Originally Posted by
FAULTPUSH
I mostly agree, in that TPIC is overrated, but not that it's totally arbitrary. In two equally capable applicants, the one with more experience would probably be the safer pilot to hire. There are more important things to look at than flight time; race and gender are meaningless factors for safety, and I think they should be meaningless in the hiring equation too.
Agreed. I don't mean to say that it's entirely arbitrary, just that using it solely as a deciding metric is narrow-minded. In my view experience is experience.
Originally Posted by
FAULTPUSH
One was race, one was race and gender, one was nepotism.
In a safety sensitive position, I think that experience should count for more than race/gender/family. I think that the current race or gender distribution of your flight crews should have no bearing in an airline's hiring decisions.
Meh.. This position is safety sensitive, but it's not hard. If you want to go down that road why is the worst FO going to get annual raises and an upgrade the same as the best FO? Why does a senior captain only qualify for a $30k-$55k FO job at any other airline if Frontier were to fold? Why is there literally no merit based system whatsoever? From a corporate standpoint you are paid to perform a few number of repetitive tasks in some relative order over and over for the next 20-30 years (or however long your career is). Nothing is fair about this gig, but it's all mostly easy so long as you can avoid a career of furloughs. I'm totally fine with HR hiring metrics. Besides, do you really want every trip to be with a paranoid white guy in cowboy boots droning on about guns, politics, and whatever else is new on blaze.com? (I kid I kid)
Originally Posted by
FAULTPUSH
I've been highly impressed with almost everybody we've hired since the new process started back in about 2004. With maybe two exceptions, they've had great attitudes, and will go the extra mile to help out. That's far more important to me than PIC time.
Yep. It's been a good place to work.