No pilots involved in interview process?
 

Just curious.... As a line Captain I noticed that we seem to be hiring two kinds of pilots: 1. Experienced/qualified, and 2. Not ready for prime time

I would think that Line Captains or other experienced folks would be involved in the process to insure that the Not ready for prime time folks would be still waiting in line. For some reason, and I think it's some sort of HR thing we seem to be lowering our standards and qualifications for "special interest" category people. Our need for "diversity" may be resulting in lowering the bar.

I think you have been misinformed.

Of the three people that did my interview two of them were pilots. Both captains.

I obviously don't know all the pilots hired. But, of the ones I do know, all are well qualified. Do some of them check other diversity boxes? Yes. But they are all qualified.

Just curious what makes them not ready for prime time? What did they say when you asked them who was involved in the interview process? I assume you asked them right?

I am a fairly new hire, there was an HR person, FO and Capt involved with my interview.

What are you talking about? Line pilots are involved in EVERY interview.

OP is stirring the pot

Really?...
 

Sometimes you just gotta laugh...a little homework b4 you go on a rant makes a difference...

Pilots are involved, but they're not at the top of the pecking order. HR is. Maybe that's what you meant to say.

I think HR has way too much influence in this process. You get points??? Yes, that's what I mean. I don't think we need to be hiring 2000 hour types when there are several other more well qualified candidates out there right now. Just my opinion, but a 2000 hour co-pilot at a commuter should probably not be getting the nod right now to come up to the majors, when you consider the depth of the applicants out there that have been humping it for a long time paying their dues.

Don't really see 2000 hr type guys as anything near the trend of what's coming through the door.

Stats from the 2/3/15 class of 21 new-hires:

How on earth are people getting hired with no Turbine PIC?

FWIW, the published minimum is 1000 turbine (no PIC turbine required).

Obviously most competitive applicants will have significant turbine PIC. Those without turbine PIC typically, but not always, fit a couple of categories:
That said, it appears that the number of folks being hired without turbine PIC is not terribly significant as a percentage.

The SAME way they ALWAYS have at a carrier without a TPIC requirement.

I used to think pilots should hire pilots. Then I worked a couple of other flying jobs outside UAL. I now think HR should hire pilots almost exclusively,with pilots only acting as a BS screen.

Ask fedex guys how that worked out going from mostly a pilot driven screening process to a mostly HR driven process.

Well it isn't a perfect system. We have lots of United pilots that went to an interview, didn't get hired, got hired at CAL, are now United pilots, and are no worse or better than any other United pilot. We turn away too many qualified people IMO. Lots of my friends didn't get hired here, and I can't figure out why not. They are successful pilots at other majors.

I interviewed and was hired at FEDEX (but took the United job instead) in 1996. I never saw an HR person. I flew in the sim with a FEDEX pilot and was interviewed by 2 FEDEX pilots. The only admin person I ever saw was the one that administered the test all prospective pilots take.

I won't expand upon my opinion as it would offend some on this board. But pilots are experts at being pilots. HR are experts at evaluating individuals for the purpose of employment.

yeah, some HR people are complete idiots, as are some of us. But after working a couple of other jobs, I stand by my previously stated opinion.

That process changed somewhat later on to include almost 100% (AGAIN, almost) pilot screening to be selected for interview. Where HR had a say who was selected for interview AFTER the candidates had a screen with JUST pilots. With HR having a say after the F2F.

The current system, meh, not so much....

Probably because they realized that a 5-7,000TT FO who has spent almost a decade at his/her dying regional is no different in quality than a 4,000TT CA at a regional that experienced random growth.

Anyways, very few FO's are getting hired. And most of the ones who have were former United/CAL interns or had very high level connections. The nepotism factor is way down compared to years ago, but I think some still exists. I remember one guy posted on here talking about having something like 2,500TT who got hired very early on.

If I could go back in time, I would have gone to Eagle, gotten a flow-through, and been at AA by now. Or quit and gone to Compass when they started up, etc. Hindsight is 20/20.

Of the three without TPIC, their total times were 11,000, 7,000, and 4,300. Two of the three had experience flying large transport jets internationally. I don't remember the specific experience of the third.

NO, I disagree.

HR should only provide the sandbox in which to play in. They can give guidance on federal regulatory requirements and corporate policy. Pilots understand pilots and pilots can spot the BS pretty quick. I've been involved in various types of interview scenario's and those in which HR had a speaking part it was rather goofy. They tried to ask serious questions and be taken seriously. It just goes over as a Lead Balloon. One HR guy asked me if I still had a flight instructor certificate. Really. That' s what ya got.

HR should hire gate agents and ticket agents. That's really all they are good for. And, I mean that in a positive way.

This is a good discussion.

No, I disagree. HR people really have no special gift or skill set in this area. I have a Masters in HR management. I got the degree while looking for a job flying airplanes. Basically killing time.... I took some classes, did some mock interviews, read the rules. HR is just a magic word for "gate keeper". They think they are experts, but most of the HR people I've met are nice people, have good intentions, but are in no way qualified to assess the technical acumen of pilots or other technical people. Further, they are very much at a disadvantage in evaluating leadership traits. I haven't met any HR people that have real world experience in doing real world things. Building teams, administering large programs, meeting deadlines, or driving results. Most that I've met have the degree, and have worked in a few HR departments at smaller companies before working their way up to a fortune 500 company.

In my "perfect world" the interview goes like this.

1. evaluate qualifications
2. Invite to interview
3. Give appropriate test
4. ask questions to match the applicant to the resume
5. ask questions to find out if this person is an A hole or not
6. Simulator session to evaluate skills
7. Final interview to determine if he/she is right for the company/culture (good fit).
8. HR can just sit in the corner and observe

As a Line FO I have noticed two kinds of non
'special interest" Captains:

1. Experienced/qualified, and 2. Not ready for prime time

As for the latter, we keep them out of trouble.

I swear I was told on OE, "you are our last line of defense."

Check airman was grilling me on everything as we crossed the Atlantic. After he said that we both started cracking up.

Sad, but true. I seriously felt like I've been giving IOE on 3 of my last 4 trips. Ironically, 2 of those were with former LUAL Captains. Both pilots were extremely nice people, but we're grossly incompetent pilots. Hopefully, it's was just an anomaly.

A couple of comments

First the ego of someone to say any of our new hires are not ready for prime time is amazing.

This group of new hires is by far the most qualified ever in the history of United Airlines and probably any major airline.

Second HR and all their rules prevents CP him or her from hiring their buddies. They provide a structured process and discipline that often prevents the BS artist from getting through the interviews. Notice I did say "often." There will always be those who should not be hired and even one or two of us who post on this blog may be him or her.

Finally I'm amazed the 1500 hour single seat fighter person is still getting through the process. Not that they won't make outstanding pilots for UAL, it's just when considering the depth of experience out there, why would a pilot with basically zero commercial experience be considered?

Oh and there are a large number of pilots with substantial UAL line experience involved in the hiring decisions.


Oh well you all have the answers so rant away.

Mitch

I'll bet you are still under 50?

I don't know who these two or three pilots are, but the truth is we don't get better as we get older.

Life has a way of sucking the wind out of even the finest pilots and many of us should retire earlier than the mandatory age of 65.

Not sure what fleet you are on, but perhaps some of the, "not ready for prime time" is a direct reflection of the exceptionally **** poor 7 THREE 7 training we all have to endure. Nothing like having to teach yourself the jet.

We have a bunch of guys who have spent the last 15-16 years as bunkies. They found out that being a Capt pays more these days.

With that kind of thinking, you will eventually get your butt in a jam. You are actually calling the company's judgment out.

When DAL first got 72's the book was almost all TBD. The oral was with NE FAA guys... If you were smart you had a NE manual...Survival man, survival.

Curious what exactly you didn't like about the 737 training? Thought the CBT had modules that could have been better, scheduling could have been more streamlined, an awful lot of time spent on RNAV approaches instead of ILS at speeds ATC usually requests, and not incorporating ACARS into sims. On the other hand sim instructors were almost all great, support staff was helpful, and breakfast burritos were awesome, but they are gone now.

The ground instructors, CBT and facilities in IAH were horrible. The entire purpose of the first two weeks was to pass a ridiculous rote memory test where many of the questions/answers were either wrong or wholly ridiculous and unnecessary. I learned more from a set of flashcards than I learned from the instruction given WRT systems. The ground instructors were ill prepared to answer real questions. Worst I've seen in 20+ years in this industry.

The flight instructors were on average very good. In particular, the F/O instructors (the newer ones) were far better than the "Line Check Airman" type that we had for the later sims. General instructor continuity was unacceptable. Shouldn't have a new instructor for each day. The Miami sim was somewhat unreliable, and there was zero support structure WRT the Miami operation. Fortunately, the hotel didn't suck, and there were lots of good food options close to the new hotel. Shouldn't matter but it does. Much better than IAH under the 15L departure path, and limited food choices. Overall, I preferred MIA.

Finally, the last week was a waste of time. After the MV, we did the IOPS loft. Poorly presented, poorly executed. I hope that guys are getting more from the route check than we got in the sim. Pretty weak.

Then, we did the LOE prep. What a horribly designed sim session. The first leg made sense, but the whole MMEX leg was a cluster. In our case, the instructor was rushed as we had lost time due to a sim issue. Not a good experience.

Finally, we had exactly one sim session that even remotely represented what actually happens on the line WRT Acars 2.0 and Sabre. It happened in FTB something. No continuity. Lots of negative training. "Our airplanes don't do that" was spoken numerous times daily. Fun.

Enough?

Scott

Typically the company's (ie flight ops management) judgment is off. Many decisions are made for convenience sake. I can look at some of the people who have been elevated to positions of authority over the years and just scratch my head. Now, as they mature into their roles and get more influence, it's no wonder that their judgment gets called out.

Sure, people can get their butt in a jam, but that has nothing to do with the issue. That is separate, and if you are professional and make the best decisions you can for the good of the operation your chief pilot will take care of you.

Criticizing what needs to be criticized is actually a constructive way to deal with things. We could put our head in the sand and pretend this stuff isn't important, or we could be proactive and suggest a better course of action. Isn't that what CRM is all about? It's not my problem that I speak the truth, but it may be someone's problem up the food chain if the management peeps involved just pretend this isn't germane to their job function or the long term health of the airline.

I can't speak of UALs process or the quality of applicants getting hired today, but it has to be better than 96-99.

I used to go to DEN TK to qual/requal on the HGS (HUD) in the 727.

We'd have lunch sometime with interviewees/new hires. It was amusing to be told by a 500 hour wonder that we'd make it to the big time just like them someday. Um yeah, you're a new hire 727 FE and I've sat in every seat on the airplane.

Never did break the code back in the day even with a rec from a -400 captain.

Could not possibly disagree more. Your chief pilot is a management pilot. He will not take care of you. He is not looking out for you. If you honestly think that UCH management (your chief pilot) has your back, you're delusional.

Scott

If "take care of you" means lecturing, ordering, punishing, or admonishing you, yes you will be "taken care of". There is only one person a management pilot is looking out for.

That hasn't been my experience. I have had to make some tough calls operationally speaking and I explained my actions and I have come out on the other side just fine. Not everything in Aviation is in "the book." Sometimes you need to use your best judgment and trust your boss. Likely the topic for another thread. But, if I didn't feel supported in the CPO, I wouldn't fly in the left seat. I have no problems making decisions, but it is a comfort knowing your CP "gets it."

If the Chief Pilot isn't a pilot advocate first, then the line pilots will let that be known and operational reliability, and other things like sick leave will get noticed. I recall Andy Joost getting a lateral transfer of sorts, Hugh Dean, getting booted, and a few others over the years that when they acted in the wrong interests and against the interests of line pilots they were asked to leave the office.

You have it backwards.

If the CPO advocates for the line pilots too much, senior management pilots give them the axe.