Anyone would think CX had designed it that way!

Apologies to you. I should really have narrowed it to "every one with a rating, on here and whingeing". I do hope you upgrade soon so you can market yourself, get a job and live somewhere you can have a prosperous future.

Charging for doing any specific job by the hour is a conflict of interest. Conversely, framing a contract to pay someone by the hour to go from A to B is just asking for them to do it as slowly as possible. The behaviour is the proof!

I can't think of any jobs a client would want done that they'd enjoy paying more for taking longer. Ok, maybe one, but that's nothing to do with aviation.

They need to rethink the motivation they've built into what is evidently (I haven't read it) a very stupid Contract.

We don't actually have a contract. COS18 is all company policy, which the company can change whenever they like to whatever they like.

Qatar Airways only requires 500hrs in the RHS

maybe worth asking why

Yes.CX require zero, which is exactly what they’ll get. You just need someone with zero aptitude or personality to tell your stupendous pilot selection team that they grew up in HK looking up at the thin streak of light between the buildings, and if the pollution wasn’t in the red that day, they might have seen a 330 go over and it made them very excited.

How’s the DEFO recruitment going?

Funny, but sadly true

Yawn. Tens of thousands of pilots who all started with zero hours as junior or second officers are now flying all over the world, with dozens of airlines, many as captains.

So, erm, yawn?

But whereas once most of their colleagues had to go through thousands of hours of GA or military flying learning the ropes before being allowed anywhere near an airliner (so ab initios at least flew primarily with people with that background and thus had some opportunity to learn from the experience of others), now they’re straight into the flight decks of wide bodies with maybe 250 hours, but increasingly paired with people of similar provenance.

This means fewer and fewer are capable of much more than routine automatic flight, which breeds lack of confidence in one’s skills, which is self-fulfilling in this game. When suddenly put in situations where aviating skill is required, the results are understandably less than stellar, reinforcing the idea in the industry that automation is the way forward, which in turn means more automation and fewer opportunities to build skills.

To be fair this erosion of skill due to increasing dependence on automation is true for experienced crews as well, but for inexperienced crews with little to fall back on it’s presumably worse.

To get back on topic, slow taxying may be partially down to increasing lack of experience as well as lack of recency for many (only partly tongue in cheek).

Not sure if everybody is aware of how long recruitment of zero to low hour applicants is actually going on... Many airlines employ cadets straight from school, since decades. It is standard practice, all over the world.

Perhaps you should read "Fate is the Hunter" again

So you make a snide remark to why QR is hiring low time pilots but you defend the reason why other airlines like CX hire zero hour pilots.

Every country has its own requirements, some countries only take cadets straight out of the military, some require you to have a degree for a cadet ship, some require you to only be a citizen to be considered for a cadet ship.

To say many airlines employ cadets straight from school is not right.

You misunderstood me. QR has lower hour requirements than e.g. EK because they apparently have to lower the bar. Most would agree it's a difficult employer in a not very attractive place to live.
Regarding zero hour requirements for cadets, just pointing out that many airlines recruit this way, since 20+ years. I find the associated safety discussion futile, just look at the data. Plus the vast majority doesn't care who sits in the cockpit anymore anyway.

please furnish your data, I’ll wait.

You can use literally any accident statistic. Note that there is no increase in accidents since introduction of cadets, quite the opposite really. Accidents are in steady decline and every year marks a new low, currently 0.7 accidents per 1 million flights. If you control and analyse the data for developed world aviation it's basically zero.
In the future automation will increase further, pilots will all but monitor. Think MTR driver with a red push button in front of them. As a consequence, safety is not a helpful argument for pay anymore, unfortunately. Mr and Mrs Wong from Guangzhou don't care who sits in the cockpit, they look at connection time, inflight entertainment or miles program, but really mainly at the price.

CX780.

You truly are a short sighted individual, COS18 will be around for a long time whilst we have individuals who espouse this rubbish.

The next CX780 will be a lawn dart smoldering hole in the front yard.

Emirates had a crash in 2016 and a near crash just a few months ago that came within a couple of hundred feet of buildings. cathay has had a hard landing pandemic on the 747 fleet lately. Coincidentally with a reduction of experienced crew. "Coincidentally"

That red button you speak of has yet to be invented for airliner aircraft. Nothing inherently unsafe with hiring cadets, providing robust training and years of experience built up. If you remove qualifications and experience too soon before the cadets can be safely brought online, there will he a gap thru which its easy to lose aircraft and most importantly reputation. I'd like to see Mr & Mrs Ho get on a cathay flight after a well publicized event.

An airline that has to fill close to 2000 pilot jobs asap doesn't have the luxury of time to develop cadets to fill them anyway.