Originally Posted by
OldBiff
That’s what is called a training problem. What your saying is that we have not adequately trained our new captains to operate in a safe manor. Good news is that we can do something about that.
If you tell me we need to up the standards or contact hours in initial upgrade training that’s fine. If you tell me that IOE CAs and check airmen are signing guys off that they shouldn’t then I’ll go along with replacing some of them. In fact if our failure rate is too low that can be indicative of a problem, everyone shouldn’t make it. But the idea that we should construct an actual winter night in Chicago portion of IOE/check rides to meet an experiential moving goal post is ridiculous. There will always be some arbitrary experience that someone doesn’t have, which will allow others to look down on them. Fortunatly we don’t have DECS codes for logging various events throughout your time as an FO as a prerequisite for upgrade, maybe we should. I’m sure participation would mirror the pulse survey or slide video.
It’s about money and comfort for the guys that don’t want to upgrade, not safety or training. To make it about safety is disingenuous.
I get the “this is your job, do it, shut up” mentality. You’ve made it clear you’re comfortable with a CA that flew 800 hours back in the 90’s and now rapped up another 200 here at Envoy because the company process said he was safe. Being disingenuous is a waste of time. I reject all of the above. As you inadvertently stated, the company doesn’t care about our career progression outside of Envoy, professional record, future plans or QOL. All they care about is “get those butts in the left seat” ....for what? Money?