Originally Posted by
Scott Stoops
If you think that's bad, take a quick look at what adds points to the application process. We have basically turned the application process into an extortion scheme. The job fair process forces applicants to spend $500-1000 for about 15 minutes of face time. Join an organization you wouldn't have, reserve a space, pay to get in, probably pay to get there and pay to stay a night, work it around your schedule and hope that the line isn't too long to see a recruiter. It is nothing short of extortion IMHO.
On the sim, not sure I agree. When I interviewed (94) we were using the Frasca. What a waste of time and resources. It evaluated nothing frankly. It most certainly didn't evaluate flying skills, decision making or CRM. How is sticking a potential new hire into a sim for an airplane they have probably never flown judging anything? We earn our keep with our decision making. That can much more easily and accurately be judged with scenario based discussions. The flying, is, or at least should be the easy part. The hard part of our job is the head work. I am not fundamentally against a sim ride in any way, but it needs to be structured to evaluate something valuable. The Frasca didn't do that, and based on what I've heard from buddies the newer sim ride was more of the same.......
Scott
Well-said, although I thought the Frasca DID show the steepness of one's learning curve, and the ability to absorb and hold short-term information.
I agree, I don't know if I could pass it now without a practice ride.
Besides the "buy your ticket" aspect now, I don't like the current promoted aspect of "nominate an intern," and especially, the nepotism of "nominate a family member."
I'd much rather they gave each of us one or two names a year to endorse. Then you could use it for the person you really felt was the best candidate: the weird family member who is an awesome stick, or the average-plus guy that is easy to fly with from your last flying gig.