who gets the promotion

[Garfield1966]

Let’s play a game. It’s called who gets the promotion.

Background.

In crew sked we just had two people promoted to level 3. They are junior to me by several years. In my opinion they are not qualified to be a level 3. In my own opinion, neither am I. I believe a level 3 should be able to work the DFW today desk in a OSO and not have any “huge†problems. I believe they should have a though understanding of the contract and be approachable for questions among other traits. I am not say that the people who were given the level 3 are not good schedulers but rather that they are not “great†schedulers. I would say that I am about as good as those who were promoted. There are level 3’s in the department who have no business being a level 1 much less a 3 (of which we have a few). As stated in a different thread (I believe on the NWA thread) I have no interest in becoming a level 3 due to the BS that they have to deal with. Now, there is a scheduler who is junior to all 3 of us who wanted a level 3 but did not get it. This person in my opinion is very qualified to be a level 3. We have level 3’s who are so senior they probably remember when we flew the DC3 in the museum. They are about at worthless as teats on a bull. There is A LOT of politics in our department. Several people should have been terminated long ago but they have friends, connections and or dirt on someone so they get to keep their job. It’s BS but it’s part of the game I guess. Thing is they are senior so they would have gotten the level 3 if we were union but we are not union and they still got the level 3. Not sure where the difference is.

To be honest, I have no idea what the process is to get a level 3. I have never put in for (not that I know you have to) I have not requested it of my supervisor, for all I know they are just chosen and ‘poof’ they are a level 3.

If I understand the union process correctly I would have been offered it first, but since I turned it down it goes to the next in line who (for arguments sake) are the 2 who got it. They are not deserving (for arguments sake) and the 3rd person who is junior to all but more qualified (for arguments sake) does not get it.

Now in my world the 3rd person would have received the promotion. Is there any way this would have happened in a union environment?

So how would you guys handle this?

BTW, this is a real senario. This actually did/soes happen.

 

[Mach85ER]

So how would you guys handle this?

I have no idea, but my phone will ring sometime in the future at 3:00 am when it probably didn't have to.


I also know nothing of your internal politics. I do know that I was shocked a few years ago when one C/S showed up as a new supervisor during a meet/greet session in pilot ops one day.

This paticular individual had all the traits of a disgruntled corrections officer when calling for trips <_<

All C/S's have been nice, polite and great around by me for the last few years (pilot side)

 

[Garfield1966]

It occurred to me that I should clarify a few things.

First I believe that I am as qualified as the 2 who got the level 3 but not as good as the junior one who did not.

Also, I am not saying that the 2 who got it are not 'qualified' for the job per ce. They can grow into to and learn what they do not know. But having said that, there are others who perhaps are already ready for the position that were passed over. I hated working today’s desks but due to the new bidding process a few years bag I got stuck with it and have grown to like the today operation better then the future.

 

[Wretched Wrench]

There is A LOT of politics in our department.

You may have answered your own question.

I think a lot of us have observed or experienced similar situations.

.

 

[jimntx]

Gar,
Welcome to world of big business office politics. When I was at Texaco, there was a woman who started (like me) as a programmer trainee on the same day I did, except she knew even less than I about computers at the time.

When I left Texaco 16 years later, she was the computer department general manager in a Texaco subsidiary--at least 4 management levels above me. She still did not know as much about computers as I, but she had the talent of giving upper management the correct answer. Mind you, I didn't say the right answer. The correct answer is what management wants to hear. I (in retrospect, very mistakenly) always thought that if you asked my opinion of an idea or plan, you wanted to hear what I really thought based upon my experience and expertise. Wrong!

 

[SCEflyer]

Let’s play a game. It’s called who gets the promotion.

I have read your most recent message, along with many others which you have posted in the past 18 months or so.

I have found that your responses to issues/grievances registered by members, who appear to be from your AA FA constituency have been very aggressive, and take on an "in your face" appearance. If you approach your official responsibilities at AA with the same attitude, you could be marked as someone who lacks an alement of tactfulness/diplomacy.

You might want to work on your bedside manner, and if you are successful in doing so, that change along with your job proficiency might be enough to put you at the top of the promotional ladder.

Regards,

Tom

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Garfield(THE MOVIE),

Actually, you seem to me, to be a CLOSET UNION wannabee !!!
h34r: h34r: h34r:


NH/BB's


PS,

"Answer the Phone" !! (It's a dozen 12/23 Sick/Flu calls)

Ring-A-Ling-A-Ling
Ring-A-Ling-A-Ling !!!!!!!

 

[Garfield1966]

You may have answered your own question.

I think a lot of us have observed or experienced similar situations.

.

Not really. I guess for me the question is this. Is it better to have someone promoted purely based on their longevity verses having them promoted based on merit with a "political influence"? I am leaning toward the latter since at least there is a likelihood of it being based purely on merit verses the former where it a merely chance. At least that has been my experience. The 2 people who got their level 3 may not be the most qualified, but they are certainly more qualified than at least 2 of the people who are senior to them who are not lever 3's

 

[Garfield1966]

SCEflyer

You have me pegged fairly accurately. If someone asks me a question, I tell them what I think. I do not and have no intention of playing “politicsâ€￾ to move up the ladder. If we intend on changing the system that we all seem to hate, that is one place to start. If I believe that I am being fed a line of BS I will stand up and call them out. It is the way I have always been. I lay it on the line and see what happens. My point is though that I try my best not to buy into the corporate BS that surrounds me. I take responsibility for my actions. I do not play well with others and I do not share my toys. I have no interest in moving up the ladder in crew skd. For right now, I am as high as I wish to go. When the time is right, I will transfer out and find something else.

As far as my job proficiency is concerned I feel that I am as good as most and not as good as some. I would guess in the upper 80% but that’s just my opinion.

 

[eolesen]

As a hiring manager, "departmental seniority" is the third worst single reason to promote someone (the worst two reasons are popularity and personal friendship...).

Sure, there are people who stay in a job for five years or more at a time because they really do enjoy what they do, but there are also people who aren't capable of making the types of decisions that come along with a higher level position, thus they get stuck in that job and can't move out.

Being a manager is a lot like being a parent -- if you don't show them how to tie their shoes, they probably won't figure it out on their own. Where most of us fail (and not just at AA) is that we don't do anything to work with those people to get them to a point where they are capable of taking on the added responsibility. Some people laugh when I say that once of my main departmental goals is getting my current employees promoted or lateralled into other jobs...


All that said, when I have two people who are close to being equal in terms of their ability to do a particular job, I'd gravitate towards a more senior employee inside the department, even if they might be slightly less qualified, or didn't have a degree or fancy initials behind their name. I know they'll bring with them a lot more street knowledge that simply can't be tought from books or in a training class.

 

[limit]

Not really. I guess for me the question is this. Is it better to have someone promoted purely based on their longevity verses having them promoted based on merit with a "political influence"? I am leaning toward the latter since at least there is a likelihood of it being based purely on merit verses the former where it a merely chance. At least that has been my experience. The 2 people who got their level 3 may not be the most qualified, but they are certainly more qualified than at least 2 of the people who are senior to them who are not lever 3's

It is clear to me that you have a somewhat distorted view of the process.
A union member applying for a management position falls under your typical “who do you know, who do you ....â€￾AA tradition.
A union member (let’s say a mechanic) can only upgrade through the biding process to a crew chief, or inspector position.

It is clear to me that the new crew chief should be the senior employee that wants the job (bids for it).He should be more experienced and knowledgeable than his juniors.
Since this is the real word and he might not be as good as a junior applying for the job, management has retained the right to:
1. Test the candidate before he is awarded a position. He must take a written, an oral and a practical test.
He must pass all three or the next senior candidate in line will be taking the test.
2. If he passes, management can demote him -no questions asked- during his probation period, and bring on the next one in line.
The new candidate will face the same probationary rules.
Here we have a system where a candidate can be selected not because he kissed ass, knows the correct thing to say, or is the child of a friend or relative, but rather because he is the employee that has put in the time and is capable of doing the job.

Can you tell us how exactly the process you support is better?

 

[Wretched Wrench]

I guess for me the question is this. Is it better to have someone promoted purely based on their longevity verses having them promoted based on merit with a "political influence"?

Experience makes a good performer better. It does not make a poor performer good, and has limited benefit on the middle of the road performers, after a few years, anyway.

The only reason so many of us sort of agree with the seniority system, at least for days off and shift bids is that it at least protects us from the politics of favoritism and sycophancy. Since so many of our managers are promoted for reasons other than competence, we need some protection from arbitrary and capricious management.

However, ignoring seniority could allow management to manage better in some instances. It would allow a manager with a special need for certain person or persons to assign them one particular place. The down side of this is that then the supes fight over personnel assignments. I have even seen shoving and punching over this. I have also seen a supe sent to midnites to induce him to retire. BTW, he was one of the best. So, it works both ways.

I should add that promotions in maint are not always seniority driven. Promotions to tech crew chief and crew chief instructor are more interview driven, with both union and management on the panels. Even regular crew chiefs have to pass a written and oral test, and sometimes fail. Perhaps not often enough, though.

But, back to your original question, "Is it better to have someone promoted purely based on their longevity verses having them promoted based on merit with a "political influence"?

My answer is NO. And the better management is, the more comfortable I am with that answer.

 

[DFWCC]

It is clear to me that you have a somewhat distorted view of the process.
A union member applying for a management position falls under your typical “who do you know, who do you ....â€￾AA tradition.
A union member (let’s say a mechanic) can only upgrade through the biding process to a crew chief, or inspector position.

It is clear to me that the new crew chief should be the senior employee that wants the job (bids for it).He should be more experienced and knowledgeable than his juniors.
Since this is the real word and he might not be as good as a junior applying for the job, management has retained the right to:
1. Test the candidate before he is awarded a position. He must take a written, an oral and a practical test.
He must pass all three or the next senior candidate in line will be taking the test.
2. If he passes, management can demote him -no questions asked- during his probation period, and bring on the next one in line.
The new candidate will face the same probationary rules.
Here we have a system where a candidate can be selected not because he kissed ass, knows the correct thing to say, or is the child of a friend or relative, but rather because he is the employee that has put in the time and is capable of doing the job.

Can you tell us how exactly the process you support is better?

Pretty much the same in Fleet Svc.
Enter into bid. Most senior empl from bid awarded. He may then refuse or accept. If it requires a move to a different station the move is at his expense. He then is on probation for 6mos. He may also be demoted for poor performance. If he is at another station and demoted within the first 6 mos he is required to move back to his original station. This protects the most jr emp from being bumped out if said CC demotes in another city. Within the first 6 mos he must pass written, oral and practical application tests. After 6 mos a decision is made wether he is qualified for permanent status. Even after permanent status a CC can be demoted
at any time but a show cause hearing with union rep is neccessary. This keeps the personal CSM vendettas out of it. That being said. There certainly are some crappy CCs out there, but there are far far more good ones.

 

[Kev3188]

Pretty much the same in Fleet Svc.
Enter into bid. Most senior empl from bid awarded. He may then refuse or accept. If it requires a move to a different station the move is at his expense. He then is on probation for 6mos. He may also be demoted for poor performance. If he is at another station and demoted within the first 6 mos he is required to move back to his original station. This protects the most jr emp from being bumped out if said CC demotes in another city. Within the first 6 mos he must pass written, oral and practical application tests. After 6 mos a decision is made wether he is qualified for permanent status. Even after permanent status a CC can be demoted
at any time but a show cause hearing with union rep is neccessary. This keeps the personal CSM vendettas out of it. That being said. There certainly are some crappy CCs out there, but there are far far more good ones.

More or less the same over here at NW; the main differences being the CC (or ESL as they're called here) probation length is 90 days, and you also have a 30 day "station probation" on top of that anytime you move to a new station (that one applies to everybody, not just CC's).

For CSA supervisors, the are a whole battery of tests and interviewing in MSP before a decision is made/awarded. With that group, seniority is only part of the equation.

 

[Kev3188]

DFWCC--

I forgot to ask; what's the override pay for CC's @ AA?

Thanks.

(we now return this thread to it's original topic )