Will a good hiring time ever return again?

[High Wing Drifter]

predicts that, in the future, most of the intra-Europe short-haul market willl be dominated by "two or three MAJOR, low-cost, no frills operators.......

Pah! Professors and experts. Just when have they ever been correct? The only reason industry listens to these people is because instrustry is confused as the rest of us. However, their confusion is rather more backed up by assorted data, facts and figures, whereas us laymen just say "I dunno."

[V- 5]

Or High Wing Drifter, they could be using common sense. The market is already moving in this direction and continues to do so. Easy and Ryan are both continuing to grow fast. Are you saying that, for example, Easy's new Berlin route is not going to impact on the profitability of BAs route to Berlin? Of course it will. BA will have to cut their prices or cut out routes. To cut their prices they have to further emulate the low cost philosophy, but there is only so much BA can do to lower costs as it has a much higher set of overheads.

I dont like it but i see it happening, eventually long haul may be the the only place we will find our majors.

[High Wing Drifter]

Hey, I'm not in denial you know You are trying to predict the short-haul business for the next 10-20 years; there is no such thing as common sense.

From the outside people just see low-fares. Low fares means more punters. Most punters means market domination. I think some airlines have/are expanding too quickly. There are a host of internal factors that can slow growth and even retard development. These should not be discounted...IMHO

[V- 5]

Hope your right H.W.D

[scroggs]

Ravenx wrote: Talking of anti-ageism:

How can airlines get away with blatantly refusing to recruit non type rated pilots over a certain age. Surely this is a form of discrimination (which I believe is illegal in the US)

As far as I am aware, any employer can determine the professional qualifications it requires of its applicants, and is entitled to refuse to accept anyone who does not meet those qualifications. Whether you like it or not, there is a proven link between age and ability to learn - however tenuous - and many airlines are not prepared to take the financial risk of failures in training.

Another quote from article on same subject, next page.......

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
predicts that, in the future, most of the intra-Europe short-haul market willl be dominated by "two or three MAJOR, low-cost, no frills operators.......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

These words came from the highly regarded industry cosultant Professor Rigas Doganis.

Professor Doganis was the chief executive of Olympic Airlines from 1995-98. Whatever the qualities of Prof. Doganis (author of 'The Airline Business in the Twenty First Century'), Olympic notably failed to make a profit under his (or anyone else's) stewardship. What does this go to show? That no-one - no-one - has the font of all knowlege when it comes to the airline business, and that he could be as wrong as the next man.

The bottom line is the number of punters that wish to fly is increasing. Legislation and pricing is making it increasingly attractive to fly. Which airlines survive to take advantage of that demand is irrelevant; those people will fly, and more pilots are needed to fly them. If the market returns to its recent historical trend of 5% cumulative expansion (which can't continue for ever), many more pilots will be required, unless we start doing short haul lo-cost in A380s.

Which of you are in those cockpits will mostly depend on the attitude you display to those who might employ you, rather than your age, your exam pass rates, or how far up the CFI's ass you got your nose during your sooper-dooper, 'kin expensive integrated course.

Scroggs

[V- 5]

Scroggsy,

Which airlines survive to take advantage of that demand is irrelevant

If BA is the one that survives we see our families some times. If Easy or Ryan do survive we dont.

[scroggs]

That rather depends on how many more of you offer to fly for a pittance and for crap terms with any employer, doesn't it? BA will tear down its great employee contracts if it thinks it can get pilots for less - and too many of you, it seems, would be willing to accept that. Remember that when you're working out where your pension will come from and why you're on your third divorce.

Scroggs

[Justbelowcap]

It is HIGHLY likely BA will begin recruiting type rated pilots in Summer04. It is likely this will be on all fleets with the exception of the 737 at LGW . So if you've got an A320, 777, 747 rating you'll be needed. We are desperately short of pilots on all fleets (except 737LGW).

Once the pension issue has been sorted out (internal politics) then Cranebank once again will be working flat out.

BA got badly caught out by recruiting guys as old as 29 into the old cadet scheme. The failure rate for these older cadets was marketedly higher than the younger ones. If you've not flown jets before it is a VERY steep learning curve for the first six months and, unfortunately, the fact is that the younger you are the higher your chance of success. However flying the aircraft is just a small part of being a pilot and many of the skills you need on the line can only come with a bit of life experience, so what the older applicant tends to lack in flying skill is made up by being a better people manager. Swings and roundabouts.

[scroggs]

Actually, Justbelowcap, I think BA have taken a drip-feed of rated guys over the last year or so, but of course couldn't increase the in-service numbers of pilots with certain numbers targets to maintain. It's no surprise that a few fleets are beginning to hurt; it just needs the bean counters to open the money taps a bit to allow new folk in. However, any cadetship scheme is still some way off, as far as I can tell.

Scroggs

[Justbelowcap]

We've not taken on any new guys for a long time. The cadet scheme is dead and buried never to return.

[Snigs]

Regarding the age issue, sadly, I believe my CV gets binned solely on the fact that I’m 38, regardless of my other attributes.

I’m just checking for a glint of sunshine peeping out of the back of my trousers, but if I do say so myself, I’m intelligent, quick at picking things up, sociable, actually quite a nice chap. I’m someone that most wouldn’t mind spending 8 hours in a cupboard with, (even my farts smell sweet!!). The thing is, how can I prove that to the people that matter if I can’t get an interview.

Before you all bite, I did know that I was entering the industry at a mature age (and knew the implications) before I started my professional training, but it is frustrating that I’m treated differently to someone like Scroggs (just using you as an example, and I know there are experience and other issues!) who at slightly older than 38 converted from the 747 classic to the A340. So, to make a narrow point here, doesn’t that take the same amount of “ability” to learn new stuff?

[scroggs]

Snigs Virgin already had a lot invested in me when I converted to the A340, and I was a known quantity. They took more risk when I joined them from the RAF at 42, but I already had the thick end of 8000 hours, mostly as a captain and training captain on C130s with an 'above average' assessment from that system. That makes it more than a little easier for them to decide whether to risk employing the likes of me! Whether they have regretted that decision since is quite another conversation....!

Justbelowcap, OK, I'll take your word for it! We did have one or two at Virgin get the tickle of a job at BA over the last couple of years, and I had heard of others, but I couldn't say what the final outcome of those were - now we know. As for the cadetship, it's not 'officially' dead for ever (as our own BA recruiting mole on the Pprune staff reports), but we're not expecting anything remotely resembling the old system to ever resurface.

Scroggs