Wanted: M1 AME or apprentice....
Equals
Wanted: Warm body, regardless of qualifications and we're not paying much.
?????

Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako
Hmmm. Actually the cost to an employer is considerably higher for an apprentice than a licensed employee.I swear, I'm not cynical but the hiring of the apprentice is cheaper right? Unless the pay scale was reversed while I was napping.
Don't know where you came up with that one.It's a fixed wing thing to pay 1 guy well and 6 paid ok to get the job done.
...define "good amount of "...i.e. one day, one month, one year, one snag, one time ? (TC says 2.5 years minimum)Any apprentice worth hiring should be able to fly solo after a good amount of familiarization on the aircraft
...You completely contradicted yourself Mr. WiseWith regards to which is cheaper, well on paper, which is what most companies adhere to, apprentices are. My experience has been they cost more because any production you might have had from the few AME's is mostly eliminated because they're having to babysit the newbs.
...what can I say to that!!I fly a private aircraft and am glad to be surrounded by semi-educated individuals that share the same views.
Where's the contradiction?NeverBlue wrote:...You completely contradicted yourself Mr. WiseWith regards to which is cheaper, well on paper, which is what most companies adhere to, apprentices are. My experience has been they cost more because any production you might have had from the few AME's is mostly eliminated because they're having to babysit the newbs.
Does anyone in this thread know what APPRENTICE means??? Have to babysit??? OF COURSE YOU DO!!
...what can I say to that!!I fly a private aircraft and am glad to be surrounded by semi-educated individuals that share the same views.
Unbelievable.....What can I say to that!NeverBlue wrote: the
It doesn't exist. Is it common sense yes.Pat Richard wrote: If you can find the this mystical ratio that tc is purported to have for apprentices/ame's, I'd really like to see it. I've heard of it many times over the years, but I've never seen it or seen it applied/enforced anywhere.
It doesn't exist. Is it common sense yes.
...it doesn't matter what anyone "thinks" should happen with apprentices...the rules are the rules!!Apprentices should not have be watched constantly but their progress should be inspected often. Good maintenance is in the details.
NeverBlue wrote:...it doesn't matter what anyone "thinks" should happen with apprentices...the rules are the rules!!Apprentices should not have be watched constantly but their progress should be inspected often. Good maintenance is in the details.
here's from CAR 571.11 6)Does anyone in this thread know what APPRENTICE means??? Have to babysit??? OF COURSE YOU DO!!
NeverBlue, please understand I am not trying to pick on you, but I don't agree with this statement. I am NOT going to jump and change if I don't agree with a TC inspector, or am fully aware of the impact on my operation . You have the right to get a higher ruling if you disagree with a TC Inspector. It depends on which region you are dealing with as they can have different interpretaions of the regs (ONT is different from the east coast is different than BC...). It comes down to "well, my lawyer doesn't read it that way". Not saying you will win by getting a higher ruling, but it is your right to get further advice if something will significantly impact your lively hood....it does if the TC Inspector says it does...try and fight them...we have and lost....in more than one district office.
+1Unfortunately, that is the way it is. The amount of "babysitting" required is proportional to the quality of the apprenti. if he or she asks the right questions/has good mech skills, the rope is longer. what i can't stand is the fricken "blame sharers" - the one's who won't take ownership of their screw-ups, and are more than willing to share their incompetance with others in an attempt to lower their own involvment/disiplinary action. Those ones you do your best to get fired, and quickly. Regretably I am seeing more and more of these people..
NeverBlue wrote:Quote:
It doesn't exist. Is it common sense yes.
...it does if the TC Inspector says it does...try and fight them...we have and lost....in more than one district office.
What's with the MNR link. This has little to do with rules for the industry. Frankly it has little to do with reality.NeverBlue wrote:...it doesn't matter what anyone "thinks" should happen with apprentices...the rules are the rules!!
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/AF ... 65709.html
hoptwoit wrote:NeverBlue wrote:Quote:
It doesn't exist. Is it common sense yes.
...it does if the TC Inspector says it does...try and fight them...we have and lost....in more than one district office.
Please show me a reference somewhere in the CARs that regulates apprentice to AME ratio. There isn't. The whole apprentice thing is more than a little fuzzy at the federal level.
Get in line, Im still waiting for the same from him, lol.
What's with the MNR link. This has little to do with rules for the industry. Frankly it has little to do with reality.NeverBlue wrote:...it doesn't matter what anyone "thinks" should happen with apprentices...the rules are the rules!!
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/AF ... 65709.html
Totally agree with you rb...but the point from the beginning was about the cost of employing an apprentice as opposed to an AME.here's from CAR 571.11 6)
(6) If a maintenance release is signed by a person in respect of work performed by another person, the person signing the maintenance release must personally observe the work to the extent necessary to ensure that it is performed in accordance with the requirements of any applicable standards of airworthiness and, specifically, the requirements of sections 571.02 and 571.10.
(amended 2000/12/01; previous version)
...again...totally agree with you and that's what I've been trying to say in these threads as well...it's definately not unique to Aviation.In fairness I have experience with apprentices in another industry and I believe the blame game and lack of responsibility is a widespread phenomenon not unique to the AME.
...and that is the kind of attitude that helps no one.My responsibility is to ME and MY well being with regards to liability and workplace stress and I could care less if some punk ass can't figure out how to use a tire gauge after he's been in school.
After graduation one must secure work in the Aviation Maintenance Industry to complete an apprenticeship period of on-the-job training under the supervision of a licensed AME. The apprenticeship program can last up to four years.
...I never saw any reference to oil/gas...just heavy equipmentTrain builders...wasn't I referencing the oil/gas industry???
..no I don't...you keep jumping around from "no jobs" to "nobody wants the jobs"...to "I don't care about anyone but myself"Ha ha ha, so now my attitude is the problem when it comes to not wanting to deal with apprentices... You really don't know what avenue to turn down when it comes to responding to me, huh?
Where's the comparison I asked for or the ratio reference?
Sure, you must observe the work. The important part of that reg is the "extent". Are you going to stand over his shoulder and watch him do the work? Not likely. What will happen is you will make yourself available to the apprenti, and check up on them when they do the critical stuff. That is how the 1 licence guy, 4-5 apprentice thing works. You have good apprenti, less stress. Bad apprenti, less hair.. You pray for the good apprentices.Totally agree with you rb...but the point from the beginning was about the cost of employing an apprentice as opposed to an AME.
Yes everybodys extent is different but the person signing must personally observe the work. After that it becomes a question of the company"s operating procedures and what their own rules are.
I really don't know where the difficulty is in understanding what I've been posting for years, so I'll to help you here. "Companies want experienced guys for cheap, experienced guys don't want to work for cheap companies." There is almost always jobs being posted and reposted because there is apparently little interest from qualified candidates. This, in a recession. Are you going to argue differently to that also?? Why do you think they can't find qualified guys if this business is awesome?? It should sell itself, right?? But hold on, maybe it is.....no I don't...you keep jumping around from "no jobs" to "nobody wants the jobs"...to "I don't care about anyone but myself