Originally Posted by
RubberDogPoop
KiwiAvi8er, "If the current recruitment model was in the interests of link pilots...", I ask you - why should the recruitment model be just in the interests of link pilots? What special thing has a "Link" pilot done to usurp the rights of all other New Zealand pilots, and all other NZALPA pilots? Before you shout "loyalty", remember entire generations of Eagle pilots joined with just one airline in mind - Cathay. That you are employed by the largest employer in NZ doesn't guarantee loyalty, just that the odds on being hired by them was already far better than even. Unless you specifically turned down Air Nelson for just Mt Cook, or Eagle for Air Nelson (and some might in that case!), or to make the point more clearly, didn't take that GBA job because you only wanted the mighty Aztec gig at Mountain Air, then I'd suggest you just took the first job offered - like most of us did. If Link weren't hiring at the time you joined, are we to believe you wouldn't have taken an Origin, or Air Chats gig on offer and stuck with GA for many more years at $10/hr? Such is the nebulous nature of "loyalty". You may have been loyal, it doesn't mean that those employed elsewhere are disloyal.
You’ve quoted me there responding to a ‘talking point’ I’ve seen in Pathways meetings and now in forums that Link Pilots don’t understand the GOP list, and the current recruitment process is much more advantageous to us. My reply was in that context is that it is clearly not. Making a Cook pilot attend a two day interview at their own cost when they’ve in most cases already completed the process once, in some cases twice is unnecessary.
The trend here is that Air New Zealand are centralizing subsidiary operations. There will be no Cook or Nelson shortly but some in the ‘old guard’ are adverse to change.
"The failed interview as a reason to oppose a GOP list is also a misnomer, you can have a GOP list with criteria to be met before a move to jet..."
We have one, it's called an interview. Isn't what you're advocating here just an interview in seniority order? Is this what is being achieved right now by way of the 70:30 process? It's a "misnomer" to suggest that the only way to achieve this is through a GOP list.
Incorrect. The Pathways group are advocating that an additional interview for an internally employed pilot is superfluous.
"One or two of the pilots I've seen in the last 2-3 years has opened my eyes...." (My bolding)
We all probably have an account similar to this, the first thing this highlights about all of us is how good we think we are at spotting things that the experts don't (Dunning-Kruger perhaps?), the second is that the proof is in the pudding. Out of 1050 "jet" pilots (FYI, nobody at AirNZ "jet" calls themselves this), there are very few bad eggs - perhaps, by and large the process works? All of this ignores the fact that the big issue everyone seems to have is with the selection of interviewees - clearly an HR function (with a little bit of "help" from the affected link management).
The “experts” you’re referring to, is this Talent Acquisitions or our peers who participate in pilot recruitment? I’m casting no aspersions at the recruitment team, they do the best job they possibly can but it’s not and can never be a perfect process. The nature of our job is we spend a lot more time with our colleagues than the snapshot that is taken during a recruitment board, obviously. If making observations about who gets through but more so who doesn’t, after flying with various people for years, seeing them under stress and in various moods means one has an ‘inflated sense of their own abilities and judgements’ that’s your view to suggest. I’d suggest it’s human nature to make observations about who we interact with all the time.
Overwhelmingly, I'm astounded by the implication that the "jet" guys are trying to pull the ladder up after them (out of self-interest, though no one can say what the motivation might be - we're "grand-personed" remember?), but the possibility that the intentions of previously failed interviewees, candidates that couldn't compete against overseas kiwi passport-holders CV or overlooked, extremely senior Link guys are entirely pure. This project, by and large, is being presented as a package - not all of the component pieces can be implemented in isolation - it requires "jet" guys and girls to concede some of their conditions for you, it may be worth the price, it may not (most of us agree in principle with the concepts), but at least be polite.
Agree that debate is healthy and there’s no need to play the man, so to speak.