Chosing a company with the 200 CAD loss over a company that does not require a bond will lead you to a 250k job? There is no reason nowadays why you should accept such a risk. It's more about the XXk you have to put up, than just the 200 dollar cost, but it is still ridiculous. Lots of other options.rookiepilot wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 2:18 pm Pilots who will ultimately make 250 K a year, yet won't risk $200.
Getting the big bucks In a career........usually involves taking some financial risks.
Risk, security, big dough, lifestyle, hours.
You have to choose. Rarely get it all.
Bonds
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
Re: Bonds
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
- rookiepilot
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5069
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm
Re: Bonds
Gee I don't know. In the bigger picture of where it leads, to me $200 bucks is meaningless.digits_ wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 2:31 pmChosing a company with the 200 CAD loss over a company that does not require a bond will lead you to a 250k job? There is no reason nowadays why you should accept such a risk. It's more about the XXk you have to put up, than just the 200 dollar cost, but it is still ridiculous. Lots of other options.rookiepilot wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 2:18 pm Pilots who will ultimately make 250 K a year, yet won't risk $200.
Getting the big bucks In a career........usually involves taking some financial risks.
Risk, security, big dough, lifestyle, hours.
You have to choose. Rarely get it all.
The big picture is what matters, to me.
I would choose the better company, more financially secure and greater chance of advancement, and accept the terms are tougher as part of that deal.(maybe cause they have a great reputation and everyone wants to work there.)
In a heartbeat.
Seems to me (some) pilots want it both ways. Don't want to work for the slimeball operator with scummy maintenance, but don't want to sign a bond to work for a better company. Companies with great reputations probably have pilots lined up who are willing to sign a bond. They don't care if someone says no. They know they are gold and everyone wants to work there.
Nothing is for free, unless you're so experienced you have your pick. So what's most important?
That being said I'd never loan a company money without solid security on their part.
-
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2389
- Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am
Re: Bonds
The pay was pretty crap too, but having to pay them to get the low paying job just seemed too much. Took a few weeks, but got a better offer, and no bond from another company.
Re: Bonds
Curious what those golden companies are that require bonds and/or money up front? Companies with a crappy reputation might not get any applicants if they have a bond. But that doesn't mean that companies that require a bond are super great either. They might just be able to hide their negative sides better. After all, if they were really that great, people wouldn't have been leaving after 1/2/3 years, and thus not require a bond.rookiepilot wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 2:34 pm but don't want to sign a bond to work for a better company. Companies with great reputations probably have pilots lined up who are willing to sign a bond. They don't care if someone says no. They know they are gold and everyone wants to work there.
It's a difficult trade off, but in this hiring climate, I'd be extremely suspicious if you have to pay money up front, and I'd be very careful signing any bond.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
- rookiepilot
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5069
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm
Re: Bonds
Talking generalization, and I've heard that there are SOME good companies out there. Maybe those companies would be worth some flexibility. Everything is negotiable. I suppose like any career, all depends on what one is bringing to the table, too.digits_ wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 6:22 pmCurious what those golden companies are that require bonds and/or money up front?rookiepilot wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 2:34 pm but don't want to sign a bond to work for a better company. Companies with great reputations probably have pilots lined up who are willing to sign a bond. They don't care if someone says no. They know they are gold and everyone wants to work there.
I wouldn't, if it were me, support money up front without guaranteed security. Too much risk.
Hiring environment may change. I'd value being with a stable company as opposed to one that will blow up in the next recession
-
- Rank 1
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:35 am
Re: Bonds
It's very easy to say, but put yourself in my shoes.
I rack up six thousand dollars in training expenses on one new pilot. This new pilot, fresh PPC in hand, does one charter and gets a call from Georgian that they had someone back out of a groundschool starting Monday and can he come. Of course he says yes. This is not unrealistic, in fact I've had new pilots ghost me without doing a single line flight and just leave their company material outside the hangar door.
Do I:
a) Deal with it? Training is my (personal) expense to bear.
b) Pass that expense to the next customer? They exist to cover my costs.
c) Do something to protect my investment in this individual? A bond is excellent insurance but a promissory note is in better faith, I think.
Re: Bonds
Oh, I understand. But from a pilot's point of view, why would he sign a bond if he's interested for other companies as well? That being said, leaving after training before line flying is a dick move.seven-oh-nooo wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2019 8:24 amIt's very easy to say, but put yourself in my shoes.
I rack up six thousand dollars in training expenses on one new pilot. This new pilot, fresh PPC in hand, does one charter and gets a call from Georgian that they had someone back out of a groundschool starting Monday and can he come. Of course he says yes. This is not unrealistic, in fact I've had new pilots ghost me without doing a single line flight and just leave their company material outside the hangar door.
Do I:
a) Deal with it? Training is my (personal) expense to bear.
b) Pass that expense to the next customer? They exist to cover my costs.
c) Do something to protect my investment in this individual? A bond is excellent insurance but a promissory note is in better faith, I think.
I don't know what your hiring requirements are, but I've worked with a company that had a 2 year bond and people left after 6 months to go to the regionals. For them, the solution would be extremely easy: lower the FO requirements from 1000 hours to 250 hours. 250 hour pilots don't have the time, generally, to be hired by the regionals that quickly. They were so focused on hiring as high time candidates as they could find to save on training costs, that they wouldn't entertain the idea of 250 hour fos.
Not sure if we are talking about a 250 hour pilot in your example. If we aren't, maybe that could be a solution? And sure, the training costs could be higher, or even double, but if the 250 hour pilot costs twice as much to train, but stays 3 times as long as any other pilot, you'd still come out ahead.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
- rookiepilot
- Top Poster
- Posts: 5069
- Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm
Re: Bonds
Don't expect sympathy on these forums, my fellow small business owner.seven-oh-nooo wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2019 8:24 am
I rack up six thousand dollars in training expenses on one new pilot. This new pilot, fresh PPC in hand, does one charter and gets a call from Georgian that they had someone back out of a groundschool starting Monday and can he come. Of course he says yes. This is not unrealistic, in fact I've had new pilots ghost me without doing a single line flight and just leave their company material outside the hangar door.
Too many people in the world think this way in terms of their character principles:
1) It's every man for himself, screw being honourable in any way shape or form; (But scream bloody murder if a company acts the same way)
2) Loyalty is for service animals.
3) All the companies are evil blood sucking scum anyway, so that justifies a decision to break my my word / contract
And one wonders why such things as bonds exist?
-
- Rank 1
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:54 pm
Re: Bonds
It's unfortunate, but there are still some people like myself that are happy to give 2-5 years before moving on. I could name several pilots at my last company who stayed 2+ years despite it being an entry level job on a single piston. That's why a bond doesn't bother me too much so long there are provisions for circumstances such as layoff, discharge, injury etc.
Lets call it having a "Not a dick" clause.
Lets call it having a "Not a dick" clause.