[quote=rickair7777;182663
Getting called by a Major...total crapshoot. It can take anywhere from 18 months as a regional FO to never. The most important factors in order of importance:

...
3) Having an affirmative action affiliation.
...

[/quote]


Since the post wasn't about the 'fairness' of affirmitive action, but about what you can do to improve yor chances of getting hired by a major, I'd like to remind y'all, before you get too worked up, that WIA, the 99s, and OBAP do not limit thier memberships based on gender or race. So sign up, and get that box checked off, and move your resume from the really big stack to a slightly smaller stack...

That's funny!

So.. you're saying that some of the females were talentless and so they obviously must've gotten hired through affirmative action. Then how about some of the bad males you've flown with? What's their excuse?

http://www.checklistcomplete.com/women.htm

as far as this AA thing goes, i really dont think anyone's got a reason to even make it an issue. if you look up the stats above, the numbers are so negligible. there are less than 1 female airline pilot per 20 male airline pilots.. a little more than that at the regional level but a little less (like 1 per 25-30 depending on company) at the major level. like what.. 3% of ATPs are women? even if every single one of those 3% got hired through AA (and some guys here like to think so), that's still only 3 out of 100.

Technically true...as AA defenders will point out, AA legislation contains no specific language that puts in place quotas, etc.

However, the actual implementation of AA has resulted in exactly that...reverse discrimination. No better example can be found than the Bakke case decided before the Supreme Court.

In the airline business, the usual example of this is the hiring practices of UAL in the 90s.


Or that they simply were not interested in that line of work.

Aspiring black or other minority pilots will find the doors wide open these days. If their numbers are not representative of the population in general, then look to factors other than discrimination for the answer why.

You might be right, I do sometime get some of the start up airlines confused, but this I'm sure of. If a management (a holding company) starts a new airline to get around work rules, kick out old guys and replace them with new people for way less pay then they have created a scab airline. Anyone who goes their progressing on the back of others. Their is no more clear definition of a SCAB than that.

Stick

BLk, I've read your post, all of them, but this one got me ****ed. "I don't think you should worry"??? Do you feel there is some conspiracy out there to keep black people out of the cockpit? If so, you sir, are the racist!

It is very simple (as others have tried to explain)

You can not base the number of people in the pilot seat upon the number of people in society.

if 99% of the people that apply for a job at Bob's widget company are little green men, then it would make sense that the company would be 99% little green men.

Does Jet magazine have only 13% black people working there? Of course not. Does that make them racist? OF COURSE NOT! Their employee group is predicated on the percentage of people that apply for the job.

You want personal history? In 2000 the only airline I applied for was United. I had a connection, 2 type ratings, 7,000+ hours, former military, Embry Riddle. Every button pushed. When my 3rd female F.O. and one minority (indian by the way) got the job and I couldn't even get called for an interview, the writing is on the wall.

Very few people (their is always the village idiot) would look at you in a regional cockpit and think you got there because you are a minority. Getting in the regionals is so easy that they don't have time to be picky on any preference. But if you get hired at Delta next week with 1,000 hours and no PIC time, then don't be surprised if people feel that your success was based on the color of your skin.

You seem like a very smart man, and I applaud your efforts at ERAU. I would venture to guess that your grades are better than mine. I would view you as equal if we were sitting in the cockpit. Your denial of race in the industry is exactly that. Denial. I wish you the best.

Stick

I mentioned this in the Majors thread and got flack for it, but Affirmative action is alive and well in the airline Industry, and in the 90's UAL was notorious for this....................:(

Ok...so you quoted stats that only .1% of pilots are black women. And only 1.5% of pilots are black men. Is this FAA licensed pilots? Because all that tells me is that not that many minorities got their pilots license...unless racism kept them from trotting on down to the FBO and dropping some money on their career like all of us had to do.

It would be awfully hard to make 12% of pilots at regionals/majors/fractionals/135/whatever miniorities if only 1.6% of your available pilot pool are holding a pilots license....

And you're right...I don't know you and you don't me. And while I have never walked a mile in your shoes (cuz then I'd be a mile away...with your shoes)...you do not know my background. But this isn't a dispute about backgrounds, it's a dispute of whether it is fair or not to give hiring preferance to someone based solely on the subject of race. It wasn't right when they did it for white males, why is it suddenly ok to do it for minorities?

I'm impressed that this conversation has remained civil. More civil debate on this topic in our nation would do wonders to improve the racial tensions we deal with.

I think AA is a perfect example of good legislation that has been bent by execution to suite special interests at times. My impression (as several above stated) is that the point was to prevent discrimination between equally qualified people of different race,gender, etc. I agree that if all other factors are equal, the population of the career should match the general population. This is where we go wrong. Someone decided that means that we need to lower standards at times to entice minority groups into jobs. I don't think that was the point of the legislation.

I'm all for outreach programs to improve the distribution among the applicant pools and I agree that if everyone is qualified, there should be an even distribution. The problem is defining "equally qualified".

I think part of the problem(in today's times) starts with what value different communities put into education. I went to a fairly diverse high school (I too fall into the blinding caucasion bucket) and was horrified at some of the comments made to one of my African American classmates. We were enrolled in an AP Physics class where he was the only African American student and he was doing quite well. I remember distinctly when he was confront by some of his friends who declared that he "sounded too white" when he spoke. I think the pressures on young minority men and women to confrom to a culture that doesn't value education and non-material success is a large source of the tensions we as a society feel today. I get the impression that its not considered ok to succeed in fields dominated by white men because then you are considered a sell out.

Outreach programs to all young people to show them that there is more to life than instant gratification, bling, and money are critical to the continuing prowess of our society. This is a problem that all members of our society are going to face as we progress. Hard work isn't considered rewarding anymore unless you are given a trophy everyday.