frmrdashtrash

What did you want the union response to be? "We feel you're entitled to the left seat even if you're weak and can't decide which cheese to put on your burger, so we've declared all out war on Caesar."?

Magpuller

I think the TD is more about who they like in the left seat vs. who "deserves" it and that goes both ways. They are famous for passing complete boobs that shouldn't be PIC of a rowboat and busting pilots that could fly circles right around their "command decisions" all day long. Then you got the majority of the PG that they are indifferent to right up to the point where the individual's particular PIC style disagrees with the TD's agenda...and now you've got one more poor sod on that seniority list who will never see a day as PIC at PDT and will be lucky to have a job the next time said pilot goes to CQ.

As far as a re-fleet goes, be careful what you wish for gents...You can sell your souls through a good old fashioned LOA screw-job via your supremely self-centered MEC for airframe deliveries all just to fly what would almost certainly be 2nd hand ATR's...

It's not impossible, but I'd be more likely to believe a scientist trained a great white shark to be a vegetarian then believe there will ever be a day that PDT will have jets dripping oil on a US Airways gate...That being said..good luck to you..I hope I'm wrong...I'd love to see things turn around there for you fellas.

FixTheMess

I'm not sure why you'd think anyone would be "entitled" to the left seat. You must have misunderstood my post. My issue is with someone who has never been a CFI, or worse yet, must be a terrible CFI, making the claim that ADM and captain authority is just natural, and bread into someone. These are not either you have it or you don't traits. They are learned over time mostly through experience. As with everything, some people learn quicker than others. I get our training department being under time constraints as well as getting pressure to save money. However, an upgrade with 5-8 years invested in this place, and is willing to learn, should be given the respect of getting at least the amount of additional training as a new hire would. The problem is, our TD has about zero ADM/CA training built in to the upgrade curriculum.

True, this is a two way street, and FO's should be taking notes, over their years spent in the right seat, watching good captains, and modeling their behavior after them.

My biggest issue is our own union rep making the comment that apparently 25% of our captain upgrades are hopeless and untrainable. 1 in 4? I don't think so. They are not being given the tools nor the additional training in these areas for them to be successful.

If someone thinks they are just a natural born captain of captains, they are most likely themselves the weak link, because that mindset is called complacency.

Maybe we should wash-out 25% of the training department, and ALPA reps. That would be a good start.

Gentlemen in the right seat . . . do your part and prepare yourself for your upgrade. To our TD, and Training Committee, take a refresher course, because you're out of touch.

buddies8

bet your union rep just shows up with coffee for a checkride and is allowed to leave after the coffee is done.

l1011

The mentality of the Piedmont Training Department is a problem, no question. They believe they can just throw people away and many more will follow to replace them. The word has gotten out and I think thats one of the reasons driving both the attrition rate for junior FO's and for the trouble we are having recruiting new hires.

That said, a few good apples are in the PDT TD. JK is the main problem.

OneEye

Does anyone know the facts of the 25% upgrade failures? As usual, probably not so here you are. The TC chairman got that number from the first four classes held this year. There had been 4 classes with 4 pilots in each class. One pilot in each class failed to complete the program.

In one class the upgrade failed to pass the MV after 43 hours in the simulator. In another class, the upgrade failed the systems written twice although the new-hires managed to pass it. In another, the pilot voluntarily withdrew himself after realizing he was not ready for the position. In yet another, the pilot passed the MV after 24 hours but had issues in LOFT. After 32 hours of LOFT he failed the LOE. Review boards were conducted for two of the failures and each were provided additional training but failed to complete the program.

Most upgrades complete the program with 24 hours then MV, followed by 12 hours of LOFT then LOE. Therefore, it’s noteworthy to mention that the other 12 upgrades blew through the program in the minimum time.

It’s convenient to blame the TD and union reps for these failures but it won’t “fix the mess.” If you want to be successful in upgrade training then just do your job like you’re supposed to and you'll do fine.

Blackwing

It was the main factor in my decision to decline their job offer.

l1011

The individual who reported the unprofessional antics of JK to SBY (When he told the new hires to get the F out of the classroom) was in that 25%. Obviously backing the new hires when they reported this to SBY did not gain him any points with TD management. Then no surprise he fails upgrade.

Would these two events be connected? If I were a betting man I would say yes.

One eye, you seem knowledgable about the workings of the TD so I must ask your opinion on this event.

FixTheMess

OneEye, thanks for giving some more detailed information. All we can go off of is what little information our union reps send out. However, I don't know why the disparity between your information (which I'm sure is more accurate), and the original statement from ALPA's minutes that were posted. Regardless, I'm still troubled by the mentality surrounding that statement. I'd also suggest that if certain trouble areas are continuously being identified for our captain upgrades, the program needs to be re-evaluated, and improved to help correct these areas. That is one of the benefits of having AQP.

Paid2fly

"Void where prohibited"...