Originally Posted by Sluggo_63

Oh, that’s rich... wait... you were serious? That’s even funnier. Pot..kettle

Originally Posted by TonyC

Let's have dinner in Paris next week. I'll explain.






.

Originally Posted by TonyC

Perhaps you don't understand the difference between objective and subjective.



The fact that you entered your "data" into a computer does not mean the selection was objective. When scores and weights are attached to those numbers based on judgments made by psychologists and preferences of lawyers, the selection is decidely subjective. Which college is better? That's subjective. How many hours, too many, too few, are best? That's subjective. Every criteria considered is weighted by a subjective judgment, and none of those judgments are being made by pilots.











So, not only are you an expert on hiring at FedEx, you're an expert on hiring industry-wide. Your talents are being underutilized, I'm certain. You should call Pilot Recruiting and make an appointment to visit and offer your services.











What a condescending remark.



I DID read your comment in context, and reading it again doesn't change a thing.









Do you believe it has never been the case in the past that we've been privileged to pick candidates out of thousands of applicants? You act like this is a new phenomenon, and the only process with which you are familiar must be the only way it can be done.



It's not new, and it's not the only way.









You're correct, for once. Your point is not mute. It is MOOT. Look it up.





Your main point was, "... that here at FDX, it’s FDX pilots interviewing and scoring pilot candidates."



FedEx pilots do NOT have the chance to look at the entire population of applicants. They only get to look at the pilots who pass through the initial screening, which gets ZERO pilot input. They only get to look at the pilots approved by the psychologist and the lawyers -- you know, the same lawyers who sit on the OTHER side of the negotiating table and negotiate AGAINST us during CBA negotiations, the same lawyers who sit on the OTHER side of the table during discipline and termination hearings. You don't think they have a bias?









I'm sure you know who's just as qualified or more qualified based on your vast experience and successful application process. Since the process picked you, it must be the best process, right? After all, you were entitled to be successful, and this process gave you what was owed.



I think you're starting to prove my earlier point. We should fly together, soon. I'll buy dinner, and you can educate me.















.

Originally Posted by Floy

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.

Originally Posted by JollyF15

I won't even try to add anything to Tony C's SNAP Intervention (SNAP = Sensitive New Age Pilots). I would not label all the new hires as SNAPs. The young CRJ new hires I've had the pleasure of working with have been very impressive. But it's obvious by some of the responses on this thread that the lawyers have been actively recruiting SNAPs. You are the gift that keeps on giving. You continue proving our point that PILOTS should be doing pilot s--t, and lawyers should be doing lawyer s--t.

WARNING - that was intended to be Microaggressive

Originally Posted by Sluggo_63

Ok, but I get to pick the wine...

Originally Posted by HIFLYR

I get you might think civilians might be sub standard have attitudes but both groups have their 10%.

Originally Posted by PicklePausePull

That's precisely what I'm saying, and for many, it shows in both their flying skills and their entitlement mentality. Not all, mind you, but plenty. And yes, it is a good bet that a population of pilots with the skills and experience you mention will be eminently more qualified than the average joe with the minimums quals on paper. Have you flown with some of our 25 year olds yet?

Originally Posted by ShyGuy

Posts like these why HR types have taken over pilot hiring. If it was up to you, only your own pilot buddies would get in and lead to cronyism. You probably want merit based upgrades too?

Originally Posted by Boeingornotgoin

Misinformation - Ah, no. Did you see the part about "past 6 years, working as a counselor for ECIC, hundreds of clients, phone conversations with 50 folks in the pool recently", etc?