Yeah Im wonderin when I get my hat if it cant wear it under my head phones WW2 style

 

Whatever you do, don't try to sell your ideas in South Africa. As you can see discrimination is rarely, if ever, based on majority.

 

you are correct...how about this...if blacks were primarily in power then we'd have AA for nonblacks

 

Somebody already beat me to the South Africa thing. This forum has been all about opinion. I would like to see some facts. Does anyone know the race/gender statistical breakdown of new commercial certificates issued by the FAA? How about ATP ratings? Current 1st class Medical certificates? If someone were keeping track of this, we could compare new-hire data against these numbers and make some concrete analysis of hiring bias. As it is, you see it one way, I see it another. Our perception dictates our reality. We need some real numbers to make this debate relevant.

And about the "daddy's boy" argument...Not trying to single anyone out. Really though, what kind of sick father would want his son/daughter to grow up to be a pilot

 

http://faa.gov/data_statistics/aviat...atistics/2004/

 

Thanks for the link. These numbers get you close, but only with women, not minorities. Also, we need the new certificates issued based on gender. If we knew how many newly minted pilots were out there, and their ratio, we could compare that to the numbers seen in new-hire classes, and get an idea what is going on. The total numbers break down to about 6% of all commercial pilots are women, about 3.5% of all ATP's are women. Compare that to what you see at your place of employment. Also keep in mind that more and more women are getting into aviation, so that means that the ratio will show more of the older, more qualified pilots are mostly men. What we actually need are employment numbers. I don't know of anyone keeping track of that, or the numbers of people who quit flying by choice. I know that where I work, 16% of the F.O.s are women. And that is in Alaska where women are hard to come by! Maybe someone sees a bias against women in hiring, but the numbers don't reflect that from what I see in my little corner of the world.

 

Tables 1 and 2 show a great disparity between men and women and but also show that the disparity is shrinking.

Currently in 2004 for every student pilot (male or female) there are almost 2 ATPs. For women, on the other hand, in 2004 for every female student pilot there is only 1/2 ATP. So that is the disparity.

Looking at table 2 from 1995 to 2004 you see that the ratio of female ATPs to female students is improving. This shows the disparity is shrinking.

Looking at students makes sense because everyone can become a student. There is no discrimination there. Then you would expect the ratio of female students to all students to be the same as the ratio of female ATPs to all ATPs if there were no discrimination.

However there are a number of other factors that skew the results. Many women with good careers go into aviation to become private pilots only. Most of my buddies talk their wives or girlfriends into at least taking a few lessons, etc. But aspiring to become a commercial pilot is largely a male thing. You really need to exclude all those students that aren't aspiring to become commercial pilots. Maybe we can look at the enrolment figures at aviation universities instead?

And yes - as the previous poster pointed out the disparity may be a result of prior discrimination, not current. It takes a long time to go from student to ATP.

 

I guess this thread finally stalled.
Whether we agree or disagree, or agree to disagree, thanks for voicing out your opinions.

 

No charge.

 

Uh, I have no idea who he/she is talking about