why is FDX posting pilot jobs?

[Purpledog]

I didn't start this arguement that continues to plague this forum. Stupidpilot did by saying that a 2000 hr fighter guy isn't as qualified as a 6000 hr civvie. What am I supposed to do? Would you want a member of your military to sit idly by while someone hurls stereotypical insults? Would you sit idly by if, out of the blue, I made a sweeping generalization that all 6000 hr civvies aren't as qualified? I think not. I agree that people on here sound horrible, myself included. Kooombya......

 

[stupidpilot]

Hey Purpledog, You didn't read my post very well did you? I am both a military pilot & civilian pilot. I just did a DC-10 transition and my sim partner, who flew fighters and had over 10k hours of flight time, well & I flew circles around him. And I am not that stellar of a pilot. I know many,many military pilots, some are better and some are worse than civilian pilots. The point is it is the individual, not where he comes from. But some companies roll out the red carpet for you guys and because you get hired with so little time you think you are better. Well you're not. Flying broken down, beat up, poorly maintained aircraft in hard IMC dodging bad weather so you can gain the type of time you need to get on to the next step is just as, if not more valid than the good training you receivedfree and got paid for it from Uncle Sam. Whereas many civilian pilots are deep in debt and leagues away from where you are in your career. So, who has had to sacrifice more and work harder for their career?

 

[b757driver]

Hey Purpledog, You didn't read my post very well did you? I am both a military pilot & civilian pilot. I just did a DC-10 transition and my sim partner, who flew fighters and had over 10k hours of flight time, well & I flew circles around him. And I am not that stellar of a pilot. I know many,many military pilots, some are better and some are worse than civilian pilots. The point is it is the individual, not where he comes from. But some companies roll out the red carpet for you guys and because you get hired with so little time you think you are better. Well you're not. Flying broken down, beat up, poorly maintained aircraft in hard IMC dodging bad weather so you can gain the type of time you need to get on to the next step is just as, if not more valid than the good training you receivedfree and got paid for it from Uncle Sam. Whereas many civilian pilots are deep in debt and leagues away from where you are in your career. So, who has had to sacrifice more and work harder for their career?

I'm with you, Stupid! I couldn't agree more with your comments. And like you, I have a military as well as civilian background. It's time to destroy the myth.........

 

[HoursHore]

We may not be better pilots, but we can sure network!

And thats the name of the game.

 

[Dumbluck]

2000 hrs of flying a 1900, several 7 legs a day for four days in a row, in uncontrolled airspace, no autopilot, dodge weather on your own, full procedure turns, or a dme arc to a localizer B/C all while keeping a eye on the FO who just came off OE and the biggest thing they've flown is a Cessna.

Yeah, mil. guys who were led by the hand had it rough. Who paid for your training, if you washed out, still had a job somewhere didn't you.

by the way, I did my time in the Navy didn't fly though, I have great respect for members of the military, regardless of their rate or rank.

Sorry, but anybody who thinks that their better than any and everybody, is just ignorant.civilian or military

 

[j41driver]

...KC-10 to an MD-11 is a lateral transition. Going from an RJ to an MD-11 or any Boeing is a huge leap

I've just done a transition from the CRJ to B717 and I can say that there was most certainly not a huge leap. Actually, it was barely a hop. Do you have personal experience to the contrary?

 

[j41driver]

It doesn't?? Let me get this straight. 52 weeks of 12 hours days learning to fly multiengine jets and then another 4-12 months learning another aircraft and how to employ it tactically does not make you a better pilot than any gomer flying a 172?

Perhaps you should re-read his post. He said being a military pilot doesn't automatically make you a better pilot. He's right. There are good military pilots and there are bad military pilots just like there are both good and bad civilian pilots.

 

[dtfl]

I've done both military and civilian flying. There are good pilots in both. Although I do think it's ridiculous to hire a military guy with 2000 hours or less thinking that he is as good as a civilian guy that has 6000+ hours. It doesn't matter where you've flown or in what conditions. Sometimes there is just no substitute for hours spent in the air. Flying tactically has nothing to do with flying boxes. Oh, and by the way our Air Force has had no real challenge from ADA after the first day of Desert Storm or Iraqi Freedom. So don't give me that dangerous flying crap! I flew to Baghdad many times. The most nervous I got is how pissed off the kids would get when we ran out of candy to give them!

whoa whoa whoa...... "Dont give me that dangerous flying crap?" Excuse me?
Let me explain something about flying THESE days. I flew Spec Ops..and I got shot at LESS than the airlifters are now that the war is "over". I had manpads and AAA shot at me EVERY other time I flew in Afghanistan...and these guys now (mainly in Iraq - ESPECIALLY into Baghdad - ask my squadron buds that were there) have to deal with the insurgents firing manpads, small arms and RPGs at them on a daily basis. It is dangerous flying. Maybe you just FORGOT.

And as far as the training being free? Last time I checked I gave them 10 years of my life and spent more than half in some rat infested craphole....flying over Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan and other countries I can't admit to. It's far from free. FAR from free. But we DID sign up for it...so I'm not bitching..just pointing out that every person that flew in the military then separated paid the military back....10 fold.

Out of curiousity - what did you fly?

 

[stupidpilot]

That is true dfl. You did have to give time some back. I flew CH47D's for 18 years. Didi my last tour in Iraq. Decided my family needed me more. Never once got shot at. Only got a missile launch light once. I chalked it up to old equipment. Yes its true alot of the rotor jockeys are getting shot at. But most of the fixed wing guys stay above the max alt of the manpads.

 

[stupidpilot]

of course thats hard to do on approach and departure. But I cede your point.

 

[stupidpilot]

Boy you said it hourswhore

 

[Paradoxus]

give me a break

You have to admit one thing amidst all of this...

It isnt about the spectre of flying while under fire, nor your excuses about hand flying sorties (pathetic) that makes preferential treatment of military drivers so utterly sickening. What IS intolerable about you people is the sheer audacity in the arrogant claims many of you make in justification of it all when anyone inclined to reasonable thought considers that it took you 10-15 years to build 3000 (if even that many) hours.

I dont care how many sorties/tours/desks you've flown in your career, you arent nearly as qualified as the DA-20 cargo slave with twice your time.

You people ought to have to take the jobs WE all slaved through building enough time for these interviews after your retirement. That ought to even the playing field a bit, you might double your total times in the span of a couple of years.

...though corporate hiring policies would have to make a dramatic cultural departure....

 

[Rook]

If you get the interview..you are qualified! reguardless of background...end of story

The end.

Rook

 

[AdlerDriver]

I've done both military and civilian flying. There are good pilots in both. Although I do think it's ridiculous to hire a military guy with 2000 hours or less thinking that he is as good as a civilian guy that has 6000+ hours. It doesn't matter where you've flown or in what conditions. Sometimes there is just no substitute for hours spent in the air. Flying tactically has nothing to do with flying boxes. Oh, and by the way our Air Force has had no real challenge from ADA after the first day of Desert Storm or Iraqi Freedom. So don't give me that dangerous flying crap! I flew to Baghdad many times. The most nervous I got is how pissed off the kids would get when we ran out of candy to give them!

??? I guess I imagined the 88mm AAA going off from FL200-FL400+ and SA-3s launched at our strike force well after the “first day of Desert Storm.” Were you flying candy into Baghdad during Jan-Feb of 1991?

So.... your opinions about the value of flying tactically are based on flying the CH-47? I would be curious to know what you consider "tactical flying". Here's a thought: Flying boxes means you take off, climb, level off, navigate, descend, maybe fly an approach and land. Guess what. I did that stuff on just about every sortie I flew in a fighter (well, okay - sometimes it was nice weather and I didn't fly an approach).

So, let me see if I have this right…. We’ll take a Cessna-172 pilot and let him drone around in circles VFR for 6000 hours. We’ll put another pilot through military flight school and let him fly a fighter for about 8-10 years and get 2000 hours. Now we’ll compare their abilities and see who the better pilot is. The Cessna guy has “hours spent in the air” and I hear there’s no substitute for that. Plus, everyone knows “it doesn’t matter where you’ve flown or in what conditions.” So I guess he’ll come out on top – right?

Denying there is high and low quality flight time is ignorant. It’s equally ignorant to think the high quality type is only available through the military. Each situation and pilot is different and should be evaluated separately – not painted with a broad brush. Contrary to what many frustrated applicants say on this forum, Fedex is hiring civilians – lots of them. My class was 40% civilian and other classes have been higher. There is significant value in a diverse pilot force – no question about it.

From my experience at 3 airlines, here’s my 2 cents. Once we’re at the airline working, the only people who really care about what you used to do are insecure civilians and arrogant ex-military (the famed 1%). The other 99% have very good skills and are fun to work with no matter where they came from.

 

[stupidpilot]

??? I guess I imagined the 88mm AAA going off from FL200-FL400+ and SA-3s launched at our strike force well after the “first day of Desert Storm.” Were you flying candy into Baghdad during Jan-Feb of 1991?

So.... your opinions about the value of flying tactically are based on flying the CH-47? I would be curious to know what you consider "tactical flying". Here's a thought: Flying boxes means you take off, climb, level off, navigate, descend, maybe fly an approach and land. Guess what. I did that stuff on just about every sortie I flew in a fighter (well, okay - sometimes it was nice weather and I didn't fly an approach).

So, let me see if I have this right…. We’ll take a Cessna-172 pilot and let him drone around in circles VFR for 6000 hours. We’ll put another pilot through military flight school and let him fly a fighter for about 8-10 years and get 2000 hours. Now we’ll compare their abilities and see who the better pilot is. The Cessna guy has “hours spent in the air” and I hear there’s no substitute for that. Plus, everyone knows “it doesn’t matter where you’ve flown or in what conditions.” So I guess he’ll come out on top – right?

Denying there is high and low quality flight time is ignorant. It’s equally ignorant to think the high quality type is only available through the military. Each situation and pilot is different and should be evaluated separately – not painted with a broad brush. Contrary to what many frustrated applicants say on this forum, Fedex is hiring civilians – lots of them. My class was 40% civilian and other classes have been higher. There is significant value in a diverse pilot force – no question about it.

From my experience at 3 airlines, here’s my 2 cents. Once we’re at the airline working, the only people who really care about what you used to do are insecure civilians and arrogant ex-military (the famed 1%). The other 99% have very good skills and are fun to work with no matter where they came from.

If you would have looked at another of my quotes I said the same thing. It doesn't matter that you come from military or civilian avenues. What matters is the person. And I wasn't talking about Desert Storm , I was referring to after we destroyed their AAA. And nobody in their right mind would hire a C-172 pilot to fly an Airbus or MD-10. Use a little common sense will you? Gee, I think flying at 50 to 100 feet off the deck at only 100 kts with a much longer exposure time to enemy fire doesn't qualify in your book. Someone flying large turboprops or jets is just as qualified as any of you Air Force prima donnas for a job at FDX. I resent that fact that you guys get preferential treatment. Civilian pilots far outnumber military pilots. The fact that your class was only 40% civilian reinforces my argument. Its nowhere near a representative sample. To get in as a civ you practically have to walk on water.

 

[AdlerDriver]

To get in as a civ you practically have to walk on water.

:bawling:

Someone flying large turboprops or jets is just as qualified as any of you Air Force prima donnas for a job at FDX. I resent that fact that you guys get preferential treatment.

Prima Donnas - ooooh - how are them sour grapes tastin' there bud? We don't get preferential treatment - we have a better network. Guess the CH-47 network was lacking a little - eh?

 

[stonewall]

You have to admit one thing amidst all of this...

It isnt about the spectre of flying while under fire, nor your excuses about hand flying sorties (pathetic) that makes preferential treatment of military drivers so utterly sickening. What IS intolerable about you people is the sheer audacity in the arrogant claims many of you make in justification of it all when anyone inclined to reasonable thought considers that it took you 10-15 years to build 3000 (if even that many) hours.

I dont care how many sorties/tours/desks you've flown in your career, you arent nearly as qualified as the DA-20 cargo slave with twice your time.

You people ought to have to take the jobs WE all slaved through building enough time for these interviews after your retirement. That ought to even the playing field a bit, you might double your total times in the span of a couple of years.

...though corporate hiring policies would have to make a dramatic cultural departure....

Any time someone uses the phrase "you people" in an argument "those people" become defensive and quit listening to you. You talk about audacious and arrogant claims, and then go on to make a few about yourself. Nice.

 

[stupidpilot]

Any time someone uses the phrase "you people" in an argument "those people" become defensive and quit listening to you. You talk about audacious and arrogant claims, and then go on to make a few about yourself. Nice.

It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with chief pilots that have this attitude that a 2000 hour air force guy coming straight off of active duty is as qualified as a guy that has actually been flying boxes on a heavy with 6000+ total time. This attitude is a farce and it is reflected in the hiring pool. Military pilots are a small part of the total pilot pool but they fill 60% or more of the classes hired by FDX. "You Guys" have had your career handed to you on a silver platter. I have had both military and civilian flight training and jobs. I'm telling you the civilian route is much more lengthy and difficult. You have to fly some really questionable aircraft for next to no $ to get the time you need or you'll never progress. Military pay and maintenance is substantially better than the majority of little operators. To go direct from active duty to a top of the line airlinel eaves "you guys" absolutely no appreciation for the hardships the civs have had to go through to get to the top.

 

[b757driver]

Preferential Hiring?

It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with chief pilots that have this attitude that a 2000 hour air force guy coming straight off of active duty is as qualified as a guy that has actually been flying boxes on a heavy with 6000+ total time. This attitude is a farce and it is reflected in the hiring pool. Military pilots are a small part of the total pilot pool but they fill 60% or more of the classes hired by FDX. "You Guys" have had your career handed to you on a silver platter. I have had both military and civilian flight training and jobs. I'm telling you the civilian route is much more lengthy and difficult. You have to fly some really questionable aircraft for next to no $ to get the time you need or you'll never progress. Military pay and maintenance is substantially better than the majority of little operators. To go direct from active duty to a top of the line airlinel eaves "you guys" absolutely no appreciation for the hardships the civs have had to go through to get to the top.[/quote)

I agree 100% with the above statements.

There is no question that, on the whole, the civilian pilot has a much tougher time building time and getting interviews. They often make many sacrifices, both financial and personal, to eventually get to that coveted job. There is no "silver spoon" or "old boys" network for them; no GI bill; no deferred pension nor VA to come running. It's sheer hard work and determination. If any military aviator thinks they "deserve" an interview slot just because he/she served his country, they are only showing their ignorance of what it takes to become a civilian pilot. I take my hat off to them.

Personally, I have nothing against military pilots, their training nor what they have to offer. But to suggest that a military pilot is the best candidate because he is a known quantity, is quite ludicrous. If that were really true, then an interview should be made up of equal numbers with no bias. I have personal experience of a major carrier which practiced what they preached about equal opportunity. The mix of candidates could not have been more diverse with military, flight instructors, low-time, high-time, female, commuter Captains and FOs, all in one big melting-pot vying for a few positions. It was indeed, a refreshing sight and one that you will never see at the likes of Fedex. After all, isn't that what a selection process is all about? Giving equal opportunity to prove oneself and then, selecting the best. Why should any one particular group get preferential treatment? It really goes against the grain.

Also, I have to smile at the various references to the C-172 pilot whizzing around the pattern for 3000 hours - I've never met one. Figment of one's warped imagination, perhaps?
_________________________________________________________________
From another ex-military, now civilian pilot who has has been on both sides of the fence and did it the hard way.

 

[HoursHore]

You guys are missing the point. The FedEx Interview process favors one type of person.....Not Mil...Not Civ, but A Person who knows other FedEx Pilots.

Obviously the company has liked what they have gotten since they went to the sponsorship format, (or at least the SCP has, since he runs the interview selection process) They seem to like that it requires so many hoops to jump thru. Seperates the wheat from the chaff. Mil guys seem to have the upperhand when it comes to networking. I barely remember any names from my former pt 121 job, but if a bud from my first squadron called me up, we could drink beers like I'd seen him yesterday.

As to the whole Civ/Mil thing, you guys seem to have made up your minds. However, Once you flown for a while with a group made up of both camps, you realize there is no difference.