I know what I read, too bad I didn't quote it yesterday.

But I give you some credit for having second thoughts and changing it.

come on rickair, NO company fires people lightly, not even good ole pinchanickle. the lawsuit ramifications are to much of a liability. what people are suprised at is that SKYW, which is supposedly pilot friendly, would actually have a policy like that. upgrade is stressfull enough. now throw on top of that the threat of being fired if you don't pass and now you have a mess. sure lots of people pass. but i am sure people have failed that had a good attitude. if you dont think so you are kidding yourself. i know a couple of guys here with great attitudes that went in for upgrade and didn't pass. luckily for them they went back to the right seat for a year, studied some more, went back and are now captains here.

just on a side not rickair have you upgraded at skywest yet? for all the guys at skywest who are posting stuff saying tony had some underlying issues becareful. tony was one of skywests biggest cheerleaders and they threw him on the street like a pile of trash. if they did it to him, they most certainly can do it to you.

I've always been concerned about this policy. Once they start running upgrade again I was planning on putting my name in but I really don't feel good about it. Doesn't give me any confidence when people don't have a good idea what is expected at the oral.

I think I'm going back to my Part 91 King Air vacation...I mean job.

See Ya

and on a side note, not to defend sabaroowski, but if he had edited his post it would say that underneath the post that was edited.

I have said repeatedly that I am opposed to the policy. It is one of the negatives at SKW.

If TW had outside factors, they might not have been with "the company"...it's a big place and there are factions.

But I think he said in a previous post that there were no outside forces...he would know better than anyone.

Not true. It only says that if you come back some time later, not sure how long, but it's a while.

If you edit a post immediately after initially posting it does not flag an edit...I guess it assumes that you are entitled to proofread and do a final revision. Maybe I caught him in the middle of that.

Use mine.... Where is Vagabond btw I miss talking to her:D

....................

Nice. :D
....................

[QUOTE]I was having this very conversation with one of our reservists last week when discussing accepting a job with one company and then while waiting for training another company comes along and offers you a job. I said that I would have trouble leaving the one company because I would feel some loyalty to the company that hired me. He kind of laughed and told me that I was going to have to lose this loyalty issue that I have once I get out in the **real** world. He basically said that the loyalty mentioned above DOES NOT FLOW BOTH WAYS! Sad situation really.:(

USMCFLYR

I thought so too - but that is not always the case.

USMCFLYR

Please Stop The Conspriracy Theories !!!!!
 

First let me say that I don't think there was a diabolical plan... by anybody. I hope we can get the focus off that. As to my service at SkW, I was late once on a commute. Once. That was when the Delta 75 that I was on diverted (SLC was snowed-in, Jan 2008). I called in sick once (Apr 2008). I never even got in a heated debate with anybody at SkW.

Certainly, that doesn't mean that everybody loves me. There are a rare few folks that I wouldn't choose to work with again. But, that's normal life in a 13,000 employee company.

When folks don't pass upgrade, it isn't advertised in any way that I know of. Rarely are there facts, since how often does the subject of a termination want to advertise it? And like was said, you never hear, "hey, he/she was a good Joe, and failed upgrade, and was fired."

Therefore, I must be a bad Joe? Had I been a good Joe, I would have passed? I must have a bad attitude?

If either the training dept., or some pilot considering upgrade needs to believe that, you're welcome to. When we were offered the "5 failed in 4 year" BS, it was also suggested that they were all partying and not studying. Maybe folks are saying that about me?

My point is that I'm not aware of ANY "soft" issue on my behalf in my failed upgrade. None. That includes my attitude. I was convinced enough in the security of my job to not only put my job on the line by entering the class voluntarily, but to spend a significant amount of my own money in that pursuit.

I did that in an economic climate that didn't lend itself to me getting another job, at least in the US of A. I was "all in".

Overall issues in no particular order:


1. Unfamiliarity with the aircraft. This one was huge for me, for several reasons.

a. EMB upgrade training is shortened compared to a new hire course. Ground school is shorter, FTD is one day shorter, not sure if the sim is shorter.

So, a new hire who flew the EMB at Great Lakes, or Amflight, or anywhere; he gets the expanded course. But a captain class is shorter, 'cuz... "you're a captain now". Heard this a lot.

Nobody seemed to consider that familiarity with the machine might be a serious issue. Of the 3 in my class who flew the EMB as an FO, all passed. I doubt they broke a sweat. The two who failed in my class out of the remaining six were FO's in the jet.

b. No "training" during a sim checkride. For FO training, if during the checkride you screw up, the examiner can have you repeat the failed maneuver. Not in the captain checkride (although, I'll say that I know that this policy is selectively applied... I didn't get any "do-overs").


2. A rushed training program. First day of class to sim checkride in 26 days total. In the jet course, we had days off between ground and sim (I think 6 days).

I literally finished ground school in SLC on Tuesday around noon, flew home to SAN, washed my clothes, got on a plane the next morning and flew to FAT. That evening at 7pm, we had a briefing at the FTD. Then the next two mornings at 6am for FTD.

Next day, travel to LGB (my sim partner and I actually volunteered to go to the FTD at 6am that morning also). Then, 4am at the sim the very next morning in LGB, and at 4am each of the next mornings.

After the 4th sim, I stepped directly out of the sim at 10am into the oral exam. Then, sim checkride the next morning at 6am.


3. Indifference amongst a few in the training dept. This is not a huge issue, but the reality is that your whole deal in on the line, and a few could really care less. Presumably, they've been doing this a long time, and their paycheck will be in the bank no matter what happens to you. But, if you are not the star performer in class, AND end up with one of these guys, your odds of success just got stacked against you.


4. Some crappy training equipment. The FTD is a TOTAL piece of junk. They give you a full page of things not to do in this antique. There are things that is does WRONG, and things that is doesn't do AT ALL. It's hard to imagine that this is FAA approved for training with the many issues.


5. Needless pressure from the up-n-out policy.....


6. Not stopping training at the failed oral. It seems, in hindsight, that the rules support this. And practically, they would not have sent somebody who failed the written test on to FTD until they pass the written.

Since we had a written failure in our class, that is EXACTLY what they did. If we had failed FTD, we would have been held over until we completed that. If we had failed to get signed off for the checkride, like my sim partner, they would have, and did, stop him from the checkride until he completed his extended training.

But, when I failed the oral, I just keep going like nothing happened? The rules seem to imply that I should have been "trained" THEN to complete the oral. Practically too.


7. Not changing examiners from the one who failed me on the oral. This is a huge intimidation and mental game player.


8. Age. My class had one guy barely legal (just turned 23) and everybody else up to age 29. Then two of us in our 40's. I'm here to tell ya that age makes a difference. I'm sure there's whole studies done on this, so I won't expand much here, except to say that the two folks who were the anchor in the class were the 40 somethings. My days of smoking through classes without breathing hard are probably over.

ACTUALLY....if you edit it in the first few minutes after you post....it doesnt say that....

I guess the thing the sticks out to me most is the fact that after he failed you on your oral that they went ahead with the the sim check....... I agree that training should have stopped moving forward and you should have been given a set amount of time for retraining, study and retaking of the oral. And NO way should you have been subjected to the same examiner. No salt in the wound but many CBA;s would have allowed you to ask for and receive another examiner. Good luck.

Make no mistake, rarely will loyalty get you somewhere in this job when it concerns your employer. There have been times when guys were in new hire training, only to be furloughed, do you think the company felt any loyalty to them? If the company has to do what's best for them, they won't think twice about any loyalty towards you. Bear in mind, guys may have quit an already decent job. OR, they may have banked their military separation on that job.

9. Being tired. I'm not an early morning person, which means that I woke up at 3am for the sim, but generally stayed awake until my normal time of 11pm. Then, after I failed the oral, I couldn't sleep that night. When I stepped out of the sim after the checkride, I had been awake for 31 hours. I slept 16 of the next 24 hours. I haven't been that mentally and physically exhausted in a LONG time.

[QUOTE=USMCFLYR;486272]USMCFLYR,
Business relies on Managers to run companies. Our country relies on Leaders to run the Military. Furthermore, business by necessity is profit driven and that is the end goal of the business. Ethically managed, this is a good thing. In contrast, the military is clearly a non profit enterprise for those serving, the end goal requires loyalty as virtually everyone serving in todays military voluntarily signed a check to Uncle Sam with a value that includes "upto and including my life". There is a significant difference as you well know. Often, military folks like ourselves entering the market fail to recognize these simple facts. It is normal.

Off the pointy end, leadership and your loyalty as a Marine will permit you and the leadership to drop peace time rules to complete a real world mission. We have pressed weather, equipment problems to serve the Marines/Sailors/Soldiers/Airmen on the ground. Leadership is pleased, the mission was successful. However, In the FRS/RTU, you would say "no reason to die for a training scenario" with bad wx or equipment problems just to get an 'X'.

In the professional flying business, managers want the mission complete at maximum profit. That is all. It is fair, it is business. If they need to furlough you, it will be done. It is not the mission of the company to provide you a career, paycheck etc. unless you are can provide profit. It is simply part of the business equation to have your services enhance the business abilty to make profit. You presence is a negotiated business decision with the aim to provide the business maximum profit. Thus, we must approach a civilian job with the same interest and focus as the managers. You need to look out for the best interest of your family at maximum benefit. It is a business transaction. Loyalty is left out of that equation in the business world.
Personally, when I left active duty, I was dubious of pilot unions. However, learned quickly that pilot unions, as imperfect as we are, are the best way of enhancing a transacted business deal with my company (a collective bargaining agreement 'CBA" or simply, the contract).

So keep your loyalty intact, just direct it squarely at your family, not a corporate entity. However, as the majority of my fellow aviators do daily across the spectrum, we proudly conduct ourselves professionally at our companies. No conflict. Just properly placed priorities.

What Salty said...

You owe the unsuspecting public enough loyalty to show up competent, and do a thorough job.

After that, your loyalty should be to your family and your compensation (pay, bennies, QOL in whatever combination suits you).

Blind loyalty to a company will never get you far.

Loyalty to a pilot group or union is great as long as they also have your best interests at heart.

Wasn't there a list of study questions floating around the training center?

[quote=SaltyDog;486400]
I think that this goes beyond military vs. corporate mentality. I'm certainly not advocating blind loyalty to any person or organization. However, I'm just advocating "doing the right thing." Companies can and do sacrifice their employees for short-term profits, and there are selfish/self-centered people out there who do not care about anyone else except themselves. This is all fine and dandy in the short-term, but in the long-term it WILL come back to bite you. For example, APC has numerous threads about the merits of working for a good company like "ABC" because they treat their people well and the pitfalls of working for "bottom-feeder" airlines like "XYZ" because they do the opposite. By the same token, if you're one of these "me-first, hell with the rest of the world" types, then people will eventually pick up on that and they won't go out of their way to help you, and doors of opportunity will be closed to you. As far as this incident with SKW is concerned, I don't think that any one individual or faction should be blamed. Rather, the summation of all of the previously mentioned sins equals an organizational mentality that raises a big red flag in my mind.

This is just a random question as I'm not sure what SKW policies are with seatlock, transition, etc.

At SKW if you see you are getting close to an upgrade in about say 6-12 months and you currently are on the jet, can you transition to the EMB as an FO? Then once you have the seniority you can make the right to left transition easier (a/c familiarity-wise).

I'm not sure if you have the same bases for equipment as that would obviously be an issue in making that decsion. Just some food for thought.

You could, and it might be a good idea.

But there is a one-year seat lock on transition...so you would be stuck in the right seat for a year. You might be able to upgrade on the jet in that timeframe.

There is some base overlap, but not much.

If you were hell-bent on getting PIC, lived in a dual base, and knew that jet upgrade was far away, it might make sense.

[QUOTE=Droog;486530]Don't really disagree with your personality comments. I did not address that issue other than to state that most of us proudly and professionally do our jobs for our employers. I strictly addressed the reality of a business plan. Loyalty is simply not a metric addressed in evaluating the strength of a business plan. If you ever find any, certainly would like to see them and by whom <g>. Even the military rarely touches this metric.

Quick question - didn't all airlines used to have an up-and-out policy? Seems like that is how it was at TWA when my Grandpa was there - 1953-84. I thought at the time other airlines had that policy too - when did it start to change?

At SKW you don't bid for transition from CRJ200 to CRJ700. If you are based in a CR2 only base then you will get the ground transition training for the CR7/9 but you’ll never do the SIM or checkout. If you are upgrading into domicile or transferring to a domicile that flies multiple types (CR2/7/9) then you will be “trained to proficiency” on the CR7/9. In other words you can’t fail because they will keep training you until you get it right. When you upgrade on the RJ your Sim ride and Type ride are on the CR2 only. After you have passed you’ve passed.

To recap, you don’t bid for a CR7/9 slot and when you move into a CR7/9 domicile you just complete differences. There is NO transition.

This is an FAA thing, not a company policy. I think TYPE rides have to be clean, the first time through. I might be confused, and it might have something to do with the ATP or the ATP+type ride combo.

I don't know of anyone who has been given a "re-train" on an upgrade ride.

It's just like any practical. If you don't pass a part then they can either mark that box and continue the ride there and or pick up from that point in another checkride.

Salty/Rickair -

Thanks for those words/advice/insight.

USMCFLYR

I'll guess I'll add one overriding issue. SkW is overstaffed. By a lot.

They have never had a furlough, and they don't want to start. So, there is an easy way to reduce staffing and not have to recall anybody, retrain them, and pay them at a much higher rate than a new hire.

So, recently, the company change the standard for captain recurrent training. One failure can get you unemployed.

I'm not here to say BS but it's something I've seen at RAH too.

Sounds like even more incentive to be a career FO.

If thirteen FOs over the course of one year failed upgrade and were fired, that would save the company about half a million dollars per year. Not an insignificant amount! These are not days where the airlines are going to hand anyone the keys to the jet so to speak.

I've had many a captain tell me that if I'm up for recurrent then to study extra hard because of this very reason.

Thanks to all for not letting this thread deteriorate. It came dangerously close the other day and almost ruined my lunch!

Anyway, this seems like a good point for me to give my "pitch" that if you were let go by your airline due to this up and out thing, you should apply for unemployment benefits. You are eligible for it. If you are denied, you should contact me right away so we can work on the appeal. It makes no difference that you may not live in Washington state - hearings are pretty much the same everywhere.

Vaga you need to write your own story column. You're too good for all of us here!

The monthly SAPA meeting just concluded, and I'm told that there is zero interest amongst reps to diminish the up-r-out policy. So, I suspect it will remain for a long time.

Too bad there isn't a legally binding document to enforce work rules, instead of a "policy handbook".

The other thing that was brought to my attention that I didn't initially realize is that there is no review for an upgrade failure termination. If I'm accused of sexual harassment, or whatever, I get the option of a review.

This has none.

Also, although the policy says you get terminated, it doesn't say anything about never being allowed to reapply. That just sounds like a "that's the way we've always done it" policy.

Well, there is. Court.