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.