Why hire military over your competition?

[Russ]

Airlines hire military more because they are cheaper.

Cheaper to train, cheaper to keep, less likely to strike, tax deduction for hiring vets, etc.

Curious if you can back that up beyond simple opinion?

 

[Dan Roman]

Curious if you can back that up beyond simple opinion?

Good point.. I was trying to figure out how an ex mil pilot with a 737 type was cheaper to train than an ex RJ pilot with a 737 type ??? If anything, the ex-mil pilot might need a little extra training to transition to the civilian world (and then he would be just as good as a civ pilot).
Also, I have to wonder if that's internet reality that hiring ex mil pilots give the airlines a tax break????
No slam on ex mil pilots, I've known a lot of great one's, but the few that think they are "better" because they are ex mil are actually the weak one's of the breed.

 

[pilotyip]

Also, I have to wonder if that's internet reality that hiring ex mil pilots give the airlines a tax break????

I too wonder about this one. Maybe disabled Vet's but not many airline pilots would fit in that category. I got two vets in our last class, I'll ask HR if there is such a thing.

 

[scarlet]

Rather fly with Civilian way. Never been impressed by the military pilot skills, weather, approaches, or LANDINGS. just saying..Its just a poll.

 

[SIG600]

Is that why you guys have 12,000 foot runways?

HA! Owned!

Anyone can be a military pilot, the training is very good, it is just their entrance requirements make it hard to get a slot. Unless of course there is a war going and on and guys like me get a shot.

Wrong. If this were true you wouldn't have attrition in the Training Commands, and you wouldn't have guys getting FNAEB'd in the fleet for poor performance/decision making. The vetting is a never ending process.

 

[DCAA320]

Wrong. If this were true you wouldn't have attrition in the Training Commands, and you wouldn't have guys getting FNAEB'd in the fleet for poor performance/decision making. The vetting is a never ending process.

We lost 50% of our AOCS class, and that's even before anyone touched an airplane.

 

[SIG600]

We lost 50% of our AOCS class, and that's even before anyone touched an airplane.

I'm not saying it isn't a huge hurdle, but yip insinuates that it's the only hurdle to getting, and then keeping your wings.

 

[scoreboardII]

Curious if you can back that up beyond simple opinion?

What's your opinion against it? There is no hard study on any of this, just what I heard from my company.

I have heard of training busts. None by ex mil. I have heard some pretty adamant burn the place down comments from pilots, none ex mil.

Sorry this is a slap in the face of the everyone gets a trophy crowd, but at USAF pilot training we lost about 50% of our guys before the end of training, 100% of the girls. You couldn't just keep buying another hour trying to get better, you had to do it right the first time. Heck, at the next stage, after they spent $2 million on you, the bust rate was about 25%.

 

[DCAA320]

I'm not saying it isn't a huge hurdle, but yip insinuates that it's the only hurdle to getting, and then keeping your wings.

He is wrong, I am agreeing with you, lots of attrition start to finish, I had a great time.

San Diego, Hawaii, Manila, HK, Singapore, if was a rough cruise

 

[Russ]

Scoreboard

A claim was made, my expectation is it can be backed with empirical evidence, otherwise it's opinion only.