Part of the miscommunication that’s happening here is that we’re talking about two different things.

First was the MEC statement on non-discrimination, which was the subject of the original post. This was extremely benign & generic and- as discrimination is against the law, anyway- tantamount to me making a commitment to not cooking meth in my basement. Exactly no one should care about this; but I do love the irony that I’m a fragile snowflake for not being offended by it.

The second topic seems to be the existence of a DEBI committee at ALPA. Again, not the topic originally in question, but fine. Now, we could attempt to have the nuanced adult conversation about the social theories upon which DEI is based, gaps in representation, concerns of overreach, etc., that has as yet eluded these forums; but in the meantime, the pragmatic reality is that a large part of this is just litigation insurance. Everyone here should be wise enough to understand that relying solely on “organic diversity”- an interesting term used to describe an industry that’s historically drawn over 90% of its labor from a single demographic, but I digress- opens any group up to potentially damaging & costly accusations. Some of you guys are so fired up on principle that you’d spend your entire war chest in court rather than having the dreaded DEI label attached to anything you’re associated with. Please grow up, take your own advice, & focus on the actual battle at hand- our contract.