M1 AME or Apprentice

[Injun]

Does anyone else see this as well

Wanted: M1 AME or apprentice....

Equals

Wanted: Warm body, regardless of qualifications and we're not paying much.



?????

[SeptRepair]

Not at all. Some third year apprentices are just as good as a two year licensed guy. There is a growing demand for M1 guys and employers are looking at all options.

[Injun]

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.

I've been in rotary for a while now. It's a fixed wing thing to pay 1 guy well and 6 paid ok to get the job done. One guy signs for it all....If it wasn't about money they would look only for licensed guys. Not that in demand really.......or the pay would finally lapse my garbage man. All a guy needs for small fixed wing is the License, no endorsements. This is where I see most of these type of ads.

I am speaking in generality of course, so saying "not at all" would be in defense of your opinion and also finite in nature.

Just wondering if anyone else got the same impression from these type of ads? (there are ads outside of Av-Canada!!)

OK, maybe a little bitter, but never cynical...All in good fun right

Injun

[NeverBlue]

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.

Hmmm. Actually the cost to an employer is considerably higher for an apprentice than a licensed employee.
It really has little to do with the actual wage.

If done properly the entire apprentiship of a technician is supposed to be under direct supervision of an Engineer. Apprentices usually require company as well as industry training courses as well.

We all know that an apprentice just out of school has nowhere near the skills neccessary to do the job of an Engineer. It is pretty much impossible to teach "the job" to a student in school for 1800 hrs. That is why an apprentiship for 2.5 years is required...this is where they learn how to do the job properly and gain real experience.
School is only for learning the basics of everything from the theory of flight to electricity and electronics to piston and turbine theory to Hydraulic and Pneumatic theory...and so on...and so on...etc.

There is no way a student can learn how to "fix" airplanes in 1800 hrs of school...especially if they have no life experiences yet and went directly from highschool into college.
I have found that the best apprentices out of school generaly have some other sort of skill they have experience in (mature students being retrained) and applied that experience to their schooling and apprentiship.

That being said I don't think any organization would rather have apprentices then licensed engineers working on their airplanes.

It's a fixed wing thing to pay 1 guy well and 6 paid ok to get the job done.

Don't know where you came up with that one.

I know for a fact the TC starts to bark at organizations with a poor Engineer:Apprentice ratios. I don't know what the exact ratio would be but there is a limit and 1 - 6 seems pretty low on the E:A scale.

Apprentices alone simply can't get the job done right in my opinion. They may know in theory how an airplane works but they sure don't know how my [make and model of] airplanes work.

[Injun]

Hard to get a point across in text I guess.

$16 = $33, and Fixed wing shops are full of licensed Engineers. Industry and company training? Apprentices cost more do they? Perhaps useless ones (as well as engineers) What planet do you work on?

I started the post to see if anyone felt that ads like the previously mentioned drew the same images in other's mind's as my own. Clearly someone that does not have the technical ability to perform a task cannot do so. Thanks.



Injun

[NeverBlue]

...I'm not going to argue with you.

I live on earth thank you.

As I said...an apprentice is supposed to be supervised and therefore...theoretically speaking... the apprentice wage ($16/hr) plus the engineers wage ($33/hr) is the true hourly wage cost for a working apprentice.

I've been in management long enough to know what I'm talking about when it comes to overhead costs for a company.

Company Operating procedures training, QA system training, SMS training, Human Factors training, Manufacture training, Type training...these are what apprentices don't have and must receive and costs the company money in two ways...
1. Can't bill customers for apprentice training hours
2. Still have to pay wages during training ( if travelling then per deim, food and lodging etc...)

It initially costs a company way more per hour to employ an apprentice then it does an experienced engineer.

I'm out...you're just looking for a fight and to complain about something...

[flyinggreasemonkey]

What kind of apprentices are you hiring that they need to be supervised the entire time? Any apprentice worth hiring should be able to fly solo after a good amount of familiarization on the aircraft, aside from the occasional question and inspection by an engineer.

[NeverBlue]

Any apprentice worth hiring should be able to fly solo after a good amount of familiarization on the aircraft

...define "good amount of "...i.e. one day, one month, one year, one snag, one time ? (TC says 2.5 years minimum)

...define "the aircraft"...i.e. one aircraft, fleet of aircraft, jet, helicopter, piper cub, G6 ?

...define "familiarization" ...i.e. what it looks like, how it works, what normally breaks, what it looks like when it breaks, the brakes, the engine, the hydraulics, the electrical, the control surfaces, the rigging, fabric, aluminum, composite...etc

Of course every situation is different... but until one does become "Familliar" enough to "fly solo", one is costing the owner more money then one that is "familliar"

Ask any AMO owner...


If an apprentice can "fly solo after a good amount of familliarization"...why can't they sign their own work out??

[NeverBlue]

Familiar...that is...

[Pat Richard]

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.
Fact is that most places are doing just what has been described, which is gaggles of greenhorns being mothered by a few AME's. This is especially common in the bigger places.
With 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.

Trouble is there isn't much of a choice for companies these days because there ain't that many experienced guys left in this business who are willing to move/work for what's being offered.

That's why I think you see the "ame or apprentice" thing coming up in ads. They want an experienced AME, but from the responses they've received in the past they know they probably won't get one.

[Injun]

Pat Richard gets it....We should have a beer.

As for you New Blue....you don't.

I'd imagine you'll have some more gems about the imaginary ideals of this great industry. Don'y get me wrong. I LOVE the work, I fly a private aircraft and am glad to be surrounded by semi-educated individuals that share the same views. When an aircraft of any kind flies by, I look up, ya know? If I could go back in time I would kick my younger self in the sac, still stay blue collar (if your still willing to get dirty in the next 10-15 yrs. Bob's your Uncle) but more along the lines of electrician or plumber.

Funny...in aviation the sh*t still runs downhill but it doesn't increase your paycheck.

[NeverBlue]

With 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.

...You completely contradicted yourself Mr. Wise

Does anyone in this thread know what APPRENTICE means??? Have to babysit??? OF COURSE YOU DO!!

I fly a private aircraft and am glad to be surrounded by semi-educated individuals that share the same views.

...what can I say to that!!

[Pat Richard]

With 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.

...You completely contradicted yourself Mr. Wise

Does anyone in this thread know what APPRENTICE means??? Have to babysit??? OF COURSE YOU DO!!

I fly a private aircraft and am glad to be surrounded by semi-educated individuals that share the same views.

...what can I say to that!!

Where's the contradiction?

Are you saying it's cheaper when a few AME's are babysitting a bunch of apprentices verses not and working with more AME's, if the company's could attract some? Sounds like you are. Is that figuring in having to do tasks over, explaining basics such as how to use a drill, read a tape measure, use a tire gauge, etc? If you do, you most definitely belong in management with the rest of the asshats.
Still waiting for the ratio, BTW.

I agree with flyingreasemonkey that this sort of coddling is ridiculous and should be unnecessary when hiring experienced apprentices, but there just doesn't seem to be a whole lot of them out there either, for usually the same reasons companies can't get experienced engineers.
An experienced reliable apprentice usually knows they are as such, and want proper recognition. Company's for the most part though, they still see "Apprentice", and want to pay accordingly, and guess what, they usually get what they pay for.

As for mentoring apprentices, I have had several, and Im not really interested in doing it anymore based on the "it's not my fault ever." attitude, arrogance, laziness, and general stupidity I've seen in many of them in the last few years.
I know Im not alone in sharing this view based on conversations with mechs and seeing ads regularly looking for AME's and specifying "must be willing to mentor apprentices".
Most guys would rather not deal with "now" generation and their BS.
Do I care that there is waning interest in mentoring newbs ? After the crap I've dealt with trying to, No, I don't. 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.

There's always exceptions, I have seen them and enjoyed working with them, but the vast majority otherwise should be mentored to get into another field, like 7 eleven.

[Injun]

the

Unbelievable.....What can I say to that!

[hoptwoit]

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.

This industry is its own worst enemy. The level of on the job training is terrible. The mentoring terrible. When you make the reference to fly on their own I agree for the most part you should be able to give a task to an apprentice give them the section of the manual a quick overview and maybe stay for anything that may result in injury or damage. Other than that any questions come get me and let me see each stage for inspection before before you close the area up. Meanwhile I could tackle the mountain of paperwork that the QA department has enacted for CYA purposes. Apprentices should not have be watched constantly but their progress should be inspected often. Good maintenance is in the details.

[NeverBlue]

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.

Apprentices should not have be watched constantly but their progress should be inspected often. Good maintenance is in the details.

...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

[rubberboot]

Apprentices should not have be watched constantly but their progress should be inspected often. Good maintenance is in the details.

...it doesn't matter what anyone "thinks" should happen with apprentices...the rules are the rules!!

Does anyone in this thread know what APPRENTICE means??? Have to babysit??? OF COURSE YOU DO!!

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)

Everybodies "extent" is different, and open to interpretation. Is it watching the apprenti complete the task from start to finish, or is it inspecting the task after the job is done? Would you go and tighten all fittings to verify, or show-up for the leak check?

Unfortunately, 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..

...it does if the TC Inspector says it does...try and fight them...we have and lost....in more than one district office.

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.

Respectfully
r/b

[Pat Richard]

Unfortunately, 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..

+1

Nice writing. Not as cranky as mine...

[hoptwoit]

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.




[/quote]

...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

What's with the MNR link. This has little to do with rules for the industry. Frankly it has little to do with reality.

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.

[Pat Richard]

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.

...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

What's with the MNR link. This has little to do with rules for the industry. Frankly it has little to do with reality.

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.[/quote]

Yup, and I've said the same here before, it's a generational thing. Whatever the reason though, it's bullshit, and they need to grow the @#$! up.