American Airlines Pilot Rules

[Avtrchris]

I was told that AA pilots MUST upgrade when a seat is available. So you basically do FO on MD80 to Captain then FO on 737 etc. till you get to the top. And you have no choice in the matter?

Is this true?

 

[jke406]

I was told that AA pilots MUST upgrade when a seat is available. So you basically do FO on MD80 to Captain then FO on 737 etc. till you get to the top. And you have no choice in the matter?

Is this true?

my recommendation would be to not listen to a word your FBO "know-it-all" CFI says about the profession...

 

[bubbers44]

There is a requirement to upgrade to captain when your seniority allows it with about a year to do so. Once a captain you can do whatever you want, even go back to FO. Some of our people did it to get the Hawaii flights, etc.

 

[Avtrchris]

There is a requirement to upgrade to captain when your seniority allows it with about a year to do so. Once a captain you can do whatever you want, even go back to FO. Some of our people did it to get the Hawaii flights, etc.

Thanks, that awnsers Q

 

[AA717driver]

Yeah, it's true but unless you're in the 5,600 to 7,000 seniority range, you won't have to worry about it for the next 10 years... TC

 

[glasspilot1]

I'm too lazy to look it up in print but I think they've suspended that policy. Since AA is the ultimate bean counter company, this was a way to reduce their training costs.

I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong.

 

[TWA Dude]

I think the "Up or Out" policy is a good one. It prevents airlines from having tens or even hundreds (everyone knows which airline I'm refering to) of FOs that remain FOs because they're incapable of passing upgrade training. Competent FOs have nothing to fear from such a policy and as far as I've heard pilots having trouble are given ample help to make it through.

 

[bizicmo]

I don't know what airline?

 

[Jonny Sacko]

Is it Skybus?

 

[TWA Dude]

For you young'uns: UNITED.

 

[ultrarunner]

TWA dude called it. And he's exactly right!

 

[GuppyWN]

Train to proficiency at its finest!

Gup

Reminds me of a funny I heard years ago......

A United gal kept bugging center for a short cut. Finally an unknown voice chimed in - "just be patient sweetie, you're whole career has been a shortcut."

 

[ultrarunner]

And it some circles Guppy, proficiency is relative to...

...well, never mind....

"some" outfits are paying for their "hiring practices" of the past....

...Oh well...

 

[aa73]

I think the "Up or Out" policy is a good one. It prevents airlines from having tens or even hundreds (everyone knows which airline I'm refering to) of FOs that remain FOs because they're incapable of passing upgrade training. Competent FOs have nothing to fear from such a policy and as far as I've heard pilots having trouble are given ample help to make it through.

Yes and no.

For the most part, it works as advertised. However, quite a few folks who have no business upgrading, upgrade. We all know what kind of a trip that turns out to be.

"Up or out" has always been AA's way of getting around age discrimination... i.e., you don't get hired if you won't be able to upgrade. Since the upgrade is running 18-20 years now, I guess you're SOL if you're 42 or older? (when we start hiring in the next ten years..)

It also results in a lot more stagnation than other airlines... since EVERYONE has to upgrade, it creates long "waiting lists".... whereas at airlines like CAL, UAL, etc, upgrades can go very jr from folks who simply bypass for QOL.

I'd personally like to see the policy go away.

73

 

[D-Bo]

Reminds me of a funny I heard years ago......

A United gal kept bugging center for a short cut. Finally an unknown voice chimed in - "just be patient sweetie, you're whole career has been a shortcut."

Must have been about 20,00 folks on the exact same frequency that day because that's about the number of times I've heard that lame story.

But to your assertion, the number is less than 100 and from what I hear, a lot of them were scabs. Funny though, from all the bashing everyone wants to do on good old UAL, they seem to have one of the best safety records in the industry. Keep talking that BS if it makes you all feel better though.

 

[D-Bo]

I think the "Up or Out" policy is a good one. It prevents airlines from having tens or even hundreds (everyone knows which airline I'm refering to) of FOs that remain FOs because they're incapable of passing upgrade training. Competent FOs have nothing to fear from such a policy and as far as I've heard pilots having trouble are given ample help to make it through.

You must be feeling even more miserable about yourself this evening.

 

[TWA Dude]

For the most part, it works as advertised. However, quite a few folks who have no business upgrading, upgrade.

True enough, but then the same can be said for any airline.

It also results in a lot more stagnation than other airlines... since EVERYONE has to upgrade, it creates long "waiting lists".... whereas at airlines like CAL, UAL, etc, upgrades can go very jr from folks who simply bypass for QOL.

That may be but I'd still rather there be at least a some weeding-out of those who truly need to be weeded out. And before anybody here starts feeling offended I'm truly only referring to a handful of pilots who manage to make it through training but really shouldn't.

 

[TWA Dude]

You must be feeling even more miserable about yourself this evening.

Nope, feeling good and having a good layover. Don't know why you'd think otherwise.

 

[FreightGod]

Yeah, it's true but unless you're in the 5,600 to 7,000 seniority range, you won't have to worry about it for the next 10 years... TC

Okay TC, how about a guy in the 8700 range?

15 to 20 years...?

 

[aa73]

That may be but I'd still rather there be at least a some weeding-out of those who truly need to be weeded out.

That's the problem, in most cases they don't end up getting weeded out. However, I'm guessing that happens even at airlines where F/Os don't have to upgrade.

 

[Cardinal]

It prevents airlines from having tens or even hundreds (everyone knows which airline I'm refering to) of FOs that remain FOs because they're incapable of passing upgrade training.

+1

Every airline has 'em.

 

[SKYLAWYER]

Train to proficiency at its finest!

Gup

Reminds me of a funny I heard years ago......

A United gal kept bugging center for a short cut. Finally an unknown voice chimed in - "just be patient sweetie, you're whole career has been a shortcut."

I don't get it. I'm thinking there is some history here that has to do with uniteds training or hiring policy in the past. Anyone care to give one of the younger members here the history lesson. Thanks

 

[ultrarunner]

Sky, you can search FI and get PLENTY of intel on UAL's past hiring practices as it relates to "diversity" or whatever catchy PC phrase fits. It's actually quite entertaining when you start reading it.

 

[SKYLAWYER]

Thanks I'll try to go find that info. I guess if it's PC type information its probably better left unsaid. Flying with a TWA retiree this week who doesn't know anything about being politically correct. I'm hoping he has some info on it because if he does it will be much better to hear it from him. lol

 

[Gorilla]

Okay TC, how about a guy in the 8700 range?

15 to 20 years...?

YESSS! I am in the mid 5,000's! After only 15 years with AA, I am almost ready to upgrade to Junior CA MD-80 LGA! Like I'm going to leave my cush senior FO job and sit junir reserve in NYC. Don't think so.

The policy still exists, but there are plenty of ways to avoid it. They CAN'T make you commute. In fact, I think you can bypass until you can hold a line at your domicile.

 

[dooork]

Is it also true you must retire at 60? Heard this from a jumpseater.

 

[aa73]

Is it also true you must retire at 60? Heard this from a jumpseater.

Uhh, please tell me you're kidding?

73
10 more years to upgrade (maybe) because of age 65

 

[C-150ETOPS]

Is it also true you must retire at 60? Heard this from a jumpseater.

Not at AA. The AA guy can go to 65 even though he will be the absolute worst example in the industry of a pilot screwing his buddies for his own personal gain.

In our case, the earliest upgrades in the last 15 years was around 9-10 years, and we only now started to get moving again with upgrades around 18 years when age 65 hit.

The big rallying cry for the self absorbed p@#$ks in 2003 was "save the retirement!", well we did at the expense of pay for guys lock in their seat for 20 years, and the furloughed guys.

 

[TWA Dude]

I'm thinking there is some history here that has to do with uniteds training or hiring policy in the past. Anyone care to give one of the younger members here the history lesson. Thanks

I'll help, although it's also a good idea to do a search.

First, a short commentary. Funny thing about pilots on message boards: they can say all the bad things they want about their own employer but if somebody says something bad about another airline they take it personally. I've been on this message board since like 1998 or 1999 and I've never insulted any pilot group collectively just because of their employer. If I say something deragatory about an airline I'm talking about their management and not the rank-and-file pilots.

Now here's what you may not know about United. Back in the mid to late '90s I was flying at a regional (then called the commuters) and all the majors were hiring. United stuck out for two major reasons: their deliberately confrontational interview style and the fact that over and over the best pilots and best guys I knew were being turned down while the worst pilots and biggest jerks were being hired. To some extent this happens everywhere but without a doubt United was the worst. I place the blame squarely on their interview process.

Disclaimer for the inevitable "sour grapes" accusers: I did interview at United in 2000 but they'd changed their interview process by then. Not exactly friendly but not confrontational either. I simply didn't fit their particular style of questioning. I wasn't at all disappointed because I was happy at TWA and hadn't even updated my scanton form with them for over a year. Go figure.

 

[aa73]

Yup, good ol' United a la Nancy Stuke: "What's this 0.2hr discrepancy in your logbook? OK, thanks for your time, we'll let you know." :laugh: