Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1619366
MichaelP wrote:“$100 per clock hour” in the USA.
Canadians get a fraction of that!


So do most Americans. I believe about $40 is typical.

MichaelP wrote:weather TAFs and METARS


Yes, it would be better if we had TAFs and METARs the same as the South of France.
Flintstone, ChrisT liked this
User avatar
By Dusty_B
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1619367
Action?
Stop thinking about hourly rate, and instead think about what salary you think a full-time experienced and talented flying instructor who you like, respect, and believe should have a comfortable and relatively stress-free domestic life (ie, can afford to settle down with a partner, child, mortage), whilst carrying up to £100k of training debt.
Because if you want an FI to stick around, don't you think they deserve that?
neilmurg, Flintstone, Ben K and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By MichaelP
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1619383
One of the things to consider is the student shortage.
A small percentage of students themselves become instructors in the future.

Without a bouyant student population there are fewer people who choose to become instructors.
Of the people who become instructors, only a percentage of them become effective instructors.

An effective instructor instils all the right qualities in a student, and also instils enthusiasm for what we do. Enthusiasm was the reason many of us overcame or ignored the financial burden of learning to fly because we really really wanted to do it.

As for pay.
The populace does not want to pay, it’s why airlines are often of poor quality, and their crews are often poorly paid and poorly treated.
Not so many people would choose a career flying for Low cost airlines.

Aviation has been on a race downward as far as employment is concerned.
Thank goodness for computers, it’s just as well the Airbus and Boeing aircraft can do almost everything without the aid of a pilot.
Captains no longer need years of experience, assessing the conditions, wrestling the controls to bring the DC6 safely to the runway. I see Captains not yet 30, flying the 737-900s, and the A320s here.

Imagine being told you are a Retard, Retard, Retard, every time the aeroplane lands...

Eventually we will drone around the sky... The technology will be proven in the electric air taxis the race to certification of which is moving apace.

It’s not a rosy future if the media is to be believed, and then there’s the moans of the pilots who have achieved their dreams...

So the only way to improve our lot is by being visibly and actively enthusiastic to attract people who wonder what it is that makes us enjoy what we do.
Lockhaven liked this
By CapnM
#1619384
I'm a PPL holder currently undertaking the ATPLs with the aim to get my CPL/FI rating and would love to see some kind of change in the process to make it more attractive - either reducing the time needed to pass all the theoretical knowledge or reducing the financial requirements. The cost to get to that stage and the time needed for the exams mean that I'm still well over a year away from it. Look forward to seeing any kind of positive announcement in this area. :thumleft:
ClearOfCloud liked this
#1619385
Obviously not a 100% serious suggestion but wouldn’t there be some redress for FIs wages under employment law here?

If you’re in all week from 8 to 5 but you only fly (and therefore get paid) for a few hours would that not be a breech of minimum wage laws?

Just need a particularly grumpy old FI to take his/her school to court now for lost wages/holiday pay/sick pay like that plumber the other week. Luckily for the schools 100% of old, bold pilots are delightful rays of sunshine who skip along all day with a cheery whistle... :D
User avatar
By jaycee58
#1619391
From the AOPA newsletter which dropped into my inbox this morning:-

"FI shortage. Austrocontrol highlighted the problem concerning shortage of PPL-level FIs, which is become ever more acute. The reasons being that many FIs are retiring and that very few younger pilots wish to plough through the morass of CPL theory just to become a PPL/FI. Of course I supported this (as it has always been IAOPA Europe’s view) and pointed out that Part-FCL already includes the right for PPL holders with FI ratings to receive remuneration for such activity. This is 'commercial' activity under the dictionary definition as it means working for money! EASA never intended that CPL-level knowledge should be a prerequisite for PPL/FIs, but the 2008 CRD included strong (often self-interest) arguments that CPL knowledge should be required. However, as ICAO Annex 1 requires flight instructors to have theoretical knowledge for a commercial pilot licence ‘appropriate to the aircraft category’,"

There appears to be a bit missing off the last sentence.
User avatar
By Lockhaven
#1619400
Until JAR / EASA came along a PPL with a minimum of 150 hours could obtain an AFI rating and was legally entitled to earn money for their instructional duties with nothing more than PPL theory.

Of course once the CAA got involved in trying to be the first to adopt JAR / EASA rules they were the one's responsible with pressure from the airlines for the demise of the self improver route which was. PPL, AFI/FI rating build hours to 700 then do your CPL, increase your hours most likely with a turboprop operator to 1500 then get your ATPL and move on to a jet operator. ( Gaining experience )

Now of course all the eager young wannabes with wealthy parents or daft bank managers throwing money at them want to go directly to fly a shiny jet, again encouraged by the airlines and companies such as CTC who are there like vultures waiting to strip them of every penny.

These daft sods then end up with a debt the size of a mortgage around their necks for the next 20 years, get stuck with a low cost airline earning a minimum wage, or worst still paying for their line training, with poor conditions or no job at all and a licence with no experience thats not worth the paper its printed on. I even recall companies such as Ryanair charging £50 just to read their CV, FFS what level has the industry lowered itself to.

In the meantime the instructors from the 80's 90's are gradually disappearing with very few to fill the gaps for all the reasons stated in this thread.
flybymike liked this
User avatar
By ClearOfCloud
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1619407
Lockhaven wrote:Until JAR / EASA came along a PPL with a minimum of 150 hours could obtain an AFI rating and was legally entitled to earn money for their instructional duties with nothing more than PPL theory.

.....but at least now we're all so much safer :-)

Lockhaven wrote:In the meantime the instructors from the 80's 90's are gradually disappearing with very few to fill the gaps for all the reasons stated in this thread.


.....that seems to be the the long and the short of it. Essentially, the FI shortage is just one symptom of neglect of the GA environment and it needs some holistic solutions
User avatar
By Flintstone
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1619415
Lockhaven wrote:Of course once the CAA got involved in trying to be the first to adopt JAR / EASA rules they were the one's responsible with pressure from the airlines for the demise of the self improver route which was. PPL, AFI/FI rating build hours to 700 then do your CPL, increase your hours most likely with a turboprop operator to 1500 then get your ATPL and move on to a jet operator. ( Gaining experience )

Now of course all the eager young wannabes with wealthy parents or daft bank managers throwing money at them want to go directly to fly a shiny jet, again encouraged by the airlines and companies such as CTC who are there like vultures waiting to strip them of every penny.

These daft sods then end up with a debt the size of a mortgage around their necks for the next 20 years, get stuck with a low cost airline earning a minimum wage, or worst still paying for their line training, with poor conditions or no job at all and a licence with no experience thats not worth the paper its printed on. I even recall companies such as Ryanair charging £50 just to read their CV, FFS what level has the industry lowered itself to.

In the meantime the instructors from the 80's 90's are gradually disappearing with very few to fill the gaps for all the reasons stated in this thread.




It's like you're channelling my thoughts into more polite words. :D
User avatar
By MichaelP
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1619416
Instructors are paid below minimum wage almost everywhere in the Western World.

I once raised this question with COPA...
COPA passed this on to ATAC which represents the employers in the industry in Canada, and I was mentioned in their annual meeting...
Who’d want to employ a trouble maker like me?

I have not renewed my membership of COPA since.

To gain satisfaction I would have had to complain to the authorities about the company that employed me... Who wants that on their record when applying for a job?

The President of ATAC at the time ran the biggest school, with the tattiest aeroplanes, and told me they had an agreement with the Canadian Government to enable them to pay below the legal minimum. They had to compete with American schools...

Schools there charged the lowest rates to attract students. But this was at the cost of quality.

You do not get the best out of a hungry employee.
If you want quality you need to choose the best, and develop their abilities, and pay them enough.

I visited WLAC who paid £500 a month to their instructors and then a rising hourly rate. Good.

In Canada I managed to start the school with Class III instructors and up getting a monthly ‘base pay’, and everyone getting $25 an hour which was slightly above the average hourly pay. Together with the base pay this was better than anywhere else.

But one instructor was lazy, and later he was caught with his hand in the till so to speak. Reducing the amount of declared simulator training, and charging directly for briefing times.
This blew it for everyone and now the school pays the same as anyone else.
I tried.

Developing their abilities meant occasional flights with each instructor to increase their skills.
Doing a dual Mountain Flight to ensure that what was taught met with the Chief Instructors requirements etc...
Most instructors are left to their own devices and so standards drop. Not at my school.
Flying the DA42... Each instructor had to have ten hours on it to be able to teach in it... I did many ‘student’ flights with them.
And, having fun, it’s a job, but it is fun too!

At my school the tea was to a high standard, not a tea bag in a mug of hot water! Scolded pot, heated cups, boiling water. Choccie biccies...
I had the boss of another place around for tea and Penguins from time to time. He wanted to learn how I managed to keep instructors.
If you treat people well they stay.
If you work with them they improve.
If you do this the students have little to complain about.
If you do this the school is a safer operation.

Think about it. How much maintenance is saved if people learn to keep the weight off the nosewheel taxying on the grass?
I went to fly a Cessna 152 but the pitot cover was missing and a bug had made its residence there. The aeroplane was snagged. I poked the bug out with a bit of grass. The pitot was now clear, and so I placed the pitot cover on. Can’t fly, the aeroplane was snagged, an engineer would have to sign it off... Expense.
Quality instruction means less maintenance releasing funds for something else.

I picked up a new pitot cover and placed it on the pitot of the Warrior I flew recently... I put my money where my mouth is sometimes.

Happy people are motivated to do their best for you.
Weed out the bad apples though.

The best Chief Flying Instructor is one who oversees everything, and most importantly exudes enthusiasm for what we do.
It’s people more than price that attracts customers to flying.
Lockhaven, TopCat liked this
By Barcli
#1619431
Lockhaven wrote:Now of course all the eager young wannabes with wealthy parents or daft bank managers throwing money at them want to go directly to fly a shiny jet, again encouraged by the airlines and companies such as CTC who are there like vultures waiting to strip them of every penny.


The bank managers said NO a long time ago - the wealthy parents can " lose" it - the vast majority certainly dont expect it paid back.

Lockhaven wrote:These daft sods then end up with a debt the size of a mortgage around their necks for the next 20 years, get stuck with a low cost airline earning a minimum wage, or worst still paying for their line training, with poor conditions or no job at all and a licence with no experience thats not worth the paper its printed on. I even recall companies such as Ryanair charging £50 just to read their CV, FFS what level has the industry lowered itself to.


The wage is about £55K starting salary with the jet low cost carriers that I am thinking of..... Ryanair are considered good payers.....and using the non repayable bank of mum and dad its actually pretty good :roll:
User avatar
By Lockhaven
#1619436
Barcli wrote:The wage is about £55K starting salary with the jet low cost carriers that I am thinking of..... Ryanair are considered good payers.....and using the non repayable bank of mum and dad its actually pretty good :roll:


I think you need to check your figures, for a start pay is in Euros. Even Captains are only earning Euros 10500 per month before tax.

My figure of £50 to read your CV is obviously out dated its now 350 Euros non refundable just to acknowledge your interview in Dublin !!!!! You also have to pay for your own accommodation if away from base, unpaid leave, the list goes on.

Mugs thats all I can say.

http://www.pilotjobsnetwork.com/jobs/Ryanair
Last edited by Lockhaven on Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By kanga
#1619437
ClearOfCloud wrote:..you still have to have the licence for which flight instruction is to be given. ..


ISTR that in US all autogyros are 'Experimental', so factory-built examples are banned: US owners wanting one of the modern European ones must go to a factory in eg Italy for Magni and do an 'assisted build', then crate the result back home. However, they are also in the same FAA 'class' (?) as helicopters, so an autogyro instructor must first have a CPL(H) and then a FI(H) qualification, which I gather from a gyro friend is not the best background for flying let alone teaching on gyros.
#1619440
If flying schools had to pay their instructors a minimum wage then they would be in a “catch 22” situation - the cost would obviously be planted on to the students who could then not afford to do the syllabus - flying instructors out of work. The last person to leave put the lights out please.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8