Airtran/Southwest AIP in a nutshell
09-01-2011 | 05:59 AM
#101
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Oscar, I don't have a clue why I didn't get the call. I just find it odd that people with only flight instructor and rt seat time in a turboprop were "worthy". It left a lot of people in the crew room scratching their heads.
All I'm saying is when comparing real world hiring quals, Airtran can stand against any airline.
All I'm saying is when comparing real world hiring quals, Airtran can stand against any airline.
09-01-2011 | 08:34 AM
#102
On Reserve
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: B737
Delta Founded 1926 Northwest Founded 1928
Valuejet Founded 1992 Airtran Founded 1995
Southwest Founded 1967 Valuejet/Airtran 1992
Airtran Founded 1992 Airline B Founded Yesterday
25 years later and you think #1 Airtran pilot goes Below #1 Southwest
I just started an Airline yesterday, we have 400 pilots. The #1 pilot from new Airline goes below #1 Airtran pilot. Still sound good.
Valuejet Founded 1992 Airtran Founded 1995
Southwest Founded 1967 Valuejet/Airtran 1992
Airtran Founded 1992 Airline B Founded Yesterday
25 years later and you think #1 Airtran pilot goes Below #1 Southwest
I just started an Airline yesterday, we have 400 pilots. The #1 pilot from new Airline goes below #1 Airtran pilot. Still sound good.
09-01-2011 | 08:40 AM
#103
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 998
Likes: 0
From: B737/Capt
Oscar,
Just a quick question:
If the Air Tran group were to keep their same benefits and pay for -- let's say three years -- BUT, also get straight relative seniority, (ie. their #1 pilot behind your #1 pilot, then ratioed all the way down) -- would that be something you would be ok with?
Just a quick question:
If the Air Tran group were to keep their same benefits and pay for -- let's say three years -- BUT, also get straight relative seniority, (ie. their #1 pilot behind your #1 pilot, then ratioed all the way down) -- would that be something you would be ok with?
Great question! One which would require some investigation on my part since I upgraded before Vjet/AT existed. That would require a compromise on my part. If I thought it would prolong the positive work environment at SWA it might be worth considering. My sacrifice would be minimal at first glance. Given the posturing and rhetoric by both sides so far I seriously doubt the AT folks are willing to sacrifice anything (are you?) and certainly I must ask our #2 pilot who was hired in 1975 if a 1994ish should go ahead of him.
Are you the one who just became a lawyer? I "accused" FTB of being a lawyer a little while back.
The Oscar
09-01-2011 | 09:24 AM
#104
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 998
Likes: 0
From: B737/Capt
Oscar, I don't have a clue why I didn't get the call. I just find it odd that people with only flight instructor and rt seat time in a turboprop were "worthy". It left a lot of people in the crew room scratching their heads.
All I'm saying is when comparing real world hiring quals, Airtran can stand against any airline.
All I'm saying is when comparing real world hiring quals, Airtran can stand against any airline.
Those priorities and why companies use them is WAY above our pay grade.
The Oscar
09-01-2011 | 10:05 AM
#105
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 557
Likes: 4
No offense to JD or others who've gotten the, "Thanks, but no thanks," but companies hire for more than just flying qualifications. I only interviewed at one airline, but from what I've heard around the water cooler, qualifications get you in the door. After that it's up to you to fit what they are looking for in a XXX Air Lines pilot.
Thread creep, but any interview panel members on here care to throw out $.02?
Thread creep, but any interview panel members on here care to throw out $.02?
09-01-2011 | 10:08 AM
#106
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: DC9 CA
No offense to JD or others who've gotten the, "Thanks, but no thanks," but companies hire for more than just flying qualifications. I only interviewed at one airline, but from what I've heard around the water cooler, qualifications get you in the door. After that it's up to you to fit what they are looking for in a XXX Air Lines pilot.
Thread creep, but any interview panel members on here care to throw out $.02?
Thread creep, but any interview panel members on here care to throw out $.02?
09-01-2011 | 06:44 PM
#108
Line Holder
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Just as you have said that AT is not an OJT training mill. Neither is SWA. If your former FO's didn't have CAPT time it matters not. They at very least had the PIC time required. Ever wondered why they got the call and not you? Might have nothing to do with a green card.
If CAPT time was a requirement than I would have been out of the running because all I had was single seat fighter time. Very deficient flight time quals, but somehow I slipped through.
The Oscar
If CAPT time was a requirement than I would have been out of the running because all I had was single seat fighter time. Very deficient flight time quals, but somehow I slipped through.
The Oscar
09-01-2011 | 08:32 PM
#109
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,844
Likes: 0
From: 765-A
nK,
Great question! One which would require some investigation on my part since I upgraded before Vjet/AT existed. That would require a compromise on my part. If I thought it would prolong the positive work environment at SWA it might be worth considering. My sacrifice would be minimal at first glance. Given the posturing and rhetoric by both sides so far I seriously doubt the AT folks are willing to sacrifice anything (are you?) and certainly I must ask our #2 pilot who was hired in 1975 if a 1994ish should go ahead of him.
Are you the one who just became a lawyer? I "accused" FTB of being a lawyer a little while back.
The Oscar
Great question! One which would require some investigation on my part since I upgraded before Vjet/AT existed. That would require a compromise on my part. If I thought it would prolong the positive work environment at SWA it might be worth considering. My sacrifice would be minimal at first glance. Given the posturing and rhetoric by both sides so far I seriously doubt the AT folks are willing to sacrifice anything (are you?) and certainly I must ask our #2 pilot who was hired in 1975 if a 1994ish should go ahead of him.
Are you the one who just became a lawyer? I "accused" FTB of being a lawyer a little while back.
The Oscar
09-02-2011 | 04:02 AM
#110
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
From: Retired, again...
The answer is obvious, it depends upon who is actually on the hiring board. Unfortunately, this leads to obviously biased hiring boards which lead to poor results down the road ie; Delta in the 80,s, AA in the 90,s, Fed EX recently wrecking DC 10s at a record pace. United, well, enough said.
As you appear to be relatively new to APC world, I will cut you some slack. Please ensure your glass house is in order before you start skewering other crews and airlines from the comfort of your Lazy-Boy.......especially if you are factually incorrect.
Don't make me stop this car and send NewK back there to talk to you.
FD
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
