This thread was about line pilots being part of the pilot selection process. We’re not, and I don’t think we should be.

Yet, there are new hire pilots that don’t belong here. UAL HR owns that pipeline, not ALPA, not line pilots.

Are you suggesting that Captain’s not write probationary reports, or worse, only write positive reports?

I guess I’m in the rip the bandage off quickly camp. I’d rather see a probationary pilot who doesn’t belong be shown the door within the first year rather than give ALPA volunteers 30 years of DFR work.

You’re putting the onus to filter out HRs mistakes on the captain group, in many cases the probationary reports aren’t working to their desired effect. In most cases we have pilots with years of of experiences dealing with problem individuals that HR can’t filter out or pick up on in a few hours. In the meantime it costs the company (and us) money in training, pay, benefits, etc. The ones the slip through then become ALPAs problem, and again our dues then get spent protecting them.

Or we could take care of the problem before it starts.

I agree with you that in a perfect world ALPA (ie pilots) would have a much stronger role in hiring. I know that sounds contradictory, but I still reject the idea of a “silver bullet” just because a pilot is on the line. Maybe we could earn the right to recommend someone based on fuel savings or the number of Bravo reports :) :)

I haven’t heard anything about probationary reports not working as intended. A public forum may not be the best venue for that discussion, maybe a PM would be appropriate.

You guys are mentioning ALPA with one breath and then talking about having pilots fired in the next. That's not unity, brother/sister hood, or anything any of us should wish on a fellow pilot. The training department, then LCAs, and finally the CPO for the first year are responsible for thinning the heard if needed.

I think I'm going to go vomit now after reading a lot of these comments.....

Are you (also?) saying don’t write probationary reports, or only write good ones?

I seem to recall a pilot sitting at the table in my interview. And a pilot talking to me at the recruiting event. And a pilot running my sim. HR may set the process but pilots are still involved.

Running the sim? It’s been a while is what you’re saying.

No. What I am only asking.....Is the average line Captain qualified to evaluate a new hire pilot that's on reserve and possibly not flying much during the slow winter months? Of course if there is an obvious issue it should be addressed first with pro standards. After that, then escalate it up the chain. Yeah, I've heard some "dude, really?" stories about some FNGs just not getting the professional part of being a professional pilot. I just think most of these issues can be handled without anyone being terminated on probation.

First, yes the average line Captain is more than qualified to produce observations about deficiencies in airmanship, or worse attitude, in a probationary report.

With the “dude, really” FNGs, as a group and individually, ethically where’s the line? I’m not gunning for anyone, but I also reject “protect at all cost” which sounds like what you’re advocating.

Agree to disagree. The average line Captain is a position of seniority not necessarily skill or of master airmanship. It's certainly not a position of evaluation like that of a TK instructor or LCA.

Protect at all cost is setting the bar a little high. I'd say give everyone some respect and a chance to succeed. Each person on our seniority list has worked their way through the system (ex-military or civilian) to earn a place at a major airline. Not everyone gets this far to be in the cockpit of mainline jet. There are enough places to reach out for help that average line Captains should not be expected to be the new hire police.