Firebird2XC
Well-Known Member
I remember something an old Sergeant Major said once from back in my Army days. I was graduating the Non Commissioned Officer Academy, a requisite for promotion to Sergeant. The Sergeant Major had an interesting subject for the speech he was giving us. He told us to avoid "Dumb Hooah."
For the unfamiliar, "Hooah" (hoo-ahhhh) is an Army-specific word, and means possibly anything except for "no", depending on the context in which it is used. Generally speaking, it's a word used to express motivation and enthusiasm. It's the single word that taps into a can-do attitude and the motivation, effort, and skill to get things done. So what, then, is "Dumb Hooah"?
The Sergeant Major had seen something consistent with young Sergeants and new leaders at all levels- the drive to get things done often lead to Dumb Hooah, and the end result was people tended to work harder instead of smarter. Smarter was better, he said, because in the harsh realities of both peacetime and wartime both, harder could get you killed.
While the day to day realities of professional aviation are a good deal different, the can-do attitude of aviators is something I often see. We deal with life or death decisions on a daily basis, and routinely cheat death with a skillful defiance of gravity and other natural forces. We fuel our exploits with all the motivation and confidence of 'Hooah', and the successful results of the business ventures we drive are the end result.
It is in the business equation of things where pilots venture into the dark territory of Dumb Hooah. Too often, I hear about pilots being required to 'pay their dues'. I call this entire concept to question. What exactly determines when a pilot has paid their dues? If there is such a requirement, who requires it, and why?
In the days gone by, the career path a pilot followed through the years has changed again and again. A time where barnstormers turned Air Mail pilots begat the first airline pilots was in turn replaced by ex-military pilots. The large majority of military pilots filling the ranks has since been replaced by civilian pilots coming from all variety of backgrounds.
In my father's day, most pilots were coming into the airlines from the military. Non-military civilian pilots were seen as never having 'paid their dues', and a slew of unrepeatable terms were generally applied to them. Some of it was based on career position envy, as many former miiltary pilots found themselves junior to their civilian counterparts. Some was more ideological.
The passage of time and change in military and airline composition saw fewer military pilots moving into the airlines. As civilian pilots began to fill the ranks as the greater majority, the attitudes shifted again. This time around, the prevailing attitude was that one had to climb the many rungs of a career progression ladder in order to get airline seat. Flight instruction, freight flying, regional airline time, etc, were the process-du-jour. So what, then, of those who bypass one of those steps, or those who take a different route entirely?
The rise of ab-initio pilot training academies gives rise to this question. Modern civilian pilots can pay a lump sum to a school of their choice and leave the academy with a fil of pilot certificates. Some, like myself, will have taken a different path. Based on my former employ in the Army and life circumstances, my training is a patchwork quilt of various FBOs, specialized academies, and other endeavors.
Regardless of the path one took, nowadays the end result is often the same. Pilots strive to find a job that allows them the lifestyle and salary that gives them the best life they can get, and everybody's definition of that is different. The variety of paths taken to that route, however, have been truncated by recent hiring booms. Given the very low times some companies were hiring pilots at in the past years, people have been quick to make the statement: "You don't belong here. You didn't pay your dues."
I ask this, then: If we're supposed to pay dues, to whom do we pay them? Furthermore, who determines who pays what and how much? Is credit given for some previous experiences and some not?
The underlying concept of 'paying one's dues' comes from the idea that one works and suffers a certain degree on the way into a life-long career. With the ever-changing nature and composition of modern air travel and freight operations, this seems to be a lingering after-effect of a time now past. Archaic notions of 'paying dues' in order to get in line to receive low pay and long hours seems ridiculous given current conditions and ever-shifting career expectations.
The civil aviation community is a business- to approach it as otherwise is contrary to good, sensible business practices. Paying more than one has to in order to reach a business goal is foolhardy at best. The cost of entry is already sky high- to add some intangible cost requiring some drawn out career progession on top of it seems questionable, at best.
Past generations of pilots are all too ready to tell the up-and-comers how hard they had it and how they 'paid their dues'. That may well have been appropriate in their era, given a lifetime expectation of return of investment in their case. Present day, this thinking does not apply.
While some may argue that bypassing certain segments of the piloting experience waters down a pilot's ability, that's really not the case. Were examiners and flight schools doing their jobs, pilots would not be able to submit resumes for jobs they're not realistically able to perform.
Proving that you're tougher and can follow a harder, less productive, more expensive path to arrive at the same destination doesn't help anyone. It just proves that pilots will pander to less and accept lower returns on their significant investments in their training, if only to prove that they've 'paid their dues'.
Given that, 'paying your dues' is just so much 'Dumb Hooah'.
For the unfamiliar, "Hooah" (hoo-ahhhh) is an Army-specific word, and means possibly anything except for "no", depending on the context in which it is used. Generally speaking, it's a word used to express motivation and enthusiasm. It's the single word that taps into a can-do attitude and the motivation, effort, and skill to get things done. So what, then, is "Dumb Hooah"?
The Sergeant Major had seen something consistent with young Sergeants and new leaders at all levels- the drive to get things done often lead to Dumb Hooah, and the end result was people tended to work harder instead of smarter. Smarter was better, he said, because in the harsh realities of both peacetime and wartime both, harder could get you killed.
While the day to day realities of professional aviation are a good deal different, the can-do attitude of aviators is something I often see. We deal with life or death decisions on a daily basis, and routinely cheat death with a skillful defiance of gravity and other natural forces. We fuel our exploits with all the motivation and confidence of 'Hooah', and the successful results of the business ventures we drive are the end result.
It is in the business equation of things where pilots venture into the dark territory of Dumb Hooah. Too often, I hear about pilots being required to 'pay their dues'. I call this entire concept to question. What exactly determines when a pilot has paid their dues? If there is such a requirement, who requires it, and why?
In the days gone by, the career path a pilot followed through the years has changed again and again. A time where barnstormers turned Air Mail pilots begat the first airline pilots was in turn replaced by ex-military pilots. The large majority of military pilots filling the ranks has since been replaced by civilian pilots coming from all variety of backgrounds.
In my father's day, most pilots were coming into the airlines from the military. Non-military civilian pilots were seen as never having 'paid their dues', and a slew of unrepeatable terms were generally applied to them. Some of it was based on career position envy, as many former miiltary pilots found themselves junior to their civilian counterparts. Some was more ideological.
The passage of time and change in military and airline composition saw fewer military pilots moving into the airlines. As civilian pilots began to fill the ranks as the greater majority, the attitudes shifted again. This time around, the prevailing attitude was that one had to climb the many rungs of a career progression ladder in order to get airline seat. Flight instruction, freight flying, regional airline time, etc, were the process-du-jour. So what, then, of those who bypass one of those steps, or those who take a different route entirely?
The rise of ab-initio pilot training academies gives rise to this question. Modern civilian pilots can pay a lump sum to a school of their choice and leave the academy with a fil of pilot certificates. Some, like myself, will have taken a different path. Based on my former employ in the Army and life circumstances, my training is a patchwork quilt of various FBOs, specialized academies, and other endeavors.
Regardless of the path one took, nowadays the end result is often the same. Pilots strive to find a job that allows them the lifestyle and salary that gives them the best life they can get, and everybody's definition of that is different. The variety of paths taken to that route, however, have been truncated by recent hiring booms. Given the very low times some companies were hiring pilots at in the past years, people have been quick to make the statement: "You don't belong here. You didn't pay your dues."
I ask this, then: If we're supposed to pay dues, to whom do we pay them? Furthermore, who determines who pays what and how much? Is credit given for some previous experiences and some not?
The underlying concept of 'paying one's dues' comes from the idea that one works and suffers a certain degree on the way into a life-long career. With the ever-changing nature and composition of modern air travel and freight operations, this seems to be a lingering after-effect of a time now past. Archaic notions of 'paying dues' in order to get in line to receive low pay and long hours seems ridiculous given current conditions and ever-shifting career expectations.
The civil aviation community is a business- to approach it as otherwise is contrary to good, sensible business practices. Paying more than one has to in order to reach a business goal is foolhardy at best. The cost of entry is already sky high- to add some intangible cost requiring some drawn out career progession on top of it seems questionable, at best.
Past generations of pilots are all too ready to tell the up-and-comers how hard they had it and how they 'paid their dues'. That may well have been appropriate in their era, given a lifetime expectation of return of investment in their case. Present day, this thinking does not apply.
While some may argue that bypassing certain segments of the piloting experience waters down a pilot's ability, that's really not the case. Were examiners and flight schools doing their jobs, pilots would not be able to submit resumes for jobs they're not realistically able to perform.
Proving that you're tougher and can follow a harder, less productive, more expensive path to arrive at the same destination doesn't help anyone. It just proves that pilots will pander to less and accept lower returns on their significant investments in their training, if only to prove that they've 'paid their dues'.
Given that, 'paying your dues' is just so much 'Dumb Hooah'.
