Can get a job anywhere but Oz
 

I complained on pprune a few times about the lottery that is airline hiring in Australia.

Why then am I surprised that a person with 3000+ hours including King Air PIC and biz jet FO time can't land a jet job in Oz? They have an ATPL and all the other bells and whistles. In desperation they went to an interview prep company specialising in Airlines and they can't find fault.

Two reputable overseas airlines offered NTR positions with start dates.

Do Australians still have to go overseas to fly a 737/A320?. I thought that stopped in the 90's?

I'm surprised you are surprised. There is a glut of qualified pilots with too few airframes. The glut exists because Australians work hard, have a bloody good economy, good pay and have a pretty classless society. This enables (too) many people to train to become pilots, leading to a glut of qualified wannabes.

Just out of interest, why the fixation with jets? Surely a paying job is the goal?

PM

Some airlines may view GA and Biz Jet time as less attractive, whilst they have an abundance of applications with extensive airline time.

Some other airlines may view GA and Biz Jet time as less attractive, whilst they have an abundance of applications for their cadet schemes.

Looking into the future.

Some other airlines may view GA and Biz Jet time as less attractive, whilst they have an abundance of applications who can operate pilotless aircraft remotely.

Getting any job, anywhere, is a lottery. There are winners, and there are losers, that's how the world works. Locally there seems a reasonably steady stream of GA turbo prop folk being accepted by the airlines for jets.

Plenty of Australians getting opportunities to fly 737's and A320's and larger in Australia. All majors have been recruiting within the last year, and will continue to do so in the short to medium term. It seems to be mostly from the regionals, does your friend have extensive multi-crew time in a regional? The reason why Rex, Qlink seem to provide most of the recruits may be because it's easier for them to make the jump up to the majors in terms of SOP's, multi-crew dynamics etc?

I don't think it's nepotism, there certainly isn't an old boys club mentality anymore.

Dr dre there is the problem. If Multi crew RPT pilots are what they want why don't they list that as a minimum? I find it counter productive to advertise a minimum requirement that isn't really the minimum.

Because that is the minimum they will take, before maybe an external person needs to be sourced on a skilled worker visa.


But any employer that employs a minimum - over a worker (Australian) that brings more to the table than the minimum, is a fool.

The more you have to offer above the minimum the better the chances of a gaining the job - if you don't have the minimum, don't apply. If you have the minimum and no one else applies, good chance you will get the job.

* My guess is more than 1 person in Australia will be applying for a Boeing/Airbus gig in Australia.

Band a lot. I see your point but if you have a huge pile of applicants with well over the minimums wouldn't you adjust your minimums?

When I advertise for staff I list the qualifications I require. If I get no takers I revise the list. I don't just list a YR12 certificate and hope to get uni grads because graduates are what I really want.

And set the standard high and re advertise (at my cost) each time with a lower minimum, until I get an applicant to apply?


Get real - it is supply and demand.


I would set the level high but low enough to be able to allow a certain type of applicant to still have the chance of employment - but not have an under minimum qualification to not be able to employ - or if I do get raped by unions and government regulators, for employing them.


Currently in Australia if you WANT a flying job in Australia, you need to stand out - not the airline beg for you to join them. So you apply 50 times and they advertise once. That is until they get no applications, then you call the shots and name the terms.

At your cost? AFAP was free to advertise on last time I checked. Changing the careers section of your website doesn't cost either. If you really want splash the cash you can put an ad on Seek ($198 last time I did that). If a jet operator doesn't want to spend another $198 to post another Seek ad then they need to take a look at their business model.

As for your under qualification you only need a CPL and a multi IR (and type rating) to fly any jet in Australia. Jetstar already do that so what are these union and regulator problems you speak of?

BandaLot, if you are going to mention cost then you need to consider the hidden costs - HR depts expenditure on recruiters sifting through hundreds to thousands of applications which are below the current cut-off standard - even just sending out a generic 'thanks but no thanks' email takes time and effort which is measurable in $$s.

I agree with pilochute that if airlines know there is currently more than enough pilots qualified to 'x' standard why advertise minimum criteria at 'x - 25%'?

Who is typing and gathering the minimum levels on the floating scale for free?

A GA pilot?

Nothing is for free.

You are A type I would not employ, minimum or maximum. You just don't seem to get it, no offence - just I don't like your style. Maybe other get the same impression.

Rubbish, they have ideal candidates - they must also have minimums. HR are employed as HR and filter the applicants.

Some close to minimums will progress, some from certain backgrounds (old HR staff company employment and area) will prosper or be hindered in the process.


If say HR staff worked for Dog Aviation in the Far North and enjoyed that experience and flying, you will find that persons from that company and area will tend to get preference - if they did not enjoy it, it will have the opposite effect.

They are leaving their options open as per the law, you guys are not working that part out.

HR departments don't often go over budget - as it is mostly only labour, they use the other departments funds when there's is outside budget.

* Cast a net big enough to catch a feed, you can always throw back what you don't need.
Casting a line with a hook is pointless if a fish is not hungry.

I'm not arguing with you Band - you're right. I'm just making the point that it seems lazy and inefficient to recruit in that manner.

At the end of the day, its the same process that every pilot goes through so its not like any one person is disadvantaged by it. We all just need to either accept that HR departments have not progressed since 1980 otherwise, find a new industry.

From the United Airlines website.

"FAA Requirements
FAA commercial fixed-wing pilot license with an instrument rating.
Current FAA First Class Medical Certificate.
Meets ALL minimum FAA ATP requirements including successful completion of the ATP written exam.
Flight Time Requirements
Minimum of 1,500 hours of total documented flight time.
Minimum of 1,000 hours of fixed wing turboprop or turbofan time".

If we look at this example you will see that the company is nice enough to tell you that simply meeting the minimum won't get you an interview.

Do pilots really need telling that just having the minimums isn't enough to guarantee a job?

S2A, in this day and age, yes. Everyone coming up in the industry these days seem to expect that they will be given a job, what they don't realise is that they have to earn it. Just having the minimum experience listed does not mean you have earnt the job.