My Interview Experience at a Regional Airline

[RegionalInterview]

I've been a member of this forum for five years or so, but being a coward, I'm posting this under a different username…

This is my first ever and so far the only interview experience. It was so very very confusing, I'd like to share it with you and hear your opinions. Having gone through interview practice and mock interviews at my flight school and having read couple of pilot interview prep books, my experience with a regional carrier was nothing like I expected.

One of the very first questions was what were my thoughts about 9/11. Ermm… It was horrible, but I doubt it'll ever happen again -what can I say?! They also asked what would I do, if the crosswind was, let's say 34 knots and the max allowed for take off was 35 knots. I said (maybe wrong) that I would not be comfortable taking off in that weather, as the safety of the passengers is my priority. The interviewers then tried to persuade me otherwise saying (among other things) that sometimes one has to bend the rule and these safety rules are overlooked all the time in practical operations. I was quite stunned to hear this, but I didn't argue, only stuck to my opinion. I guess this might have been a way to see how I would react?! Maybe I should I have said that I find your operational attitude very worrying -and not get the job if this was true and not a game…?! And if I had a choice, I defo wouldn't feel comfortable working for a company like that -hell no! They also asked what I thought about my flight school. I said honestly, that they had something to learn in practical arrangements, but I think we were all well taught in the end. I was then asked why I thought we were well taught. In my "tell us about yourself" letter I had written that I enjoyed working irregular hours, which they challenged. On one answer I referred to my experience as cabin crew saying something about if the toilets were blocked for instance, and I was interrupted by one of the interviewers saying we don't care what happens in the cabin…

In total, everything I said was challenged, I was made to feel very uncomfortable. I understand if they want to see how a candidate reacts to being challenged or disagreed with, or faced with hostility, but facing an hour of all that together was very diminishing and tiring! They didn't ask anything about my previous aircrafts nor my knowledge of the aircraft the company had. No technical questions were asked or anything about my flying or cabin crew experience. Now that I think of it, no work experience related questions were asked at all. The whole interview felt very unprofessional and I totally failed to build rapport.
As I said this is my one and only experience about a pilot interview so far, so would be very interested in hearing is this the norm? I had definately imagined something very different! Now I'm planning to apply for them again, because they seem to be the only company in the whole wide world hiring newbie pilots :ugh: "We're always looking for pilots..." -I wonder why...:hmm:

[PrestonPilot]

which airline was it? you been to a flight school or this a full training/hiring scheme?

[Da-20 monkey]

Thanks for sharing the story anyway, whatever the outcome will be.

Keep us updated:ok:

[GolfTangoFoxtrot]

Just wanted to clarify you didn't make a typo here:

"They also asked what would I do, if the crosswind was, let's say 34 knots and the max allowed for take off was 35 knots."

My immediate thought would be if I'm a professional pilot being paid to (a luxury today! :}) work for a business I should be expected to willingly operate the aircraft within its safe operating limits. 34knts is within these limits if max allowed is 35knts!

Am I missing something here or did you get the figures wrong? Just wondering, not a criticism - I've only got circa 10hrs in about 10 years!

[DarkSoldier]

GTF, if the figures are correct then I would entirely agree with your comments. This is within the prescribed limits and as such you are good to go. I was asked the same question in one of my exams (IR or CPL) and the answer was confirmed as the same. Had the wind been 36, then even 1kt outside of the limits is too much and unless there was some leeway or an allowed deviation in the SOPs, then you are not going anywhere.

But interesting post by the OP, would be good to know the airline in question!

[pudoc]

Sounds like a test of character. How cool and collected you remain when being battered with hostility and stress.

I'm curious about this crosswind thing. IIRC, still a student btw, the wind isn't fixed at a speed so whats reported by tower could be a few knots less than what the wind actually is? Interested to here from the pros out there on their take on this.

I probably would have given the same answer as the OP did. To be fair, what new professional pilot would be fully confident handling an aircraft 1kt below max limit? If I already had experience, different story perhaps.

[frontlefthamster]

That question is a good opener, to test knowledge around crosswind limits or demonstrated crosswinds, part B limits versus manufacturer's recommendations, met reporting criteria for instant versus 2 minute wind, and technique... The 'PhD' answer, given unlimited time, might touch briefly on all those topics and more. It sounds like the OP got funnelled into entrenching his position having got it wrong. Many, many, have done so before. Some nonetheless passed. A good interviewer is looking at all-round performance and has few, if any, stop/go questions.

It amazes me that folk spend tens of thousands on training and nothing on learning how to get a job.

In another thread, I hinted about a friend of mine, an experienced interviewer and very able aviator, who had in the past run some free-of-charge interview training by email. I said that he might be willing to do so again for a group of candidates, and anyone interested should PM me.

I got one message.

[Northbeach]

I've been a member of this forum for five years or so, but being a coward, I'm posting this under a different username…

Being invited to interview for a job you want is an opportunity to sell yourself. Yet after 5 years on PPRuNe you introduce yourself as a coward-what the heck? Are you not among friends and colleagues here? If you want to preserve your anonymity that’s fine, yet you describe yourself in very unflattering terms; to me that does not bode well in an interview candidate. If you came across the same way in the interview the outcome was not likely a job offer.



This is my first ever and so far the only interview experience. It was so very very confusing, I'd like to share it with you and hear your opinions. Having gone through interview practice and mock interviews at my flight school and having read couple of pilot interview prep books, my experience with a regional carrier was nothing like I expected.

One of the very first questions was what were my thoughts about 9/11. Ermm… It was horrible, but I doubt it'll ever happen again -what can I say?!

I would agree that is an unusual question to open up an interview with. But so what; it is their company they can open up the dialogue in any way they choose. I would probe for the root issue of the question by seeking more information. I would follow that question with a question of my own; something like this. The day commercial aircraft were flown into the Trade Towers in New York, Washington DC and Shanksville Pennsylvania was a pivotal day in modern history with worldwide implications. To help me address your question efficiently what aspect of September 11th would you like me to address: aviation security, economic impact, geopolitical implications, the altering of national political debates, the subsequent wars or some other aspect? I would then sit back and listen very carefully to their response and be ready to answer intelligently.
They also asked what would I do, if the crosswind was, let's say 34 knots and the max allowed for take off was 35 knots. I said (maybe wrong) that I would not be comfortable taking off in that weather, as the safety of the passengers is my priority. The interviewers then tried to persuade me otherwise saying (among other things) that sometimes one has to bend the rule and these safety rules are overlooked all the time in practical operations.

There is a difference between legal and safe. If the actual crosswind is at or below the manufacturers limits then the departure is within operational parameters and legal. I would say something like “I look forward to the day when I can with confidence safely operate one of “our” jets under those conditions. However as a brand new first officer with limited experience on (use the airplane the company operates) I would defer the 34 knot crosswind to the aircraft commander until I had more experience on type.”

By sticking to your original position and not changing emphasizing safety was a wise position.
The interviewers then tried to persuade me otherwise saying (among other things) that sometimes one has to bend the rule and these safety rules are overlooked all the time in practical operations.
As my direct supervisor(s) and the individuals responsible for the operation of our airline you are the authors of our flight operations manuals and set the standard for our operation. To the best of my ability I will operate in compliance with those policies doing my best to give our customers the service they expect, but never sacrificing safety. I believe operating in such a way would reflect the best upon our airline if I were ever required to answer to the authorities for the actions I took as a crewmember on one of our jets. Then sit back and read their body language. I doubt if anybody would say “Junior we expect you to bust minimums, fly overgross and ignore the crosswind limitations to generate Euros/Dollars/whatever for us. If they do then get up and walk out – you really don’t want to work there!In total, everything I said was challenged, I was made to feel very uncomfortable.

It is difficult not knowing the cultural context in which the interview took place. It sounds to me like you are looking for affirmation and emotional support. That is normal and good; we all want to be affirmed, we all like to be among supporting colleagues just don’t come across as “needing those things” during a pilot interview.

I would recommend you identify the cultural and corporate qualities that are valued at that or whatever company you are interviewing with then emphasize how you emulate those values while presenting yourself in the most professional and confident manner you are capable of.

[Northbeach]

Getting the opportunity to interview is the toughest part.

The interview process consisted of three separate events occurring over the span of several days. The first step was a simulator evaluation. There were 4 of us pared with a senior instructor. We met late in the afternoon and gathered in a break room where the instructor introduced himself and asked us about our backgrounds. It was an informal conversation; he was dressed in business causal attire we were in 3 piece suits. When one of the company simulators became available the instructor had two candidates occupy the two front seats he was in the observer’s seat and the other two stood in the back. The candidate in the Captain’s seat was being directly evaluated; the candidate in the FO’s seat was assisting.

Each candidate flew the same profile; if my memory is correct the profile was simple SID with a DME arc. Direct routing to a NDB followed by a NDB hold issued about 2 minutes out. That was followed by raw data, non radar procedures to a NDB approach followed by a missed approach clearance straight ahead; then radar vectors to an ILS and a landing.

After each of us flew the profile we were privately debriefed. It was at this point I likely came closest to not making it to the next level. The instructor “accused” (I chose this word deliberately) me of turning inbound prematurely towards the NDB and not being “established” on final prior to turning inbound. I listened very carefully, restated the regulatory criteria for turning inbound and said that was the performance standard I was working to achieve. The instructor actually ratcheted up the tension by physically closing the distance between us, increasing his volume, maintaining eye contact and restated that I had turned inbound prior to being established on the final approach course. I did not rise to the occasion, become confrontational or refute his recollection (it would have been pointless). I restated the regulatory requirements, told him I had no recollection of having turned in early, and then said that an early turn would have definitely be a violation of procedure and not appropriate and to have turned early would have been a mistake on my part. He did not pursue it further; I thanked him for his time and told him I would love to fly for his airline.

I am not sure if he was pressing me to see how I responded to critique or pressure or if in fact I had turned early. I honestly think I flew the profile correctly. It was an “interesting” exchange. I was relieved when the invitation to attend the Human Resource and Captain’s board interview arrived.

]The next interview took place early in the morning at corporate headquarters; there were 2 Human Resource specialists, the Chief Pilot and another senior Captain. There was a snow storm that morning and one or two others who were supposed to be there did not make it in. They looked at my resume and asked general questions about my corporate flying job and the time I had spent flying the bush in Africa. Eventually they asked the question about what I would do if I were flying with a Captain that that wanted to descend below minimums on an approach? I do not remember any “technical’ questions; they were more interested in my experiences flying for a multi-billion dollar corporation and my “exotic” flying experience in Africa. I was happy to “entertain” them with yarns of “high adventure”. I closed our time with restating some of the company’s recent accomplishments, telling them they would be my first choice as a place to spend a working lifetime and specifically asked for the job. They smiled and told me they would be in touch with me. It was a pleasant experience; still I was relieved to receive the invitation for the medical exam.

The final phase was a FAA first class medical exam; I think they might have had a chest X-Ray done as well. It was routine. A few days later my son was born, and when I got home from the hospital that night there was a letter with an offer of employment and a class date from that airline; which has been my employer for the last 16 years.

Over the last 40 years I have interviewed 10 times for a pilot position. I was given a job offer at 8 of the 10. One commuter airline turned me down because I lacked the stated experience minimums; they later offered me a job when I met the minimums. One corporate flight department was not interested in me. The other 8 pilot job interviews I was a successful candidate. The very best interview resource I can recommend is offered by Martin Yate in his “Knock ‘em Dead” books and web site (Google search it if you are interested. I do not work for this individual nor am I compensated in any way for recommending him).

That was my last airline interview experience. Good luck with your preparation!

[sevenstrokeroll]

so, did you get the job?


crosswind...I would takeoff assuming that I had been properly trained and rated for the aircraft.

not having toilets work is covered by the minimum equipment list...like it or lump it.

and for bending the rule.s...bend the rules...bend airplanes is the only answer.

and if pressed...you say: you don't bend the rules unless you are operating under the ultimate authority of the pilot in command for an emergency situation...and if you plan on operating this airline in an emergency situation very often, then you don't want me for a pilot.

[JammedStab]

GTF, if the figures are correct then I would entirely agree with your comments. This is within the prescribed limits and as such you are good to go. I was asked the same question in one of my exams (IR or CPL) and the answer was confirmed as the same. Had the wind been 36, then even 1kt outside of the limits is too much and unless there was some leeway or an allowed deviation in the SOPs, then you are not going anywhere.


Personally, I wouldn't take such an attitude for a Go/No Go decision based on 1 knot below a maximum crosswind limit at a company as being "good to go". I should think that an appropriate real world answer would be that it depends....on my comfort and experience level on the aircraft, as a captain anyways. First few hours on the machine with no previous experience in high winds...no go. Significant terrain around...no go. Plenty of experience on type in this situation and comfortable with it....Go.

[ReverseFlight]

Regional Interview: I guess if I were in your position, I would ask the interviewer whether the ATIS crosswind included gusts ? If 34 kts did not include gusts, then I would be busting the limits by taking off anyway. If it included gusts, then what was the mean x-crosswind ? If this was beyond your personal capability or experience, I would request to depart on a more into-wind runway or just wait it out if it was associated with say an advancing thunderstorm. I think the interviewer was asking you to think outside the box rather than concentrate whether a 34 kt x-wind was outside legal limits.

My 2 cents worth.

[mad_jock]

With the cross wind thing. I would have said its legal so we have ticked that box. But as its outside my experence in this type I would be led by my Captain if there were other factors which we would need to take into account. Such as runway condition or the fact that the crosswind may indicate a temp wx condition due to CB activity.

Its definately a question to see if you think of the big picture and not just focus on the numbers. There are quite a few occassions where you can have all the legal ticks in the boxes but it would be inadvisable to launch.

Then again some companys do actually want you to launch as long as all the boxes are ticked.

Its very hard to know what they are looking for in the interview, some operators want a balanced individual with average flying capabilties. Some want a person that can be bullied. Some want a pilot in every shape and form who can operate with minimal support and will muck in and get the job done. Others want a company person who will suck up all the ****e that gets thrown at them and not talk back.

[DarkSoldier]

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkSoldier
GTF, if the figures are correct then I would entirely agree with your comments. This is within the prescribed limits and as such you are good to go. I was asked the same question in one of my exams (IR or CPL) and the answer was confirmed as the same. Had the wind been 36, then even 1kt outside of the limits is too much and unless there was some leeway or an allowed deviation in the SOPs, then you are not going anywhere.
Personally, I wouldn't take such an attitude for a Go/No Go decision based on 1 knot below a maximum crosswind limit at a company as being "good to go". I should think that an appropriate real world answer would be that it depends....on my comfort and experience level on the aircraft, as a captain anyways. First few hours on the machine with no previous experience in high winds...no go. Significant terrain around...no go. Plenty of experience on type in this situation and comfortable with it....Go.

I agree, but my post was just made to make a point, assuming perfect conditions. The point was that it was legal to go and that would be your starting point. There will of course be many other factors to consider, as others have already pointed out.

[windypops]

I would probe for the root issue of the question by seeking more information


I was unsuccesful at a well known Q400 operator in the UK and the interview feedback I got included "you answered too many of our questions with questions".

For me an interview is two way, and my questions were because I wanted to find out more about their operation. eg when I was asked to give my understanding of SOP's, I finished my answer with "I assume that your SOP's are a large part of initial training and is introduced early on during the type rating training". The interviewer seemed to enjoy answering this giving me examples of some scenarios during initial training.

I was succesful elsewhere a short while later and decided not to change my interview technique as I still felt that an interview is a useful opportunity for me to get some info on them.

There certainly are some very odd interview techniques out there. I will say though that I am very happy where I am currently and the interview for this one had no surprises, although it was very structured.

[ATPMBA]

Usually in an oral test situation just answer the question and do not do too much talking because sooner or later he/she will disagree with you. Ex. What is decision speed on a transport category aircraft? Ans. V1 If you start talking about adjustments to V1 for wet runways, inop antiskid, sooner or later there will be a disagreement.

Under the FAA the crosswind is usually defined as Maxium Demostrated Crosswind, it is not a limiting factor. Not sure what the JAA rules are our if the airline has a set wind velocity as a hard rule.

I have hard of an American regional asking bone-headed questions. Something like this - You are flying a Piper Seneca out of a 10,000 foot runway and an engine quits at VMC + 7? Guys says, I would abort. Then they ask how about the engine quits at VMC + 11, VMC + 15?.... It seems like they are asking toss-up questions.

[windypops]

Usually in an oral test situation just answer the question and do not do too much talking

If we are discussing a "test" scenario then I would agree, but an interview should be very much a two way experience.

Having recently discussed interview technique with those involved in recruitment at our place (and we are a very large multinational company with a sizeable HR department) they definitely like to see some substance to potential candidates, those who are interactive during the interview and ask useful questions about the company and the operation are looked at more favourably.

Our company culture is one of "nurture" and nobody is ever trying to "catch you out", by the sounds of it some places are trying all sorts of whacky experiments with potential candidates and deliberately trying to get them to trip up and see how they react. If this is to try and gauge how they would react if caught out in the aircraft then I think they are barking up the wrong tree. Even synthetic training devices operated by skilled trainers do not always show up how a pilot will react in the real aircraft when put under stress.