i think the main issue is that it’s 6 weeks of a GA wage to essentially watch a couple episodes of air crash investigations, learn nothing, and get your photo taken in a fixed base 737 toy.
it’s a joke and we all know it.

There is obviously more than one school of thought on this.

Let me spell out mine.

I entered the airlines without any multi crew experience, real, virtual, or otherwise. My employer was happy (and competent enough) to properly integrate me into the multi crew environment as part of my training. I have always been an average student, but on the whole I encountered no issues. To date I have some 15,000 hours or Multi crew airline experience of which 10,000 hours are as pilot in command.

IMHO the requirement for a multi crew qualification in order to apply is no more than a HR driven, self serving exercise that enables yet another way of relieving hopeful candidates of their money.

They reckon they can’t get suitable candidates. Is it any wonder when more than suitable pilots are passed over because people who haven’t even walked a metre in their shoes are calling the shots.

I see a few differences.

Firstly, in the past it was not a requirement. It seems to be fairly recently strapped on. I don’t have a MCC , but my understanding, which could be wrong, is that it’s fairly easy to achieve during type rating.

Also, as far as other professions go. Not a single one of my doctor/lawyer/engineer/teacher/ATC friends have moved to the more remote parts of Australia to be paid less than 50k. Or have spent over 70k upfront (as many don’t use the fee help). Or have work conditions even remotely close to entry GA. In fact they are usually paid significantly more than their city counterparts and receive an array of government subsidies. I only use this as an example as the ones coughing up the 6k+ are usually the people out remote , and it is a very very larger percentage of their annual income.

Lastly, any that go back for further qualifications, which isn’t that many, are usually paid by the uni, or are under scholarship, or by their employer (PhD / masters/ more specific training, workshops etc). The ones that pay up are usually doing further education in another field , not improving their currently achieved skills set.

Those are extra points of complaint that I see anyway, and they certainly aren’t hard and fast rules. However, the nature of the game is to tick the required boxes, so be it. It just seems extra boxes frequently appear!

All depends on QF recruitment. Regardless, there are a few leaving and others looking. I’d think they won’t replace them to keep the costs down.

Does anyone know much about the Virgin Cadetship especially when they generally advertise for the program?
Thanks.

Probably the one who jumps through the HR hoops and has the best ‘tell me about a time when’ answers.

The female one