Compass 4 year degree
 

Was just browsing and noticed that on the hiring page for Compass they are requiring a 4 year degree. Was that always one of their requirements? I am thinking that more airlines will be going to this.

It should have been a requirement all along..... At least a 2 year degree. To get this industry back to where it needs the 18 year old High School graduate whom never has had a job before and barely has 200 hours and a CMEL wet need not to be going straight into a jet..... Just like many were opposed to young men going from High School to NBA or there's a minimum age on a college football player going into the NFL there are reasons for such... The high school to a jet jump takes a level of maturity and hopefully by going through college one has gain more of that..... Who knows... Rant over...

I couldn't agree more. It should at least be similar to getting hired as a police officer. Most departments require that you have at least have 60 credit hours, or an associates degree. It's about the maturity like you said. Granted, there are people that go to college and join the military that still don't mature, but it's the bigger picture here.

Even look at flight instruction. You can hardly teach pre-school without a college degree, so why should we allow someone right out of high school teach someone to pilot an aircraft?

If there is ever a time to change a standard, it's right now. There are so many qualified pilots with college degrees and thousands of hours of flight time on the street that there would be plenty of time for aspiring pilots to get degrees and gain experience before coming to the 121 world.

I think it also has to do with the flow-through to DAL. DAL requires a 4year means Compass requires a 4 year degree. I'm not sure if mesaba was required to do the same or not.

I agree with meyers in that in that it should be required, not be cause it makes you a better pilot, but for the life experiences and maturization that one goes through while getting the degree. Granted their are some things that I think may trump college in terms of life experience and learning responsibility such as military service.

I highly doubt that many airlines will be hiring without one as the job market is still uber-competitive. That 4 year degree just looks better to HR than someone without it.

Very true.... I have a lot of respect, as many do, for those whom have served... But most whom are pilots and in the military will also have degrees, most likely....

I was always told that a college degree shows that you can start something and finish it. Doesn't make you smart. Doesn't make you intelligent just educates the individual. In my 30 years in the workforce I can't count the number of educated idiots I have worked with and for. I wish I had a degree just to have it but it would not have helped me at all in my previous career.

I was interviewing with a company and I ask what was so desirable about a degree. I was told the standard sticking with something and completing it. I ask if having the same job for 25 years and being married to the same woman for 30 years would qualify. He said that I have an excellent point.

My dad (not an educated man but a wise man) always gave me this advice "Boy, if you're offered a pound of brains or an ounce of common sense, take the common sense."

In no way am I dissing those with a degree. I wish I had one. It's a companies right to require it but I just wish they would give weight to other factors also.

If the desire is to get those that are 22 years and older, just make that a requirement

Strange all the regionals don't require at least a 4-year degree.

The 4 year degree is like the new high school diploma.

A college degree should be a requirement for all professional careers, but why no complaints when 18 year olds join the military? All of a sudden the stereotypes are dropped?

Compass added the 4 year college degree requirement in early-mid February of 2010.

What ^^ said.

very true. I believe the DL hiring page even says graduate level is favorably looked upon. I also thought that military pilots were officers- which required a 4-yr degree- could be wrong, not a military guy.

I know a number of former military people who were not pilots in the service (other rated officers or enlisted flyers and non-flyers) but are now trying to make a go of a pilot career as a civilian. Then again, I think they all have a 4 year degree as well.

Military pilots are either from the commissioned officer ranks or warrant officers. Commissioned officers require a 4 year degree to be commissioned. Warrant officers do not require a 4 year degree, though many have one and it helps to be competitive for a slot.

Army Aviation's warrant officer program is the only way to fly in the military without a 4 year degree.

No offense to the qualifications and skills of people in the military, but most service members are not in a professional career field in the sense of a field that involves specialized knowledge that requires licensing and government regulation. Most enlisted are closer to technicians, and most officers are more generalized managers than they are professionals in that sense (notable exceptions being officers who have traditional civilian professional careers: doctors, lawyers, clergy, ect.)

For that matter, most professional careers don't require a generalized 4 year degree. Professional career fields usually require a professional degree (MD, DDS, JD, ect.)

Assuming you have prior service before selection really, and even then don't expect to get past a junior rank with no degree.

How about making aviation training more comprehensive. Getting a 2-year or 4-year degree in whatever doesnt make this profession safer. If you look over in Europe they have a longer and harder program to get you ATPL, and a 4-year degree is not required most places. And they are still valued higher than U.S. pilots....

What about air traffic controllers in the military and the FAA? Flight Engineers in the military? Neither require a degree of any kind.

I knew an individual that went through the FAA ATC academy. He had a PHD in education. Smart as could be but did not have a clue when it came to air traffic control. He was mathematically eliminated in week 8 of a 12 week program.

A four year degree is only required because some HR lady has one and believes that only people who have one are qualified. Where-as self-motivation, self-education, passion, common-sense and general intelligence is far more important.

As Frank Zappa once said, "If you want to get laid, go to college. If you want to learn something, go to the library."

Aa
 

A four year degree for what? A $20,000 a year job. The requirement should be to read and memorize.

1. Flying the line.

2.Confessions of a union buster.

Then you may have a career that is worth a 4 year degree.

Clearly, gaining X numbers credit of classroom instruction in random things to gain a diploma does not make one an air traffic controller, or a pilot. But, it is a good requirement, particularly for the youngest applicants in their 20's, IMHO. Probably not so important for an experienced 40, 50, or 60 year old.

In my ATC academy class, even former military ATC's failed the program. Heck, I know of one guy who worked over 20 years in Area A at Oakland Center (where I worked at the time), retired for a year, and then came back to be a part time employee. He couldn't check out. Sad. It's a learned and practiced trade, best learned when young, and continously practiced as one ages.

There is a reason for the 31 year old cut off for ATC, although I'm sure it could be much higher than that.

Perhaps today, but in the past, they most definitely were not all graduates. Chuck Yeager was not, for instance.

When I was in the USMC, there were "limited duty officers" flying, who were restricted to a maximum rank of LtCol. They had no degree requirement.

Hi all, I don't have a degree,,, but I have some other experience that might help... of course I do know that without the degree, I'm not getting hired at Compass or Delta... A few things I have been privelaged to do: trim a JT8 at 80% thrust, hang an APU in a snowstorm (737), Teach how to dynamically rig a CFM56, Install a TCAS system, build an aircraft from plans-fly it, install the first HUD system in a 737 (see SWA aircraft), R&R a CFM56 on an R.O.N., R&R all the flaps on a 737 after a mssive birdstrike, R&R the R/T, antenna and radomes on 72, 73, 74, 75 aircraft, remove and re-install-rig entire throttle quadrant on Boeing 737,757.... I could go on but you get the point. I don't have degree and am not qualified to interview for the big boys. I am working on a degree at the moment... it's a good thing to finally accomplish during this furlough.

The main reason for the 31 year old cut off is the 25 year retirement and 56 year old mandatory retirement age

31+25=56

Does anyone else think that requiring a 4 year degree to be a bus driver at a regional is the ultimate insult? I don't care about the educational aspect of the 4 year degree, I care about the principle of it. It's pretty sad really. And yes Compass is just another regional, even if you might have a flow through down the road. I can just imagine the fat yokels in the HR that probably have never even been to community college going through college grad resumes to pick who gets 19000 per year.

I don't think that requiring a 4 year degree at Compass is an insult, because they have a flow-through to Delta which DOES require a 4 year degree. If Colgan required a 4 year college degree, it would be a different thing.

But times have changed... with hundreds, if not thousands of qualified pilots looking for a job now, a 4 year degree is probably just another way to filter out pilots that Compass (and/OR Delta/NW) doesn't want.

There need to be a few things that allow a corporation to separate people out of a pack. A four year degree does that. Does it eliminate some great candidates? Yes, but it also gets rid of a bunch of people that would be trying very hard to prove their smarts.
I saw this first hand many many times at my former regional carrier. At DAL you know that 99,99999% of the guys have a degree, so there is absolutely no one upmanship going on. Yes, I mean it. A Captain knows that you have X qualifications and one of them is that you are able to complete an accredited (for????) year degree. It tells them that at a min you can complete a college approved curriculum. Does it make you smart? No, but it also means that you are not a dolt.

DAL likes advanced degree work. Most of the guys I fly with have post graduate degrees if not PHD's. It is not often that I fly with a pilot that does not have an advanced degree and or a business on the side. Most of the guys here are too smart for their own good.

Why we do it? Just another box to check and we have been doing it this way forever. Will it change? Probably not as we promote from within!

Let me throw out a hypothetical... Let's say someone with an ATP, 727 type, FE rating (jet) and 8000 TT, 1000 FE and age 30 applies for a job. Should a college degree be "controlling" on an applicant like that?

Yes. DAL requires one. It is a standard to start. It is their requirement and helps them to a certain degree hire the folks they want in their pilot ranks. Can't blame them, can't fault them. Don't have to like it either. It is just a requirement.

The bachelors degree is the new high school diploma. Not that it is easy to get, or that the people that have them didn't work hard to get them, but in the US today you pretty much need it to even enter the ring.

I don't think these companies are saying that you aren't qualified, by not having the degree. However, I think they would rather employ the type of people and personalities that they find in people that possess the education. The reason they don't care what your degree is in is because they want the lessons that you learned while obtaining your degree. They want the dedication, work ethic, maturity, time management and so on.

As someone else mentioned, there should absolutely be a more in depth training program to be an 121, or even a 135 pilot. Washington should take a really good look that the ATPL and consider it here.

There's no requirement to retire, but yes, you must be done doing "front line" operations on the month you become 56. Besides, not everybody, even with the current rules, will have 20 years "good time" at age 56.

Considering those are the mid level qualifications a DAL new hire has, yes, the degree ups the game.

Alas, the qualifications I mentioned are not mine at this time, they are those of a friend.

Now I will poses similar qualifications around that age, but I have no desire to fly for a Major (or any sort of airline) in the ConUS. I just wanted to gauge what the general perception was of a highly competent and skilled pilot as well as a highly personable and genuine individual. The funny thing is that pilots with those qualifications can command higher pay and respect overseas is amusing to me (and others). And the only phrase that adequately describes the attitudes I've seen in this discussion is "high maka maka".

If you don't have 20 years good time(good time is where your main job is controlling air traffic not working in an office 8 hours a day) it's by choice. However, they have been giving waivers to work past age 56 on a case by case basis.

I think he was referring to someone who enlisted for a hitch in the service, then got their flying certificates at either the base flying club or off base before applying to the airlines. Agreed there are things more important than a BA in Physical Education, but the requirement it isn't arbitrary. It's a filter and a good one. As acl65pilot pilot said, they lose some good people doing it this way. OTOH, it's a cheap and effective way to screen applicants and the results are often satisfactory with HR. It's not a just system, but not much is in the world.

I've known some darn good Captains who've logged over 10,000 hours in the left seat and whom I've learned a lot, but they couldn't be hired by some airlines because they lacked a four-year degree. Most were family men who married young and could never make the financial sacrifice to gain a degree while providing for their family. Their choice, but in many cases I think it is our industry's loss.

The difference in CONUS is that there are more pilots than jobs. Quite different in other parts of the world.

I agree that someone with half the qualifications can get a equal or better paying job overseas. The supply side has allowed the bar to be raised for the majors and lowered overall. Kind of an interesting dynamic we have here.

Beagle65, you're making a similar point to what I am... which is asking the question of why "College Degree" is overriding thousands of hours of valid experience.

acl65, I understand that, however let me throw this out for you to consider...

If the HR people are checking a box which says "College Experience" and only printing those resumes for further consideration... how much more difficult is it to check a box that says "Boeing Experience and PIC Type Rating" or "Extensive Experience in Related Field"?

It's the standard corporate cost benefit analysis model. College degree Y/N is one block. How many blocks to cover Boeing, Airbus, MD and every other manufacturer out there? What about the pilot who has 10,000 Citation time? What if he didn't work as a professional pilot, but it was his daddy's? The point is, while I agree with you the system isn't fair nor all encompassing, the reason they do it that way is because it's cheaper to do it that way rather than how you and I think it should be done.

And Beagle, let me be clear, I'm not (and never was) disagreeing with you, but let me know if you agree with this...

To sum it all up... it is a broken system, not only in the way that regional pilot pay is reflected, but also in how we determine what good qualifications and good judgement is these days and on to how a company should and does treat the employees it has. It's been on a downward spiral since Eastern was taken apart, and it will continue to do that until people start getting off their high horses and using common sense again.

There are other ways to not get 20 years. Let's say you decided not to go to work on Aug 3, 1981? If you got rehired 15 years after Ronny Reagan fired your butt, you'd probably not have 20 years at age 56.

Also, there are cases of direct hire military who did not possess 20 years at age 56. I had both instances in my last facility.

As far as the PATCO rehires that was a special consideration. We also had retired military that were over 31 by a large margin.