upgrade failure rates / sacked while in trainig

[sisyphos]

can anybody confirm that the failure rate for commands especially on the 747 is out of control (again) ? I heard only one guy out 6 made it recently.

also , is it true that chances failing the training(!) on the classic is one out of four this year statistically ?

[Numero Crunchero]

It is easy for me to say and hard for you to accept....no one wants you to fail. If you focus on failing you may very well do so. CX wants 100% pass rate for everything...do you realise how much money it wastes for all teh failures? Instead of finding a reason why you should fail let them try and find a reason why you shouldn't pass! Come on people its just a job....1000s have gone before you...why shouldn't you walk in their footsteps?

[filejw]

Doesn't say much for the Training and HR departments if true.

[CXtreme]

"CX wants 100% pass rate for everything...do you realise how much money it wastes for all teh failures? "

Sorry Numbers, have to disagree. Lets look at the sums if you upgrade from J.F/O to F/O. The difference between the two positions in terms of Pay ? Huge

The difference in productivity? Hmm, cross wind from 10 kts to 15 kts and a bit less vis.

So if we fail a couple of Q.L's ( as is the case more often that not ) where is the smart money?

It is 3 month's between Q.L. check's at lets say 10 J.F/O's vs. 10 F/O salaries.

It is not just failures, lets look at upgrade for S/O's. At the moment the buzz word is " not accertive enough" A substantial number of S/O's have been informed lately that the have to do at least 3 more months as S/O as they are not "accertive enough". This was after reviewing a file of a S/O that do a module every 6 weeks, and after scrutenizing the very subjective ERAS system.
P.S. They only do a couple more sim's, once again there is no remedial help to "become more accertive" Only more S/O modules.

With all respect, you might be a little out of touch with what's happening at the lower levels Numbers

[FlexibleResponse]

CX wants to upgrade you.

If you are not ready, you will not be upgraded.

Talk to your line Captains and get some free advice on your strengths and weaknesses. This information will not normally be offered unless you ask.

[Numero Crunchero]

Hey flex, if you fly with me I will definitely let you know what I think of me;-)
And of course, if I laugh after the landing that is usually a clue that I have seen better landings!

CXtreme
I have heard of this QL upgrade delay thing before. Can you give me the numbers...like how long after becoming a JFO till you can QL..what back pay do you get...etc Don't worry about the salary figures, I have COS at home. I would like to get some numbers on this. If it appears the 'system' is taking a monetary approach to training we need it highlighted....not left on a posting on PPRUNE.
Also, are you suggesting that CX are keeping SOs as SOs for financial gain? In the words of Pauline Hanson "Please explain"
cheers
PS being an Aussie I don't have the best speelin in the world, but it is "assertive"

[cpdude]

Originally Posted by Numero Crunchero

PS being an Aussie I don't have the best speelin in the world, but it is "assertive"

and that's without any beers! Do you also turn into a green monster when you're angry?

[FlexibleResponse]

Hey flex, if you fly with me I will definitely let you know what I think of me;-)
And of course, if I laugh after the landing that is usually a clue that I have seen better landings!

It is very rare indeed for the physical manipulation of the jet to feature in the failure of pilots to be upgraded to Command (possibly a little more likely for other upgrades for early career JFO/FOs).

By far the greatest factor is plain old simple application of commonsense to the operation of the jet to accomplish the mission safely and efficiently.

For some people it is inate, for most people it is learnt and for other people it will never happen.

[Five Green]

Fully Ready

Originally Posted by FlexibleResponse

CX wants to upgrade you.

If you are not ready, you will not be upgraded.

Talk to your line Captains and get some free advice on your strengths and weaknesses. This information will not normally be offered unless you ask.

So after 10 years flying heavy jets you are saying that 40% - 50% of cx FOs are not ready for command ? That this is not a failure of the training department ? Wow !

"This information will not normally be offered..." just about sums up cx's training department !

As for "physical manipulation", (which I assume means flying "the jet") not entirely true. People are held back all the time at the JFO upgrade for said lack of manipulative skills. Pilots are also Cat B'd because of Line checks and/or sim rides that were less than stellar in the manipulatin' department.

What is the common thread and most likely root of the problem ? ....LACK OF SECTORS and LACK OF NON THREATENING SIM SESSIONS. A pilot at Cathay is not given the chance to explore his weaknesses and improve on them in ANY sim sessions here at Cathay. Even the "handling" and T(x) sims come with extensive written reports. So where and when can a pilot put up his hand and say "I need to practice landings.." or 'give me another V1 cut at rotation..." you hardly ever hear that and why ? Because they will write a report on it !! You hardly ever fly here and yet you are written up for "lack of local knowledge"..."had to repeat radio transmission"...."gave briefing in wrong order"...."not assertive enough"...."too assertive.." "too N. American"..."too conservative on approach.." These types of comments that are in no way safety related are over the top. In my book if a pilot clarifies a radio transmitted clearance etc. that is good airmanship. Yes there are extremes, if he needs to clarify every one well maybe not so good. Clarifying one or two in this neighborhood is good practice but not on a line check cause you will get written up for it ! That is just one example of how pedantiscism has been misinterpreted as "High Standards". I love high standards, I want them followed and I want them written down.

I have been trained to do something the sim and then written up for it on a ride ! What a joke ! At a more reasonable airline the checker might say " hey where did you get that from?" then go and fix the problem at the training meetings. Or how about after noticing something a comment like " I notice you did your flow in this order...the fleet's accepted way is this.. carry on well done do it right next time since you covered everything and flew safely !"

At the moment the above scenarios would result is a quick briefing (possibly a running briefing during the ride itself) and then a surprise ERAS with extras !

Soap box off

I am off to manipulate now....cheers

[jtr]

Five Green there is not one point in that post that anyone could dispute.

You have summed up the situation EXACTLY as it is.

Hope you are not planning on going into C+T soon?

[flyingkiwi]

I for one hope Five green is going for C&T soon. The more guys that know the system and the issues assosiated with massive ERAS reports the better.

The best check i had was with a checker that saw my mistake reemed me out for it abused me some more told me never to let him catch me doing it again and left it at that the ERAS reflected the otherwise really good check.... Ill tell you what i kicked the habbit pretty fast.. What good is it to give a guy a one off low mark that could and would have delayed a promotion 6 months down the track. (it was my PC prior to the QL)

Regarding failing guys QLs for monetery gain this system is as follows.

Once you do your check to line as a JFO the clock starts ticking , 6 months after the check you become eledgiable for upgrade to FO, they will then roster you for the QL, this can take up to a few months to be rostered and actually happen because you are the lowest priority for a check, (legaly you are still not due for one for 6 months) If you pass the QL then no matter when you sit it you will be back paid FO salery to that 6 month mark. However if you fail the QL then you continue on JFO wages for another 3 months which is when they will reschedual another QL.

The big issue is that you endup doing exactly the same flying, except the odd Melbourne and Sydney trips.

Guys put the accusation up that it its money savings because the company does not just look at the QL line check they do a full review of your last RTPC and any other progress flights you have done. If you have erred anywhere they will knock you back first time. Even if they have just had a fantastic line check.

I remember going up to the third floor to work out my QL and talking to one of the training managers he said "hmmm flyingkiwi let me see..... i see this is going to be your first QL......" I looked up in shock and asked are you planning on giving me more than one at which point he started back pedaling, but it really gave me the impression it is just a normal thing to knock guys back first time. and yes to answer the question it saves them a lot of money, i reckon in my case had i failed first time i would have lost 85k, 2.5 months back pay, 3 months more on the JFO salery and 13th month being based on JFO not FO pay.

Hope this gives a clearer idea.

[airbusa330]

Hi guys/gals,

here's my thoughts.

What about if everyone concenrates on discovering what are the prime reasons behind failures (other than prehaps the checker's lack of sex maybe)and try to correct them even if it means sharing information among crew on a place such as PPRUNE.Use it to our advantage.

If one goes in for an assessment with the thought of a possible failure, in the subcounscious mind which we do not have control over, that is bound to show without one realising it.
How about thinking that one will pass instead of failing and go in with a positive attitude(easier said than done I know).
If we can't beat them than what about we try and join them at their own game, think startegically.

Why not post one's experiences and prehaps recive input/thought(piss take) from all the crows at PPRUNE.

I dont work for CX so I can't really comment on inhouse politics.

[airamerica]

Can anyone confirm regarding the S/O to JFO upgrade policy.Is one asked to resign if they do not make the grade, no additional training just resign?How many attempts can one have?
AA

[Numero Crunchero]

Flying Kiwi...was that a freudian slip when you said "kicked the habbit" when you meant to say "kicked the hobbit"??????


Five Green....well said! You have to wonder at a system that keeps failing, well I dont' know exactly but lets say 30-50% of courses, for years on end and never looks up the phrase "systemic problem"!

I don't have any immediate solution in mind...flexresponse sounds ex military....in the military the culture was definitely training(non threatening) on a daily basis so that by the time you came up for any upgrade it was a no brainer! There should be an amnesty....only your reports for the last 2 years count...delete everything before! And double the number of sims when you are within the last 2 years of any major upgrade(half unassessable)! Of course this will never happen as it costs money and we are training capacity constrained. I think it is like CX medical policy...it is statistically cheaper to pay the medical expenses of a wife with cervical cancer than it is to pay for pap smears! Great logic if you don't give a sh@# about people, only money!


PS Flying Kiwi, thanks for explaining the JFO thing...I might see if I can quantify this. If you have any ideas/help let me know, cheers

[404 Titan]

airamerica

I think it is four attempts at the QL check which is from JFO to FO. If you can’t get through you will be asked to leave. Also an SO that can’t make the grade to be upgraded will be asked to leave and a JFO that can’t pass his line check after his LFUS training will also be asked to leave. In short CX doesn't allow career SO's.

[ACMS]

FIVE GREENS
RUBBISH RUBBISH RUBBISH
Just about every RT sim I've ever done has had lots of time for extra V1 cuts etc. Only a short time ago I did an RT in the 777 sim, the FO and I both accepted the offer of extra V1 cuts and 1 eng missed approaches. And not a word was written in ERAS. Just positive and constructive comments from the Sim instructor.
Then the STC offered us time at the end of the PC for "fun"
Stop complaining and blaming everyone else you lot, CX is what it is--- CX.

[Five Green]

Blinders on

First of all the 777 fleet does not suffer from a lack of sectors. The 400 and to a lesser extent the 340/330 fleet does.

Also on the 400 fleet the candidates are less likely to do and ask for what you have in the 777 sim.

If you have done the latest RT I am really suprised you had so much extra time to do all of that. We did not even get all the items on the profile complete in our 4 hours and there was someone on the phone asking us when we were finishing. Now that might be as a result of having more engines buut still means noo extra time. ast RT was the same.

So it is not RUBISH RUBISH RUBISH. It may be "what it is" but it could be better. We the lowly First Officers all know what the problem is. You sir seem to have made it to command at a time when there were not the written reports and hurdles there are now. Nor did you sit and rot as a relief commander when all the while you are being checked at pedantic extremes. I am telling you from personal experience that you get written up for things that are not in the book. For things that are a personal peeve of the checker and for things that the checker has just got plain wrong. If you flew more sectors these would not be an issue, both from an operating seat and from the checking seat.

No I do not want to just accept it. I suppose I could if there were not so many of my friends getting Cat B'd for dubious reasons. Or getting held back on their command courses because of grey areas. Or direct entry captains taking positions that my friends deserve to get a fair crack at first. I have heard all your answers before. Three sides to every story....deserve to fail..etc etc. It still does not wash. We should not sit back as a pilot body and accept that it is entirely our fault. There are problems with the system. Those problems WILL grow as the airline does.

If they cannot increase the command pass rate where the frick are they gonna get the commanders from too fill all the seats on arriving aircraft???
Age 60 will only solve part of the problem.

Which "LOT" are you referring to ?

Standing by.......

[ACMS]

We did the JFK RT, and had about 25 mins to spare at the end. No corners were cut I assure you. Same with the EDDF EDDK PC.
I spent 8+ years on the 400 flying through the night across the Pacific, I know what you feel like believe me.
I too get pissed off seeing friends CAT B and D.
However 9 times out of 10 there is a reason for it. They just wont tell you the full story.
I agree the Star chamber system is flawed, it should not exist. If you are not good enough you shouldn't get a 4 bar flight in the first place.
Lets not forget the politics of CX, unfortunatly it does exist and sometimes it causes a few good men to fall along the way. PLAY THE GAME.
The 3 most important letters in Cathay........- O I C -
What am I trying to say here????????
Nothing is perfect, true CX have a few hiccups who doesn't? I've seen a lot of good guys sail through the system without a scratch. So the system does work. A few will fall by the wayside, shouldn't happen but some guys just aren't up to it.
Put the work in, study the books, keep your mouth shut, take what's offered, stop wanting freebies and you will make it.
We now have a lot of good trainers, sim instructors and checkers in CX. Most of the old lot have gone or will go very soon.
The glass is half full, not half empty.
PLAY THE GAME

[sec 3]

ACMS

Best advice I've seen on here for a long time!PLAY THE GAME !! It works everywhere, all the time

[Five Green]

This is serious

That is well said FCUX ! This is not a game, it is a serious business. One in which we should be open to change that results in safer flying. The culture at CX is by no means open to allow for mutual learning. In the same way CRM changed cockpit culture to a more open relationship such that sharing of information improves overall safety, so too could the cx training culture be more open so that when a checker is most obviously getting it wrong, there would be a mechanism to allow for the candidate to bring this to the training department's attention.

"Oh I see" should be occansionally replaced by "can I confirm that in the SOPS ?"

Do we want the safest airline possible or not ?