FTU Pay scale

[Big Pistons Forever]

Airborne Management Inc. is hiring!

Based out of Chilliwack Airport CYCW
Cessna 172 M 180hp Conversion 2550lbs MCTOW

Class 3 & 4 Flight Instructors $35 per hour
Class 2 Flight Instructor $60 per hour
Class 1 Flight Instructor $100 per hour

Email your resume to airbornemanagment@gmail.com

Is this for real ?

[Aspiredtofly]

Airborne Management Inc. is hiring!

Based out of Chilliwack Airport CYCW
Cessna 172 M 180hp Conversion 2550lbs MCTOW

Class 3 & 4 Flight Instructors $35 per hour
Class 2 Flight Instructor $60 per hour
Class 1 Flight Instructor $100 per hour

Email your resume to airbornemanagment@gmail.com

Is this for real ?

I took a screenshot of this a couple hours ago, I was surprised to find out about it too. I wonder how many ftu's offer such compensation to their instructors. If this is true I'll be happy to apply here

[NotDirty!]

In 2006 I made $15.50/Hobbs hour as a class 4/3. Glad to see compensation is improving!!

[photofly]

Airborne Management Inc. is hiring!

Based out of Chilliwack Airport CYCW
Cessna 172 M 180hp Conversion 2550lbs MCTOW

Class 3 & 4 Flight Instructors $35 per hour
Class 2 Flight Instructor $60 per hour
Class 1 Flight Instructor $100 per hour

Email your resume to airbornemanagment@gmail.com

Is this for real ?

Not sure if you think this is good, or bad….

[TalkingPie]

It makes sense that pay is going up at FTUs, given that the time from 250 hour wonder to airline jobs is quicker than ever. Retention of instructors, especially more experienced ones, is bound to become difficult enough to cause real stress on FTU operations.

On the other hand, depending on the weather $35/flight hour probably still amounts to about the same as 40 hours per week on minimum wage, before accounting for the $75k+ in training costs.

[flyndad]

What is the base pay?

[780Pilot]

I would hope there’s a difference between class 4 and 3 wages, and I’m sure there is. But besides that, it’s a pretty typical pay level these days. Personally I think the class 2 rate is a bit low, but the 1 rate is spot on.

[khedrei]

At a local school in Ontario the class 2s are around 35-40 and class ones are not more than 50 AFAIK. So this is impressive in comparison

[photofly]

Do you think that there's a market for charging $100 x <markup> for whatever kind of instruction can be done in a 172M, regardless of what class of instructor is doing it?

[digits_]

Do you think that there's a market for charging $100 x <markup> for whatever kind of instruction can be done in a 172M, regardless of what class of instructor is doing it?

Why would there need to be a markup on the class 1 wages?

Assuming that:
- class 1s are hard(er) to find nowadays
- instructors don't stick around
- they are necessary to make new instructors

I wouldn't be too surprised if FTUs might even take a loss on the direct hourly wage of a class 1 FI when paying them 100/hour. Just to make them stick around.

[photofly]

I wouldn't be too surprised if FTUs might even take a loss on the direct hourly wage of a class 1 FI when paying them 100/hour. Just to make them stick around.

Why? There's zero point having a loss-making asset "stick around". The longer you have such an asset, the more money you lose. That's not good business.

A class 1 instructor is an "hourly" asset only for teaching instructor ratings. It's possible that someone will pay $150 per hour for such an instructor, but it seems borderline. If you're paying the asset $100 an hour, then less than a 50% markup is commercial suicide.

An expensive "hourly rate" instructor might be good for specialty teaching - multi-IFR, aerobatics, tail-wheel, whatever - but none of those things require or are related to having a class 1 rating. And you can't do any of them in a 172M.

Other things that a class 1 instructor is good for include managment and oversight, but those items are overhead, not revenue, and are not properly accounted for on an hourly rate, rather as a salary either full time or pro-rata for part time.

So either the $100 per hour is click-bait, the business has a case for charging upwards of $150 per hour for instruction, or the person running that school has little business sense.

[digits_]

I wouldn't be too surprised if FTUs might even take a loss on the direct hourly wage of a class 1 FI when paying them 100/hour. Just to make them stick around.

Why? There's zero point having a loss-making asset "stick around". The longer you have such an asset, the more money you lose. That's not good business.

If that 'loss-making' asset is generating you 10 class 4 FIs a year that work for you for 25 CAD/hour, you'll get your profit that way.

Other things that a class 1 instructor is good for include managment and oversight, but those items are overhead, not revenue, and are not properly accounted for on an hourly rate, rather as a salary either full time or pro-rata for part time.

We'll pay you 100 CAD/hour for 8 hours/day to supervise all our instructors and do 2 hours of FI instruction a day

Not everything or everyone in a business needs to generate straight cash. Some employees have other value. Lots of ways this could work.

[photofly]

If that 'loss-making' asset is generating you 10 class 4 FIs a year that work for you for 25 CAD/hour, you'll get your profit that way.

If an FTU with a single 172M is getting through 10 class 4 FI's per year, and it's paying on it's own dime for those FI's training at $100 per hour to the Class 1 instructor training them, it's going out of business very soon, if not yesterday.

It's possible that it has (or sees) a business case for selling instructor rating training at $150 per hour, but is Chilliwack a hot-bed of instructor creation? And is this FTU planning to do *only* instructor training? Because charging $150 per hour for anything else you can do in a 172M is sketchy, and the offer is, or appears to be $100 per hour paid for all training conducted in this 172M.

We'll pay you 100 CAD/hour for 8 hours/day to supervise all our instructors and do 2 hours of FI instruction a day

No; this is silly. You don't pay an hourly rate for management tasks. You offer a salary. And that's not going to be pro-rata $800 per day.

Something doesn't add up; my suspicion is that $100 rate isn't realistic.

[digits_]

Right, I missed the the 1 airplane fleet. It does make it seem a bit weird.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I wonder if this is a scam, like earn a $100 hour and be part of a world leading flight school with only a $50,000 investment

Unfortunately most students shop for the lowest hourly cost and schools that try to move the needle on instructor pay get out competed. As long as the barrier to entry for flight instructors is so low I don't ever see an industry wide move to better instructor pay.

[photofly]

It’s not nefarious. I think it’s just not well thought out. If you look at the FTU website they already have a class 1 instructor (who by the look of it owns or at least runs the company). I suspect that until it gets rather bigger and busier they’re not going to hire any (expensive) class 1 or 2 instructors.