Flight Standards at The Blue

[teletubby]

Can anyone answer, why is it that real poor performers coupled with being troublemakers slip through?

How many times do Captains have to refuse to fly with someone (yes I am referring to an individual) before a level playing field is achieved?

Checks, training rules regs you name it count for nothing sometimes.

[terronnd]

This is not exclusive to F/O's, there are plenty of Captains out there who should not be. (at all)

[priapism]

pray....do tell!!

[teletubby]

It walks and it talks and it wiggles.......Long history of trouble.

[bentandtwisted]

Is it true they've employed a few pilots based on who they new at the blue (senior pilots), without conducting reference checks from previous employee's and then these pilot's have struggled during the sim and line training.

[neville_nobody]

Hence the problem with their recruiting system. Jobs for the boys never really works no matter what industry you're in. Why don't they just set up a proper recruiting system with a mix of pysch, sim, technical etc and go from there. Cathay and Emirates seem to have the right method of doing this sort of stuff. QF is really to reliant on their beloved pysch/skills testing.

The fact you know someone should never be the reason you get a job at a major airline!! It really rules out so many people that do have the ability to be there. Not to mention the hassles for the staff having every person they've worked with in the past asking them for bluestars!!!

[DJ747]

Nobody can change the past however the current recruitment system has become quite tough if the high % of failures is anything to gauge it by.

Every airline has crew of all ranks that don't shine, that is life.

[bentandtwisted]

DJ747,

If they are having such a high failure rate with the new system then it sounds like they’ve gone the wrong way.

I don’t have a problem with the old system, ie, an interview with senior pilots, but this process needs a follow through and not stop at the interview just because the pilot knows someone.

The process must include a reference check from their previous company, preferably from the Chief Pilot, Check and Training or Senior pilot. These pilots would be able to give a fair assessment of the pilot’s ability to fly an aircraft but also their ability to learn and apply what they’ve learnt.

[The Butcher's Dog]

Knew a fellow just like that!......... No commitment to standard ops, thought he knew it all, had absolutely no insight to his lack of skills and gave the safety stats a real pounding, abused staff relentlessly, he was a perfect storm – we smiled and waved a relieved good bye as the door hit him on the backside as he left.

The offender had bounced (wiggled is a good description) from one job to the next until the trail caught up to him. Last seen wiggling toward a 146 job, but left that then got into VB. Apparently not one reference check made by any of the future prospective employers. Hope he is well supervised!

[DJ747]

Fair point Bent.

[touchncloth]

I hate pysch tests however the science behind them does out whey the one or two F#ckwits we all know that have passed them. Besides Back to the original argument I would bet the very person that sparked this post from 'tubbs' has passed that particular test.;) I think valid reference checks should always be done. Reference check questioning can be designed to decifer whether a 'buddy' or 'enemy' is giving the answers and facts can be discreetly drawn out through a proper line of questioning;)

[Centaurus]

Reference check questioning can be designed to decifer whether a 'buddy' or 'enemy' is giving the answers

Yes - you need to be very cautious who you nominate as your two prime referees. Most put down the chief pilot or some other management honcho of your last two jobs. I have known very sound and well skilled pilots who have had mysterious problems with getting jobs and it turned out under quiet investigation that their previous employer who they had apparently got on well with had rubbished them without them knowing.

[4 letter words]

Could somebody within VB please tell us WHY there's so many fantastic aircrew out there - that you can trust to let fly our family around - that aren't getting interviews within VB? Through our eyes it seems that if your've been in this industry for over 5 years your experience isn't required as much anymore? To those new crews that are getting inn we say good luck to them, however is the recruitment team happy with the current failure rates and lack of qualified tech crews that are currently available. One has to wonder, maybe it's those greater minds at work again :confused: :confused: :confused:

[goddamit]

To be honest, most pilots in VB I believe are unsure about how people get interviews these days. A mate of mine flying jets as FO got an interview for an FO on the B737. He knocked it back. All in all it would have cost him about 60-70K to make the move. He'll get a command on his jet where he is within a year. He hadn't updated his file for a while from what I understand. Nominations from present pilots were popular for a while, not sure if this is how it is now or not. Some guys like myself were chosen without being put forward or nominated(although a very long time ago.) They are also aware that the people they will employ must be happy with the right seat for maybe a very long time.
All I can suggest is to persist(without pestering) & update your details(just the standard stuff I'm afraid). Good Luck

[Gordon Schumway]

I've always played the game simply - If you don't give a 'Check' F/O' anything to hook you for, you'll find they generally sh1t in their own nest before too long!
Unfortunately I haven't had one seem to recognise they're a long way from competent and pull their head in and repeat the error(s) on each sector.

[Jet_A_Knight]

They are also aware that the people they will employ must be happy with the right seat for maybe a very long time.

I would imagine that people making applications are aware of that fact.

It is a pity that people with substantial hours in command of turboprops - with plenty to offer Virgin - are not afforded the opportunity for assessment on the basis that they 'may' be disgruntled and frustrated in the RHS of one their airliners - without asking them directly.

[johnnychopper]

I think Gordons got it right, don't give those 'check F/O' a look in, and in time, they will fall in to the abiss they seem so competent in digging for themselves, such a shame the likes of this one is causing so much greif on the flight deck that 'its' got to the point of being told to get out! I hope for all concerned that the 'Blue' are able to sort out a way of avioding these dramas in the future, and a few more of the decent types will get a look in.