Butthurt (formerly Baffled)
01-26-2019 | 08:12 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,368
Likes: 366
Ladies and gentlemen, can we all agree the best pilots are the ones that volunteer on their off days by passing out Christmas gifts in their uniforms and then posting the photos on Facebook to make sure everyone knows how nice they are?
Those are the only ones I want in that cockpit when the no2 engine pops out of Bogotá.
Those are the only ones I want in that cockpit when the no2 engine pops out of Bogotá.
01-26-2019 | 08:45 AM
#34
Banned
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Yes bless my heart.
I’m betting a regional pilot flies more in 2 months than the mil guy does in a year.
Yeah the states in between Nevada and North Carolina.
I’m betting a regional pilot flies more in 2 months than the mil guy does in a year.
Yeah the states in between Nevada and North Carolina.
01-26-2019 | 09:11 AM
#35
All is fine at .79
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 4,486
Likes: 42
From: Paahlot
I think it's more than a military fetish or even gung-ho comradeship or respect for the quality of military training. It keeps the cost of the payroll down.
Why WOULD an airline wish to hire a 25 year old at a major when they could hire a 45.year old military retiree? Both are going to get paid based on their seniority.
Say both spend ten years climbing the FO Payscale, then become captains. That's a push for payroll. But then two years later both are going to go over 12 years, essentially maxing out top Payscale for a lot of airlines. But one guy is going to stay there for eight years and then retire - to be replaced if possible with another 45 year old and the process gets repeated. The other is going to stay there for 28 years and retire.
So which group of pilots is going to represent the LOWEST annual personnel cost to the airline over the course of their career? The guy who spends half of his career as an FO - who are needed on a pretty much one for one basis as captains - or the guy who spends three quarters of his career as a captain, most of that at the top of the Payscale? That's pretty simple arithmetic for the HR and accounting people to do.
No, given their druthers, the guys with the green eyeshades and sharp pencils will always prefer the older guy, other factors being essentially equal. The training cost of bringing two 45 year olds up to standard are trivial compared to the cost of bringing one 25 year old up to standard and then eventually paying him top scale for three decades.
Given their druthers, the accountants would rather start the 25 year olds out at a wholly owned regional, and keep him there for 20 years, plugging older flyers from the military and older OTS hires from somebody else's regional in above him so they can reset his seniority back to zero when he does eventually flow to the major.
It isn't personal, just bookkeeping.
Why WOULD an airline wish to hire a 25 year old at a major when they could hire a 45.year old military retiree? Both are going to get paid based on their seniority.
Say both spend ten years climbing the FO Payscale, then become captains. That's a push for payroll. But then two years later both are going to go over 12 years, essentially maxing out top Payscale for a lot of airlines. But one guy is going to stay there for eight years and then retire - to be replaced if possible with another 45 year old and the process gets repeated. The other is going to stay there for 28 years and retire.
So which group of pilots is going to represent the LOWEST annual personnel cost to the airline over the course of their career? The guy who spends half of his career as an FO - who are needed on a pretty much one for one basis as captains - or the guy who spends three quarters of his career as a captain, most of that at the top of the Payscale? That's pretty simple arithmetic for the HR and accounting people to do.
No, given their druthers, the guys with the green eyeshades and sharp pencils will always prefer the older guy, other factors being essentially equal. The training cost of bringing two 45 year olds up to standard are trivial compared to the cost of bringing one 25 year old up to standard and then eventually paying him top scale for three decades.
Given their druthers, the accountants would rather start the 25 year olds out at a wholly owned regional, and keep him there for 20 years, plugging older flyers from the military and older OTS hires from somebody else's regional in above him so they can reset his seniority back to zero when he does eventually flow to the major.
It isn't personal, just bookkeeping.
01-26-2019 | 12:07 PM
#36
Living the Dream
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
I think it's more than a military fetish or even gung-ho comradeship or respect for the quality of military training. It keeps the cost of the payroll down.
Why WOULD an airline wish to hire a 25 year old at a major when they could hire a 45.year old military retiree? Both are going to get paid based on their seniority.
Say both spend ten years climbing the FO Payscale, then become captains. That's a push for payroll. But then two years later both are going to go over 12 years, essentially maxing out top Payscale for a lot of airlines. But one guy is going to stay there for eight years and then retire - to be replaced if possible with another 45 year old and the process gets repeated. The other is going to stay there for 28 years and retire.
So which group of pilots is going to represent the LOWEST annual personnel cost to the airline over the course of their career? The guy who spends half of his career as an FO - who are needed on a pretty much one for one basis as captains - or the guy who spends three quarters of his career as a captain, most of that at the top of the Payscale? That's pretty simple arithmetic for the HR and accounting people to do.
No, given their druthers, the guys with the green eyeshades and sharp pencils will always prefer the older guy, other factors being essentially equal. The training cost of bringing two 45 year olds up to standard are trivial compared to the cost of bringing one 25 year old up to standard and then eventually paying him top scale for three decades.
Given their druthers, the accountants would rather start the 25 year olds out at a wholly owned regional, and keep him there for 20 years, plugging older flyers from the military and older OTS hires from somebody else's regional in above him so they can reset his seniority back to zero when he does eventually flow to the major.
It isn't personal, just bookkeeping.
Why WOULD an airline wish to hire a 25 year old at a major when they could hire a 45.year old military retiree? Both are going to get paid based on their seniority.
Say both spend ten years climbing the FO Payscale, then become captains. That's a push for payroll. But then two years later both are going to go over 12 years, essentially maxing out top Payscale for a lot of airlines. But one guy is going to stay there for eight years and then retire - to be replaced if possible with another 45 year old and the process gets repeated. The other is going to stay there for 28 years and retire.
So which group of pilots is going to represent the LOWEST annual personnel cost to the airline over the course of their career? The guy who spends half of his career as an FO - who are needed on a pretty much one for one basis as captains - or the guy who spends three quarters of his career as a captain, most of that at the top of the Payscale? That's pretty simple arithmetic for the HR and accounting people to do.
No, given their druthers, the guys with the green eyeshades and sharp pencils will always prefer the older guy, other factors being essentially equal. The training cost of bringing two 45 year olds up to standard are trivial compared to the cost of bringing one 25 year old up to standard and then eventually paying him top scale for three decades.
Given their druthers, the accountants would rather start the 25 year olds out at a wholly owned regional, and keep him there for 20 years, plugging older flyers from the military and older OTS hires from somebody else's regional in above him so they can reset his seniority back to zero when he does eventually flow to the major.
It isn't personal, just bookkeeping.
But this also begs the question: why don’t the majors just generally hire 53-year-olds? Seems like Delta doesn’t mind young guys, and it seems like most mainline new hires are in their 30’s and 40’s.
01-26-2019 | 12:08 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Baffled
This is the reason no major will staple a regional to its seniority list; always cheaper to reset.
But this also begs the question: why don’t the majors just generally hire 53-year-olds? Seems like Delta doesn’t mind young guys, and it seems like most mainline new hires are in their 30’s and 40’s.
But this also begs the question: why don’t the majors just generally hire 53-year-olds? Seems like Delta doesn’t mind young guys, and it seems like most mainline new hires are in their 30’s and 40’s.
IIRC, the average age since hiring resumed in 2014 has been about 37.
01-26-2019 | 12:24 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
I am sitting in a hotel having a crappy dinner at the Marriott. I meet a fellow pilot and ask him if he is here for The FedEx interview. He looks at me and says yes . I then find out that he is ex-Military, I believe Air Force and has never flown anything larger than a KIng Air. I am thinking this B.S. I have five type ratings with 121 pic and two check airman qualifications and a letter of rec. and can't get a call!!
I doubt it has anything to do with your resume.
Good luck.
Last edited by terminal; 01-26-2019 at 01:02 PM.
01-26-2019 | 12:34 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,871
Likes: 189
This is the reason no major will staple a regional to its seniority list; always cheaper to reset.
But this also begs the question: why don’t the majors just generally hire 53-year-olds? Seems like Delta doesn’t mind young guys, and it seems like most mainline new hires are in their 30’s and 40’s.
But this also begs the question: why don’t the majors just generally hire 53-year-olds? Seems like Delta doesn’t mind young guys, and it seems like most mainline new hires are in their 30’s and 40’s.
01-26-2019 | 12:41 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,244
Likes: 2
From: Baja Vermont
After 50+ years of intensive experience in hiring, mountains of data, probably tens of thousands of interviews, airlines have a real good idea of the person they believe will be successful employees generating profits and good will. They wouldn’t be hiring who they are hiring unless they were positively convinced those hires will work out.
Then, they watch every pilot’s performance over the years, more mountains of data of who handled the training, and more importantly, who performed during daily ops and in emergencies best. What backgrounds did best for the company. Any one pilots experience rating their peers is anecdotal compared to the data.
GF
Then, they watch every pilot’s performance over the years, more mountains of data of who handled the training, and more importantly, who performed during daily ops and in emergencies best. What backgrounds did best for the company. Any one pilots experience rating their peers is anecdotal compared to the data.
GF
