The long, dark walk on the airline conveyer belt

[pilotyip]

Why?

It is like buying the Dogs of the Dow, the best time to get in is when no one elsa wants to. Planes are going to fly, they will need pilots. but have to decide why you want to do it, if you are it in...see below

 

[100LL... Again!]

Weeding Out

I think most of us acknowledge that if the supply of new pilots were decreased, that compensation would go up (all other things being equal).

If employers did not have people standing in line to work for 20K per year, they would have to offer more.

Now when it comes to thinning the herd, there are three categories of criteria:

1) Clearly relevant criteria: Obviously, a pilot certificate and current medical. A certain minimum level of knowledge and flight proficiency. No significant factors that would make you a problem employee - criminal record, attitude problems, multiple DUI's, etc. Most of us pass this test easily.

2) Clearly arbitrary factors: Whether you went to the 'right' college or are from the 'right' branch of the military. There are probably a few people out there who truly think that one particular school or particular type of military pilot is superior to all others.

3) deatable criteria:

MOST of the weed-out discussion take place in this realm. Total time, PIC, turbine PIC, jet, actual instrument are some criteria. What about 20/20 vision? What about maximum body weight? Minimum height? Able to run a mile? Or what about college education? A masters degree?

Criteria in this group range from being fairly relevant to being failry arbitrary.

Consider two scenarios-

Scenario 1: Pilot A has a four year degree in aero science, pilot B has no college education. In this case, it is easier to make the argument that the college degree is a legitimate weed-out.

Scenario 2: Pilot A has a four year degree in art history. Pilot B has no college education, but spent 2 years in tech school for electronics, and has worked as an electronic techinician before becoming a pilot. It is now harder to cheerlead for the college degree, seeing as how in-depth knowledge of electronics PROBABLY has more relevance to piloting than does art history.


THEREFORE, my conclusion is that throwing the term 'college degree' around is WAY oversimplifying the issue. If simply possessing a degree in anything is considered mandatory, and no consideration is given to people who have accrues valuable knowledge and life experience other ways, how is this not arbitrary?

Most people do not mind arbitrary decisions if it is in their interests, or if they are not affected. However, one must consider those who are affected.

I'd like to ask a question: Have you ever shaken your head in disgust as some ignorant TV reporter refers to any small plane as a Cessna? Or every business jet as a Learjet?

That is what I feel like every time I hear this issue being discussed. It is a foolish oversimplification of the issue to discuss college degrees as though they are a some sort of 'smart-person certificate'.

If you want to use the degree as an arbitrary weed-out, GO RIGHT AHEAD. Just please do not insult the rest of us (who also have college degrees) by suggesting that is is NOT arbitrary.

For those of you who might question my stance, I have a degree. But I recognize that I have met many talented pilots who have no college at all. I would hate to depreive them of a job just because some elitist thinks that their degree makes them better than everyone else.

 

[pilotyip]

well said 100LL