Originally Posted by
hummingbear
Since this conversation keeps drifting to the idea of hiring minority pilots with reduced criteria, it bears repeating that the initiative in question is about finding minority candidates to include in the Aviate program that trains prospective candidates from zero to the career stage so that they arrive at that point equally qualified among their peers.
Hiring a woman with a wet ATP & poor flying skills over a dude w/ multiple engineering degrees & left seat heavy time has nothing to do with the Aviate diversity goal; but it is a much easier position to attack.
The program and the underlying goals behind it are pretty easy to read and interpret.
instead of having a goal set of "hire the best, brightest, and most talented" we have a goal to hire the most diverse work force of pilots on the planet.
The overall goal is the problem. I can't tell you how many special video presentations, etc., I have seen touting the number of female pilots we have. Special videos on percentages, etc. I've seen so many "all female crew" videos it's making me sick. These girls that are in these videos must be embarrassed at what the airline is doing. The female pilots I know and respect just want to come to work and do their job and go home with no fanfare, etc. It's just another day at the office for them.
The initiative in question is "flawed." It should NOT be about "finding minority candidates." It should be about simply HIRING the best QUALIFIED candidates. The "goal" is flawed and so is the logic behind it.
The public pandering that the Big U is doing in this area is a bit embarrassing. Moreover, it degrades, minimizes and marginalizes the profession. Further, it may result in lower qualifications and have downward pressure on pilot pay rates. Lastly, we haven't seen the outcome yet: but it may definitely increase check airman workload and degrade safety.