Well, we can't have candy store salesmen in the CPO, but all I ask for is friendly, firm, and fair. I do hope that old union reps and NC members stay away from the CPO. I think I am tired of seeing our union being used as a training ground for management. That sword cuts both ways, but for people who don't want to fly that program has really worked out well for them.

At least since the merger, I haven't seen any instances where the CPO went off the reservation and hung someone out as an example, or have applied inappropriate discipline. Under the old CAL system, we routinely had a "fair" trial and a fine hanging.

Swedish...

I take it you never got hired by UAL or CAL?

The interview process is an interesting one and just having the resume is never enough. Eventually it comes down to the person to person interviews and the flight/sim tests.

I hope your career has been good anyway.

What does amaze me is those who busted their butt to get the job with UAL (or some other airline) and then a few years later do nothing but complain. I wonder if that one you met is still a big complainer?

Thank you for the reminder Regularguy. OUR airline is not perfect, but we certainly have it good. This is still one of the best jobs in the world, and we need to remind ourselves sometime!

While hiring shouldn't be done by pilots with access moving their buds to the top of the pile (full disclosure... that's how I... and I'd imagine many others here we're hired) there's no substitute for strong recommendations from people who have actually worked with a pilot. What HR has done is provide what they profess to be a scientific process (Hogan test... AYKM?) when actually there is no substitute for long term observance in the very position we're hiring for. The interview should just be to verify we want to hire someone who has already proven, through recommendations and resume, they are the right person for the job and the Hogan needs to go.

I agree, it's not apples to apples, 121 flying is different and the learning curve will be steep for months, but telling someone who was selected and succeeded through a much more intensive and thorough process than that of the airlines they need to go jerk gear on an RJ for seasoning after having just served their country for a decade seems kind of silly to me when fighters to airlines was the norm for decades.

Why do you think that is? What changed?

Scott

One word....Insler.

Never hired at UAL/CAL. Not bitter about it. More amused/curious on why I didn't break the code at either place to even interview. Not quite sure what they were looking for/at.

I'm good though. Was fortunate to make it to another legacy pre 9/11 and then cargo post 9/11.

So you no doubt took up the issue of "grossly incompetent" captains you observed with professional standards, right? Or are you just adding "I saved the day" dramatic flair to your post?

I wonder if those LUA Captains were new to the Guppy?

Volumes have been written about just how crappy the transition course is. It's been overwhelmingly negative. I say, if they're new to the plane, cut them some slack and offer some productive input. Instead, you're talking trash and polishing your LCA creds here on a public forum. I find that nauseating and in very poor taste.

Have to agree with this. New to the plane is new to the plane. You could have 3000 hours in the sr-71 and 4000 hrs in the space shuttle and still need a little help learning a new jet. Don't be a **** in the cockpit.

Totally. You can't send someone through terrible training then complain they don't fly like 3,000 hour pilots.

Mitch...I don't get it. You are a junior captain in EWR. Do I understand you correctly that you've recently had FOs that were previously captains at LUAL? Something doesn't add up.

for non-military readers some fyi. the eagle and viper drivers were the top two or three pilots in their classes of thirty. most professions (law, finance, medicine, science) seek top graduates. why wouldn't employers of pilots seek to hire the top of the class as well ?

I would be curious to see results of the Hogan test administered to pilots already on UAL property. How many of us would not fit HR's criteria?

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/i...-c5IAjshZ0te3Q

"Is this your Hogan Larry? Is THIS your Hogan Larry!?!"

I know I wouldn't want to bet my career on it.

According to the Navy, the most dangerous pilots are low time pilots (duh). The second most dangerous pilots are high total time, low time in type.

Truth.

The most dangerous I ever felt in an airplane was the first couple flights in the E-2. 3000+ total, zero in type.

Yep. They try to operate the plane like they did their old equipment. The first time I flew a T-2 as an instructor I almost blew the canopy off because the Canopy jettison handle is exactly where the parking brake was on an A-6. Shaped the same and pull the same way.

Most of the time habits are good. But sometimes the opposite is true.

LOL..
Was wondering that also.
HR has a place in the hiring process.. but why not have that HR person also be a pilot? Out of 12000 pilots, there are probably a handful who have degrees that would fit the HR build.
As far as the "Hogan Test"... I'll just think back to the Delta Psych who ended up offing himself.

I've "heard" that some of the guys that have failed the Hogan Test are guys with good military backgrounds. Makes you wonder about that. And how many Commuter pilots have failed it yet continue to move "United" passengers on their Express flight?
Any FFDO's fail it?

It would be funny to let current hires take the test to see how we fit in.. then again, it would probably scare the $hi+ out of HR!

Motch

PS> Would also be funny to see HR and those who decided to implement the Hogan test, take the test themselves!

Amen!!!!!!

Apparently, the test was given to a selected group/cross sectioin of UAL pilots before the hiring process began. Then the overall/general personality traits were garnered from that, making it the "measuring stick" so to speak going forward.

As well as at DAL, they've had mil guys NOT get through the MMPI and/or psych eval on day 2. However, this hiring round the amount people they've let RETAKE the MMPI on day 2 is pretty high. Versus the past where if the MMPI was out of bounds, they'd get the TBNT/FOAD.

One key difference is that AT LEAST DAL will do the face to face interview with the pilot FIRST, before administering the psych stuff. In other words, they AT LEAST meet the pilot face to face as opposed to screening the pilot out over the interwebz.....

Sadly, in EVERY round of hiring they've ALWAYS been there. Not in large numbers at all, and actually a minority of the new hires in just about ANY airline's new hire class. However, THIS hiring round seems to see the MOST of them on average relatives to hiring waves past.

Donning my flame suit now...........

......although there's A LOT of great people in the 10,000+ applicant stack, I'd agree with your point. There are TONS of VERY experienced pilots NOT getting called. I run into many, I know many, and this board as well as others are full of them. For RIGHT HERE, and RIGHT NOW, there's PLENTY of guys with PIC/AC/LCA/IP/EP/STANDEVAL/NATOPS and whatever time that are ALSO saving kittens on their time off when their not attending job fairs, AND STILL NOT GETTING A CALL.

Well, I think I get what you're saying.... BUT, I am for less diversity, and more quality. I seem to be noticing that the standards get lower if someone can fit neatly into some sort of "category" or "class". Donning my flame suit as well, but I really don't care what color someone is, or if they are a damn (darn) yankee, or Puerto Rican, yada, yada, yada. But, I get a sense that people are getting a "leg up" on the competition if they are in a minority group or a perceived minority group. This profession, and frankly all professions need to garner "get what you earn" and "earn what you get" . I think it waters down the champagne for those that work really hard to get somewhere when some folks are given a leg up just because they fit into a neat little HR category on some silly HR form in some silly HR office filled out by some silly HR person, who went to some silly HR classes and who has no perspective on the profession other than what he learned from his/her HR associate professor. This is our profession, our career. The HR people come and go, they aren't married to this airline like we are. It's a pilot's profession first and last. As I said, my flame suit is donned and I wore insulated asbestos drawers.

I AGREED WITH YOU 100%.

I was simply saying, they've ALWAYS been there. And for people that may think like you and I, it's "always been that way, ALWAYS GONNA BE THAT WAY".

And the other part was simply observation, this hiring round seems to have more of the people lacking in flight experience than EVER. Yet they are still a pretty small group in amy new hire class.

That's all...............

How exactly do you think non-white, AKA minorities, are getting a leg up? It's an algorithm that pulls you out of the stack with no weight on anything else. The current UAL model is very sensitive to that.

People often don't discose the X-factor that may have got them hired. Ironically, (as evidenced by this thread) they want you to believe they deserved it. The race/gender card is lazy. Dig deeper and I'll bet you'll find an uncle in management or an internship under a now VP. Or, heaven forbid, a really well rounded resume ;-)

From the Feb 3rd class..

1 Female - 7,000 TT with international experience
1 Black - 8,000 TT with 6,000 turbine PIC
1 South American - 11,000 TT

The remaining 18 were white males.

Quality didn't seem to be an issue.

Naaw, If I see a low time person with a well rounded resume I really feel good about that. I feel down right giddy if someone really did make it happen and did it all the right way. Just need the experience in my opinion. Youth is a good thing and I think it is great to get hired young on a major's seniority list. However, I see some strange stuff in some of the younger pilots and I wonder what the hell is HR thinking? If this were a pure pilot driven process no way do some of these folks make it through the door, much less the interview process.

I don't really look at Race (non white) at all. I don't look at females either. There are some other strange categories that I sort of scratch my head on that I never even knew were a consideration or a reason to lower the standards.

That's my beef. I don't think the standards should be lowered at all. I just think folks should work hard and pay their dues and all that HR crap should be left off the application. I think HR should go and play in the HR romper room and let the pilots run pilot land.

That all sounds really good. Maybe things are looking up. I am assuming the 18 white males had good time/qualifications too.?

Most of them could quote all of the good lines from either Airplane or Top Gun, so ya they are highly qualified.

I get what u mean in the traditional sense of the word "minority." But, recently I've learned HR has other categories I wasn't aware of. I guess I am "behind in the times".