I've got this funny feeling that Qantas will announce 320 Neos at the AGM. The Jetstar guys will be recruited to fly them on fixed term introductory contracts before bidding to whatever their seniority gets them after the introduction.

Correct me if I'm wrong.... but seeing qantas checkies and engineer management types snorkelling around the Ansett sims seems to be the smoke for the fire.

Well, Jetstar has 60 ish A320's and with the Asian offshoots ordering their own aircraft direct from Airbus there is no way Jetstar can take the 120 ish NEO's on order, so I think it is a strong possibility that we will see Qantas coloured A320's sooner rather than later. Jetstar will start conducting their own A320 type ratings next year and the rumour is there will be one or two A320 sims installed in Sydney for this purpose, so more than likely a similar deal to the 787 with Jetstar providing training to Qantas during any aircraft intro.

If you turn out to be right, there are probably already enough between those who have taken the MOU/LWOP and returned, and those wishing to use the MOU in reverse; JQ to QF, to cater for any A320 (A321 NEO LR...:E - Id say a better fit for Qantas) experience requirements imposed by CASA.

I wouldn't think any other specific recruitment would be required, let alone possible/acceptable given the above. Guess you never know though.

Nice try. A decision on a domestic fleet replacement is still a minimum of 2 years away. Those a320 orders can easily be sold if not needed. Fixed term contracts for jetstar pilots? Nope. MOU opportunities for JQ pilots? Quite possibly. Although for anyone eligible, it would get you a 737 FO position.

Good luck to everyone applying. Will be nice to have some new faces around.

The oldest 737s are now approaching 18 years old. I don't think they can wait another two years before annnouncing it. Combined with the associated lead in times to actually get their hands on some.

I believe they will move on this very shortly.

If Qantas mainline want to replace 737's with a320's then I suspect it will be crewed within mainline. There are approx 600 737 drivers. If the firm had thoughts of crewing externally or from other parts of the group,why would they be hiring second officers thereby increasing the number of mainline pilots? All pilots within the Qantas group are flying max hours as it is.

If it is their move to have another pilot group fly the 737 replacement, then you would have thought the current short haul pilot group would via seniority just slide back into long haul with the impending 787 arrivals. Otherwise we will have another major surplus of pilots which would lead to another round of rin, vr or even cr. However this does not seem to be the case nor do I suspect it will be.

No doubt though what will probably happen is when the new aircraft type is announced, the company will put pressure on the union and negotiations will take place to determine the proposed conditions. The current short haul contract is efficient enough as it but that is for another discussion.

The integration award, now referenced in the short haul ea says who will fly the replacement for the 737 - the mainline crew on the SH award.

Whilst Cobham has operated some routes previously flown by mainline, the EA also stupidly recognises that regional flying is a different operation.

The days of the company chasing major conflict are gone. Whilst it could still improve, there has been a marked change in the language. Anyone joining now can look forward to a long and varied career. Whilst Cobham will still always be a thorn in our side (no offence intended to the individual pilots....we'd much rather see you flying the 717 on better terms.....on the list...giving you and q guys access to different career pathways) the general feel is that the mainline career paths are on the up, and in a big way.

So would we.

Now that applications for externals has closed, any idea what the total number of applicants were?

I am assuming the November dates mentioned in the FAQ's would be for internal applicants given the sheer time it'd take for HR to filter through initial applicants, review video interviews etc

Internals got given 3 days to complete the psych test and video interview...I'd say things are going to move extremely quick for externals as well so I wouldn't be surprised if those dates are for externals mostly...start studying up on "tell us a time when...."

..........

."You had to concoct some inane answer to this HR derived psycho babble BS!

How do you whittle down the applicants then? There's going to be far more people wanting the job than positions available so how can you decide who to take? Are you suggesting just the top 5/10% of performances in an aptitude test or sim ride? Whoever has the most total hours when applying? Maybe the interviews and the "tell me about a time" q's let out the real character of potential recruits and whether or not they are wanted?

Real tough question there Doc.
NOT!
Maybe you could start by putting senior Captains and First Officers, particularly those from a training background back on the selection panel!
They appeared quite apt at weeding out sub optimals.
Gee whiz ,it has apparently worked quite well in the past.
Can't see why it wouldn't continue to work into the future ,despite the HR empire aspirations!

I went to a Qantas run seminar around 18 months ago and a very knowledgeable industrial psychologist gave a talk on the future of training in the Qantas Group with regard to Evidence Based Training. She was saying that there were pockets of the pilot group who did not perform to the required level during their career and it was being looked at how training could be improved to bring these individuals up to a better standard. She mentioned more 'role playing' etc. during CRM and Human Factor days etc. I asked a simple question 'why not change the way you recruit?', she was a bit confused by my question and was less than impressed when I said that surely pilots should run recruitment and we would possible get a better candidate by simply having a good old fashioned two on one sit down where the pilots can judge 'do I want to spend 9-15 hours with this person on the flight deck' during a fairly casual conversation. Follow that up with some basic tech questions and a quick sim where you demonstrate a visual circuit to them and then give them 4 attempts at getting one right! She said that all the HR research and training suggested that the intro of more role playing, tailored training etc was a better approach. I don't as such have a problem with the current state of play as I have always had a good rate of success with the behavioral type selection, so from a selfish point of you it works well. What is starting to concern me though is the new people getting employed do seem to have a great variation in flying ability which suggests to me that not enough emphasis is being put on the true 'aptitude' component in favour of the HR box ticking exercise that some of this has become.

I get the feeling that HR has 'self created' a massive mechanism to support their own need for Corporations. You could whittle down the applicants just as successfully using your min qualifications for application. For an airline like Qantas you could start with, must have a science based university degree and 3,000 hours, if that doesn't generate enough applicants then lower the requirements until you fill the pool.

You were doing really well until you said "3,000 hours".

Total time demonstrates very little about the quality of an applicant for a career airline job.

But it is also not completely irrelevant as some in HR would have you think. Why bother having any sort of hours requirement if total experience is not an important marker of suitability for an airline job?

Because by setting an arbitrary 3000 hour minimum, you miss out on the really good applicant who only has 500 hours, and instead hire the dropkick with 3000 hours, and spend the next 30 years trying to uptrain the dropkick, while the 500 hour pilot goes and flies for the opposition.

I did mention career airline, this may not apply to all airline jobs. But at this airline they spend the first few years as an S/O, gaining experience. QF mainline doesn't put 500 hour pilots directly into the RHS of a jet.

Yet :}


(additional jibba jabba to make up minimum text requirements)

I would argue that they gain exposure and very little experience as a SO. No take-offs or landings, no approaches to the minima etc. However they do get to watch two pilots working and learn the company ethos, handle the radio, cruise relief, exposure to foreign ATC and procedures, you know away from worlds best practice in Australia.