Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Qantas Recruitment

Old 5th Sep 2018, 05:46
  #1861 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,701
I’m not in QF but I believe that any Pilot that is employed in a QF group Airline with a successful track record of check and training should get priority over outsiders AND a steamlined selection process......

Some here are holding on the edge too tight.
ACMS is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 06:45
  #1862 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 64
Posts: 335
Originally Posted by Lapon View Post
Nothing against the sheilas, but what is it that QF/JQ seem to think the blokes are SO bad at that has nessisitated this push towards gender goals.
I doubt that they do. They just think that they'll be more compliant...
mrdeux is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 06:45
  #1863 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 556
Wow, I must have been reading the alternative universe copy of Keg's post!
What I read is that he believes Qantas should be employing the best candidate; one who has a reasonable ability to operate an aircraft and is able to comfortably fit into the crew environment in the back seat at first, but have the appropriate skills (physically, psychologically and socially) to become a F/O then Captain. If that person comes from outside the group or inside is irrelevant and those currently inside may not necessarily be ahead of the queue.

Unfortunately it's largely irrelevant as the impression I get is the only thing you'll need to do is impress the HR representative on the panel and/or meet some other non-operational selection criteria. From what I'm hearing, flying and operational ability and aptitude has little to do with a successful application. That's not to say we've employed a bunch of duds in this round. Quite the contrary, we've employed some excellent pilots, but 'skills' other than flying seem to have a higher priority.
C441 is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 07:08
  #1864 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... Still!
Posts: 3,338
but 'skills' other than flying seem to have a higher priority.
Who'd have thought that would be a job description for a pilot. I think I'll drive from now on!
Capt Fathom is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 09:48
  #1865 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Shire
Posts: 2,904
Its hard to sit hear and read some of this garbage without adding my bit.

Working for the link, jq qf or any group company doesn’t entitle you (or me) to a thing.

All the divisions have their own requirements and their own cultures.

Flying a jet ’aint hard. Its a retirement job.

The hard part is the interpersonal. The non technical. The art of remaining humble. Of fitting in to the culture.

Then doing all that stuff on a bad day when things are going wrong. Or right, but not your way.

QF pilots arent better or worse than anybody else. They have their own culture and the HR process is about ensuring you’ll fit in. HR doesn’t always get it right. What I can tell you though is most of the QF guys Ive had the pleasure to fly with over the years have been that same guy.

If you’re not that guy, or girl. Its not a big deal. Theres other places that will suit you and give you the career path you desire.

HR are probably doing you a service.

Sometimes it takes a little more maturity and perspective to realise that.

+1 for keg.

Cheers
The Green Goblin is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 11:23
  #1866 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: australia
Posts: 123
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin View Post
Its hard to sit hear and read some of this garbage without adding my bit.

Working for the link, jq qf or any group company doesn’t entitle you (or me) to a thing.

All the divisions have their own requirements and their own cultures.

Flying a jet ’aint hard. Its a retirement job.

The hard part is the interpersonal. The non technical. The art of remaining humble. Of fitting in to the culture.

Then doing all that stuff on a bad day when things are going wrong. Or right, but not your way.

QF pilots arent better or worse than anybody else. They have their own culture and the HR process is about ensuring you’ll fit in. HR doesn’t always get it right. What I can tell you though is most of the QF guys Ive had the pleasure to fly with over the years have been that same guy.

If you’re not that guy, or girl. Its not a big deal. Theres other places that will suit you and give you the career path you desire.

HR are probably doing you a service.

Sometimes it takes a little more maturity and perspective to realise that.

+1 for keg.

Cheers

Well said.
wombat watcher is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 11:37
  #1867 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FNQ ... Still!
Posts: 3,338
Flying a jet ’aint hard. Its a retirement job.
Damn. I wish someone had told me that 20 years ago! I should have mentioned that to HR at the interview!
Capt Fathom is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 14:11
  #1868 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,177
Crikey there’s a lot of verballing going on here. Thanks to so many for illustrating my point so well though- particularly the bit about people wilfully misreading. Thankfully people like C441, Goblin and wombat watcher (the latter two JQ and mainline I think) get it.

Timmytee.
Keg, so you want the right fit people that you will have to sit next to, yet see no benefit in someone being in the group for 3-5 years being continually monitored and assessed to group standards?
I’m sorry, where did I say this? Your comprehension is appalling. Of course there is some benefit though I suspect we’d quibble as to the extent of that benefit. So let me say it clearly again. If you’ve been in a regional gig in a subsidiary for 3-5 years (or let’s face it, any job in Aviation for the amount of time to have the appropriate level of experience) and as a result of that experience you think deserve a walk up start into Qantas mainline then you’re demonstrating perfectly why you’re NOT the right person.

While you’re at it, I’m not sure where I said this comment either.

In Kegs own words “they must have just wanted it more”
I’m not sure I’ve ever made such a point. It runs so contra to my life outlook it’s not funny. I wanted to be an astronaut. I wasn’t good enough. It’s not about wanting but if burning your straw man helps you feel good about yourself then burn away.

jetlikespeeds, I’ve never stated the process gets it right. Sadly there are those who Qantas have knocked back who would’ve been awesome and some we’ve taken that quite obviously we shouldn’t have. A knock back from Qantas doesn’t define a person- just as getting a job with Qantas doesn’t define a person. If you think that was what my post was about then you too need to work on your comprehension skills.

Seagull, you’re probably right. Most regional pilots easily make the transition to flying a jet. That still doesn’t make them the ‘right’ person to be doing so. We can all probably think of a number of examples of people who could ‘do the job’ but we all wondered how they got there and how they stayed there. Mostly these people were widely detested by the rest of their pilot colleagues- a former regional Dash captain who has made a name for himself throughout the ME and Asia and loves to instagram with his dog springs to mind. These people probably thought that because they’d been [insert aircraft type] subsidiary pilots that they ‘deserved’ a job with mainline.

So so let me be blunt (again) for those unwilling or unable to comprehend my previous post.

1. If you’re a great pilot with a great attitude I hope I get to fly with you.
2. I don’t care where you learned those skills and attitudes. I don’t care if you’re ex RAAF, ex GA, ex subsidiary regional or jet operator, ex cadet, ex flying instructor.
3. If you think that because you’ve done ‘A, B, C’ for 3-5 years that you’re entitled to a job in mainline (or VOZ, or NASA or anywhere else you think you deserve a shot at because you’ve ‘done your time’) you’re an idiot. The world doesn’t (and shouldn’t) work this way. It’d destroy organisations through complacency.

But hey, you guys know everything anyway so obviously there’s nothing to learn from me. Enjoy your careers.

How’d that go for a word count? Do I need more to cater for fool sufferer?
Keg is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 22:07
  #1869 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: home
Posts: 42
Blunt is an interesting word, - it has a particular meaning to a certain demographic. In line with that usage I find your words very interesting Keg, because the rumour is you fairly recently put forth a piece stating that all the RAAF pilots applying should be placed at the top of the recruiting process, to be handled before all others? That's not quite in line with what you are trying to portray above.
greenfields is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 22:32
  #1870 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 340
Originally Posted by TimmyTee View Post
Keg, so you want the right fit people that you will have to sit next to, yet see no benefit in someone being in the group for 3-5 years being continually monitored and assessed to group standards?
I know there’s a group paint scheme and a group pilot costume, but is there such a thing as ‘group standards’ that pilots are assessed to? (Serious question)
itsnotthatbloodyhard is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2018, 23:34
  #1871 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,177
Originally Posted by greenfields View Post
Blunt is an interesting word, - it has a particular meaning to a certain demographic. In line with that usage I find your words very interesting Keg, because the rumour is you fairly recently put forth a piece stating that all the RAAF pilots applying should be placed at the top of the recruiting process, to be handled before all others? That's not quite in line with what you are trying to portray above.
Nope. Not true. I’ve never suggested they be top of the pile. I simply suggested they (and some others) should be in the pile for consideration.

Specifically I asked why we had knocked back a number of very qualified applicants before they had even attempted the psychometric testing, based on just their resumes. The examples I used included current RAAF pilots (who have more than 12 years), regional jet pilots 3,000+ hours of experience (specifically a few Aussies I know of in the US), etc.

Now, I suspect that most RAAFies would do quite well at the psychometric and be ranked for review accordingly but it’s their psychometric results that are part of what determines where in the pile they should be. Unfortunately many RAAFies didn’t even get to do the psychometric- and neither did a bunch of other very qualified pilots. In essence we’ve prioritised certain types of experience (or previous employers) without having a full view of the capabilities of the individual pilots.

So your ‘rumour’ is either a great example of Chinese whispers or perhaps something more malicious. You should examine very carefully which of those it is and the motives of the person who told it to you if it’s the latter.

Clear enough?

PS: I certainly didn’t use the term ‘blunt’ with any insinuations to the context of the the word when used by RAAF pilots.

Last edited by Keg; 6th Sep 2018 at 00:12.
Keg is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2018, 00:54
  #1872 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 749
Originally Posted by Keg View Post
Still, it’s 2018 and very little surprises me this days when it comes to people wilfully mis reading posts.
You realise you're on PPRuNe, right? That ability of some to misrepresent your arguments has taken years of toil to finely hone!

Totally agree we should recruit from a wide range of backgrounds while concentrating on the "right" person to the extent that it's possible to do so. Having flown with several of the wrong types of people slipping through an imperfect QF recruitment process (we all know who they are), I can say with certainty that it's neither a personally pleasant nor an operationally easy experience! Also it became obvious to me early in my QF career (through my own biases which I had to quickly discard) that it's not possible to confidently predict the "right" and "wrong" type of person solely on their aviation background, so no one pilot demographic should get a monopoly advantage in the recruitment process.
DutchRoll is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2018, 05:39
  #1873 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 55
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by DutchRoll View Post
You realise you're on PPRuNe, right? That ability of some to misrepresent your arguments has taken years of toil to finely hone!

Totally agree we should recruit from a wide range of backgrounds while concentrating on the "right" person to the extent that it's possible to do so. Having flown with several of the wrong types of people slipping through an imperfect QF recruitment process (we all know who they are), I can say with certainty that it's neither a personally pleasant nor an operationally easy experience! Also it became obvious to me early in my QF career (through my own biases which I had to quickly discard) that it's not possible to confidently predict the "right" and "wrong" type of person solely on their aviation background, so no one pilot demographic should get a monopoly advantage in the recruitment process.
Very true, good ones and tossers from every prior area.
Not sure if the current HR run recruitment will be worse or better? Some good guys and gals recruited recently, from a small sample I have flown with.
Tankengine is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2018, 07:35
  #1874 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 427
Originally Posted by Tankengine View Post

Very true, good ones and tossers from every prior area.
Not sure if the current HR run recruitment will be worse or better? Some good guys and gals recruited recently, from a small sample I have flown with.
There will always be good ones and tossers recruited into airlines, and don’t forget it’s all up to individual perceptions and interactions as well. Your “good guy” could be someone else’s “tosser”.

I’ve found that a lot of criticisms of an airline’s recruitment strategy tend to be a mask for “I’m upset that me or my mates didn’t get a job here”.

Last edited by dr dre; 6th Sep 2018 at 13:48.
dr dre is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2018, 09:19
  #1875 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 95
Performance on the day can play a big part in whether you land the job. That includes the psychometric and interview. I knew a bloke a long time ago who was interviewed by Ansett and by his own admission did not put in a good performance in the interview. He is now a Captain in QF with a decent seniority number.

People should have another read of this quote from Keg:

A knock back from Qantas doesn’t define a person- just as getting a job with Qantas doesn’t define a person.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2018, 03:07
  #1876 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: home
Posts: 42
Keg, as was relayed to me, you stated that you can't understand why every RAAF pilot who applies to Qantas isn't automatically sent for psychometric testing. So you are therefore holding a pilot group above all others, believing they are better candidates, and shouldn't have to follow the standard process. As most know, there are also RAAF guys who have joined QF that haven't progressed as one would expect (as there have been GA, regional and Cadets pilots who haven't.) It doesn't matter whether they are ex military, regional or GA, they should all be placed through the same process, resumes reviewed, and not given a pass just because they were ex RAAF. To believe otherwise displays a bias, or a certain naivety.

I trust implicitly the person who told me of your opinion, and they hold no ulterior motive.

Last edited by greenfields; 7th Sep 2018 at 03:41.
greenfields is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2018, 03:27
  #1877 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 1,246
Qantas, like many other workplaces follows whatever the latest hiring fad is. HR love making stuff up that has seemingly no scientific basis.

Asking me during an interview whay my biggest fear is could possibly be the stupidist question I have ever been asked. If you or someone you know who is a strong candidate didn't get past application stage they were probably weeded out on one of many worthless criteria come up with by HR.
pilotchute is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2018, 03:28
  #1878 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 332
Ex RAAFies are awesome though..

..and humble.

ruprecht is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2018, 08:48
  #1879 (permalink)  
Keg

Nunc est bibendum
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 5,177
Greenfields, this was your original allegation.

...you fairly recently put forth a piece stating that all the RAAF pilots applying should be placed at the top of the recruiting process, to be handled before all others?
Thats a very different thing from what your latter post.

Wothout posting the full full transcript of email/ SMS I fired off, here is the guts if it... perhaps the part of the story you weren’t told.

1. I’ve advocated for every pilot who meets the minimum criteria to do the psychometric testing. That way you find the ‘diamond in the rough’; the best psychometric pilots irrespective of experience. Sure there are more parts to the process but the psych helps builds a more complete picture.

2. Given that a line in the sand was drawn I questioned why we arbitrarily drew that line based purely on resumes and excluded some of the best trained pilots in Australia- RAAFies. I used the RAAF pilots of an example of why I felt the recruitment process was fundamentally flawed. In that respect I did ask if we were drawing a line in the sand, why were these people (as well as multi thousand hour regional jet pilots) excluded.

3. So no, not holding a pilot group above all others. Using them as an example of a flawed process and I suspect yours and my positions on all people should be progressed is virtually identical.

That’s not your perception of my position though so agian i suspect the version provided to you has not had some critical context. I’ll presume that was done of ignorance and not to tarnish my reputation.


Last edited by Keg; 7th Sep 2018 at 10:52.
Keg is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2018, 09:22
  #1880 (permalink)  
34R
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Brisbane
Age: 48
Posts: 181
What a tedious thread this has become......
34R is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.