Naturally enough,this thread got sidetracked into a us vs. them slanging match.Personally,I thought the overblown nature of BA's(and a lot of other airlines)pilot selection procedure was more interesting to discuss.Being a pilot isnt rocket science,nor is being a BA pilot.In a 20 minute interview,you can learn pretty much what you want to know about someone;if they fit your corporate image,are they a maverick dude pilot or a stuffy stuff-shirt by the book type or somewhere in between, are they a conversationalist(a flightdeck is an awfully small place),are they patient and understanding etc,etc.
Then a 30 minute sim check to check basic flying skills and prioritization and judgement when faced with an emergency.Its really that simple and I cant for the life of me see the need for anything more.
One thing this thread has exposed which is a sign of the times and rather sad;pilot skills are losing out to corporate image.If you're a good pilot and embody the BA corporate image then just great.If you're a good pilot but a touch too maverick and independent,you'd better work contract(better pay anyway).If you embody the BA corporate image but arent a particularly good stick and rudder man with so-so judgement,NOT OKAY.Ok,you dont need any stick and rudder skills if you fly Airbus.But you still need the judgement.How many of these category 3's slip through the net?When all is said and done,doesnt the chief pilot before hiring someone say to himself:"Is he a damn good pilot,one I'd want with me when things go from bad to worse on a lonely moonless night?"