This has got to be one of the most inane excuses for a questionable practice that I've ever heard. What does the competence of a the groundschool instructor have to do with whether or not someone sitting in his class should get the job? (Psst, by the way... other companies do, in fact, have excellent instructors with actual experience, too.) Whatever happened to interviewing a guy, hiring him on merit of his experience and personality, and then putting him in groundschool? Is there something wrong with that? Do you suppose, perhaps, that Perimeter does things the way they do just because they can, seeing as how we work in an over-saturated industry in which guys, particularly inexperienced ones but even those with a bazillion hours, will often give their left arm for a job?centerstored wrote:The reason PAG has never paid new hires for the ground school is because they put through 10-20 and hire from a pool. Some guys do a Ground School get on the next day, some don't ever see the tube, and some wait months before a position is available. See, unlike other companies at this level, PAG brings in an experienced GS instructor, who from what I understand puts on a damn good GS. I think any company would be pretty stupid to pay potential employees for a GS given the circumstances.
Sorry, you're obviously the expert on Bearskin, so I take back anything I said. I only worked there five years... couldn't possibly know what I'm talking about.centerstored wrote:I don't think Bearskin guys are making quite that much. With all the downsizing they're lucky to be employed.
And who am I to argue with someone who has such a sharp wit. Name-calling obviously makes you right, so I'll quit while I'm ahead.Yeah...ok GELBitch.
Try using your big-boy words instead of spouting non-sensical rhetoric.
I don't see how an operation like PAG could operate efficiently any other way?
