Why I chose FedEX
02-27-2018, 12:13 PM
#141
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Posts: 121
Originally Posted by JollyF15
I definitely feel we should interview some pilots with no recommendations, there are some great pilots out there that don't know anyone on the inside. That's what the Dr Kavorkian Computer Matrix was supposed to do for us. Score applications based on certain qualifications and experiences. Recommendations did raise someone's score, as it should. If they are a known quantity, and I'm willing to stake my reputation on someone who's a great fit here, then that should happen.
Where things went south is when the Lawyers got the hammer on who we hire about 3-4 years ago. They decide who interviews and who does not. These NON-PILOT Lawyers actually went in and started lowering peoples scores if they had too many recommendation (not urban legend, it really happened). This is crazy, and as previously posted you can't make this sh-t up.
So guess who stopped getting called? The rock star, test pilot school graduate, Space X pilot who had 10 letters of recommendation. That really happened. Others some of us knew and flew with (mostly military fighter types in the circles I ran in) that were rock stars also were passed on getting the call to interview here. They are all at Delta, American, SWA, and United now.
Now, the same is happening with PEs. Those with PEs are getting punished and we continue to hire pilots with ZERO recommendations in large numbers over guys with a past we can vouch for.
We need to change the sign on the Door of pilot recruitment to "Lawyers Enter by Appointment Only."
PS - If that was too Microaggressive, my appologies
Where things went south is when the Lawyers got the hammer on who we hire about 3-4 years ago. They decide who interviews and who does not. These NON-PILOT Lawyers actually went in and started lowering peoples scores if they had too many recommendation (not urban legend, it really happened). This is crazy, and as previously posted you can't make this sh-t up.
So guess who stopped getting called? The rock star, test pilot school graduate, Space X pilot who had 10 letters of recommendation. That really happened. Others some of us knew and flew with (mostly military fighter types in the circles I ran in) that were rock stars also were passed on getting the call to interview here. They are all at Delta, American, SWA, and United now.
Now, the same is happening with PEs. Those with PEs are getting punished and we continue to hire pilots with ZERO recommendations in large numbers over guys with a past we can vouch for.
We need to change the sign on the Door of pilot recruitment to "Lawyers Enter by Appointment Only."
PS - If that was too Microaggressive, my appologies
Known quantities are important in our business.
02-27-2018, 12:23 PM
#142
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,099
Why I chose FedEX
Originally Posted by Floy
The algorithm, computer scored system to score applicants is really the big problem IMO. I've seen what I would categorize as some of the most qualified pilots in the entire industry, get passed by as a result of not scoring high enough. Perhaps they have too many hours, not a recent enough training event, or took too long to get a degree for having to feed their family through it all.
Many of these ultra qualified folks will never have their app even looked at by a human if I read these posts right. I think thats a shame. I know a few of these folks. Maybe I've got it wrong as to why they cant get a call...
Many of these ultra qualified folks will never have their app even looked at by a human if I read these posts right. I think thats a shame. I know a few of these folks. Maybe I've got it wrong as to why they cant get a call...
I’m not sure how picking pilots to interview would be done other than by some algorithm considering the thousands of pilots that apply/reapply/update every year. This is the same at every other airline. The other thing that is the same at every other airline is imminently qualified pilots not getting an interview invite. This issue is not just a FDX issue.
My main point was that here at FDX, it’s FDX pilots interviewing and scoring pilot candidates. As far as I know, there are no quotas. So if this “biased” algorithm picks a dozen unqualified pilots to interview, none have to be offered a job. Until that happens, it’s difficult to argue that the algorithm isn’t choosing qualified pilots. What is different at DAL, AAL, UAL, and SWA is that those airlines, HR is directly involved in asking questions during the interview and selection process.
It seems that there are a lot more civilian pilots to choose from compared to military. Maybe that’s why there is a disparity in the comparison. Although, in my class of a couple dozen, about half were military.
By the way, I’m strictly civilian (CFI/135/121), took 6 years to get a BS, didn’t have a recent training event (type rating) in the previous 10 years, had more than 10,000 hours, and had no PE. I literally checked every box you mentioned but was fortunate enough to have received an invite anyway.
02-27-2018, 01:41 PM
#143
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 318
Algorithm is French for bias
Originally Posted by FXLAX
I’m not sure how picking pilots to interview would be done other than by some algorithm considering the thousands of pilots that apply/reapply/update every year. This is the same at every other airline. The other thing that is the same at every other airline is imminently qualified pilots not getting an interview invite. This issue is not just a FDX issue.
My main point was that here at FDX, it’s FDX pilots interviewing and scoring pilot candidates. As far as I know, there are no quotas. So if this “biased” algorithm picks a dozen unqualified pilots to interview, none have to be offered a job. Until that happens, it’s difficult to argue that the algorithm isn’t choosing qualified pilots. What is different at DAL, AAL, UAL, and SWA is that those airlines, HR is directly involved in asking questions during the interview and selection process.
It seems that there are a lot more civilian pilots to choose from compared to military. Maybe that’s why there is a disparity in the comparison. Although, in my class of a couple dozen, about half were military.
By the way, I’m strictly civilian (CFI/135/121), took 6 years to get a BS, didn’t have a recent training event (type rating) in the previous 10 years, had more than 10,000 hours, and had no PE. I literally checked every box you mentioned but was fortunate enough to have received an invite anyway.
My main point was that here at FDX, it’s FDX pilots interviewing and scoring pilot candidates. As far as I know, there are no quotas. So if this “biased” algorithm picks a dozen unqualified pilots to interview, none have to be offered a job. Until that happens, it’s difficult to argue that the algorithm isn’t choosing qualified pilots. What is different at DAL, AAL, UAL, and SWA is that those airlines, HR is directly involved in asking questions during the interview and selection process.
It seems that there are a lot more civilian pilots to choose from compared to military. Maybe that’s why there is a disparity in the comparison. Although, in my class of a couple dozen, about half were military.
By the way, I’m strictly civilian (CFI/135/121), took 6 years to get a BS, didn’t have a recent training event (type rating) in the previous 10 years, had more than 10,000 hours, and had no PE. I literally checked every box you mentioned but was fortunate enough to have received an invite anyway.
They can put in any bias they want to get the records they want thrown on the table. I can tell you for a fact that the bias is in favor of those without letters, and against those who happen to know other pilots on property and can be vouched for. You would think the pilots we are referring to would max out the Kavorkian Matrix. They are either not being called at all OR by the time we call them it's been so long that Brand X has scarfed them up.
My example of a Test Pilot Graduate and Space X pilot with 10 recommendations NOT GETTING CALLED is not a myth. It really happened. We could list many other "rock stars" that FedEx Pilot recruitment has passed on in favor of unknowns with ZERO letters/PEs.
I hope people who have the power to change this can put Pilots back in charge of pilot recruitment. Time will tell.
02-27-2018, 01:47 PM
#144
Organizational Learning
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Originally Posted by JollyF15
Where things went south is when the Lawyers got the hammer on who we hire about 3-4 years ago. They decide who interviews and who does not. These NON-PILOT Lawyers actually went in and started lowering peoples scores if they had too many recommendation (not urban legend, it really happened). This is crazy, and as previously posted you can't make this sh-t up.
So guess who stopped getting called? The rock star, test pilot school graduate, Space X pilot who had 10 letters of recommendation. That really happened.
That sign replaced the "DO NOT DISTURB -- TESTING IN PROGRESS" sign when we started figuring out they couldn't possibly be testing 24/7. When I visited for the first time in over 20 years to ask what they needed to constitute "recent experience" I could barely get the manager to look up at me from her computer.
The ex-legal department, non-pilot manager, who apparently can't be bothered to offer a pilot the common courtesy of eye contact.
The first "wicket" of our process is not controlled by pilots. Having pilots in the subsequent filtering stages may exclude some bad apples who made it through the first stage, but it will never be able to recover and include the OUTSTANDING apples who were eliminated in the first stage by lawyers who don't particularly like pilots in the first place.
I chuckle when I hear new-hires or recent hires on here aver that standards haven't been lowered and we're getting the same caliber of new pilots today as we've been getting all along. Oh, really, Mr. New-hire? Tell me about your experience flying with new-hires over the past decade. I've been flying with new-hires for more than 10 years now, and it has been my experience, sadly, that the quality of the product is NOT the same. I've never been an advocate of our Probation policy. I voted against it the first time, I've voted against every expansion of it, and I've advocated against the extra-contractual abuses of it. I do not support the system of captains writing reports on probationary pilots. If they didn't want my opinion about who do they hire in the first place, why should they care about my opinion now? And yet, based on some recent experiences, I've been tempted to submit one of those things, with negative remarks even. Tempted.
They've broken the system. Plain and simple.
.
02-27-2018, 02:05 PM
#145
Organizational Learning
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
Originally Posted by FXLAX
I’m not sure how picking pilots to interview would be done other than by some algorithm considering the thousands of pilots that apply/reapply/update every year. This is the same at every other airline. The other thing that is the same at every other airline is imminently qualified pilots not getting an interview invite. This issue is not just a FDX issue.
You missed it when actual pilots who know what it's like to work here got to recommend other pilots who they knew would be a good fit. That was when pilots' opinions were considered at least as valuable as some psychologist's opinion of who might be able to successfully navigate all the training cycles — that is his stated, singular goal.
Originally Posted by FXLAX
My main point was that here at FDX, it’s FDX pilots interviewing and scoring pilot candidates.
I'd be interested to compare interview failure rates today to interview failure rates 5 or 10 years ago. It used to be said if you got called for an interview, the job was yours to lose. Anecdotally, failure rates were very low then, and not so low these days. What does that say about the Doctor's algorithm?
.
02-27-2018, 04:01 PM
#146
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,756
Originally Posted by 5millionaire
Man, I’ll admit at first I was kind of against the idea the system is broken. But if they really aren’t giving weight to the PE system to favor guys getting one, that is broken.
Known quantities are important in our business.
Known quantities are important in our business.
Deciding they aren't going to give preference to an applicant is one thing. Soliciting recommendations and then denying those applicants just because they have recommendations is low and twisted. I hope it isn't true.
02-27-2018, 06:31 PM
#147
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Originally Posted by PicklePausePull
My experience here shows that quite a few of our new hires are arriving with both an entitlement mentality, and, as the saying goes, "Writing checks there bodies can't cash." It seems to be among the younger crowd (twenties and early thirties) coming from a year or so as captain at their previous outfit.
What some of these guys fail to understand is that their 1000 PIC Turbine is the MINIMUM requirement for getting an interview. Most of the guys on the property here had 3000+ PIC Turbine to get the interview prior to this hiriing wave. Those were the competitive numbers back then. Moreover, I've had to counsel some of these Millennials to tone down their bragging. I tell them they'll be flying with guys/gals with combat experience, air medals, years of bush pilot flying, and thousands of hours 121 PIC Turbine. And while their box work is often very good, their hand flying and decision making are more in line with a young, inexperienced pilot.
I prefer the old way: pilots hiring pilots.
What some of these guys fail to understand is that their 1000 PIC Turbine is the MINIMUM requirement for getting an interview. Most of the guys on the property here had 3000+ PIC Turbine to get the interview prior to this hiriing wave. Those were the competitive numbers back then. Moreover, I've had to counsel some of these Millennials to tone down their bragging. I tell them they'll be flying with guys/gals with combat experience, air medals, years of bush pilot flying, and thousands of hours 121 PIC Turbine. And while their box work is often very good, their hand flying and decision making are more in line with a young, inexperienced pilot.
I prefer the old way: pilots hiring pilots.
02-27-2018, 06:32 PM
#148
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Originally Posted by HIFLYR
Nothing against military guys and gals, respect the service for us. However those 2500 hr RJ guys are working in the system we operate in everday and probably doing wing low cross wind landings to boot. Just Saying
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
What does this even mean?
02-27-2018, 07:12 PM
#149
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,099
Originally Posted by JollyF15
There's always been a bias, the algorithm is programed by a human. The humans doing the programing right now are Shrinks and Lawyers, not pilots. Pilot only interview and score the pile of records they are given from behind the curtain.
They can put in any bias they want to get the records they want thrown on the table. I can tell you for a fact that the bias is in favor of those without letters, and against those who happen to know other pilots on property and can be vouched for. You would think the pilots we are referring to would max out the Kavorkian Matrix. They are either not being called at all OR by the time we call them it's been so long that Brand X has scarfed them up.
My example of a Test Pilot Graduate and Space X pilot with 10 recommendations NOT GETTING CALLED is not a myth. It really happened. We could list many other "rock stars" that FedEx Pilot recruitment has passed on in favor of unknowns with ZERO letters/PEs.
I hope people who have the power to change this can put Pilots back in charge of pilot recruitment. Time will tell.
They can put in any bias they want to get the records they want thrown on the table. I can tell you for a fact that the bias is in favor of those without letters, and against those who happen to know other pilots on property and can be vouched for. You would think the pilots we are referring to would max out the Kavorkian Matrix. They are either not being called at all OR by the time we call them it's been so long that Brand X has scarfed them up.
My example of a Test Pilot Graduate and Space X pilot with 10 recommendations NOT GETTING CALLED is not a myth. It really happened. We could list many other "rock stars" that FedEx Pilot recruitment has passed on in favor of unknowns with ZERO letters/PEs.
I hope people who have the power to change this can put Pilots back in charge of pilot recruitment. Time will tell.
FDX not calling qualified pilots isn’t just a FDX issue. Anecdotally, from talking do dozens and dozens of pilots just at my previous employer, all airlines pass up great people and pilots and hire some head scratchers. This happens everywhere!
Originally Posted by TonyC
Of course you're not sure. You've only seen one way. You didn't get to see it before it was broken.
You missed it when actual pilots who know what it's like to work here got to recommend other pilots who they knew would be a good fit. That was when pilots' opinions were considered at least as valuable as some psychologist's opinion of who might be able to successfully navigate all the training cycles — that is his stated, singular goal.
And your main point is moot when you recognize the FDX pilots only get to interview the candidates who the lawyers and psychologists let them interview. Giving them the power to exclude outstanding candidates not only lowers the quality of the final product (not necessarily individually, but as a whole, and in some instances individually as well), but it also increases the burden on the FDX pilots who conduct the interviews to weed out the candidates who should have never been invited to interview in the first place.
I'd be interested to compare interview failure rates today to interview failure rates 5 or 10 years ago. It used to be said if you got called for an interview, the job was yours to lose. Anecdotally, failure rates were very low then, and not so low these days. What does that say about the Doctor's algorithm?
.
You missed it when actual pilots who know what it's like to work here got to recommend other pilots who they knew would be a good fit. That was when pilots' opinions were considered at least as valuable as some psychologist's opinion of who might be able to successfully navigate all the training cycles — that is his stated, singular goal.
And your main point is moot when you recognize the FDX pilots only get to interview the candidates who the lawyers and psychologists let them interview. Giving them the power to exclude outstanding candidates not only lowers the quality of the final product (not necessarily individually, but as a whole, and in some instances individually as well), but it also increases the burden on the FDX pilots who conduct the interviews to weed out the candidates who should have never been invited to interview in the first place.
I'd be interested to compare interview failure rates today to interview failure rates 5 or 10 years ago. It used to be said if you got called for an interview, the job was yours to lose. Anecdotally, failure rates were very low then, and not so low these days. What does that say about the Doctor's algorithm?
.
If you read my comment in context, you should see that it was in reference to how to pick candidates out of thousands of applicants. Not that I can’t fathom some other way of it physically being done.
Also, my point isn’t mute. Even if you are right that only psychologists and lawyers pick who is interviewed, that doesn’t mean that those pilots are not just as qualified or more qualified than pilots chosen to interview in a different way. The burden to the interviewer isn’t any more when interviewing a qualified applicant versus an unqualified applicant. The interviewers evaluate both the same. Unless there are quotas, and I’ve never heard of such a thing, the interviewers doesn’t have to pass anyone or isn’t obligated to. Or they can give a thumbs up to everyone if they all pass.
02-27-2018, 07:41 PM
#150
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 96
I think you may be an outlier on that. I may be wrong but I think that for every story like yours, there's likely 10 that are the opposite.
That said of course I understand you need a computer scoring system to sift through the thousands trying to get an interview. I just think its a shame that pilots seem to have been left behind on the criteria that the computer uses. The most qualified and safest pilots may not have gotten top grades, or had enough money to get through school uninterrupted.
Hours of flying and positions of responsibility at your previous job should count higher. At the very least to get to talk to a human. In most cases however, the hours actually start to work against you at a certain point. There is so much anecdotal let alone observational evidence of what the airlines prefer. They seem to pick, more often than not, younger guys (and gals) who had good grades and got through school quickly. Meanwhile so many pilots with bonafide credentials have been left behind. I dont know how qualified and safe a pilot is who got good grades. I'm not sure how getting through school in 4 years proves anything except maybe how much money you had.
I do know however of several incredible pilots who the computer scored low. One guy in particular is an LCA, an SCA, the consensus SME and developer of CRM/TEM at his company and the list goes on. He never has gotten a call, he believes, because he didnt excel in school until much later. He had to mortgage his house to finish college which took a long time. And he's now got so many hours they likely consider him untrainable.
Life in the age of algorithms in not the wonder and panacea that some make it out to be. In some cases those who have programmed the algorithm dont even know how its working.
QUOTE=FXLAX;2538664]I’m not sure how picking pilots to interview would be done other than by some algorithm considering the thousands of pilots that apply/reapply/update every year. This is the same at every other airline. The other thing that is the same at every other airline is imminently qualified pilots not getting an interview invite. This issue is not just a FDX issue.
My main point was that here at FDX, it’s FDX pilots interviewing and scoring pilot candidates. As far as I know, there are no quotas. So if this “biased” algorithm picks a dozen unqualified pilots to interview, none have to be offered a job. Until that happens, it’s difficult to argue that the algorithm isn’t choosing qualified pilots. What is different at DAL, AAL, UAL, and SWA is that those airlines, HR is directly involved in asking questions during the interview and selection process.
It seems that there are a lot more civilian pilots to choose from compared to military. Maybe that’s why there is a disparity in the comparison. Although, in my class of a couple dozen, about half were military.
By the way, I’m strictly civilian (CFI/135/121), took 6 years to get a BS, didn’t have a recent training event (type rating) in the previous 10 years, had more than 10,000 hours, and had no PE. I literally checked every box you mentioned but was fortunate enough to have received an invite anyway.[/QUOTE]
That said of course I understand you need a computer scoring system to sift through the thousands trying to get an interview. I just think its a shame that pilots seem to have been left behind on the criteria that the computer uses. The most qualified and safest pilots may not have gotten top grades, or had enough money to get through school uninterrupted.
Hours of flying and positions of responsibility at your previous job should count higher. At the very least to get to talk to a human. In most cases however, the hours actually start to work against you at a certain point. There is so much anecdotal let alone observational evidence of what the airlines prefer. They seem to pick, more often than not, younger guys (and gals) who had good grades and got through school quickly. Meanwhile so many pilots with bonafide credentials have been left behind. I dont know how qualified and safe a pilot is who got good grades. I'm not sure how getting through school in 4 years proves anything except maybe how much money you had.
I do know however of several incredible pilots who the computer scored low. One guy in particular is an LCA, an SCA, the consensus SME and developer of CRM/TEM at his company and the list goes on. He never has gotten a call, he believes, because he didnt excel in school until much later. He had to mortgage his house to finish college which took a long time. And he's now got so many hours they likely consider him untrainable.
Life in the age of algorithms in not the wonder and panacea that some make it out to be. In some cases those who have programmed the algorithm dont even know how its working.
QUOTE=FXLAX;2538664]I’m not sure how picking pilots to interview would be done other than by some algorithm considering the thousands of pilots that apply/reapply/update every year. This is the same at every other airline. The other thing that is the same at every other airline is imminently qualified pilots not getting an interview invite. This issue is not just a FDX issue.
My main point was that here at FDX, it’s FDX pilots interviewing and scoring pilot candidates. As far as I know, there are no quotas. So if this “biased” algorithm picks a dozen unqualified pilots to interview, none have to be offered a job. Until that happens, it’s difficult to argue that the algorithm isn’t choosing qualified pilots. What is different at DAL, AAL, UAL, and SWA is that those airlines, HR is directly involved in asking questions during the interview and selection process.
It seems that there are a lot more civilian pilots to choose from compared to military. Maybe that’s why there is a disparity in the comparison. Although, in my class of a couple dozen, about half were military.
By the way, I’m strictly civilian (CFI/135/121), took 6 years to get a BS, didn’t have a recent training event (type rating) in the previous 10 years, had more than 10,000 hours, and had no PE. I literally checked every box you mentioned but was fortunate enough to have received an invite anyway.[/QUOTE]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
