Did we reach the next phase of the pilot shortage?

[photofly]

...

[jg24]

Valid questions and concerns, so I will try to answer it:

1. Remember that a lot of airline pilots are in the training departments at their respective airlines or were instructors at one point in their careers. I can assure you that the value a student gets, EVEN FROM A PART TIME AIRLINE PILOT is a lot more than a brand new Class 4 instructor with 200 hrs

2. I understand having 1 instructor paired up with one student. That way training can be "continuous" and the instructor knows its subjects. Things don't work that way in the airline world. You get whoever is available that day. To have that succeed, you need strong SOPs, a strong training syllabus and uniformity. That way, it should not make a difference who is doing what lesson. The material is the same, the instruction is the same, the points covered are the same.

I hear ya, and agree for the most part. It's just that FTUs that I have seen tend to create really strict SOPs (some of them) and training syllabuses, but instructors just don't seem to always stick to them. I get it, there are times when the best method for the student's sake is to deviate a bit, but then it just snowballs and goes off on a tangent over time. I like the idea of continuity because I have personally seen it work well, for both myself, and others. Uniformity, in theory, should work well.... but it just doesn't seem to hold up if there isn't constant reinforcement from the CFI etc.... just my 2 c.

[HansDietrich]

1. Remember that a lot of airline pilots are in the training departments at their respective airlines or were instructors at one point in their careers. I can assure you that the value a student gets, EVEN FROM A PART TIME AIRLINE PILOT is a lot more than a brand new Class 4 instructor with 200 hrs

2. I understand having 1 instructor paired up with one student. That way training can be "continuous" and the instructor knows its subjects. Things don't work that way in the airline world. You get whoever is available that day. To have that succeed, you need strong SOPs, a strong training syllabus and uniformity. That way, it should not make a difference who is doing what lesson. The material is the same, the instruction is the same, the points covered are the same.

I hear ya, and agree for the most part. It's just that FTUs that I have seen tend to create really strict SOPs (some of them) and training syllabuses, but instructors just don't seem to always stick to them. I get it, there are times when the best method for the student's sake is to deviate a bit, but then it just snowballs and goes off on a tangent over time. I like the idea of continuity because I have personally seen it work well, for both myself, and others. Uniformity, in theory, should work well.... but it just doesn't seem to hold up if there isn't constant reinforcement from the CFI etc.... just my 2 c.
[/quote]

You're not wrong. I personally liked having one instructor and the continuity. He knew my strong and weak areas. With that being said, we're talking about solutions to fix the current shortage. We can't keep an instructor for more than X amount of years. This is an alternative solutions I was imagining. No system is perfect, but this one at least, could make it work for both world.

Of course, the most obvious fix is Pay the Instructors a very good salary. I think if you pay them 60K - 70K, a lot will stay. There's something to be said about being home every night. Not everyone is out to fly long haul jets. We all have a dream and we have ambitions when it comes to career goals, but I'm going to say that money is one of the biggest factors. Take me and my previous airline. I didn't like it there and I left. If I made 80K a year as an F/O and 150K as a captain, I would fly Montreal to Val-d'Or every day till retirement.

[floatplanepilot]

If someone wants to pay for me to renew my Class I in the Lower Mainland, I'll do a few instructor ratings on my days off. I'll charge $100/hour or a day rate of $450 with my experience. For $125,000/year you can have me full-time. It's a bargain for my experience.

[HansDietrich]

If someone wants to pay for me to renew my Class I in the Lower Mainland, I'll do a few instructor ratings on my days off. I'll charge $100/hour or a day rate of $450 with my experience. For $125,000/year you can have me full-time. It's a bargain for my experience.

And that's a reasonable salary. You see? If they're willing to pay they can get people. I don't think 125K is outrageous for a class 1 instructor living near one of the most expensive cities on the planet.

[jg24]

Yup, pay would definitely go a long way in regards to work ethic, performance, and commitment time... among other factors. Unfortunately, many FTUs just don't have the budget to pay such beautiful salaries. Sure, some companies can afford to pay a couple guys an appropriate non-mcflip-the-burger salary and are too cheap, but many are literally running on the edge financially every year.

[photofly]

Employees are paid half to one third of what they bring in. So your Class 1 sky-god instructor paid $125k annually has to bring in fees of $250k-$375k every year.

Now work out how much a student has to pay per hour to be trained by such a god, based on 200 working days per year, 5 hours of teaching per day.

Then cross-reference to the threads about junior pilot debt, the cost of learning to fly and how pilots shouldn't have to live in their parents’ basement until they're 40 because they have no income left over after their loan repayments.

Then go and be ashamed of yourselves.

[digits_]

Employees are paid half to one third of what they bring in. So your Class 1 sky-god instructor paid $125k annually has to bring in fees of $250k-$375k every year.

Now work out how much a student has to pay per hour to be trained by such a god, based on 200 working days per year, 5 hours of teaching per day.

Then cross-reference to the threads about junior pilot debt, the cost of learning to fly and how pilots shouldn't have to live in their parents’ basement until they're 40 because they have no income left over after their loan repayments.

Then go and be ashamed of yourselves.

Doesn't that work out to rotary wing numbers? About 250 CAD/hour? Unless that changed as well, my info on that is a few years old.

[flyingjerry]

Employees are paid half to one third of what they bring in. So your Class 1 sky-god instructor paid $125k annually has to bring in fees of $250k-$375k every year.

Now work out how much a student has to pay per hour to be trained by such a god, based on 200 working days per year, 5 hours of teaching per day.

Then cross-reference to the threads about junior pilot debt, the cost of learning to fly and how pilots shouldn't have to live in their parents’ basement until they're 40 because they have no income left over after their loan repayments.

Then go and be ashamed of yourselves.

$375000/200 = $1875 per day
$1875/5 = $375 "per hour"

I've just finished my training and every flight test fee was either $300 or $350. So by your logic, unless my math is wrong, an hourly rate of $100 or a day rate of $450 doesn't sound to unreasonable for the instructor or the school.

[photofly]

My local flight school charges $240 (ish) hourly wet for dual instruction, or $70/hr for ground instruction. The very junior instructor takes home significantly less than half of that.

If you want the instructor to take home $125/hr, the dual rate is going to be around $400-$500/hr.

So, I can confidently say, that airline pilots will transition back into primary flight training when instructor scarcity has driven up the going rate for dual instruction to around $400 -$500 per hour.

A PPL will cost $25k, and a CPL about $100k. Add another $100k for a multi- and instrument rating.

And I will then roll on the floor laughing at everyone wondering why it’s soooo expensive to learn to fly and why can’t we do it for less, and wasn’t it better when 200 hour CPL instructors taught primary instruction.

[Diadem]

If you want the instructor to take home $125/hr, the dual rate is going to be around $400-$500/hr.

There's no reason the school still has to take 60% of the instructor's rate; if they're making $50/hr now, they could make the dual rate $150 and give $100 to the instructor.

[photofly]

There's no reason the school still has to take 60% of the instructor's rate; if they're making $50/hr now, they could make the dual rate $150 and give $100 to the instructor.

Of course there is: it’s called margin. A $125k per year instructor is a costly asset, and needs to provide a return for the school proportionately greater than a $50k instructor. That’s the only business case for employing an expensive instructor in the first place.

It’s the same reason that renting a Mercedes costs more per day than renting a Ford.

[HansDietrich]

Well,

Maybe "Windy Farm Flying Club" won't be able to afford a $125K a year instructor, but any college / flight school with a lot of students (to be read: international students) can afford it. These guys bring in a lot of money. I am very curious to find out how much places like Montair, Harv's Air, Brampton etc bring a year. Are you telling me they can't afford at $125K a year Class 1 and 60K - 70K a year class 2/3?

[photofly]

It’s not about what you can “afford”, which is a concept consumers consider when they buy something for themselves. It’s about making money - profitability - which is what businesses consider.

I’m saying there’s no point in hiring an expensive instructor unless they can make as much money off that expensive instructor as they can on three cheaper instructors they can have for the same price.

Harv’s Air is a business there to make money. As much as possible, within the constraints of a highly regulated and competitive market. Just like every other business.

[Diadem]

Of course there is: it’s called margin. A $125k per year instructor is a costly asset, and needs to provide a return for the school proportionately greater than a $50k instructor. That’s the only business case for employing an expensive instructor in the first place.

It’s the same reason that renting a Mercedes costs more per day than renting a Ford.

Of course it costs more; that's what the $100 from the $150/hr is for. How do the school's other costs change if the instructor makes more? Rent is the same, fuel is the same, maintenance is the same, so if it cost them $50/hr to run things before there's no reason that will change now. There's absolutely no reason to triple the amount of the school's rate because you triple the instructor's wage. Likewise, when minimum wages increase 25%, restaurants don't increase prices across the board by 25%, because the only part of their costs that went up is labour; they'll mark up each item a small amount to make up the difference in wages, but it's a matter of a few cents.

[photofly]

I didn’t say they’ll triple the whole rate. But they will keep the markup on the instructor the same - %300.

Right now, instructors makes $25 but are charged for at $75. The instructor who is charged out at $125 has to be billed at $375. Add the bare aircraft rental of $170, that makes $445 per hour of instruction.

[flyingcanuck]

When I instructed I made just under 30 a work hour (flying and ground) while the FTU charged students 80 an hour. Really, I dont see how giving a 10-15$ raise would hurt FTUs, really they are just being taken advantage of. For me to sit in a room and talk with someone for an hour, no cost to the FTU, and make about 30% of it is crazy. And also add the fact as its been mentioned that if I had to sit around for 5 hours to fly 1 hour and paid an hour really sucks. The month of Jan and most of feb my cheques were on the low side.

Its just another reason to not instruct long term.

[mbav8r]

I didn’t say they’ll triple the whole rate. But they will keep the markup on the instructor the same - %300.

Right now, instructors makes $25 but are charged for at $75. The instructor who is charged out at $125 has to be billed at $375. Add the bare aircraft rental of $170, that makes $445 per hour of instruction.

Photofly, I think you’re missing the big picture, how much can you charge if you have no instructors to train students?
The OP mentions that there appears to be a shortage of instructors and the next poster says there is a 6 month waiting list for instructor ratings for lack of class 1s. If you can’t staff your business, you have no business so maybe you might want to think about reducing your margins.
Take the CPA Jazz has with Air Canada, the wages were a pass through cost with very little mark up, certainly not triple, not even in the double digits. If owners of FTUs aren’t willing to reduce their margins, they’ll get the bankruptcy they derserve.

[Diadem]

I didn’t say they’ll triple the whole rate. But they will keep the markup on the instructor the same - %300.

Right now, instructors makes $25 but are charged for at $75. The instructor who is charged out at $125 has to be billed at $375. Add the bare aircraft rental of $170, that makes $445 per hour of instruction.

But that doesn't make any sense! I'm not talking about the whole rate either. You haven't explained why a school would still charge a 300% mark-up; there's no rationale behind it. It doesn't cost the school any more to pay the instructors more, except for the wage itself, which would be covered by the higher rate. The fixed costs to the school wouldn't change, so there's no reason they should take the same percentage when absolute costs are the same. If two schools start at $75/hr, and one adds $100 to the instructor rate that goes straight to the instructor while the one next door triples the rate so that they can still take 2/3 of the money, obviously everyone would go to the school charging $125 over the one charging $225. There's no financial reason to triple the whole rate.
Let's say there's an actor who makes $5 million on a $50 million movie, and it's a big success. The next time he makes a movie, it still costs $45 million for the rest of the production, but because he's a star now he wants $10 million. The budget only increases from $50 million to $55 million, but by your logic the cost of tickets should double because the actor's pay doubles. Does that make any sense?

[photofly]

I didn’t say they’ll triple the whole rate. But they will keep the markup on the instructor the same - %300.

Right now, instructors makes $25 but are charged for at $75. The instructor who is charged out at $125 has to be billed at $375. Add the bare aircraft rental of $170, that makes $445 per hour of instruction.

But that doesn't make any sense! I'm not talking about the whole rate either. You haven't explained why a school would still charge a 300% mark-up;

Because for $125 the school can employ five instructors at $25/hr, and earn 5*$75=$375/hour.
Alternatively for the same outlay, they can employ one instructor at $125/hr, and earn... how much do think the flight school owner would expect? $200/hr? What a great business decision.

Your movie example is irrelevant. The movie studio amortizes the star’s fixed salary over the cost of many tickets. They’re not selling him or her at an hourly rate. A better example would be that star’s agent. When the studio doubles the star’s fee, the agent takes the same percentage, double the amount. Not the same fee because the agent only had to do the same amount of work.

Business works on profit as a percentage of turnover. If you know better, go right ahead and show the world how wrong it is. But ask yourself, how many flight schools are currently following your advice?