Before this turns into a conspiracy theory I can guarantee people out there that Qlink
cannot get enough people in through the door atm.
I'm assuming because they just don't need that many guys so the competition is higher.
This is completely untrue!
AFAIK, the only base in the network where there are excess crew is Cairns where we have too many Q300 FO's. EVERY other base has shortfalls in either Captains or FO's either on the Q300 or Q400. Some bases have multiple crew shortfalls.
We are still losing either Captains or high-time FO's to other carriers. We are expanding and have additional aircraft arriving in 2012 which will need to be crewed.
Some of you guys are so quick to look for "Applicant gouging" that you'll take any bait and run with it.
This:
Apparently, over the last few months the overall pass rate has been a bit under 50%
And this:
They must have interviewed close to 200 this year (roughly 4 per week) and as far as I'm aware there were only 3-4 ground courses. So roughly 30 people, which is about a 15% take up rate.
Gets turned into this:
200 interviews, testings, appearance fees (paid to the company not the applicants), for 30 positions!?
So who do we believe?
OFS who says just under 50%, or
Fonz who says 15%? We'll go with the Fonz as it's leading to the conspiracy that Qlink has
nothing else better to do than find ways of charging potential applicants some money.
Putting a candidate through a complete interview process takes a lot of time and money. Back in the day, airlines like Qlink and Rex probably only ran one or maybe two ground schools (around 6-8 people in each) per year. That's a far cry from today when (according to the rumours here
) Qlink have run 200 interviews in the past 12 months. If the success rate is so low it stands to reason that the company will want to minimise the cost of putting an applicant through the entire process. The simplest way to do that is to charge the applicant. I'm not saying I agree with this, but I can see their point of view.
For
Pilotchute I'm sorry you didn't get in and it cost you money to find that out. It's been my experience that applicants who didn't make it failed for a reason. In late 2007 I went for a Rex interview and thought I'd nailed it. Four days later I got a reject email (cost me almost $1000.00). In 2008 I went for a Qlink interview and thought I'd messed it up and here I am.
Excuse my ingnorance but wouldn't the airline only get you in if they thought you had a little better than a slim chance of making it?
From a recruiters point of view, it can be hard to make that kind of assessment when the airline only has your application to work with. Even your aptitude tests don't guarantee that you'll do well in your sim assessment or even do well in your interview.
I'm not in Qlink recruiting but I know a couple of people who've conducted the interviews and their stories to me confirm what I've experienced in the past when I was interviewing I.T. candidates.
People f*ck up interviews.
IME, the people who do the worst at interviews are the ones who are cocky, cannot find any faults in themselves, have problems with authority, and don't prepare for the interview process.
By prepare I include this guy:
http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-a...ml#post6506433
People who (allegedly) got through everything but got rejected after their referees were contacted.
DIVOSH!