Qantas Recruiting Strikes Again

[backspace]

Heard a rumour very recently that a certain person (pilot) who used to work for Qantas, went to Ansett, then couldn't get passed the apptitude testing for Qantas the second time around and was rejected, ended up as the Airbus FOI at CASA and has just been poached by Qantas to head up flight operations at JETSTAR.

Talk about swings and round abouts. How good is the recruiting process if a guy is good enough to be management but not good enough to be a S/O. Yes, for all you cynics I probably just answered the question!!

[The Riddler]

Backspace,

All those knowing this gentleman were more than surprised when QF knocked him back from their recruitment process.

Must say we had a little smile when he got the CASA appointment. Talk about the tail coming back to bite the dog! (or rat in this case).

If the rumour is true then Jetstar Flight Ops will be in excellent hands. :ok:

[oicur12]

one would laugh if it wasnt so tragic.

QF management are making a joke of thier whole selection process.

They obviously have faith in it unless they want someone in particular in which case stick all your testing up your coit.

[Ralph the Bong]

Let's put is this way, backspace; when Jet star announced the acquisition of A 320s, it was almost certain that the appointment of this man would be made. His qualifications? He was a very, very highly regarded A 320 supervisor at AN, oversaw the regulatory side of the CRJ introduction at KD and now has experience and contacts at the regulator. Good luck to him.

[balance]

He will be in good company then. Most of the pilots at pornstar have failed the QF selection process, some more than once.

[Keg]

Geez, do we HAVE to do this time and again! :rolleyes: :yuk:

[Capt Claret]

Are you saying that a pilot who fails QF selection is a failed pilot? Or have I misunderstood your post? :confused:

[The Messiah]

So this chap oversaw the A320's of AN and was heavily involved in the introduction of the CRJ?

He must be the ducks nuts as they were both very successful ventures..........not!

Has the right CV for CASA anyway.

[Yawn]

If you know the man you would have no doubts about his quality. It is unthinkable that QF would ever reject such a person. As anyone who has seen how the QF recruiting machine works knows it's broken; this is just more proof.

I must say I had a pleasant surprise when the forementioned came out to do a ramp check on my Metro in SYD. Lots of found memories of the CRJ and Montreal.

Always good to see the good guys getting on with life.

[oicur12]

hey messiah,

What exactly was unsuccessfull about the operation of the A320 in Ansett.

Keen to know.

[Felix Lighter]

So he failed the QF interview........big hairy deal.
Many have and are now Capts with far bigger (and arguably better airlines).
Who made QF king of the castle?
Many at QF failed the RAAF interview.........Go figure?

I flew with a skipper recently who failed the same military wings cse I was on.....he is now a skipper and me, an FO, at the same airline. I had a fantastic 15years in the mil - he went to the airlines, hes a very good pilot and operator who has my utmost respect - our careers just took a differnet turn many years ago.

Rather than knocking folks down why dont you miserable old gutz-aches trying offering a helping hand from time to time.

That is if youre not too busy patting each other on the back and walking on water.

Rant out!

[Flying Tiger]

Having had close contact with this person at various stages during the past 4 years there are a couple of things I can say without question:

1. This man is one of the finest operators I have seen.
2. This man is one of the finest managers I have seen.
3. This man is balanced in his views, treats people fairly, and is very honest in his appraisals.
4. This thread is a ridiculous attempt at a slur on a man who deserves far better, and some of the comments posted here are nothing short of shameful.

Again, all of the above I can say WITHOUT QUESTION.

It is true that mainline rejected this and many other well qualified candidates. That is more a quirk of the system then a commentary on the relative merits of the individuals. Recruiting processes, and indeed any type of process, do not get it right all of the time. Ask yourself - do you get caught every time you speed?

If I can be half the operator as the subject of this thread I will have achieved something.

FT.

[FlareArmed]

Qantas recruiting has a long history of rejecting a multitude of outstanding operators while accepting the village idiot. Of course, this phenomena is not restricted to QF.

Although I haven't done the testing, my observations over the years of who gets taken and who gets rejected leads me to believe that Qantas recruiting is a random number generator.

Qantas has many fine operators, yet the rejection of excellent pilots and the acceptance of dubious ones is a clear indication it's selection process is derelict.

The subject of this thread was widely respected by both management and underlings at Ansett and is one of the most capable and pleasant operators I have ever flown with.

If he applied to Qantas, after the Ansett collapse, and was subsequently rejected, it would have to rate as one of the biggest stuff-ups in Qantas recruiting history.

[hoss]

Okay, enough is enough who are we talking about? (initials will do as I may also know him).

Talking about initials, Flying Tiger, you wouldnt happen to be PK by any chance?

:)

[Woomera]

Sorry hoss, not even initials, thanks.

I don't know who is being referred to, but I'm sure there's more than enough in this thread to identify the person concerned.

Contact another poster by PM if you wish, but any further personal identifying details in this public forum would not be fair and reasonable.

I'm sure you understand. :ok:

Woomera

[backspace]

Thanks Woomera, The intention of the post was not a slur at the gentleman concerned and personally I could think of no finer a person to do the job.

To all of the above, the intention was to point out the irony of how one minute a person is not good enough for the big Q and the next they want him (or her if thats the case) for management.

[Farcome]

My thoughts on QF recruiting:

Whenever you let psychologists near recruiting processes it is inevitable that there will be some very peculiar candidates that will get through.

[payload777]

backspace

Have you ever thought of looking at this from another point of view. The fact that the person in question did not get into Qantas might have nothing to do with his ability, like a lot of people. Qantas are smart enough to know many people who miss out are very capable pilots. It is the whole package they look at,(not saying they never get it wrong) hence why they want this person in another role. They probably thought at this stage of this persons career an S/O positon would not be suitable, nor satisfying for them. It is like GA when a person leaves to a better job, then may lose it and want to come back but usually the company isnt to keen because of the step back for that person and all the motivation/morale/attitude issues that come with this situation. The S/O position is seen as a learning position, and you are almost like an apprentice. So like anything why would you want to get a very experienced person and put them back in this role, why not put them in a position more sutiable for them at this point in this persons life, where they can actually make use of all their experience, hence the management position.

Those of you who are so ready to shoot down the Qantas selection process, take a hard look at the Virgin process, how many experienced guys do you know who cant even get an interview!!!

[druckmefunk]

payload 777

I think you are right on the money. QF recruiting is so arrogant that they think they know more about what an applicant is prepared to accept, than the applicant does.

I fly with heaps of guys who were previously captains. Many of them wide body with much more experience than I. None of them seem to have any trouble dealing with the change of seats/responsibility/taking orders/pay etc. They knew what they were getting into before they applied and are more than proffessional enough to do their job as required by the company and wait their turn for an upgrade. I can't see it being any different at QF.

Don't forget also that a good F/O or S/O should be able to inject his previous experience into the operation as well. Or is that another problem with QF, (experience not gained at QF doesn't count).

dmf

[Curved Approach]

hmmmmmmmmmm, everyone has a view on this and im sure no-one will budge on what they think! so im not going to enter into the argument on this topic........i do wanna say:

Farcome,

My thoughts on QF recruiting:

Whenever you let psychologists near recruiting processes it is inevitable that there will be some very peculiar candidates that will get through.Baahahahahahha, and before i say anything im not a psychologist!!! ;)

In recruitment processes in general (not specific to any company or airline ;)) there are numerous processes which are undertaken. The first one being tests designed by who else but psychologists. Im not gonna say much about the initial maths, spatial, verbal reasoning etc etc tests as these are fairly simple and self explanatory and i admit a cheap method of illiminating candidates (whilst effective with a standard set not that high and fairly attainable, as personality plays a part in the selection) The actual psych tests are formulated and refined by the experts. They are impossible to fudge and turn out in a way that you are not as it will show up that you are fudging; this is done quite simply by having a control type question in there which most of the population would answer one way but if you are being dodgy and trying to control your outcome it will show up. Enough of this anyway, psych testing is accurate and highly effective.

Having only skimmed the thread i dont want to comment on the main topic. But not passing skills or psych can be for any number of reasons from trying to appear a certain way in a test or just not the personality thye are looking for or simply not reaching the bench mark in reasoning tests or a combination of them all.

sure............................i dont know any of you and dont wish to offend anyone, so if something i said doesnt make sense or im just talking crap just bag me ;) oh and, we will never understand recruiting processes as we are not privvey to there intricicies (sp?)..........

[Planned Root]

psych testing is accurate and highly effective.

http://www.kurts-smilies.de/pillepalle.gif

[bigfella5]

Not too sure if this is the applicable spot however.......is there any ppruners reading this who have been involved in a direct or indirect way with the q recruitment process at a human resource level? If so...how does it work?
If accepted and put on a hold file, what happens to that individuals employment chances as time goes on? What affects their place in the line etc.
If not accepted, what then? How many bites of the cherry do they get?
Is age a factor?
The list goes on but I'm sure you get the drift.

[DutchRoll]

Unfortunately there are no standard answers to your questions BF5.

The recruitment policies (hold file, review process, etc , etc) can vary depending on who is in charge at the time. Pretty much the only constant is that a fail of the written tests (including psych) will shut the gates in front of you.

The hold file has historically been a bizarre piece of work. Once the policy was a 'ranking system' which allowed people to leapfrog you if they did better at the testing/sim/interview. Then that was scrapped and went to some sort of date based ranking. Then there was a review board which kicked in if you'd been on the hold file for x amount of time and could recommend you either stay on the hold file or get the 'don't bother us anymore, have a nice life' letter. Then that got scrapped. And god only knows what it is now.

Age is not legally a factor (iaw anti-discrimination laws), but the basic premis is 'flying experience for age', so if you're 35 with a few thousand multi hours, you have a chance. Similarly, if you're 40 and have just attained your CPL on a single comanche, they won't deem you competitive!

It's pretty rare, but 3 or 4 people I know have apparently been rejected at interview and have had two bites at the cherry (another interview in a couple of cases). I don't know the exact circumstances, except that some post-interview doubt must've existed. They were pretty good blokes & I'm not sure why they would've been marginal in the first place. Qantas never, to my knowledge, gives anyone more than two chances at anything (including promotion).

[Douglas Mcdonnell]

Ballance yet again you are displaying your head in the sand membership card!

The gentleman concerned is the model of a professional aviator. Kind of makes you wonder about the legitimacy of these tests as ballance once again has showed.

Cheers DM

[backspace]

Doug, my point exactly. How can a psych/apptitude test show that a person is unsuitable for employment and then that same person is the right stuff for a chief pilot position.

And, as I have previously stated, I have no doubt that this person is the right one for the job and I am sure all those that know him or will get to know him down the track will agree.

[elektra]

There seem to be two sorts of readers here...those who know who this guy is and those (like me) who have no idea. But the general issue is interesting.

So...without re-igniting too many old fires, can someone tell us where this "fine aviator" was say 14 years ago? Was he flying domestic routes in Australia? Don't rush to bucket me for asking this. It's just that whether some PPruners agree with it or not, there is a view that says that one's aviating worth does not start and finish within the bounds of the cockpit. If a senior management pilot has a certain track record in times of industrial turmoil then that is part of his/her "aviating" worth. To some, a certain attitude may be a plus, to others a minus.

I think that, given the challenges ahead for both "low cost" pilots as well as AIPA pilots, the question is well worth asking.

[Torres]

About as subtle as a Jumbo wheels up landing at Sydney in peak hour..............

One guess how this thread is going to end up! :ugh:

[Douglas Mcdonnell]

Electra, probably a bit to personal there mate. Its probably fair to say that many airline pilots of a fair vintage were caught up in that nasty event. Unfortunately.

[Kaptin M]

It is possible that QF had this person (and I also have no idea as to his identity) lined up for this position for some time, and intentionally kept him out of the QF pilots' ranks to avoid future possible problems.
That he was able to stay current on the A320, through employment with the Government aviation branch headed by "The Minister for QANTAS", speaks volumes for those who have suggested where J.A.'s future salary might come from, once he bails out of politics!

We are all well enough aware that the choice of the A320 was not merely co-incidental with the fact that it is NOT a type currently operated by QANTAS (as was the B767 with Australian), and that, as such, AIPA would have little likelihood of success in laying claim to the crewing of it by the QF pilots.

Jet Star is, imo, just another example of another company's willingness to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to start another new company employing workers at lower than the established industry standard, because of QF's apparent failure to be able to successfully and amicably NEGOTIATE with their current employees' unions, and in the HOPE that there will eventually be a flow-on into the parent company.
It is a "tactic" that appears to be becoming SOPS for management worldwide.