I for one do believe our interview process is F'd up. First of all, you have to know AND have flown with somebody? That caters to the Military squadron ranks (no mil/civ bashing intended). So, if my neighbor is a 10 year regional Captain, I have to go fly with them to THEN recommend them? Idiotic, if they are flying at a 121 carrier or in the armed forces, then they should be able to fly.

Then you have the Sim eval, which is a joke. There is no approach, and no landing? ***? Oh, in my previous 7 years at a regional we got clearances like "climb at 500' feet per minute and turn 30 degrees left while slowing to 170kts. El stupido. How about seeing if the candidate CAN FLY (you know, train like we fly?).

And we can't forget the written test. Let me tell you, I am much safer with a guy/gal that knows the first 10 elements on the periodic table.

At least the infamous Doctor DT came up with the "situation eval". So you sit in a folding chair in a paper trainer while they tell you that a UPS plane crash landed and you low on gas, what to do! (heard that was discontinued).

I think our process is a joke and not commensurate with one of the largest and greatest airlines in the world.

I have a bud that just interviewed at American Eagle and it sounded like a much more professional process.....

1. First day was a technical eval with a standards check airman - do you know anything about flying and your current plane? Not limitations, more like hangar talk, situational stories.

2. Second day was a sim eval, a REAL one. With a take-off, approach, hold, ILS to a full stop landing.

3. Last day is the Captain's board interview with the VP of flight ops, system chief pilot, and a line captain, Eagle's version of the "personnel interview". Not with some dudes they grab from the flex department.

The decision is made by the VP. Sounds more professional than ours IMO.

And I agree with the previous poster, JL's "not hiring furloughees" was EL STUPIDO.