Flight instructor Class 4 pay. Salary? Hourly? or Both?

[C-172]

Hey folks,

I've been reading a few threads on this forum about pay for flight instructors. Some threads are really old, but I found a recent one:

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 27dda28945

One post that got my attention says: "My pay is straight hourly, so given that I flew 400ish hours in the past year that puts me in the $10-12k range for annual salary. Some of my colleagues flew 600+ hours in the last year which would put you in the $15-20k range as a Class 3 or 4."

10k-20k range is brutal.

Another member posted on a recent threat I started, saying: "2 years instructing at 30-40K/year."

What's your experience? Do many schools offer only hourly range and no base pay?

I imagine base pay is hard for the FTU is no one is flying, but then wouldn't they just let you go? Goes to show how little I know about this industry.

Anyone currently or recently instructed in the lower mainland? (boundary bay, Pitt meadows, Abbotsford, etc)

Let me know what your thoughts are.

Thanks in advance.

[Bede]

The company I work for now pays all entry level pilots (instructors, survey pilots) a salary plus a daily rate for time away from home. It's more than a new pilot at WEN, Jazz, etc make and enough to buy a middle class house in a good neighbourhood.

If the school is charging $80/hr, the instructor should be getting $40.

[photofly]

Lawyers get to keep about 1/3 of their hourly billings. Why do flight instructors get half?

[JHR]

Don't devalue yourself with such questions

[photofly]

Double post

[photofly]

I’m just curious if it’s a moral imperative, a provincial or federal regulation, a nice-to-have-if-you-can-get-it, or something else. “Should” is such an ambiguous word, you see.

So why a half? Why not two thirds? Again, I’m not saying he’s wrong, I just want to know the calculus.

[780Pilot]

Hey folks,

I've been reading a few threads on this forum about pay for flight instructors. Some threads are really old, but I found a recent one:

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopi ... 27dda28945

One post that got my attention says: "My pay is straight hourly, so given that I flew 400ish hours in the past year that puts me in the $10-12k range for annual salary. Some of my colleagues flew 600+ hours in the last year which would put you in the $15-20k range as a Class 3 or 4."

Unfortunately those numbers remain true. I can confirm flying 600+ in a year and doing somewhere north of 22k on my T4 I believe. Wages vary. I know friends of mine pulling 25 hr for class 4 and some pulling 32. All about how much you fly / bill for ground work. The guy at 25 works at a small school and fly's 4 times as much as the other making 32 at a bigger FTU. So ask yourself who's really ahead when it comes to applying for a 703,4,5.

[Bede]

Lawyers get to keep about 1/3 of their hourly billings. Why do flight instructors get half?

Because Shakespeare never wrote, "first let's kill all the pilots."

Seriously, because when you pay employees more, they stick around, and become more experienced. Companies that pay better attract better employees. More experienced pilots attract customers and are far more efficient (ag flying and survey) resulting in more revenue for the operator.

[photofly]

Lawyers get to keep about 1/3 of their hourly billings. Why do flight instructors get half?

Because Shakespeare never wrote, "first let's kill all the pilots."

Seriously, because when you pay employees more, they stick around, and become more experienced. Companies that pay better attract better employees. More experienced pilots attract customers and are far more efficient (ag flying and survey) resulting in more revenue for the operator.

I agree with all that. But I don’t see that leads to a magic fraction of 40 dollars out of 80 for a class IV instructor.

It sounds like you’re assuming implicitly that most FTUs pay less than 40 out of 80, in which case 40 would be “more”. If you thought most places were paying 50 (and charging 80) then the 40 for which you advocate would be “less”.

What are your implicit assumptions about instructor pay? Care to make them explicit?

[780Pilot]

Having seen how most FTUs operate, they are very reluctant to give even close to half the instruction rate away especially for a 4 or 3. The only person who really is in the position to get over half is a class 1 from what I’ve seen.

[ant_321]

40 out of 80 doesn’t seem too unreasonable to me. I was getting $25 out of $55 as a class 4 and $28 as a 3, 11-12 years ago.

[rookiepilot]

Lets get someone who owns an FTU on here to express their POV on the numbers.

Easy to say what should be when it isn’t your money at risk.

[Squaretail]

But I don’t see that leads to a magic fraction of 40 dollars out of 80 for a class IV instructor.

The fraction varies depending on the market values of labour verses services rendered. One should say that this ratio is generally consistent through many jobs. If you're working for a company they're probably charging for you roughly twice what they pay you. I have seen instructors get paid as low as 35% of what they're being charged for and as much as 65%. Similar to other jobs. Not all the plumbers, welders, gravediggers, etc. are being paid the same, but probably are being charged out the same for similar seniority or skill level.

[5x5]

Two things come to mind. First of all, there's hardly an instructor in Canada who is going to stay instructing when a multi-engine opportunity comes available regardless what the school's paying. So the concept of retaining staff doesn't really exist. Secondly, schools have basically 2 products - instructor time and aircraft rental - both of which are weather limited. Yet they have all the expenses of any other type of business - rent/mortgage, insurance, building maintenance, consumables, etc. Since the ability to make money is greatly impacted by weather, there has to be what could be considered by some as excess income when planes are flying to cover when they're not. Most businesses have a much higher ratio of revenue to employee salaries than flight schools do.

Ever wondered why you seldom see a wealthy flight school owner? Unless of course they had money before they started (and may still have money now, only less than before).

[photofly]

Secondly, schools have basically 2 products - instructor time and aircraft rental - both of which are weather limited. Yet they have all the expenses of any other type of business - rent/mortgage, insurance, building maintenance, consumables, etc. Since the ability to make money is greatly impacted by weather, there has to be what could be considered by some as excess income when planes are flying to cover when they're not. Most businesses have a much higher ratio of revenue to employee salaries than flight schools do.

IF you think flight schools are impacted by weather, try running a ski resort. Or selling umbrellas.

[digits_]

Two things come to mind. First of all, there's hardly an instructor in Canada who is going to stay instructing when a multi-engine opportunity comes available regardless what the school's paying. So the concept of retaining staff doesn't really exist.

Of course it exists. A dollar an hour more isn't going to prevent someone from leaving, but paying 100k a year instead of 30k most definitely would. And you might attract pilots leaving from other jobs.

[NotDirty!]

I made $15.50 per hour as a class IV (when George W Bush was president). The school charged about $60 to the student. A few of my students realized that they could get a lot more value for their ground brief by buying me lunch and/or a coffee than doing it in the classroom, and I was further ahead too. Doesn’t work for every PGI, obviously, but more than a few.

[5x5]

IF you think flight schools are impacted by weather, try running a ski resort. Or selling umbrellas.

Wow, thanks for the top quality contribution.

Of course it exists. A dollar an hour more isn't going to prevent someone from leaving, but paying 100k a year instead of 30k most definitely would. And you might attract pilots leaving from other jobs.

Tripling your biggest expense without altering income or the potential for income isn't going to fly in any business, let alone flight training. And you might keep someone around a while longer, but they would still leave. There are very few pilots I've ever met that want a career of flying, (actually monitoring someone else flying), light singles in the same 25 mile radius over and over again. Or monitoring other pilots flying the same 1 or 2 routes and approaches in clear weather "IFR" flights. Also, doing it so you "might" attract other pilots is an extremely high risk and not one any prudent owner would take. And the reality is that a lot of experience in some other type of aviation doesn't automatically make someone a good instructor.

[photofly]

IF you think flight schools are impacted by weather, try running a ski resort. Or selling umbrellas.

Wow, thanks for the top quality contribution.

I wasn't clear enough then; flight training is a somewhat seasonal activity, but that doesn't make it a unicorn, or even unusual in economic terms, and it doesn't change the basis of what to charge or how much to pay. In fact, to the extent that instructors don't get paid when they're not flying, the overheads are reduced in the "off" season.

Of course it exists. A dollar an hour more isn't going to prevent someone from leaving, but paying 100k a year instead of 30k most definitely would. And you might attract pilots leaving from other jobs.

Tripling your biggest expense without altering income or the potential for income isn't going to fly in any business, let alone flight training. And you might keep someone around a while longer, but they would still leave. There are very few pilots I've ever met that want a career of flying, (actually monitoring someone else flying), light singles in the same 25 mile radius over and over again. Or monitoring other pilots flying the same 1 or 2 routes and approaches in clear weather "IFR" flights. Also, doing it so you "might" attract other pilots is an extremely high risk and not one any prudent owner would take.

You are stuck in a mindset where only a "pilot" (by your definition of a pilot) can teach people to fly. That's wrong. I don't need a successful author to teach my children to read and write, I need a dedicated kindergarten teacher whose job is actually teaching, not writing. I don't need Alfred Brendel to teach me the elements of the piano, either.

Teaching people to fly is a different job to flying, just like teaching children to count and add up is different to being a mathematician, and teaching piano is a different job to playing it. The person who wants a career of teaching people to fly is closer to the kind of person who wants a career of teaching people (children, or adults) to read. Or coach tennis. You might not want to be a driving instructor, but you should have no difficulty understanding there are people who do.

Your imagination can't see further than "monitoring other pilots flying the same 1 or 2 routes", but kindergarten teachers have no problem reading "The Owl Who was Afraid of the Dark" year after year. Because the reward in teaching is different to what your imagination can see. Piano teachers don't worry about teaching the same short, easy pieces of music week after week and year after year because - it's not about the music, for them.

And the reality is that a lot of experience in some other type of aviation doesn't automatically make someone a good instructor.

This is a sensible point. But it doesn't go far enough. A lot of experience in *any* type of aviation doesn't automatically make someone a good instructor.

[Bede]

And you might keep someone around a while longer, but they would still leave. There are very few pilots I've ever met that want a career of flying, (actually monitoring someone else flying), light singles in the same 25 mile radius over and over again. Or monitoring other pilots flying the same 1 or 2 routes and approaches in clear weather "IFR" flights.

That's nonsense. And a bit condescending I might add. I know lots of people who have made a career of being a flight instructor, albeit at the subsidized colleges. But it goes to show, $80k+pension does a lot to help with retention.

Not sure what kind of flying you've done but new pilots severely underestimate the BS involved in airline flying. In May, I'll be going back to my job as a captain on a jet. Since Covid I've been instructing. Yes the pay is not as good but it's been way more fun- especially the float instruction.

I anticipate my BS pail filling up real soon. When I pull the pin I'll get some aerobatic or float plane and do specialized training until I die.