AL Cadet programme

Dacian

xflyer wrote: »

Irish ethos, flag carrier? That was then this is now. In practical terms Ryanair carries the flag and maintains it's Irish ethos despite it's multinational status.

There is a certain naivety to some of the posts here. Need I remind you that ALT;) even has a German CEO. It's a low cost carrier now.

But the German CEO is in the process of moving away from the LCC model into being a 'hybrid' carrier. I would like to see them follow the JetBlue/Virgin America model.

EI will hire the pilots they want regardless of origin. They have had a history of Dutch and French pilots too. It is a great chance for some Irish to become a pilot but EI will not relax any requirements just because a guy is Irish. The bond I assume will be sufficient to ensure any successful cadets repay the training cost. Once that is done EI have broken even.


In regard to FR. Personally I view them as the first 'proper' European airline. Irish in origin but multinational in make-up and pax demographic.

high ho

ALT, EI, AL, shamrock, FR , even aer lingus. who cares what we call them here, we all know who we are referring to. thing is, if you are in an interview you wont be calling them anything, you will be talking directly to them.
as for who they will recruit, i honestly think they will recruit mainly irish, if not totally, i guess time will be the only thing that will prove me wrong....

Delancey

Have to agree with xflyer - anyone who thinks Aer Lingus will favour Irish applicants is gravely deluded.
Lest we forget - this is the airline that dumped the Shannon-Heathrow service without a second thought , the days of an airline serving it's ' National Interest ' is more appropriate to 20 years ago.

pilot1087

high ho wrote: »

ALT, EI, AL, shamrock, FR , even aer lingus. who cares what we call them here, we all know who we are referring to. thing is, if you are in an interview you wont be calling them anything, you will be talking directly to them.
as for who they will recruit, i honestly think they will recruit mainly irish, if not totally, i guess time will be the only thing that will prove me wrong....

True, but I was highlighting this in case anyone is abbreviating in their initial application. It makes all the difference.

alan85

True, but I was highlighting this in case anyone is abbreviating in their initial application. It makes all the difference.

If they were to abbreviate at all in an application they shouldn't get the job. You're applying for a job, not filing a flight plan! I wouldn't apply to Tesco using their stock market symbol TSCO... Think about it...

pilot1087

alan85 wrote: »

If they were to abbreviate at all in an application they shouldn't get the job. You're applying for a job, not filing a flight plan! I wouldn't apply to Tesco using their stock market symbol TSCO... Think about it...

Alan, I was trying to help. It was just a suggestion from someone with who might be able to share a bit more information about the process than most. I'll leave it at that.

high ho

for those of you who speak english, french and dutch

http://www.jetaircareer.be/EN/87-Jetairflycadetpilotprogram.html

http://www.jetaircareer.be/jetcadet.pdf

Roar83

So if jetair require English, French and Dutch, all aer lingus have to do is make it a requirement to be able to speak English and Irish! That should keep things local :D

Jocry

Roar83 wrote: »

So if jetair require English, French and Dutch, all aer lingus have to do is make it a requirement to be able to speak English and Irish! That should keep things local :D

I concur

Jammyc

Jocry wrote: »

Roar83 wrote: »

So if jetair require English, French and Dutch, all aer lingus have to do is make it a requirement to be able to speak English and Irish! That should keep things local :D

I concur

It would probably narrow it down to about 5 people as well. :P

GKJK

Hmm some new info here!

I was told by a reliable source that EI are in "advanced" stages of planning for a cadetship, however the stumbling block seems to be cost. "The people in accounts" as it were are expressing concerns over the "profitability" of the structure put forward. I was told that for the 1st few schemes it seems having flight experiance will be a plus as it means less money required from both sides while keeping the bond at the same length.

From what I heard it seems EI are looking to run a few schemes over the next 5 years to keep numbers up, but they will still recruit the majority through DE-FO advertising.

I would trust what I heard as I know the guy who said it fairly well. That being said he stressed that they were not hard facts, but that he was confident that things would be more or less as expressed above.

high ho

GKJK wrote: »

Hmm some new info here!

I was told by a reliable source that EI are in "advanced" stages of planning for a cadetship, however the stumbling block seems to be cost. "The people in accounts" as it were are expressing concerns over the "profitability" of the structure put forward. I was told that for the 1st few schemes it seems having flight experiance will be a plus as it means less money required from both sides while keeping the bond at the same length.

From what I heard it seems EI are looking to run a few schemes over the next 5 years to keep numbers up, but they will still recruit the majority through DE-FO advertising.

I would trust what I heard as I know the guy who said it fairly well. That being said he stressed that they were not hard facts, but that he was confident that things would be more or less as expressed above.

that is the bean counters talking, not the flight op's. this would never work on a practical level. could you imagine a class of 10, each having varing levels of flight experience, each paying different amounts for the course, each having a different contract, each starting / joining the course at different times based on what they are getting credits for, 1 might have a ppl, another has their atpls sat and another has 25 hours and never gone solo. each with their own bad habits already well developed and not starting out a fresh again on a structured ei course, it wouldnt work. im not saying its a bad thing to have previous flight training / exp, not at all, but i do think that all the students need to start at the same place on the course and do it start to finish.
just my 2 pennys worth.

jwcurtin

Roar83 wrote: »

So if jetair require English, French and Dutch, all aer lingus have to do is make it a requirement to be able to speak English and Irish! That should keep things local :D

Bring it on!!! Táim ag súil go mór leis!

GKJK

high ho wrote: »

that is the bean counters talking, not the flight op's. this would never work on a practical level. could you imagine a class of 10, each having varing levels of flight experience, each paying different amounts for the course, each having a different contract, each starting / joining the course at different times based on what they are getting credits for, 1 might have a ppl, another has their atpls sat and another has 25 hours and never gone solo. each with their own bad habits already well developed and not starting out a fresh again on a structured ei course, it wouldnt work. im not saying its a bad thing to have previous flight training / exp, not at all, but i do think that all the students need to start at the same place on the course and do it start to finish.
just my 2 pennys worth.

Well no airline will take a guy who has anything above ATPLs onto a cadetship. If he has a CPL then there would be no use in having them just there for an MEIR! However the idea of a guy with a ppl having "bad habits" is a bit overstated in the context of a cadetship. During CPL and MEIR training any bad habits could be cleaned up easily. If a guy has bad habits that threaten his ability to get a CPL or that cannot be ironed out then he shouldnt have a ppl as he is a danger to himself and others out there. After all that is what SEP renewal is all about!

The structure EI would inject into a cadetship would centre largely on procedure and procedural awareness. These issues usually crop up in CPL/MEIR training. They are not likely to go over board in PPL training. At the core of it a PPL is useless for anyone wanting to be an airline pilot. It is in affect a "license to learn" and more of a stepping stone to CPL. The only preocedure's that could come into PPL would be when landing lights go on and off and when flaps are raised/lowered etc on the ground. Anything beyone that would be a CPL matter I'd say

high ho

GKJK wrote: »

Well no airline will take a guy who has anything above ATPLs onto a cadetship. If he has a CPL then there would be no use in having them just there for an MEIR! However the idea of a guy with a ppl having "bad habits" is a bit overstated in the context of a cadetship. During CPL and MEIR training any bad habits could be cleaned up easily. If a guy has bad habits that threaten his ability to get a CPL or that cannot be ironed out then he shouldnt have a ppl as he is a danger to himself and others out there. After all that is what SEP renewal is all about!

The structure EI would inject into a cadetship would centre largely on procedure and procedural awareness. These issues usually crop up in CPL/MEIR training. They are not likely to go over board in PPL training. At the core of it a PPL is useless for anyone wanting to be an airline pilot. It is in affect a "license to learn" and more of a stepping stone to CPL. The only preocedure's that could come into PPL would be when landing lights go on and off and when flaps are raised/lowered etc on the ground. Anything beyone that would be a CPL matter I'd say

you have quoted me but not replied to what i said.
so how do you think the course would pan out with different levels of previous training been taken into account up to atpl exams passed. ie, who pays how much, who starts when etc....

either make it current ppl as min requirement or dont....

GKJK

high ho wrote: »

you have quoted me but not replied to what i said.
so how do you think the course would pan out with different levels of previous training been taken into account up to atpl exams passed. ie, who pays how much, who starts when etc....

either make it current ppl as min requirement or dont....

Well I know in the old days that it was taken on an hours basis. If a guy from the air corps came in with 3000 hours and atpls he went straight to CPL. You seem to look at this like a school, when it isnt!

If EI take on 10 cadets 4 may finish in 12 months and the remaining 6 in 18 depending on how they take to the course work and that was always the way. When you pass MEIR and MCC you go to Type Rating and then on line. They dont all have to finish together and to suggest they would is unrealistic!

EI will get a flight school and take the 10 cadets and say on we want 10 fATPLs. If 5 of those guys have PPLs and 100h then they will finish quicker than the raw guys but EI get 10 pilots within 18 months and that's all they care about.
If you go to any integrated flight school you'll see classes starting with a mixture of PPLs and raw. The PPLs finish quicker as they have less to do.

Jocry

Im not going to agree nor completely disagree with what's been said but I think the idea of Aer Lingus actually going down this route is simply because:
1) they're not happy with the DEFO's which are coming through the FTOs at the moment (fact) and want to oversee the training their potential employee receives, ensuring confidence that when the student completes training and "is ready" to fly, that Aer Lingus dont have to in effect retrain and iron our bad habits as it has been put here.
2) they want to shape and mould the cadet into one of their own whom they expect to receive quite a subtantial ROI on over the life of the pilot - this being achieved by working the cadet towards the mentaility that the company will be their one and only stop after training.

I dont think that whether you have 5hrs, 15hrs, or even a PPL will make a huge difference. You have to look at the bigger picture here, how much will having a PPL save the company REALLY, when they're looking at employing the person for 30+ years. While yes, cost obviously is a factor, I dont think that the possible saving of maybe €8k =-> €10 per cadet will be the turning point for this course or its requirements.

Aer Lingus will want the best of the best out of this scheme and by setting stipulations of requirements like this, will it not be ruling out possibly the candidate who is exactly what they are looking for but for one reason or another has not been able to build upto the PPL?!! That aside, airlines and recruitment being the strange organisations they are, there is an undertone that for cadetships while obviously they would like to know that the person they're hiring has atleast gone up a couple of times and doesnt puke at the first shudder the plane makes, they less time spent flying as a pilot the better from the company's perspective

While what I have said above isnt just some random rant that Ive typed, having spent some time researching this and discussing with EI pilots and people in the airline recruitment game with previous EI connections, I do believe that no one here really knows what is going to be contained in their press release advert for this scheme.

Coming from a side where I havent been able to achieve my license and build many hours over the last number of years, but who passionately craves a chance to fly for this company, I hope that the Ab Initio route is one which they will follow. However chances of actually getting a shot after that, mmmmmm, quite slim I reckon as I suspect a SERIOUS amount of applicants from far field!!

.......and since this is in effect a rumours forum I shall leave you with this, from what I hear, the decision has already been made and they're down to pretty much finalising the campaign for release in the not too distant future, so we'll see where this leads

xflyer

GKJK, I think you misunderstand how an integrated ATPL course works. The whole class goes through together, PPL or not whatever the hours. Initially there's the ground school phase. Several months sitting in a classroom studying followed by the exams. Then the flying starts and it doesn't matter if you have a PPL or not. They all go through the same process. Obviously someone with a few hours will find it slightly easier initially. But it's important to remember that the standard of flying expected is higher for the CPL than for the PPL. Much tighter tolerances. Any difference in hours wll only arise during the hour building phase. It all evens out in the end. In fact a PPL isn't even issued to integrated students.

There are no staggered finishing dates. Some people will be quicker to learn than others. It's catered for in the schedule. They will finish together.

Jocry, while you indeed right that Aer Lingus want to mould their pilots and that sometimes they are unhappy with some of their DEFOs. This is in fact a peculiarity of Aer Lingus, something they share with BA. It doesn't mean their way is the best way. No doubt it's due to the fact that a large proportion of their pilots came down the cadetship route.

Other airlines seem to have no trouble getting pilots and moulding them to their modus operandi, notably Ryanair. Does anyone honestly think Ryanair pilots are not as good as Aer Lingus pilots?

But of course Aer Lingus is entitled to recruit their pilots anyway they wish. They are old school in that. They are a legacy airline after all. Personally I think it's time to move on from that.

For anyone interested in being an Aer Lingus pilot by all means apply for the cadetship but if you don't get it and you really really want it. Then become a pilot anyway and apply as a DEFO. But you really don't have to be an Aer Lingus pilot to have decent career and in any case it's likely that the T&Cs will not be as favourable in EI as it used to be as evidenced by the recent strike threat.

Aer Lingus pilot seems to be a bit of a holy grail among some misty eyed quarters. But really it's just a job, being a pilot is just a job in the end. It has it's upsides but plenty of downsides too.

Jocry

xflyer wrote: »

Aer Lingus pilot seems to be a bit of a holy grail among some misty eyed quarters. But really it's just a job, being a pilot is just a job in the end. It has it's upsides but plenty of downsides too.

I agree and as someone recently said to me the asset while one (the pilot) might think is the pilot, its not. The real asset is the plane itself! You are employeed to operate a vehicle from point A to B, simple as. Responsibilities are greater than lets say a train or bus and alot more can go wrong, but at the end of the day it still is what it is, a mode of transport. The pilot is just the driver albeit trained to a higher more technical level and with a view a millions times better

John_Mc

Jocry wrote: »

I agree and as someone recently said to me the asset while one (the pilot) might think is the pilot, its not. The real asset is the plane itself! You are employeed to operate a vehicle from point A to B, simple as. Responsibilities are greater than lets say a train or bus and alot more can go wrong, but at the end of the day it still is what it is, a mode of transport. The pilot is just the driver albeit trained to a higher more technical level and with a view a millions times better

Yeah but you can break any job into simple terms like that. E.g A formula 1 driver is just driving a car around in circles really fast

Jocry

John_Mc wrote: »

Yeah but you can break any job into simple terms like that. E.g A formula 1 driver is just driving a car around in circles really fast

Yep, and once you get over that, and take management and all the political cr@p which goes with it with a pinch of salt you should be fine.....anyway, its kind of off the topic on this thread though, better leave it over on pprune

high ho

has anyone heard anything new on this recently?

GKJK

high ho wrote: »

has anyone heard anything new on this recently?

Yeh...I heard that EI were surprised by the quality of some of the people who appied in the recent DE campaign(a lot of ryanair FOs and Irish Easyjet FOs(with 320 ratings)......and now they may shelf this cadetship idea for another year or so....oh well..

smellslikeshoes

GKJK wrote: »

Yeh...I heard that EI were surprised by the quality of some of the people who appied in the recent DE campaign(a lot of ryanair FOs and Irish Easyjet FOs(with 320 ratings)......and now they may shelf this cadetship idea for another year or so....oh well..

Considering there is an airline in Ireland (which you'd have to guess is Shamrock) hiring contract FOs for the 320 at the moment I'd guess that they weren't at all happy with the quality of applications.
If that's a positive or not for the cadet scheme who knows, but it certainly leaves the possibility open.

basill

1 and 1 doesn't make 3 I am afraid. You are mixing up your apples and oranges.

The quality rated fo's you mention were ex Easy and trained through CTC. AL was in the right place at the right time a few years ago and they joined the Lgw and Bfs bases after being stuffed around by Easy. Most have gone or are going as they have been treated badly and got better deals and career progression elsewhere.

The contact f/os are there because of an almighty management stuff up leaving us desperately short of pilots for this summer. It takes months to get a 300hr wonder online and we started recruiting late. Consequently there have been cancelations, hire ins, management pilots forced to fly and a 5 on 1 off roster, buy back of annual leave amongst other things to cover this summer. Generally it's amateur hour at work these days.

GKJK

Although I've heard a lot of explainations on why EI are not impressed with DE applicants can anybody explain the exact areas that people are found wanting? Is it sim checks? Tech knowledge? General ATPL Theory type knowledge or just personality?

searescue

Was speaking to a Shamrock skipper last week. He said he's only waiting to hear a date as to when they will advertise the Cadetship. He said AL needs alot of new pilots - some resigned - others left to airlines that hired recently - British Airways etc. (who, may I add have opened their DE scheme again).

Some 70 pilots left in the past 12 months.

He also told me that pilots who applied and failed for the Direct Entry scheme included Air-Corps personnel (flew the Gov. Jet etc.) and alot of other pilots. The reason they didn't pass was the psychometric testing.

Hope that helps.

GKJK

searescue wrote: »

He also told me that pilots who applied and failed for the Direct Entry scheme included Air-Corps personnel (flew the Gov. Jet etc.) and alot of other pilots. The reason they didn't pass was the psychometric testing.

Hope that helps.

I think that is very much a result of the reliance on calculators in schools etc in the last decade. Some of those tests can be really annoying though. What kind of stuff is on the EI psycometric tests?

searescue

GKJK wrote: »

I think that is very much a result of the reliance on calculators in schools etc in the last decade. Some of those tests can be really annoying though. What kind of stuff is on the EI psycometric tests?

He said he hadn't an iota. He did say though that you get a better result if you answer fewer questions but get them right - rather than doing more questions and getting them wrong.

xflyer

He also told me that pilots who applied and failed for the Direct Entry scheme included Air-Corps personnel (flew the Gov. Jet etc.) and alot of other pilots. The reason they didn't pass was the psychometric testing.

They seem very devoted to their psychometric tests. I remember chatting to a former Air Contractors Captain who had just got into Aer Lingus. (Medical renewal time is a great way of meeting people) I was amazed to hear he had to pass the psychometric tests too. Years of flying, thousands of hours of experience counts for naught if you don't pass the little psycho test. Very odd indeed. I wonder would Sully get into Aer Lingus, probably not!:pac: