I didn't meet the mins, but I sent my resume in anyway.

Random aside to this thread....

two anecdotes:

1) was told the story of a class of "interviewees" who were given a "new" requirement when they all showed up, with the statement that, "if you don't meet this, you can leave now".... the person who stayed who didn't meet the requirement got the job, because they were trying to weed out the "non-dedicated" folks

2) it may vary industry to industry, but I've been told by friends in the Computer Security field that just because you don't meet all the "requirements" of a position doesn't mean you shouldn't apply. Obviously, skills can potentially be more portable in that field, vs. the stringent total time or time in type or PIC requirements...



That being said, in general, in the aviation field, "don't meet the mins, don't come in through the 'must be this tall' entrance".... you'll need another way.

carry on...
 
Numbers game. 100 resumes sent to 100 jobs that you wouldnt qualify for might get 3 interested and one job offer. You have a much better chance at landing a job than just applying for 4 or 5 positions that you actually qualify for. Its sales (yourself). Nothing personal.


And yes, I have gotten 2 aviation jobs, 3 non and plenty more interveiws/offers using this approach. Since being unemployed and picky I have only been applying to jobs that I qualify for AND want. To date I only have a factory job.
 
Doug Taylor said:
I called 'em "Crazy-8's" because I had a devil of a time performing them. Somehow I still managed to safely fly 767's! ;)
Click to expand...

yes... but can you deal with the crazy 88's?

Crazy88.jpg
 
cencal83406 said:
2) it may vary industry to industry, but I've been told by friends in the Computer Security field that just because you don't meet all the "requirements" of a position doesn't mean you shouldn't apply. Obviously, skills can potentially be more portable in that field, vs. the stringent total time or time in type or PIC requirements...
Click to expand...

This, I suspect, is probably driving a lot of the apply-for-the-hell-of-it mentality.

In my field, (IT/Telecom) job postings even for entry-level positions (like tech support) tend to outline requirements which are almost laughable in some cases - the requirements generally far exceed that of the applicant they will hire. What they're trying to do is get the most-qualified people in for the job that they can. The "requirements" are actually "soft requirements" and they will generally hire the candidate closest to that model, because the guy with all of those actual creds isn't going to want THAT job. In a sense, the employer is wasting the time of the applicant, too.
 
Doug Taylor said:
I called 'em "Crazy-8's" because I had a devil of a time performing them. Somehow I still managed to safely fly 767's! ;)
Click to expand...

Ah hah. My only checkride bust was on lazy 8s for my commercial single add on.

That's a "I'll tell you about it at NJC" story though.
 
HARRY POTTER said:
another thing to consider is that if you're on unemployment, you have to do so many work searches per week to be eligable for benefits. Sending resume = work search. In texas at least, you have to do that 4 times per week.
Click to expand...

Funny that Harry/Weed/Banned brought this up... I was caught in this situation. Laid off from old job, but not enough time left staying in Texas to pick up something new because the wife was about to graduate, we were moving to Seattle, and would shortly begin work for the federal government. I went ahead and applied for unemployment, but didn't want to waste people's time while meeting the application requirement... so I'd include a cover letter that said in the very first sentence that I did not meet their requirements and that in order to qualify for unemployment benefits I needed to apply to four jobs a week.

Simple and easy, and including time for a possible slow internet connection, it couldn't have taken more than ten seconds for them to process and delete my application. Got what I needed while imposing a minimal burden on others.

/7500

Closer to the topic, I've been in the hiring position before, and I personally would gravitate towards the people who would provide cover letters that actually highlighted the important points. Not "self-started, motivated, driven A-personality go-getter seeking employment in a proactive, innovative, forward-thinking environment" garbage, but "I have X years in Y, resulting in Z results." If I knew they weren't going to waste my time, congratulations, they just bought some more of it.
 
The best place for networking I've ever found is right here on JetCareers. If it wasn't for one of our members I'd still probably be unemployed, and I tried and try to pay that forward as well.
 
I got a job in the right seat of a PC-12 with zero turbine time because of an internal recommendation. That recommendation got me the interview. My determination and passion. I would have never got the chance to even prove myself unless I would have given that initial push. And I can honestly say I proved myself and showed that minimums do not always display talent. I think that says a lot for a company to reconize that. And I know there are amazing pilots on this board. I say put your damn resume in you never know. The worst they can say is no...
 
So, to get to the bottom line:

1. Applying to flying jobs you know you are not qualified for is bad UNLESS you have an internal recommendation.
2. For almost every other job, you should apply even if you don't necessarily meet the requirements (within reason).
 
cencal83406 said:
2) it may vary industry to industry, but I've been told by friends in the Computer Security field that just because you don't meet all the "requirements" of a position doesn't mean you shouldn't apply.
Click to expand...

The computer field is a bit different. That's why my CV is 9 pages long (I'm 30, I shouldn't have a 9 page resume....) The problem is that the "requirements" listed for a job generally go through HR, and HR generally has no clue if these requirements are relevant or not.
 
TXaviator said:
thats just it though, without ego or snowflake-specialness, i can honestly look in the mirror and say my 1200TT *may, for some operations* be more valuable than say someone with 1500TT in skydiving planes, or even 1500TT of CFI'ing at the same airport/general area.... ive crossed every direction of this fair country in a C172, generally with crappy equipment, in all kinds of weather, with all decisionmaking, planning, logistics arrangement, EVERYTHING handled by just me. also with my aerobatics background and documented success, i can honestly say that i feel i am a above average stick, and can follow very precise instructions, under scrutiny of others, under high pressure situations. and thirdly, ive been living on the road for 2 years now, really flexible and adaptable, and have demonstrated i can get along with guys in close quarters for months on end.

so when I throw in a resume I'm not doing it blindly or cluelessly like OMG HIRE ME I HAZ LICENZE!!!

if someone did give me a shot, even with lower than 'required mins', I feel that for some operations I would indeed be a valuable candidate.

but yeah, all that stuff doesnt seem to matter much. aviation is not a meritocracy.
Click to expand...

This is gonna come across harsh.

So what? Do you really think you are the only pilot out there that has done what you have done, logged what you have logged? It doesn't take a whole lot of brain cells to figure out if a job posting is for hard minimums or for "preferred" minimums. Most corporate operators are gonna want, at a minimum, an ATP, PERIOD. My company won't look at anyone for a jet position with less than 2500 hours AND an ATP. There is no insurance reason (other than 2500 is min for captain, we try not to hire DECs), it is plain and simple ability and training costs. Beechjet initial is just around 20k, not including food, hotel and transportation AND .299 rides. There is a much higher probability that someone with a little more time under their belt will not waste those resources.

All that being said, your attitude is the one everyone is talking about. So you did some cross country flying for a year or so, you now think are above another pilot doing some other form of aviating just because you did it a certain way. Little secret, this job is about 5% stick and rudder 90% doing things the way your boss wants you to do them and 5% thinking outside the box. You and a collection of others, have demonstrated over and over again you simply lack the ability to do what 90% of this job requires, follow directions.

I love paying it forward and I am the first person to stand up and say TT means nothing, ability is all that matters but damn man, you make it hard for me to tell my boss that I have any confidence anymore in people out of UND or even folks coming up through the ranks now, that you deserve that chance.

Our operation has bases in some pretty neat places and we do some cool flying, jets and turboprops, I was really hoping to be able to do a lot of paying forward when things turned around and we hire and grow again. There just isn't that drive from anyone anymore to do the right things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top