Georgia Pacific

[pa56pa]

Anyone know anything about Georgia Pacific? How many planes they fly? based out of where? anything that can help.... a posting has just come up .... thanks.

JR

 

[2000flyer]

Georgia-Pacific Corp.
3905 Aero Drive, Hangar 8R-8
Atlanta GA 30336
404-691-4805
404-691-7171 (fax)
John Ransom - Dir. of Aviaiton and Chief Pilot

Based: FTY

I don't have any aircraft listed for them, though I believe they have LR45s and at least one Challenger, though not positive. Their website would provide good info on the company.

Regards
2000Flyer

 

[sleepy]

(2) Cl-604 and (4) LR-31A based at FTY. They have about 18 pilots. PM me if you want more info.

 

[BigFlyr]

I know this one might be tough to answer, but does anyone know what LR-31A Captain and First Officer pay rates are at Georgia Pacific, or any other CORPORATE operation?

 

[pa56pa]

Thanks for the replies.....

JR

 

[105viking]

well, who got hired?

hey guys,
anybody on here know who G-P hired for their most recent opening? just curious what was considered competative from the most recent group of applicants.
-105

 

[Old Crow]

They needed to check the minority box. Qualifications had nothing to do with it. It's a shame. There were some quality applicants they turned down.

 

[105viking]

i didn't even get an interview. didn't really expect to. a friend of mine told me that it was abnormal for corporate staffing to be involved in the flight departments hiring, and said he expected something was up.

crow, do you know what kind of mins would have been competative, not considering "minority status," and beyond that, what kind of background did the new-hire have?

105viking

 

[bman]

Minority box huh?!

If that person met the requirements that were set by the company then they must be qualified enough. " Check the minority box", You shouldn't say things like that. I would be willing to bet your next paycheck that everyone is and has been in that department is a NON minority!

 

[sleepy]

I'll take your bet. BTW, how much is your pay check, I can't wait to spend it.

GP had two token, I mean minority, pilots (an Afro-American male and a European-American woman). The woman was downsized (that is how they get rid of the pilots they don't like about every four years), but the Afro-American had already won a racial bias lawsuite against the company, so he is still there (a job for life, or at least until he crashes).

They hired another European-American woman (highly qualified), but she quit after two weeks, when she found out what the job was really like.

They hired another European-American woman with really low time (that is what they look for now), as far as I know she is still there.

 

[English]

someone sounds bitter....

 

[SkyGirl]

English

Just for the record - you're a female, right?

 

[bman]

Still doesn't change the fact

Look I must apologize, but one tires ever so much of hearing about how this subject. The reality is it just isn't true that "minorities" are taking jobs from there allegedly more qualified white male counterparts. Look around the FBO next time you are there. I am sure it is full of all of those "minority" pilots. The way people talk about this one might think it was pandemic!

The only time I see this as troublesome is when HR doesn't consult with the department as to who they are going to hire, but everyone should admit that hiring in corporate departments has always been an extremely closed, who you know kind of thing.

regards

 

[sleepy]

sleepy so what is wrong with haveing a minority in they flight dept?

In "they flight dept". Are you a product of affirmative action?

I'm not bitter, I have no reason to be. I belive that people should be judged based on merit alone. I'm just stating facts. If you don't like the facts, then what can I say.

BTW, they hired a European-American Female. I don't know her, but I'm sure that she was the most qualified applicant. They had to hire a female, because they ran their token female pilot off. I hope this one has thicker skin.

 

[bman]

Sleepy

As you have stated you don't really have an axe to grind, might I ask you not to use terms like "token". Look it isn't easy working in an environment when people believe that you don't deserve to be there.

Regards

 

[105viking]

sometimes, people feel like you don't deserve to be there, because you don't deserve to be there. if the REASON you are hired is strictly BECAUSE you are a minority, then you will NEVER be accepted by everybody in your flight department. there has never been a better use for the term TOKEN, than a situation like that.

hiring a pilot because he or she is a minority candidate is as much of a bullsh*t policy as NOT hiring a pilot because he or she is a minority candidate.

i still want to know about the quals of those who applied this round. i can't become a minority before the next job opening, but maybe i can fly some more.

105viking

 

[sleepy]

Sleepy

As you have stated you don't really have an axe to grind, might I ask you not to use terms like "token". Look it isn't easy working in an environment when people believe that you don't deserve to be there.

Regards

So sorry, but when you only hire one of something, and have only ever had one of that something on hand, and that something is different than all of the other things, then that something is a token.

A token is something that serves as an indication or representation of a fact, event, or emotion; sign ; symbol; merely symbolic.

When the HR Department takes over a hiring process with the express intent to hire an EEOC token, then the hiring process becomes unfair. They should be required to put it in their want ad, only hiring female pilots, others need not apply. Wouldn't that be fair?

 

[bman]

Okay

I don't want to turn this into some long drawn out arguement about the merits of "diversity", but I must say that I am not aware of any flight department that hired someone from say accounting, who happened to be a female or whatever, a pilot position. My point is that the idea of someone getting hired for a skilled position simply, because they fit a certain category is just simply untrue! They must meet some min. qualifications. I am sure someone out there could pull some story they heard about some guy or gal who had no ticket and no time who got hired for X job, but come on lets be adults. I have flown with professionals who are male and female, black, hispanic, etc and so have many of you.

"Qualified" is extremely subjective beyond a point. Total time is not an accurate guage of ability, nor are the number of type ratings!
As to:

"if the REASON you are hired is strictly BECAUSE you are a minority, then you will NEVER be accepted by everybody in your flight department."

The person that get hired should be given a chance to prove their abilities with out pre-judgements. The "minoritiy" pilot didn't ask to be hired based upon their gender or race and should be afforded the same opportunities to prove their mettle that anyone else would.

When another white male is hired are you going "I bet he's not qualified for the job!". If the answer is no then why do people assume something different from a non WM?

On a personal note about the word token. Maybe that may be what I am, but I am qualified to have the job I have and no one where I work can question my ability to operate an airplane. And if any one ever calls me a token to my face we are gonna have some problems. I won't need to sue either. We can handle that crap behind the hanger one way or another!

Regards

 

[English]

So sorry, but when you only hire one of something, and have only ever had one of that something on hand, and that something is different than all of the other things, then that something is a token.

A token is something that serves as an indication or representation of a fact, event, or emotion; sign ; symbol; merely symbolic.

Ok, let me be sure I have this straight. If a company has only ever hired one type of pilot, then that pilot is a token? So, if it has only ever hired male pilots, then the male pilots are "token"?

Thanks for clearing that up for us.

 

[Flywrite]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but its interesting to observe that when one of us white guys gets hired in a corporate position with low qualifications everyone says "way to go" and talks about how aviation is all about "who you know" and that qualifications really don't mean much over a certain base minimum. When the same thing occurs with a female or black guy there is an uproar about how unfair it is to not hire based on qualifications.

I know this isn't the same as affirmative action, and yes in some ways affirmative action is almost as bad as NOT hiring someone based on sex, race, etc., but don't justify your anger towards a minority pilot by saying that it is wrong for a company to hire a less qualified pilot than yourself. It happens with other white guys all the time and nobody blinks an eye.

If you were offered a great job in a corporate flight dept, (even though you may not meet the paper minimums) because you know someone in the department, would you turn that job down so a more qualified applicant could have it?

If the answer is "no" then you have no right to be angry at any lower time minority who takes a job. The system may be committing a wrong in an attempt to make up for past injustices, but that pilot is just trying to get by and build a career like the rest of us.

Anyway...thats just my opinion.