Mitch Cronin Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 My son's guitar teacher is a friend of mine.... works as an IT guy for a big bank... He called me the other night, bubbling with glee over a promotion he just received. After the phone call, my son asked me: "Why did Jim call Dad?" He just wanted to tell me about his promotion. "What's that mean?" It means he's now got a better job with more pay at the same company. "How much does he make now?" ( ) I don't know. "Why did he get a promotion?" Because he was so good at his job his bosses felt he deserved the reward. ... "If he was so good at his job, why wouldn't they want to keep him there?" ..so.... if an eleven yr old can see it, I wonder why so many can't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 Because he was so good at his job his bosses felt he deserved the reward. ... "If he was so good at his job, why wouldn't they want to keep him there?" Mitch, I think you have it wrong. He got promoted because he was good at his job and his bosses thought he'd be also be good at a job with more responsibilty and therefor of greater value to the company. Whether or not he actually is we don't know yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDR Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 Hi Mitch Just wondering then, who do you promote to the positions of higher responsibility; the ones who aren't performing well in their current position? I still think you'd make a great manager. All the best Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted November 27, 2004 Author Share Posted November 27, 2004 Okay, okay... good points you guys... and thanks Greg, I think. Still, I think my son hit on something. Sometimes, when someone excels at their job, that's just where they ought to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTFA Posted November 27, 2004 Share Posted November 27, 2004 If you only excel at doing the same thing all the time. You will cease to excel. Then what? A demotion back to where you excelled before? There must be some management class for this kind of stuff. No? GTFA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccairspace Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Sometimes, when someone excels at their job, that's just where they ought to be. GTFA If you only excel at doing the same thing all the time. You will cease to excel. Then what? The answer to GTFA's question is: you take the person who excels at what he does, and try him out occasionally in a position of greater responsibility and see if he excels there as well. Sounds to me like motivating and organising a short handed crew to put through 6 aircraft (incl. an A check) on a midnight shift is pretty excellent. IMHO of course... ccairspace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted November 28, 2004 Author Share Posted November 28, 2004 Awe horsepuckies... the crew did that... all I did was field the phone calls and BS and provide information feed. Anyway... this one wasn't about me, remember? (but I do appreciate the kind thoughts. ) I don't see why one would "cease to excel" ?.... Imagine a really fine buldozer operator... he's the Bob Hoover of bulldozers... can thread the thing between parked Ferarri's with a blade full of rocks... can feel the edge of a precipice, see the slope that needs to be, knows exactly how far he can push his machine.... He's awesome... what do you do? Put him at a desk in charge of others who aren't his equal? ...maybe when his arthritus prevents his excellence... but in the mean time, geez, in that bulldozer is where he oughta be! No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moeman Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 all I did was field the phone calls and BS and provide information feed.....The perfect end?.... Yup, we got all the bloody things done by morning Sounds like a damned fine job of managing, to me . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 A lot of back-slapping and perhaps very well-deserved BUT (always a but), where is the "excel" in doing the job for which you are paid? Had you proven incapable of performing the jobs entrusted to you, Mitch, would you have drawn attention to your accomplishment (or the lack thereof)? And, having proven able by reference to results on this occasion, is not the person who selected you to perform the chore also worthy of praise for his foresight? So often it is said on this site that a pilot earns all of his/her pay on those rare instances when talent and training intersect to prevent a disaster. Much of the time, that talent is neither required nor on display. Is the pilot who is so unfortunate as to be afforded the opportunity to prove his/her worth to be praised for meeting implicit expectations; for earning their pay; or, should they be satisfied at confronting the challenge and knowing within themselves that they were adequate to the task? In the end, should one bask in the sunshine of praise or revel in the personal joy of realizing their worth; knowing they have cleared the hurdle of self-doubt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted November 28, 2004 Author Share Posted November 28, 2004 I don't know how much you've read here UpperDeck, but I'm sure as hell not basking... and fear not, I know I'm no ace of anything. This thread started with a light hearted tale from me about what I felt was some noteworthy insight from my son... It later got mixed, by others, with something I posted around the same time this morning, about the last day of my week at work... Yessir, I'm just silly enough to tell a story of the kind that paints me as a fool or as having failed. (I do believe I've done so once or twice)... At times, it's just the story telling I enjoy. ...and at times, all I'm doing is sharing whatever it is I feel... happy, proud, sad, embarrassed, frustrated, whatever... For what reason? Who knows?... conversation, the comfort of feeling not alone, the pleasure of making someone smile...? It wasn't about praise or back slapping UpperDeck... Whatever of that there was came from the good feelings of a couple other nice folks here, all on their own. The point of the tale in that thread... what made me feel good... and what I wanted to write about, was the charge I got at the end of a tough week out of shedding it all and playing with an airplane again. Getting closer to the point of this thread... Re: "Is the pilot who is so unfortunate as to be afforded the opportunity to prove his/her worth to be praised for meeting implicit expectations; for earning their pay; or, should they be satisfied at confronting the challenge and knowing within themselves that they were adequate to the task?" I think we agree the latter is the only worthy satisfaction, but piloting is rather unique in that any "promotion" that comes from excellent performance will likely only result in more piloting... perhaps on a better, bigger, or more complex machine. (the use of the word "only" there certainly seems improper, but I believe you'll know what I'm saying) I'm sure many other occupations have an entirely different form of promotion that can find the recipient in a position of incompetence. Whatever... as my old man would say: a hundred years from now, we won't care. Cheers, ...and I hope you get your upper deck back some day. Mitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FADEC Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Mitch, Is this what is meant when they say, "He rose to the level of his incompetence" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Mitch--the reference to "back-slapping" was not to any "over-the-shoulder" contortions but rather to the comments of others that were more in response to your earlier post than to that relating to your child's observation. I thought that there MIGHT have been a LITTLE "fishing" in the first post but you say "not" and that's that. I'm not a pilot and though very involved with industry issues, I am not an industry employee. I did harbour hopes for the "upperdeck" but I'd have to be full-fare on an OAL ---and who can afford that from their own pocket? Unfortunately, for most unionized employees (including pilots), "promotions" do not result from superior performance but rather from the passage of time unless one seeks a position in management and submits their professional prospects to the vagaries of personal popularity; nepotism; market conditions ; and, perhaps, competence. Have a great day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccairspace Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 ...where is the "excel" in doing the job for which you are paid? Just a few points here, Upperdeck. Doing the job for which one is paid is not excelling. Doing the job noticeably better than average and beyond expectation is excelling. There will always exist gradations of competence when performing any activity, whether it be in sport, work or leisure. The question is whether and how it should be rewarded. Had you proven incapable of performing the jobs entrusted to you, Mitch, would you have drawn attention to your accomplishment (or the lack thereof)? He probably would have. I do think he has done so on the past, but I am not going "wading" this morning. ...is not the person who selected you to perform the chore also worthy of praise for his foresight? Yup. Perhaps related to the fact that the last time he asked, Mitch didn't completely hamfist the hangar into a pile of parts. So often it is said on this site that a pilot earns all of his/her pay on those rare instances when talent and training intersect to prevent a disaster. [should this pilot] be praised for meeting implicit expectations; for earning their pay; or, should they be satisfied at confronting the challenge and knowing within themselves that they were adequate to the task? Both. Those rare instances where we have to actually deal with the "10% terror", are notable, and sometimes should be shared. For most pilots during their whole career, these instances are usually only dress rehearsals in the sim. It can be an amazing self-revelation to discover that we can accomplish what was expected of us when confronted by the reality of the terror. In the end, should one bask in the sunshine of praise or revel in the personal joy of realizing their worth; knowing they have cleared the hurdle of self-doubt? Keep it or share it - the choice is ours. But the sharing can help reassure the uncertain and give others the courage to speak as well. Besides, the sunshine is good for the soul... As for Mitch, well my comments could just easily have been along the lines of: "Good thing you were confined to the office that last shift. Gave the team a chance to get some real work done... " And I've no doubt he'd have taken it with a and a and then a . I will now... ccairspace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Is the pilot who is so unfortunate as to be afforded the opportunity to prove his/her worth to be praised for meeting implicit expectations; for earning their pay; Pretty deep thoughts there UPPERDECK, and my answer would be "yes". Anyone who knows pilots realize that, in all honesty, airline flying is normally hours and hours of boredoom marked with moments of stark terror, that's just the way the job is. We have undergone hours and hours of training, covering almost every conceiveable problem we could face ...but...... there are problems that crop up that no one ever thought would/could ever happen and in those few moments/minutes a pilot has to dig deeper than the "norm", and hopefully resolve the problem. The case(s) that come to mind are the DC10 in Sioux Falls and even the AirTransat glider, as well as the Gimli glider. Let us forget that there may have been man made errors made prior to the point of terror......... but if you don't think the survivors of those incidents don't deserve to praise the pilot for his skills, you are dead wrong. The concerned pilots themselves should be proud of their "flying" skills and you know damned well all their peers feel those individuals did something beyond just earning their pay. knowing within themselves that they were adequate to the task One NEVER knows if one is "adequate" for unknown "tasks" until the moment of terror strikes ...............you can train pilots forever but when they are confronted with a totally unforseen situation, even they will not know. The proof will be the end result, and hopefully it concludes with a happy ending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Mr. Powick....my principal point in reference to any employee (not simply pilots) was that their pay is earned by doing the job for which they were hired. There is no question that some go "above and beyond" ; they greatly exceed the norm. For them, in a union environment, the only reward is 1) praise and 2) their own knowledge that they scaled a self-defined Everest. Rightly or wrongly, I believe that achieving personal goals (when you may be the only one that knows of your success) which includes performing a task successfully, is more rewarding than a generic pat on the back rom someone who likely doesn't even know what exactly was accomplished. In reference to pilots----it is assumed that the significant pay cheque once tendered for operating large equipment was not for the 90% tedium but rather, for those few moments where the fate of many rested upon the ability of one (or two) to shepard them from death's door. Perhaps only a very few pilots could have walked away in Sioux Falls. The survivors extend not praise (they don't know what talents were displayed) but gratitude. The DC10 in Chicago ----they didn't pull it out. The simulator results indicated that it was a survivable incident FOR SOME PILOTS One does not know that they have "what it takes" until that moment comes and thank heavens, for most it never arrives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 In reference to pilots----it is assumed that the significant pay cheque You would get some difference of opinion concerning significant pay cheques, pretty sad when F/As are making more than an RJ driver...but that is another thread...isn't it operating large equipment and you know...the difference between an RJ pilot and a 747 pilot is only a six week course Perhaps only a very few pilots could have walked away in Sioux Falls. The survivors extend not praise (they don't know what talents were displayed) but gratitude. praise.....commend the merits gratitude....thankfulness, commending You are playing with words and I am sure the folks did have some "praise" for the pilots after all the facts were out. The DC10 in Chicago ----they didn't pull it out. The simulator results indicated that it was a survivable incident FOR SOME PILOTS One does not know that they have "what it takes" until that moment comes and thank heavens, for most it never arrives. Basically, what I said in my last paragraph. PS...not necessary to be so formal..."Kip" will do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moeman Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 pretty sad when F/As are making more than an RJ driver Now who signed on the dotted line and then ratified that little gem...? Get over it. If the pay was such an issue, you guys never should have signed the deal. What exactly was the upside of signing such a deal? Keeping the jets from Jazz? Something else? I can't remember, but I believe you guys got something else for screwing your RJ drivers, all in the name of the greater good. Enlighten me please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted November 28, 2004 Share Posted November 28, 2004 Certainly MOEMAN........Before you seize on a couple of cylinders, best you realize that I am no longer involved with any aspect of cockpit rituals...since 2002...but perhaps an RJ driver, if there is one on AEF, will give all the info, if so inclined. I made a factual statement, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to "get over",but it does seem that you have a wee axe to grind with ?????...as I said the last time I replied to one your posts...perhaps you should chill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 Kip...may I? You suggest "playing with words". Hmmm! I ask only that ALL of mine be read, not a select few so that you can "make" (?) another point. My words were "significant pay ONCE tendered"; ie; no longer paid. I think it was around 1982 that an acquaintance with Quantas was being paid about $245,000. per annum. He'd been ATPL for less than 12 years. That has nothing to do with the pay scales of RJ FO's (pretty damn few years in the seat) and 30 year FA's (a longgggg time in the saddle). By the way ---many of those RJ jockey's have ben described as "queue-jumpers". Any statistical analysis of the frequency of incidents among those who didn't ascend within the ranks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 Another selective reply.......... That has nothing to do with the pay scales of RJ FO's (pretty damn few years in the seat) and 30 year FA's (a longgggg time in the saddle). The RJ pilot is a pilot. How do you know what he had to go through to get to the point he is at now? Did he come up through the school of hard knocks, and sit years in the bush accumulating his time, or flying his butt off in lousy aircraft in lousy working conditions so he could make the requirements to be an AC pilot. How many years did it take him/her? That he has been sitting in the seat a couple of years is not relevant...his profession is. I really get tired of individuals that think pilots just pop out of high school into a high paying job and fail to even comprehend the cost of what he/she did, financially or otherwise, to become a professional pilot. There is a BIG difference between becoming qualified airline pilot and becoming a qualified F/A............live with it. Any statistical analysis of the frequency of incidents among those who didn't ascend within the ranks? You are asking the wrong guy, and you are making an assumption that your statement about "queue" jumpers is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted November 29, 2004 Author Share Posted November 29, 2004 ...... could be the mood I'm in I guess, but it occurs to me... If there's any cases at any company where an FA on board is making more than a pilot in the front of the machine, it's such an absurd and ridiculous situation that the whole lot of you ought to just sit on your hands and refuse to fly 'til the insanity is corrected! There's no justification on earth that can make that scene "right". None. ...so fix it. Sorry Kip... I know you're out of the picture in that regard... but heck! Some things are just nuts! That's one of 'em. It shouldn't ever happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 Kip---you are a pilot...forgive me..... you WERE a pilot in the employ of CP/AC. Your perspective might be somewhat biased because you believe that "sacrifices" were made to attain your status. I had an employee who left a "profession" to join the military. In the relative "blink of an eye" , he was a pilot, jetting around the country. If economical conditions were different, I venture to say that he could have left the military; obtained an ATPL and joined a commercial carrier. The road from bush pilot to left seat on a 320 (or 37) is one travelled by some but certainly not by all. Anyway---you "hijacked" the topic. This thread was NOT about the "equality" of FA's and pilots (see other thread) but about achieving one's level of competence and rewards for a job well done. For the record...the two jobs are entirely different and cannot sustain any comparison save and except that they both require presence on an aircraft. Some law clerks in London and Toronto earn (receive?) more per annum than many lawyers in the same city. Do you know how much "training" is required to be a "law clerk"? Nada. However ---some law clerks are worth their weight in gold because of innate skills and learning ability. Does that make them the same? No. Am I equating the amount of training or education or even skill required by either to do their job? No. I am simply making an observation and reducing it to a statement of fact. My point? You are wasting your breath (or ink) in arguing relative "values" or "worth" by reference to incomes. So what. An RJ FO receives less, for a short portion of his/her career than does an FA at maximum scale. By the way, most of my remarks (unless otherwise stated) are based at least to some degree, upon personal knowedge. For eg; the Quantas pilot who did NOT fly "lousy" equipment or spend years in "the bush". And "queue jumpers"...you weren't with AC at the time but I'm sure you're familiar with the issue. Many of those Regional pilots who accepted the AC offer were in the right seat on Prop aircraft. Willy-nilly ---they were bottom on the AC list and who got to operate the RJ at AC? The junior guys and the result is reasonably well-documented. And...I note your reference to "profession". Hmmm. Wouldn't "job" suffice? I'm guessing that you seek to further draw a distinction between pilots and FA's by denying that appellation to the "lowly back-end". Personally ---I think that BA's (and MA's) are too easy to come by now and that the description of one as a "professional" is basically meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 Mitch....apart from your desire to "grease the wheels" and maintain "buds", tell me.....why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 I had an employee who left a "profession" to join the military. In the relative "blink of an eye" , he was a pilot, jetting around the country. Really, which organization did he fly with? I thought all Kamikaze squadrons were disbanded, cause I know it was not the CF....why don't you spend some time and find out how long it takes to get CF wings...hint...more than 2 weeks. I'm guessing that you seek to further draw a distinction between pilots and FA's by denying that appellation to the "lowly back-end". Wowsers...you call the F/As the "lowly back end"?? Go ahead, post a few lines about how that is not what you meant and that I should have grasped that you were merely indicating what some folks call the F/As, after all, your remark is in quotes. Anyhow, you are entitled to your opinion, as it should be, and in all honesty, I did not intend to hijack the thread......... but now I grow weary of this issue and take solice in the fact that I must now leave the board and pack my scuba gear for, alas, it is farewell for a goodly portion of this month. Who ya gonna rant with now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UpperDeck Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 Au revoir, mon ami. Never fear --there will be others. But ---"rant"? Ramble, perhaps but...rant? Never!! Back just a sec ---yes. It was CF and no...I didn't say two weeks. Where did you come up with that time frame? I said "a relative blink of the eye". As one growing longer in tooth, you should understand that concept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.