Perhaps I should have kept my opinions to myself.
Woomera, I did not say that if you were rejected from AN or QF you were a total reject, simply that you were a reject from the AN & QF employment processes. As you so eloquently explained this should not be seen as anything else but that others were more suited to their criteria.
Devil, please re-read my post as you may have misunderstood. I asked whether the Virgin nil / low JET time pilots were more likely to be AN or QF rejects, NOT the pilots who joined with vast jet experience (which you generously listed).
I have not suggested that this is any kind of a safety issue, merely asked if it is truly the case.
In aviation, unlike the vast majority of other industries, pay is not necessarily an indicator of ability or capability, ARDU test pilots are paid less than Virgin Captains or even some Qantas S/O's.
However, the employer providing the most favourable working conditions in AUS is Qantas. That is a fact. Previously it was matched or bettered by Ansett. I think it is also fairly safe to assume that in addition to career opportunities, renumeration and terms and conditions form an important part of the decision of which employer one would choose in the vast majority of cases, all things being equal.
Therefore, my assumption is that if you work for Qantas (or Ansett in the past) you are working for the employer in the most demand. I say this personally as others may place higher emphasis on other criteria. You can therefore say that you were employed by the most desired employer and are paid accordingly.
After all, wouldn't we all like to be paid more to do the same job?
Nowhere did I suggest you were better because you worked for employer A.
At the end of the day the kid who did his QF cadet course 18 months ago may very well hold the left hand seat of a QF 767 in 18 months time, yet he has 10% of the experience held by most out of work AN pilots.
Luck, not ability or capability is responsible for this, the same kid could very well have been an Ansett cadet. The same kind of luck put the QF and AN 'reject' out of the doldrums and into the left hand seat of a 737.
Lets all be grateful for lady luck whilst we bask in her warm glow, after all, not many people are blessed with permanent good fortune
On another note, I find it curious that at times the notion of free speech is tested on this forum in regards to Virgin. Some may have strong feelings on this subject as others do with respect to the 89' dispute, yet the same degree of tolerance is not applied.
I am constantly suprised by the loud calls to silence some for what simply may be a misguided opinion. Just as in 89' there is a large group out there with strong feelings about the events of the last 18 months in Australian aviation, to silence their opinions is to deny reality.
As I have said before, live and let live, but lets not distort or worse deny the facts or hide the truth.
