Regarding UAL Troubles

[Redtailer]

46Driver and Ty,

I'll just repost what I said earlier:




Competitively qualified, once again as long as they meet the airline minimums then it is all good minority or not. What you fail to realize is that minorities were not the only ones being taken at or near those minimums, just the most visible. There were several others including interns, which by the way had their own stack as well, those with recommendations, and those whose parents worked there. If you're going to complain about one group you should complain about all of them, but because they are not an easy target why bother? Not to mention that there were a lot more of them than any minority group.

Signup said:

A logical conclusion to be drawn is that generations prior to us had very little if any competition with minority groups, and these very people still are in positions to help majority groups gain employment. Minority groups don't enjoy this benefit, so that lends even more validity to preferential interviewing.

This is a very true statement and one of the reasons for affirmative action nationwide. Keep in mind the MAJORITY, without these rules in place, tend to intentionally exclude the MINORITY no matter the qualifications. History has proven that.

So lets just get rid of affirmative action and let the "Good 'ol boy network" do it's thing.

 

[spinup]

Ty Webb,

What you advocate is to sit back and watch things correct themselves without being proactive, in essence stagnation. Do you really think the old school rhetoric on the flight line will allow this to happen? Gimme a break. Comments and attitudes prevalent in aviation prevent any progress in this area. We had a chance to fairly integrate and neglected to do so already.

As for your University comments, I'm not sure how that comparison as any bearing on aviation preferential interviewing. All applicants have to meet the same minimum requirements, without exception.

As for your ability to speak up, glad to hear you had an average American upbringing.

 

[46Driver]

One more time: no one should get preferential hiring on the basis of race or gender - which is the reason behind all of the uproar over continued affirmative action. When you have minorities (and females) on the Supreme Court, in the Presidential Cabinet, in the Congress, as the Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff - then you have arrived.

Lets just get rid of affirmative action and hire someone based upon their merits - what a concept.

 

[spinup]

46driver,

I understand what you are saying, but we are not there yet in aviation. In my opinion we are still a long way off mainly due to the seniority system in place. Past hiring practices are exasperated because it takes 20 to 30 years for implementations to take full effect, as pilots move up in senority. Most likely aviation will be the final industry to right it's wrongs.

 

[Redtailer]

Lets just get rid of affirmative action and hire someone based upon their merits - what a concept.

That's the first thing I've seen you post that I absolutely agree with. The problem is it works in an ideal world and we do not live in one. I'm not saying that minorities are being hired under qualified, because contrary to popular belief, they're not. What the anger about is that, on average, they are hired at lower flight times than white males. They still meet the minimums for that carrier. If you don't think they are qualified to fly the aircraft at those times then the minimums need to be raised at your company.

If there were no affirmative action there would be scores of minorities NOT getting hired on their merits. Look at the dismal numbers of the 1980s. But once again, if it doesn't affect you why would you care? Right?

Just for comparison:

Minority Makeup (Including White Females)
(1989) Before Affirmative action ~ 4%
(1999) After Affirmative action ~ 10%

So you guys are complaining about a system that only increased the total minority population by 6%? That is a small price to pay for the 90% of minorities that would have never stood a chance in the industry regardless of what their qualifications were. But then the white males would have gotten to keep their exclusive club, so that's ok.

That's exactly what you guys sound like.

As I stated earlier, it's not the 10% you need to be worried about. It's the other 90% (read White Males) that will take your job.

 

[Ty Webb]

No, Spinup:


What you are advocating is racism and sexism, just skewed to your own race and sex, and that is why we disagree.

I am for fairness to ALL pilots, and preferential hiring is not fair to ALL pilots.

'Nuff said.

 

[Ty Webb]

Redtailer:

As I said earlier, you could really benefit from a Statistics class. That is not a personal attack, just an observation. You provide a subset of numbers, but without including the number of licensed, qualified female pilots, it is just gibberish.

The real reason number of minority pilots is lower is because there are less minority applicants who are competitively qualified for the position.

What this industry needs are competitively qualified minorities who are hired under a system that judges applicants on their merits.

The answer is not to lower the bar, and give preference to one group over the other- that only breeds resentment and re-inforces stereotypes.

When you hire minorities before they meet the COMPETITIVE MINIMUMS of the othr applicants, you are also doing a disservice to the rest of the members of that minority group, who got their jobs by gaining the time and experience to become competitively qualified.

I know you have been brought up to believe that preferential hiring is somehow your birthright, but I am here to tell you that it is simply reverse discrimination. I don;t expect you to be able to step back and see my point, because you are way too close to the subject to be objective.

Good luck, and good luck losing that chip.

 

[spinup]

Ty Webb,

To set you at ease, I am a white male. Apparently that matters to you. What doesn't seem to matter to you is doing the right thing. Elaborate as to how I am being sexist and racist. Comments like those demand explanation, so no you are not done.

 

[Ty Webb]

Spinup-

Discriminating against white males in some well-intentioned but misguided effort to correct "past wrongs" is racist.

The white males that are getting discriminated against, for the most part, are not who you think they are. They are not the "good ol' boy" senior pilots at the majors, who you probably were taught "benefitted" from the system.

It's the Regional Captain who watches their female FO's get hired out of the right seat who is getting hurt. And the CFI that watches his female students get interviews and jobs before his male students. That does not breed respect!

PC robots basically just repeat the same mantra over and over again . . . . "The minority applicant meets the minimums". . . . . the problem is that they are often hired before they meet the competitive minimums, which is way different.

If the female pilot shows up for class having met the published minimums of 800tt but everyone else in the class has 3000tt and a type rating in something turbine, someone else who had paid their dues got bumped to let the 800tt pilot in, and that is obvious to everyone in the class.

It is not fair to the guy who got passed over to let her in, it is not fair to her sim partner, and it is not fair to the other female pilots at the company, who had the 3000tt and type.

Those simple truths get lost in PC land. Look at Redtailer, who is so "high" on her own sense of entitlement that she can't even get her mind around the difference between "published minimums" and "competitive minimums" . . . . .

We both want the same goal- fairness and equality for all applicants, but your way (preferential hiring) keeps me from being able to do much to support your postion.

My grandmother, who was one of the first female attorneys, had to deal with an tmosphere unimaginable today, but she did it her way, on her own merits, paving the way for those behind her. without handing it to them.

All I know is I am done with this string. I am going to hit the pool with my family. You guys and gals can take it from here.

 

[spinup]

Ty Webb,

Well said, that was the best post you have made concerning this yet. I see where you are coming from.

Preferential interviewing is certainly not without its pitfalls, I recognize this. The only perfect way to address this issue is for it to have never happened. Now that it has, affirmative action appears to be the best way to get back on track. I disagree that the current situation will take care of itself, one needs to only look as far as the types of individual recommendations they have submitted over the course of a career. This is not to say that one would avoid minority recommendations, they just don't occur as often. Nor would it with the majority doing the recommending. Preferential interviewing softens this disconnect.

I completely agree with you that it's not fair we are paying for historic malpractice, but the truth is that to fix this problem someone has to. I don't like it anymore than you. I would graciously accept any viable alternative, as this one breeds malcontent and distention. You cite some very good examples of this. That being said, I believe preferential interviewing to be the best option.

It comes down to this; either you believe the lack of minorities in aviation is problem or you don't. If you do, than (at least for now) preferential interviewing appears the only viable fix, and clearly far from being a perfect solution.

Enjoy the pool