Should seniority be scrapped in airlines?

[Hand Solo]

In my example I think you are putting excessive faith in the ability of an HR department to intervene. HR are good for touchy-feely things. Are you nice to your co-workers?, etc etc. HR are not good for hard technical details. If they are asked to assess the programming or software engineering abilities of two candidates do you think they could rise to that?

Exposure of brown-nosing poor performers is neither going to occur at a the one-off promotion to commander in the airline, nor would exposure prevent the airline from demoting/terminating said employee - the promotion is not the only occassion to assess performance, with numerous sim and route checks in the preceding years, I would be surprised if were ever possible for the entire cohort of checkers and examiners to be conned to putting forward for promotion an individual whose technical skills were inadequate.

You are essentially arguing for the ability to fast track promotion for experienced candidates. That completely undermines the opportunity for long term assessment. Will the high calibre Captain move companys on the promise that he may get that command in three years subject to assessment?

Indeed, the command course is not the only instance of promotion: FO to SFO, SFOs permitted to remain in charge when the commander is on a rest on long-range flights etc, are all "promotions" of a kind, although clearly FO to SFO is automatic in seniority airlines - need this remain so without seniority?

Actually the promotion need not be automatic. It isn't in BA, further career development is required.

Young, capable managers are indeed relevant to a flying operation: yes, certainly, as you say, "experience can only be gained at a certain rate in this profession and to earn a promotion the new young things need to prove that they are smarter, better and faster than the older incumbents": but if they do so, why should they be prevented by a seniority system from moving upwards?

To turn the question on it's head, why should they be given accellerated promotion. What does the younger, smarter, faster pilot actually bring to the operation that the older, slower but more experienced incumbent can't? As previously mentioned, there's very little scope to add icing to the cake in this line of work.

Certainly the case for a global, or at least national seniority system is the only defensible method of ensuring those with that huge experience are permitted to retain their position and continue to contribute to those of lesser experience when they move companies - presently they are unable to do so due to the company-based seniority system.

I beg to differ. It was only a handful of years ago that easyjet were desperately seeking Airbus TREs as direct entry Captains. Ryanair still take direct entry Captains. There are plenty of DEC positions available. What you are actually advocating is a system that tries to parachute people into senior positions in companies that recruit internally. There is no lack of opportunity for the ambitious Captain to jump ship.

Regarding your views on checking:

Yes, but you know whether you have passed, require some retraining, or are atrocious there and then on the day - there is not input by HR, delivering any feedback from any other source. You have no contact with HR in this process is the point.

What's so bad about knowing the result there and then? Does withholding the result somehow make it more meaningful? And what would HR tell me about my check? That I was nice to the cabin crew and dispatcher? That I did a good speech to the passengers? All communications with other groups are done by strict protocol using defined terminology, something best assessed by a qualified practitioner, not an HR bod.

It does appear from your responses that you think effective HR solves all recruitment/promotion problems. I don't believe HR is the silver bullet you make it out to be. Instead of having a transparent seniority system you are suggesting we move to an opaque system of HR managers reviewing candidates for a job that they themselves are not technically qualified to do and hoping that some internal system of checks and balances within the HR department will keep everything fair. It all seems rather too idealistic for my liking.

[Re-Heat]

Now, Re-Heat, how do you measure the superiority of one pilot over the other?

You're the professional pilot - you tell me. Your skills are assessed both in the sim and on the line - are you telling me that you cannot possibly rate one above another by rating the skills required to be demonstrated?

What's so bad about knowing the result there and then? Does withholding the result somehow make it more meaningful?

No, not at all - let me put it more simply - have you ever met anyone from HR in BA? The point is that they have no contact with you, which is not healthy.

Compared to this, we as airline pilots are first of everything else not there to make a profit

Don't tell that to the guys in the US/Singapore who earn more on larger fleets - at least those I know such as BA allow the older pilot to choose a European rather than a longhaul lifestyle...

In the normal biz world, in every career step the pyramid gets significantly smaller. There is absolutely no chance for everybody to move up the ranks. Every step up the ladder means at least a reduction of positions by a factor of 5.

This is a hugely significant point: and largely there are only 2 (or 3/4) on any single flight.

However, that does not influence the point that company seniority systems are far worse (for your financial position as a pilot, and for your career) than a wider seniority system based upon experience alone.

[Re-Heat]

You are essentially arguing for the ability to fast track promotion for experienced candidates.

Absolutely; subject to knowledge of operating procedures/areas of operation. And objective assessement.

[Hand Solo]

Quote:
Compared to this, we as airline pilots are first of everything else not there to make a profit

Don't tell that to the guys in the US/Singapore who earn more on larger fleets - at least those I know such as BA allow the older pilot to choose a European rather than a longhaul lifestyle...

I believe he means to make a profit for the company, not a personal profit.

No, not at all - let me put it more simply - have you ever met anyone from HR in BA? The point is that they have no contact with you, which is not healthy.

Why is it unhealthy? HR cannot assess my pre-flight brief. Perhaps they might be able to assess some small talk with the cabin crew or dispatcher but not the operational side of things. They cannot assess anything that takes place in the cockpit as they do not have the ability to relate the spoken words to the phase of flight or company SOPs. They might be able to assess my PA to the passengers. What exactly would be the purpose of my contact with HR, other than to help HR build an empire?

However, that does not influence the point that company seniority systems are far worse (for your financial position as a pilot, and for your career) than a wider seniority system based upon experience alone.

I beg to differ. I know I'll progress in BA and I won't be overtaken by somebodys mate from the Air Force slotting in ahead of me because HR thought it was a good idea. I am also protected from said candidate agreeing to work for less money than me, hence starting an unstoppable dive for the bottom. There are people out there who will fly for free and my company would probably hire them if they could. Once again, you are starting from the stand position that seniority is bad for us without actually producing a case beyond "HR will sort it all out". In other words, you simply think you know better than all the pilots on here.

Quote:
You are essentially arguing for the ability to fast track promotion for experienced candidates.

Absolutely; subject to knowledge of operating procedures/areas of operation. And objective assessement.

Once again, I challenge you to tell us how the candidates will be objectively assessed. Don't bat it back to us and say "you're the experts", we've already told you all the reasons why we think it's unworkable.

[Re-Heat]

you simply think you know better than all the pilots on here

Hardly. If that were the case I wouldn't bother debating it...I'd be in BA management.

[GlueBall]

Objective assessment is always biased by personality issues, by company culture, by in house politics [brown nosing] and by herd mentality [hangar talk].

It's hard to get into people's minds, but the fact is that some people just don't like each other no matter how well they fly and no matter what professional demeanor and experience they demonstrate.

That's why the universal phenomena called "unions" exists at many companies: Collective bargaining for better pay and improved quality of life issues [rostering/hotels/vacation/pay/etc]; and a seniority system. . . so that all qualified pilots have equal opportunities for upgrades.

The seniority system itself is no guarantee for upgrade, its only a means of fair selection. Indeed, many F/Os don't make it into the left seat, some are permanent F/Os. Irrespective of seniority and union protections, some Captains and First Officers are turfed because they can't pass 2nd sim or line checks.

In many countries, the seniority system [by date of hire] is the accepted industry standard for airline pilots.

[Clarence Oveur]

Re-Heat,

Just in case you didn't see my question the first time I will ask it again.

Which airlines offer the most attractive T&C and career prospects? Those with a seniority system or those without?

[parabellum]

Studi said: "You can see what 'free market' carriers like Ryanair, Wizzair, Vueling, Singapore etc. pay."

Don't think it is fair to compare SIA with those other airlines Studi, when the entire package they offer on mainline is taken into consideration they don't pay so badly. SIA Cargo is a different issue.

I think Re Heat is a recently joind HR professional, either that or his Mum and Dad are.

[bugg smasher]

You're the professional pilot - you tell me. Your skills are assessed both in the sim and on the line - are you telling me that you cannot possibly rate one above another by rating the skills required to be demonstrated?

The skills we are required to maintain are those that have been established by our respective governmental aviation authorities, administered and overseen by our company training departments.

The frequent assessments we all go through on the line and in the sim are designed to ensure we maintain these skills, not how much ‘right stuff’ in excess of the standard each one of us may or may not have. You seem to suggest we should all be assessed to the maximum limits of our abilities in order to determine who should, or should not, be promoted.

Re-Heat, it would help all of us if you could clarify your background; are you an HR person, a pilot, a senior manager, a business studies major?

[Hand Solo]

Re-Heat is an accountant.

[Re-Heat]

I am none of the aforementioned professions any longer, and certainly have never been HR. My profile gives you enough information. Needless to say, my background provides no motivation for my views - these are the views of myself thinking through my training as an economist, accountant and business professional on what is best for the labour force based upon some experiences of mine both in the industry and beyond: and though now on light aircraft, through that training as well. These are not an attack on the system, but food for thought...consider them as such and no more.

Clarence - I was focussing more on the impact of being locked into one company - regarding your point, it would seem that if you compare Ryanair/easyJet to BA/Virgin/bmi, then the financial packages are reasonably comparable across the board, not hugely different.