No seniority list..how does it work?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No seniority list..how does it work?
I work for a charter airline where seniority has an effect on pretty much everything: promotion, leave, requested DOs, roster bids, basing, pay, redundancies etc.. and surely thats the fairest and most transparent sytem (that actually has been established by BALPA and recommended by their lawyers, although some people will still argue seniority lists are illegal and discriminatory)
I am wondering how it works without it. For example at EZY, how do you guys work it out when it comes to getting leave, getting a particular base, or more importantly what would happen if redundancies were on the agenda? Surely then its a matter of who's the closest friend to the chief pilot?
I am wondering how it works without it. For example at EZY, how do you guys work it out when it comes to getting leave, getting a particular base, or more importantly what would happen if redundancies were on the agenda? Surely then its a matter of who's the closest friend to the chief pilot?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some airlines without seniority lists have 'unofficial' lists - These are generally lists of people with their rank, and date of joining.
Many disputes such as base changes, fleet moves are settled by these 'unoffocial' lists.
Some also use alphabetical order for sorting out holiday, RDO's etc....may seem unfair, but they generally reverse it every year, so you may have been last this year, but first next! seems to work ok.
Redundancies are generally last in first out.
Many disputes such as base changes, fleet moves are settled by these 'unoffocial' lists.
Some also use alphabetical order for sorting out holiday, RDO's etc....may seem unfair, but they generally reverse it every year, so you may have been last this year, but first next! seems to work ok.
Redundancies are generally last in first out.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Massachusetts Bay Colony
Age: 57
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My take, for what it's worth, is that a seniority list might be fine for taking care of those kinds of adminstrative details, but shouldn't apply to things like promotion to command. I'd rather have the most capable and appropriate promoted first, rather than simply the one who's been there the longest. In that respect, seniority lists encourage a culture of entitlement rather than one of earning advancement.
Of course, this is predicated on the system being fair and a genuine meritocracy. The people deciding on who gets promoted have to be competent to make that decision and base it on fair and known criteria, and not let it decend into cronieism. There will always be doubters of any system, and one has to have some trust in the people deciding on the merit for promotion, but I still think that can't be any worse in promoting the untalented than a "who's been alive the longest" method.
The military, for instance, have a mixed system. You are only eligible for promotion when you've reached a certain level of seniority, but you still have to pass a promotion board who decide on your suitability. You still get some wasters promoted in that system, but it does tend to weed out the truly unfit for command.
Of course, this is predicated on the system being fair and a genuine meritocracy. The people deciding on who gets promoted have to be competent to make that decision and base it on fair and known criteria, and not let it decend into cronieism. There will always be doubters of any system, and one has to have some trust in the people deciding on the merit for promotion, but I still think that can't be any worse in promoting the untalented than a "who's been alive the longest" method.
The military, for instance, have a mixed system. You are only eligible for promotion when you've reached a certain level of seniority, but you still have to pass a promotion board who decide on your suitability. You still get some wasters promoted in that system, but it does tend to weed out the truly unfit for command.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pitts
The seniority system is not used to select who is command suitable. It is ONLY used to decide who will get the command slot amongst the FOs who consistently have demonstrated command standard during their sim and line checks. In other words, 'the weeding out of truly unfit for command' occurs during recurrent training. If there is, for instance, 2 command suitable FOs but only one slot, it makes sense to promote the most senior of the two.. It seems to me the easiest and fairest way.
The seniority system is not used to select who is command suitable. It is ONLY used to decide who will get the command slot amongst the FOs who consistently have demonstrated command standard during their sim and line checks. In other words, 'the weeding out of truly unfit for command' occurs during recurrent training. If there is, for instance, 2 command suitable FOs but only one slot, it makes sense to promote the most senior of the two.. It seems to me the easiest and fairest way.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Massachusetts Bay Colony
Age: 57
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monsieur,
Granted if you have two equally qualified candidates, not only technically but also in leadership terms, for the responsibility of commanding a crew, then I agree you're right. But in reality, how often does one truly get that situation? Your case is also based on the premise that those who aren't suitable for command, but are perfectly good FOs, get dropped by the company so that only command-capable people are left when their opportunity for promotion comes about. Is that the case or are all candidates believed to be command capable by the time their promotion slot comes about? Is it done on merit or merely time served?
Granted if you have two equally qualified candidates, not only technically but also in leadership terms, for the responsibility of commanding a crew, then I agree you're right. But in reality, how often does one truly get that situation? Your case is also based on the premise that those who aren't suitable for command, but are perfectly good FOs, get dropped by the company so that only command-capable people are left when their opportunity for promotion comes about. Is that the case or are all candidates believed to be command capable by the time their promotion slot comes about? Is it done on merit or merely time served?
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: BHX
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots would only accept a system based on meritocracy if "God" was the arbitor.
In the absence of that happening, seniority is the best alternative. In terms of promotion, you still have to tick all the boxes and pass your sim rides and line checks whether you are the ace of the base or not.
In the absence of that happening, seniority is the best alternative. In terms of promotion, you still have to tick all the boxes and pass your sim rides and line checks whether you are the ace of the base or not.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Massachusetts Bay Colony
Age: 57
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure, I understand the need for technical competence, but I'm suggesting that's not the discriminator (or shouldn't be). If you haven't got the hands for handing the aircraft or the head for making the final decisions, you shouldn't be in the left seat. No argument there.
But what about some of the other, more people-oriented things, such as leadership, promoting a healthy corporate culture (does one exist in an airline anywhere?), coaching and developing FOs for command as part of the job, looking after the entire crew downrange if needbe? To me, those are the real discriminators as to whether someone is worthy of "command" as opposed to technically able to handle the responsibility.
Playing devil's advocate, to some extent, but I think it's an issue around seniority that's worth discussing.
But what about some of the other, more people-oriented things, such as leadership, promoting a healthy corporate culture (does one exist in an airline anywhere?), coaching and developing FOs for command as part of the job, looking after the entire crew downrange if needbe? To me, those are the real discriminators as to whether someone is worthy of "command" as opposed to technically able to handle the responsibility.
Playing devil's advocate, to some extent, but I think it's an issue around seniority that's worth discussing.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Massachusetts Bay Colony
Age: 57
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SPGo,
Well, if that is truly what is happening, and it's intentional, then that's neither one nor the other. That's a promotion system not based on ethics or standards but by cost or politics, neither of which are a sound basis for having the best people in the right jobs. A meritocracy has to be based on a management team who behave ethically and can be called to account when they don't. The onus there is on the management to be responsible, but I could be being naive to expect that (based on current evidence in the industry).
I think that kind of responsibility by management is possible, just not terribly common. Even in the military example, you get some dorks through because they need the numbers.
But why would you not want to promote the best as a matter of policy? Why merely go with "acceptable" when someone superior may be available? Would you do that if you were manning your own company and your house payment depended on having top performing people in place?
Well, if that is truly what is happening, and it's intentional, then that's neither one nor the other. That's a promotion system not based on ethics or standards but by cost or politics, neither of which are a sound basis for having the best people in the right jobs. A meritocracy has to be based on a management team who behave ethically and can be called to account when they don't. The onus there is on the management to be responsible, but I could be being naive to expect that (based on current evidence in the industry).
I think that kind of responsibility by management is possible, just not terribly common. Even in the military example, you get some dorks through because they need the numbers.
But why would you not want to promote the best as a matter of policy? Why merely go with "acceptable" when someone superior may be available? Would you do that if you were manning your own company and your house payment depended on having top performing people in place?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think seniority is just the fairest and most transparent system. It is not by all means perfect, but when you join a company that uses it, at least you know what to expect and you know how things are going to be dealt with.
With regards to unsuitable FOs.. No one gets dropped. Every few months the command selection board review the training files of any FO who has bid for a command (that also includes any FOs who previously failed the course or hadnt yet achieved the standard)
Now what SpGO says about easyjet and madrid is out of order. I'm just wondering if there is any other system out there that actually works and people are happy with!? I doubt it though
With regards to unsuitable FOs.. No one gets dropped. Every few months the command selection board review the training files of any FO who has bid for a command (that also includes any FOs who previously failed the course or hadnt yet achieved the standard)
Now what SpGO says about easyjet and madrid is out of order. I'm just wondering if there is any other system out there that actually works and people are happy with!? I doubt it though
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: S England
Age: 54
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think seniority is just the fairest and most transparent system
I agree with Pitts on this one. Performance/suitability based promotion works in pretty much every other industry, why do we consider our industry different. There are many faults with the military (that's why I'm leaving!), but I do think that they have their promotion policy about right.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: south england
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really seniority is the poison chalice. It is a device to keep our terms and conditions lower than they should be. The company knows they have you by the balls once you have 10 years seniority with a command around the corner. The only reason you will move (in most cases) will be for a lifestyle change.
Would I want to get rid of it.......not on your nelly (I'm not in the right squadron)
Just to clear up one point. We don't get command just because our number has come up. If your sim performance has been up to scratch for several years, you have passed the command assessment flights...THEN you will get an opportunity to pass the command course. Not everyone will get through first time.
Would I want to get rid of it.......not on your nelly (I'm not in the right squadron)
Just to clear up one point. We don't get command just because our number has come up. If your sim performance has been up to scratch for several years, you have passed the command assessment flights...THEN you will get an opportunity to pass the command course. Not everyone will get through first time.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you guys for real? What on earth makes you think that promotion to captain in a seniority based airline is based on time served only?
Firstly, you need a track record of meeting the required 'minimums' in terms of ability. This covers ALL command skills, not just technical but manage the operation including CRM, ability to make decisions, plan ahead, work methodically through problems etc etc etc. This is usually garnered through viewing your training file with records from previous LPC/OPC and Line Checks. Notice I say you only need to meet the 'minimum' grade for command suitability. This means that you have to reach a certain level of ability in all areas and sure, some guys are going to be better than others, just like in any walk of life, but you are assessed as being SUITABLE if you reach at least the minimum grade.
Secondly, you either enter a hold pool of Command Suitable F/Os if your airline likes to hold a pool ready for vacancies that occur, or you do some form of Command Selection Course which may mean a series of flights with a TRE or other suitably qualified trainer/assessor when you 'run the show' from the F/O seat and are assessed at how you perform on the line making all the operational decisions. Other companies may have a simulator based exercise where you are 'loaded up' with lots of issues and failures and your performance is assessed. Only then may you enter the 'hold pool'
Thirdly, a vacancy has to arise that needs filling and if this is any time after you entering a hold pool then you need to keep gaining 'Command Suitable' grades in any sims/ line checks that occur in the mean time.
Forthly, you must then pass the Command Course, and believe me, many fall at this hurdle.
Where does seniority come into this? Well, your 'chance' at entering the process is usually done in seniority order, i.e. the most senior F/O is looked at first, if not command suitable then the next most senior is looked at and so on. This means that if you have patiently waited your time in the right seat in a career airline, you don't get trumped by the Chief Pilot's son, Fleet Manager's daughter and every senior pilots' 'mates'.
Another pre-requisite in many career airlines is the bid system. If you don't bid for a command then you will be bypassed and a more junior pilot to you may get the command. This is particularly important when you look at fleet changes and the like.
So there you have it. Please don't interpret a seniority list as the sole 'unfair' criterion for deciding who gets a command first because it is NOT.
PP
Firstly, you need a track record of meeting the required 'minimums' in terms of ability. This covers ALL command skills, not just technical but manage the operation including CRM, ability to make decisions, plan ahead, work methodically through problems etc etc etc. This is usually garnered through viewing your training file with records from previous LPC/OPC and Line Checks. Notice I say you only need to meet the 'minimum' grade for command suitability. This means that you have to reach a certain level of ability in all areas and sure, some guys are going to be better than others, just like in any walk of life, but you are assessed as being SUITABLE if you reach at least the minimum grade.
Secondly, you either enter a hold pool of Command Suitable F/Os if your airline likes to hold a pool ready for vacancies that occur, or you do some form of Command Selection Course which may mean a series of flights with a TRE or other suitably qualified trainer/assessor when you 'run the show' from the F/O seat and are assessed at how you perform on the line making all the operational decisions. Other companies may have a simulator based exercise where you are 'loaded up' with lots of issues and failures and your performance is assessed. Only then may you enter the 'hold pool'
Thirdly, a vacancy has to arise that needs filling and if this is any time after you entering a hold pool then you need to keep gaining 'Command Suitable' grades in any sims/ line checks that occur in the mean time.
Forthly, you must then pass the Command Course, and believe me, many fall at this hurdle.
Where does seniority come into this? Well, your 'chance' at entering the process is usually done in seniority order, i.e. the most senior F/O is looked at first, if not command suitable then the next most senior is looked at and so on. This means that if you have patiently waited your time in the right seat in a career airline, you don't get trumped by the Chief Pilot's son, Fleet Manager's daughter and every senior pilots' 'mates'.
Another pre-requisite in many career airlines is the bid system. If you don't bid for a command then you will be bypassed and a more junior pilot to you may get the command. This is particularly important when you look at fleet changes and the like.
So there you have it. Please don't interpret a seniority list as the sole 'unfair' criterion for deciding who gets a command first because it is NOT.
PP
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Snowland
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But there a difference.
The seniority system works on the assumption that the IF (and I agree with PP, there is a big if) you pass the assesment then you are equal.....
In other words, if you had a good CP candidate and a excellent CP candidate (let's face it people have different previous experiences) they are then awarded the position not in order excellent, then good but rather senior to junior.
If the "pass" mark is set to high, candidates who may be suitable will fail and very demoralised.
If the "pass" mark is set to low, well then you end up in the situation that is mentioned by previous posters, that F/O simply wait for their time.
So I wouldn't say that it's quite that simple. still for other issues such as base bid, leave etc, it seems to work fine, especially if the system compensates for achieved bids etc.
just my 2c
The seniority system works on the assumption that the IF (and I agree with PP, there is a big if) you pass the assesment then you are equal.....
In other words, if you had a good CP candidate and a excellent CP candidate (let's face it people have different previous experiences) they are then awarded the position not in order excellent, then good but rather senior to junior.
If the "pass" mark is set to high, candidates who may be suitable will fail and very demoralised.
If the "pass" mark is set to low, well then you end up in the situation that is mentioned by previous posters, that F/O simply wait for their time.
So I wouldn't say that it's quite that simple. still for other issues such as base bid, leave etc, it seems to work fine, especially if the system compensates for achieved bids etc.
just my 2c
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But
That is not an issue of seniority, that is an issue of Command Selection process. The seniority has nothing to do with the suitability, merely when you get your chance to be looked at. Your argument is down to selection standards and would be equally true in an airline without seniority.
We are all individuals working within a 'system'. You have to set the bar where you (the pilot management/ pilot training management) judge it needs to be set to ensure the continued safe operation of aircraft under your regulatory system, thus protecting the best interests of your airline business.
If you set the bar too low you get unsuitable candidates passing who could go on to make serious errors in this safety critical industry (nothing to say that the suitable candidates won't have a bad day though, just that you are balancing the risk with your assessment).
If you set the bar too high you will only get exceptional candidates in the left seat, but will get many failures from us mere mortals who just don't make the grade and potentially not fulfil your left seat requirements which would have an effect on the business. You would also have many disgruntled right seat occupants who would potentially not be adding as much as they could to the operation. You will also lose many of them to pastures new.
This is why most airlines recruit 'future captains', not F/Os. They try to pick suitable candidates for command, based on their selection process, to ensure that they get a good number who, with experience, have demonstrated an ability to progress to command.
Having said all that, the short term needs of the business can come into play and it would be rare to find an airline cancelling flights because they can't find pilots........
PP
That is not an issue of seniority, that is an issue of Command Selection process. The seniority has nothing to do with the suitability, merely when you get your chance to be looked at. Your argument is down to selection standards and would be equally true in an airline without seniority.
We are all individuals working within a 'system'. You have to set the bar where you (the pilot management/ pilot training management) judge it needs to be set to ensure the continued safe operation of aircraft under your regulatory system, thus protecting the best interests of your airline business.
If you set the bar too low you get unsuitable candidates passing who could go on to make serious errors in this safety critical industry (nothing to say that the suitable candidates won't have a bad day though, just that you are balancing the risk with your assessment).
If you set the bar too high you will only get exceptional candidates in the left seat, but will get many failures from us mere mortals who just don't make the grade and potentially not fulfil your left seat requirements which would have an effect on the business. You would also have many disgruntled right seat occupants who would potentially not be adding as much as they could to the operation. You will also lose many of them to pastures new.
This is why most airlines recruit 'future captains', not F/Os. They try to pick suitable candidates for command, based on their selection process, to ensure that they get a good number who, with experience, have demonstrated an ability to progress to command.
Having said all that, the short term needs of the business can come into play and it would be rare to find an airline cancelling flights because they can't find pilots........
PP
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: "this is where the magic happens"
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No seniority list..how does it work?
Simple! It doesn't work!
People just screw or try to screw all their colleagues under the motto "survival of the fittest."
Most people are naive enough to believe the company line that a seniority system is more expensive for a low cost airline. But why should it be so? Additionally, those same naive people also believe that the complicated and non-transparent company imposed systems in place (leave bidding, base transfers, upgrades) are "fair and balanced." And if it's not fair to you? Well, then you 'progress' into kissing the @ss of you base captain/OPS manager and you try to make a deal for just yourself.
Oh....and then there is BALPA, the British Airways Line Pilots Association for which a lot of easyJet pilots pay a monthly subscription fee... BALPA as a whole seems to be more concerned with BA related things like Project Lauren instead of the different European contracts EZY tries to introduce or trying to introduce a seniority system for this orange "career airline" for which we work. There is no vision from BALPA that Low Cost is here to stay, nor is there a vision about the related problems like fatigue, pension and seniority. It's all quick fixes, a new coat of paint over the same rusty surface.
No doubt the EZY CC tries very hard, but I wonder whether they are given the adequate resources from BALPA HQ to deal with the massive challenges that lie ahead.
People just screw or try to screw all their colleagues under the motto "survival of the fittest."
Most people are naive enough to believe the company line that a seniority system is more expensive for a low cost airline. But why should it be so? Additionally, those same naive people also believe that the complicated and non-transparent company imposed systems in place (leave bidding, base transfers, upgrades) are "fair and balanced." And if it's not fair to you? Well, then you 'progress' into kissing the @ss of you base captain/OPS manager and you try to make a deal for just yourself.
Oh....and then there is BALPA, the British Airways Line Pilots Association for which a lot of easyJet pilots pay a monthly subscription fee... BALPA as a whole seems to be more concerned with BA related things like Project Lauren instead of the different European contracts EZY tries to introduce or trying to introduce a seniority system for this orange "career airline" for which we work. There is no vision from BALPA that Low Cost is here to stay, nor is there a vision about the related problems like fatigue, pension and seniority. It's all quick fixes, a new coat of paint over the same rusty surface.
No doubt the EZY CC tries very hard, but I wonder whether they are given the adequate resources from BALPA HQ to deal with the massive challenges that lie ahead.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another company that operates (but is not based ) in the UK doing something very similar to Easy Jet manages (very badly) without a seniority list, well from the pilot's point of view anyhow. . . I believe the management are very comfortable with the enhanced "flexibility" it offers.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I pretty much started this thread to see how other airlines were doing without a seniority system and if anyone in these companies was actually happy about it.. It appears so far that our mates at easyjet are getting shafted quite often for basing/promotions. Is the EZY CC actually pushing to establish a seniority list? That would seem an almost impossible thing to do with bases in so many countries on different contracts..!