bleagle

So, are you saying that in the entire history of commercial aviation that ALL non-minority pilots hired by past/present legacies were FULLY qualified?

Wouls you believe me if I told you that non minority pilots [several decades ago] were hired with 0 time?

Also, I would like to see documentation of all these "many minorities that had low experience levels"... the majority of minority pilots I know at the legacies were fully qualified from either a regional/military standpoint.

I do know of pilots who were not fully qualified BUT the number of qualified minorities (that I know) significantly outweigh the "unqualified" minorities.

Where are you getting your information from?

Again, I am not disqualifying anyone ... I am addressing your "one-sided-ness" on the issues of AA/EEOC.

I do not recall you talking about non-minority/ non-female "under-qualified" pilots that were also hired...

bleagle

re-read post #113....How about a minority CA that went to a CAL interview and was told BEFORE the interview started by one of the "gentlemen" on the panel that "We are old dogs about to retire and we want to hire people that "we want to SEE at this airline"!


several... BUT to be fair did they [the minority pilots I know and the pilots you know] get denied due to race or just plain bad interviewing skills...

I applied as a CRJ CA last year and got a post card... EVEN with an internal rec. I KNOW several guys who got hired at NJ from my former company that NEVER UPGRADED... BTW they were NOT minorities.

dojetdriver

Nope, you wouldn't have to tell me that people were hired with 0 time, it's no secret. But maybe it's new to you.

Can you show me documentation on how qualified the poeple during UAL's 90's fiasco were?

Of the minorites that you know that are "qualifed", what percentage gets turned down? Of the White males that are "qualified", what percentage get turned down? I'll bet you that they are not the same. Go on, argue, but I won't believe you.

Where are you getting your information from?

You are calling me "one sided" on this issue. Funny, I think the same about you. Very one sided, very "boo hoo" "woe is us", the old guys at CAL only want to hire pilots that look like them, you could not be more wrong on the issue. Again, where are you getting your information from as far as what CAL hires?

And I never said I approved of a white male getting hired who was not competitive, I don't care for the practice either. I have never defended that a "european american" who is not competitive should get a job over a minority who is not comptitive. Can you find a case where I stated the opposite? Doubt it.

And you never answered my question about who you would hire, although I answered yours. But I'll expand on it, if I did hire my friend, would that make me racist or sexist? If I personally knew of the pilots skill and record but nothing of the other two, again, would you say I was discriminating?

CaptainMark

http://www.adversity.net/united/1_UAL_incidents.htm

dojetdriver

Did the minority CA have bad interview skills? It's OK when a white male doesn't get hired, he must not interview well. When a minority doesn't get hired, it must be discrimination, right?

Did the FO's have prior PIC time? How much PIC time did you have? Were they also NOT calling other regional CA's because of a fear of attrition? Would you hire a minority with 1000 PIC at NJ's? They will leave as soon as FedEx, SW,UPS,CAL,DAL, ect call.

flaps 9

I dont work at UAL but here are some posts from Flightinfo.....Something for Dojet and Saab to look at.



Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 9
Civ/Mil: Mil/Civ
A/C Flown: T-37, T38, KC-135R, T-1, 727, 737, A320
Ratings: ATP
Total Time: 6000+
Posts: 9 I was hired the summer of 97. I'm a white male. My class was all white males. The class before that was all white males. The class before that was all white males. The class after mine was all white males. The class after that was all white males. The class after that was all white males. You get the idea.

If you didn't get hired at United during that time, you lost your job to another white male. Deal with it.

Or else just keep keep up with your nonsensical whining; "It is just sooooo hard to be a white man today......."


Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 6
Civ/Mil: civilian
A/C Flown: 727,757,767
Ratings: DA20,757,767
Total Time: 9000+
Posts: 6 I'm a white male, hired in '98, with no degree...go figure...all you guys with your "he said,she said"...yea, things are not great now, but most everyone on this board would have given their left nut to get hired with UAL in the late '90's. Stop being so bitter because you didn't get an interview or didn't get hired and get a life. Oh, by the way, I haven't flown with a minority in over a year.



Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 192
Civ/Mil: civilian
A/C Flown: L188, B737, A320
Ratings: B737
Curr Position: Capt
Total Time: 10Kish
Posts: 192 Quote:

Originally Posted by PositionandHold
Why'd they lose the suit in the first place? Were they turning down highly qualified minorities prior to it?


We lost the suit (among other EEOC lawsuits for other "indiscretions" like alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act recently) because we were supposedly not hiring the "right amount" of females/minorities, etc., etc. Too many white males, not enough everyone else.

And when reading about this particular EEOC lawsuit, you have to keep in mind the people you're dealing with when discussing it on this forum. There isn't ONE person on this forum who has "real" numbers as to how many minorities UAL hires vs. white males vs. any other group of interest. All ANYONE on this forum knows is that UAL lost the suit and now all we hire are females and minorities and if you're a white male you'll never get hired. Of course that is not true, but again, consider your typical poster on this forum whenever UAL's hiring practices are discussed here.

And it wasn't that UAL was turning away "qualified" minority applicants- they just started running out as obviously all airlines are looking to hire these types of applicants as well as to not feel the wrath of the EEOC and the expense incurred trying to defend a lawsuit. When airlines start hiring like crazy, the pool of high-time/experience minority groups dry up and therefore the minimums go down. Again, take the stories with a big grain of salt.

I would love for ONE PERSON on this forum to stop talking in generalizations and come up with REAL, VERIFIABLE hiring numbers for UAL (or any other number) concerning the hiring of any particular group of pilot. Of course, no one will and the crazy stories, rumors, and innuendo will continue.


Just some perspective from those who work at UAL.

dojetdriver

[QUOTE=flaps 9;185518]I dont work at UAL but here are some posts from Flightinfo.....Something for Dojet and Saab to look at.


Funny, I don't work for UAL either. But my father and brother did. Are you telling me they lied to me? And why should only me and SAAB take a look at it. What exactly are you inferring? Both me and SAAB belong to a certain demographic that faced discimination in this country, and in Europe. I don't see him or me crying about the wrongs of what happened a century, or centuries ago. Do you? Are there not other people that you think should take a look at it?

I also commuted on UAL for over 4 years exclusively, they were the only game in town. There are plenty of guys there that might not share your view point, or what you are inferring, sorry.

JoeyMeatballs

I'm officially done with this thread, discussing Affirmative Action and airline hiring is like Politics & Religion............better to just leave it alone and not discuss ona public forum..............

dojetdriver

I think I'll join you. Bleagle doesn't seem to want to aswer some very objective questions, oh well. Gotta finish up the Global Contrails anyway.

SAAB, GO GET YOUR SHINEBOX!!!!!!!

kalyx522

http://www.lionhrtpub.com/orms/orms-8-97/Aviation.html

With this simple approach, I found that female airline pilots were significantly more likely to have aviation accidents than their male counterparts. After exploring the data further, I discovered that female airline pilots, on average, were less experienced and much younger than males. Studies of the effect of age on pilot error accidents have demonstrated that accident rates decrease with age, but may level off for older pilots. Accident rates also tend to decrease as experience (measured by total flying hours) increases. Therefore, it was important to use a more sophisticated modeling technique that could address the issue of confounding of factor effects. Since males were older and more experienced, this explained their lower accident rates.

The differences in age and experience levels of males and females were due to the fact that females have only recently entered the airline pilot profession in any significant number. After adjusting for variables in a logistic regression model, accident rates of male and female airline pilots were not significantly different [2].