A Different Question for the InterviewER

[Mach086]

Before you all bite my head off, I am not asking for interview advice!! I've seen the thousands of threads on it. Hopefully you will find this question interesting.

This is a question for you training captains/ people right at the top as I'm sure you visit Prune once in a while.

Because there are so many threads here with every question every prospective pilot has been asked at an interview, tips on how to act, how to dress, what to expect - hell even what to expect in a sim ride, from the runway, the SID, the emergency being tested etc...

Does it make your job harder in recruiting the pilot you want? Providing evreyone has prepared by following all the tips that are in prune (practicing in a sim before a test, interview skills, reading the threads here on pprune and everything i said earlier) - how the hell do you choose?

Is it down to a simple first 8 seconds count. If I don't like your shoes, or your sideburns, or your tie forget it?

I'd be really interested to hear from the people on the other side of the table.

[BelArgUSA]

First clue is this... I see you are 25 of age...
The check-captain or chief pilot interviewing you will be of the 50+ generation.
So, ask yourself how they will consider your generation and ideas.
Just be yourself, average haircut (no green or orange hair), clothing, no sandals.
Maturity and being conservative is often appreciated by old-farts.
Fighter jockeys with Top-Gun attitude is not recommended.
xxx
If their hiring minimums are fATPL and 250 hrs, they know what to expect.
You should have that experience and proficiency level.
As an example, how to enter a holding pattern, and holding time/speed.
Stall recoveries, regular maneuvers, such as steep turns, basic instruments.
If no 737 experience required = no need to know where IGN switches are.
xxx
:}
Happy contrails

[Mach086]

um.... thanks, but I'm not really sure how that in anyway answers my question.

[BelArgUSA]

Hiring selection is not done by a single person.
xxx
First stage are your initial application form and your CV.
At that stage, you are selected by licences held, flight experience and education.
If selected, you are invited for an interview. Might be 2 or 3 day process.
(1) Starts with a company medical. Sometimes, you pilot Class 1 is sufficient.
(2) Then written exam to judge aviation subject knowledge and education.
(3) If applicable, a simulator assessment. Could be 737, 320 or MD-80.
xxx
If all of the above went fine for you, the last hurdle will be -
The "actual" interview, meeting 2 or 3 people - HR manager, chief pilot etc.
Interview might take 20 minutes, or 1 hour...
You might be asked the history of that airline, or country in which based.
They might ask you why an aft CG is better, or to discuss V1 go/no go...
These 2 or 3 people will decide of your final selection.
Either immediate notification, or by mail a few weeks later.
xxx
All airlines do somewhat differently, but this gives you the idea...
I filled-in occasionally for a chief pilot.
Often got a mental decision about a candidate within the first minute.
Might surprise you - Example, your handshake... Guess that one.
HR idiots hardly ever agreed with pilots. They have your CV in hand...
"But he is already 37 years old" said HR...!
And my answer would be "Then what, do you know how to fly, Mrs HR...?"
xxx
:ok:
Happy contrails

[Mach086]

Hi Bel Arg,

Perhaps my original question wasa so long winded which is why I'm not getting the responses i thought I would.

bel arg, thanks for your tips and what to expect, but like I said, I already know Prune has 1000+ posts on this - from what to expect in a sim ride to the interview. Thank you Prune!!!

So let me put my question a little bit more simple:

What I'm asking is whether the chief pilots out there/ recruitment guys are finding it increasingly difficult to find the pilot they want - Because of the amount of tips and advice in Prune. Are wannabees coming out with text book answers?

[Bealzebub]

With respect, perhaps it is a case of the question being a little naive in the first place. That is why you have had the answers you have?

An interview is about face to face dialogue. There are no textbook answers, because the there are no textbook questions. If you ask an interviewee to tell you a little about themselves or how they started off in aviation, how would somebody elses experiences on PPRuNe be of much use to them? The interview serves a number of purposes, but it enables the interviewing panel members to form an impression of the candidates character, demeanor, communication skills, deportment and overall presentation. Rather like fingerprints, no two candidates are the same and each person is regarded as an individual applying to join an organisation.

What you may have learned from research about the application process is not regarded as a bad thing or something that makes life difficult for the interviewers. In fact rather the opposite. People who present themselves poorly, or who have obviously failed to do much research for the interview are likely to waste both their own time and the interviewers. Given the necessary application, effort and luck that has afforded the opportunity for an interview, it is a shame to waste everybodies time.

Interviewees are also expected to ask questions of the interviewers, and if they are well researched (on PPRuNe or anywhere else,) the type of questions asked should reflect both a good understanding and level of maturity. Nevertheless one of the reasons for an interview is that both sides have a better appreciation of the other, even though one is the seller and one the buyer.

Interviewees are individuals (as I already pointed out), but so too are interviewers. The chemistry between the two can be very different from one day to the next, and from one interview to the next. As a result, you can be unsuccessful with one company, and the next week be offered an employment contract with the next. Interviewing is often referred to as the art of interview, simply because there is little hard science to the process, although there is plenty of sound advice, the application of which should markedly improve your chances.

It never has been difficult finding the pilots you want. It is simply a selective process. In this weak economic climate there are many experienced pilots looking for work, and that tends to raise the bar with regard to experience levels required for selection. However the same methodology and formats are employed whenever vacancies do occur.

[Halfwayback]

Good posts by BelArg and Beazlebub - spot on!

As an interviewer in the recent past, I can tell you that you want to get to know the person and what makes them 'tick'. It is NOT a verbal exam with pass / fail answers and ticks in boxes.

Of course there wil be the 'standard' questions - just like those you personally will have had during your Flybe / Cabair interview. It is dependent upon the response to those that a good interviewer will explore the depth of knowledge / attitude / persona / etc.

Sadly as B/bub points out there is a glut of highly experienced, redundant pilots hitting the market so the bar has been raised for all applicants. Their advantage is that they have been there, done it and know the industry inside out - and, through bad luck, have lost their job through no fault of their own. It makes it very much harder to get that first foot on the bottom rung however I wish you the very best of luck. It is worth pursuing.

This may not answer the questions that you are so keen to have answered but maybe there is no simple answer?

HWB

[K.Whyjelly]

I always thought that the guys who made it through the initial interview phase were the ones you felt you could happily sit in the bar with at the end of 4 tough sectors and still find things to talk about over a cold beer!!!

[Reluctant737]

Mach086 -

No disrespect, but I should advise you to think before you type. You came across as a bit of a pr**k to me in that first response mate. Considering someone had just taken the time and trouble to type up a decent response.

Nothing personal, just letting you know how it came across to me :ok:

Or perhaps I just have an unreasonably low tolerance threshold! :}

[Mach086]

"No disrespect" doesn't really soften the blow.

I didn't think a forum like this where we are encouraged to have perfect grammar and never to write in txt speak would ever have one person calling another a pr**k.

The question I originally asked (although admittedly it may have been long winded) was whether the guys on the otherside of the table noticed text book answers coming from wannabees due to the amount of tips and hints on PPrune.

The first answer I received did not answer my question - i.e I did not need to know that turning up with orange or green hair would not be advised. Although I do appreciate the time taken for a response.

"bel arg, thanks for your tips and what to expect"

Bealzebub did however kindly point out that perhaps my question was naive.

[Flintstone]

Mach086.

Forming an opinion of a candidate should be a gradual process. I've interviewed for three companies (two my employers and a freelance project for a start-up) over the last eight years or so and each time have tried to employ the same method of having several candidates arrive at once and amuse themselves in a reception room for a while. It gives them time to relax and us time to see how they interact with others once their interview persona starts to slip.

You're right though, it can be a challenge keeping fresh and not have the candidate feel they're just going through another stage in the sausage factory. They've taken the time and trouble to turn up so the least the interviewers can do is treat them as individuals even if they think 'computer says no' early on. It's important for an interviewer to reserve judgement until the debrief with the rest of the panel. Often one will have missed something that others picked up on, something that can throw an entirely new light on the candidate. Like the interviewee who quietly confessed to one of us to having a criminal record for prostitution. Now THAT made for a lively debrief, particularly as it was a guy :E

We all know the standard interview questions about a crewmember smelling of drink, colleague wanting to bust the minima and we all know the standard answers, that part's easy. Often the question itself might not be important but you'll want to see how they work through it and who/what they consider on the way through with allowances made for level of experience. Keep it interesting, I love it when an unusual question stops a candidate for a second or two and they really have to think for themselves rather than spout the answer they've been given by their school/mates/dad. I'm not talking about JAR Ops stuff or asking them to recall a weight or speed for their aircraft. I'm talking about the sort of scenario they might realistically be expected to encounter. Better still ask them to describe their worst/best flying day and watch them carefully when they talk. Is there real enthusiasm or do they just shrug and say "Dunno"? After that how about their best/worst day ever? Not just flying but tell us about the most interesting day you ever had. It's a great insight to what makes people tick. If you asked me mine might be the day I was arrested for a burglary at a place I'd never been using a car I'd never owned at a time when I was somewhere else (with an alibi thank God). Pretty sure that would have my interview standing out in the minds of the panel ;)

Sim ride? I don't believe in surprising candidates by throwing them in cold, they should have a thorough brief at least a day in advance. You wouldn't turn up to work in such circumstances would you so why do some companies delight in giving someone a sim they've never seen of a type they've never flown with a co-pilot they've never met with no common SOPs under interview pressure and then throw in an unnatural sequence of emergencies? It's downright nasty.

In our arm of aviation (bizjets) we're particularly interested in personalities. A bad 'un can, to a certain degree, be less of a problem among a couple of hundred crew where the roster means the same two people might not fly together for months. However in an organisation where the number of crew allocated to a single aircraft will be in single figures and they'll often spend a lot of time downroute unless you get it right people's working lives can become a misery. A pilot might be ace of the base but a complete @rsehole and no amount of courses will change that. On the other hand a rusty or average pilot with a good personality can be brought up to speed on the flying side and pay you back in spades with their demeanour, will to work and effect on the rest of the crew. I'd choose the second over the first any day.

[Mach086]

Flintstone,

Thank you for the brilliant response. Definately thought provoking in the least.

[MMEMatty]

The chief pilot of a company I used to work for told me he threw in the odd "curve ball" question, just to see if it ended up on PPRuNe... :}