Local community college wants to cut flight instructor pay.

On Apr 12, 12:00 pm, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:
"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message

oups.com...

From my
experience, I agree with the comment that "flight instructors aren't
faculty in the usual sense". Faculty have to demonstrate intellect,
creativity and insights, none of which are required from a CFI.

From what we're seing in academia, those qualities are not needed for
faculty, either.

Actually, those qualities are required in order to become a tenured
faculty, and it is evaluated by peers outside the institution. But
some institutions may not enforce these standards. On the other hand,
CFI's are not expected to demonstrate those qualities at any point in
their career.

One big difference is, most people in academia will not be able to
survive without innovation and creativity. But in flight instruction,
we are trained to follow procedures, exactly as written, such as POH,
FARs, and FAA documents. A pilot who displays 'creativity' is quickly
branded as risky or stupid. As a result, many misconceptions get
passed down generations without anyone challenging them.

"Maxwell" wrote in message
...



I knew I had problems when I handed him my original certificate from
1972
and he looked real puzzled and said, "is this really a pilots license".



"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...
You could have really ****ed him off if you said, "No, sonny, that's a
pilot
CERTIFICATE."

Jim

One of the long time Wings hosts in southern Florida frequently made a point
of that difference.

Peter

"Peter Dohm" wrote:
"RST Engineering" wrote:
You could have really ****ed him off if you said, "No, sonny, that's
a pilot CERTIFICATE."

One of the long time Wings hosts in southern Florida frequently made a
point of that difference.

If there was a difference, it seems to be getting blurred because even the
FAA is starting to use "license" as a synonym for "certificate" as
evidenced by some of the main pages on their web site, where they are
starting to use the terms interchangeably; for example:

http://www.faa.gov/pilots/

"Licenses & Certificates

* Change Your License Information
* Get a Copy of Your License"

And:

http://www.faa.gov/pilots/become/

"What is the first step to becoming a pilot?

Decide what you want to fly. FAA’s rules for getting a pilot’s license
(certificate) differ depending on the type of aircraft you fly. You can
choose among airplanes, gyroplanes, helicopters, gliders, balloons, or
airships. If you are interested in flying ultralight vehicles, you don’t
need a pilot’s license."

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
"Peter Dohm" wrote:
"RST Engineering" wrote:
You could have really ****ed him off if you said, "No, sonny, that's
a pilot CERTIFICATE."

One of the long time Wings hosts in southern Florida frequently made a
point of that difference.

If there was a difference, it seems to be getting blurred because even the
FAA is starting to use "license" as a synonym for "certificate" as
evidenced by some of the main pages on their web site, where they are
starting to use the terms interchangeably; for example:

http://www.faa.gov/pilots/

"Licenses & Certificates

* Change Your License Information
* Get a Copy of Your License"

And:

http://www.faa.gov/pilots/become/

"What is the first step to becoming a pilot?

Decide what you want to fly. FAA's rules for getting a pilot's license
(certificate) differ depending on the type of aircraft you fly. You can
choose among airplanes, gyroplanes, helicopters, gliders, balloons, or
airships. If you are interested in flying ultralight vehicles, you don't
need a pilot's license."

Admittedly, the guy is a "grey beard"--or would be if he didn't keep shaving
it off.

Peter

"B A R R Y" wrote in message
t...
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
Working all those numbers in my head isn't real life. I'd **** it up
for sure.

As would I! g

I screw up deposit slips all the time...

And that's just the date...

"RST Engineering" wrote in message
...
You could have really ****ed him off if you said, "No, sonny, that's a
pilot CERTIFICATE."


Hey Jim, good to see ya.

Yeah, I should have, he was a real Poindexter. Next time I'm going to shop
very carefully. I have had too many BFRs that were really good experiences,
and well focused on my needs. The last one just wasn't one of them.

On Apr 11, 8:56 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Robert M. Gary writes:
Why is it not fair to employ someone at a rate that they agree to????

Because some people benefit from other income, and others don't.

And that is the gov'ts fault?? You propose to punish those that don't
need the extra income by turning them away because others have taken
the job at above market rates. Anytime the rates are above market,
someone will be left in the cold because supply/demand are out of
wack.


Some people work for things other than just money (flight time for
instance).

Nobody does that if he must support himself with the work.

So?? Some don't need the income to support themselves. In the end each
person needs to choose what their minimum salery they are willing to
work for?

-robert

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Matt Barrow writes:

From what we're seing in academia, those qualities are not needed for
faculty, either.

Faculty members just need credentials and a willingness to follow the
politically-correct line.


What, and come out of their bedrooms once in a while? Stating in your
bedroom and playing video games?
That's not a political stance, fjukktard.




Cretin


Bertie

On Apr 11, 8:56 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Robert M. Gary writes:
Why is it not fair to employ someone at a rate that they agree to????

Because some people benefit from other income, and others don't. A student
who still lives with Mom and Dad may be able to work for nothing, but if he
does so, that eliminates a position for someone who can only work for enough
money to support himself. There are lots of occupations in which this dynamic
applies, and it drives salaries so low that some people must live in poverty.

Yea, punish those rich kids living with mom and dad for wanting to
work for experience. Make sure the jobs are all filled up when he goes
to apply. Gees, you socialists have no idea what you are really
saying.

-robert

On Apr 11, 2:53 pm, "Maxwell" wrote:
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message

...





Newps writes:

No. You are worth what somebody is willing to pay. Don't like it?
Move. Unions didn't come into existence because of low pay but
primarily because of working conditions.

It's not that simple. Sometimes a heterogenous labor pool can include
people
who are willing to work for less than a subsistence wage, competing with
people who cannot afford to do so. The former pull down wages for the
latter,
causing problems. And the former are not really being paid a living wage,
so
it's not necessarily a fair arrangement. Unions sometimes protect against
this as well.

Have you ever been a union member?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He lives in a socialist country, the union is the govt.

-Robert