We fly airplanes. We're not working for some trendy tech company in Silicon Valley. Being "well-rounded" has nothing to do with how well you fly an airplane. You know, the thing they pay us to do. In what industry does more experience make you less marketable? It's just so backwards.
But hey I don't own these companies. They can use whatever hiring process they want, they're writing the checks. It's pretty obvious HR has taken over for the most part and has made it into the circus we see today.
Well, they're looking for a very particular person. Without my friend seeing your application, he has no idea what's really in there or what,
if anything, is holding you back. Remember, one can be Buzz Aldrin in real life, but the application may make the applicant look like Jeff Spicoli from "Fast Times at Ridgemont High". He's seen this,
a lot.
Apple makes operating systems, Microsoft makes operating systems. Two different companies essentially with two different corporate cultures and expectations of employees but two similar products. They're going to look for different intangible things in people they're looking to recruit and a lot of that is, well, not easy to tell through a quantitative number grid.
Again, like I've said before a number of times, my friend did not create this system. He's more than happy to forward your suggestions up the food chain where they'll be taken seriously.
There's no way to tell if someone flies well or not short of sitting on the jumpseat for a week to see how he communicates, exhibits aircraft control, meets operational challenges, etc. No one flies a Frasca for a living and it'd be idiotic to put a CRJ pilot into a 767 simulator to "see how he flies" because he's not trained. Hence, no simulator check.
Remember, everyone applying is a pilot. Everyone has cross country, some jet time, the FCC restricted radiotelephone license, yadda yadda yadda.
What are your suggestions?
