Seniority, good or bad?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Europe
Age: 56
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seniority, good or bad?
I would like to ask what peoples’ opinion is on the matter of seniority.
I hear people complain that it restricts them from moving from one company to another then sing it’s praises when it comes to laying people off and promotion.
So what is the general consensus as to whether it is a good or bad idea?
I hear people complain that it restricts them from moving from one company to another then sing it’s praises when it comes to laying people off and promotion.
So what is the general consensus as to whether it is a good or bad idea?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good system.
It is fair and transparent. Everyone gets their turn to be near the top. The only exceptions are those who chose to do other things in their previous lives etc etc. That, of course, was their decision at the time.
I do sympathise with those who never make it to the top of the list but no-one has yet proposed a better system for us and I think you'd find the majority of BA pilots in favour of retaining it.
Best wishes,
It is fair and transparent. Everyone gets their turn to be near the top. The only exceptions are those who chose to do other things in their previous lives etc etc. That, of course, was their decision at the time.
I do sympathise with those who never make it to the top of the list but no-one has yet proposed a better system for us and I think you'd find the majority of BA pilots in favour of retaining it.
Best wishes,
SkyGod
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Palm Coast, Florida, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
1 Post
Seniority is everything here in the US.
Have worked for companies without seniority (Middle-East) and much prefer to work for a company with a proper seniority.
(Even if it meant I had to climb down from a B-747 left seat to a B-727 F/E seat to start with a new company 2 years ago.)
In general seniority is a good thing.
It does not restrict people from switching job, you just have to start at the bottom every time.
Have worked for companies without seniority (Middle-East) and much prefer to work for a company with a proper seniority.
(Even if it meant I had to climb down from a B-747 left seat to a B-727 F/E seat to start with a new company 2 years ago.)
In general seniority is a good thing.
It does not restrict people from switching job, you just have to start at the bottom every time.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: on the blue danube
Age: 48
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good seniority system guarantees the MOST important thing in aviation: SAFETY.
No contests of who does the trip with the least fuel, who arrives fastest, etc just to gain the boss' attention to get promoted. Everbody gets a chance when it's time.
Living and working in central Europe, our seniority system is mainly limited to your progress from right to left. Other things, such as vacation, scheduling, transition to other types are not purely based on seniority. Requests for certain flights are limited, with everybody, even the most junior FO getting a reasonably fair chance. As pay doesn't change for the aircraft types, it being based on years of service, the company sets up a training schedule based on economic needs with request / wishes being fulfilled based on seniority
No contests of who does the trip with the least fuel, who arrives fastest, etc just to gain the boss' attention to get promoted. Everbody gets a chance when it's time.
Living and working in central Europe, our seniority system is mainly limited to your progress from right to left. Other things, such as vacation, scheduling, transition to other types are not purely based on seniority. Requests for certain flights are limited, with everybody, even the most junior FO getting a reasonably fair chance. As pay doesn't change for the aircraft types, it being based on years of service, the company sets up a training schedule based on economic needs with request / wishes being fulfilled based on seniority
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: der oberder
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that seniority is SACRED.
If the airline you work for has it; don't touch it, leave it alone.
I have a friend who has been a 737 F/O for atleast the last 5 years; and has been bypassed for upgrade to captain by his juniors and new hires countless times.
In my opinion,not having seniority sows low morale and does nothing for camaraderie among pilots.
I consider myself lucky because the airline i work for honors the seniority system.
If the airline you work for has it; don't touch it, leave it alone.
I have a friend who has been a 737 F/O for atleast the last 5 years; and has been bypassed for upgrade to captain by his juniors and new hires countless times.
In my opinion,not having seniority sows low morale and does nothing for camaraderie among pilots.
I consider myself lucky because the airline i work for honors the seniority system.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I agree, overall seniority has to be the way to go.
BUT, there should also be fleet seniority! Have seen the case of the most senior pilots not wanting to convert to a newer, bigger type as their seniority would dictate they could, junior men then moved up to the new fleet and were able to enjoy all the benefits of that fleet, UNTIL, the senior men decided they would deign to move to the new fleet and promptly took over the top bid positions etc.
Nothing should compromise a persons company seniority which controls promotion, option for fleet moves, last in-first out redundancy etc.
but if a person chooses not to move up when given the chance then, within the fleet that he turns down initially but eventually accepts he seniority for roster bid, leave etc. should be date of final line check on the new type.
Failure to move for strictly compassionate reasons can be dealt with on an individual basis by the union and the company.
Of course, not everyone will agree with my thoughts on the subject!
BUT, there should also be fleet seniority! Have seen the case of the most senior pilots not wanting to convert to a newer, bigger type as their seniority would dictate they could, junior men then moved up to the new fleet and were able to enjoy all the benefits of that fleet, UNTIL, the senior men decided they would deign to move to the new fleet and promptly took over the top bid positions etc.
Nothing should compromise a persons company seniority which controls promotion, option for fleet moves, last in-first out redundancy etc.
but if a person chooses not to move up when given the chance then, within the fleet that he turns down initially but eventually accepts he seniority for roster bid, leave etc. should be date of final line check on the new type.
Failure to move for strictly compassionate reasons can be dealt with on an individual basis by the union and the company.
Of course, not everyone will agree with my thoughts on the subject!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: The wild blue yonder
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I disagree. Promotion should be based on merit, not on time served. Changing the system will mean that we have more portable jobs, which in turn means better pay as the airlines obviously want to attract the best people.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: In the Haven of Peace
Age: 79
Posts: 600
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever happened to ability? I don't see it mentioned here by all the seniority proponents? Surely a good company should take account of both so that both loyal and junior, but better qualified or more talented, employees both have a chance to advance. I've worked for companies where only seniority counts, where there is no account of seniority and where both seniority and ability count and I believe the latter to be the best compromise.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Europe
Age: 56
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess it is a bit difficult to see the overall benefits of seniority when I work in a business where there is no such thing (telecoms). The arguments, if that is the right word, for having appear good.
I have worked in a sort of seniority based environment, the military, but seniority only takes you so far then ability takes over. Tend to agree with soggyboxxers on that one.
However the argument put by OPEN CLB that safety is ensured with the system has to be a strong one for having it.
I have to say the idea of having to stick with one company to progress up the ladder sounds a bit frustrating to me but having read what has been written the majority seem to believe pilots are better of for having the seniority system than not.
Maybe I should just start my own airline then that puts me at the top to start with
I have worked in a sort of seniority based environment, the military, but seniority only takes you so far then ability takes over. Tend to agree with soggyboxxers on that one.
However the argument put by OPEN CLB that safety is ensured with the system has to be a strong one for having it.
I have to say the idea of having to stick with one company to progress up the ladder sounds a bit frustrating to me but having read what has been written the majority seem to believe pilots are better of for having the seniority system than not.
Maybe I should just start my own airline then that puts me at the top to start with
Last edited by Vortex what...ouch!; 27th Jun 2002 at 12:37.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: der oberder
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe that a senior pilot who doesn't have the "ability" would eventually flunk his upgrade training and get frozen for sometime. Then the next guy gets a shot at it, and so on...
Not very cost effective for an airline but i still have to see a system that works better that seniority; specially in the majors where we have pilot corps that would number in the hurdreds, or thousands.
What sort of OBJECTIVE merit or ability formula are we to use that would not be ABUSED by the personal biases of airline management?
I would hate to see it all degrade into the "point" system: whoever the chief points his finger at.
Not very cost effective for an airline but i still have to see a system that works better that seniority; specially in the majors where we have pilot corps that would number in the hurdreds, or thousands.
What sort of OBJECTIVE merit or ability formula are we to use that would not be ABUSED by the personal biases of airline management?
I would hate to see it all degrade into the "point" system: whoever the chief points his finger at.
Last edited by e6b; 28th Jun 2002 at 07:27.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me that the proponents of seniority as a "sacred cow" not to be touched, are mostly senior types who have much to lose by a system of merit.
The idea that you have a right to command or type conversion is ridiculous. A company invest a great ammount of money into training, why should it therefore not have the ability to select those in whom it wants to invest?
I agree with the concept that seniority, or length of service should be recognised and rewarded. In an ideal environment all should be capable of type transfer or command, and have reached the required experience level when such an opportunity arrises. However we do not operate in an ideal environment. How many of you have sat next to a F/O that will never have what it takes to command or the Captain that no-one can explain how he passed the command conversion. Why should a company have to spend money and training resources on someone with no real prospect of completeing the course. It may be possible in a large company such as BA, where the training budget is huge but not economical in smaller operators.
Are pilots affraid that they might not be up to scratch if a system of merit is used. The contention that advancement will then be at the whim of a management type surely does not wash. This is not a criticism levelled at other areas of industry where this is the norm. Also a manager who does not select on merit, but some cronyist or nepotic way will be found out when they do not perform.
The idea that you have a right to command or type conversion is ridiculous. A company invest a great ammount of money into training, why should it therefore not have the ability to select those in whom it wants to invest?
I agree with the concept that seniority, or length of service should be recognised and rewarded. In an ideal environment all should be capable of type transfer or command, and have reached the required experience level when such an opportunity arrises. However we do not operate in an ideal environment. How many of you have sat next to a F/O that will never have what it takes to command or the Captain that no-one can explain how he passed the command conversion. Why should a company have to spend money and training resources on someone with no real prospect of completeing the course. It may be possible in a large company such as BA, where the training budget is huge but not economical in smaller operators.
Are pilots affraid that they might not be up to scratch if a system of merit is used. The contention that advancement will then be at the whim of a management type surely does not wash. This is not a criticism levelled at other areas of industry where this is the norm. Also a manager who does not select on merit, but some cronyist or nepotic way will be found out when they do not perform.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its a good system for order of promotion (commands), but I feel is grossly unfair for lifestyle issues, ie. roster preference.
People may join the company with 5000+ hours but be working X times harder than bloggs with the same hours - all because bloggs has been in the company longer.
How many other company's or careers have a system where the longer you have worked for the company the least work you do, and more time off you get ???
All airlines give more money for time of service and generally more leave and staff travel perks ..... but why a better lifetsyle and choice of destinations ? Its crazy ......
Its OK if you are very lucky and joined the company in your mid 20's but for guys joining in the mid 30's from other airlines get totally screwed throughout their whole career and never see the cream !
People may join the company with 5000+ hours but be working X times harder than bloggs with the same hours - all because bloggs has been in the company longer.
How many other company's or careers have a system where the longer you have worked for the company the least work you do, and more time off you get ???
All airlines give more money for time of service and generally more leave and staff travel perks ..... but why a better lifetsyle and choice of destinations ? Its crazy ......
Its OK if you are very lucky and joined the company in your mid 20's but for guys joining in the mid 30's from other airlines get totally screwed throughout their whole career and never see the cream !
SkyGod
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Palm Coast, Florida, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
1 Post
loadshifta:
Seniority does not mean you have a right to command regardless of ability or talent.
The company does have the ability to invest in those they choose.
(Initial hiring of course)
The F/O with no command abilities will not be upgraded just because his number is up. (Duh)
Instead he will be given a chance to prove himself and his abilities when his number is up.
(If I have to explain it, you will never understand anyway.)
Seniority does not mean you have a right to command regardless of ability or talent.
The company does have the ability to invest in those they choose.
(Initial hiring of course)
The F/O with no command abilities will not be upgraded just because his number is up. (Duh)
Instead he will be given a chance to prove himself and his abilities when his number is up.
(If I have to explain it, you will never understand anyway.)
