![]() |
My 727 FE instructor in 95 told me in the past they had to give remedial classes to some new hires. They had to teach them what pressurization, hydraulic systems, etc was. From scratch.
|
Originally Posted by Probe
(Post 2174539)
I don't think accepting a job during a strike qualifies as "striking".
Hi Staller |
Originally Posted by Dave Fitzgerald
(Post 2174664)
Sorry to burst your bubble. I was hired April '87. There were several in my class that had less than 1000 hrs, in fact one only had 650. I was in the first group to be interviewed after the pool of interviewies were used from the strike.
The 650 person had a very rough time getting through but we did have a lot of other experience in the class with some prior heavy time. In the end, we got everyone though, and a lot of instructing on our own to do it. Our 727 FE class was the shortest in UAL history--which didn't help any. Right after our class, UAL announced that they had lost the EEOC discrimination hiring law suit. Everything changed. I'm sure our class was impacted by the "new requirements." Well Dave if you read my post it was a response to the writer who posted United hired 250 hour pilots. Additionally you confirmed what I wrote, most had at least ATP and the bottom you experienced was 650 hours. When I was hired in 78 the lowest time person (a woman) had 850 or so hours and I'm sure there were others with slightly less, but not many. However, as you confirm the minimum allowed in the app was 350 and even the interns had more than that. I was an LCA on the 737-200 in 95 and the lowest time F/O new hire I checked out was an intern with around 650+ hours. So you didn't bust a single bubble at all you confirmed what I posted. Thank you very much. To the other poster: Now were the 570 ever scabs? How many times does this have to be answered? NO! I believe only two actually crossed the picket line. |
Oh and Dave the subject was minimum hours and you turned it into deficiency as pilots. You may have forgotten the senior caps when you were hired had many who were hired with almost no time and In their day the initial new-hire class was close to three months, mostly learning how to build the airplane systems.
Today it's a switchology approach to systems, read the check list, turn it off or on, check the inop list and then apply a performance penalty. Much simpler approach and it meets minimum FAA required system knowledge. |
Originally Posted by MacrossJet
(Post 2173119)
Where does it state that?
|
I know the focus is UAL here, but this may ruinate things at ATCA. "academy type" instructors eager for a job will work there for next to nothing just for the promise of a flow to UAL.
When I was there, ATCA was a very good job and it pays pretty decent. Now its going to be peanuts. There always seems to be a turd in the punchbowl. |
"Once selected and hired by United, these pilots would start as United "new hires" and would be eligible to fly aircraft in United's narrow body fleet. "
When would they be eligible to "fly" the entire fleet? Which part of the contract separates the fleets and allows limiting pilots to a type? Black helicopters aside, there is way more to this than what is currently shown. |
Originally Posted by ClickClickBoom
(Post 2175839)
"Once selected and hired by United, these pilots would start as United "new hires" and would be eligible to fly aircraft in United's narrow body fleet. "
When would they be eligible to "fly" the entire fleet? Which part of the contract separates the fleets and allows limiting pilots to a type? The 767 fleet is the exception. The 767 is really a wide body, but for pay, it's a bit weird. Many new hires on the 767/757. |
Originally Posted by ClickClickBoom
(Post 2175839)
"Once selected and hired by United, these pilots would start as United "new hires" and would be eligible to fly aircraft in United's narrow body fleet. "
When would they be eligible to "fly" the entire fleet? Which part of the contract separates the fleets and allows limiting pilots to a type? Black helicopters aside, there is way more to this than what is currently shown. Sometimes hoof prints are simply evidence of horses. |
Originally Posted by cadetdrivr
(Post 2175850)
Sometimes hoof prints are simply evidence of horses. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHFXG3r_0B8 |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:49 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands