Delta ponders pilot sources (Flightglobal article)

[dasleben]

What would you based your merit system on? I have never gotten an answer to this question.

To expand on mshunter's response: Whole-person concept. Being hired or promoted because you earned it, not because you simply meet the minimums or your number comes up. Honestly, I've been thinking about this for quite a while after seeing ALPA, two iterations of the IBT, and an in-house union. The major issue that we face as airline pilots is that we expect to be treated with respect and command high rates of pay when, in fact, we willfully cater to the lowest common denominator within our own group.

How to base it? I'm not really sure. Committee, maybe. The point is, we should all strive to be the best we can at our profession, rather than expect everyone to drag themselves onto their bellies in the name of collectivist "fairness." No, merit-based isn't fair. It's not meant to be. Some people will not earn their spot. It requires more work for those of us who want it. It requires you to be competitive and push yourself further. In the end, it brings the group up rather than down.

I'm not the highest common denominator. I don't wash my chief pilot's car or walk his dog on the weekends (I'm pretty sure he doesn't even know my name). I could shine my shoes a little better. If I upgrade where I'm at, I want it to be because I earned it, not because I've simply waited for my turn, or because I sucked up to the right people.

 

[jynxyjoe]

For starters, by being treated as a person, and not a number. By how much time you have, not how long you've been with the company alone. Being with a company for x numbers of years is not a representaion of how experinced you are. Remember previous thread where someone was in IOE for 45 hours? Times, although not perfect, is a better indicator of experince, otherwise one would be able to get hired into a BBJ/G550/A380 woth 250TT.

There are so many ways. Time with the company should be one factor, but merrit/skill should be as well. Records are already kept by captains on FO performance, are they not?

Eh, look at it from my perspective. We all get treated equally and (hopefully) fairly. Everyone likes flying with me, I like flying with everyone. I don't want to be treated better, I know I've got a lot of guys in front of me. I've made mistakes, I've been forgiven. One of these was a big old HR mistake during one of our monthly witch hunts.

As long as the company is a good one, and we are all going to be there for 30-40 years who cares who started where? It's a damn long time to be judging yourself off "merit" when the goal is one large safety conscience operation, and if you do everything right you shouldn't stick out.

Am I that far off?

 

[jynxyjoe]

How to base it? I'm not really sure. Committee, maybe. The point is, we should all strive to be the best we can at our profession, rather than expect everyone to drag themselves onto their bellies in the name of collectivist "fairness." No, merit-based isn't fair. It's not meant to be. Some people will not earn their spot. It requires more work for those of us who want it.

At my companies, the trouble makers and low points on the spectrum are downgraded (sometimes fired). Of course it takes more than a year being here to see it happen but with time the system is set up to sort itself out.

Exactly what does "more work for those of us who want it?". You work more hours in a year? More on time arrivals. Certainly you can see where this pushes the industry as a whole.

 

[Gonzo]

For starters, by being treated as a person, and not a number. By how much time you have, not how long you've been with the company alone. Being with a company for x numbers of years is not a representaion of how experinced you are. Remember previous thread where someone was in IOE for 45 hours? Times, although not perfect, is a better indicator of experince, otherwise one would be able to get hired into a BBJ/G550/A380 woth 250TT.

There are so many ways. Time with the company should be one factor, but merrit/skill should be as well. Records are already kept by captains on FO performance, are they not?

But at what point does TT become meaningless. At the company I work for 3,000TT is upgrade mins.

To expand on mshunter's response: Whole-person concept. Being hired or promoted because you earned it, not because you simply meet the minimums or your number comes up. Honestly, I've been thinking about this for quite a while after seeing ALPA, two iterations of the IBT, and an in-house union. The major issue that we face as airline pilots is that we expect to be treated with respect and command high rates of pay when, in fact, we willfully cater to the lowest common denominator within our own group.

How to base it? I'm not really sure. Committee, maybe. The point is, we should all strive to be the best we can at our profession, rather than expect everyone to drag themselves onto their bellies in the name of collectivist "fairness." No, merit-based isn't fair. It's not meant to be. Some people will not earn their spot. It requires more work for those of us who want it. It requires you to be competitive and push yourself further. In the end, it brings the group up rather than down.

I'm not the highest common denominator. I don't wash my chief pilot's car or walk his dog on the weekends (I'm pretty sure he doesn't even know my name). I could shine my shoes a little better. If I upgrade where I'm at, I want it to be because I earned it, not because I've simply waited for my turn, or because I sucked up to the right people.

In short you like the idea of merit-based upgrade(most people I talk to do), but have one clue how it would work(I am in the same boat).

 

[fosters]

You think pilots have ego problems now? Wait until you introduce a merit based upgrade system. There's going to be so many people on my do not fly list.

 

[dasleben]

In short you like the idea of merit-based upgrade(most people I talk to do), but have one clue how it would work(I am in the same boat).

Well, I work for a company that has merit-based upgrade, which is why I've come to support it. I went around asking lots of pilots about their experiences with it, and overwhelmingly it's been done in a reasonable manner (not done because you sucked up to someone, etc.). It's done by captain/check airman recommendation, and overall aircraft/sim performance.

You think pilots have ego problems now? Wait until you introduce a merit based upgrade system. There's going to be so many people on my do not fly list.

That hasn't been my experience, actually. Every captain I've flown with has been hard-working and humble. Of course, there are always 5%ers everywhere.

 

[Gonzo]

Well, I work for a company that has merit-based upgrade, which is why I've come to support it. I went around asking lots of pilots about their experiences with it, and overwhelmingly it's been done in a reasonable manner (not done because you sucked up to someone, etc.). It's done by captain/check airman recommendation, and overall aircraft/sim performance.

What do you mean "overall aircraft/sim performance"?

Also at a small company it is easier for merit-based to work. At the company you work for you only have 100-120 CAs. So when then company is going to upgrade it is not had to send out and email to the CAs and ask who they think should get the upgrade. Also with so few CAs there is a good chance you have flown with most of them.

 

[boondr]

Well, I work for a company that has merit-based upgrade, which is why I've come to support it. I went around asking lots of pilots about their experiences with it, and overwhelmingly it's been done in a reasonable manner (not done because you sucked up to someone, etc.). It's done by captain/check airman recommendation, and overall aircraft/sim performance.



That hasn't been my experience, actually. Every captain I've flown with has been hard-working and humble. Of course, there are always 5%ers everywhere.

Merit based promotion? You might as well just change that avatar header of yours to "FO for life!"
:bandit:

 

[fosters]

That hasn't been my experience, actually. Every captain I've flown with has been hard-working and humble. Of course, there are always 5%ers everywhere.

That part about pilots having egos what somewhat in jest.

I did my multi-engine training with a former Omni check airman. He is a great guy. I didn't know they had merit based upgrade. I'll need to ask him about it. I'm sure it can work in a smaller pilot group in a very controlled environment. Perhaps it could work in a large one too.

 

[dasleben]

What do you mean "overall aircraft/sim performance"?

Judgment scenarios in the sim, judgment in the airplane, etc. For example, a check airman might give you something like a rudder ratio or generator failure on an approach in the sim to see how you handle it. Other times, it could be something like a cargo fire on the approach when you've already got an engine shut down. All of this would be non-jeopardy, but they're looking to see how you handle yourself (i.e., do you meticulously run the checklist and take delay vectors, or blow the bottle and put the airplane on the ground?). I'm sure there are other interesting sim scenarios that come about. I sat down and chatted with a check airman about this recently, and it's meant to be a "whole pilot" concept that takes multiple aspects of your abilities, experience, and performance into account.

Also at a small company it is easier for merit-based to work. At the company you work for you only have 100-120 CAs. So when then company is going to upgrade it is not had to send out and email to the CAs and ask who they think should get the upgrade. Also with so few CAs there is a good chance you have flown with most of them.

I could agree with this. I know at XJT we had probationary-FO reports we had to get from captains during our first year. What about something like that (non-jeopardy of course) for FOs who might be ready to upgrade?

Just tossing ideas around.

Merit based promotion? You might as well just change that avatar header of yours to "FO for life!"
:bandit:

Sometimes people still slip through the cracks. Hoping I can be one of those.

 

[Center_Mid]

I've always figured that a merit-based system couldn't work at a huge airline because there are just too many pilots. If you look at a pilot group with, say, 500 qualified 757pilots, how would you ascertain why Pilot 1 should be upgraded over Pilot 2, 3, 4...232, 233, etc.? You could probably do it with a small pilot group, but beyond 20 or 30pilots it'd just be really subjective. Isn't is more fair to assume that any pilot who doesn't get violated and passes their checkrides is just as good as everyone else?

Piloting is a weird profession. It's unlike almost any other. Pilots are highly skilled, but they're basically interchangeable, at least within their airline and type. You can't swap out one vascular surgeon for another an hour and a half before a major surgery. You can't substitute one lawyer for another 1.5 hours before opening statements. Well, I guess you could, but I wouldn't want to be the patient or the defendant. But if you need a 767 pilot to fly from Newark to Dublin on 1.5 hours' notice, no problem. Interchangeability and uniform levels of performance are key. So, how do you dole out promotions among hundreds or even thousands of pilots when the whole point is to have them performing at pretty much the same level?

 

[Gonzo]

Judgment scenarios in the sim, judgment in the airplane, etc. For example, a check airman might give you something like a rudder ratio or generator failure on an approach in the sim to see how you handle it. Other times, it could be something like a cargo fire on the approach when you've already got an engine shut down. All of this would be non-jeopardy, but they're looking to see how you handle yourself (i.e., do you meticulously run the checklist and take delay vectors, or blow the bottle and put the airplane on the ground?). I'm sure there are other interesting sim scenarios that come about. I sat down and chatted with a check airman about this recently, and it's meant to be a "whole pilot" concept that takes multiple aspects of your abilities, experience, and performance into account.

I think every airline already does this. If you do good you get to keep your job.

I could agree with this. I know at XJT we had probationary-FO reports we had to get from captains during our first year. What about something like that (non-jeopardy of course) for FOs who might be ready to upgrade?

Just tossing ideas around.

How do you decide when somebody is ready to upgrade? Also what about somebody who buddy bids?

 

[dasleben]

Isn't is more fair to assume that any pilot who doesn't get violated and passes their checkrides is just as good as everyone else?

Well, ideally yes, but we all know that the real answer is quite different. We've all flown with guys who've barely passed training and are weak in the cockpit. If you're stronger, why not get the opportunity before the guy who barely passes his/her sim events? Again, I'm not saying that I'm that guy at this point, but wouldn't this better reward your hard work? It doesn't treat everyone equally, but again, that's kind of the point of the system. Your hard work should be rewarded, instead of rewarding mediocrity.

I think every airline already does this. If you do good you get to keep your job.

This is true here as well, but if you work harder than the guy who never studies, doesn't give a damn, and barely passes his checking events, should you be treated the same way?

How do you decide when somebody is ready to upgrade? Also what about somebody who buddy bids?

"Whole pilot" concept based on evaluations from multiple captains and check airmen, both in the airplane and the sim. If you're ready to upgrade, it should be apparent to those who are in a position to make that decision. I realize that it's very subjective, but that's how this sort of system would have to work to be effective.

 

[derg]

Records aren't kept by captains on FO's performance. Might be something you might see as new hire where I work until you're off probation but 99% of the time the captain would hand me the form and tell me to turn it in for them.

There's a pretty good discussion on how a 'merit based' system would be disastrous. I don't need to have to fight with a captain about accepting with an unairworthy aircraft because he wants a 100% completion rate for the month. Or more of the guys flying sick that brag about never having called in sick for a few years.

 

[dasleben]

Records aren't kept by captains on FO's performance. Might be something you might see as new hire where I work until you're off probation but 99% of the time the captain would hand me the form and tell me to turn it in for them.

There's a pretty good discussion on how a 'merit based' system would be disastrous. I don't need to have to fight with a captain about accepting with an unairworthy aircraft because he wants a 100% completion rate for the month. Or more of the guys flying sick that brag about never having called in sick for a few years.

It's not like that here at all, but I could imagine issues popping up at other companies.

 

[Gonzo]

It's not like that here at all, but I could imagine issues popping up at other companies.

Because it is small company which is one of the reasons I would like to work there(Less Dbags). 5%-10% of 300 is a lot less then, 5%-10% of 11,000.

 

[derg]

A couple pilots, sure. But following evaluation trails of 12,000, not so much.

Additionally, sometimes the FO isn't the problem child, the guy in the left seat is!

 

[Bigey]

As an operating condition for all 121 carriers, all employment for flight crew positions must come from a approved national seniority list in which contain union members in good standing.

So the airline industry would be a closed shop. Doesnt sound to plausible.

You mean this isn't 1970? Where am I? God damn acid trips!

Haha lay off the drugs! Remember, they're bad for you!

Job security for the pilots.

For whom? The ones on the top?

That is how a national seniority list would work. If a pilot senior to you loses his equipment he may bid to another base/equipment his seniority would hold. Whoever is at the bottom of the list would be furloughed. That is exactly how it happens already inside an individual company.

Whats to say Pilot A doesnt keep moving from airline to airline bumping pilots off the list continually. Whats the incentive for a pilot to go to a certain airline if he can be bumped at the whim of another pilot?

What you've done is explain how seniority works already. Maybe you should be asking, "How do we integrate all the lists?".

Finally, how do we integrate all the lists? Furthermore, how does pay fit into all of this at different airlines?

 

[BeRich]

I'm not the highest common denominator

Possibly because there's no such thing? And all the other stuff, of course.

/end slight threadjack

 

[jynxyjoe]

For whom? The ones on the top?

Isn't that a little silly to say? It is the person on the top, that's one group, it's also the people in the top middle, middle, lower middle. Some pilots on the bottom of the list will go on furlough, just like already happens, and when there is room for more pilots, their jobs are secured.

As for the National Seniority List being plausible, I refer you to Canada and Jazz.