An SLF/Atty interrupts
There is something about FOs electing not to act upon opportunities to move to Captain that this SLF/attorney has been wondering about really since this thread opened up. Not about defending or attacking the seniority system and its impacts, and not about the necessity for individuals to elect career paths and choices which fit into their lives, rather than forcing their lives to fit into some pre-determined career path (which often isn't much of a path - more of a holding pattern).
(In the law firms where I spent much of my career, concern about the cadre of most successful partners "pulling the ladder up" thereby stranding those on the verge of partnership was an often voiced complaint. On the other hand, in the unionized labor force in the steel mills of youth, the guys - and the few ladies there were - wanted their name to be the answer to the question, "who is the older man?" Of course it was a more narrowly defined kind of work. Still, I recall (with sparks inside the flameproofs) the two-week stint when I had successfully bid into an open slot on the big Caster machine . . . many heats of molten steel ago. So I haven't had a definitively "for" or "against" experience with the seniority system.)
In the past, the traveling public, and along with it probably most people in the legislative and regulatory world who dealt with commercial aviation, viewed service and seniority as a First Officer as a kind of "extra training and experience" stint which it was at least highly desirable, if not actually necessary, to complete in order to become a Captain. At least as I recall hearing about this perspective back in those years, the LHS (if an SLF can use this terminology, which I sometimes doubt) is Captain and Pilot In Command. Which - again as I recall hearing about this idea - is an aspirational attainment, something to be strived for, not intuitive, not only the ability, or KSAs (knowledge, skills and abilities) to operate the aircraft safely and properly.
One time a Captain compared the role of Captain-and-PIC to something the aviator thought I might comprehend. We had been talking about favorite types of cars, motor vehicles. He asked me if I had ever heard of pilots referred to as . . . , "Drivers?", I asked. In fact I had first read that term in letters to AW&ST in or around Summer of 1976. Anyway, that was the term the aviator had in mind. He asked me, when I drive, do I have a sense of the dimension of my car, to each side, really around 360 degrees, so that when I can't actually see the clearance between the fenders and (for example) those pesky yellow-painted poles that can have a habit of jumping into the narrow parking spaces in the underground garage, I still manage to avoid scraping them? I said something about, yeah, most of the time.
Well, this very patient aviator who was taking the time to try to get something through my dense skull then said, can you imagine the transformation in your dimensional perception, your awareness of the dimension of the vehicle you're driving, required when it is not a sedan or some other everyday motor vehicle, but a commercial airliner? He told me, you in the traveling public think we're doing the pre-flight walk-around to make sure everything looks right. That is part of it, but it's also to refresh the dimensional perception. It's a big thing, in its actual physcial dimensions, and it's kind of a balancing act between an art and a science to keep the right perception active at all times - at all times.
But he went on. He told me that when an individual is driving their car, let's say they have their kids or whole family, or friends .... that's a level of "dimensional perception" too. Your responsibility behind the wheel is held on behalf of the entire group of individuals, be they family, or friends or .... (and without elaboration) passengers in your taxicab. Now, scale that up to hundreds of peoeple, in the biggest jets even hundreds of families.
Don't accuse me of disregarding the professional burdens of the RHS. And I'll withdraw this post and apologize if the role of PIC shifts depending on which pilot is PF and which is PM, if I have misunderstood. What I'm wondering about, is there not a higher calling in the LHS? - work-life balance writ much larger, for the many families traveling whether all on the manifest or some "traveling" at home waiting for word of arrival safely; for the aviation safety ecosystem? Yes, go to the soccer games and practices and all the recitals, all the everythings. But don't lose sight of the importance of taking that hard-sweated, hard-tolerated, sometimes verging on unbearable, struggle to cope with the RHS pressures and even unjustified Mickey Mouse games by managament, and then leveraging into the wisdom needed for the combined role of Captain and PIC. And I don't mean Captain is God. I mean, absolute impeccable flying instincts proven over a long time.
I would not interrupt talk amongst pilots without some connection to looming issues. If there is nothing so important in RHS experience that the industry (writ in its largest sense) needs to have transitioned over to the LHS (again, premised on the understanding that Captain and PIC together define the role) in order to thrive in future years, what does that say about controversies about single-pilot cockpits? And about more autonomous flight operations altogether? Is the fact that FOs who decline the "down-shift" associated with Captain have both clarity and certainty that they're making the best choices for themselves just not relevant to thse looming issues? . . . and what if those issues in some sense won't wait for the kids to grow up and for life perspectives to change?. But hey, I should be retired, so.