Garuda applicants beware
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on guys... this needs to be a fair game for both parties:
1. Airline screens pilot, don't like him... Airline takes the costs
2. Pilot screens airline, don't like it... Pilot takes the costs...
1. Airline screens pilot, don't like him... Airline takes the costs
2. Pilot screens airline, don't like it... Pilot takes the costs...
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Terra firma
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How they could push you to pay the bond if you decide do not pay, what can they do ?
de minimus non curat lex
You just wonder what is the true cost to attend an interview?
Travel could well be a staff ticket, paying only the taxes.
Yes, there is the cost of HOTAC, but to be charged for the interview process / sim check is not something which quality employers do.
You need to visit to assess the opportunity on offer, but it will clearly discourage those who have no inside information. If the employer is confident that what is on offer is attractive, then why charge if you decline their kind offer?
They are either at it [beancounters at work], or the grass is definitely not greener once you see the place for yourself.
Initial meetings/interviews in your own country might be one way to do it?
Travel could well be a staff ticket, paying only the taxes.
Yes, there is the cost of HOTAC, but to be charged for the interview process / sim check is not something which quality employers do.
You need to visit to assess the opportunity on offer, but it will clearly discourage those who have no inside information. If the employer is confident that what is on offer is attractive, then why charge if you decline their kind offer?
They are either at it [beancounters at work], or the grass is definitely not greener once you see the place for yourself.
Initial meetings/interviews in your own country might be one way to do it?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe take you to court for breach of contract or send it to the debt collectors since if you attend the interview then you would have first have to agreed to their conditions.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Majority so far against ----------
It is gratifying to learn that many of my fellow pilots are also against the passive acceptance of whatever recruitment procedures are presented to them.
There are other airlines who are ' trying it on ' with type rated,experienced pilots eg Fly Dubai with their ' pay to interview at CTC ' and ridiculous bond mentioned by my old friend captainjns. Some of you may be able to produce other examples of corporate arrogance.
To provide some balance to the topic there are airlines who deserve much credit for their selection procedures. In the last 4 years I have done the selection for both Korean Airlines and Jet Airways. In both cases the airline flew me overseas { Seoul and Mumbai ),gave me excellent hotel accommodation and,regardless of the outcome, did not ask me to spend any of my own money ( apart from my travel to Heathrow,the airtax(refundable if job accepted) on Korean business class and minor items in both hotels ).Both selection procedures were done with mutual respect and I had no complaints so FlyDubai and similar guilty airlines---
take note ! You can conduct a dignified process and you may avoid missing out on highly experienced candidates who will benefit your airline.
Regarding the figure of 2,000 euros mentioned in my original post,please note that this is only a guesstimation on my part.To recap,Parc declined to be drawn when I asked for more information but it seems a reasonable figure based on flying Amsterdam to Jakarta,a sim check and several days hotel accommodation.
Anyway,we all make our own way through life and this is one subject where we will never be in total agreement.
Regards,
Caissa
There are other airlines who are ' trying it on ' with type rated,experienced pilots eg Fly Dubai with their ' pay to interview at CTC ' and ridiculous bond mentioned by my old friend captainjns. Some of you may be able to produce other examples of corporate arrogance.
To provide some balance to the topic there are airlines who deserve much credit for their selection procedures. In the last 4 years I have done the selection for both Korean Airlines and Jet Airways. In both cases the airline flew me overseas { Seoul and Mumbai ),gave me excellent hotel accommodation and,regardless of the outcome, did not ask me to spend any of my own money ( apart from my travel to Heathrow,the airtax(refundable if job accepted) on Korean business class and minor items in both hotels ).Both selection procedures were done with mutual respect and I had no complaints so FlyDubai and similar guilty airlines---
take note ! You can conduct a dignified process and you may avoid missing out on highly experienced candidates who will benefit your airline.
Regarding the figure of 2,000 euros mentioned in my original post,please note that this is only a guesstimation on my part.To recap,Parc declined to be drawn when I asked for more information but it seems a reasonable figure based on flying Amsterdam to Jakarta,a sim check and several days hotel accommodation.
Anyway,we all make our own way through life and this is one subject where we will never be in total agreement.
Regards,
Caissa
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Terra firma
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To do so would require a legally biding contractual agreement, which would, party to the agreement, require the provision of the full terms and conditions of employment for review prior to accepting the terms of the interview.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: -11`
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caissa,
Looking back at your previous postings, I think it`s people like yourself that make airlines want to create a certain threshold for applicants. Just to weed out the treasure hunters.
You have been seriously considering leaving aviation, have tried to get a 50% roster although your employer didn`t give you that option, have been doing several job interviews all over the place and it looks like you`re still going at it.
Now. I`m all for trying to better yourself and improving career prospects. But I simply can`t blame an employer for creating a system where you only get applications from pilots who actually want the job and fulfill the qualifications.
I mean, timesharing a 737 sim for a checkride? That`s your background for DEC 737?
I hope you don`t take it personally, but a bit of a realitycheck seems in order....
Looking back at your previous postings, I think it`s people like yourself that make airlines want to create a certain threshold for applicants. Just to weed out the treasure hunters.
You have been seriously considering leaving aviation, have tried to get a 50% roster although your employer didn`t give you that option, have been doing several job interviews all over the place and it looks like you`re still going at it.
Now. I`m all for trying to better yourself and improving career prospects. But I simply can`t blame an employer for creating a system where you only get applications from pilots who actually want the job and fulfill the qualifications.
I mean, timesharing a 737 sim for a checkride? That`s your background for DEC 737?
I hope you don`t take it personally, but a bit of a realitycheck seems in order....
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to clarify
Ref: Previous Post.
the statement made:
Was based on the 'assumption' that anyone (with half a brain) would in fact require the applicable data in reference to the contract they were committing to, per se, an agreement to refund 'costs' in terms of an interview.
That is to say, in advance of agreeing to accept a contractual position, if offered, it would be advisable to know what the terms of the contract being offered are prior to agreement to acceptance.
Ergo: The candidate would be entering into a contract, to accept a contract if offered with no prior knowledge of the terms and conditions set forth in the contract if offered. !!
It would be appropriate to be aware of the terms in advance of acceptance as the law protects the law, not the terminally stupid.
Now, it's into a legal mess.
A piece of paper with a signature on it does not constitute any right seek financial recompense from another party. To enter into legal proceedings there would have to be an acceptance of terms offered. In that respect, continuance (progression) can be deemed as an acceptance of terms.
NB: It would be enforceable under Indonesian Law (unless legal jurisdiction is stated otherwise) and could well be enforced through international channels with any country that may have bilateral agreements.
As a commercial pilot, it would not be conducive to a career, involving international travel, finding out some years down the road that on arriving through a country, or any other country that may have, or indeed, develop reciprocal arrangements, detainment as a bad debtor is encountered.
the statement made:
To do so would require a legally biding contractual agreement, which would, party to the agreement, require the provision of the full terms and conditions of employment for review prior to accepting the terms of the interview.
That is to say, in advance of agreeing to accept a contractual position, if offered, it would be advisable to know what the terms of the contract being offered are prior to agreement to acceptance.
Ergo: The candidate would be entering into a contract, to accept a contract if offered with no prior knowledge of the terms and conditions set forth in the contract if offered. !!
It would be appropriate to be aware of the terms in advance of acceptance as the law protects the law, not the terminally stupid.
Now, it's into a legal mess.
A piece of paper with a signature on it does not constitute any right seek financial recompense from another party. To enter into legal proceedings there would have to be an acceptance of terms offered. In that respect, continuance (progression) can be deemed as an acceptance of terms.
NB: It would be enforceable under Indonesian Law (unless legal jurisdiction is stated otherwise) and could well be enforced through international channels with any country that may have bilateral agreements.
As a commercial pilot, it would not be conducive to a career, involving international travel, finding out some years down the road that on arriving through a country, or any other country that may have, or indeed, develop reciprocal arrangements, detainment as a bad debtor is encountered.
Last edited by stuckgear; 6th Dec 2010 at 13:08.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seat 0A,
Without doubt the costs involved in recruiting any staff member, let alone those of a commercial jet transport pilot in a commercial environment can be extensive. And likewise without doubt, there would be a specific interest in mitigating those costs. And sourcing the realistic candidates from those that that are, to coin a colloquialism 'having a looksy'.
What also must be considered is that Garuda have employed the services of a recruitment agent, who would be gaining a percentage of the placements made in order to earn their crust.
However, if Garuda are just sourcing a resume/CV stack, they can equally take out an advertisement, implement their HR people to actually generate a candidate list, then start to reduce the pile through whatever means they deem appropriate and directly manage the recruitment criteria.
Now, if they are using a reputable and capable aircrew recruitment provider there needs to be the ability of the recruitment agent to screen candidates. If the recruitment agent 'screws up' and sends someone along for consideration who isn't workable, or someone who is just 'having a looksy' IE an inappropriate candidate, or a non serious candidate, then the recruitment agent needs to pick up the tab for not doing their job properly.
If the employer selects candidates that it later views inappropriate or later adjusts the terms and conditions of the position, where it no longer becomes acceptable to the candidate, then the employer need to pick the bills incurred due to their cause.
Once again, the risk is carried by the pilot, not the employer, or the third party recruitment agent.
In passing the costs along to the candidate, it places the candidate in the position of having to accept financial penalty for not accepting the position, predicated on unknown terms and conditions of the contract of employment, unless the full terms and conditions of employment are set forth at the outset prior to arrangement of interview (unlikely. Ask any employer for a full contract of employment for review prior to an interview and see what response is received.); or having to accept financial penalty if the terms and conditions are different from those presents by a third party (the recruiter) or if the terms and conditions are changed by the employer anywhere between acceptance of interview and commence of contract of employment.
etc etc etc, Ad nausem...
Without doubt the costs involved in recruiting any staff member, let alone those of a commercial jet transport pilot in a commercial environment can be extensive. And likewise without doubt, there would be a specific interest in mitigating those costs. And sourcing the realistic candidates from those that that are, to coin a colloquialism 'having a looksy'.
What also must be considered is that Garuda have employed the services of a recruitment agent, who would be gaining a percentage of the placements made in order to earn their crust.
However, if Garuda are just sourcing a resume/CV stack, they can equally take out an advertisement, implement their HR people to actually generate a candidate list, then start to reduce the pile through whatever means they deem appropriate and directly manage the recruitment criteria.
Now, if they are using a reputable and capable aircrew recruitment provider there needs to be the ability of the recruitment agent to screen candidates. If the recruitment agent 'screws up' and sends someone along for consideration who isn't workable, or someone who is just 'having a looksy' IE an inappropriate candidate, or a non serious candidate, then the recruitment agent needs to pick up the tab for not doing their job properly.
If the employer selects candidates that it later views inappropriate or later adjusts the terms and conditions of the position, where it no longer becomes acceptable to the candidate, then the employer need to pick the bills incurred due to their cause.
Once again, the risk is carried by the pilot, not the employer, or the third party recruitment agent.
In passing the costs along to the candidate, it places the candidate in the position of having to accept financial penalty for not accepting the position, predicated on unknown terms and conditions of the contract of employment, unless the full terms and conditions of employment are set forth at the outset prior to arrangement of interview (unlikely. Ask any employer for a full contract of employment for review prior to an interview and see what response is received.); or having to accept financial penalty if the terms and conditions are different from those presents by a third party (the recruiter) or if the terms and conditions are changed by the employer anywhere between acceptance of interview and commence of contract of employment.
etc etc etc, Ad nausem...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
reply to seat0A
Well, seat0A, I have to tell you that I am in no need of a reality check and your assumptions about me show a high level of arrogance.
Having spent some of my valuable time looking at a cross section of your points,you appear to be with KLM,in which case you will have been pampered and spoonfed in aviation for many years. As a national carrier pilot you will have a sense of reality which simply does not qualify you to comment on the world of contract flying.
I have been flying for 32 years and came to contract flying fairly late ,after a successful career with an overseas airline.
If I choose to enquire about part time flying ,do you see some problem ? I am lucky enough to be able to choose if I work and where I work,any problem there ? If I have allowed my rating to lapse and wish to renew,looking for a sim partner is a logical step to take.
At no stage have I approved of the 'going for an interview to have a free holiday' philosophy although I am aware this can happen.I have always personally taken interviews seriously but the airline must sell itself to me also.
May I suggest that you stick to pontificating on matters about which you may actually know something or are you turning into a European version of 411A ?
Caissa
Having spent some of my valuable time looking at a cross section of your points,you appear to be with KLM,in which case you will have been pampered and spoonfed in aviation for many years. As a national carrier pilot you will have a sense of reality which simply does not qualify you to comment on the world of contract flying.
I have been flying for 32 years and came to contract flying fairly late ,after a successful career with an overseas airline.
If I choose to enquire about part time flying ,do you see some problem ? I am lucky enough to be able to choose if I work and where I work,any problem there ? If I have allowed my rating to lapse and wish to renew,looking for a sim partner is a logical step to take.
At no stage have I approved of the 'going for an interview to have a free holiday' philosophy although I am aware this can happen.I have always personally taken interviews seriously but the airline must sell itself to me also.
May I suggest that you stick to pontificating on matters about which you may actually know something or are you turning into a European version of 411A ?
Caissa
Last edited by Caissa; 8th Dec 2010 at 11:33. Reason: word omitted
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In a far better place
Posts: 2,480
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caissa brings up an important point.
For the past 20 years, I have been an expat employed by a number of carriers, and corporations around the world. Taking that leap away from home takes a great deal of thought starting from the job website to the acceptance of the position.
At times its hard to obtain total and accurate information about your prospective employer, just as it is hard for your prospective employer to do the same.
With that being said, be prepared to bring with you to the interview as much information about your prospective employer. Ask questions... ask questions... ask questions.
Sit down with pen and paper and jot down questions you want answered, which should not be limited to the typical salary, benefits, housing, or commuting... but perhaps ask who started the airline, who is at the helm, what are their backgrounds, fleet expansion, five year plan.... etc. Keep the pad out and take your time.
After the interview you can do some additional research to confirm what you have learned during the interview.
If your prospective employer skirt issues or are not forthright, or provide you with a stock response to the effect "that issue does not effect you", then that company may not be worth working for.
The bottom line, I interviewed my prospective companies, and glad I did. I am able to pass important information to other prospective candidates too before they attend their interviews.
Sorry to be off topic. But I will say this... no respectable airline should require any candidate to pay expenses in connection with interview process.
Good luck to one and all
.
At no stage have I approved of the 'going for an interview to have a free holiday' philosophy although I am aware this can happen.I have always personally taken interviews seriously but the airline must sell itself to me also.
At times its hard to obtain total and accurate information about your prospective employer, just as it is hard for your prospective employer to do the same.
With that being said, be prepared to bring with you to the interview as much information about your prospective employer. Ask questions... ask questions... ask questions.
Sit down with pen and paper and jot down questions you want answered, which should not be limited to the typical salary, benefits, housing, or commuting... but perhaps ask who started the airline, who is at the helm, what are their backgrounds, fleet expansion, five year plan.... etc. Keep the pad out and take your time.
After the interview you can do some additional research to confirm what you have learned during the interview.
If your prospective employer skirt issues or are not forthright, or provide you with a stock response to the effect "that issue does not effect you", then that company may not be worth working for.
The bottom line, I interviewed my prospective companies, and glad I did. I am able to pass important information to other prospective candidates too before they attend their interviews.
Sorry to be off topic. But I will say this... no respectable airline should require any candidate to pay expenses in connection with interview process.
Good luck to one and all
.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: that western skyline
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caissa et al
Under no circumstances should an applicant pay to have attended an interview based on a rejected offer of employment after a successful interview selection process.
Not in this industry, nor in any other.
If the airline has done its homework and the flight ops recruiters and management team have at least an average IQ, they are responsible for selecting suitable candidates. Period.
If the candidate subsequently rejects an offer of employment, so be it.
It is this kind of squeaky snivelling dissembling bull**** from management of airlines that has helped bring our profession to its knees.
Who the hell would want to work for Garuda anyway?
Under no circumstances should an applicant pay to have attended an interview based on a rejected offer of employment after a successful interview selection process.
Not in this industry, nor in any other.
If the airline has done its homework and the flight ops recruiters and management team have at least an average IQ, they are responsible for selecting suitable candidates. Period.
If the candidate subsequently rejects an offer of employment, so be it.
It is this kind of squeaky snivelling dissembling bull**** from management of airlines that has helped bring our profession to its knees.
Who the hell would want to work for Garuda anyway?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: -11`
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Caissa,
Yes, I`ve had a good career sofar. I`ve been lucky.
But don`t for one instance believe I have taken it for granted. I`ve done almost 20 years of union work to try to keep improve our T&C`s and, more importantly, pass them on to the next generation. And I hope I can continue the union work for another decade or so.
You seem to detect some arrogance in my reply. The direct way of Dutch communication seems to trigger that a lot on these boards
Not intended that way at all.
Who knows, I might be in the same position as you are in some years, as we still retire at 56. I might feel like doing some contract work myself by that time. (although I wouldn`t want to steal promotions from local F/O`s by doing so........)
On the subject: I really feel it is not too much to ask by any employer to expect the applicant to contribute in the expenses in case the job offer is rejected.
This has nothing to do with pay to fly or any other scheme as such.
Although stuck gear brings up a valid point about the role of the contract agency.
PS, nothing wrong with part-time flying. I`ve done it myself for years. Just that I`ve done it under a negotiated agreement in the our CLA. Not much chance of getting it any other way, me thinks.....
Yes, I`ve had a good career sofar. I`ve been lucky.
But don`t for one instance believe I have taken it for granted. I`ve done almost 20 years of union work to try to keep improve our T&C`s and, more importantly, pass them on to the next generation. And I hope I can continue the union work for another decade or so.
You seem to detect some arrogance in my reply. The direct way of Dutch communication seems to trigger that a lot on these boards
Not intended that way at all.Who knows, I might be in the same position as you are in some years, as we still retire at 56. I might feel like doing some contract work myself by that time. (although I wouldn`t want to steal promotions from local F/O`s by doing so........
)On the subject: I really feel it is not too much to ask by any employer to expect the applicant to contribute in the expenses in case the job offer is rejected.
This has nothing to do with pay to fly or any other scheme as such.
Although stuck gear brings up a valid point about the role of the contract agency.
PS, nothing wrong with part-time flying. I`ve done it myself for years. Just that I`ve done it under a negotiated agreement in the our CLA. Not much chance of getting it any other way, me thinks.....
