Originally Posted by
LJ Driver
Weird flex, but ok... No idea how mil rank even enters this discussion as a relevant question.
Oh, and thank you for the warm welcome to apply elsewhere if I have questions about the system - that I brought up and asked on the Airline Pilot Central FedEx discussion forum... (no barriers to innovation/creativity here folks, move along - the irony is thick on this point). I hope the 'outsiders' you fly with are treated a bit better when they ask questions and try to understand the old-guard line of thinking.
If anyone thinks I was insulting FedEx pilots, that is literally as far from my intent as possible but maybe I miscommunicated, that's clearly on me if people feel that way. Diversity of thought (which often translates directly into innovation) comes from people with many backgrounds, that was my point.
My questions: Can you explain how more endorsements allowed by each pilot is better? What is your rationale? Does that really translate into more FedEx pilots getting their top men an interview? Do you think it reduces the value of each endorsement? If so, why are so many for it? The verbiage states that the more an applicant has, the higher he is racked. Reading between the lines, that probably means having one isn't valued the same as it was before. The old way gave you a golden BB, if the person was qualified they would very likely get an invite because a pilot can only use one every ten years, they were extremely valuable and pretty rare. Are they 1/5 as valuable now because there will be 5x more in the system?
Thanks in advance for your insight and experience. I'm trying to understand the process and your thoughts through an adult conversation, not toss grenades and insult anyone. Obviously a touchy subject.
How does mil rank enter this discussion? - since you dodged the question I’m going to guess that I was right. Here’s the rub: instead of leading with genuine questions (like the ones in your latest post) you gave a lecture about innovation, and our process, and second/third order effects, etc.
You still seem to be wrapped around the axle regarding “innovation and creatvity”... well, that’s not our number one job here as pilots. In fact, I would venture to say that it’s not our second or third priority either. The top priorities are things like airmanship, CRM, and decision-making to name a few, and we strongly believe that we have useful input when it comes to recommending people we know and/or have flown with. At 3 am on an ILS in the weather, I don’t care if the pilot I’m with is ‘innovative’, or ‘diverse in thought’ or whatever- I want that person to be a disciplined aviator so that we arrive alive. That’s why we do a CRM exercise as part of the interview process, not TMAAT you creatively innovated. This is line flying at FedEx, not Apple or Google.
Under the old system, the ‘golden bb’ you speak of was not that at all- many people submitted a PE only to find out a year later (or more) that their guy didn’t get called because he still didn’t have enough “points” on his application. So again, it was never honored as a guaranteed interview for someone who met the minimums. So now not only do we have more options in PEs to give, but they are also channeled through line pilots who can give meaningful feedback to the endorser. This was non-existent under the old system- current pilots could talk to pilot hiring via ‘appointment only’ to check up on their endorsee.
To be clear, the new system values legacy endorsements above the other three. Are you going to opine now on the dangers of nepotism? I hope not- as others have already stated, focus on what you can control.