Are FOs sitting left seat on narrow body A/C
06-19-2018, 11:20 AM
#81
Swimmin' in da pool
Joined APC: Jan 2014
Posts: 444
Originally Posted by OOfff
That was my post. It has nothing to do with higher education statistics.
"This thread is about advertisement and support networks, not some attempt to twist affirmative action into a place it isn't"
And this?
"It matters because not all genders are treated equally by those in the majority. Equality for all, indeed"
You were the one that initiated the 'equality for all' discussion right? Is that not related to affirmative action and equal opportunity?
06-19-2018, 11:20 AM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Posts: 529
Originally Posted by dawgdriver
Just because it's aimed at the (safe target) white male didn't excuse the practice of discrimination. I will cite the definition for you:
"The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex."
Seems clear enough. Instead of snarky come-backs, perhaps you could provide a logical answer as to why you disagree with the Supreme Court and feel it's ok to openly discriminate on the grounds of race, age or sex(?) Not that it would make it legal, but are you implying women somehow have less access to education, financial aid or hiring then the males? If so, I would point you to recent university enrollment statistics for the United States.
"For 35 years, women have outnumbered men in American colleges. Federal data show that female students became the majority in 1979 and for the past decade have accounted for about 57 percent of enrollment at degree-granting institutions. Mar 26, 2014"
https://www.google.com/search?q=percentage+of+women+at+universities&ie=UT F-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
You complain about discriminative practices of the past (actual) but support those of the present. You can't have it both ways.
"The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex."
Seems clear enough. Instead of snarky come-backs, perhaps you could provide a logical answer as to why you disagree with the Supreme Court and feel it's ok to openly discriminate on the grounds of race, age or sex(?) Not that it would make it legal, but are you implying women somehow have less access to education, financial aid or hiring then the males? If so, I would point you to recent university enrollment statistics for the United States.
"For 35 years, women have outnumbered men in American colleges. Federal data show that female students became the majority in 1979 and for the past decade have accounted for about 57 percent of enrollment at degree-granting institutions. Mar 26, 2014"
https://www.google.com/search?q=percentage+of+women+at+universities&ie=UT F-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
You complain about discriminative practices of the past (actual) but support those of the present. You can't have it both ways.
A lot of women don't want to be airline pilots and the ones that do can go straight to the top in this day and age.
Very few women sign up for the blue collar work that keeps our society afloat, yet you dont see op-ed articles hemming and hawing about the lack of female representation in the dirty jobs sector!?
Work related fatalities is no statistic to joke about (97 percent male by the way). It's not a glass ceiling stopping them from joining the ranks it's an innate aversion to physically demanding or risky labor (121 may be a safe bet but the same cannot be said about the stepping stone positions). This part about the legacy of male dominated fields is conveniently ignored while figure-heads clamor on about the dwindling number of female CEOs of fortune 500 compainies. What a sick perversion of reality that dishonors the uniquely male sacrifice that made our modern world possible.
These aspects demonstrate the true motivation of feminist policy.
Last edited by TimetoClimb; 06-19-2018 at 11:33 AM.
06-19-2018, 11:50 AM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,383
Originally Posted by OOfff
Here we are, THIRTY YEARS since the trib penned that article. What relevance does that have to today? UAL isn’t hiring excessive numbers of female and minority applicants.
This thread is about advertisement and support networks, not some attempt to twist affirmative action into a place it isnt. As for your edit about higher education, what the hell does that have to do with the 99s or OBAP or a banner ad?
This thread is about advertisement and support networks, not some attempt to twist affirmative action into a place it isnt. As for your edit about higher education, what the hell does that have to do with the 99s or OBAP or a banner ad?
06-19-2018, 12:46 PM
#85
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Posts: 529
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
06-19-2018, 12:59 PM
#86
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Position: systems analyst
Posts: 757
As Louis ck says (oh the irony based on his current rep) being considered an ********* is not up to you. Until every black, female, Indian, Asian, space alien, transgender, and m88b that was once alive during the time of rampant sexism and racism perpetuated by white men is dead, then these lovely reminders are certainly warranted and I welcome them. If you don’t like it snowflake, then don’t pay attention. (I’m white and male and my family wealth is directly tied to white privilege)
06-19-2018, 01:25 PM
#87
Swimmin' in da pool
Joined APC: Jan 2014
Posts: 444
Originally Posted by OOfff
And yet, they’re still hiring tons of white males (5). Perhaps they are aggressively recruiting people who otherwise aren’t showing up in their application pile. Seems like seeing people you can identify with in the position might make it an attractive career option previously not considered.
These privileged 'white guys' have access to so many more avenues than those who don't have the fortune of sharing their race/gender (69's, OWAP, MIA, etc.). Clearly missing in Major/Legacy recruiting ads are these victims of discrimination who, as you say, "...don’t see themselves in those positions."
Looking through the united video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXIr9LNclPQ) I didn't see a single female or minority. I don't see any in these company approved/sponsored pilot application sites either...
https://swa.pilotcredentials.com
https://fedex.pilotcredentials.com
https://aa.pilotcredentials.com
Apologies for the sarcasm (had to lighten things up), but I don't see the point being made that there's any reason TODAY, other than personal choice, excuses, health, or finances (none of which are gender/race related), for PEOPLE to find themselves outside of a flight deck. Women and minorities have better access to the financial aid organizations mentioned and recruitment opportunities than white males. They have the same--if not better, access to military fight training via Service Academies, ROTC, or barring that, the GI Bill for ratings.
The fact that white males, for whatever reason, continue to show more interest in pursuing the pilot profession is why they're hired in larger numbers by the airlines. Plain and simple. Same goes with many other blue collar professions women don't elect to pursue (construction, mechanics, plumbing, electrician, etc). It's a free country.
Whatever bias the uninformed wish to inject, HR departments, not 'white male' pilots, do the recruiting, interviewing and hiring these days and they bend over backwards to bolster their ranks with under-represented categories. At my current airline, there were 4 pilots involved in my interview, 2 males, 2 females, 1 of which was a minority. All panels had an HR rep present. No good ol' boy club here. Similar experience at United, except every slide and pamphlet had nothing but females and minorities.
I worked my way up through the regionals and for years witnessed first hand the countless number of female/minority FOs hired to the majors/legacies ahead of more experienced and qualified white male captains who couldn't even get an interview.
I agree with you that the airlines' target numbers aren't showing up, we just disagree as to why. It's not the days of old; no one is being institutionally barred from flying. I welcome evidence to the contrary.
Last edited by dawgdriver; 06-19-2018 at 01:51 PM.
06-19-2018, 03:47 PM
#88
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,383
Originally Posted by dawgdriver
Tragically, yes, 'tons of white guys', are hired every day at the expense of so many qualified females and minorities who are institutionally discriminated against. Clearly this is the case.
These privileged 'white guys' have access to so many more avenues than those who don't have the fortune of sharing their race/gender (69's, OWAP, MIA, etc.). Clearly missing in Major/Legacy recruiting ads are these victims of discrimination who, as you say, "...don’t see themselves in those positions."
Looking through the united video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXIr9LNclPQ) I didn't see a single female or minority. I don't see any in these company approved/sponsored pilot application sites either...
https://swa.pilotcredentials.com
https://fedex.pilotcredentials.com
https://aa.pilotcredentials.com
Apologies for the sarcasm (had to lighten things up), but I don't see the point being made that there's any reason TODAY, other than personal choice, excuses, health, or finances (none of which are gender/race related), for PEOPLE to find themselves outside of a flight deck. Women and minorities have better access to the financial aid organizations mentioned and recruitment opportunities than white males. They have the same--if not better, access to military fight training via Service Academies, ROTC, or barring that, the GI Bill for ratings.
The fact that white males, for whatever reason, continue to show more interest in pursuing the pilot profession is why they're hired in larger numbers by the airlines. Plain and simple. Same goes with many other blue collar professions women don't elect to pursue (construction, mechanics, plumbing, electrician, etc). It's a free country.
Whatever bias the uninformed wish to inject, HR departments, not 'white male' pilots, do the recruiting, interviewing and hiring these days and they bend over backwards to bolster their ranks with under-represented categories. At my current airline, there were 4 pilots involved in my interview, 2 males, 2 females, 1 of which was a minority. All panels had an HR rep present. No good ol' boy club here. Similar experience at United, except every slide and pamphlet had nothing but females and minorities.
I worked my way up through the regionals and for years witnessed first hand the countless number of female/minority FOs hired to the majors/legacies ahead of more experienced and qualified white male captains who couldn't even get an interview.
I agree with you that the airlines' target numbers aren't showing up, we just disagree as to why. It's not the days of old; no one is being institutionally barred from flying. I welcome evidence to the contrary.
These privileged 'white guys' have access to so many more avenues than those who don't have the fortune of sharing their race/gender (69's, OWAP, MIA, etc.). Clearly missing in Major/Legacy recruiting ads are these victims of discrimination who, as you say, "...don’t see themselves in those positions."
Looking through the united video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXIr9LNclPQ) I didn't see a single female or minority. I don't see any in these company approved/sponsored pilot application sites either...
https://swa.pilotcredentials.com
https://fedex.pilotcredentials.com
https://aa.pilotcredentials.com
Apologies for the sarcasm (had to lighten things up), but I don't see the point being made that there's any reason TODAY, other than personal choice, excuses, health, or finances (none of which are gender/race related), for PEOPLE to find themselves outside of a flight deck. Women and minorities have better access to the financial aid organizations mentioned and recruitment opportunities than white males. They have the same--if not better, access to military fight training via Service Academies, ROTC, or barring that, the GI Bill for ratings.
The fact that white males, for whatever reason, continue to show more interest in pursuing the pilot profession is why they're hired in larger numbers by the airlines. Plain and simple. Same goes with many other blue collar professions women don't elect to pursue (construction, mechanics, plumbing, electrician, etc). It's a free country.
Whatever bias the uninformed wish to inject, HR departments, not 'white male' pilots, do the recruiting, interviewing and hiring these days and they bend over backwards to bolster their ranks with under-represented categories. At my current airline, there were 4 pilots involved in my interview, 2 males, 2 females, 1 of which was a minority. All panels had an HR rep present. No good ol' boy club here. Similar experience at United, except every slide and pamphlet had nothing but females and minorities.
I worked my way up through the regionals and for years witnessed first hand the countless number of female/minority FOs hired to the majors/legacies ahead of more experienced and qualified white male captains who couldn't even get an interview.
I agree with you that the airlines' target numbers aren't showing up, we just disagree as to why. It's not the days of old; no one is being institutionally barred from flying. I welcome evidence to the contrary.
06-19-2018, 03:51 PM
#89
Swimmin' in da pool
Joined APC: Jan 2014
Posts: 444
Originally Posted by deadseal
As Louis ck says (oh the irony based on his current rep) being considered an ********* is not up to you. Until every black, female, Indian, Asian, space alien, transgender, and m88b that was once alive during the time of rampant sexism and racism perpetuated by white men is dead, then these lovely reminders are certainly warranted and I welcome them. If you don’t like it snowflake, then don’t pay attention. (I’m white and male and my family wealth is directly tied to white privilege)
As much as Weinstein/Lauer types are the flavor of the week--and deservedly so, it would be naive to claim white males are the only perpetrators of racism and sexism. There's not a gender or race on this planet that can claim the title of innocence. Plenty of guilt to go around and few can claim they haven't had those ugly stereotypes and done things they've regretted. Only by working with amazing people--of all backgrounds, genders and races, have I been able to remove those baseless foolish prejudices. A work in progress for all of us.
"let him who is without sin cast the first stone..."
Last edited by dawgdriver; 06-19-2018 at 04:19 PM.
06-19-2018, 04:30 PM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 924
As a millennial and someone who frequently talks to young people about aviation as a career, I have yet to speak to any minority or gender who says "I want to be a pilot but I don't think I'll be taken seriously because of my XYZ identity."
I have, however, seen many minorities and women move on to higher paying positions much more quickly than their male counterparts. Do I envy them? No. Do I wish we would stop evaluating people, especially in the context of job offers, based on their skin color and gender? Yes.
Have we not considered as a society that perhaps women are represented differently than men in certain careers because women and men often have different career goals? My wife, for example, is a highly qualified bacterial researcher with higher education than myself. She wants to raise kids. Therefore she works part time and avoids advancement that would change her work schedule. Of course her yearly earnings and job title are not typical for someone with a Microbiology Ph.D. But that's ok. We've lost sight of this concept as society in trying to make men and women into the same when they're inherently not.
I have, however, seen many minorities and women move on to higher paying positions much more quickly than their male counterparts. Do I envy them? No. Do I wish we would stop evaluating people, especially in the context of job offers, based on their skin color and gender? Yes.
Have we not considered as a society that perhaps women are represented differently than men in certain careers because women and men often have different career goals? My wife, for example, is a highly qualified bacterial researcher with higher education than myself. She wants to raise kids. Therefore she works part time and avoids advancement that would change her work schedule. Of course her yearly earnings and job title are not typical for someone with a Microbiology Ph.D. But that's ok. We've lost sight of this concept as society in trying to make men and women into the same when they're inherently not.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Convair340
Flight Schools and Training
31
01-16-2012 08:00 AM
