In 15 years you might interviewing for a major airline job. What if you have Gulfstream on your resume and the captain doing the interview was laid off for a couple years in 2005-2007. Maybe he had to work as a roofer to feed his kids...think he knows what Gulfstream is about? Think he's gonna hold a grudge?

 

Wow I am amazed. A professional pilot would actually say no to someone because of the way they gained their training, without regard to how well they fly or the applicant's ability to make decisions in the cockpit. Seems less than "professional" to me.
If you think about it there is a reason these guys are willing to put up the money to have a chance at a low paying job. There is a long term economic incentive to do it. Just look at the paytables for legacy or large cargo carriers, that is big bucks, especially to a young person. As someone else said pay the money to reduce the amount of time to get hired, be it a year or two and make a meager living instead of making a meager living for a year or two then get hired at another job at minial pay and be two years behind . Although you might not see it this way that is an indicator that there is at least a chance to make the big money. You dont see that kind of attitude for civil servants, factory workers or other honorable but less paying jobs.
Seems to me that many want a guarantee that they will always have a great paying job. As a wise person once told me if you want that kind of guarantee then get a good education that allows you to be independent of others. Be a doctor or lawyer, or another such profession that as long as you are ethical and competant you will always have a job, be it for others or for yourself. Quit being bitter about the decision you made in life. Flying is a unique way to earn a living but it, and you, aint that special.

 

"without regard to how well they fly or the applicant's ability to make decisions in the cockpit. Seems less than "professional" to me."

Newsflash:

Many folks think PFJ is sick. You'll see this all the way up the ladder. I'd discriminate with it as I would a scab. That's just me. I already told you why. If I seem less than professional to you, I'd respond that PFJ is much less than professional and ask you what part of that you don't understand?

"Wow I am amazed. A professional pilot would actually say no to someone because of the way they gained their training"

Be amazed all you want. For PFJer's, it happens and will continue to happen.

 

Yeah, this guy obviously hangs out by the kool-aid machine all day or something. He's in for a rude awakening if he thinks airline people make all their decisions based on people's "skills." He'll soon learn how political and calculated every decision is.

 

Don't waste your time on those guys who don't understand why paying-to-work is wrong. They never will understand.

They never will be part of strugle to keep the standards high, part of the solution to keep wages in line with the output produced. They won't be united in keeping this the safest mode of transportation because to them 'as long as you get ahead..it does not matter what happens to the profession'.

Don't waste you breath brothers.

 

You need to understand the realities of organized labor....There are PLENTY of qualified pilots out there, never has been a shortage, never will be. With that being said, we have the luxury of selecting from among those qualified pilots folks who will be easy to work with, fun to hang out with, and willl not SCEW OVER their fellow pilots for a few extra $$.

YES, a professional pilot will ABSOLUTELY refuse to hire someone based on their WORK history. It is less likely that someone would refuse to hire you based on your training history. Here's the way I would do it (my views are probably typical)

Let's look at some examples..assume all candidates have the same total, turbine, and PIC flight time.

Candidate A went the usual route and has all his instructor ratings, he will get the highest preference due to his leadership and instructor experience (airline captains have to be leaders and instructors).

Candidate B did a pay-for-training program that got him a CMEL amd hired at a regional airline with low time. I will hire this candidate, but only after I hire Candidate A. (a few folks out there would try really hard not to hire this candidate at all, but I would)

Candidate C also did a pay-for-training program similar to B. HOWEVER, the last phase of this guys "training" involved his paying for the "privelege" of "flying" as an SIC on a REVENUE PASSENGER FLIGHT (or cargo). He was using daddy's money to bribe an airline to displace a REAL pilot who needed to feed his family. This guy will NEVER be hired by me even if he has 40,000 hours and a type rating in the space shuttle.

Candidate D at one point worked as a contract pilot for a regional which was being struck by it's pilot group. He is a SCAB and will be lucky not to get his @ss kicked in addition to not being hired. And yes there is a list. And for you young guys who think your past won't follow you, the list goes all the way back to beginning...IN THE 1930's!

 

To all that posted here Thanks. I clearly see that I would be making a huge mistake being a pilot for an airline. I am not suited for the "workers of the world unite." dribble of organized labor. When people would actually threaten another for his desire to make a living I would have to say that group has failed to be professional and is more like a skilled mob. I understand some are fit for group think, not me. I am sad to see that this seems to be the pervasive attitude of the airline pilot corps. If it is not someone please inform me otherwise. I wish you all well.

 

"I am not suited for the "workers of the world unite." dribble of organized labor."

You think it's dribble. I think it's the only thing left keeping the final thread of what this career used to be from breaking. Without unions, things would be worse, much worse.

"I am sad to see that this seems to be the pervasive attitude of the airline pilot corps"

I'm sad to see you're not willing to fight, as part of a group, for a better deal. If you're not, then you're better off not getting involved in the first place.

 

Yep you are probably right. It has nothing to with basic economics. This is a serious question, how much do you pay a month for Union representation?

 

1.9% it's too much for what you get, but there's no alternative. This particular industry lives and dies by collective bargaining.