Will the bottom of the barrel ever be scraped for pilots in the future?

[Toujours]

Let's say when the aviation industry goes on the cyclical upswing (perhaps in the next millenium or so), I am sure it will meet a surplus of experienced, and newly qualified commercial pilots.

When it does go in an upswing, even with all the pilots that will be available do you think it will come to a point where airlines worldwide would literally scrape the bottom of the barrel for pilots for their fleets?

Experienced airmen please reply from your past experience. But then again, is it worth the while comparing the present time (oil etc) with the past?

Toujours

[BerksFlyer]

There won't be pilots in the next millenium.

[Adios]

If they scrape the bottom of the barrel, they won't have a fleet for very long! Seems like a really strange question to ask. Do you feel that your only shot at a job is if they scrape bottom?

[startownairline]

What ability do you need to be an airline pilot?

[bear11]

wrt experienced pilots, there's no question we are back on a downturn after several exceptional years. Over the last 12-18 months I am sure some airlines were taking "experienced" pilots on who in normal circumstances they wouldn't touch with a bargepole, plus some sectors eg; experienced TRI/TREs were very hard to find, and some were making ridiculous money with airlines fighting for their services.

There always seems to be a surplus of newbie low hours pilots who, lemming-like, march on to their "destiny" (be it the 50% who get a commercial job or the other 50%), ignoring economic and airline reality. If you look at India recently which was effectively closed to foreign F/Os, within an incredibly short time there is a massive overload of Indian wannabees (many badly trained) fighting with each other to get into the right hand seat. Some of them were saying to me 2 years ago that there was "no way" they would start flying an ATR, they only wanted a jet job when they finished training.

There is the odd country like the former USSR where there is a chronic shortage of local pilots through specific circumstances, but it's very much the exception.

[99jolegg]

Why the hell is there still this arrogance over jet jobs?

Money and status probably. But I agree...TP or desk...difficult choice.

[Adios]

DJ,

Money for large loan payments probably, or else it has more to do with lust than disrespect. Daft nonetheless though.

Regarding Russia, there is an article in a recent Flight International saying the Russian state flying school is modifying their course to meet the high demand sooner. They are reducing the theory from 5 to 4 years and the flying to 18 months. All I can deduce from this is that the theory must be either high school starting with 14 year olds or it includes a university degree. It's probably a training system held over from the Soviet Union days.

[Brainstorm]

Toujours, don't believe the flying schools! After 20 years in aviation I have concluded that there has never been a shortage of pilots, and there never will be a shortage of pilots. And aviation will not grow exponentially forever. End of story.

[Bigfoot]

Mercenary Pilot,

Your comments are not justified. A lot of good pilots nowadays need to pay for their type rating to get onto the job ladder and even in some cases pay for some line training.

Just because people pay for their ratings does'nt mean they are bad pilots or at the bottom of the barrel. If you don't pass an interview or sim ride does'nt make you a bad pilot.

In my opinion, a good pilot is someone who does'nt give up and keeps going inspite of all comments and negative attitudes towards them.

Some people are very lucky in getting sponsorship or being at the right place at the right time.

I myself, like a great deal of my friends are Ex-Military.

Because we paid for are ratings and had low commercial hours, does that mean we are bad pilots???

Would you feel that we would be a danger because of our low hours??

Have you ever experienced real danger?

Besides having a good CV and experience in avaition, the airlines wanted us to be type rated. Granted BA is different.

Yes, we paid for our ratings and got the job.

People have a choice, wait for something to fall in their lap or take the initative and increase the chances of success.

Not the way I wanted to do it, but the outcome was worth it.

I agree this is'nt how it should be. Airlines should be investing in their future and their pilots.

Bigfoot

[Mercenary Pilot]

djfingerscrossed,

So, because somebody failed an interview due to nerves, pressure etcetera it means they should try to circumnavigate sim-checks, psychometric tests and just attempt to buy their way into the job?

BUT remember we all go through failures like these in life. It's what helps mold our characters so that we don't crumble under pressure next time.So true, and in my experience its the ones who slog it out and who keep battling that turn out to be the best pilots.

Bigfoot

My comments are more than justified! Please don't get my views confused between paying for a type rating and paying an airline to sit in the RHS to build up a few hours in the expectation of getting hired somewhere else. I don't have a problem with pilots paying for a type rating (although 200 hr pilots should be made aware that it doesn't really make them that much more employable in the majority of cases).

I do have a problem with people paying an airline to build hours! These people take away jobs and money from decent professional pilots and the only real qualification is a fat wallet. Some airlines don't seem to realise it yet, but it WILL bite them in the ass!

Would you feel that we would be a danger because of our low hours??Everybody has to start somewhere but while you are low houred you do present a risk. That is why experience and training is so important.

Airlines who are involved with these "pay to play" schemes are continuously keeping a low level of experience on the right hand side of the flight deck, this IS a flight safety risk!

Have you ever experienced real danger?

Seriously, what has that got to do with anything?


regards


MP


:ok:

[Vortex Thing]

MP you talk utter sh1t. I and plenty of other ex military pilots spent at least a couple of years trying to get real employment (I am NOT counting the full time FI jobs that I did whilst I waited). I have ex colleagues spread across the industry. Some with BA some who 5 years since leaving (with over 1500hrs) still have not gotten that first interview!

Were they bad pilots, no one ever bothered to find out. I like most at FR paid for my own TR and have never looked back. I've met pilots here who are so scary that I do not understand how they are allowed to be on their own in a cockpit and others who make me realize how much I still have to learn with more or less hours than me. Why? Simply because the only selection criteria is money or luck not ability? Do I agree with this no, but hey I didn't decide that it should no longer be a meritocracy. The accountants did.

I did not SSTR to circumvent test or selections. I did it because I have a mortgage to pay and a family to feed.

I have never failed any selection military or civil and have been offered every single job that I have been interviewed for.

The problem for me like many was simply that you do not get invited to interviews/selections as many firms out there would rather interview a 250hr Integrated student aged 25 and three quarters.

It is nothing to do with ability your comments show nothing more than your lack of knowledge about the struggle that some pilots face to get an interview. Getting jobs is easy, getting interviews was by far the hardest thing. I really do wish that this game was a meritocracy and pilots were selected purely on ability but that is about as likely as seeing oil go down to less than $100 a barrel by Xmas.

If you have written your comments as anything other than a wind up then you are either deluded or clearly have little knowledge on the realities of the recruitment cycle in aviation as it currently stands (from the point of view of a low hour pilot i.e. less than 2000hrs)

VT

[G SXTY]

A while back, I met one of those Eagle Jet 'FOs' who was paying for the privilege of flying for Royal Air Maroc. He was positively dripping with bitterness at the injustice of it all, but that hadn't stopped him shelling out to hours build in a 737.

To put it very mildly indeed, he didn't come across as someone you'd want to be locked in a flightdeck with for hours on end. Which may explain why he was having to buy his way into a right hand seat - in 2007, at the peak of the job market.

As MP says, there is a world of difference between self-funding a type rating (wrong though that is) and depriving a professional first officer of work by paying to do his job.

[Vortex Thing]

Okay this may put me further infront of the firing line but.......

Yes I do clearly see the difference between SSTR and paying for line training but unfortunately the airlines don't. I actually advocate paying for all the above. If the Ts&Cs slip for everyone else then that is market forces dictating that that is where the industry is.

Do you not think that the coalminers, shipbuilders, weavers, seamstresses and cotton pickers of yesteryear did not have a time when their trade (I specifically did not say profession, another thread methinks...) lamented the destruction of their Ts&Cs.

The reason for the need to SSTR is no different for the reason to pay for line training. It is simply because right now if you do not pay for it you will not get a job unless you are very lucky as it is not a meritocracy. If you do not have 500hrs plus on type there are hardly any jobs available to you. So after having SSTR'd you then HAVE to pay for line training as if you do not you stay unemployed.

This is sad, this is wrong but this is still reality whilst airlines still refuse to invest the money in actually selecting pilots properly and taking the best applicants the selection criteria remains disposable cash.

Do I see where this leads, absolutely but if that means that I have to pay for my own command assessment, pay for my own uniform, pay for my own car parking, pay for my food at work, loose my generous pension, etc, etc then that is life I would do and fly a B737 from the left hand seat for 50k a year if thats what it paid because I want the job more than the Ts&Cs. If you are not prepared to do the same then perhaps I just want it more than you.

Just because I have sacrificed and paid £80k to get where I am just not mean that I should now sit back and reap the rewards. I love flying and if I can earn a living do it then that is a bonus. Those who don't like it talk to their managers and shareholders. Would I like the days of earning 100k and a job at BA for all who met the grade, yep but they are soon to be the days of history. Today you get ahead by selling your soul, I remortgaged the family home to be where I am and if you think that is too great a sacrifice well unlucky I don't and there are plenty more where I came from. Why do you all believe that you should have your dream job in a highly competitive market and also earn more than a lawyer, accountant or dentist.

You get what the market can afford, deal with it and enjoy the flying and Ts&Cs as they are if they change reassess. If you decide it is no longer viable then tell me, I and my generation will do your job for less and you can go and do something else in an industry that works the way you dream it should rather than one controlled by the reality of market forces.

Supply and demand is really simple, market forces demand that I do it for less and less. I supply it until I can no longer support my family and if I get driven out of the industry by the decreasing Ts&Cs because some one wants it even more than me then the world doesn't owe me a living......

VT

[EGHH]

I wonder where the ever raising "standard" requirements will stop?

First it was the MCC, then the SSTR, now line training. The problem is that the more that wannabes shell out for these extras, the higher the bar to entry gets raised. Now this notion of needing 500 hours of line time crops up. The faster they run, the faster the hare goes.

Someone will come up with a scheme to get you 500 hours of line time. In response, airlines will want an unfrozen ATP, so then someone comes up with another scheme...

I can't see it going on for ever though. Like a few other folks, I sadly foresee an incident at some point in the not too distant future where these pay to play schemes will be thrust into the forefront of public discussion and maybe, just maybe, this progression of scheme/countermeasure will be curtailed.

How about this for a future advertising slogan - "All of our flight crew are paid professionals"?

That said, I should add I'm not trying to put these folks down. I just despise that this is creating an industry where the barrier to entry is based on money rather than aptitude.

[MIKECR]

Oh and it will happen. The public outcry as to why the pilot wasnt an employee of the airline, paying to have a shot of the plane etc etc. You can see the media headlines already. Irrespective whether the pilot had a TR, or had absolutely no blame for the accident...the media will have their frenzy!

[G SXTY]

Do I see where this leads, absolutely but if that means that I have to pay for my own command assessment, pay for my own uniform, pay for my own car parking, pay for my food at work, loose my generous pension, etc, etc then that is life I would do and fly a B737 from the left hand seat for 50k a year if thats what it paid because I want the job more than the Ts&Cs. If you are not prepared to do the same then perhaps I just want it more than you.


VT

So to paraphrase, we all have to accept our terms and conditions being eroded because some people behind us are prepared to do anything to undercut us - because they 'want it more'? Do you really see where this leads? I can guarantee someone behind you will feel exactly the same way about undercutting you, because he really really wants the job - even more than you. A never ending downward spiral. :ugh:

People reading this thread could be forgiven for thinking that the only way into an airliner is to buy a type rating and 250 hours on type. It isn't, and the vast majority of airline pilots don't have to.

[tupues]

VT you make me sick.

That is all.

[Vortex Thing]

EGHH it is a shame indeed it just seems such a great shame that airlines refuse to invest enough money in their HR process to actually select people on pure ability and suitability for the job rather than just how much money they can raise.

GSXTY Sorry that was my intention! People reading this SHOULD think that the only way into an airliner (N.B. For a First proper Job) IS to buy a TR and line training. If it isn't perhaps you could enlighten us on who will interview you without those hours on type or with a TR as they appear to be hiding themselves well.

I am not even referring to just the UK. I for one was willing to go anywhere in the world for any salary as long as it flew I would have done it I applied to literally hundreds of SEP and MEP operators and could not so much of get a sniff at a PA31 or PA34 job. I tried email, letters, visits anything to get an interview for years whilst instructing full time and keeping as current as I could. The old favourites being "oh but you did modular", "oh but you have a good CV and are likely to get a job somewhere else soon" and even "Oh but you're OVERQUALIFIED!!!".

From the turbo prop operators such as Eastern, Highland, Flybe, etc I still await even an acknowledgment that they had received my applications over the last 5 years.(Admittedly Flybe do send a standard email) I am not asking for responses to blindly sent CVs I mean in response to application forms filled in for advertised jobs!!

I spoke to heads of sheds of Flybe, Eastern, Highland during many BALPA EOCs and even at thier HQs in person. They would say send me your CV or take my CV and say "You are definitely the type of guy I am looking for with the right experience, there is no reason why we would not interview you." I would send a follow up email, with another CV and then there would always be some reason why they had to take just 2 or 3 other guys with 250hrs from Oxford or Cabair but they would never actually get you in interview you or assess you against them.

Someone reading YOUR email would believe that if they had a natural ability and passed a good academic CV, rounded and diverse experience across all spectra of business and aviation that they could apply to an airline, get asked to come in for interview, prove their ability and suitability via a barrage of psychometric tests, interviews and sim checks and get the job because they were better than the other people who applied or met the required standard.

The fact is that it just doesn't happen that way until you are making the move from your first into your second airline with 500 plus hours on turbos or jets in my case. Now airlines write back to me, then I may as well have not existed...

I agree that this is bad, even disgusting but I did not make the industry this way, the senior management & senior pilots out there who choose to refuse to recruit in a meritocratic way at the 1st level are the ones who drive this, why well because if they didn't then the chances are their airlines would find someone else who did! Even when you are CEO you answer to the shareholders.

VT

Disgusting situation yes but please direct the disgust at the powers that be that point blank refuse to let this be a meritocracy

[Vortex Thing]

Is that it Tupes. Are you not even going to say why? Is it because I tell the truth how it is or because your Ts&Cs are being eroded.

Before you answer, if you have the gall this time rather than just sniping a comment and coming back with no substance.

How have I caused the situation to be how it is? Why do your family have more of a right than mine to be fed and have a roof over their heads?

I'd love to know?
VT

[BerksFlyer]

GSXTY Sorry that was my intention! People reading this SHOULD think that the only way into an airliner (N.B. For a First proper Job) IS to buy a TR and line training. If it isn't perhaps you could enlighten us on who will interview you without those hours on type or with a TR as they appear to be hiding themselves well.

But that's incorrect, it isn't the only way at all. Where all this has come from that you have to pay to fly just to get a job I don't know, thousands before you didn't lower themselves to that, so why should the people coming through now have to do it?

Interested to know your logic when you say that you want it more than others because you're willing to be raped to fly.

[MIKECR]

Vortex,

I dont think anyone's going to cut you any slack, irrespective of how you try and justify it. The fact remains that the terms and conditions of airline employment and training have ultimately erroded because people have bent over and accepted whats put in front of them. The morals of it are perhaps a seperate issue but the facts remain. The recent ATP buy a job scheme caused major grief recently, even causing ripples through balpa and the likes. How quickly did Ezy wash thir hands of it once the stink went up!

[Vortex Thing]

MIKECR I am not after any slack. I haven't created the market conditions. Those above me did that!!

I do not doubt the fact that people like me erode the terms and conditions, I do not try and ignore the fact that this will lead to further and continual erosion for all in the industry including myself!

I am only stating that the sole cause is that airlines refuse to invest money in enough capacity in HR or enough quality in HR to recruit properly. This is the sole cause as to why I believe that money is now driving recruitment rather than the ability of pilots.

The above ONLY relates to paying for training vs. ability to get jobs.

Your QUITE CORRECT argument is that the Ts&Cs are eroded by those who are willing to do more for less. Errm yes they are its called supply and demand. As long as men and women want to fly this will continue my logic is simple in deed and Berksflyer's question is also answered in this paragraph. I am willing to do anything to keep my job i.e. get paid less, loose my house if I have to and rent because I live to fly. What are you willing to do to keep yours and if not more then why do you deserve it more than me?

They don't select soldiers, doctors, lawyers, accountants or sporstman on those who are talented but don't want to sacrifice enough. Did Lewis Hamilton's father say ,"No son I won't work 3 jobs and live in this council house in Hatfield to get you the next go kart." I fear not.

Success is for those who win it on the field of play or die trying it is not for those who believe that they are entitled to have more than others. You should earn what you have by fighting for it. If you really think that the Ts&Cs are being eroded to much then get on your feet and go on strike.

If not accept the changes as they are made but then do not complain when it has happened. The apathy is appalling in our aviation community and is part of the reason why countries like ours end up with useless Labour governments but that is a whole other thread.

VT

[G SXTY]

My airline are in the process of recruiting around 100 FOs this year, none of whom are paying for a type rating, never mind time on type.

And some of them are as old as me. :ok:

[MIKECR]

Vortex,

We'll agree to disagree. Paying to fly is not the industry norm as you end to suggest, im afraid it is very much the minority. I got 2 airline hold pool slots, both with bonded TR's. Im a modular guy, low hours, no spring chicken, and only paid 30k for my fatpl. I havent stooped to buying a job, I even turned down a Ryanair interview when I was told the financial outlay. I rest my case.

[BerksFlyer]

Vortex,

When you go down the "I've got a mortgage to pay and a family to feed" road, you're shooting youself in the foot. Surely if (or when, as I fear) flying becomes destroyed by people willing to fly for a loss as a sort of "I've always wanted to try that" 'job' (only to move on to a proper job where they get paid for their contribution to the company's wealth production when they can't afford any more hours), you're better off finding a non flying job? Even Sainsbury's pay people while they're training.

Saying that you are willing to take this as low as it goes is doing nothing but ruining it for yourself. You say you live to fly, surely you want to be able to fly to live and support your family in the future? Because I fear that you won't be able to due to this increasingly prevalent attitude towards the profession.

[Vortex Thing]

We'll agree to disagree. Paying to fly is not the industry norm as you end to suggest, im afraid it is very much the minority. I got 2 airline hold pool slots, both with bonded TR's. Im a modular guy, low hours, no spring chicken, and only paid 30k for my fatpl. I havent stooped to buying a job, I even turned down a Ryanair interview when I was told the financial outlay. I rest my case.


MIKECR I believe that your argument just proved my case rather than yours. You got into 2 airline hold pools with the above mentioned qualifications and I did not BUT did the firms that gave you hold pool slots interview you and I compare us and choose which of us were better? So how do they know that you are a better pilot than me? The fact is they don't and the reason they don't is because they did not select from the pool of available pilots and select them based on aptitude and ability.

I am not implying that I am a better or worse pilot than you I AM IMPLYING that the airline you fly for did not take the time to interview me (and many others) to find out. I am sure you did a sterling job of getting yourself noticed enough to get an interview but I know many many pilots who cannot for life or money get an interview even though they are very well qualified. I rest YOUR case.



My airline are in the process of recruiting around 100 FOs this year, none of whom are paying for a type rating, never mind time on type.

And some of them are as old as me.

I have a twenty which says that they will recruit them without properly sifting all the CVs they currently hold. 35 from Oxford, 35 from Cabair, 25 from a nod and a wink and then 5 from the other 1200 unemployed pilots out there.

If they are actually going to do a proper job of it and screen the CVs and bring forward everyone with the best qualifications and prior roles, psychometrically test them, interview them, aptitude test them and sim test those who get through. Then I would eat my hat if my airline were not so cheap that we didn't have any and even if we did we would have to pay for one...

But my real point is how lovely that they are recruiting but if they do not do it in a meritocratic way then it just fuels scenarios like the one we are discussing.

I am glad that you and MIKECR did not have to pay for a type rating lucky you!!! I am not saying that you do not deserve your jobs I am asking you if you would not prefer that you knew you were in the job because you knew that you were the best of those who were available when you got the job rather than because you were one of the lucky ones who feel into the right pile of CVs or knew the right people.

On one hand you want stable Ts&Cs because clearly you believe you deserve them and that would be the fair thing to do (NOW that you have you first jobs) but I did not see you campaigning for me and my colleagues right to even get an interview when 250hr pilots were jumping into our airlines not because they were the best available but just because they were in the right time and the right place.

BERKSFLYER

I think you hit the nail on the head. You talk about what I want. I think Nickleback just wrote a great song about that. What I want and what I get are not the same thing. I want to get £250k a year and free flights across the world, I want to have stable Ts&Cs, I want to live in a meritocracy, I want our troops pulled out of Iraq, I also want a 7 bed detached house with indoor pool in Gerrard's Cross, school fees to be waived for my children a sponsorship deal from Porsche giving me a new Cayenne S every year and a never ending string of cup winning polo ponies stabled out by my helipad with my sponsored Dauphin ready to whisk me to work.

I'll settle for a Brookfield contract, rubbish terms and conditions and paying for my uniform because that's what life gave me. If eventually the Ts&Cs drive me out of the industry OR the wife and kids leave me in favour of not having to raid supermarket bins for dinner then that's what life gave me.

VT

[BerksFlyer]

Vortex,

Ryanair don't ask you to pay for hours before joining at least. Things are as they are now, that's fine. But why surrender yourself to ever-falling conditions? It is not the norm to pay for line hours, though I'm sure it soon will be if people believe it is.

The best people for the job are often taken, why wouldn't they be? It's in the airline's best interest for the new recruit to be as little a training risk as possible. Even Ryanair only accept 40% of applicants - so clearly you don't get in if you're not good enough.

[tupues]

I'll settle for a Brookfield contract, rubbish terms and conditions and paying for my uniform because that's what life gave me. If eventually the Ts&Cs drive me out of the industry OR the wife and kids leave me in favour of not having to raid supermarket bins for dinner then that's what life gave me.


I rest my case.

[Vortex Thing]

Berksflyer.

I think you miss my point I WANT A MERITOCRACY where only the best people for the job are taken. My implication is that that this rarely happens as some of the "best people" cannot get interviews and therefore do not have the chance to compete on a level playing field.

i.e. Let me give you the story of 3 colleagues in brief.

Colleague 1
Minor public school, 3As and 1B A level, Cambridge University 1st Class Hons in Law, RAF Flying Scholar, Cambridge University Air Squadron, 12 yrs RAF Puma pilot 1700hrs PUMA QHI, left and then did 1000hrs fixed wing (2 yrs) as a QFI before getting an interview for BMI regional, completed bond and now moved on to BA.

Colleague 2
Major public school, similar As, Bath University, Aeronautical Eng 2:1, also RAF Flying scholar, also UAS, RAF Fast Jet Engineering Officer for 8 years. Left service 2002. 3000hrs TT, 1500hrs turbo prop, 800hrs multi crew, full JAR ATPL, FAA and DGCA licences. Applied to over 200 airlines got first job earlier this year with a jet firm base out of a London airport has still not received answer from Eastern, Flybe, or Highland to whom he has been applying for 6 years.

Colleague 3
Minor public school, 4 As, Durham Uni Physics 1st Hons, Army Air Corps Officer. 1400hrs Lynx, left 2003, as squadron commander. 300hrs SEP straight into A320 job no SSTR.

Colleague 4
School unknown, Army Dental Hygenist, non grad left as a corporal. 250hrs no other flying experience aged 30. Straight into a turbo prop left hand seat 2 weeks after receiving CPL IR.

Colleague 5
Aged 22 Danish, supermarket assistant, no previous flying, non grad, on my SSTR now has 1200hrs on B737.

Don't tell me that it is a meritocracy out there. This is the reality that well qualified people cannot get replies or interviews thus they pay to fly as no one will give them a chance otherwise and after a few years of driving trucks and working in McDonalds they get fed up and just pay Eagle Jet et al as there is nothing else they can do...:ugh:

[Vortex Thing]

Before you rest your case why don't you start it.

You can answer the questions above or sit on the fence and complain about your Ts&Cs.

It is ever so easy to criticize but maybe you could tell us all what the solution should be? Or you could just place asinine comments on the thread but not actually say anything. Your call.....

VT out:rolleyes:

[BerksFlyer]

Here's you complaining it's not a meritocracy, then you use people going to Public Schools and not getting a job as examples. So because someone can afford to go to public school they are better than someone who came from the state system? Also, just because people have served time in the forces doesn't give them the right to walk into a civilian airline job.

If you want a meritocracy, condoning people paying to get ahead is the wrong thing to do. Paying to get ahead is exactly what you are doing the second you give Eagle Jet money to sit in the right hand seat and play pilot.

[ant1]

It just a matter of supply and demand and that tremendous force cannot be canceled.

Whether the selection system is a meritocracy or a Meormydadknowomebodycracy or something in between, those left out will be a big pool of customers for those organizations selling whatever scheme they can come up with. Then back to the times when money was the selection criteria.

So we're back on topic: Will the bottom of the barrel ever be scraped for pilots in the future?

Because unless Pilot demand becomes greater than supply, T&C's ain't gonna improve. And I personally don't think the Pilot supply chain is going to shrink to that point.

So if we could get back on topic and talk a little bit about supply and demand we may foresee what the future will bring as far as T&C's are concerned.

[Vortex Thing]

Here's you complaining it's not a meritocracy, then you use people going to Public Schools and not getting a job as examples. So because someone can afford to go to public school they are better than someone who came from the state system? Also, just because people have served time in the forces doesn't give them the right to walk into a civilian airline job.

If you want a meritocracy, condoning people paying to get ahead is the wrong thing to do. Paying to get ahead is exactly what you are doing the second you give Eagle Jet money to sit in the right hand seat and play pilot.

You've missed my point, apologies I haven't put it correctly. My implication was not to imply in any way shape or form that having a public school background should give you the right to anything. My point was that these are well educated, well qualified men and women with clear flying pedigree some of whom who could not secure interviews for years. Whilst pilots with a clear lack of pedigree academically, within aviation and in life in general by THEIR own admission got lucky.

That is my point.

Paying to get to where you would have gotten anyway had their been a level playing field is not paying to get ahead; it's paying to not waste years of your life driving fuel bowsers, working in ops, or as cabin crew whilst someone less able and less qualified flies for an airline becuase their dad plays golf with someone else's dad. It is about getting to where you deserve to be anyway but no one is willing to give you the chance to get to as they will not invest in finding the best pilots.

The fact that someone cannot afford to go to public school is a brilliant example because this actually does not disadvantage them in any shape or form they have the ability to get into any university regardless of background. They can go on to become Prime minister or invent the longer lasting light bulb if they are able. If they aren't they may get a head start but they will never achieve much.

The fact that someone has many years service as a military pilot does not mean that they are Chuck Yeager but it does mean that for everyone of them who started the process they have beaten 2500 other applicants to be awarded wings. They have also survived a completely meritocratic and demanding 2-4 year course. You do the sortie if it's not good enough you get to do it again if it still isn't good enough you get a chop ride, three strikes and your out pack your bags. Race, colour, creed and education are irrelevant the best survive the rest get chopped. In civvy street you just keep paying until you pass, the standards best pilots are just as good as the military best pilots but the average standard is far lower and the product inevitably far more wider ranging.

You have demonstrated the ability to take complex and varying information and work under intense pressure and as an officer probably commanded other people whilst doing it but yet you say it doesn't give you the right to walk into an airline job. Maybe it doesn't but please explain what gives some with none of that AND no commensurate civilian experience the right to an interview over candidates with that background? I am not implying military pilots are better I am implying that they are hardly so rubbish as to not merit an interview!

[Nearly There]

VT
Welcome to civvy street:ok:

[Screwballs]

How come you didn't mention any of their nationalities except the low-houred guy who was DANISH, shock, horror of all things? Would you have told us he was black too?

Nice chip on the shoulder there VT.

[CamelhAir]

VT, five years looking for a job during the biggest recruitment boom in years? When anyone with a licence, except the most useless muppets, found a job?
The world doesn't owe you a job VT, some people who hold a CPL will never fly a commercial airliner. Some just aren't good enough. If you haven't made it during the recent boom, maybe you need to honestly assess your suitability for the job.
As for your extreme willingness to cut your, and everyone else, throat in the process, let's all fervently hope you never get a flying job.

[BerksFlyer]

You've missed my point, apologies I haven't put it correctly. My implication was not to imply in any way shape or form that having a public school background should give you the right to anything. My point was that these are well educated, well qualified men and women with clear flying pedigree some of whom who could not secure interviews for years. Whilst pilots with a clear lack of pedigree academically, within aviation and in life in general by THEIR own admission got lucky.

Everyone gets luck at some point. Not all good pilots have a particularly good academic record. The Danish fellow you speak of probably left school at 18 and stacked shelves every waking hour to save enough money to train. The assessors on your course obviously saw that he was capable enough and got offered a job.

The ex forces public school gentlemen who haven't got jobs have probably been unlucky. Maybe they are doing something wrong? Maybe their CV isn't very good? I don't know, but they are either unfortunate or are not trying hard enough. People with a worse background manage to get jobs, but these people still have to be selected, and why airlines would deliberately hire bad pilots I don't know. What benefit is there for them to employ a poor pilot over a good one?

[Vortex Thing]

CamelhAir VT, five years looking for a job during the biggest recruitment boom in years? When anyone with a licence, except the most useless muppets, found a job?
The world doesn't owe you a job VT, some people who hold a CPL will never fly a commercial airliner. Some just aren't good enough. If you haven't made it during the recent boom, maybe you need to honestly assess your suitability for the job.
As for your extreme willingness to cut your, and everyone else, throat in the process, let's all fervently hope you never get a flying job.

CamelhAir I do hope that your attention to detail is better when you come to looking at your FCOMs and SOPs. I never for a moment stated that the world owes me anything. In fact if you read above in the thread you will see that I am trying to champion the cause of meritocracy and advocate that in a perfect aviation world airlines would only select the BEST candidates available. To do this they need to interview everyone suitably, or at the least equally, qualified rather than just taking those from their preferred schools or those who have managed to be lucky enough to have found the right contact at the right time.

As for me I do have a job flying 737s thank you very much for asking. If you bothered to read this thread from the beginning you would notice that:-

a) I actually state on more than one occasion that no one should have to pay to get a job but that is the way it is. Hence my post entitled I just want the same for everyone only 4 posts ago!

b)my point is about the fact that some of my colleagues whom I know to be better pilots than I have still yet to get a job, many others took five years in the same market when pilots who by THEIR own admission were not as good did so in weeks.

The reasons for this are not because they are not good enough but because they have not managed to get interviews. Getting a job is easy once you have the interview. If you get interviews and fail them THEN you can worry as to whether you are good enough or not. The problem is that most airlines do not select from a level playing field. I agree with you Berks flyer not all good pilots have a good academic record, my point which you seem desperate to avoid is that when you look at a CV you have to select them for something. There is nothing on most peoples CV saying how good a pilot they are so how comes some people with proven FLYING ability AND strong academics are not being interviewed when others with lesser both are. I am not saying that airlines are hiring poor pilots I am saying that the best pilots are not in the best jobs i.e. a meritocracy there are excellent pilots who cannot get interviews when average pilots with a bit more "luck" you call it have managed to do so.

I am not talking about anyone being selected over anyone else. That is down to the individual, if you get an interview and fail it then there is no come back, you were either not good enough or do not fit. As I also stated I have never failed a selection and have been offered every single flying job that I have been interviewed for, my point was not about ME it was about those other unfortunates who have not been selected because they have NOT BEEN INTERVIEWED that is why ABLE pilots sometimes have to pay to get on in aviation. It doesn't matter how much money you have if you do not have the ability the problem is until the airlines invest time and money in a fair selection process we will continue to see pilots with high ability going to other jobs elsewhere if they do not have the funds or willingness to part with cold hard cash.

CamelToe don't misplace my desire to fly with a willingness to cut anyone's throat. I have more than earned my right to do what I do for a living and I want it perhaps more than many but that is why I DID make it the point we should all hopefully be aiming for is that it should not be luck of the draw it should purely be about the most able pilots in the best jobs.

The only people who need to reassess their processes are those who let this happen rather than doing something about it.

I really am not sure how much clearer I can make this point.:ugh:

[Flaps up no lights]

VT:D:D:D

VT well fought and I couldn't agree more with your views....

AS a modular guy and SSTR chap!! I don't personally see the difference between what I have done to secure a job and what these snotty nosed Pay for your Job Oxford/Cabair types!!! , apart from mummy and daddy bought them their job Circa £60K. Whilst I like so many went out to earn the much needed cash to complete the training myself.........not to mention life experience...

So no matter how you look at it we all BUY our flying jobs through our licences, whether your LUCKY enough to get the first interview with just 200hrs FATPL, or have to keep applying whilst improving your chances with a SSTR then maybe some line hours.....

So All of you on your HIGH HORSES get off of them........:mad::mad:

Happy and safe flying all

[BerksFlyer]

As I also stated I have never failed a selection and have been offered every single flying job that I have been interviewed for, my point was not about ME it was about those other unfortunates who have not been selected because they have NOT BEEN INTERVIEWED that is why ABLE pilots sometimes have to pay to get on in aviation.

So what do you think about the poor pilots who pay to get ahead?

By encouraging paying for line training it's only making the playing field less even as far as I can see.

[Screwballs]

I have more than earned my right to do what I do for a living and I want it perhaps more than many but that is why I DID make it the point we should all hopefully be aiming for is that it should not be luck of the draw it should purely be about the most able pilots in the best jobs.


I take it by ignoring my earlier post you re-affirm that being in the RAF and being a born and bred UK citizen you are automatically earning your right to do what you do for a living and want it perhaps more than many?

As you said, most able pilots in the best jobs: take a good, hard look at yourself and wonder again why you took so long to get hired? And before you go off on a rant at me saying I slagged off your ability -I have not, and never will do such a thing. I am merely asking you to go back and look again at why you were not hired when you though you should have been.

Cheers.

S.

[tupues]

these snotty nosed Pay for your Job Oxford/Cabair types!!! , apart from mummy and daddy bought them their job

So All of you on your HIGH HORSES get off of them........

Seems like someone needs to follow their own advise.


VT- anyone with half a brain knows my 'case' from my earlier comments. Simple solution is have some self respect. Would you hear someone from any other profession even contemplate the below comment??

If eventually the Ts&Cs drive me out of the industry OR the wife and kids leave me in favour of not having to raid supermarket bins for dinner then that's what life gave me.

[gone till november]

Tupues

Come on give VT a proper argument.

At least Berksflyer et al are standing toe to toe and having a proper debate on an interesting subject.

Throwing rocks and other peoples quotes from your bunker is not debate. Im interested to hear your proper thoughts and opinions rather than the snipes you've given so far. Come on lets see some literal blood.

My two pence worth is do what you've got to do to get a job as no one else will help you. But beware that that could kick you in the arse at a later date.

At the end of the day we have five people/groups to blame for the state of our industry

1. MOL and his appostles at the church of F**K YOU

2. OPEC

3. Passengers who want everything for nothing

4. Ourselves for wanting more to do less and of course

5. OBL

Safe flying

[Vortex Thing]

As you said, most able pilots in the best jobs: take a good, hard look at yourself and wonder again why you took so long to get hired? And before you go off on a rant at me saying I slagged off your ability -I have not, and never will do such a thing. I am merely asking you to go back and look again at why you were not hired when you though you should have been.

ScrewLoose the whole point about this thread is that ability is only relevant at the point where someone has actually interviewed you. For the last time I reiterate that every interview or selection that I have attended has resulted in a job offer.

As for why it took me long to get a job I don't think that it did take that long to get hired it took me a long time to get an interview. As for why I didn't get hired by airlines when I thought I should, well never has there been a more simple question simply because they hadn't interviewed me. Had they interviewed me, I expect like everyone else who has, they would have offered me the job.

I was never in the RAF!!!! There are 3 other armed services who have pilots you know. Don't assume!

And as for earning my right. I was trying to imply that I had fought for my country, putting my life on the line so that people like you AND I have the right to a democracy. This in the vain hope that a democracy should also be a meritocracy. So do I think that being a born and bred UK citizen I should be entitled to a job ahead of others who aren't no! I think that all eligible pilots i.e. fluent in English, equally qualified and with right to live and work in EEC are equal the only thing that should matter is the basic background on their profile and their ability. The problem here is that ability doesn't count for anything if you don't get interviewed.

I think that the profiles should be fair so if you interview a 250hrs pilot over a 2000hr ex-military pilot (N.B. I SAID INTERVIEW NOT SELECT and I a NOT talking about myself) then something is wrong. If you take the former over the latter then that is fine if they are better at selection but how they can assess a 250hr pilot to be better by just the CV to the point that they do not interview the latter is beyond me.

It is the fact that some airlines take this stance that we should take umbridge at.

Gone till November Thank you at last the voice of reason speaks up!!! This is what a lot of us think but oh it is so hard to get people to say it.


How come you didn't mention any of their nationalities except the low-houred guy who was DANISH, shock, horror of all things? Would you have told us he was black too?
Nice chip on the shoulder there VT.

The fact that I mentioned the pilot was Danish was simply because the others were English. His/her colour was never mentioned and has nothing to do with this discussion. By all means fight me on issues but do not imply xenophobia or racism especially as I am trying to champion meritocracy which by its nature implies that only those with the most merit should be considered better than others no mention or application of race, colour, creed, nationality, disability, gender or sexual orientation. There is also no mention of background or class in my posts and you assumption that these issues have any substance in this thread is just an illusion as it appears is your ability to put together a convincing argument.

The only thing on my shoulders are gold bars. If you want chips get down the chippy...

VT:=

[hollingworthp]

It is simply not possible or even worthwhile interviewing EVERY single flying job as such jobs are not generally so mission critical as to require a Chuck Yeager each time. Also there tends to be pressing time factors involved so why should a company wish to interview all potential applicants or incur the associated costs in doing so. You rightly point out that there is precious little to differentiate between CV's and if you can fill your 4 flying jobs by interviewing 10 applicants why bother to go any further?

Luck plays a large part in aviation recruitment, being in the right place at the right time (i.e. your CV at the top of the pile on the right day instead of the day before), networking and FTO recommendations (for low hours applicants obviously and it is certainly debatable how valuable and forthcoming these are).

It could be - and only playing devils advocate here - that fresh low-hours pilots provide less of a training risk to a typical airline than a fast-jet pilot who may have been looking for a civilian flying job for 12+ months? There is probably some method to the perceived madness you & your friends have experienced thus far?

A true meritocracy would be lovely, but then so would a true democracy .. . I doubt I or my children will live to see either.

[Screwballs]

Well VT, you have clearly beaten my case by making funny names out of my username. Bravo

You say you didn't mention class or background in your posts. What about "Major public school, Cambridge University 1st Class Hons in Law, RAF Flying Scholar" does not strike you as class or background? You have a chip on your shoulder. You're only denying yourself.

Anywho, when it's down to slagging off my username and telling me all about your gold bars then it's time for some ignore list action.

Screwloose is off to the chippy.

[Vortex Thing]

Hollingworth P I completely agree that it is not worth interviewing every possible candidate for every single seat that becomes available. I am not asking airlines to do that that would be ridiculous. As for pressing time factors anyone who has applied is available so time factors are irrelevant. Sort the CVs now into order of preference by a common standard and when you get the go ahead to recruit take from the top of the pile. My bug bear is how the pile is organized!

I do not however agree that there is precious little difference between a 250hr pilot straight out of training and a 1000hr plus ex military fast jet pilot. I think you will find that Virgin, BA, Emirates, Cathay, Thompson, Easyjet etc agree with me.

A 250hr pilot straight from a course has no proven pedigree other than having a CPL/IR which to be honest is the basic minimum to apply for any flying job regardless of recommendation this can never be seen to be more than displaying potential. The line military pilot IS not about potential he/she has already demonstrated their ability by passing a far more rigorous selection and course than any type rating or civilian course.

This isn't my view, this is fact, the only problem seems to be that the airlines above know, understand and actively recruit fairly hence why they factorize their hours in their application process and make adjust their recruiting policy accordingly so that military pilots require less hours.

I am suggesting that the problem is the airlines who interview 250hr pilots over 1000hr+ pilots with similar sorts of background.

So whilst I accept that airlines should not interview every pilot with a CPL/IR for a job they should have some common standard like in the USA where everyone works their way up to the next rung i.e 250hr pilots do not get interviews over 1000hr pilots they work from SEP, MEP, SET, MET then jet then go upwards and onwards. Then we could approach a meritocracy quite easily.

So if the airline have the resource to interview only 10 pilots, fair enough, interview the next 10 most qualified pilots in the queue. Just form the queue fairly

Screw loose you started the slanging match by telling me I have a chip on my shoulder where there is none. If a bit of harmless banter scares you off and prevents you from expressing you opinion logically and maybe even backing it with some examples or facts and figures then your lack of fortitude in the face of adversity will hardly make us all stop and look at your views.

Sorry the fact that someone did or did not attend Cambridge is nothing to do with their class. Prince or pauper have to pass the same academic standards, I am not naive enough to think that there are not some who have not bought a place by their parents fame and/or wealth (but this is the significant minority these days), RAF Flying scholarships also pay no attention to class just pure ability and public schools have scholarships schemes and thus also do not imply any specific class.

As explained I was not describing myself but colleagues and simply using things that are meritocratic that should be important in our democratic society when it comes to the pecking order for job selection. If you feel that a Cantab 1st has no bearing on someones ability for just about any role then perhaps it is you who have the chip on their shoulder and may I suggest that that chip is coloured green....

VT :eek::ooh::E