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
Been turned down at SWA?
- Thread starter UALjan15
- Start date
- Watchers 18
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
Stay motivated!
UAL,
First, very sorry to hear that you didnt get hired at SWA. Its hard to tell why you didnt get the nod, could have been the actual interview or the obvious first SWA denial.
But, I have had a few friends that have gotten hired at SWA after their first rejection and love thier job. Re-apply with SWA as soon as you can to show them that you really want to work here and hopefully you will get called quickly and can show them SWA is the place for you.
In the meantime, like ATR said, apply with JetBlue, Airtran, ATA, AmericaWest, or anyone whose hiring and get back in the air. Who knows, you might end up happier somewhere else and maybe fate has stepped in. But I would personally Luv to have ya at SWA with a junior senority number to me!
Good Luck!
UAL,
First, very sorry to hear that you didnt get hired at SWA. Its hard to tell why you didnt get the nod, could have been the actual interview or the obvious first SWA denial.
But, I have had a few friends that have gotten hired at SWA after their first rejection and love thier job. Re-apply with SWA as soon as you can to show them that you really want to work here and hopefully you will get called quickly and can show them SWA is the place for you.
In the meantime, like ATR said, apply with JetBlue, Airtran, ATA, AmericaWest, or anyone whose hiring and get back in the air. Who knows, you might end up happier somewhere else and maybe fate has stepped in. But I would personally Luv to have ya at SWA with a junior senority number to me!
Good Luck!The decision board at SWA is smoke and mirrors (as with all airlines, I'm sure)! Nobody knows exactly how they decide who to hire! I was not hired my first time simply because of flight time. You may have passed the interview with flying colors, been sent to the hiring board as recommened for hire with 100 other candidates. But if they are only hiring 50 pilots at that decision board, then it may come down to something as simple as flight time or something as complex as having turned SWA down last time. Who knows? Call them to see if you can find out!
Don't give up! Re-apply when you can!
Don't give up! Re-apply when you can!
SFR
Pilot Guy
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 720
True, I may be a jacka$$ sometime, but it is funny who agrees with me and who does not.
Usually furloughed guys don't, understandable.
True, in 1999/2000 UAL was the place to go (along with DAL, AA, even USAir). Who would have thought of the 180 degree change within 2-3 years. But, I know more than 1 individual who turned SWA down and went to one listed above because "they did not want to fly a 737 the rest of their life". I find it funny how now they don't care and will fly RJs too!!!!
But call me what you want, I really don't care. I will be glad to have this discussion while attending SWA indoc over a beer.
L8r
Usually furloughed guys don't, understandable.
True, in 1999/2000 UAL was the place to go (along with DAL, AA, even USAir). Who would have thought of the 180 degree change within 2-3 years. But, I know more than 1 individual who turned SWA down and went to one listed above because "they did not want to fly a 737 the rest of their life". I find it funny how now they don't care and will fly RJs too!!!!
But call me what you want, I really don't care. I will be glad to have this discussion while attending SWA indoc over a beer.
L8r
Currency
Of the two factors mentioned, I'd lean much more toward currency as the issue. As was mentioned, they wouldn't bring you in for the interview if there was some red flag in your record ("turned us down before") that would guarantee you being shot down. On the other hand, I have heard of good guys coming in for the interview, doing well, and nevertheless being rejected at the DB, with recent flying as the only visible problem. Why the invite, then? I don't think currency is particularly visible from the paperwork that's submitted before the interview, and it's also pretty hard for non-pilots to gauge... is 300 hours in a year good? It's not uncommon for a fighter pilot. It's crummy for a -121 pilot. The DB has lots of pilots on it, and they can gauge things that those selecting apps for the interview can't.
The "turned us down before" deal may be a BIT of a negative, but I don't think it's what killed you, and it sounds like you're on the right track addressing it. I'd recommend applying again, and work hard at having lots of hours in the logbook during the year before the interview (as best you can guess when that will be ).
Best of luck,
Snoopy
Of the two factors mentioned, I'd lean much more toward currency as the issue. As was mentioned, they wouldn't bring you in for the interview if there was some red flag in your record ("turned us down before") that would guarantee you being shot down. On the other hand, I have heard of good guys coming in for the interview, doing well, and nevertheless being rejected at the DB, with recent flying as the only visible problem. Why the invite, then? I don't think currency is particularly visible from the paperwork that's submitted before the interview, and it's also pretty hard for non-pilots to gauge... is 300 hours in a year good? It's not uncommon for a fighter pilot. It's crummy for a -121 pilot. The DB has lots of pilots on it, and they can gauge things that those selecting apps for the interview can't.
The "turned us down before" deal may be a BIT of a negative, but I don't think it's what killed you, and it sounds like you're on the right track addressing it. I'd recommend applying again, and work hard at having lots of hours in the logbook during the year before the interview (as best you can guess when that will be
).Best of luck,
Snoopy
Falconjet
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2002
- Posts
- 1,586
Number of things
It could have been a combination of several things of course, but it sounds to me like the most likely explanations are (1) the lack of recent flying or (2) perhaps the members of the decision board have a different opinion on the merits of re-applying after having turned the company down once before than the rest of the People Department does.
I say that because I don't think they (the PD) would have brought you in for an interview if they were going to just turn you down based on the past offer and refusal. I can understand why the DB members might feel that they didn't want to reward somebody who hadn't been "loyal" to the fold over others who had never had the opportunity and turned it down. I'm NOT saying I think that it is right, but that is their call, not mine.
Recency could come into play, although their new mins (200 hours in the past 3 years) seem to be specifically geared toward making an allowance for those who were furloughed in the wake of 9/11. I would think that since you met that new min, that wouldn't have been held against you. Again, these are just opinions and conjecture.
To me it appears that the DB decided that there were others better qualified than you (again, their definition of what is best qualified) or they felt that there was a price to pay for having turned the company down before.
SFR and CRJammin: EVERYBODY who goes to an interview (if they have any brains) is going to say that they always wanted to fly for (insert the carrier's name here) since they first learned to fly. Your desire to fly for SW is commendable, but it doesn't make you any more qualified for, nor deserving of a job, with SW than anybody else.
It is kind of shortsided to slam sombody who made a decision (you hopefully will never have to make) and now must live with the ramifications of that decision while trying to feed his/her family. It doesn't sound like he started at SW and then left in the middle of training or probation, which might understandably burn some bridges. They simply picked another offer and tried to move on.
In any case I don't think you have the right to imply that they have no business trying again until you and all the others who have "always wanted" to fly for SW and haven't had the 'pleasure' of a furlough have gotten your shot.
Best of luck to all of you!
FJ
It could have been a combination of several things of course, but it sounds to me like the most likely explanations are (1) the lack of recent flying or (2) perhaps the members of the decision board have a different opinion on the merits of re-applying after having turned the company down once before than the rest of the People Department does.
I say that because I don't think they (the PD) would have brought you in for an interview if they were going to just turn you down based on the past offer and refusal. I can understand why the DB members might feel that they didn't want to reward somebody who hadn't been "loyal" to the fold over others who had never had the opportunity and turned it down. I'm NOT saying I think that it is right, but that is their call, not mine.
Recency could come into play, although their new mins (200 hours in the past 3 years) seem to be specifically geared toward making an allowance for those who were furloughed in the wake of 9/11. I would think that since you met that new min, that wouldn't have been held against you. Again, these are just opinions and conjecture.
To me it appears that the DB decided that there were others better qualified than you (again, their definition of what is best qualified) or they felt that there was a price to pay for having turned the company down before.
SFR and CRJammin: EVERYBODY who goes to an interview (if they have any brains) is going to say that they always wanted to fly for (insert the carrier's name here) since they first learned to fly. Your desire to fly for SW is commendable, but it doesn't make you any more qualified for, nor deserving of a job, with SW than anybody else.
It is kind of shortsided to slam sombody who made a decision (you hopefully will never have to make) and now must live with the ramifications of that decision while trying to feed his/her family. It doesn't sound like he started at SW and then left in the middle of training or probation, which might understandably burn some bridges. They simply picked another offer and tried to move on.
In any case I don't think you have the right to imply that they have no business trying again until you and all the others who have "always wanted" to fly for SW and haven't had the 'pleasure' of a furlough have gotten your shot.
Best of luck to all of you!
FJ
StopNTSing
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2003
- Posts
- 715
UALjan15: One other possibility not yet mentioned...could your file have been torpedoed by a past co-worker who is now with SWA? Admittedly a long shot, but a question you should honestly ask yourself. One black ball can make a BIG difference at the hiring board.
My best guess is the currency issue. You really must be actively employed in a flying gig at the time you interview here. Even if it is just instructing in a C152...currency is very important to SWA.
My best guess is the currency issue. You really must be actively employed in a flying gig at the time you interview here. Even if it is just instructing in a C152...currency is very important to SWA.
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
