Khell

Am I not understanding something about these 2 companies pay scales? It seems to me that with the bonus at envoy, you would make the equivalent of $57/hour vs $38 at spirit but second year you would make $40 at envoy and $72 at spirit. $57 + $40 at envoy ($97) vs $38 + $72 at spirit ($110). Wouldn't you be making more at spirit by the end of the second year?

flensr

Yes, but a lot of people would be hoping for a legacy job after 1-2 years so spirit second year pay just doesn't really enter the equation at the current payscale. CA upgrade also could make a huge difference during the 3rd year at a regional. Remember, spirit explicitly relies on "juniority" in the pilot group for their business model, meaning they both expect and NEED new spirit FOs to quit and go somewhere else before they get expensive. Just because they took it off the investor slides as they entered mediated negotiations doesn't mean they aren't holding on to that pillar of the core business model.

Not saying hey everyone should go to Mesa, but just for comparison with what's becoming typical in the regional world...

Mesa sent out an info email after the virtual job fair, with their incentive program. $50k in bonuses over 3 years. Up to $30k bonus first year with first year pay $36/hr, which works out to nearly double Spirit first year pay. $20k bonus at end of 3rd year plus "guaranteed" CA upgrade in less than 36 months, and Mesa 3rd year pay plus 20k bonus is close to spirit 3rd yr FO pay. That means first year pays a lot more at Mesa, 2nd year doesn't match spirit, but 3rd year does after upgrade, plus building PIC time for that Legacy application by the 3rd year at Mesa.

If you're realistically looking at 1-3 years transition to somewhere else, spirit is pretty much $$$-neutral and you probably won't get PIC time. The spirit benefits are flying a bigger plane (yay), a good hotel committee, and the ability to drop trips ($$$-negative of course). Plus free high-fives and a restraining order, but that's just gravy.

sflpilot

What is the deal with the high failure rate? I know the training is short. I have always considered Spirit only because of the FLL base and my refusal to commute ever again, well Jetblue also but they send all new hires to JFK and BOS. I spent several years at a regional up until 5 years ago back when they did you no favors in training and had no problems. Also that flow is being metered according to Envoy pilots. They say it could be 10 years now.

flensr

Lots of reasons. The training is quite condensed, and the initial academics are taught by people with no experience or context. And then if a student self-identifies as being behind, the training department knee-jerk reaction is to label the student a whiner and tell them to suck it up and fail like a man, regardless of how much experience that student has.

I ran a major flying training shop for a couple of years, and our instructor training shop for a year. Among other roles, I was responsible for identifying students who were at risk of washing out and making direct recommendations to the boss on if we were going to keep them or wash them out. So I have some experience judging when a student is at risk of failing. Asking for a single study day to prevent failing my checkride got me the standard spirit training answer of "All students complain about the program, suck it up, request denied."

So it's a combination of a minimalist training program, inexperienced instructors, and a training department that is at least partially stuck on stupid. My advice to anyone going through spirit training is to quit early if you think you're gonna fail, since there's absolutely no reason to ever go to a checkride you think you might fail. Call out sick, chop off a toe, whatever it takes, but do NOT go to a checkride you're not fully confident you'll pass. And certainly don't fail a checkride for $38/hour and a restraining order. You're much better off explaining why you quit a training program, than having to explain a checkride bust or getting fired.

UNSUBSCRIBE

Lol, GMAFB.

So its EVERYONE elses fault (instructors/check airmen) but not the 2000hr applicant? (Of which some dont even have thier ATP)

Laughable.

You dont find it the least bit odd that we hardly EVER had anyone fail up until about a year ago? Has notning to do with quality of new hires right?

flensr

Never said anything about the check airmen or the company instructors who actually had flying experience. Except for one guy who everyone already knows about, those people were great, given the limitations of the syllabus and myopia of the training department.

I also didn't say ONE WORD about the flying experience of other students/trainees. Not one word. I am specifically calling out the company's willingness to ignore highly experienced trainees when they cry uncle or ask that their oral exam doesn't come on the 6th day of their third 6-day week in a row. I am very specifically NOT saying ANYTHING about the experience level of the students coming in.

That's your addition, and you can make all the assumptions you want about whether that means jack shxt. Just don't attribute them to me.

But if you want to flip to the extreme with your biases, and try to put words in my mouth, assume things I didn't say or even imply, go ahead. Just expect to be called out for the tool you're acting like.

flensr

I wasn't on site more than a year ago, and neither of us has access to hiring or applicant stats that would be necessary to draw any sort of factual conclusions about whether or not new-hire experience is directly resulting in a higher wash-out rate.

I AM saying that there are training program issues that affect everyone. Doesn't matter how many 121 hours you have, when a kid with 500 hours is teaching the academics you're getting cheated, period. When the training department tells a trainee who lost over half the syllabus-directed study time through no fault if his own, that they need to suck it up and fail like a man, that is a situation that affects every trainee regardless of experience.

I don't know how many hours the new guys are showing up with. Neither do you. So don't try to make up stuff and attribute it to me.

sflpilot

Well I asked and I think he gave a well thought out and informative response even if you disagree. Have they removed the ATP requirement, because it still shows as a requirement on the job listing as of 11/18/17?

Alphafloor

I absolutely refuse to get a sex change even if it meets the hiring criteria

nkbux

Seriously??? What universe are you living in? This is all 100% false. The training department will bend over backwards to get new hires through. Including extra sims and lots of extra OE. You clearly haven’t the faintest idea what your talking about and are flaming out of anger towards the current labor environment. The level of experience from new hires is in the crapper. PERIOD. They struggle with this program which was implemented when the “low time” applicants had 6 or 7k hours. Your definition of a “knee jerk reaction” is so far from reality it’s unbelievable. The training department is suffering from the lack of qualified pilots due in large part to an incompetent DO and COO which leaves us with new hires who barely or don’t at all have ATPs and belong nowhere within 10k miles of an Airbus. Fact. I’ll agree one one point and one alone... if you don’t have a high level of experience, your leaving yourself VERY succeptable to a training failure. That has little to do with instructors and much more to do with crappy management and a lack of resources.