new hire training contract. I think they don't want to train people to instruct their ground schools and simulators... just to see them run off to a better job a few months later. I am not keen on locking into a two-year contract. Delta Air Lines never had this... of course they are the golden ring job!

Both CAE and Flight Safety at the two centers I know people are hurting for instructors and it is a long period to get someone spooled up.

Many instructors (not all) have lost their medical, retired, and or don't want to travel so in masse I think these days they are hiring from a little different pool. But nonetheless they are hurting.

billsaw
02-28-2019, 09:39 AM
I also believe that many of these 135's are not trusting of any pilots who walk through their doors. I was offered a few 135 gigs, however one was paying $57K and another was paying $65K but they both required a training agreement, loan agreement and non-disclosure. I feel that this taking advantage of pilots because you are also paying back interest on a $20,000 loan. I think that with today's market, one should not have to sign any type of agreement as this could be considered indentured servitude.

Just tell them thanks but the regionals pay more with no agreement:D

I understand why these companies want this. They are getting burned. But hey if they compete and pay more people won't quit. Then there is no need for the contract. Signing a training contract is just bad news.

Anyhow most of these companies that make you sign them aren't operating above board totally anyway. I have seen many leave these types of places and when the talk of withholding their last check and paying back the training bond comes up the pilots have let three little letters fall out of their mouth (FAA) and so far it has ended with here is your paycheck and good luck! So I guess there is always that.

SpaceManX
02-28-2019, 12:06 PM
Just tell them thanks but the regionals pay more with no agreement:D

I understand why these companies want this. They are getting burned. But hey if they compete and pay more people won't quit. Then there is no need for the contract. Signing a training contract is just bad news.

Anyhow most of these companies that make you sign them aren't operating above board totally anyway. I have seen many leave these types of places and when the talk of withholding their last check and paying back the training bond comes up the pilots have let three little letters fall out of their mouth (FAA) and so far it has ended with here is your paycheck and good luck! So I guess there is always that.


Very well said, I think that many 135 operators have the ability to read between the letters F.A.A. lol



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1