why is FDX posting pilot jobs?

[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.