FTO styles - too militaristic and conformist? [Archive]

boogie-nicey

29th Jun 2006, 10:19

Is it really true that OAT still has a small element of staff who treat the establishment like a training barracks? I thought this was more rumour than fact, are there any instances, episodes of this type of behaviour being exhibited.

I recall at SECOAT (South East College of Air Training) just before it closed in the 1990s of how they taught flight training but also an undercurrent of something else too. This "something else" or additional activity seemed to be unnecessary and got in the way of the student's focus and primary aim of learning. In fact they had some poor chap mopping the floor at the end of the day (quite large floor mind you so can't have been fun especially after a day's studying).

Why is this silly behaviour still present at places like OAT and some others? I doubt the argument that it helps to reinforce learning or that the discipline is required, then in that case why not go the whole hog and have parade ground activities and saluting too. Flight Safety in the States is just if not more professional and they don't need to adhere to such regimes, why is it so unique to the UK like hooliganism is to England football supporters.

Shouldn't the extra energy be directed towards more positive things like tutorial workshops or 'experience' in the hangars to get a 'feel' of what aircraft annatomy is all about?

Maybe this is nothing more than an inadvertent physiological exhibition of superiority on the poor unsuspecting student. One who must bear this brunt because of some self appointed attitude of status and importance by his/her instructional staff.

Then again if these people are so great then what on earth are they doing at a flying school? The brightest people go on to industry and help companies earn big bucks in fact those companies actively head hunt such personalities. I am increasingly of the opinion that those who end up at OAT (ex-services) are the ones that few others want. "The best always go to the front of the queue".

potkettleblack

29th Jun 2006, 11:20

I don't think that it is strictly limited to OAT per se. For some inexplicable reason this industry seems to attract people that can't help themselves than treat newbies with disdain even though it is these very students that enable them to earn a buck.

In my time I have met ex RAF navigators with chips on their shoulders and a deepset hatred of pilots in addition to ones that would give of their time without question to get you through the ATPL's. I have met 10,000 hour C-152 rated CFI's who think that the be all and end all of aviation is their crappy flying school operating out of a portacabin and will tell anyone who can be bothered listening how they chose not to go commercial even though they had airlies beating down their door but decided to concentrate on training. Yeah right! I have come across prats that insist on doing their PPL's in a captains uniform complete with epaulettes and the nice shiny black leather flight case. Best of all though is the brand spanking new PPL holder that started to offer flying tips to newbies and regaled stories of how it was all just so simple for him.

Wee Weasley Welshman

29th Jun 2006, 11:52

Speaking as someone who was once an instructor in Jerez.

I observed that some students had an expectation and attitude that was in stark contrast to those held by many staff.

Many instructors had enjoyed a high quality grammar school education and/or a service career. Usually they were over the age of 40. Times have very much changed in the sphere of education and this shows.

Both a high quality education and a service career can be in a broad sense characterised as instilling discipline and decorum. From standing up when a teacher enters a room, to saluting, to polishing ones shoes. Due defference and respect for rank and experience is something (sadly, I think) lacking in many schools and young peoples lives today.

Instead there is a culture of consumerism, of rights, that all must have prizes and that no individual is better than any other. That nobody can shout at you and that the school fails you and not the other way around. That anybody purporting to be an authority figure is likely considered a bully.

So what you have is a clash of cultures between the life experience of the staff and that of the students.

Sure, its the 21st Century and yes you are not in boarding school or the armed services. So undoubtedly this should be borne in mind by the staff. But similarly the student should aspire to be something more than just a customer buying a service. You can learn a lot from some of those slightly crusty old sticklers with their curiously polished shoes and short back and sides. If nothing else I can assure you that a great many of the Captains and Training Captains in the airline you aspire to join are just like them. Better learn how to make them like you..

I went to a bog standard comprehensive and never got further with the military than the UAS system and the Air Cadets. Nevertheless I once had a student (self sponsored, Integrated) who crashed through the briefing room door, shirt un-ironed, 6 minutes late for his briefing with a piece of toast in hand. He was genuinely gob smacked to be told that I was unimpressed and had bumped his flight to the last slot of the day and given 'his' aircraft to another student. He took his indignation straight to the CFI and demanded better customer service. The CFI bumped him off flying for two days and never did recommend him to an airline after graduation.

Treat every day of training like its a job interview and you won't go far wrong.

Cheers,

WWW

boogie-nicey

29th Jun 2006, 14:45

WWW: You raise some very valid points and as a grammar educated chappie myself I agree that we have a somewhat different type and standard of product from the educational system these days. I too am the butt of light hearted jokes about always being overdressed and shoes polished, etc simply because that's all I know and I would feel naked to wander around in new age t-shirt and shorts.

However we need to accept as you rightly pointed out that we're moving onwards and times have changed. There are nevertheless some characters who are still utlising old tools to get a modern job done and though it would have been somewhat impressive in years gone by we can now employ numerous up to date and more effective methods. Yet the flying world seems to scorn these methods of tution and insists on going the long way around just for the sake of it. Therefore we need to find a balance between preserving the best of the past whilst simultaneously updating it to fit into the modern age, a double edged sword.

The students need to take on additional learning outside the sphere of the aviation syllabus and develop their characters after all times may have changed but the laws of nature and science haven't, so beware! But if the educational system/society isn't hitting the mark then maybe these ex-services chaps need to realise this and instead of berating them they should think of them as another wet behind the years student that needs to have their character and confidence built. This can be acieved in parallel to the aviation training by means of support, guidance and of course a slap on the wrists from time to time to remind them where the 'edge of the envelope' is.

Students need to realise that like any other service you can easily jump up and down whilst demanding things but in order to effectively get things resolved you need to <b>work<\b> with the other party. It appears that the only thing askew here is the balancing point and how much each side is contributing at different points along their training. At present we have so called students demanding things and instructors desperately biting their tongue wishing they could tell those horrible students who and what they used to be in the services. These are two very polarised poitions and we need to move closer together and integrate more.

High Wing Drifter

29th Jun 2006, 15:30

WWW,
From standing up when a teacher enters a room, to saluting, to polishing ones shoes. Due defference and respect for rank and experience is something (sadly, I think) lacking in many schools and young peoples lives today.
Life is different now and the old ways are totally incompatible with modern demands, flattened hierarchies, extended and multiplied professional responsibilities. We can't have choice and expect people to feel personally responsible for their contribution in the professional workplace whilst retaining the parent-child/master-servent relationships with those above us. Likewise, the way we bring up children has to be aligned with this cultural shift. There is much pain in schools at the moment, but the next generation of teachers will be more in-tune with the new demands. From what I can gather, it is rightly the objective of CRM to remove these old parent-child relationships and install a highly interactive team, able to conduct an effective professional two way diaglog. Thankfully, the spate of accidents directly or indirectly attributed to +G-P/-G-P Captains 20 years ago is no more; that I think is the proof in the pudding.

Wee Weasley Welshman

29th Jun 2006, 16:20

Hmm, I still think its appropriate for there to be a Me Teacher - You Student relationship where respect is shown on both sides rather than a Me Customer - You Seller relationship. I'm all for a relaxed and friendly training atmosphere which is almost certainly what OATS achieves.

Sadly the 'call me Steve' culture where extendable deadlines, loose punctuality and a lack of hierarchy results in some (only a few) students on Integrated courses being a bit shocked intially and hostile later.

It's ususally a time of high stress and your world does tend to shrink to the boundary fence of the campus. Thus small failings by the school or its instructors are greatly magnified.

I'd love to see how some of the worst moaners would cope on say RAF Basic Flying Training - they wouldn't know what hit them. Spending £70k and being treated like children or in an off-hand manner is a deep cultural shock. But it does happen, often and everywhere. Its just one of the unique and character building features of an Integrated style course of training.

Play the big man, smile and be nice and you'll find it all goes a lot easier.

Cheers

WWW

Regis Potter

29th Jun 2006, 17:22

Have to agree with WWW on this one.
I'm amazed at the number of students who can't apparently dress themselves properly for school each day. I'm sorry but if you can't iron a shirt or be bothered to wear a belt/polish shoes etc are you really cut out for a career where you will be expected to wear a uniform properly each working day. A previous employer of mine would instill the sense of corporate responsibility that came with wearing a uniform; we would be disciplined for not wearing items (e.g. caps whilst walking through the terminal) or looking shabby whilst acting as an ambassador of the airline in public. We are indeed in a changing world but that doesn't mean that you can't still have standards.

Is it me or have things really gone downhill since the adoption of JAR; like WWW says Instead there is a culture of consumerism, of rights, that all must have prizes and that no individual is better than any other. That nobody can shout at you and that the school fails you and not the other way around. That anybody purporting to be an authority figure is likely considered a bully.

This is exactly how it is in flight training in the U.K. today. Pity really.

40 yearflyer

29th Jun 2006, 19:25

Apparently I last posted on 10th September 2005 ! Speaking as one of those failed Airline Captains who underpin the FTOs throughout the UK I can only say that I had the chance to jump straight into the left hand seat but circumstances intervened. ( I choose not to say what). I took up instructing but I suppose I was never cut out for those long boring legs in Airlines. To this day I have NO 1st Officer/co pilot time in my log book. So what does this all mean?. Be grateful somebody is manning the FTOs. In real terms I have taken a 25% cut in salary over the last 16 years. (Any airline pilot done the same?) I sometimes work 12 hour days - sometimes 6 days a week. Why do I do it? My wife thinks I am mad. I think she is right. Sometimes too tired to enjoy a night out - too tired to play golf. So when you choose your FTO -just think on the costs of training in UK - real estate costs greater than anywhere - fuel costs greater than anywhere - VAT on training cost (not so In the rest of Europe) - landing fees -not so in USA and a CAA talking in ever growing telephone numbers for test fees. So where has the cost of training gone? - not into my pocket.

I wish I was a Nigel flying through the skies,
Money in the bank never mind the bleeding piles,
Instead I am an Instructor bod,
With mortgage still to pay,
No BALPA to look after me,
I work 6 days a week............................................The rest is just as bad

microfilter

30th Jun 2006, 12:29

boogey nicey is right in what he says- there is a definate militaristic strain running though half the lecturers there. It's unnecessary and childish.

I accept that for the military world then yes, you need to instill discipline through many other facets of the daily life- for that reason you live in barracks etc, but for a school which is 9-5 it is unnecessary. I could understand it more if you were a cadet chosen by an airline, but not if you are paying your own way.

The fact that you are wearing a uniform bears no reflection on your ability to fly an aeroplane, and the uniforms are so cheap and nasty- they look a state after just a few weeks- many of the integrated guys wear 'unofficial' clothing- does that imply they are not fit to work in an airline?

if we are going to wearing a uniform for the next thirty years then give us a break at this stage! I accept that even tube drivers (who spend a lot of time in the dark) have to wear a uniform, but there are plenty of schools out there in which you don't- these guys also get jobs flying planes. There is no correlation between wearing a uniform and ability to conform. If you don't wear a uniform to fly a plane it doesn't mean that you will suddenly ignore ATC and charge over the hold to take off quickly or something like that.

It's popular culture that degrades standards not consumerism and rights- I always thought rights were good things......Magna Carta...did she die in vain????

captwannabe

30th Jun 2006, 19:52

Whatever you choose to do in life, whatever school you go to, etc., you will always wear a uniform. In schools without uniforms, certain fashionable clothes become the "uniform". Uniforms are just a part of life. I've had to wear a uniform all the way through school, and I think it's a good thing. Imagine having to get up every morning to decide what to wear, so that you'll look somewhat respectable to your peers. People who haven't got the money to spend on flash clothes (this should include pilots who have just spent €100k+ on training! :) ), benefit from this too. In my experience, wearing uniforms improves peoples performance and attitudes to work. "No-uniform days" in my school have often led to riots. Good times though! My school is not a "posh" school, far from it. But wearing uniforms adds a level of professionalism, at any institution. If you've paid €50K - €100k+, to train at any FTO, shouldn't you feel proud to be there training to be a professional pilot? You should consider yourself as a professional student.................:ok:

microfilter

30th Jun 2006, 20:47

well no school uniform in France- doesn't seem to have done them much harm- I know who's beef i would rather eat!! There is a history of deference in this country of course.....

Dave Martin

30th Jun 2006, 21:31

Captwannabe,
I have no dress standard and the people I work with have no dress standard - yet they constitute some of the UK's top experts in their field. Uniforms are not part of life, they are part of culture. In the corporate culture dress standard is there to demand unformity. That is, to aid in the selection of employees who show their willingness to conform, to adhere to company ethos (creed or colours), to accept your place in a hierarchy or to say "yes" to their superior's wishes.

As I understand, CRM emphasises the need to speak up, regardless of your position in the pecking order. Bearing that in mind, who would you prefer for a second opinion? The pristine cut suit conformist, emulating the captain's mannerisms, afraid to think outside of the box? Or the slightly eccentric but considered candidate with an alternative solution to your own?

In my mind neither should have the edge. Judging the candidate by their ability to tie a half windsor, polish their shoes to a pristine shine, or cross their t's on a document might very well eliminate the best pilot - some of the best in every profession weren't the naturals. In fact, the whole stigma of dress standard sounds disturbingly similar to the justifications used for keeping women out of the flight deck.

Wazzoo

30th Jun 2006, 21:37

I think we're suffering from a totally consumer based society these days.

You only have to look at the youth growing up today, that expect to somehow be on the same level as people ten, twenty years older than them. Its a society that says 'I'm right and I don't care what anyone else thinks'. It leads to kids that don't respect their parents and teachers, leads to crazy things such as happy slapping where kids think they are just above everything else and can do what they want.

I don't wish to label everyone to that degree, but its still there in other people, just to a lesser degree. It comes out as 'I want it, so I can have it' leading to a country that is ever more in debt. Its shown in the simple lack of respect of other people and complete lack of humility in any situation, because I'm number one and everyone should accept that.

Its a product of a consumeristic, capitalistic society and to be honest it makes me sick to see the attitudes of people these days.

microfilter

30th Jun 2006, 21:45

Dave Martin is absolutely spot on, but the post on consumerism and choice leading to a collapse of society- these arguments have been put forward for decades- even centuries! The next generation will be arguing exactly the same point when we are gone! TO focus on the problem as capitalism is a more astute observation however.

captwannabe

1st Jul 2006, 09:08

Dave Martin,

Uniforms are a part of our culture, and therefore are a part of our life. When at work, you are representing your airline/company/sports team/etc., and I think you dress accordingly. You don't see footballers dressed in jeans and t-shirt when they are representing their club. They wear their kit/suits/clubs products.

Wearing a uniform does not detract from ones ability to speak up. That's the biggest load of cr*p I've heard. Wearing a uniform does not make you a conformist, but what's wrong in taking pride in your appearance when representing yourself and your company.

I doubt that airlines judge their candidates by apearance alone! If they did, they'd be hiring models. I disagree with the argument that women could be kept out of the cockpit based solely on their dress standard, maybe in the past there was a prejudice, but things change.

BEagle

1st Jul 2006, 10:01

At a recent MPL meeting, recruiters for the major airlines commented that applicants may have all the qualifications - and even a type rating - but the harsh fact is that around 50% of fATPL holders are considered to be totally unemployable. Because they are simply NOT the type of people the airlines would ever wish to employ.

This view is shared by several folk high up in the CAA. Indeed one only has to sit at the door of the Belgrano on an exam day watching the candidates as they come in to know who the future unemployable are....

Just because someone is paying £70K + for flight training, that does not absolve them from doing as they are told. There are certain personal standards to which you must aspire if you wish to succeed - and that probably includes polishing your shoes and respecting your seniors.

Some applications for sponsorship are, frankly, quite unbelievable. It seems that someone urgently needs to tell ignorant modern digi-yoof that spelling, grammar and punctuation are still necessary in 2006. As is legible handwriting. Txt msg prose and spellcheckers are wholly insufficient!

High Wing Drifter

1st Jul 2006, 10:09

captwannabe,
I disagree with the argument that women could be kept out of the cockpit based solely on their dress standard,...
I know what you are saying, but Freud would have had a field day with that wording :\

Beagle,
This view is shared by several folk high up in the CAA. Indeed one only has to sit at the door of the Belgrano on an exam day watching the candidates as they come in to know who the future unemployable are....
It simply is not possible to assertain somebody's suitability for a job just because, at a glance, you personally find them incompatible with your personal values. An example of if the face fits, clique brigade. Aviation is a business, not a Golf Club. Employers in commerce have woken up to the idea that the people who help them make the most money, are not necessarily the people they would have over for afternoon tea.
Just because someone is paying £70K + for flight training, that does not absolve them from doing as they are told.
Don't believe that a dislike of the "put up and shut up" mentality means it should be a free for all! Of course you should be minded to do as you are told, just that if what you are being told to do is not in the best intersts of the business you represent you should be expected to query, provide alternatives and ultimately refuse if there is a good reason. I suspect that reality is, that if that culture is encouraged, then it hardly ever leads to refusal because stupid/selfish orders are not issued in such an environment.

captwannabe

1st Jul 2006, 18:26

HWD,

Yes, I've just realised how I worded it! :) ;) But you get my point.........:ok: There are equal oportunities now.

Dave Martin

2nd Jul 2006, 12:54

BEagle,

This isn't a new thing though. I have scores of CVs coming across my desk in a typical week, from applicants still completing PhD's to Professors nearing retirement age. The presentation standards don't seem to correlate to year of birth or expertise, rather, they just seem to correlate to a personality type.

It can be frustrating as their presentation of work often emulates the sloppy CV standard, but the actual quality of work again seems unrelated to the presentation.

I agree that a certain degree of decorum in public is required, especially when representing an employer. At the same time though, the judgement that one persons smarter haircut constitutes a better work ethic, a tie indicates professionalism, or a suit ahead of smart-casual shows greater committment are in my opinion counter productive and quite possibly over-opinionated judgement calls.

Dave Martin

2nd Jul 2006, 13:17

Captwannabe,

I think you miss my points.

No one questions the requirement that you follow company guidelines and present yourself to a high standard when on the job - a footballer would not turn up on the field wearing an opponents strip. When in the public eye, whether at school or in work most employers demand certain standards. But does turning up to an exam require this? Is arriving at Gatwick for your Class-1 in a suit really necessary? Once my suit has been worn on a train in the morning it already looks worse than my tidy casual dress does.

Why, in a bank for example, is a back office worker required to wear a tie at all times (or only allowed to remove it when the floor manager removes theirs), while in a media related company casual dress is entirely satisfactory? There would be no difference in professionalism between the two. The only explaination I can find is a needlessly conservative mindset - "We have always worn ties. I wear a tie. The boss wears a tie. If you take your tie off you aren't part of the team".

That to me is utter tosh but quite representative of a "don't speak out" mindset which I would have expected to be on the way out in aviation. If you are going to claim a specific standard of dress is required to make a good pilot, it should also be accepted that the same standard of dress may equally well mark a bad pilot.

As an aside, at an IT firm I used to work for I couldn't even enter the building in the morning having cycled in (and wearing casual clothes). I had to get changed at the back entrance and then enter the building from the front wearing a suit. It's an extreme example but probably not an isolated one and just shows how counter productive the presentation ethos can be.

My example of women was that once upon a time all kinds of excuses were used to keep women out of technical jobs - they don't have the right mentality, aren't mentally tough, empathatic rather than aggressive, always thinking about children, you name it. The judgement that someone of slightly sloppy appearence should also be kept out of an airline job seems very similar.

P.S. this rant is written by an anally-retentive, obsessive cleaner, ironer and tidier - I can't believe I am arguing in support of people who are the bane of my existence!

microfilter

2nd Jul 2006, 13:35

Dave is spot-on with his observations. The fact you have to wear a uniform at some of the schools is absurd. Can you imagine students of law at Durham University parading around in a wig and gavel?

BEagle

2nd Jul 2006, 15:41

HWD, sorry, perhaps I gave the wrong impression of my Belgrano observations. It wasn't just their appearance, but also their manner which indicated who was likely to be unemployable.

Person 1. Scruffy jeans (stained) and t-shirt with old leather jacket. Greets receptionist with "Oi mate, where's the car park".....

Person 2. Shirt and trousers. Greets receptionist with "Good morning. I'm here to take some exams.".....

captwannabe

2nd Jul 2006, 19:21

Dave Martin,

I agree that people should be judged not on their appearance, but rather on their own merits.

BigGrecian

2nd Jul 2006, 23:16

Quote:From standing up when a teacher enters a room, to saluting, to polishing ones shoes. Due defference and respect for rank and experience is something (sadly, I think) lacking in many schools and young peoples lives today.
Life is different now and the old ways are totally incompatible with modern demands,
May be true - but the lessons which underpin all of those qualities are still just as valuable today - they're just in short supply nowadays.

Wee Weasley Welshman

3rd Jul 2006, 07:47

We are getting bogged down in haircuts and uniforms.

Turning up for briefing forgetting a pen, with an unironed shirt, 6 minutes late, still eating toast. Sitting in a classroom and continuing their conversation when the lecturer walks in rather than shutting up and turning to front. An absence of please and thank yous. The inability to either switch off a mobile phone or desist from texting or checking texts for any period greater than 15 minutes.

Why the thread title links the military to conformism is a mystery probably best explained by the originators total ignorance of military personnel ethos and life. The conformity of many <25yrs olds to a pseudo American Rap influenced admiration of bling and slavish fascination with innane communications and gadgets with far more widespread and recognisable.

The simple fact that in somewhere as relaxed and civilian as Kiddlington flying school (OATS) some students find things 'too militaristic and conformist' merely highlights what a liberal wishy-washy experience of education they have enjoyed so far in their lives.

Still, this is a commercial world. I'm sure there are more 'relaxed' training providers out there if you look.

Cheers

WWW

Groundloop

3rd Jul 2006, 08:26

At the same time though, the judgement that one persons smarter haircut constitutes a better work ethic, a tie indicates professionalism, or a suit ahead of smart-casual shows greater committment are in my opinion counter productive and quite possibly over-opinionated judgement calls.

Maybe so, but it might show that someone has bothered to research the standards expected in the profession and made an effort to fit in. It might seem strange but demonstrating an ability to conform to certain standards could indicate to a prospective employer that you will not turn out to be a maverick. And the sooner this attitude is instilled in students at an early stage the better it is for the student in the long term. Very often people do not recognise what is actually a good thing for them. Hindsight is wonderful though!

BEagle

3rd Jul 2006, 08:26

WWW - is that really how students behave these days?

Why doesn't the school have a code of practice stating:

1. Students will conform to a (stated) uniform policy. Spell it out if necessary.
2. Food and beverages will not be permitted in lecture rooms or briefing rooms. And no, there is NO NEED for bloody bottled water in an hour's lecture either!
3. The use of mobile phones is prohibited during lectures and briefings.

And tell the little scrotes that anyone who doesn't stop talking and pay attention when the lecturer enters will be assumed to be volunteering for a tech quiz. Or to decode the current TAF and METAR.

airborne_artist

3rd Jul 2006, 08:36

Turning up for briefing forgetting a pen, with an unironed shirt, 6 minutes late, still eating toast. Sitting in a classroom and continuing their conversation when the lecturer walks in rather than shutting up and turning to front.

Professionals have a high attention to detail and an ability to remain focused on the task in hand for long periods of time. I would be very worried if a student aviator could not arrive at class on time, correctly dressed and fed, and with the right equipment for the day, and then be unable to concentrate in class.

scroggs

3rd Jul 2006, 08:43

Why the thread title links the military to conformism is a mystery probably best explained by the originators total ignorance of military personnel ethos and life.

My fault, mate! I wanted to split this off from the OAT thread as it had grown too generic. The title was the best I could come up with at the time that encompassed the spirit of the discussion. Feel free to change it to something less marshal if you wish!

Scroggs

boogie-nicey

3rd Jul 2006, 09:47

WWW: If you choose to read through my originator's thread you'd see it was extracted by scorggs and started off on it's own. I had no intention of sparking such a debate and made that quite clear immediately after the hijacking of post on a previous post. Even the title was 'arranged' for me, so please don't berate me for that.

You are correct I have no experience of military life but then again I wasn't fighting in the first world war to know it was nasty episode in the human chapter.

Nevertheless considering the subsequent posts by people I would feel things have moved onto a uniform/casual wear debate, whereas it was originally entitled along a slightly different persepctive of military mannerisms in civilian flight schools. Obviously uniform is one example but ceratinly not the sole issue that surrounds this topic.

I personally think that a professional standard on it's own is simply a bridge too far for most people these days. They don't even have the fundamentals and can't study, express themeselves, show empathy to others, exhibit self control and manners, lack of general knowledge (rapidly approaching the level of the US public), etc. However I feel these issues need to ideally be addressed by the mainstream schooling system and not the flight shcool they are there to focus on flight training and not to complicate things with teaching other aspects too. I'm sure the same can be said about other professions. Do you remember the Chief Surgeon in carry on films that had the big beard with an equally fluffy name Sir Bum-phrey :E He commanded respect by all and was a very well eductaed in both his profession and general upbringing, he no doubt took personal responsibility for his actions and a care for all his staff.... honourable. Fast forward to the present day and there I am at a wedding sitting next to a very senior doctor using colourful language, driving a 'kitted out' car (rude boy style), a display of constant arrogance accompanied by a very selfish tone to all. That is the result of today's disrespectful system that we are pushing the young people through.

I agree with many of this thread that other unwelcome facets of social behaviour have unfortunately found their way into our FTOs but flying is still a very serious business. However many define flight training through their personal experience as a passenger (it's takes a long time sitting down then you get there and the doors open), I turned a 747 on my Microsoft flight simulator thus I'm a semi-qualified pilot, I saw a documentary on the Discovert channel and they have computers flying the aeroplane therefore anyone can fly it. Most unfortunate but there you have it....

The conclusion as far as I can see it is to raise standards outside of the FTOs so the 'input' of student can make better use of the training to be undertaken. The RAF wouldn't want to combine every stage of training from Initial Officer right upto adanvanced weaponary and conversion training into one single college, so why should civilian FTOs.

Until we can't get rid of the 'excessive left wing tendancies' in society then we are prone to lots of bad quality students.

unfazed

3rd Jul 2006, 10:11

Until we can't get rid of the 'excessive left wing tendancies' in society then we are prone to lots of bad quality students.

OK So now you have to be a non US citizen and definitely not a leftie if you wan't to fly an aircraft ?

What utter B%ll£%ks !!

boogie-nicey

3rd Jul 2006, 10:18

It's got nothing to do with US citizens just a fleeting comparison with the general knowledge of the American public.

The silly ambitions of present day schooling is to replace the headmaster with the caring, touchy feely school nurse. These kids are coming out thinking they have a right to be a pilot and right not to apply themselves too hard to anything much in life, etc.....

What we need is a balance not a to-fro of the politcal pendulum and at the moment it's biased to a point that it's threatening core skills like maths! How are we to push any of these school kids into the technolgical aspects of inductry with kind of assault underway? Media studies, drama and arts isn't going to do it.

Once again apply that to the military model would they accept that? .... Well then why is it okay for civil FTOs to do so?

Dave Martin

3rd Jul 2006, 12:10

Groundloop,

I would have thought most people turning up to an organisation like OAT will be doing their utmost to pelase and conform anyway. When I was there for a sponsorship briefing, the smiles and volume of laughter everytime the staff cracked a joke seemed pretty indicitive of that ;) .

Some people are just naturally messy, some a ridiculously tidy. I'm sure in most cases each individual is judged on merit with little regard to this, but there does seem a little too much in the way of hasty judgements about someone apparently based on a slightly less than formal presentation.

I think the example was turning up to their initial medical or CAA exams. I don't feel either of these require exceptional dress. Leave the Ali G bling bling at home by all means, but do the clean and tidy trainers, jeans and collared shirt really indicate a lack of professionalism?

As I said, I don't think dress standard (if accompanied by a polite persona) indicates anything at all. But if we are going to claim it does, then it is just as likely this willignness to conform could represent a very negative trait.

Dave Martin

3rd Jul 2006, 12:23

Boogie-nicey,

I'd take exception to the comment about left-wing tendencies, but everyone here is more or less on the same track I think.

The reality for most kids though is that there are no jobs for them in technical fields. Aviation couldn't be a better example! Media studies, drama and a whole host of "modern" courses are actually relevent, especially if the intention is to give the majority of school leavers a tertiary education. Studing university level calculus, while important to an engineer, is utterly pointless to 99.9% of the population. While these new courses sound wishy-washy, you might find the course content is exceptionally difficult for the unitiated and do have some practical application..

As for applying the military model to day-to-day schooling; that's all well and good for a certain type of student, but not most. In fact military style learning would be undesireable and incompatible with most normal human beings. It is also a very uncritical style of learning. Having experienced the pitfuls of the Far East's attraction with rote learning and absolutely deferrence to hierarchy, I think it is something we could do without. This has had negative practical implications in a number of East Asian airlines CRM performance.

microfilter

3rd Jul 2006, 15:33

Dave is spot on once more. Why many staff in OAT want to belittle you and treat you like an absolute idiot is beyond me. What can this possibly achieve?

littco

3rd Jul 2006, 16:42

Why many staff in OAT want to belittle you and treat you like an absolute idiot is beyond me. What can this possibly achieve?

It is the typical ADULT - CHILD relationship except in this case OAT - STUDENT

OAT has something the Student wants ( a possible jet job) and the student will do what it takes to get that prize at the end..

So who's at fault? OAT for acting this way or the student for accepting it?
Personally I think neither. Just the way it is...

As Dave Martin says, it wont suit most people and those it does will probably benefit it from it..
If you don't like their style , there are plenty of other places to go that will...