Ok here's a brain twister : how is it legal ...

[pilot602]

Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

I've been thinking about this for awhile now and thought I'd toss it out here and see what kind of flame fes... err "intelligent discussion" we can get out of it.

All these schools that advertise "get hired at 300 hours" at some point did have at least a few folks getting hired under the advertised minimums of whatever airline they were sent to.

How is this not discriminatroy hiring practice on the part of the airlines doing the hiring?

If I had sent my 300 hour resume into the same airline at the same time (or even the few that still have "bridge" programs and are hiring now) I would have to meet the advertised minimum quals (if not the "competitive quals) ... so how is it that the airlines can legally hire a select few at 300 hours yet hold everyone else to a different standard?

Seems to me if you hire one at 300 (or 700 or whatever the number may be - yet, under the advertised minimum times needed to qualify for the job) in essence you've set a new minimum and thereby must now hire everyone at the new lower number.

Discuss it amongst yourselves.

 

[naunga]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

There are four possibilities.

1. ) The company looks at the schools training program as being simlar to their's so they assume you will be trained as well as one of their regular pilots.

2. ) The pilots coming ouf the school are not hired as regular line pilots, but rather into a internship type of deal. Which translate into doing the job of a pilot with 1000 hours for less money.

3. ) They never really say, just imply, that you'll be hired as a pilot. You could be hired as a trainee and not only do training for a certain amount of time. Similar to the intern type of thing, but interns don't necessarily get benefits, where someone in training might.

4. ) It's not legal, but no one has challenged it.

My thoughts for now.

Naunga

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

[ QUOTE ]
How is this not discriminatory hiring practice on the part of the airlines doing the hiring?


[/ QUOTE ]Of course it's discriminatory. But what does that have to do with the price of gasoline in Chicago? There's nothing illegal about discrimination unless it's against a protected class of people. The 99% of the population that didn't go to a particular flight school isn't a protected class.

 

[pilot602]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

So, if a school or some other business only hired or gave quatnifiable, documented preference to members of one certain college you don't think someone would be all over that with a lawsuit?

I know no one is dumb enough to challenge these arrangements (because the aviaiton coumminty is smaller than the even doctor's community) but it just doesn't seem right (big diference between "right" and legal, I know).

 

[Jason]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

Aviation has ALWAYS ALWAYS had tons of discriminatory hiring practices. That's nothing new. Is it illegal? Maybe, maybe not but that's how it is.

Jason

 

[shooter13]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

There are many businesses that will preferentially hire someone from based on the college they went to. Do you think that if you or I went to Crazy Eddie's Discount Law College and got a 4.0 that we would be treated the same as someone who graduated with a 4.0 from Harvard Law???

 

[ready2fly]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

Heyyyy - don't knock Crazy Eddie's!! (or CECL). Hell of a fine law school for $1.50 per credit hour.

 

[pilot602]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that if you or I went to Crazy Eddie's Discount Law College and got a 4.0 that we would be treated the same as someone who graduated with a 4.0 from Harvard Law???

[/ QUOTE ]

No. But that's not the point. The point is these airlines have published hiring minimums that they set aside for a select few schools with whom they have written agreements in place to do just that.

There is a big difference between a preference or reputation and a written, signed agreement that sets aside the normal hiring criteria for an identifiable and select few who are determined by nothing more than the agreement.

 

[DE727UPS]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

I've always wondered if some of these regional airlines got kickbacks of some sort to interview or employ a low time pilot from one of these training programs. What's in it for the airline to hire a super low time guy when there are so many much more qualified guys out there? It means so much to these "be an airline pilot now" academies to be able to say so and so airline will hire you if you go through our program. But what's in it for airline?

 

[MissedApproach]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

Well with MAPD (a 300hr bridge program) upon graduation the student will have invested quite a lot of money into Mesa Airlines. I suppose that puts them at a different level than some one off the street.

When an airline hires someone through a bridge program, they also know there's a certain standard that that student has met or surpassed. Naturally, that airline will probably also have had their hand in the schools business and has manipulated the training to shadow their own. When an airline has followed a student through their training they also loose some of the liability that pilot brings to their airline.

 

[Jason]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

But as DE727UPS points out - it still begs the question - WHY???? Yes there may be a certain standard of training but at the end of the program you still have a 300 hour pilot with experience in nothing bigger than a light twin. I'm not that familiar with MAPD - maybe they also get some time in a 1900 but still - you have a 300 hour pilot with a few hours in a 1900. Is he a better pilot than a 300 hour guy from an FBO? Maybe, maybe not - that's debatable. But still - WHY?? What's the benefit?? As a chief pilot do I want to hire a 300 hour pilot or a 5,000 hour pilot with several years flying the CRJ(as an example). This is not meant to dump on low time pilots(I've been there too) - I'm not saying that you're not good pilots BUT at 300 hours you're still learning. I'm not saying that a low time guy can't do the job or do the job safely(debatable) but there are sooooooo many advantages to hiring one of the more experienced guys on the street right now why do it unless there is some sort of incentive for the airline to do it???

Now - to sort of answer my own questoin - consider this - the airlines make a TON of money off of their training academies. It has absoultley nothing to do with the quality of training. They have people coming in plunking down $50,000 checks because they have a good marketing programs that "guarantees a job(or interview) in an RJ at 500 hours. If they quit hiring their own 500 hour graduates they could no longer make that claim and likely lose ALOT of business

As far as independant flight schools with bridge programs - who knows but my guess is they're providing some kind of kick backs.

It's a wacky wacky world.

Jason

 

[naunga]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

[ QUOTE ]
So, if a school or some other business only hired or gave quatnifiable, documented preference to members of one certain college you don't think someone would be all over that with a lawsuit?

[/ QUOTE ]
You got the key point there: it has to be documentable, but then again it doesn't.

Corporations do this all the time. A guy from Harvard gets a job over a more qualified guy from Podunk U.

The guy from Podunk U may have gotten better grades in college and highschool, but because of Harvard's reputation The Harvard Man gets the job.

You'd hear all sorts of defenses for this practice: Harvard is tougher to get into, so the Harvard Grad is a better candidate (even though the only reason jr. got in was because daddy just happens to be a grad), or a C student at Harvard is equivalent to the validictortian at Podunk U.

That's why so many people put such a premium on educations from Ivy League Schools. The perception of better quality graduates.

Or how about this: A guy is the star running back at Podunk U and his twin is the star at a Big Ten School. Who's going to have an easier time making it to the NFL. Granted the guy from Podunk U is equally as talented, but he doesn't have nearly the exposure that the guy in the Big Ten has. And again, people might say, "It's easy to standout a Podunk U because the other players aren't at the same level."

My computer science prof told us about when she would hire people she immediately threw out resumes from certain schools. Bill Gates could have applied, but if she saw a particular school on the resume it when in the trash.

So this stuff happens all the time.

Naunga

 

[pilot602]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

Along with DEUPS727 and Jason - the other, more tangible, drawback to low time guys is the insurance cost.

Essentially, what drives the minimums for almost any job comes down to how much it costs to insure the guy or gal and a 300 hr pilot at worst - in a lot of places - is simply uninsurable and at best extremely expensive to insure so where is hte benefit to the airlines to hire these guys. It's not like they're paying them a lower wage than the 1,200 pilot so where is the benefit to the airline?

 

[Mr_Creepy]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

In defense of Ab Initio schools such as MAPD, etc:

These schools teach airline discipline, techniques and procedures from day one.

The students learn CRM, two pilot crew, dispatch, crew scheduling, etc.

They are way ahead of other 300 hr pilots as far as an airline career is concerned.

Most of the San Juanies could take apart a BE1900 and put it back together again. Their systems knowledge was bordering on the obnoxious in systems class!

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

[ QUOTE ]
So, if a school or some other business only hired or gave quantifiable, documented preference to members of one certain college you don't think someone would be all over that with a lawsuit?

[/ QUOTE ]
There might be lawsuits, but unless they could hang their hats on a theory that the discrimination at least had effects on a protected class, they'd lose.

 

[MidlifeFlyer]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

[ QUOTE ]
There is a big difference between a preference or reputation and a written, signed agreement that sets aside the normal hiring criteria for an identifiable and select few who are determined by nothing more than the agreement.

[/ QUOTE ]Now there's a legal theory that might hold water. An antitrust suit based on an unreasonable restraint of trade.

 

[pilot602]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

OK that's easy ... members of a "protected" class would probably not be able to afford to attend said school (talking flight training here) thereby necessitating the need for them to go the part 61 route. This would then place them "outside" the lower hiring minimums.

Get a sharp enough lawyer and you can just about do anything.

 

[MikeD]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

Probably because the execs at ClownAir (Eagle''s fictional airline, in name only) know they can pay someone with 300 hours beans and that person will gladly eat up the beans and love it. He hasn't yet been exposed (tainted, in their view) by the low pay, the unions, the desire to make 300K, etc. They prey upon their love of flying, how happy they are to just be "flying the line", and happy they're making beans...since they love it so much, they'd probably do it for free anyway.

On the other hand, the experienced guy usually can be a headache....

 

[Bell47]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

Wow, this is going to be a long thread! You'll get a lot of response, much of which will probably be wrong. There's a big difference between what's fair and moral versus what's legal .

I usually just sit back and watch these discussions. But, I'll put in my 2 cents worth for the sake of discussion with the expectation of being shot down in flames. I'm not a lawyer, but have been a private business owner for many years, with some exposure to this issue.

The "bottom line" is that the airlines (like any other business) can hire and fire anybody they want (without discrimination for race, sex, religion, age?, etc). It has nothing to do with your previous experience, flight school, alma mater and so forth (but, "networking" rocks).

Of course, the ALPA (and others) who negotiate collective bargaining agreements between the airlines and employees can add some legal stipulations to the process.

Another exception to the rule would be an airline (air carrier) holding a Government (publicly funded) contract. They are required to make a "good faith effort" to hire a stipulated percentage of minority employees or service providers (which includes 52% of the population who are women - please don't take offense ladies, I'm not sexist and love ya'll, but it's the law).

I'm sure there are many other laws, rules, regulations, exceptions, stipulations, etc. that affect the process, but we won't get into that now. It would take the proverbial "Philadelphia Lawyer" to figure them all out.

Remember too, you have the same right as an individual to take or leave employment with any airline (or other business) as you please - it's known as "the right to work" law.

But, if you get one of those coveted airline positions, count your blessings - you can't beat the view. And, a bad day in the air is far better than a good day at the office!

This is all about free enterprise and human rights. Thank God for the good ole USA. It ain't perfect, but it's sure better than whatever is in second place!

Now go ahead and "Make My Day" (Arnie for Governor) or sue me!

"INCOMING".

 

[pilot602]

Re: Ok here\'s a brain twister : how is it legal ...

So, then why not hire everyone at 300 hrs?