Low-Time CPL Compensation

creedence623

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jul 20, 2013
Messages
11
Location
Boston, MA
Display Name

Display name:
creedence
Hi all. I've got what may be a loaded question here, but I thought there would be value in posting to this forum to get your insight.

Background. I work for a firm that employs primarily former military aviators for overseas contracts (at the requisite overseas/hardship pay rates). We recently stood up a division that provides aviation services in the continental US. The problem is that when we submit proposals for CONUS-based programs, the relatively higher labor rates we carry tend to prevent us from competing on a cost basis.

My instinct was to open up pilot positions with lower minimum experience requirements to fly our single engine fleet (C206s or similar) here in the States, but a discussion I had with our hiring manager has me wondering if we're off base on our compensation package for these new positions.

I'm going to keep this very general as some of the finer details of the requisition are still being worked out. In terms of experience, we would be looking for low-time CPL holders. Very generally speaking, 250-300 hours would be fine.

We are leaning toward this being a full time, non-exempt position starting in the neighborhood of $40,000 a year with medical and a 100% 401k match (up to 10%). Part time employment at a minimum of 32 hours per week has been thrown out there as well, but I think it's going to go the full time non-exempt route.

In addition to what I consider pretty solid pay for a good candidate with a new CPL, we could potentially pay for a multi-engine commercial rating to fly King Airs, and potentially provide a type rating in one of our larger aircraft assuming solid performance over a 1-2 year period in the single engine (with the customary 1 year service obligation or requirement for repayment of training expenses incurred if the employee left within a year of one of those training events).

So for conversational purposes, I'm interested to hear where the community thinks an offer like this falls on the spectrum for low time commercial pilots without the military background, as this is a reasonably new labor pool for me. My contention in the office today was that this is a pretty competitive offering when compared to the CFI who got me my PPL. If I'm off base and need to re calibrate my expectations I'd love to hear it.

As an aside, this isn't a solicitation per se, but I'd be happy to pass resumes on to the hiring manager if anyone in new England is interested (or if you're interested in moving to New England). Once the requisition has been approved and posted to our careers portal, I could point people in that direction as well.
 
Last edited:
I think, if this is serious, you would have a MASSIVE amount of eager applicants for that given profile. Including me if it weren't for the whole New England + my wife and child thing.
 
You would have difficulty dealing with applicants at that, there would be more than you expect unless they have reason to believe it is too good to be true. 135 Operators with turbine equipment offer less than half that for left seat and are now required to have over 1500 hrs and an ATP.

If your business model truly allows for that, best wishes. It would be great for guys coming up to have such an environment to work in - might even be able to keep unions out of the mix which would be a win-win for everyone.

'Gimp
 
That was my impression of the market as well, which is why I was so surprised at the comments during my discussion this afternoon.

We're Part 91 when we're not on a government contract (then we're typically under DCMA's 8210.1/AR 95-20), so the 1500 and ATP don't apply. As long as we meet the minimums for our underwriters, we're good.
 
We are leaning toward this being a full time, non-exempt position starting in the neighborhood of $40,000 a year with medical and a 100% 401k match (up to 10%). Part time employment at a minimum of 32 hours per week has been thrown out there as well, but I think it's going to go the full time non-exempt route.

In addition to what I consider pretty solid pay for a good candidate with a new CPL, we could potentially pay for a multi-engine commercial rating to fly King Airs, and potentially provide a type rating in one of our larger aircraft assuming solid performance over a 1-2 year period in the single engine (with the customary 1 year service obligation or requirement for repayment of training expenses incurred if the employee left within a year of one of those training events).

Even if you took away the multi-engine commercial training, the pay would still be more than double the next closest job for a 250 hour single engine commercial pilot...and that's without ANY benefits.
 
Even if you took away the multi-engine commercial training, the pay would still be more than double the next closest job for a 250 hour single engine commercial pilot...and that's without ANY benefits.

Edit: next closest civilian 250 hour single engine commercial pilot job. You're probably in line with the equivalent GS-9 fed job. Of course those jobs aren't easy to come by.
 
What does your insurance carrier have to say?

Bob Gardner
 
If you were on the west coast I'd be putting in an application right now.
 
Our underwriters gave us minimum experience requirements for the aircraft we own (those minimums aren't applicable for the aircraft used on contracts where minimums are stipulated elsewhere).

For this particular application, a CPL with 250 hours is sufficient.




And believe me, I understand the hesitation to move up to New England. I just moved up from Florida in time for the winter. Absolutely brutal.
 
Last edited:
Let me see if I am hearing you correctly...

Paying almost twice(with benefits!) what an entry level CPL job will pay...
With almost half the hours normally required for an entry level CPL job(500 is pretty typical)...
1-2 year upgrade from single engine to a multi-engine turbine...
paying for the multi-engine rating...
potential further advancement to an aircraft requiring a type rating...

I think your biggest problem is going to be having an inbox big enough for the waves of resumes you are going to receive. If I wasn't active duty military I'd jump on it!

Location aside...people would move to Alaska for a job like that.
 
Jesus... if I didn't enjoy my current position, I'd be on this like white on rice.
 
Let me see if I am hearing you correctly...

Paying almost twice(with benefits!) what an entry level CPL job will pay...
With almost half the hours normally required for an entry level CPL job(500 is pretty typical)...
1-2 year upgrade from single engine to a multi-engine turbine...
paying for the multi-engine rating...
potential further advancement to an aircraft requiring a type rating...

I think your biggest problem is going to be having an inbox big enough for the waves of resumes you are going to receive. If I wasn't active duty military I'd jump on it!

Location aside...people would move to Alaska for a job like that.


That's pretty much the deal. I'm glad to have gotten the validation here; I wasn't sure if I was going to get torched for appearing like I wanted to take advantage of lower time CPL holders. Having said that, I can't help but think it's a win all around. We are able to compete more effectively on cost, and we get to help launch some careers in the process.

And for those who care about this sort of thing, there could be a security clearance out of it as well on the multi-engine side.
 
Last edited:
You know the saying " if it is too good to be true" Who in their right mind would pay a 250 hour CPL 2-1/2 times the going rate. Again, if it is too good...
 
While you're at it, throw in a "we'll train you to meet the requirements on our own dime, but afterwards you owe us X years of your life flying on contract" program and you'll never have a vacancy for long
 
You know the saying " if it is too good to be true" Who in their right mind would pay a 250 hour CPL 2-1/2 times the going rate. Again, if it is too good...



I can definitely appreciate that sentiment. From the forum's perspective, you've got a long time lurker with virtually no posts throwing unusual salary numbers out there, etc.

By way of a little background, I work in business development for our firm. I was going over pricing for a proposal with our division VP this morning and couldn't understand why we were coming in so high on cost for this effort. Once we drilled down into the labor, I realized we were quoting our deployed pilot rate which I knew to be grossly off base with respect to the domestic single-engine market (based solely off of discussions with my civilian flight instructors and what I've read online).

As I mentioned the vast majority of our pilots support federal programs which are governed differently than these CONUS programs we're now bidding for. That's why I'm sure I'm coming across oddly unfamiliar with commercial aviation- as a former army aviator and having been immersed entirely in the federal domain, I am. Having said that, the position is legitimate. That's not to say we'll hire anyone who throws a resume at us. There's always an interview process that has to be contended with to ensure we find the right people, but in terms of minimum experience and compensation, that's where we are.

You'll notice I haven't said anything about what kind of flight time these pilots would be getting. The truth is, I don't have a solid grasp on what a pilot of our small aircraft would log in a year. I can say that for some programs, we'd be looking at 6 hours a day, 5-6 days a week for a limited time. But having said that, we're not going to hire pilots and let them bill against our overhead all day, so we would be pushing to get them flying.

I don't know that it's truly too good to be true. From the feedback I've gotten, it seems the numbers are very good, but it's still a 9-5 job for a large corporation, so you'd probably have more structure (for lack of a better term) in the business day that other organizations.
 
Last edited:
While you're at it, throw in a "we'll train you to meet the requirements on our own dime, but afterwards you owe us X years of your life flying on contract" program and you'll never have a vacancy for long

Yeah, if a pilot elected to have the company train them up on the multi engine platforms, and if they opted for the type rating, there would certainly be an obligation to work with us for a year after the training, or they would owe the cost of the training upon separation, but that's been standard with all of the other companies I've worked with in the federal contracting space.

Having said that, and I think the distinction you're outlining is, we have no need to train any of the pilots we're talking about here in our multi-engine platforms. That's just something we wanted to avail as an incentive/option. And that's entirely dependent upon performance the first year or so as well. By moving up to one of those programs, the company assumes a lot more contractual liability.
 
Last edited:
This also begs the question, what kind of flying is a 250 hour CPL going to be qualified to do? You appear to be saying both 91 and ???. I can't envision what kind of work you could do for the government that does not require a 135. What could a pilot be doing to generate revenue (other than corporate) under 91? You for sure will not be doing corporate work witha 250 hour pilot. Very, very strange. And again what possible motive could a company have to pay a $18K pilot $40K+ very good benefits. Just does not make business sense to me:dunno:
Maybe hauling contraband in which the pilots are expendable.:D
 
lol, nothing that exciting.

We fly mapping and survey payloads. Mapping forest fires, using hyper spectral systems to predict crop yields, etc, so our guys need to hold a line, maintain altitude, and mow the lawn.

We actually partner with 135 operators for programs that require a 135 component, but we're strictly part 91 or under the DCMA circular I referenced earlier.

So the resounding feedback at this point is the comp package is laughably off base, but on the other end of the spectrum than what our hiring manager maintained. It'll be an interesting discussion tomorrow.

For what it's worth, there isn't an ounce of bulls#!t here. I'll gladly post the opening once we get it back from corporate. What's ironic is that I had to make a case to bring the comp package down as low as it currently stands. It's an unusual artifact from the last 14 years of war where King Air 250 drivers pulled in $1000 a day.
 
Find the balance of good pay and employee benefits without destroying profits, and I think you'll find you'll attract the type of employee that you WANT to pay more than the rest.
 
I guess we just cost some poor sap(s) a $40K + a year job. Heck I am a little over qualified and retired but, if you promise not to put me in a single engine I will move to the NE for that. I already have ME turbine time. Where do I sign up?:rofl:

In fact, do you have any of the $1K/day KA jobs left?
 
Last edited:
If I wasnt already of very senior paygrade as a fed, I'd be interested as well.
 
Let me see if I am hearing you correctly...

Paying almost twice(with benefits!) what an entry level CPL job will pay...
With almost half the hours normally required for an entry level CPL job(500 is pretty typical)...
1-2 year upgrade from single engine to a multi-engine turbine...
paying for the multi-engine rating...
potential further advancement to an aircraft requiring a type rating...

I think your biggest problem is going to be having an inbox big enough for the waves of resumes you are going to receive. If I wasn't active duty military I'd jump on it!

Location aside...people would move to Alaska for a job like that.

As someone who is also in the industry, I'll echo that.
 
So the company I work with hires low-time guys. Some are good, some aren't so great. I think your numbers sound about right for the idea of keeping some guys on and incentivizing them to stay a while. If you're too cheap, they'll move up pretty fast, but of course you don't want to get stuck paying for someone who isn't OK, either. The pipeline patrol jobs I've seen advertised lately are in the $40-50K range (I know of one open in West Texas right now if the ad can be trusted) and they offer some stability and benefits.
 
That's great industry-specific insight. And you're absolutely right, the real aim here is to attract and retain quality people. It seems from the discussions I've had, the industry is rife with exploitative pay and emolument practices.
 
The other thing you have to keep in mind is that if you want them available full time, you have to give them something for their time - or at least enough to live on - when they aren't flying for you. A CFI may be able to do some work on the side, but not everyone wants to be a CFI, and you probably don't want them getting too into CFI work on the side because then they will start having scheduling conflicts. Depending on where they live in the country, $40K may be great, or barely enough. The other question is is there a per-diam for travel and on the road food expenses, or does that come out of the $40K? That can actually make a difference, too.
 
Ryan brings a good point about compensation and turnover. Most places that hire new CPL pilots pay very little and don't offer much because 1. they know they can and 2. most of the pilots are just looking to build time and move on.

If you want to keep people around you'll have to make the job more attractive than that next job that most guys wanna move on to once they get the hours. Sounds to me like you have the compensation and benefits package to be competitive there, which means you should be able to retain the good ones longer. If they are working full time and making decent livable wages then they wont need to find side work, and are less likely to want to move on to the next job in order to climb the ladder. Sounds like your ladder also has a couple higher rungs, so there's that incentive too.
 
If you want to keep people around you'll have to make the job more attractive than that next job that most guys wanna move on to once they get the hours. Sounds to me like you have the compensation and benefits package to be competitive there, which means you should be able to retain the good ones longer. If they are working full time and making decent livable wages then they wont need to find side work, and are less likely to want to move on to the next job in order to climb the ladder. Sounds like your ladder also has a couple higher rungs, so there's that incentive too.

I was going to post this, but I'm glad someone else did. Most younger pilots want to build time ASAP as their number 1 priority. Moving on to bigger/better airplanes is the goal.
 
I was going to post this, but I'm glad someone else did. Most younger pilots want to build time ASAP as their number 1 priority. Moving on to bigger/better airplanes is the goal.

This is usually true. For me though, I want stability. If I didn't dislike the political climate and other things about Maryland, i would apply for the job. Some jobs aren't worth living behind the enemy lines however. I was very excited about this job until I noticed you are posting from maryland and the job is probably in Maryland.

Good luck with the pilot search! The job sounds great, but the location sucks.
 
Location aside...people would move to Alaska for a job like that.

Some people even move up here by choice!

I mean, who would want to live in such an awful place. It's always snowing. The weather is abysmal, and everyone lives in igloos.

11113749_10204590521183480_8937456101888819641_n.jpg


10438339_10204396427571261_1855270646266335388_n.jpg


11025739_10204183903378289_982143186976378524_n.jpg
 
Last edited:
I know of a place that hires 500 hour pilots and will pay you 45k/yr and you'll get two weeks off a month.....

Everyone wants to be an airline pilot, but no one wants to do aviations dirty jobs. They usually pay decent, although some jobs the cow feces/pay ratio isn't very favorable, even when being compensated fairly well.
 
Last edited:
Some people even move up here by choice!

I mean, who would want to live in such an awful place. It's always snowing. The weather is abysmal, and everyone lives in igloos.

I moved to Alaska by choice.

I lived in an igloo while in Kotzebue until it burned down.....:rofl:
 
I moved to Alaska by choice.

I lived in an igloo while in Kotzebue until it burned down.....:rofl:

Just like the new alcohol treatment center in bethel? LOL

http://www.adn.com/article/20150114...ll-unsolved-health-organization-plans-rebuild

My buddy Ryan and I watched that thing burn from across the slough.

edit: I've also vowed to never go west of the alaska range again unless I'm getting atleast 6 figures. Kodiak is a goot spot.

edit again: What the hell are you doing up so late?
 
Last edited:
I took a job much like this when I was 19 years old, albeit after moving to the other side of the world for it. I was in a king air by ~250 hours and right seat of a 4-engine turboprop freighter by ~1000hrs. The job payed very well, and also paid for several type ratings and my maintenance engineer license (we were expected to both fly and turn wrenches). The whole scheme was designed to retain people who fit the company culture, not to pay the least amount possible for someone to drive an airplane.

Hi all. I've got what may be a loaded question here, but I thought there would be value in posting to this forum to get your insight.

Background. I work for a firm that employs primarily former military aviators for overseas contracts (at the requisite overseas/hardship pay rates). We recently stood up a division that provides aviation services in the continental US. The problem is that when we submit proposals for CONUS-based programs, the relatively higher labor rates we carry tend to prevent us from competing on a cost basis.

My instinct was to open up pilot positions with lower minimum experience requirements to fly our single engine fleet (C206s or similar) here in the States, but a discussion I had with our hiring manager has me wondering if we're off base on our compensation package for these new positions.

I'm going to keep this very general as some of the finer details of the requisition are still being worked out. In terms of experience, we would be looking for low-time CPL holders. Very generally speaking, 250-300 hours would be fine.

We are leaning toward this being a full time, non-exempt position starting in the neighborhood of $40,000 a year with medical and a 100% 401k match (up to 10%). Part time employment at a minimum of 32 hours per week has been thrown out there as well, but I think it's going to go the full time non-exempt route.

In addition to what I consider pretty solid pay for a good candidate with a new CPL, we could potentially pay for a multi-engine commercial rating to fly King Airs, and potentially provide a type rating in one of our larger aircraft assuming solid performance over a 1-2 year period in the single engine (with the customary 1 year service obligation or requirement for repayment of training expenses incurred if the employee left within a year of one of those training events).

So for conversational purposes, I'm interested to hear where the community thinks an offer like this falls on the spectrum for low time commercial pilots without the military background, as this is a reasonably new labor pool for me. My contention in the office today was that this is a pretty competitive offering when compared to the CFI who got me my PPL. If I'm off base and need to re calibrate my expectations I'd love to hear it.

As an aside, this isn't a solicitation per se, but I'd be happy to pass resumes on to the hiring manager if anyone in new England is interested (or if you're interested in moving to New England). Once the requisition has been approved and posted to our careers portal, I could point people in that direction as well.
 
In my view, aerial survey is a very competitive space where pilots tend to turn over on a seasonal basis.

You may find that the compensation you're offering still leaves you uncompetitive.
 
Some people even move up here by choice!

I mean, who would want to live in such an awful place. It's always snowing. The weather is abysmal, and everyone lives in igloos.

I was speaking more of distance and not quality of living ;)
 
Back
Top