Why hire military over your competition?

[labbats]

it doesn't matter where you get your training; it's experience that counts. Initial military flight experience is better than initial civilian flight experience, but after thousands of hours, it really doesn't matter. That's why military-trained guys have an overall edge in relatively low total hour applicants.

Seems we're arguing the same point then.

Now all we need is for you to admit that it's unfair that a minority of pilots (military) are getting the majority of slots at majors requiring high-time pilots (equal experience).

 

[LearLove]

Seems we're arguing the same point then.

Now all we need is for you to admit that it's unfair that a minority of pilots (military) are getting the majority of slots at majors requiring high-time pilots (equal experience).

Again as with my other post on this thread, I'm not getting into this "debate" but I need to comment WRT the labbats thread on the majority of newhires being military.

Labbats I don't know where your working or getting your hiring data from, but In the past year at my airline on the equipment I'm on, every FO is a newhire (first year or 2) except the top 10 FO's. In the past year I've flown with say 40 different FO's and all except 2 or 3 have been in their first year.

Out of the 40ish FO's I've flown with only 4 have been military and all of them flew for a regional/commuter prior to getting a job at the mainline. And of those 4, three are straight up guard babies meaning they were never active duty.

So what I'm saying is, I don't know where you are getting this idea that a majority of major newhires are military. It is not what I'm seeing unless non of them want to come to my airline and we can only find civ guys to fill the seats.

Plus just shooting from the hip, the supply of regional pilot far exceeds the military guys now from previous hiring cycles. The regionals are twice the size of any pre 9-11 hiring cycle and the military pilot pool is about half what it was pre 9-11 especially from the cold war era numbers. Not to mention the fact that of the guys in the military pool today a good amount are going to have UAV and V22 time which as of yet doesn't count towards civ hiring further shrinking the mil hiring pool.

 

[SWA Bubba]

Seems we're arguing the same point then.

Now all we need is for you to admit that it's unfair that a minority of pilots (military) are getting the majority of slots at majors requiring high-time pilots (equal experience).

Well, I would agree that it would be strange (don't know that "fair" plays into what employers want), other than the fact that I don't know that I agree that what you say is actually true. You and Wave have taken one single snapshot, possibly not even accurate, and extrapolated it into a supposed industry-wide phenomenon. The fact is, that considerably more than half of Southwest pilots were civilian-trained and/or have significant civilian 121 experience. I suspect that's similar across the other majors. I don't remember anyone ever complaining about the "fairness" of that, as in not hiring enough military guys.

As far as recent hires go, I have no idea what the particular hiring talent was this quarter, and neither one of us knows how many of those "military" guys had other 121 experience. Just checking my logbook, of the last 15 FOs that I flew with, 9 were all civilian experience, 1 of them I don't remember (or never knew), and of the 5 that were military-trained, 2 had other 121 time after the military, but before they got here (one at a regional, and the other flying old 747s for Kalitta).

So let me ask you--why does this bother you so much? Why do you care how new guys got their training and experience? You have neither an accurate picture of overall practices, nor even the full story behind your recent snapshot, yet you seem to be beside yourself with the supposed "fairness" of airlines hiring practices. Why is that?

Bubba

 

[labbats]

Because most everyone I work with is trying to leave our LCC and very few if any are getting calls... regardless of how many job fairs they go to. Yet friends of mine at AA tell me the breakdown of newhire classes and they are primarily military. Then I read the breakdown of who got the call from Delta and it's almost all military. No need to go on about Fed Ex as it's the same.

So daily I speak with friends who have thousands of hours of flying the same type of aircraft that are good people just trying to move on and they are getting nowhere. It's frustrating to see and hear that and constantly read about military getting multiple interviews. That's where I'm coming from.

I'm assuming LearLove works at USAir because as I mentioned earlier it doesn't seem to have that slant in their hiring.

I bring this up not to be a whiner but simply to shed a light on the weighted average. There's no easy way to do this on FlightInfo. I hope I haven't shown disrespect but rather encouraged debate.

 

[Boxboy]

It's true that every single one of these mil vs. civ threads are started by non-military experienced pilots. Bubba has a point. Many seem to fail to see the point due to their inferiority complex, chip on the shoulder, jealousy, or whatever issues one may have. Please believe me when I say that I'm not saying this out of arrogance.
I can confidently say that I have never flown with one single military pilot who looked down on civilian trained pilots but I have flown with several civilian pilots who "diss" military pilots. Why is that so? You know who I'm talking about. When I do, I just bite my lips because there's no point in arguing with someone with no credibility. If you haven't been there and done that, I highly suggest that you not open your pie hole and make a jackass out of yourself.

Here are the cold facts:
-Military flight training is far superior to any civilian flight training. Military pilots can fly the exact same instrument approaches and safely take off and land an aircraft on the same pavement (some times much shorter) as the civilian pilots do, sometime RTBing with a battle-damaged aircraft; imagine that! You may not like this statement, but it is what it is.
-Military pilots, whether single seat or multi-crew, receive extensive CRM training to operate in extremely stressful environments.
-Most importantly, military pilots can adapt to any type of flying and they are trainable to safely and competently operate in the "extremely challenging" part 121 world. They can even lead/manage FAs and pax... big surprise there!

With all sarcasm aside, similar arguments exist within in the military. I can't speak for the other services, but the Air Force has a perceived hierarchy in the flying world. I flew heavies by choice and I saw many who would rip on the fighter guys by saying things like, "they are so damn arrogant and full of them selves" or "so and so got a fighter in my class because he was a kiss a$$ although he was a $hitty stick". Really? If he made it through IFF and RTU, then he must not be all that of a ham fist. I'm sure there are few arrogant fighter pilots out there but it's really a perception by people with inferiority complexes and huge chips on their shoulders, IMO. Same applies to the civilian world. You have people on these forums bagging on "rich daddy" paying for Embry Riddle flight training while the less fortunate had to empty their piggy banks to pay for their training. Oh, cry me a river! Did someone stick a gun and say that you needed to become a pilot or else? Does that really make you a better pilot who deserves a second look? We all need to check our selves in the mirror and do a self assessment before stepping up on the soap box. Self righteousness=ignorance. I find that people with true self confidence are the ones who are happy and satisfied with their achievements, and are grateful to God for their blessings.
I understand that some people will never change and will never see the light. I see that here too, on these forums. It's like talking to a wall. Who's better than who... who really cares! My advice to those walking around with a huge chip on their shoulders... get over it and enjoy life while it lasts. And if you want to debate a matter, perhaps you should obtain some credibility on the subject matter instead of speaking out of your other hole. Don't be a life support system for your rectum!

 

[maru657]

Wrong Boxboy, military training is just another government designed program meant to provide the least common denominator. The military trained pilot can shoot most approaches but the guy who's been doing this for umpteen legs a day in areas of "Boxed Weather" WILL be better at it. That pilot will have shot more approaches, flown far more inclement weather and probably dealt with many more problems than little Herky fresh from flying his single engine scooter for "Sweet Uncle" .

 

[Boxboy]

Wrong Boxboy, military training is just another government designed program meant to provide the least common denominator. The military trained pilot can shoot most approaches but the guy who's been doing this for umpteen legs a day in areas of "Boxed Weather" WILL be better at it. That pilot will have shot more approaches, flown far more inclement weather and probably dealt with many more problems than little Herky fresh from flying his single engine scooter for "Sweet Uncle" .

Did you receive flight training from the military and fly in the service? If not, how did you become such a military aviation expert? Watching the History channel and Wings do not count. You have no credibility. That chip on your shoulder is weighing you down, my friend. I suggest you stop typing with your emotions and stop becoming a bigger rectum life support system.
BTW, shooting instrument approaches might be the bread and butter in your world, but it's just a tiny little bread crumb in the world of military flying... just the fact.

 

[pave driver]

Oh come on now fellas...a civilian only pilot quibbling about a legacy and their preferential hiring of military pilots is akin to a nurse telling a surgeon how to do an open heart procedure. If you haven't been through military pilot training you can't say it's not better (and it is). Those who have done both military and civilian training CAN say which pilot is better. Those who haven't...well they have no clue now do they. The hiring staff at all 3 legacies obviously know who they would prefer as a pilot. Now why would that be??? Hmmm.

 

[maru657]

The hiring staff at all 3 legacy carriers are ex-military pilots. Uasually the one's who want to avoid having to fly the line and all of that nasty weather. Over the last 40 plus years I've flown with numerous military pilots. That gives me the perspective just reading accident reports gives me the numbers and I know shooting approaches is just a tiny bread crumb within their pool of vast experience. It shows. I will say that the Army's helicopter pilots that served in Vietnam impressed me the most. Some of those boys could make a 727 sit up and beg. Unfortunately, many of them were not allowed into the good old boys squadron club either.

 

[Boxboy]

Maru, I see that you are truly biased and have a hard on for military pilots. You completely missed my point. You are the wall I was talking about. Try and get out more. It's year 2014. Enjoy retirement!