An Apology to Colgan Pilot on Jetcareers

[pilot602]

As for the seniority system, it's not perfect (far from it), but it's better than anything I can think of. Every merit-based system I have observed has made mistakes in that the suck ups are mostly the ones who get promoted, not necessarily the most qualified.

A merit based system, in aviation, isn't about suck-ups getting promoted. It's about safety. There is no other system that rewards pilots without compromising safety.

The biggest question in a merit based system, regarding aviation, is what defines merit? How do you judge one pilot from the next? On-time performance? Well how many airplanes will get flown that really shouldn't be fown? Piloting skills? Show me the objective way to compare piloting skills and I'll sell you ocean front property in Nevada. Speed of which a given leg is flown or how fast a turn is completed? Shortcuts lead to mistakes, mistakes lead to death.

There isn't a single qualitative formula you can think of that won't or couldn't lead to compromises in safety.

Senority only sucks when it comes time to move to a different carrier the rest of the system actually works farily well. Everyone gets a chance to move up they just have to wait their turn. Nothing really unfair about it.

The point is there really is no other way to reward a pilot group without treading into some very dangerous territories.

 

[I_Money]

Pilot602 - your problem is easy to solve, 360 degree performance apprasial will count as merit.

 

[jtrain609]

pilot602 is right on the money. Any time you start involving performance evaluations you start bringing politics and BS into the game and that isn't good for safety.

Safety is the name of the game, right? 'Cause profits are cool and all, but if it's between me getting killed and getting the freight out on time, then my company says screw the freight and don't get hurt.

 

[Rocketman99]

Aroo?

 

[jtrain609]

Did I stutter?

 

[zmiller4]

Pilot602 - your problem is easy to solve, 360 degree performance apprasial will count as merit.

I'm not 100% sure what "360 degree performance appraisal" means, but if you're talking about a comprehensive analysis of a pilot's job performance, that would be impossible. If you've got a pilot group of, say, 2000 folks, each of whom fly 60 legs a month with four or five different captains/FO's, it's going to be impossible to get a good idea of how good an employee they are. Sure, you can look at on-time performance, violations, maintainance issues, etc, but they'd have to look at each individual situation and it's not going to be cost-effective to do that (not to mention the probably dubious objectivity of the HR people who are doing the evaluations).

I'm not crazy about the seniority-based system, as I'm sure there's captains out there who probably shouldn't be, but like pilot602 said to come up with a decent merit-based system is going to be really difficult.

 

[Rocketman99]

Did I stutter?

What? What?

The aroo was to Iain's 360 performance appraisal post. I have no idea what that is.

Freakin' jtrain...

 

[I_Money]

I'm not 100% sure what "360 degree performance appraisal" means, but if you're talking about a comprehensive analysis of a pilot's job performance, that would be impossible.

I can tell you do not know what one is - what it would include is random evaluations of pilots from all the people around them, gate agents, ground staff, FAs, pilot they flew with, management pilots etc. These would not have to be frequent, indepth, and could easily be done electronically with 5 questions on a scale of 1-10 - should take about 30 seconds.

This will give an honest representation of the pilot.

 

[derg]

I just find the whole seniority system antiquated, impractical and wrong! The system really screws you, yet you get so emotional over it - nothing is better for a employees than competition.

Don't you have a horse to be looking after?

Seriously, if you don't understand the seniority system, take a peek at "Flying the Line" as the last thing you want are pilots competing with themselves for upgrades.

The seniority system gives you the ability to exercise your pilot-in-command skills to say, "The parking brake is remaining SET until you have someone come out and look at this system" rather than constantly being worried about your career progression because you took on an extra 500 lbs of fuel because of weather, refused to fly an unairworthy aircraft or wouldn't accept an illegal re-route.

The seniority system may not be in tune with Ayn Rand or anyone's academic utopian view on how the airline business should work, but it's what we have and I don't have to worry about getting backstabbed by competing pilots or having to worry about kissing crew scheduling's ass so I don't have to work Christmas.

You don't want backroom deals and kindergarten office politics affecting your decisions behind the yoke.

Street captains are generally bad news, I had to deal with it once at my last airline and it wasn't pretty.

More or less the chief pilots buddy from another carrier. Great guy on a personal level, but had no 1900 or airline experience.

Didn't get the 'flow' of the airline operation and couldn't let go of the fact that we weren't flying part-91 Queen Airs in the backwoods of the midwest, we had a POI, a CMO and "Chet" from the FSDO -- all that would lovingly violate your ass if you didn't carry the one on the W&B sheet.

"I'm the captain, it's fine, let's go" was generally the answer -- airworthy or not. Even though you knew that you were a senior FO and that they'd drop the hammer on you because you're supposed to be looking after him and you should "know better" -- nothing worse than being paired up to 'babysit' someone that you have no authority over.

Can't talk to the chief pilot about the operation because they were pals.

Instead of sitting reserve like other junior captains, crew scheduling would piece together somewhat premium trips so he didn't have to sit reserve.

This guy delayed my own captain IOE for months because when it was time, well, in walks a 'street captain'.

Costed me money and several hundred hours of turbine PIC.

Operationally, if the airline has no FO qualified to serve as PIC, sure, but out of seniority upgrades just because someone is a 'nice guy', or 'we go way back', or 'he's helped us out SO much' in the airline environment is cheeseball.

If I stepped on any toes, well, put some damned shoes on!

 

[MQAAord]

That would require staff to conduct said evaluations, gather the data, compile it, etc.

Not to mention, most airline folks aren't too keen on spending time they're not getting paid for, for writing out evals on pilots they interacted with who knows when. With the volume of pilots that employees interact with, it can be hard to remember who was who! It's possible that you can fly with half dozen pilots during the course of a 4-day trip.

The idea of performance reviews is great in a corporate world where you see and work with the same people day-in-day-out. The airline world is very different. You can fly with someone, and literally never see them again. Ever!

The senority system is not perfect, but like everyone else has said, there's yet to be a merit/performance based system that would work well (notice I said well) with crew memebers!

This very topic was discussed on F/A.org a while ago. Someone who is with an airline based in Dubai started it, and he was gloating about how he kisses butt and gets rewarded for it. Basically everyone told him "that's nice, but instead of kissing managment's rear end, and worrying about performance appraisals, I'd rather put my energy into doing a good job".

 

[derg]

I can tell you do not know what one is - what it would include is random evaluations of pilots from all the people around them, gate agents, ground staff, FAs, pilot they flew with, management pilots etc. These would not have to be frequent, indepth, and could easily be done electronically with 5 questions on a scale of 1-10 - should take about 30 seconds.

This will give an honest representation of the pilot.

Sorry to hit you twice in the same thread, but 'aink!' wrong answer.

Sometimes when you do the 'right' thing, you're going to make enemies. And if you make an enemy, they're not going to give you a favorable evaluation.

Scenario: the flight attendant commutes between LAX and OAK and you're sitting in RNO.

In RNO, she reports that the exit lighting is inoperative near the exit row and wants you to write it up in flight.

You look at the MEL and it's a "no go" item. You can't 'flight crew placard' it and it needs to be rectified by a mechanic before pushback. If you write it up in flight, she'll make her commuter flight home to OAK.

Do you do what's right by calling maintenance, potentially the flight and your flight attendant may miss her commuter flight home? Or do you play 'nice guy', depart with the exit sign lighting INOP, even though you can't flight crew placard the item, thus flying a legally unairworthy aircraft?

Then she's asked to do YOUR evaluation after missing her commuter flight.

What do you think she'll say?

Do you get points for being a great co-worker, helpful and thoughtful, but will fly an unairworthy aircraft to maintain good repoire with fellow crewmembers?

Do you LOSE points for flying a legally unairworthy aircraft, but were helpful to a senior, well-respected flight attendant?

Is she in a position to evaluate your performance as pilot-in-command?

 

[Aero_Engineer]

Sorry to hit you twice in the same thread, but 'aink!' wrong answer.

Sometimes when you do the 'right' thing, you're going to make enemies. And if you make an enemy, they're not going to give you a favorable evaluation.

Case in point, the flight attendant commutes between LAX and OAK and you're sitting in RNO.

In RNO, she reports that the exit lighting is inoperative near the exit row and wants you to write it up in flight.

You look at the MEL and it's a "no go" item. You can't 'flight crew placard' it and it needs to be rectified by a mechanic before pushback. If you write it up in flight, she'll make her commuter flight home to OAK.

Do you do what's right by calling maintenance, potentially the flight and your flight attendant may miss her commuter flight home? Or do you play 'nice guy', depart with the exit sign lighting INOP, even though you can't flight crew placard the item, thus flying a legally unairworthy aircraft?

Then she's asked to do YOUR evaluation after missing her commuter flight.

What do you think she'll say?

Do you get points for being a great co-worker, helpful and thoughtful, but will fly an unairworthy aircraft to maintain good repoire with fellow crewmembers?

Do you LOSE points for flying a legally unairworthy aircraft, but were helpful to a senior, well-respected flight attendant?

Is she in a position to evaluate your performance as pilot-in-command?

\

I gotta say that you just nailed it man, I can't agree with you more.

 

[derg]

Thanks bro.

You're paid to make sometimes unpopular decisions. You're not paid to run around kissing co-worker's asses so they'll give you a good performance evaluation.

No one wants to divert to Des Moines in the middle of the night and miss their connections. But if you're going to land with less than your minimum reserve fuel at your intended destination, those people aren't going to have your back during the investigation.

 

[I_Money]

Valid point Doug - it would be interesting to see what hospitals do, as they have to make some unpopular decisions too.

 

[kellwolf]

I can tell you do not know what one is - what it would include is random evaluations of pilots from all the people around them, gate agents, ground staff, FAs, pilot they flew with, management pilots etc. These would not have to be frequent, indepth, and could easily be done electronically with 5 questions on a scale of 1-10 - should take about 30 seconds.

This will give an honest representation of the pilot.

That's actually not even gonna get you anywhere close to an honest rep of a pilot. The ground staff hears us on the headsets, so I guess if you nail all the terminology correctly, you're a good pilot to them. Oh, and make sure you're not running a checklist when they try to clear you on the APU when it's already running. They hate that. I've gotten yelled at by a ramper for that. Seriously.

Gate agents? We show them our IDs, we get the paperwork, make some small talk and say "See ya! Have a good one" when the door gets closed. Once again, not something that would (or should) help out on a merit based system.

FAs generally don't know much about the flight deck. Some are interested, and I try to help them out and teach them as much as they want to learn. Others couldn't care less past the door closing. Give one of those an eval, and it could be all 1s or 10s just to get the hassle to go away. Once again, not an accurate depiction of a person's ability to operate the aircraft in a safe manner.

The ones that DO know what's going on are the pilots you fly with every day, and there IS a system in place for that. The problem is, management doesn't often want to hear "CA so-and-so made an excellent and safe decision by not flying the aircraft when XX was broken. MX said it was okay to go and they'll fix it at the next station, but CA stuck to his guns until the problem was fixed." In a merit based system, like it or not, management is just as likely to promote the guy who goes because MX says it's good to prevent the flight from being delayed, thus costing the airline money in mis-connect bags and re-booked flights.

It's been said enough, but I'll say it again. Seniority system isn't perfect, but even on the near bottom rung, I prefer it to a merit based system.

 

[ColganFO]

I think the main point here is that it's not just the amount of time you have which should qualify one as a good upgrade applicant.
Beyond expierence, I think dedication, patience, personality, ability to handle stressful situations, and overall knowledge are huge components of a good captain.
I personally had alot of expierence coming into Colgan, and I treated my job here the same as I did my other regionals jobs. Sometimes the senioirity system doesn't always best refelect these attributes.

 

[kellwolf]

I think the main point here is that it's not just the amount of time you have which should qualify one as a good upgrade applicant.
Beyond expierence, I think dedication, patience, personality, ability to handle stressful situations, and overall knowledge are huge components of a good captain.
I personally had alot of expierence coming into Colgan, and I treated my job here the same as I did my other regionals jobs. Sometimes the senioirity system doesn't always best refelect these attributes.

Eh, I disagree. If we're talking FLIGHT time, then maybe. If we're talking time at the company, then I disagree. I can guarantee you an FO that's been here for 2 years has seen and done a lot more than I have in 1 year. That, to me, means they are more experienced and have more knowledge. Like I said, seniority system isn't perfect, but with management that hires 500TT pilots with less than 100 PIC, I don't really trust them to make the right decision in a merit based system on who upgrades based on operating the aircraft safely. Cheaply and for the benefit of the shareholders, yes, but not necessarily safely.

 

[Cruise]

Eh, I disagree. If we're talking FLIGHT time, then maybe. If we're talking time at the company, then I disagree. I can guarantee you an FO that's been here for 2 years has seen and done a lot more than I have in 1 year. That, to me, means they are more experienced and have more knowledge. Like I said, seniority system isn't perfect, but with management that hires 500TT pilots with less than 100 PIC, I don't really trust them to make the right decision in a merit based system on who upgrades based on operating the aircraft safely. Cheaply and for the benefit of the shareholders, yes, but not necessarily safely.

:yeahthat: Exactly Kellwolf! BTW, do you ever get into ABE? If so, I'd love to get together w/ you and your crew for dinner/ drinks.....after all, we're part of the "family" now.

If so, let me know.

 

[Maximilian_Jenius]

In a thread where you're apologizing to Colgan pilots about your braggadocio. Don't you think that your new avatar is bad form as well? As it is kinda thumbing your nose in their face, that you're jumping in the upgrade line before them? Yet again.

 

[Cruise]

In a thread where you're apologizing to Colgan pilots about your braggadocio. Don't you think that your new avatar is bad form as well? As it is kinda thumbing your nose in their face, that you're jumping in the upgrade line before them? Yet again.

You know, I was wondering the same thing. What's the deal? Arrooooooo?????