Originally Posted by
harry the cod
So, here's the scene.
In the Red corner is pilot A. Pilot A is already employed by this Company. He is a known quantity. He was previously a senior trainer on the 330/340 fleet who left EK over ten years ago. During his tenure away from EK he'd been an EASA qualified TRE on the A319/320 and came back to EK as a DEC onto the A320 private jet. Shortly after rejoining, he was informed that there wasn't really enough work to justify keeping him solely on that fleet so he'd have to fly the 330 too. Fine, not really an issue. However, a year or so later when the last 330 retired he was moved over to the 380, but because of some daft and inflexible policy restriction, right seat. Rather magnanimously EK declared he could keep rank, privileges and pay! (sarcasm) That situation, you could argue, may be acceptable for a short time filler. That he's now required to undergo a full Command course, including tech test, psychology evaluation, interview board, two day CRM, full ground school and all the simulator and line training assessments, simply beggars belief. And if that's not ridiculous enough, the fact that he's currently a trainer, examining both Captains and F/O's and signing of their licences every day, merely highlights what a debacle this over complicated and under thought upgrade policy has become. Thank god he's over 35!!!
In the blue corner, Captain B. Captain B is about to join us as a DEC from some slightly dodgy outfit with a few aircraft. Although he will have a 3 day interview and selection process with simulator, he's a lesser known quantity than Captain A. He will also NOT be required to do a separate Command interview. He will NOT be required to take a technical exam on the aircraft systems. He will NOT be required to do a separate two day CRM command course. In fact, he will not be required to undertake a whole host of checks and assessments that pilot A has done and will have to.
Given the choice, which one would any sensible person, with even half an ounce of common sense choose? We've just lost one Deputy on the Boeing and may be about to lose another. That's after losing the DSVP last year due to moral and integrity contradictions with executive management. The SVP left for more personal reasons.
If our EVP's intent is to encourage and support policies such as this, the long term future of this Company can not be viewed as a positive one.
Harry
Edited to add;
bringbackthe80s. I'm sure that fliion's comments were more in aghast than agreement, at least that's how I read it.