![]() |
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1656569)
I guess that is a fair response. Nothing is the operative word though. With all the hiring coming up, I'm not worried about it and I am still not willing to pay anything for it. If I'm an island, so be it.
Our MEC is IMHO the world's best when it comes to finding leverage. I do not expect this flow to deliver the operational reliability Richard Anderson desires across the bottom 40% of Delta's network. It is a quick band aid which creates more problems in the cockpits of Endeavor airlines. One can only imagine the entitled new hire with the grumpy crusty Captain who failed his interview. It is not an idea mentoring environment and maybe not even safe (as the two semi recent deadly accidents which hit Delta's books thanks to outsourcing proved). You should understand that you benefit when:
Your opinion is political fact (truth), but it's perceived as rude to rub our noses in it. |
Originally Posted by Lone Palm
(Post 1656588)
We're downgrading and have 7+ year first officers right now. If I were just starting out I'd go someplace else with a much shorter upgrade time. This program is just another half hearted attempt to solve a systemic problem.
|
Originally Posted by UGBSM
(Post 1656591)
Keep dreaming because that is never gonna happen...
* yeah, got a data point for that under Mullin. I'd have to find the copy of his presentation on an old computer for the exact date. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1656594)
T Square,
Our MEC is IMHO the world's best when it comes to finding leverage. I do not expect this flow to deliver the operational reliability Richard Anderson desires across the bottom 40% of Delta's network. It is a quick band aid which creates more problems in the cockpits of Endeavor airlines. One can only imagine the entitled new hire with the grumpy crusty Captain who failed his interview. It is not an idea mentoring environment and maybe not even safe (as the two semi recent deadly accidents which hit Delta's books thanks to outsourcing proved). You should understand that you benefit when:
Your opinion is political fact (truth), but it's perceived as rude to rub our noses in it. I'm a line dog. I have no political connections whatsoever. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1656550)
Interview sims are a joke. Throwing someone in a sim, particularly in an airplane/sim they have no time in, doesn't reveal secret pilot potential. All it does is prove who got the gouge or possibly who is having a good day getting lucky flying a new jet they have zero hours in. Mostly who got the gouge.
FWIW DL supposedly has had very good luck with the generic cog tests they use in lieu of a sim. I don't think there is any tangibile benefit to using them…unless you own the sim and can rent spare capacity to interview prep companies... As any ex America West pilot will tell you, they had a difficult but valid sim. No, they didn't bother with complex approaches and IFR procedures like Alaska. Instead, you flew an old school 73-1 in a constant airspeed climb and descents while doing constant rate turns between two heading bugs. Then you would slow the airspeed while climbing while continuing to do this. 250 down to 210 and then 160. One might ask, ***? A good portion of the candidates would stall in the slow airspeed climb with the turns. They were hoping they would. Because here is where they could see their instincts. Did they recover? Did they do it naturally? Basically, how did they perform under stress and resolve it. As you said, "does it reveal secret pilot potential." Naw. Valuable insight into the skills and critical thinking. Yes In conclusion. The people we hire today Gloopy are gonna be sitting next to you. We are screening pilots with less and less experience than the 90 and 2000 hires. Still think it is a bad idea? |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1656597)
Now THIS adds an interesting ingredient to the discussion. If what you say is true, then the scope hawks that are all chafed under their saddle blanket can relax because DAL will never buy all of the super duper large RJs that they are all worried about. After all, if our exclusive carrier is downgrading and backsliding, why would they need them? But what this agreement would appear to do is to start the process of exclusive arrangements with the rapidly dwindling regional airline industry. Don't want to be exclusive? See DAL vs Alaska......
The reason management is currently giving to explain the downgrades is the lack of qualified pilots applying to Endeavor. They have stated that Delta cannot execute their business plan with the current situation. I think we are going to see each major identify a most favored nation/regional. They want to be able to say to a prospective pilot that if you want to work for Delta, United, or American you need to start out at our designated regional. I predict American will follow suit shortly but I think they will offer better terms. The chess game for new hires is here. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1656594)
T Square,
Our MEC is IMHO the world's best when it comes to finding leverage. I do not expect this flow to deliver the operational reliability Richard Anderson desires across the bottom 40% of Delta's network. It is a quick band aid which creates more problems in the cockpits of Endeavor airlines. One can only imagine the entitled new hire with the grumpy crusty Captain who failed his interview. It is not an idea mentoring environment and maybe not even safe (as the two semi recent deadly accidents which hit Delta's books thanks to outsourcing proved). You should understand that you benefit when:
Your opinion is political fact (truth), but it's perceived as rude to rub our noses in it. |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1656602)
I didn't mean to come across as arrogant. I just mean that I see no reason to buy back what will eventually come our way anyway. The RJ experiment is over... especially here at DAL. Yes they are slightly bigger, but look at UAL where they still have a million of the 50 seaters. I think the battle underlying all of this is control of those larger airframes as the 50s become more and more economically unfeasible. Hmmmmm where have I heard that line of logic before? :eek:
I'm a line dog. I have no political connections whatsoever. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1656625)
You are a well spoken line dog.
|
Originally Posted by TheManager
(Post 1656604)
We are screening pilots with less and less experience than the 90 and 2000 hires. Still think it is a bad idea?
DL has had exceptional success with non sim interviews. If sim interviews are really a clear and significant advantage, it should be easy to prove it. Yet airlines at every level have sim interviews or not, with no discernible difference. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:33 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands