Let's not turn this into a Mil/CIV ****ing match. We're better than that and all professionals.

Good luck to all. And much more importantly, remember you make your own luck.

We were doing just fine until the good Colonel interjected this nugget, turning this into (yet another) Civ vs Mil thread.



Agreed!

Don't forget the fact that Spirit pilots are both domestic and international, AA is one or the other. Spit trains at high density altitude fields, no hand holding going places and the training for a PIC type is actually in the left seat unlike AA which is seat specific. Imagine getting 10 sims just in the right seat Iike AA does. Spirit's stupidest could make it through that.

Other than a brief, legendary period in the 60's there's always been way more qualified applicants than jobs. Today is no exception, notwithstanding rumors of a shortage. The civilian OTS candidate is one of thousands competing for a few slots per month. I think that's all the "whiners" are trying to say. Not everyone's gonna make it to a legacy.

On what data are you basing the fact that you are more qualified than some "Hot Shot" low time F-16 Pilot. Delta would not be valuing those individuals unless their experience with those individuals had been productive. Obviously, you don't think the F-16 trained pilot is very good or makes a very good Delta pilot. Delta management disagrees which is the reason these low time F-16 pilots get quick interviews. IF you have a chip on your shoulder over this you might have a hard time getting hired by one of the F-16 preferred (Delta, Southwest) airlines. My experience has been Delta does an excellent job of finding pilots that fit Delta's culture and I have rarely flown with a Captain who was a d***. Just my $.02.

There are 25,000 active duty mil pilots vs 18,000 regional pilots. Maybe it should be 60/40 mil vs civ hiring. Just sayin.

Good god, who cares. If you can fly an F-16 you can certainly fly an Airbus or Boeing. An airplane is an airplane and Deltas airplanes are no harder to fly than Uniteds, JetBlues etc.

You do know Delta flies the Maddog right?

Lol. Like I said, an airplane is an airplane

that wins the internets

Is this flightinfoII.com?

Krist. This thread SUCKS.
Has even a SINGLE person contributed to OP?
What a waste of five pages.

This is APC, go somewhere else if you want answers!

As a military pilot, I have tremendous respect for pilots who go the all civ route. They pay out the nose to get a job making slave wages so they might some day get a chance for a job at a major. And from looking at the hiring threads, it seems like it's harder to differentiate yourself as an all civ guy.

On the other hand, my kids have (and are still) growing up without me because when I finally leave the Navy, I'll have been overseas for the last 5 years of my Navy career. I'm not a fighter guy, but add in all the sims, pilot training, safety officer school, PQS, random tests and boards, not to mention getting the FAA quals... And I think my total time devoted to "pilot stuff" isn't quite reflected in my TT. Plus, it's an uphill battle to leave the Navy current and qualified... Lady Luck has been smiling on me in that regard.

Point is, the process of getting to a major sucks for everybody. It serves no purpose to claim one side, civ vs mil, has it any better or worse than the other. We're all paying dues. Best of luck, gringo. Hope all works out well for you.

Yeahbut...a mad dog is a...

MAD DOG! :eek:

(and that dog will bite you!):D

i have been from one side of this globe to the other. I have seen good mil guys( navy seem to have the best stories) and I have seen good civ guys. I have seen clowns from both sides of the street. The mil guys do get a break. To say you don't is dishonest. This fellow will not put up with that BS.
To say the managers are making the bet choices is laughable. I have lived through some very bad times because of the choices of these enlightened managers. They know as much as **** and shinola.
The system is just the system. As a civ only guy. I figured it out and made my bones. But you mil guys. Please don't tell me that you don't get a small break. Because as I said, your being dishonest.
Aloha
The Hunter of Bever

:rolleyes:

We get a HUGE advantage when it comes to hiring. Unparalleled. That is the one & only reason I spent 20 years in the Navy....so I'd have a leg up on all the civilian guys. And if you believe that I've got a bridge in Alaska to sell ya.

I know we have an advantage. Some things in life just are not fair. Like you said, you play the cards you're dealt in life, or something like that.

There are also a lot of cargo, corporate, expat, etc pilots trying for the legacy jobs too. Also, those 25,000 active duty aren't all applying and retiring right now, some have 10 years left before they have the option to transition. I wonder if the 25k number includes drone pilots...

100% correct. It is what it is.. We all know it.

That's it, 'nuff said, case closed.

Of the pure civilian guys I have flown with 7 were hired at UAL and 3 at Alaska in the last year. 9000 to 6000 hours, all had degrees and all but 2 were LCA, IOE instructors and such. I don't know anyone nor did the previously stated have an interview invite at DAL or AMR.

I have yet to read about a pure civilian getting multiple offers on the whose been hired thread. It seems some military candidates have multiple offers and some are getting invites even though they are not current or even separate until 2017. Other military candidates seem to have to go to the regionals first before they get noticed.

I am sure the guys that offer interview prep can give a better gauge on who is getting the interviews and what their qualifications are based on who they have been prepping over the last year.

Some relevant info
 

OK, I will shed some light on this subject and hopefully it's helpful to the OP. I heard from a friend of a friend, who just interviewed at AAL less than a week ago, that of the roughly nine pilots interviewed, only four were military. The other five were purely civilian, and all five were Part-121 regional and maybe one LCC.

In my AA newhire class last spring there were 35 total and 5 were OTS (including myself). Of the OTS, 2 were prior military, 1 was an AA sim instructor, 1 former AA intern, and me (a few years turboprop 121 and 9 years corporate).

In my interview group of 20, about half were military, half regional, and I was the only corporate guy.

My class of 30 at DL only 3 who weren't military, flow, or SSP. 1 Skywest, 1 Eagle, and 1 Asa/short-time other major.

My Sept. '15 class at UA was a pretty even split between civ and mil. Of the the civs there were 2 regional FOs (myself included) w/ 4500-7000 hours. A few regional captains. 2 LCC FOs and I believe 2 Part-135 people. I may be missing some but that's what I can remember. A couple of the mil guys had gone to regionals for a short time but I'm not counting them in these numbers.

When I interviewed, the majority of military guys, in my group had multiple interviews/offers from majors. None of the civilians had that advantage. Fast forward to the first day of class. Out of 65 only 7 were pure "OTS". The rest were military or spent less than a year at a regional waiting for a major to pick them up. IMHO the ALPA stats are skewed. If I were to guess the majority of people who score apps are prior military. They are more comfortable giving the thumbs up on someone who's walked in their shoes. If 9/11 hadn't happened this thread wouldn't exist. Too many pilots sat in purgatory for 12+ years. Flying UAL/AA/DAL passengers though not afforded the benefit of a mainline seniority number, but literally eligible for welfare assistance. This brings up the underlying issue. LOYALTY. Pilots who jumped ship from regionals to LCC's, realized that the majors had no loyalty to the pilots who flew their feeders. They gained experience flying the exact aircraft that the majors flew. The hope, that this skill set would make them look even prettier to the majors. But the hiring practice changed.
Recently, from a historical perspective, Loyalty to a select few regionals has come to fruition. IMHO only due to economic reasons.

WarEagle you hit the nail on the head.
"The whole system is designed to reinforce their filthy addiction to cheap regional labor. They will hire as many military pilots as possible in the time of pilot shortage, because this forces civilian pilots to flow through their regional feed in order to make it to the mainline."

The Flows and SSP's have helped a few. But if the interview isn't successful the regional pilot has very little chance of actually getting an interview with another Major.

United has it figured out, a diverse workgroup, fosters leaders with many different backgrounds of experience. They'll be the ones to watch in ten years when current newhires start taking leadership positions.

I respect your years of service. But you spent 20 years in for your own personal reasons. With all the O people running the show. No doubt it's been hell. But you stayed in for you.
Cheers

Here's something that hasn't been mentioned, it's tougher to get vetted, and into the military, than it is with a regional airline. That just means the odds are slightly better that the guy doesn't have any significant skeletons in their closet.

A significant portion of the hiring process is risk reduction - improve the odds that the person being hired isn't a mistake. Otherwise what's the point of psychological testing? And yes, it's amazing that some of your/our coworkers passed the pysch exam. What the heck are they looking at, or for, if they got hired!?!?

If you think AA, and perhaps DL, isn't hiring a diverse group you're not paying attention. Of 109 new hires this year a minimum of 16 (15%) were minorities when the industry is 9-11%.

The flows are taking approx. 63% of the training slots. If mil guys take 80% of the OTS slots the military percentage of the overall hiring is 30%. The military didn't take the slots you'd normally be competing for, instead the company made the decision to get their civilian pilots via flow agreements.

For those pure civilians, why not join the Guard or Reserve? Plenty of slots available nowadays IF you want to stack the odds in your favor ...

Because most of us are over 32, can't pass the military medical (asthma, eyes, flat feet, small disqualifying issues...), or we don't make the grade on the resume, or we don't know the right people in the right unit....

You don't just walk into the AF Reserve office and say, "I'll take one pilot slot, please!"

This is ignorant. MANY pure civvies would have loved to go military, but couldn't for one of several reasons. This notion that it's always a civilian guy's fault for not joining is absurd.

I didn't mention pilot slot. There are plenty of other Guard/Reserve jobs. You obviously don't understand the significance of networking with the right people.

Sorry I assumed you meant pilot slots on the AirlinePilotForums while discussing military versus civilian pilots.... :rolleyes:

I have no idea what you're getting at about networking.

I've noticed a trend of more military pilots failing the Hogan. United seems to be the only carrier doing that with their psych testing.

Actually, you specifically mentioned pilot slots when you said there wereOne doesn't join the guard for a "mechanic slot" or "supply clerk" slot. Those are called jobs.

As for your idea to join a guard unit to fly a desk just so you can hope to rub elbows with someone who can write you a letter sometime later down the road, well... That's a terrible idea and and poor use of ones time or energies. Attending a job fair would be far more beneficial networking event.

JFC. Let me guess: you have zero Guard/Reserve time, nor have ever applied for a job there and now you are telling me, someone who spent a decade in the Guard/Reserve, what 'slot' means.

'Slot' is a slang term for a position. https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/i...et-in-the-army (First one I found; there were a metric gringoton of google hits for guard/reserve slot that had zero to do with being a pilot)

But thanks for letting me know that 'slot' only refers to pilot jobs; I'll have to tell the Army 92Y that he can't use the term 'slot' to refer to anything other than pilot positions. Those damned unit supply specialists.

Still...
Anyone would logically conclude on a PILOT FORUM while discussing MILITARY PILOTS that when you mention AIR FORCE SLOTS you meant PILOT.

So chill the flip out, guardsman.

Riiiiight.

As mentioned earlier, you come on an aviation message board, on a civilian/mil thread, and say "Join the Guard! There's plenty of slots available!"

We were all born at night, but it wasn't last night. YOU know what you implied, WE know what you implied, but sure, go ahead and try to tell us now that you really meant "supply clerk slot" and not "pilot slot".

Good luck with that angle. Still a terrible idea.

Why? Because at the end of the day, even with all your "networking", when it comes time to fill out the "military sorties flown" you'll still have to put in "zero".

And how does THAT differentiate you from any any other veteran, enlisted or non-flying officer?

It doesn't.

I don't think that's just mil candidates. Seems like it's simply an emerging trend of those being selected.

I'm sure SOMEONE is going to say that "well, all the best candidates are take and that's why it seems more are failing the HPI blah blah blah blah blah......." I don't buy that. I also thought that with the switch from CV to BK in charge, some parameters and criteria were altered/changed.

Because we ALL KNOW "that guy/those guys", you know, "THAT GUY/THOSE GUYS" that were hired early on in 2013 that was OTS and somehow got through it and everyone is scratching their head.

Anybody got any of the recent stats on HPI pass/fail? Seems I've heard it's trended as high as a 50/50 split but no clue.

And although it's FACT that UAL took a sampling of UCH pilots and gave them the HPI to determine the parameters and bounds to determine a successful candidate, it's hypotholated/speculatized that some get a "sliding scale".

The rest of you b1tching about a guard "slot", YOU'RE ON GUARD!!!!!!!!!!

Hogan data?
 

Just curious, can anyone comment, factually, on what the Hogan is screening for? I know a couple of people who did not pass the Hogan….both very normal military pilots with not much in common between them.

IOW, what are we (UAL) looking for?