What a horrible opinion :(. Are you honestly suggesting that every woman and minority pilot out there today is only flying because of AA? What an insult to them! I'm sure they wouldn't appreciate you demeaning their hard work and dedication.

How about this guys? We hire pilots based on their ability, integrity, and professionalism. Not racial status, or gender.

I'll give that an amen!

Sure, I'll amen it too, if I can make believe that for the first 80 year history of aviation in the US, we hired people based on qualifications, and not on race or gender. But it's just the opposite. We were hostile to those of certain races, or genders and we basically shut the door on them and told them they're not invited. When Black veterans returned to the US after world War II, we told them that we wouldn't give them mortgages to move into all the new homes in the suburbs that were being built for the returning veterans. Heck, we've been flying airplanes longer than women have had the right to vote! The present system may be imperfect, but the neo-con system that you're saying amen too, only perpetuates an old system of injustice and exclusion. Why, because we all know that in this industry, as most, if you have the right connections you cans sidestep the rigours of the process. We should all be willing to listen and consider new ideas, but please don't over-simplify the issue for your own convenience.

I don't think he's suggesting that at all! I think that what he's saying is that woman and minority pilots that are qualified would be shut out of the system. History bares him out to be correct on this one!

There's already a soft racism prevalent in our industry that makes the assumption that minorities and women were given a "break" in order to get on the flight deck. All I can say is that the two black captains I've flown with far exceeded the job requirements at their time of hire. One has all is ratings (by this I mean helicopter, A&P, in addition to the fixed wing ratings) the other built his time flying Lear 35s before coming to the company. Meanwhile most of the non-minoirty pilots entered after being CFI's in C-172s and seminoles.

Finally, if all this AA is giving advantages to minorities and women, why is it that I've only flown with two black captains, 2 hispanic captains, and 2 female captains in the past year? How often do you see two white guys sitting in the cockpit?

WHAT?!?!


First, how is hiring based on ability, intergrity, and professionalism "neo-con"?

Second, how does such a scheme perpetuate injustice or exclusion?






.

You will find the answer to your question when you look at the make-up of military pilots.

How many blacks, Hispanics, or women do you see as compared to the numbers of whites?

Not that many.

Right?

So is this the result of discrimination in the military?

Yes or no answer, please.

First. Dude take the time to read and re-read the posts. It seemed like you responded before I even hit the SUBMIT button. I thought I was clear enough but nonetheless...

Neo-con, because it is the cry of the neo-conservatives, that all AA, EEOC, MBE, WBE, DBE, programs be eliminated. Yet these programs attempt to correct a system that today is warped and stacked against certain groups as a result of the past artificial manipulation of the workforce and artificial barriers to entrepreneurship.

Second.
1) It perpetuates injustice and exclusion because it makes believe that past injustices did not occur, they had no economic, social impact on those perpetuated against and their posterity.

2) ...it assumes that there was no social or economic benefit for those who perpetuated these injustices and their posterity. It then goes further, to put complete control of current hiring practices entirely into the hands of the very people, and their posterity, who have benefited from the past injustices.

This was clearly all born out in the first 25 or so years after the passage of the civil right amendment.

I believe (but not sure) it was Lyndon Johnson who said. "You can't keep stacking the deck of cards against someone for 300 years, and then say one day. Okay, Let's all be equal and play fair"

Onfinal

I'm not 100% sure what you're talking about?

1) Historically, discrimination for the coveted flying slots in the US military was rampant.

2) Most of the civilian pilots are coming out of civilian flight schools or colleges, the military makes up such a small part of the current pilots it's impact is negligible.

So I guess the answer to your question is no, it's not the result of discrimination in the military.

Please let me know, what do you think it is.

Onfinal

First, a neo-con is not the same as a "conservative", and the label fits more of the pro-Israel, Pro-war in Iraq, pro-Rumsfeldian foreign policy world view than anything to do with AA, or other social conservative issues like abortion, gay marriage, etc.. The two are not at all related.. and for the most part, I feel the republican party especially is over run with neo-cons' now who couldn't care less about AA or any of the social conservative issues..

So let's get that straight before we continue..

Now, for you to have flown with 2 black and two Hispanic pilots in one year is pretty good if you ask me, I've not been so fortunate in my entire career (although there are a lot of hispanic sounding names that are white as anyone, but I'm not seeing the dark skin variety at all)

When you consider the applicant pool of said races is rather small in comparison to that of the white pool, you can argue that this representation is fair. The problem lies in that we need to get more Blacks and Hispanics from poorer and underexposed backgrounds into the right kind of schools and exposed to the opportunities that will give them the impetus to get into flying. But the problem lies in the early formative years of these people as they're not exposed in many cases to the idea that this is a profession they can attain if they work hard. Schools must address it at the grass roots level. But that doesn't mean we hire under-qualified or lower experienced people into safety critical jobs just to attain instant fairness.

The treatment that the Tuskegee Airman received after WWII is disgraceful, and they've since been recognized and we've move forward form this dark time. The thing to do now is to focus on fairness in hiring, at the same time nurture the poor inner city youth and 1st generation Mexican American young man to see piloting as a profession that can attain with hard work.

Moving onto the women (and if this poll doesn't tell you something, I don't know what will).. they are indeed a difference case than racial minorities as there are indeed real differences in the sexes, unlike races, where pigment is the only difference. Women as a whole (my wife, mother, sister and daughter all prove this to me without a doubt) are not as interested in male dominated professions as a group.. Sure, you have the statistical outlier and the woman who's more man-line in her interests (and not always a lesbian, but sometimes this is the case). These women, if qualified, and able to pass basic tests (spacial awareness, instrument flying skills, etc..) should be given the same treatment as their male counterparts in the hiring and training. I've not seen this to always be the case however, as women consistently get breaks that their male counterparts are not given. Whether it's for physical differences (i.e. in the case or an ATR captain candidate I knew that couldn't past her final type ride in the aircraft (the Sim was ok) as she couldn't demonstrate to the FAA or our training dept. that she could taxi the aircraft safely due to the stiffness of the tiler on the actual aircraft); or in the case of the F14 female in the Navy some 10 years back that was given pass, after pass, even though she wasn't equipped to handle an F14. The powers that be, demanded that she be passed, and the result was 2 dead people, and a 25 Million dollar plane at the bottom of the Atlantic. This type of social engineering is dangerous, and has no place in our profession.

If a woman can stand on her own merits, then by all means, if not then show her the door. Same goes to any man that doesn't pass these basic standards; except rarely is a man pulled thru for political expediency.

I agree. CE750