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

Interviews: Common Courtesy by Companys?

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
Re: Thanks Guy

outermarket said:
Thanks, I appreciate the support from a fellow dispatcher, I guess it's easy to see it your way when your young and employed!


LIsten,

A) Young hell, I'm over 35

B) I've read your drivel in several message boards, and the one question I've always wanted to ask was "what kind of cheese would you like with your whine? I would suggest a nice Brie."

But yes, I am employed......
 
Resume Writer said:


I understand fully about the recurrent training of pilots, however, there is still a cost/benefit factor involved. If someone has the chance to get 20 years out of a pilot, instead of 10, then the cost for training for that pilot is amortized over a longer period, and is outweighed by the productivity gained.

Your argument is valid though about the pay structure of older pilots not reaching the higher pay scales before retirement. However, in most airlines now, the average upgrade time could be anywhere from 5-10 years, with some of the regional carriers upgrading sooner than that. So, if someone is at a regional, then the pay scale argument is not really valid, when the upgrade time is sometimes 3-5 years. At the end of a 10 year work history, the pilot in question would have already made Captain and be at the higher end of the pay scale.

If the company (and I say if) has a retirement plan, then the person who retires at 10 years of service, is an immediate cost burden to the carrier, versus someone who has 10 more years of service in them. So, the argument could be seen either way. I guess it depends on who is sitting on the hiring side of the desk, and what the directives are from upper management.



I hate to seem obtuse, but it seems to me that a recurring cost is a recurring cost is a recurring cost regardless of the age of the person being trained. Upgrade cost is a one time event for each aircraft type, and the number of hours spent in the sim to prepare for and take a type rating check is about the same as the cost of a recurrent ride.
Since hardly anyone is offering defined benefit pension plans for new hires any more, the cost of someone retiring after 5 or 10 years is no more than the cost of someone retiring after 20 years. In fact, given the 401(k) vesting schedules used by most employers, I would argue that it would benefit an employer to hire someone who will retire in a few years. The few companies that still offer defined benefit plans would benefit even more, since they generally require ten years' service as a condition of drawing the company paid pension.
 
TonyC said:
Kathy!?!?! IS that YOU?!?!

:) :D :) :D :) :D :)


::::::::::::::::: Kathy :::::::::::::::

Yes Tony, it is me! :) Where have you disappeared to? Off the radar screen or what? lol
 
rettofly said:
I hate to seem obtuse, but it seems to me that a recurring cost is a recurring cost is a recurring cost regardless of the age of the person being trained. Upgrade cost is a one time event for each aircraft type, and the number of hours spent in the sim to prepare for and take a type rating check is about the same as the cost of a recurrent ride.
Since hardly anyone is offering defined benefit pension plans for new hires any more, the cost of someone retiring after 5 or 10 years is no more than the cost of someone retiring after 20 years. In fact, given the 401(k) vesting schedules used by most employers, I would argue that it would benefit an employer to hire someone who will retire in a few years. The few companies that still offer defined benefit plans would benefit even more, since they generally require ten years' service as a condition of drawing the company paid pension.

Rettofly - It can be definately argued either way. But then again, we have all seen some stupid things that management has done in the name of saving money! :) But trying to make sense of the things that are done sometimes would make us all go crazy. I know after several years at my airline, I would have to put on my "management issued non-logic hat" to make sense of what they did. Once that was on tight, everything made sense! :D
 
Age discrimination

Resume Writer said:
Just a little about my background. I was in the airline industry for 16 years in several different positions. Some of those include recruitment, international sales and marketing, customer relations, revenue accounting, yield management and I worked all of the line positions, including the last few years as a Flight Attendant. Prior to working in the airline industry, I was a Hiring Manager for a Fortune 500 company. Since 1987, I have owned a resume writing and employment consulting business. While I specialize in the airline industry, I compose resumes for all positions; from front line workers up to CEOs.

The reason I tell you this information is . . . to let you know that I do have a substantial background in hiring . . . .

* * * *

Now, on to the Age Discrimination, the answer is yes, it does exist. Is it supposed to? Absolutely not . . . . The top bosses are putting pressure on you to hire younger people because they want the best cost/benefit. In other words, how much time could they get out of someone for the amount of training that was required. Do I agree with it - no. My only point here is to provide everyone with a reality check of what really goes on . . . .
(emphasis added)

Yes, indeed, it does. And now you've heard it from someone who really does know.

I've been writing on this board for two-and-a-half years that age discrimination exists in pilot hiring, especially so at the regionals against older career changers. I have demonstrated logically that it happened to me. Read my other posts on the subject - but I'll make my point once more. At my school, ERAU-Prescott, the 25-and-under flight instructors were getting the interviews and jobs at the same places to which I, who was pushing forty (40) years old, was also applying but was hearing nothing. My quals and their quals were essentially alike. Enough total and multi time to meet mins, the required certificates and ratings, and four-year degrees. I exceeded some of the requirements. All professional aviation experience gained through flight instructing only. To simplify it further for those who still do not get it, the only difference between them and me was age. I was older.

Heretofore, all my allegations about age discrimination were met with strenuous denials, anecdotal responses to the contrary, assurances that it no longer exists, which I have refuted by recent examples, dismissive, caustic retorts that I don't know what I'm talking about and I should be disregarded, and even personal attacks. (If you cannot attack the person's argument, attack the person - sticks and stones . . . .) Now, here is credible proof from an expert that supports my allegations. Perhaps, now, some of you will believe what I have been saying. Perhaps, now, some of you will not dismiss it as sour grapes, whining, being a loser, or whatever.

Read my post above about legal authority that supports airlines' anti-age bias. Take that and Kathy's comments and consider it a prima facie case of the existence of age discrimination and that it victimizes people. Also consider both as cautionary advice if you are approaching forty and considering a career change to aviation.

As I wrote above, any kind of employment law case involving an institutionalized discriminatory hiring practice is hard to prove. The court cases I cited above, Coupi and Murnane, are only two examples of the hurdles to surmount for pilots wanting to challenge age bias. Not to mention that the only reason the hiring gods have to give is they liked the other applicants better - or whatever.

Thanks so much, Kathy, for an invaluable first post.
 
Last edited:
Hiring old boys v. bad public policy

Publishers said:
The thing is that all of life is a case of discrimination, some for better, some for worse . . . . The bottom line is that we all discriminate, we all have preferences, and we all have good old boy friends we would hire if we were in position to do so. The question is --Is this bad?
When it crosses the line to be bad public policy, you bet it is bad.

Everyone deserves a fair shake. Everyone deserves fair treatment. Read Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment. And, if anyone believes that I am a pimp or shill for affirmative action programs, rest assured I am not. To receive further assurances, reread the first two sentences of this paragraph
 
Last edited:
Press release

Resume Writer said:
When I host the Human Resource Forum at the end of this month, I plan on asking all of these questions. Further, I am going to write a press release addressing this very issue. I think it is time that people in hiring positions (whether they be managers or HR people) take some responsibility for their actions. This is NOT the first time I have heard of this happening.
Would you post the release or a link to it?

Thanks, Kathy.
 
Bobby,

I will definately post that press release when I write it. I wanted to share a couple of press releases that I wrote that have ended up being printed in several newspapers across the country. Keep in mind that they were written for the general public, not specifically pilots. I will post them separate, as they are each kind of long.

Kathy
 
Press Release

Subtle Mistakes on Resumes Can Cost Candidates Interviews

Use of business contact information or cute email addresses can be the kiss of death

PRWEB) December 25, 2003, Phoenix, AZ -- Most job search candidates are aware of the common mistakes, such as typos and grammatical errors, which can make a big difference in getting called for an interview. However, most candidates are unaware of the subtle mistakes they are making, including placing personalized or company email addresses and company or cell phone numbers, on their resume. While some of these practices may seem harmless, there are valid reasons behind not putting this information on an employment search document.

“Many of my clients want to include their work email or phone numbers on their resume,” says Kathy Sweeney, president of The Write Resume, a Phoenix, Arizona based firm which specializes in resume writing and employment coaching for clients via the internet. “I advise against this, because the question a potential hiring manager may ask is whether a candidate will search for a job on their company’s time.”

Further, Sweeney points out that if a candidate does get a call from a potential employer on a company phone, the job seeker may be in a meeting with their boss or client, creating a very precarious situation.

“When a potential employer wants to contact a candidate, they are usually ready to either interview them by telephone in a screening phase or want to set up a formal meeting. They do not want to be put off by a job seeker who needs to call them back or cannot talk at the time,” says Sweeney. “The hiring manager only has a limited amount of time to speak to a potential employee and if the individual is unable to talk, they will go on to the next candidate.”

Job seekers also need to realize that including a cell phone number on their resume can cause just as many problems. First, the candidate will be at a disadvantage, because they may not have their resume in front of them to answer potential questions. In addition, they may be in a social situation, where once again they may not be able to speak at length to the employer.

Sweeney says the candidate should control the timing of the potential screening interview. The best way to ensure the interview happens on the candidates’ terms is to have a reliable home telephone number listed on their documents. If an employer calls, they will leave a message and the candidate can call them back when they are prepared and uninterrupted.

Sweeney also suggests that job seekers not allow their children to answer the telephone while searching for a new position. In addition, a professional telephone message system, with an appropriate outgoing message, is the key to an employer actually leaving a callback number.

“Many times individuals will have a cute message left by their child or a long, loud music selection on their answering machine. This will guarantee an employer will not leave a message,” Sweeney says with a chuckle.

The other common mistake candidates make is to have a “personalized” email address on their resume. Cute email addresses should not be used. Rather, a professional email address, such as the first and last name of the job seeker at the internet service provider address is the best guideline. Most internet service providers offer several email addresses per account. If a candidate does not have their own provider, free accounts are available from Yahoo and Hotmail.

If a candidate has a common name, like John Smith, they can still utilize their name, but perhaps use some numbers at the end. Sweeney warns not to use the year of birth as those numbers, as it could lead to age discrimination.

“I had a client once who wanted to use “GreatBootyBabe” as their email address on their resume,” Sweeney recalls. “I had to gently advise her that while it was fine to express her individualism to her friends, it was not professional and would send the wrong message to the employer.”

Using a company email address is also another kiss of death. Many companies have a strong email policy and violating those rules can get a candidate terminated from their current position.

By following these simple rules, Sweeney says that job seekers will portray a specific image to potential hiring managers, which in the long run, may communicate their professionalism.
 
Press Release #2

Staying at the Top of the Online Job Application Pile

Tips help job seekers make the most of internet job search

Phoenix, AZ (PRWEB) January 27, 2004 -- With numerous employers utilizing job search boards, in addition to proprietary company systems as the avenue for searching for employees, job search candidates need to understand how the systems are used by employers.

“Many job search candidates apply online to either job boards or corporate websites, but they really do not understand the technology behind the systems,” said Kathy Sweeney, president of The Write Resume, a resume writing and employment coaching firm, based in Phoenix, Arizona. “It is important to understand how employers search and what a candidate can do better to be at the top of the list of potential interviewees.”

According to Sweeney, there are two ways that employers can choose to search for candidates on job boards. They can either pay to search for candidates in the job board database or post an advertisement for an open position.

While conducting their search, employers can sort resumes received or conduct their search for candidates by geographic region, level of education or requirements of the position. In addition, when employers pay to only search a database of candidates, they can select an option that only includes candidates who have posted their resume in a certain amount of time, such as the past 30, 60, 90 or 180 days.

Sweeney says the most important aspects from a job candidate’s perspective are three-fold, with each being equally important.

First, the candidate must have “keywords” in their resume that match the industry in which they are seeking a job. Job boards rank candidates based upon ‘relevancy,’ meaning that the more terms the job seeker has in their resume that match the key words either posted in the employer ad or used by the employer searching in a particular industry, the higher they will rank in the list of candidates.

“If one candidate has five words on their resume and another candidate has only two words the employer is using in their ad, the individual with more words that match is going to show up higher on the list of resumes which the employer will review,” stated Sweeney.

Candidates do not need to have a “keywords” section on their resume, as many of the systems search throughout the entire document and will highlight the words as they appear. Sweeney warns, however, that the system may only search for present tense words, such as sales, instead of the word sold, so having both terms in the resume will be helpful.

Second, the job seeker must update their resume at least every thirty days in the system. Most employers will only search for candidates who have posted their resumes within the past 90 days, as they assume that a candidate whose resume was posted after that time may have already found another job. Updating the resume by adding a new training session or additional keywords will refresh the resume in the job board system and rank the candidate higher.

“If two candidates have the exact same keywords in their resume that the employer is searching for, the person who has updated their resume most recently will show up first,” said Sweeney.

Finally, job seekers also need to understand that some computer systems only read text formats. If candidates are posting their resume into the system with fancy bullets, lines, bold or underlining, it may kick their document out of the system. Sweeney says converting the resume to an ASCII text format is the best way to ensure that the resume will be compatible with all job search systems.
 
Resume Writer said:
Rettofly - It can be definately argued either way. But then again, we have all seen some stupid things that management has done in the name of saving money! :) But trying to make sense of the things that are done sometimes would make us all go crazy. I know after several years at my airline, I would have to put on my "management issued non-logic hat" to make sense of what they did. Once that was on tight, everything made sense! :D

Touche! Logic does seem to be a scarce commodity in many quarters. (Slapping myself in the head) That's why I left the hallowed halls of industry in the first place. :rolleyes:
 
Resume Writer said:
Yes Tony, it is me! :) Where have you disappeared to? Off the radar screen or what? lol
I haven't gone anywhere... just putting time to more productive use. :)

It's good to see you're doing well!
 
Bobby

Just where is that line.

I understand what makes nice public policy but where and who draws the lines. Who is to determine what a fair shake is? You tell me.

If I have Joe Shmoe as my chief pilot and he says he wants Ed and I think Tom would be better, I have to go with him because he is the guy I made responsible for the people under him.

We try in this country to legislate fairness and equality and it rarely works becuse ultimately, these things are decided by a person who brings all their prejudices and discriminations, and preferences, to the table with them.

If the company says you have to have a 737 type rating, you are obviously discriminating against those who do not have it. Must be a college grad, same thing, must be whatever is part and parcel of the program.

Human nature when questioned tries its best to sound logical. I bought the car because it had great gas milage and was structurally safe for my family. Maybe, but just as much chance that I thought I looked kool in it and I thought it was a neat car.

Which sounds more intelligent.

I picked Sam because he had 35 more hours than Bobby and he was 2 years younger, had more jet experience etc, or I just like Sam better than Bobby, have no idea why.

If you were not selected, chances are you feel it was unfair, you were just as qualified.

Kathy has a bunch of good points and having seen the horrors up close and personal, she did not even start to address the basic errors. Nevertheless, sooner or later, it boils down to I liked this guy or lady better because at the end, we always have more than one qualified candidate.
 
Public policy and institutionalized discrimination

Publishers said:
I understand what makes nice public policy but where and who draws the lines. Who is to determine what a fair shake is? You tell me.
Okay. "Nice" is a non-starter. To define "fair treatment," for openers, here is a quote from the preamble to the Declaration of Independence:

"WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness . . . ."

(emphasis added)

The Fourteenth Amendment, cited above, is just one of several efforts to further define and clarify fair treatment. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, civil rights legislation, and, yes, affirmative action legislation, are other efforts.

Freedom and equality are the underpinnings of our system. Thus, we, as Americans, expect fair treatment. When there are blatant institutionalized discriminatory practices, there is no fair treatment, and the line is crossed. Plain and simple.
If I have Joe Shmoe as my chief pilot and he says he wants Ed and I think Tom would be better, I have to go with him because he is the guy I made responsible for the people under him.

* * * *
We try in this country to legislate fairness and equality and it rarely works becuse ultimately, these things are decided by a person who brings all their prejudices and discriminations, and preferences, to the table with them.
Thus, if Joe Shmoe simply doesn't like women pilots, or older pilots, or black pilots, or Hispanic pilots et al, that is institutionalized discrimination.
If the company says you have to have a 737 type rating, you are obviously discriminating against those who do not have it. Must be a college grad, same thing, must be whatever is part and parcel of the program.
C'mon, Pub, you know it's not the same. That is not discrimination. Anyone can avail themselves of 737 type ratings and college. No one can roll back age or change their skin color. I know at least one person who has lied about his heritage. Changing sex? Wellllll . . . . . .

(I recall a case from years ago where a pilot who underwent a sex change operation lost his/her job and sued to get it back.)

Which sounds more intelligent.

I picked Sam because he had 35 more hours than Bobby and he was 2 years younger, had more jet experience etc, or I just like Sam better than Bobby, have no idea why.

If you were not selected, chances are you feel it was unfair, you were just as qualified.
Of course. In this instance, there isn't much difference between Sam and Bobby. But if all the Sams are much younger than all the Bobbys, or all the Bobbys are women, etc., and all the Bobbys are being shunned in favor of the Sams, that is patently unfair, and discriminatory.
Kathy has a bunch of good points and having seen the horrors up close and personal, she did not even start to address the basic errors. Nevertheless, sooner or later, it boils down to I liked this guy or lady better because at the end, we always have more than one qualified candidate.
But if you impose an illegal and/or unfair bias on any candidate, you have committed discrimination.

I have made my case above about age discrimination existing in pilot hiring.
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom