There seems to be some confusion regardling the term "Seniority" in here for whatever reason. Seniority is a relative term, it should not be confused with years of service or date of hire, although they are related.
Seniority is your position in a company relative to others in the same job as you, ie. pilot. When you are hired, you go to the bottom of the "Seniority List". You gain seniority ONLY by having people hired after you added to the list below you. You seniority number increases only by people above you either quitting or retiring from the company. But the benefit of a higher seniority number is not realized purely by having someone ahead of you leave. A new person must be hired, who then goes to the bottom of the list, hence increasing your relative position in the list.
Example,
If you are hired in 2005 at a company, and then that company does not hire another person for 5 years, in 2010 you do NOT have 5 years "seniority". You have 5 years of service. You are still at the bottom of the seniority list.
Pay is based on years of service at a particular job, like say, DHC-8 First Officer.
The particular job you are able to hold, like say, DHC-8 Captain, is based on your seniority.
Just some useful general information!
Seniority
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
Re: Seniority
'Dock',Dockjock wrote: Example,
If you are hired in 2005 at a company, and then that company does not hire another person for 5 years, in 2010 you do NOT have 5 years "seniority". You have 5 years of service. You are still at the bottom of the seniority list.
I couldn't agree with you more! Way to many of us get so focused on the 'seniority' thing that we forget what it actually means.
We had a 200h guy once who cried 'seniority' when the company hired a 1,500h guy for a Turbine F/O position (1,500h was the F/O requirement). 200h guy flipped-out and quit!!
G
Re: Seniority
... and it should not be confused with skill, aptitude, or natural entitlement to a promotion, except in union circles.Dockjock wrote:There seems to be some confusion regardling the term "Seniority" in here for whatever reason. Seniority is a relative term, it should not be confused with years of service or date of hire, although they are related.
Seniority is a tie-breaker. If I have two pilots of equal ability who are competing for a position, the one who has been with the company the longest will get the position. However, with two pilots of unequal ability, all bets are off. The passengers deserve(and have paid for) the best product in the front end of the aircraft, regardless.
'pushy'...well said.pushyboss wrote:The passengers deserve(and have paid for) the best product in the front end of the aircraft, regardless.
It's so funny that in all my time on AvCanada this is the first mention of customers/customer service. No customers, no pilots!!
G
"Slow and steady wins the race"
Skill? What is "skill" in relation to two 10000-hr ATPL's competing for a Captain spot on a 250 seat aircraft (for example)? One guy does better landings? Holds altitude to within 10 feet instead of 20? Gets in on every approach?
Skill is something that 20 hr newly soloed pilots brag about in landing competitions. Skill is something military pilots require to stay alive. Skill is something just curious uses to land his twotter on an esker in the arctic.
Skill is way down the list- behind attitude, experience, and leadership qualities when talking about 2 airline drivers going pavement to pavement in scheduled service. This is where the seniority concept becomes a necessary evil of this business. Everyone has proven they have the chops to be there at that point, and like pushyboss said it becomes the tie breaker.
Skill is something that 20 hr newly soloed pilots brag about in landing competitions. Skill is something military pilots require to stay alive. Skill is something just curious uses to land his twotter on an esker in the arctic.
Skill is way down the list- behind attitude, experience, and leadership qualities when talking about 2 airline drivers going pavement to pavement in scheduled service. This is where the seniority concept becomes a necessary evil of this business. Everyone has proven they have the chops to be there at that point, and like pushyboss said it becomes the tie breaker.
Fair enough, "skill" encompasses the totality of performance.Dockjock wrote:Skill? What is "skill" in relation to two 10000-hr ATPL's ... Skill is way down the list- behind attitude, experience, and leadership qualities
I don't understand. First you list attitude, experience, leadership qualities as distinguishing features. Then you say that seniority is needed *anyway* to distinguish between candidates? When you mean "tiebreaker", does this in practice turn into the "primary criterion"? If so, is it because managers give up trying to assess and compare those intangible traits, or because union/business tradition dictates it?Dockjock wrote:This is where the seniority concept becomes a necessary evil ... becomes the tie breaker
It is both tiebreaker and primary criteria at the same time. Like I said at that point everybody has shown they have met the standard...the only fair way to distinguish is seniority. Sure there are those with velvet hands and feet, shining personalities, and experience all over the world. They are the examples to follow and mentors to emulate in the personal quest to be the best person and pilot you can.
But if large airlines ran like some people's utopian meritocracies it would get ugly in a hurry- backroom deals, nepotism, and patronage would end up ruling the day while Joe Line Pilot gets left behind because his Daddy isn't a Captain on the A340. That is unfortunately my opinion and the primary reason why a seniority system is the lesser of many evils.
In charter, corporate, and specialized operations I agree it must be different. Where pilots are directly interacting with the customers the best must be taken over the "most senior" for the very survival of the business.
But if large airlines ran like some people's utopian meritocracies it would get ugly in a hurry- backroom deals, nepotism, and patronage would end up ruling the day while Joe Line Pilot gets left behind because his Daddy isn't a Captain on the A340. That is unfortunately my opinion and the primary reason why a seniority system is the lesser of many evils.
In charter, corporate, and specialized operations I agree it must be different. Where pilots are directly interacting with the customers the best must be taken over the "most senior" for the very survival of the business.
fche wrote:Fair enough, "skill" encompasses the totality of performance.Dockjock wrote:Skill? What is "skill" in relation to two 10000-hr ATPL's ... Skill is way down the list- behind attitude, experience, and leadership qualities
I always thought Cup size wins, and maybe the blonde over burnette. And if it's between male and female employee equality prevails...
If all candidates have met the standard, do they continue meeting the standard every day? I've seen lots of senior people meet the standard around ride time, upgrade time, and line indoc time, only to degrade when the pressure is off. Now, it's not healthy to feel like every day is the ultimate test, but some people feel so secure in their seniority that they slack off too much. Just try that in a real competitive environment and see how long you last. With seniority should come responsibility for maintaining it.
Guys... If you have passed the ride than you have met the standards set by Transport Canada, and are considered a safe pilot. Strictly enforced seniority is all we have left to prevent your company from upgrading a Captain before you if they are willing to work for less, or fly an aircraft that you or I may not fly for safety reasons.
Your bosses/owners are operating in a cut throat business, they (and fellow pilots) will be glad to cut yours to get ahead.
Your bosses/owners are operating in a cut throat business, they (and fellow pilots) will be glad to cut yours to get ahead.
