Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Air Force to UAL New Hire

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
I find regional pilots complety lost when coming into the on-demand busienss. Had a lot of ComAir guys coming here a while back. They are not proficient in steam dials, hand flying skills, and flying with only VOR and DME on the Jet Routes. They have no idea how to clear customs at 0400 at KLRD, or deal ICCS to get clearnace to off load Cargo in Mexico. Plus them seem to have no idea how to use a J-Bar and skates to move cargo on the DA-20. I guess 121 regional pilots are not very well prepared to go into the on-demand cargo world.

None of them? Again with the superlatives

Do mil guys often deal with those same things?
So what's your point? Your company is the civilian background stepping stone that I'm lobbying for. Would you argue that a civilian background in your operation would or would not prepare a candidate for the Majors?

But I'll tell you what, we'll give you our senior guys who struggle with glass and trade them for your comair pilots
 
How did they overcome the 737 type requirement that SWA had in place for all those years?

You know we have to interview to get hired at swa right?
Not just get a type?

They had to have that
 
Yeah I skipped the regionals and went right to the majors. That Part 121 ops section of ground school was so difficult, I don't know how I made it through.

Re-read your posts and insert your own name, then come back and tell me what it sounds like. And yes, your back room hand shake military pilot selection process is entirely made up.

Who said that?
There was a handshake selection process at swa at one point.
The military has a waiver for many things and politics and needs play a factor.
One of my friends at the rj operator I worked was able to get both eye and height waivers, but that involved motivating selectors through politics and who you know. I don't begrudge that. Every career benefits from an individual's relationships and recommendations. That's just as true in the civilian world, you just wouldn't have such an artificial barrier as height and eyes.
I am not saying that ones grades in flight school are negotiable.
Clear enough?

It was easy for me the first time I went through it as well. Why do you get to skip the regionals when we didn't?
Do you see the arrogance? How come a military pilot can be "qualified" with much LESS total flight time?

The term qualifications in the majors is turned on its head. The people who fly the least applicable type of op are qualified with much less flight time. Heavy mil pilots need more and their flying is much more associated. And civilian guys who are doing the same exact job, need the most.

You don't answer AC, you just deflect- how on earth does that make sense. You're the one defending it. Let us all know.
 
Flew fighters 20 years. Now I fly MD-11s around the world into places like Japan, China, Germany, and Brazil when not beating up the domestic system.

Cool thing about flying fighters first is while I once envied the cool places my friends in 141s got to go, I eventually got to go to some cool places too.

My college roommate that went to the regionals and is now an AA captain had a pretty cool life. Mine is pretty similar now too.

So?we all (hopefully) get to that point without too much heartache or angst.

However--and for the guys who did fly the fast iron, or take Hercs into Baghdad on NVGs, or refueled a C-5 or C-17 over the cold North Atlantic, there probably is some smug satisfaction. It rests with concept of "hey?.I did THAT?" And THAT--whatever it was, was something very, very few people ever get to do. And that makes it special?

My own little piece of satisfaction came from not raging in Stony MOA or flying low level tapping Tornados in Germany (both very fun, BTW..) but leading 8 ships into Iraq to enforce the (idiotic) No Fly Zone. The satisfaction in that came from knowing that it wan't the CIC, the MAJCOM CC, the Squadron Commander, or anyone else that for the next 6-8 hours was going to enforce national policy. It was ME--and 7 of my comrades in arms. How many people can say they were an instrument of policy in their lives? My dorky little circles in the sky pale in comparison to what some of the guys on this board have done in combat, but again--for a few hours of their lives, they have made history--not just read about it.

If I am a lesser airline guy because I wasted so much time first driving Eagles around the globe, I can live with it. Next time I am drinking Caipirinhas in Brazil or sipping a beer in Cologne or a some wine in France, I'll be sure to reflect on how superior those guys who came out of the regionals before working up SWA are to me. And I'll sulk. And I'll have to have another round or two to ease my pain. But I'll get through it?.

Albie, I was hoping you'd chime in. It is well documented how much I respect your opinion and definitely respect emerald coast.

Here though, you argue the merits of a military career, and it sounds pretty amazing. Definitely a worthwhile human experience and career. And service.
I have not said you're "a lesser airline guy"- I said your experience is less qualified than civilians who have actually been doing the job for many years.

The last part makes you sound like general lee, mixed in with the exact weird superiority that we've been talking about- feel good about what you did- it's great- , but you come into the civilian world to make money and maybe it ought to be normal to have done that job before getting the top end job??

How can that even be argued against?

You paid many many dues doing other things than the job you're trying to get.

With all that you've done in your career, why is it offensive to spend a year or two in the right seat somewhere- getting those 121 rules down BEFORE getting the six figure job.

Besides we all know how fedex is about hiring retired military pilots. Had many friends go through your purple nugget hazing- literally having your probation pilots make you coffee- reprimanding pilots in training for not using exact verbiage per manual, then proceeding to use military jargon with no clue how dumb it looks to the civilian who was just reprimanded.

There's a lot of groupthink over there Albie
You've got a foothold, but that doesn't make for a good safe pilot group. To dans thinking, I'd imagine fedex could use some more civilian backgrounds
 
Your arguments are a self fulfilled prophecy.



You act cocky. Pilots call you on it. You convince yourself it's bc of an insecurity on our part. ??



The single biggest reason pilots don't like mil pilots is bc of their lack of perspective


Lack of perspective... I would say you might be on to something.

P.S. I think civilian pilots are really cool. I especially like flying with the ones that bitch about mil pilots for two days on a three day trip (on day three they ask me what planes I've flown :D )
 
Who said that?
There was a handshake selection process at swa at one point.
The military has a waiver for many things and politics and needs play a factor.
One of my friends at the rj operator I worked was able to get both eye and height waivers, but that involved motivating selectors through politics and who you know. I don't begrudge that. Every career benefits from an individual's relationships and recommendations. That's just as true in the civilian world, you just wouldn't have such an artificial barrier as height and eyes.
I am not saying that ones grades in flight school are negotiable.
Clear enough?

It was easy for me the first time I went through it as well. Why do you get to skip the regionals when we didn't?
Do you see the arrogance? How come a military pilot can be "qualified" with much LESS total flight time?

The term qualifications in the majors is turned on its head. The people who fly the least applicable type of op are qualified with much less flight time. Heavy mil pilots need more and their flying is much more associated. And civilian guys who are doing the same exact job, need the most.

You don't answer AC, you just deflect- how on earth does that make sense. You're the one defending it. Let us all know.

It's simple really. What did you start flying in? Was it a jet? Air Force guys start in jets. What is more like a jet? A jet or a Cessna 172? So likely for your first 250 you were behind in experience, and unqualified for turbine powered aircraft. If you did any instructing what did you instruct in? Was it a jet? Well Air Force guys instruct in jets like T-1's. What is more like a jet? A T-1 or a Cessna 172? When you went for you ME training what was it in? Was it a King Air or Beechjet? If not you were behind in experience and qualifications again. I could go on and on but you get the picture.

So by your standard were you even remotely qualified for your first regional job? Were you able to adapt? Did anyone suggest you be penalized by getting turbine experience before taking the controls of that Beech 1900 or RJ. Should you have flown cancelled checks in an MU-2 or or cargo in a Caravan?

Wave again your politics assertion still does not hold water. It is to get a larger pool of applicants, and all you have to do is fill out a form. It is not exclusive, its inclusive. I didn't know filling out a form was political. Not to mention even with a waiver does not mean you will get selected. Again by your standard is getting a waiver for your Class 1 Medical some sort of political deal, because if that is the case you civilian pilots must have an in with AME's.

I am not deflecting anything. Nothing is turned on its head but you. As far as I can see you started out about 250 hours behind in turbine experience from most military trained pilots. Why don't you go fly skydivers in a ratty C90 until you catch up. :D
 
OMG.... This thread is still going???

Jebus Christ.

Hopefully we all realize that Major airlines hire guys into the right seat and they will have 5-20 years to figure out how to run a cockpit competently, regardless of where they come from. If they still suck at CRM or flying or whatever by then, they probably wouldn't have learned it with a stint in the regionals. 91, 121, 135, Mil all have screwups. It's up to the pilot group and the training dept to teach a culture, and not tolerate idiot behavior. You don't like an airline's hiring board? Maybe you won't like working there either....
 
Dig for dig:)
But sorry, never tried- never wanted to fly military-

It wasn't your extra special pre screens (that ABSOLUTELY predict a successful comrade :-/ ) that kept me out of your game

No- it's not the act of taxiing that gets them- it's that they never dealt with ohare and laguardia so Vegas can trip them up
It's law of primacy- they weren't taxiing or flying civilian 121 ops, so the pace, te business, the smoothness, the complexities aren't as natural- or else why would so many just blindly slam on the brakes when a Ramper crosses the wands?
Way to follow orders from a guy making $15/hr kernals- a normal pilot would know where the 737 nose wheel is and the mark they have to put it on and somewhat anticipate, not just myopically follow the wands.

And that's just one of 300 nuances civilians pick up in their initial experience that mil guys don't get bc they're excelling at dropping bombs and flying formation. Cool to talk about- but no applicability to what we do.

And as with all these critiques- if the military was such a good training ground- why do mil types struggle ?
I'm not making it up-

Wave, last time I checked, no ones shooting at you trying to land at Ohare, so, no biggy, FMC, hook it up, follow directions, land.

The ONLY guys I know have trouble at the training center are civy guys who didn't have fast jet time.
 
AC- point taken on your first 250 hours
Most don't jump into turbine until 1000 hours
And yes, I did fly cancelled checks for a time.

How does that explain needing 3 times the amount of flight time when it's all said and done and pilots start getting calls to interview?

Still haven't answered that.

Done. You win when it comes to primary training

(Though I have seen cessnas hand major airline pilots of all backgrounds their asses- so I'm not sure that underpowered light airplanes should be disrespected entirely- I find when I'm out and about and doing that light flying I'm a bit better skill wise in the Gup, but I digress.)

Please realize that there are plenty of civilian programs that have tough standards and a lot of civilians don't deserve this myth that they bought their ratings and didn't earn it.

All I can go by is what I hear and what I experience online-
Is it subjective ? Sure

But I stand by the message that civilians have earned, by our daily performance and attitudes, an equal spot at the hiring pool.
That's my only point.
 
With all that you've done in your career, why is it offensive to spend a year or two in the right seat somewhere- getting those 121 rules down BEFORE getting the six figure job.
So this is your bar for an acceptable 121 pilot, MUST fly an RJ for two years?

Sorry, I'll take ACTUALLY hand flying a jet for 3000 hours, over any spikey haired punk who knows which gate has the Starbucks, and has only sat and watched a plane fly itself. Those are exactly the guys who have trouble in our sims and on the line.
 
AC- point taken on your first 250 hours
Most don't jump into turbine until 1000 hours
And yes, I did fly cancelled checks for a time.

How does that explain needing 3 times the amount of flight time when it's all said and done and pilots start getting calls to interview?

Still haven't answered that.

Done. You win when it comes to primary training

(Though I have seen cessnas hand major airline pilots of all backgrounds their asses- so I'm not sure that underpowered light airplanes should be disrespected entirely- I find when I'm out and about and doing that light flying I'm a bit better skill wise in the Gup, but I digress.)

Please realize that there are plenty of civilian programs that have tough standards and a lot of civilians don't deserve this myth that they bought their ratings and didn't earn it.

All I can go by is what I hear and what I experience online-
Is it subjective ? Sure

But I stand by the message that civilians have earned, by our daily performance and attitudes, an equal spot at the hiring pool.
That's my only point.

Well, since there are more total civilian-trained pilots than military-trained pilots at Southwest (55 to 45%), then I'd say that you've had more than an equal spot at the hiring pool. Ya know what I mean?

And here's something for you to consider, Wave: the most recent new hires, including the class you mentioned with a preponderance of ex-military, were picked for interview by a third party computer program based on total qualifications, not by a bunch of "secret handshake" Southwest military guys. That's not the way it works anymore. The way to get hired here has changed radically in the last few years, and selecting applicants has become much less subjective with respect to qualifications. That means that "back in the day," when people could get "hooked up," the company hired more civilian-trained guys than ex-military. I'm not sure how your military conspiracy theory can explain that.

Bubba
 
This thread has confirmed what I've always known about this shiiite profession....

Pilots are total doooooshbags. I'm so glad I quit the airlines to go to corporate where the dooooosh factor is so much less.
 
I find regional pilots complety lost when coming into the on-demand busienss. Had a lot of ComAir guys coming here a while back. They are not proficient in steam dials, hand flying skills, and flying with only VOR and DME on the Jet Routes. They have no idea how to clear customs at 0400 at KLRD, or deal ICCS to get clearnace to off load Cargo in Mexico. Plus them seem to have no idea how to use a J-Bar and skates to move cargo on the DA-20. I guess 121 regional pilots are not very well prepared to go into the on-demand cargo world.

There are 91/135 corporate pilots who do that stuff all the time. When they try to make the jump to the majors, they're told at the job fairs to get some structure at a 121 regional. Can't win.


This thread has confirmed what I've always known about this shiiite profession....
Pilots are total doooooshbags. I'm so glad I quit the airlines to go to corporate where the dooooosh factor is so much less.
As well as the structure ;)
 
This thread has confirmed what I've always known about this shiiite profession....

Pilots are total doooooshbags. I'm so glad I quit the airlines to go to corporate where the dooooosh factor is so much less.


Corporate has more plastic smiles, that's for sure.
 
But I'll tell you what, we'll give you our senior guys who struggle with glass and trade them for your comair pilots
Can't do that, the Comair guys have all moved on. Those expereicned regional guys seem to move to front of everyone's hiring list. Or maybe in the combination of fr8dawging combined with the regional life that makes them such as catch?
 
AC- point taken on your first 250 hours
Most don't jump into turbine until 1000 hours
And yes, I did fly cancelled checks for a time.

How does that explain needing 3 times the amount of flight time when it's all said and done and pilots start getting calls to interview?

Still haven't answered that.

Again pretty simple. Years ago for example the United requirement was 1500 hours TT, but you could only count up to 500 hours of single engine piston engine time, so everyone needed at least 1000 hours of turbine or multiengine time. And that was just United, other airlines had different requirements including my favorite of "count time only in aircraft over 300,000 lbs".

So while 1500 hours doesn't seem like much, an Air Force pilot could count every hour starting in day one of primary, while your typical CFI, say with 1200 hours, in United's eyes only had 500 hours because they didn't count single engine recip time beyond that amount. Again who is more qualified to fly a jet but a guy who flies a jet.

So do the math. The Air Force guy meets the requirements right at 1500 hours, while the CFI with 1200 hours must go and find a way to get 1000 hours of turbine time. That meant he wouldn't be hirable until he has 2200 hours TT minimum. If they had to instruct another year before they get a turbine job, well there was another few hundred hours that won't be counted.

Here are some other examples I remember seeing on applications (all of which slant favorably toward the Air Force jet pilot. Even Navy/Marine/CG guys are excluded from some of these because we trained in SE turboprops instead of ME jets):

1000 hours TT (only 250 of helicopter time may be counted toward the 1000 hours)

No Helicopter time may be counted to the total time requirement.

Count only time in jet aircraft. No turboprop time will be counted.

No time spent as an instructor may be counted toward the total time requirement.

No single engine time may be counted.

Hope that answers your question.
 
Wave this is from SWA's website:


Flight Experience: 2,500 hours total or 1,500 hours Turbine total. Additionally, a minimum of 1,000 hours in Turbine aircraft as the Pilot in Command is required2. Southwest considers only Pilot time in fixed-wing aircraft. This specifically excludes simulator, WSO, RIO, FE, NAV, EWO, etc. NO other time is counted.3

Again it slants heavily toward Air Force guys not because they are in the military but because they have all turbine time.

They count no helo time, so I would lose about 1600 hours from the TT requirement.

Fly Barons or Navajos, and none of you PIC time counts. Fly F-16's and it does.

Spend years as a 727 FE at Amerijet and all those years are lost for the purposes of logging TT.
 
Look at the old United scantron form from the 90s. Heavily favored military time. But that's also when the mins were only 300 hours.
 
Look at the old United scantron form from the 90s. Heavily favored military time. But that's also when the mins were only 300 hours.

That BS heavily favored the least qualified..... as long as they fit a certain profile that the vast majority of pilots don't.
 
Look at the old United scantron form from the 90s. Heavily favored military time. But that's also when the mins were only 300 hours.

That also helped their interns. I think Air Force guys always had the leg up because of all the jet training. In the 80's Air Force pilots from every background still completed T-37 and T-38 training. Naval Aviators may have never flown a jet since you flew all turboprops in training, then perhaps P-3's or C-130's for USMC and USCG.
 
That BS heavily favored the least qualified..... as long as they fit a certain profile that the vast majority of pilots don't.

Considering United didn't hire its first black pilot until 1965 and it's first woman pilot until 1973, a different kind of BS was perpetuated for over 30 years. How do you remedy a situation like that? Pretending it never happened is not exactly justice or fairness.
 
Considering United didn't hire its first black pilot until 1965 and it's first woman pilot until 1973, a different kind of BS was perpetuated for over 30 years.

Discrimination is wrong, regardless of the reason.


How do you remedy a situation like that? Pretending it never happened is not exactly justice or fairness.

Hiring someone because of their race/sex is just as wrong as not hiring them for the same reason. It simply shouldn't be an issue. The most qualified person should get the job, not the most qualified (insert sex/race here) person. In UALs case, it wasn't even a factor of hiring the most qualified pilots. They were after "minority" pilots, whether they were qualified or not, and in many cases, were not.

The vast majority of people attracted to aviation as a career are white males, so of course there are going to be more white males applying for the jobs.

2 wrongs don't make a right and EQUAL is EQUAL.

Take race/sex out of the '90's UAL hiring equation.

Does 250 ever equal 7000, which, according to one of their VP of flight ops at the time, ( a friend of my dad's), was the number of hours that a white commuter guy was required to have before being considered "qualified" for an interview?

Hiring a person with 250 hours, solely due to their sex or race, when passing up thousands of far more qualified pilots, solely due to their sex/race, is still sexual/racial discrimination.
 
Albie, I was hoping you'd chime in. It is well documented how much I respect your opinion and definitely respect emerald coast.

After helping over 4000 pilots I hoped someone would notice?.

Here though, you argue the merits of a military career, and it sounds pretty amazing. Definitely a worthwhile human experience and career. And service.
I have not said you're "a lesser airline guy"- I said your experience is less qualified than civilians who have actually been doing the job for many years.

It is a NOBLE job, it is a FUN job, and it is LUCRATIVE job. It has some challenges. It demand attention to detail. But it is not so challenging a well motivated and capable pilot cannot assimilate it quickly. Ab Initio programs at KLM and Luftansa has proven you can raise a pilot from the ground up. If Pinnacle and ASA could put a 300 hour guy in the right seat of an RJ, I think a 3000 hour P-3 guy can figure out how to the do the SEAVU 2 into LAX in a 757. The MD11 is not a forgiving airliner. Yet, somehow, I enjoy it immensely. With its light touch in pitch, I could make the case that perhaps guys who had not flown a similarly pitch sensitive plane like a T-45 or T-38 might not be suited for the job. Yet--amazingly--I have a friend from Auburn days who was never military yet flew one safely all over the globe for Gemini. So I think we are all trainable.

The last part makes you sound like general lee, mixed in with the exact weird superiority that we've been talking about- feel good about what you did- it's great- , but you come into the civilian world to make money and maybe it ought to be normal to have done that job before getting the top end job??

Where were you when I was teaching spins in Tomahawks at an FBO in Georgia, or working at a University flight school teaching commercial students for 4.85 an hour? I don't remember seeing you in the DZ in central Florida when I was flying load after load of skydivers in central Florida. You weren't the tow pilot when I was flying gliders on my weekends off, spending every dollar I made as a CFI to learn more about flying something new. Was that you at my annual a couple years ago, helping me repack wheel bearings or rebuild a hydraulic gear actuator on my 1962 Navion? Maybe I could write the ultimate "perfect pilot" syllabus, and have you drop out of SWA for a couple yard so you could pay the "proper" dues before you get to go back to your six figure job?.

How can that even be argued against?

You paid many many dues doing other things than the job you're trying to get.

With all that you've done in your career, why is it offensive to spend a year or two in the right seat somewhere- getting those 121 rules down BEFORE getting the six figure job.

Besides we all know how fedex is about hiring retired military pilots. Had many friends go through your purple nugget hazing- literally having your probation pilots make you coffee- reprimanding pilots in training for not using exact verbiage per manual, then proceeding to use military jargon with no clue how dumb it looks to the civilian who was just reprimanded.

Funny. As an uptight Air Force/F-15 guy, I actually winced the first time I was in training and a guy repeated memory items in a non-verbatim manner during my first 727 recurrent. As I waited for the guy to get whacked, the instructor said "good" even though he DID NOT SAY IT VERBATIM. But since he more or less said the same thing, he got a pass. I later learned this was "normal". So--I cannot say what you friend did or didn't do, but my impression is memory items and perfect verbiage are NOT required at FedEx. Point of fact: At takeoff when the capt gives the FO the plane, the correct verbiage is "you have the airPLANE". I don't' say anything, but when a captain says "you have the airCRAFT a little pucker starts in my anus and runs up to my throat. I stop it before it leaps out of my mouth. I don't correct anyone, but I repeat "I have the airPLANE" because that is what 20 years of programming does to you. That is just a difference in culture. when you have 16 guys in an LFE on the radio, in a comm jam environment, you are taught comm is to be clear, concise, and correct. Maybe it doesn't make a ******************** now (probably doesn't) but it does not wash off just because I am flying boxes instead of missiles through the sky. And coffee--I poured the captain a cup yesterday on my trip, even though I am a 12 year FO. He was the PF, and I was glad to do it. Pouring coffee is the tax FedEx pilots pay to avoid having 5 am van conversations with Aisle Donkeys in the crew van, and IMHO it is a tax worth paying. In a 2 man cockpit, there is no "coffee bitch" anymore. Its just a couple pilots helping each other out as we do our job. We also get to go pee without asking anyone in the back. In short--its the job. If folks want their coffee poured I guess they can fly for a pax carrier.

There's a lot of groupthink over there Albie
You've got a foothold, but that doesn't make for a good safe pilot group. To dans thinking, I'd imagine fedex could use some more civilian backgrounds

What percentage would deem acceptable? I can tell you that since 2002, I have helped about 665 people get hired at FedEx, or about 15% of the crew force. 42%, almost 300, have been from other airlines, corporate, or internal candidates. I do not know what the hiring totals are, but I know my client base at most airlines is pretty darn close to 50/50.

IMHO, the best pilot out there is the one who keeps learning, enjoys the craft and is an ambassador to the profession. My suggestion is that telling anyone--military or civilian, Navy or Air Force, fixed wing or rotary wing--that somehow they aren't "ready" for the big leagues--is a real easy way to get labeled as a dick. Don't be a dick. My favorite MD11 instructor was hired by Flying Tigers at age 23. He is an awesome pilot and superior instructor. Another one of my favorite MD11 role models helped write the employment manual for the F-15 back in the 90s. (3-1 Chapter 4 for your AF types) was a Desert Storm vet, and was a standards LCA on the MD11. Guy is brilliant, and joy to fly with, and knows the MD11 inside/out. What you do next, not where you have been, defines who you are. I strive to always be moving forward. Suggest you do the same. You may admire me--nice. You may appreciate Emerald Coast--super. But I don't admire anyone who knows nothing about my experience, drive, motivation, or capability telling me what I should or should not be able to do based on my background.

What you don't like is arrogance. I get it. What you are missing is you come off just as condescending and arrogant in your own way, and it is no more attractive. The only difference in you and them is nobody makes movies about regional pilots. If the guys you fly with are so awful, you don't need more civilian pilots--you just need a better professional standards program. Be careful, however, when you cart your fellow crew members into a mediated debrief, however, because you might just found out the problem really isn't them.
 
Last edited:
Look at the old United scantron form from the 90s. Heavily favored military time. But that's also when the mins were only 300 hours.

United's Scantron back then was something else. I recall they had three multi-engine PIC columns.
Column 1: Heavy military jet or scheduled turbine and then they gave the following examples: B727, C-141, and Be-1900 followed by some helo designation I don't recall.
It got more confusing (in terms of determining the implied values) the further you went down the scale. E.G.: Be-99 cargo and Learjet time went in the same column.
Instructor time wasn't PIC and people didn't know where to put it.

According to the Scantron, no one got extra consideration for their military time over the guy flying for Great Lakes.

No matter what you did, Ms. Stucke would eat your lunch over the application errors, not to mention your C in college physics.
 
Discrimination is wrong, regardless of the reason.




Hiring someone because of their race/sex is just as wrong as not hiring them for the same reason. It simply shouldn't be an issue. The most qualified person should get the job, not the most qualified (insert sex/race here) person. In UALs case, it wasn't even a factor of hiring the most qualified pilots. They were after "minority" pilots, whether they were qualified or not, and in many cases, were not.

The vast majority of people attracted to aviation as a career are white males, so of course there are going to be more white males applying for the jobs.

2 wrongs don't make a right and EQUAL is EQUAL.

Take race/sex out of the '90's UAL hiring equation.

Does 250 ever equal 7000, which, according to one of their VP of flight ops at the time, ( a friend of my dad's), was the number of hours that a white commuter guy was required to have before being considered "qualified" for an interview?

Hiring a person with 250 hours, solely due to their sex or race, when passing up thousands of far more qualified pilots, solely due to their sex/race, is still sexual/racial discrimination.

But you didn't really answer the question. What do you do as a company or society to make amends? It is easy for us to sit here an pretend it didn't happen, but don't you think that plenty of other people remember those times, and remember the injustice? I have read a few books like "A-Train" by Tuskegee Airmen and if they wanted to keep flying after WWII or Korea they had to stay in the Air Force. And the WASP's had it worse. They did not even have the option of staying in. What is just for us as a society? I am not saying United did exactly the right thing, but at least they did something. Easy to say what is wrong, much harder to say what is right.
 
United's Scantron back then was something else. I recall they had three multi-engine PIC columns.
Column 1: Heavy military jet or scheduled turbine and then they gave the following examples: B727, C-141, and Be-1900 followed by some helo designation I don't recall.
It got more confusing (in terms of determining the implied values) the further you went down the scale. E.G.: Be-99 cargo and Learjet time went in the same column.
Instructor time wasn't PIC and people didn't know where to put it.

According to the Scantron, no one got extra consideration for their military time over the guy flying for Great Lakes.

No matter what you did, Ms. Stucke would eat your lunch over the application errors, not to mention your C in college physics.

I did another application that had "Night PIC not as an instructor". Who the hell logs that exactly, and who the hell cares?

Once I got to the corporate world no one ever asked to see my log book again in an interview, and I never had to worry about where to put FE time or Level D Sim versus FTD again. All they seem to care about is when was the last time you went to Flight Safety for whatever particular aircraft they are flying.
 
But you didn't really answer the question. What do you do as a company or society to make amends?

Amends for what? Discrimination was a societal problem, and much of what we're discussing wasn't an issue anymore in the '80's when UAL started their version of discriminatory hiring. No other airline was doing it to the extent that UAL was either.

It is easy for us to sit here an pretend it didn't happen, but don't you think that plenty of other people remember those times, and remember the injustice?

Are you pretending that racial/sexual discrimination never happened, because I am not. In fact, it was alive and well at UAL in the '80s/'90s, long after the rest of the world accepted equal as equal.

Getting hired because of your sex/race, with scant credence given to your actual experience in the field, is, by definition, discrimination.

As I said in my previous post, 2 wrongs don't make a right. The folks getting preferential treatment in the 80s and 90s were not the ones discriminated against 20-30+ years before. Up until the UAL EEOC BS, they had exactly the same opportunities as everyone else. After the EEOC got involved, they had a huge leg up.

For a hair under a decade, I watched every "minority" co worker (most with a fraction of the experience that I and most other white guys had) get interviews and subsequently hired with UAL. The rest of us toiled away year after year to get our 7k for the privilege of an antagonistic interview, for a job we were unlikely to get, because we were white guys.

Even the sim eval was set up to favor the less experienced. A good friend of mine was an intern at UAL, and ran the interview sims, which were done on a Frasca IIRC, not even a real airplane sim. The only thing they asked the interviewee was how much total time they had. The more time you had, the more often the scoring computer would check your progress. Anything not perfect was scored against you. Guys with 10k hours in Boeings were getting worse scores on it than the 300 hour wonders, who were acing it. I wonder why......

I had the opportunity to fly several mock UAL interview rides in a Frasca back in the day, as a friend ran an interview prep school back in the day. I had been a 121 Capt for about 5 years at the time, and there was a huge difference in my score depending on the number of hours he put into the evaluation computer. It was like a bad video game simulation too.....



I have read a few books like "A-Train" by Tuskegee Airmen and if they wanted to keep flying after WWII or Korea they had to stay in the Air Force. And the WASP's had it worse. They did not even have the option of staying in. What is just for us as a society?

By the time we got to the era that we're discussing, with a few glaring exceptions like South Africa etc., society had pretty much accepted that equal was equal. Well, except for UAL, who was still hiring/not hiring pilots based solely on the color of their skin/sex.


I am not saying United did exactly the right thing, but at least they did something.


Yup, they did something, and it was called discriminatory hiring. Whether or not you even got interviewed was based solely on sex/race.

I guess that was "good" discrimination though, as long as the "right" people were being discriminated against.


Easy to say what is wrong, much harder to say what is right.

Not really.....

Hiring the most qualified person for the job, regardless of sex/race/religion/color/sexual orientation etc. is the right thing to do, especially in an unforgiving, technical field like ours.
 
Amends for what? Discrimination was a societal problem, and much of what we're discussing wasn't an issue anymore in the '80's when UAL started their version of discriminatory hiring. No other airline was doing it to the extent that UAL was either.



Are you pretending that racial/sexual discrimination never happened, because I am not. In fact, it was alive and well at UAL in the '80s/'90s, long after the rest of the world accepted equal as equal.

Getting hired because of your sex/race, with scant credence given to your actual experience in the field, is, by definition, discrimination.

As I said in my previous post, 2 wrongs don't make a right. The folks getting preferential treatment in the 80s and 90s were not the ones discriminated against 20-30+ years before. Up until the UAL EEOC BS, they had exactly the same opportunities as everyone else. After the EEOC got involved, they had a huge leg up.

For a hair under a decade, I watched every "minority" co worker (most with a fraction of the experience that I and most other white guys had) get interviews and subsequently hired with UAL. The rest of us toiled away year after year to get our 7k for the privilege of an antagonistic interview, for a job we were unlikely to get, because we were white guys.

Even the sim eval was set up to favor the less experienced. A good friend of mine was an intern at UAL, and ran the interview sims, which were done on a Frasca IIRC, not even a real airplane sim. The only thing they asked the interviewee was how much total time they had. The more time you had, the more often the scoring computer would check your progress. Anything not perfect was scored against you. Guys with 10k hours in Boeings were getting worse scores on it than the 300 hour wonders, who were acing it. I wonder why......

I had the opportunity to fly several mock UAL interview rides in a Frasca back in the day, as a friend ran an interview prep school back in the day. I had been a 121 Capt for about 5 years at the time, and there was a huge difference in my score depending on the number of hours he put into the evaluation computer. It was like a bad video game simulation too.....





By the time we got to the era that we're discussing, with a few glaring exceptions like South Africa etc., society had pretty much accepted that equal was equal. Well, except for UAL, who was still hiring/not hiring pilots based solely on the color of their skin/sex.





Yup, they did something, and it was called discriminatory hiring. Whether or not you even got interviewed was based solely on sex/race.

I guess that was "good" discrimination though, as long as the "right" people were being discriminated against.




Not really.....

Hiring the most qualified person for the job, regardless of sex/race/religion/color/sexual orientation etc. is the right thing to do, especially in an unforgiving, technical field like ours.

I think your post pretty much sums up the white male perspective of "it's over lets move on" while ignoring subtle and sometimes not so subtle discrimination that continues to this day. You think it's solved but have you asked any women of African Americans what they thought? There are still many hurdles to overcome and prejudices that need to be changed. It is hardly over with, as you seem to think. If the US is 50% women, 14% African American, and 32% Hispanic, do the demographics at any US air carrier even come close to resembling those demographics? Why not if we are so far along on the road to equality?
 
Amends for what? Discrimination was a societal problem, and much of what we're discussing wasn't an issue anymore in the '80's when UAL started their version of discriminatory hiring. No other airline was doing it to the extent that UAL was either.



Are you pretending that racial/sexual discrimination never happened, because I am not. In fact, it was alive and well at UAL in the '80s/'90s, long after the rest of the world accepted equal as equal.

Getting hired because of your sex/race, with scant credence given to your actual experience in the field, is, by definition, discrimination.

As I said in my previous post, 2 wrongs don't make a right. The folks getting preferential treatment in the 80s and 90s were not the ones discriminated against 20-30+ years before. Up until the UAL EEOC BS, they had exactly the same opportunities as everyone else. After the EEOC got involved, they had a huge leg up.

For a hair under a decade, I watched every "minority" co worker (most with a fraction of the experience that I and most other white guys had) get interviews and subsequently hired with UAL. The rest of us toiled away year after year to get our 7k for the privilege of an antagonistic interview, for a job we were unlikely to get, because we were white guys.

Even the sim eval was set up to favor the less experienced. A good friend of mine was an intern at UAL, and ran the interview sims, which were done on a Frasca IIRC, not even a real airplane sim. The only thing they asked the interviewee was how much total time they had. The more time you had, the more often the scoring computer would check your progress. Anything not perfect was scored against you. Guys with 10k hours in Boeings were getting worse scores on it than the 300 hour wonders, who were acing it. I wonder why......

I had the opportunity to fly several mock UAL interview rides in a Frasca back in the day, as a friend ran an interview prep school back in the day. I had been a 121 Capt for about 5 years at the time, and there was a huge difference in my score depending on the number of hours he put into the evaluation computer. It was like a bad video game simulation too.....





By the time we got to the era that we're discussing, with a few glaring exceptions like South Africa etc., society had pretty much accepted that equal was equal. Well, except for UAL, who was still hiring/not hiring pilots based solely on the color of their skin/sex.





Yup, they did something, and it was called discriminatory hiring. Whether or not you even got interviewed was based solely on sex/race.

I guess that was "good" discrimination though, as long as the "right" people were being discriminated against.




Not really.....

Hiring the most qualified person for the job, regardless of sex/race/religion/color/sexual orientation etc. is the right thing to do, especially in an unforgiving, technical field like ours.

Here are the numbers from the United hiring bias lawsuit in the late 80's:

Among the 1,400 pilots hired out of 32,500 applicants, 75 were black or other minorities and 59 were women out of a total of 3,000 minority and female applicants.

75 out of 1400 in a country that is over 35% minority.

59 out of 1400 in a country this is 50% women.


So the 5% of minority applicants that got jobs and the 4% of women applicants that got jobs was some great injustice to you? What was the target 0%?

So roughly for every 40 white male pilots hired United hired 1 minority pilot. Sorry but your perception of scores of 300 hour wonders is not anywhere close to reality.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom