Job Ads discouraging applications

[Lapunkapten]

I need to get this off my chest.

"Pilots who do not meet the above criteria should not apply, as to do so will preclude future consideration"

Recently I've read this sentence on 2 advertisements by the same company for flight crew. Give me a fecking break!

Any company that would spend resources recording names of applicants not meeting the exact criteria just to preclude them in the future is not the kind of company you want to work for.

Any company that writes that but has NO intention of following through is scaremongering and already lying. Again not the kind of company you want to work for.

Lastly, this company (and many others) have hired many pilots with well under the stated minimums and they have performed admirably.

In previous positions of power I always made time for pilots who bought a ticket and flew up to deliver a resume in person and have a chat. Made it a lot easier than hiring off a piece of paper and the resumes from visitors always went to the top of the pile, regardless of 'minimums'. I'd hire you for your attitude and train you for skill. Much easier than the other way around!

I had to do the same door knock myself and have never forgotten the encouragement I received those years ago.

Rant over. For now.

[notaplanegeek]

Probably because the HR manager is sick of getting hundreds of C.V's from people who do not meet the minimum requirements. As a deterrent they have probably put that in, as for lying yes I agree with you. I doubt they would have the time to single people out for next time round. Why would you take anything less when you have plenty of applicants who meet the minimum requirements?

As for your Jonny on the spot type recruitment... man I totally disagree with you on this. How can you take the best person for the job if you don't do a full scale ad and interview process? Anyone can show up on your door step and yes it is way easier just to just send a C.V in, but how valuable are they to you if they have got nothing to show on paper or a significantly less experience than everyone else applying? Do you employ people on the criteria they are simply a 'good guy' and 'easy to get along with'?

Sorry but that type of recruitment reminds me of when the bench mark was 1000hrs but guy X had 250hrs however his daddy was a 747 captain and knew someone there so he got the job. Or girl B had 300hrs but happened to have a gorgeous body and blond hair, both got the job... fair, of course not!

[VH-XXX]

I've been on the receiving end of a hundred resumes where the minimum requirements are not met. If you can't read and understand and comply, in reality you are not best person for the job. Admittedly though I would probably never notice if the same person applied again, however if these guys are using some kind of application to manage the resumes the might be onto you.

[Capetonian]

I worked in recruitment for a while. We would list the criteria and put : "If you do not meet all of the listed criteria, please do not apply as you will be wasting your time and ours."

At least 50% of the applications were totally and utterly irrelevant and unsuitable, and this was years ago before it was as hard to find jobs as it is now.

[chimbu warrior]

To balance this argument, everybody starts off without experience, and I personally know of situations where the employer was unable to find someone with the stated requirements, and subsequently recruited and trained a keen applicant with the right attitude.

When I think how my former employer in PNG (and the several decent Chief Pilots he employed over the years) gave so many people a start and invested time and training in them, I realise how cheap and nasty the current generation has become.

Never discourage an applicant; when the next shortage occurs you may need them.

[jas24zzk]

I applied for a Job recently, and part of the Advertising (standard for the company concerned) was that Previous Applicants need not apply.
I managed to get to final round interview, along with 2 other candidates.

A few days later, I received a letter from said company.... blah blah blah, we thank you for your time blah blah blah. Should another vacancy for this role become available, please take the time to re-apply.

So what do they really want!!!! seems like muppetry in motion to me.

[Metro man]

I once applied for a job advertised in Fridays Australian for which I didn't quite meet the minimums. Next week I still had heard nothing and the same job was advertised again.

Following Tuesday I was invited to an interview and ended up working for them for the next six years.

[Lapunkapten]

notaplanegeek,

As others have implied, if they are hard minimums then put it in the ad with something to the effect that others 'need not apply'. In this case they are definitely not set in stone so why leave it to chance that you may need to advertise again due lack of suitable applicants and look a proper goose/incompetent in the process. A candidate may be lacking slightly in 1 of the criteria mentioned but otherwise be perfect for the job.

I'm talking in my case of recruitment for PNG GA which was difficult to do an interview for apart from over the phone and back in the 90's even that was a trial. I'm sure the same thing happens in GA in Australia in Broome, Kunnas, Darwin etc. That's why I always appreciated a visit from applicants as they are in the country and can make an informed decision and say yes I can handle this or no this isn't for me. Work is the easy part, it's the living that'll get ya.

The amount of times I've offered someone a job who has visited and have them turned the job down I can count on 1 finger. The amount of times I've made an offer to someone who just sent a resume to have them turn down the job late in the process, countless. Let's not even mention the number of guys that change their mind after arriving and find the place unsuitable. I never said anything about whether they are 'good guys', I appreciated their attitude to find out what they could be getting themselves in for.

[Jack Ranga]

And then there are the blokes that blatantly lie about their experience

[VH-XXX]

I once applied for a job advertised in Fridays Australian for which I didn't quite meet the minimums.

That, I can understand.

When we put 500 hours on C208 as a minimum and people write in with, "I don't have a Caravan endorsement at this time, however I've seen them taxi past at Bankstown, so an endorsement shouldn't be hard to get," is a different story.

[neville_nobody]

Aviation employers need to wake up and smell the coffee most other industries would loved to be in your HR situation.

Aviation companies get people who are fully licensed, experienced, willing to relocate for free and for sub par salaries and yet they are still complaining.

I have flown a few management types in the past from various industries who had categorically stated that certain aviation owners need to get a grip on reality when it comes to HR. They mismanage their HR so that when there is a surplus they winge that there are to many applicants then when there is a pilot shortage they are wingeing about there are no qualified applicants. Maybe they need to grow up a little and deal with reality. Maybe if they actually did some serious recruiting and recruited on potential rather than just reacting to crisis they may stabilise their HR problems. I have seen numerous people who were recruited on potential with way less than the minimums actually turn out to be relatively long serving employees of a good standard.

[PyroTek]

When we put 500 hours on C208 as a minimum and people write in with, "I don't have a Caravan endorsement at this time, however I've seen them taxi past at Bankstown, so an endorsement shouldn't be hard to get," is a different story.

Seriously??

[Nose wheel first]

In my last job where I was CP, I received a CV which included 2,000 hours of Flight Sim X time. It also included a breakdown of all the types flown. 747, 777 etc. All this from a 200hr CPL

[Wally Mk2]

"NWF" I've been flying toy planes/heli's for 40 yrs & they are a lot harder to fly than the real thing,does this count towards exp?
I can recall teaching an ex 89'er skipper on 737's how to fly a toy plane, he was hopeless!!!!

Loved the Flight Sim X story though:-)


Wmk2

[b_sta]

Aviation employers need to wake up and smell the coffee most other industries would loved to be in your HR situation.

Aviation companies get people who are fully licensed, experienced, willing to relocate for free and for sub par salaries and yet they are still complaining.

I have flown a few management types in the past from various industries who had categorically stated that certain aviation owners need to get a grip on reality when it comes to HR.

This couldn't be more true, and I'm certain that those here who've worked in other industries are well aware of it, too. It never ceases to amaze me how aviation employers seem to buck the acceptable standard for every other industry. No wonder there's such a consistently unprofessional approach towards job applications in aviation; what do you expect when the employers themselves are unprofessional? In between chastising applicants based on the fact that submitted a formal application with a CV and cover letter rather than spending money sitting on a commercial flight to see you, with no guarantee of any result whatsoever (reeks of self-importance and narcissism on the employer's part), to expecting new staff to bend over backwards and break (or walk a fine line on) rules and regulations, to requesting absolutely arbitrary experience minima and employing scare tactics to ward off those who might dare to apply on the off chance they might obtain some return on investment on their $100000, give or take - you'd think employers would be more appreciative of the wonderful situation they almost consistently find themselves in. Here's a wake up call - in many other industries it's often an employee's market, with jobseekers dictating salaries, role scope, working environment and so forth, and employers offering what little they can just to keep positions filled.

[bilbert]

I believe that this wording only appeared in ads for companies one particular CP has worked for and is not industry wide.