How are professional pilots scored?

ArrowFlyer86

ArrowFlyer86

Pattern Altitude
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jul 17, 2019
Messages
1,933
Location
Chicago suburbs
Display Name
Display name:
The Little Arrow That Could
In all the professional roles I've been in there has been some kind of a subjective performance review that dictates a lot of your comp and upward mobility.

That's left me wondering, how are pilots judged/scored for performance in the corporate world (for airlines or corporate pilot, etc)? Are there subjective criteria for it? What makes one pilot more favored/eligible to move up compared to another? Is it purely based off hours and your ratings or is there more to it?
 
From what I understand Airlines are pretty much seniority number.

Corporate, on the other hand, can be seniority or anything else, real or imagined.
 
Why, they use a scoring tool. I thought everyone knew that! -Skip

71xZ16LWHBL._AC_SL1500_.jpg
 
Landings ... screw that up and the rest don't matter! :D
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
In all the professional roles I've been in there has been some kind of a subjective performance review that dictates a lot of your comp and upward mobility.

That's left me wondering, how are pilots judged/scored for performance in the corporate world (for airlines or corporate pilot, etc)? Are there subjective criteria for it? What makes one pilot more favored/eligible to move up compared to another? Is it purely based off hours and your ratings or is there more to it?
Click to expand...

airlines are seniority based, there's zero meritocracy.

Not all corporate operators are devoid of organized labor. But yeah for those who don't belong to a union, promotions are subjective and out of hire order, like much of corporate america.

The "technical" aspect of operating a transportation conveyance isn't really all that distinguishable among practitioners, beyond merely not crashing it. If you meet minimum standards of performance, being "gooder" at it doesn't pay extra.

The cockpit environment requires staffing that can be substituted at will, which demands standardization. As such, it is a goal of the labor force for everybody to be carbon copies of each other. If you want to seek upward mobility by showcasing your uniqueness, flying transport airplanes on schedule for money is not a good vocational choice. Some people despise the lack of meritocracy inherent to flying airplanes, others love the guaranteed cheese inherent to longevity rights. For instance, I'm the best T-38 IP I know, but I don't get promoted based on performance in the aircraft. In a way I'm giving the milk for free around here, given I'm the best at what I do :D

Jest aside, it's a grey collar occupation for a reason, in the end. One I consider more blue collar than white between you and I. If it weren't for the additional barriers to entry of my subset of the industry, I wouldn't hinge my livelihood on it. This stuff is too low bar to entry on the .civ side, and the income volatility is there to show for it.

But you already knew life ain't fair, right? :D
 
If there's any kind of a discriminator in the airlines other than seniority, it would be the role of a check airman (that has minimum experience requirements for selection, then incurs additional training); once qualified, they provide instruction in both the simulator and aircraft (initial and upgrade operating experience) as well as give checkrides. They also perform special flight tasks for the company such as functional check flights and new aircraft acceptance.
 
At our flight training facility, there are six CFIs, not including the chief pilot/general manager. As the senior CFI by far, my hourly rate is a bit higher than the young guys (I believe) but that is indeed a subjective decision by management, partly based on job performance. In other words, I was given a pay increase after demonstrating success, not just for sticking around for 13 years.
 
While I disagree with some of the above, it is true airlines work under a seniority system…. But you still have to meet standards.

On the other hand, many of the corporate world pilots are scored on… Getting the job done. At any cost.

I know which I prefer.
 
asicer said:
As an employee? Employer? Investor? Customer?
Click to expand...
Well, seeing as though I’m not an employer, investor, or customer….

However, I would imagine in a perfect world it would be all of the above.
 
texasclouds said:
At my company, he who keeps showing up for work gets promoted. I’m super senior, been here 2 years. Most don’t make it 6mo.
Click to expand...
I think the average tenure at Burger King is longer than 6 months. Was that a serious estimate or sarcasm? If that's real - that's crazy.

So I'm getting the picture there are no real skill-based ways to distinguish yourself? It's more about showing up to work, and not crashing when you do show up for work :eek:?

Edit: and in some cases having additional qualifications so you can train / sign people off...
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
I think the average tenure at Burger King is longer than 6 months. Was that a serious estimate or sarcasm? If that's real - that's crazy.

So I'm getting the picture there are no real skill-based ways to distinguish yourself? It's more about showing up to work, and not crashing when you do show up for work :eek:?

Edit: and in some cases having additional qualifications so you can train / sign people off...
Click to expand...
I am pretty sure you have to pass a ride every 6 to 12 months.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
I think the average tenure at Burger King is longer than 6 months. Was that a serious estimate or sarcasm? If that's real - that's crazy.

So I'm getting the picture there are no real skill-based ways to distinguish yourself? It's more about showing up to work, and not crashing when you do show up for work :eek:?

Edit: and in some cases having additional qualifications so you can train / sign people off...
Click to expand...

Airlines is 1500 hr and fog a mirror. We also require you to be able to tie your shoes.
 
Corp, contract
-availability (continued decline to accept flights will put you down on the list)
-show up early, have airplane in good shape for the flight (preflight, fuel, tidy inside, drinks aboard etc) is noticed. Any delay ie pax waiting while you add oil is not favorable.
-give pax notice on any conflicting weather 2 days ahead, then constant updates so they can plan accordingly (they don't like hearing nothing from you then an hour before having you cancel) Same for airport closures, stay up on tfrs and notams well before.
-be groomed and not hungover (did you comb your hair this month? small things like this help)
-be attentive to pax needs especially if it is the owners. A few kind words before and after the flight helps immensely, they don't want a 'machine', they often want an affable, friendly person to put them at ease and answer questions. Don't talk your head off however. Never sensitive topics, keep it light.
-make it happen, and as smoothly and efficiently as possible. Advance notice of large deviations etc. Work with atc to avoid slam dunks.
-cabin temp control
-yeah, the touchdown is always noticed.
-offer help to get in and out, take care of the bags & make sure they got them all (this is constant and I mean cabin bags not baggage compartment bags.
-escort them across the ramp - ESP. children (ask me about yanking a child out of the way of a Jaguar backing on the Austin ramp lol)
-did you need to arrange to get them a car or ask if they have that covered, before you leave?
-be diligent about all paperwork throughout.

These things are noticed and subconsciously graded, then used to rank you among available pilots.
 
Last edited:
texasclouds said:
Airlines is 1500 hr and fog a mirror. We also require you to be able to tie your shoes.
Click to expand...
Oomph I still use Velcro shoes... Maybe I can try my luck in another industry.

Still surprised the turnover is so high in that business!
 
I will say that there is no "grading" per se by the company, but there is a very active, unofficial, Captain grading system done by the FOs. Lists are created and passed around. Who is good to fly with, who isn't. Who buys the beers on the layovers, and who are slam-clickers.

These lists get passed around, and it's amazing how almost everyone has the same names on it.
 
Show up, do a good job, be on time, don’t be a pain in the butt, be reliable, make good decisions, be easy to work with, well groomed. Hours seem to not really matter much after 3000.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
In all the professional roles I've been in there has been some kind of a subjective performance review that dictates a lot of your comp and upward mobility.

That's left me wondering, how are pilots judged/scored for performance in the corporate world (for airlines or corporate pilot, etc)? Are there subjective criteria for it? What makes one pilot more favored/eligible to move up compared to another? Is it purely based off hours and your ratings or is there more to it?
Click to expand...

The hiring process at the airlines is somewhat subjective. Once you're employed everything is seniority based. Pilots are trained and checked constantly; those not up to par are retrained or let go.
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
At our flight training facility, there are six CFIs, not including the chief pilot/general manager. As the senior CFI by far, my hourly rate is a bit higher than the young guys (I believe) but that is indeed a subjective decision by management, partly based on job performance. In other words, I was given a pay increase after demonstrating success, not just for sticking around for 13 years.
Click to expand...

To be somewhat cynical, wouldn't flight schools want CFIs who are "good enough" to have excellent pass rates in a reasonable amount of hours, but not so good that students are passing with minimum hours? Sure, the customers would like that, but someone who flies 40 hours is bringing in less money than someone who flies 50 or 60. So the business owner "should" favor the slightly-less-great CFI.

Okay, that's a lot cynical.
 
What professional careers use subjective performance evaluations that have any meaning beyond facilitating getting rid of the bad ones? I've not seen it in engineering or computer fields in companies I've worked with, or anyone I've talked with around here. Objective performance metrics for people in sales? Sure. Maybe in non-technical middle management tracks somewhere? Federal government service? Maybe I'm just in the dark here. I've viewed subjective reviews as devices to discourage innovation, independent thinking, and risk taking. They seem to lead to a "don't make waves, keep your head down, be quiet" kind of polite robot mindset that isn't very useful in many fields.
 
Albany Tom said:
What professional careers use subjective performance evaluations that have any meaning beyond facilitating getting rid of the bad ones? I've not seen it in engineering or computer fields in companies I've worked with, or anyone I've talked with around here. Objective performance metrics for people in sales? Sure. Maybe in non-technical middle management tracks somewhere? Federal government service? Maybe I'm just in the dark here. I've viewed subjective reviews as devices to discourage innovation, independent thinking, and risk taking. They seem to lead to a "don't make waves, keep your head down, be quiet" kind of polite robot mindset that isn't very useful in many fields.
Click to expand...
In fact, I've never worked somewhere that doesn't have performance evaluations. I'll share my experience...

Consulting: the managing director has an informal, salesy chat with your clients to find out how you're doing. They see how many of your accounts have cancelled/scaled down their purchase with you/etc. Your team-members discuss how much of a team player you are.
Product development: how quick is your turnaround on issues? Are the engineers/clients happy with the solutions? Did you push any bad calculations/wrong answers into the production application?
Investment research: how good are your ideas? How well can you sell your ideas? How much does the investment team like you?
Trading: $PL. Kind of like sales. You eat what you kill, not much else to discuss.

As my career has progressed I've learnt to move towards the roles that have more quantifiable metrics so less brown-nosing required to get a good review :D
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
In fact, I've never worked somewhere that doesn't have performance evaluations. I'll share my experience...

Consulting: the managing director has an informal, salesy chat with your clients to find out how you're doing. They see how many of your accounts have cancelled/scaled down their purchase with you/etc. Your team-members discuss how much of a team player you are.
Product development: how quick is your turnaround on issues? Are the engineers/clients happy with the solutions? Did you push any bad calculations/wrong answers into the production application?
Investment research: how good are your ideas? How well can you sell your ideas? How much does the investment team like you?
Trading: $PL. Kind of like sales. You eat what you kill, not much else to discuss.

As my career has progressed I've learnt to move towards the roles that have more quantifiable metrics so less brown-nosing required to get a good review :D
Click to expand...

Those actually make sense... For the first two, everything in this area is small, and those "reviews" aren't written, it's more along the lines of one or two managers deciding that "you're just not a good fit". Mostly 10+ year old data for me there. I believe they'd be best served by objective reviews than metrics. For the last two? I'd say it's just a straight up objective numbers game. Fields where my only experience is advising people how to keep the computers running where the researchers and traders are working...and from what I can tell people in those environments are either pure numbers people, or 95% sales.

Agree that voting for the best suck-up isn't a great metric for either the company or employee.
 
Kritchlow said:
Perhaps the regionals.
Click to expand...
I’d argue that the regionals (FOs at least) are harder to get on than the majors now, which is crazy. Regionals don’t need FOs, they need captains now so a lot of them aren’t hiring or just doing small classes. I don’t know anyone at a regional that hasn’t moved on to their destination airline. Delta just dropped their 1000 turbine requirement to preferred now. We are regularly hiring regional FOs with 2000-2500TT and no TPIC. It’s a great time to get hired by a major/legacy.
 
jordane93 said:
I’d argue that the regionals (FOs at least) are harder to get on than the majors now, which is crazy. Regionals don’t need FOs, they need captains now so a lot of them aren’t hiring or just doing small classes. I don’t know anyone at a regional that hasn’t moved on to their destination airline. Delta just dropped their 1000 turbine requirement to preferred now. We are regularly hiring regional FOs with 2000-2500TT and no TPIC. It’s a great time to get hired by a major/legacy.
Click to expand...
So it’s harder for 1500hr guys to get picked up as an FO at a regional now? How does the demand look for the next few years for those folks?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top