Regarding UAL Troubles

[Redtailer]

THE ANSWER

Ok, lets separate fact from fiction.

Here is your answer: THE REASON UNITED MADE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO HIRE MINORITIES WAS THAT THEY HAD TO!!!! THEY WERE UNDER COURT ORDER BECAUSE IN THE PREVIOUS YEARS IN WHICH YOU NEGLECTED TO LOOK AT MINORITIES WERE ALL BUT BANNED FROM THOSE JOBS NO MATTER WHAT THEIR QUALIFICATIONS!

They didn't do it out of the kindness of their hearts, nor gave in to any public outcry, but because of a COURT ORDER. Now try to imagine how bad it was for a court to tell United to hire more minorities, and it wasn't due to a lack of qualified applicants.

There is your reason, now to dispell the rumors.

At the time United had lower hiring minimums than today's standard for EVERYONE. You were separated in to different stacks. If you had 2000 hours then you were not in competition against someone with 1000 hours. There was roughly a total of 15 different stacks you could fall in to and minorities had a stack on their own. So YOU WERE NEVER IN COMPETITION WITH ANY MINORITY.
If you didn't get the job it's because you failed against your peers, not because some female took your job.

Lastly to those who look at a black person and think that he has taken your job remember this. There are over 90,000 airline pilots flying today of which only about 2000 of them are black. So if you don't get the job, what are you going to do? Blame it on a segment that makes up less than 2.5% of the industry? Get Real.

These are real numbers and facts. If you didn't get the job and you are searching for a reason then all you have to do is look in the mirror rather than trying to blame it on someone else.

 

[Ty Webb]

Re: THE ANSWER

Ok, lets separate fact from fiction.


I read your entire post, but what I saw was almost all fiction and very little fact.


I am in favor of hiring qualified candidates- regardless of color or plumbing, and so are most pilots I know. What we don't like is for someone to piss on our heads and tell us it's raining, which is what you are trying to do:


At the time United had lower hiring minimums than today's standard for EVERYONE. You were separated in to different stacks. If you had 2000 hours then you were not in competition against someone with 1000 hours. There was roughly a total of 15 different stacks you could fall in to and minorities had a stack on their own. So YOU WERE NEVER IN COMPETITION WITH ANY MINORITY.

You could also separate the 10,000 applications into 10,000 piles, and then say, "You were only competing against yourself" but that doesn't make it true. Nice try, though.

If you didn't get the job it's because you failed against your peers, not because some female took your job.

Give me a break, Ms. Goebbels. There were plenty of females and minorities hired between 1990 and 2000 who were not competively qualiifed. In fact, after they had depleted the pool of qualified minority candidates, they eventually had to do away with the sim check altogether, as many of the "preferential" candidates were washing out. That is a fact.

There are over 90,000 airline pilots flying today of which only about 2000 of them are black. So if you don't get the job, what are you going to do? Blame it on a segment that makes up less than 2.5% of the industry?

Nice try at playing the race card, there, Ms. Cochran, but no one is suggesting that at all. What we are saying is that there are a finite number of interview slots available, and to put someone on the list at a much lower experience level means that someone else (at a higher experience level) had to be removed from consideration. . . . . which is discrimination, too, although since it affects white males, I doubt you are willing to see it.

 

[Redtailer]

Distorted

Ty, I simply would not know where to begin explaining how distorted your logic and facts are.
So I'll just pick on a couple of things.

I am in favor of hiring qualified candidates- regardless of color or plumbing, and so are most pilots I know. What we don't like is for someone to piss on our heads and tell us it's raining, which is what you are trying to do:

#1: Who are you to judge who is Qualified? That is the job of HR. You have no clue what the people walking in to those interviews had for qualifications. All you have is rumor and a couple of 2nd hand stories.

#2: Once again the minimums at United were different than what it is today. NOBODY interviewed below those minimums including minorities.

I]

You can separate the applications into 10,000 piles, and then say, "You were only competing against yourself" but that doesn't make it true, it just gives credence to that old line "Figures don't lie; but liars figure".

Sorry, those are not twisted figures that's the way it was done. If you are in Stack #1 you in no way were in competition with Stack #2.. It was that simple. What stack you fell in to was determined by your qualifications and minorities had a stack of their own. Anything different is a lie. END OF STORY.

Give me a break, Ms. Goebbels. There were plenty of females and minorities hired between 1990 and 2000 who were not competively qualiifed. In fact, at one point, it got so bad, they had to drop the sim check, because too many "preferential" candidates were washing out. That is a fact.

You have got to love half truths. The sim check was taken out but not for the reason you are claiming. It was done because it was being scored by a computer which didn't care if you were off even 2kts of your A/S. It eliminated GREAT pilots from the process not just the "preferential" canidates. The humans in the sim were not allowed to alter the score to reflect what the true performance was. Along with other changes in the HR dept. at the time this was one of the things that were thrown out. Lastly, the sim was thrown out in 2000. By that point many "preferential" canidates had already hired, so it did not help that group as much as you would like people to believe.

If you didn't get the job and you are searching for a reason then all you have to do is look in the mirror rather than trying to blame it on someone else.

I could probably say the exact same thing to whoever it was that filed that EEOC complaint that started all this BS.

No, you could not. The original complaint against United dealt with the hiring of BLACK pilots. The white females benefitted the most from the lawsuit. Out of the approx. 4000 pilots United had at the time only 9, yes I said 9 pilots were black (less than 0.3%). Some carriers had NONE. The numbers spoke for themselves about United's hiring practices. This wasn't something that was pulled out of thin air. Keep in mind this was a MAJOR airline, imagine what the commuters were like.

If any one of those pilots was not competitively qualified on their merits, and displaced you for an interview slot, then I would say that you have a valid gripe. It really doesn't matter what the percentage is . . . not when it happens to you!

So you are saying out of 35 people that get selected for an interview, 1 or 2 who happen to be a minority shouldn't be there because they are taking your job? Once again, stop trying to blame your not being able to get a job on minorities. That is an excuse for the inept, you really should be worried about the other 33 people.

 

[Ty Webb]

Re: Distorted

Ty, I simply would not know where to begin explaining how distorted your logic and facts are.
So I'll just pick on a couple of things.



#1: Who are you to judge who is Qualified? That is the job of HR. You have no clue what the people walking in to those interviews had for qualifications. All you have is rumor and a couple of 2nd hand stories.[/i]

You don;t have to be an HR Guru to understand the concept of "competitively qualified", it's pretty simple, really. A 450tt piston twin driver is not competitively qualified. Can't you just concede that obvious point? And it's not a "second-hand story", I can name names of half a dozen I know personally. My College had a UAL internship program, so believe me, I saw this crap firsthand for four years.

#2: Once again the minimums at United were different than what it is today. NOBODY interviewed below those minimums including minorities.

350tt was the minimum then. So what's your point?

Sorry, those are not twisted figures that's the way it was done. If you are in Stack #1 you in no way were in competition with Stack #2.. It was that simple. What stack you fell in to was determined by your qualifications and minorities had a stack of their own. Anything different is a lie.

Anything else is "a lie"? So much for debate and discourse. Obviously, with you it is just a waste of time, since everyone else's opinion is "a lie"?

Gotta love this last part, though:


So you are saying out of 35 people that get selected for an interview, 1 or 2 who happen to be a minority shouldn't be there because they are taking your job?

Uh, no, but evidently you feel the need to put words in my mouth. Nice try.

Once again, stop trying to blame your not being able to get a job on minorities. That is an excuse for the inept, you really should be worried about the other 33 people.

I'm not worried about anyone. Well, I take that back. I am worried about you, a little. Do us all a favor, and have a little face-to-face with a mental health professional, would you? Be sure to bring up your need to demonize those who disagree with you, and your deep-seated hatred for white males . . . . .

 

[banned username 1]

The theory of cause and effect of the hiring practices and the recent series of events at UAL is laughable. If the situation that UAL finds itself in were the result of numerous accidents and incidents based on flight crew incompetency, there might be something to talk about. But there isn't. So why are you?

Will UAL make it, as one poster asked? Yes.

As far as the simulator issue and hiring: You are incorrect- as are other assertions and conclusions. But what the heck, you're entitled to your opinion.

This issue certainly allows people to display their true personalities, prejudices, and yes, occasional ignorance- kind lf like a good employment interview.

UAL78

 

[GuppyPuppy]

I was hired at UAL in '00 (yes I'm F'd now!) with about 4800TT and no turbine PIC. Now I know for a fact that there were many other candidates out there with far more experience than me who may have been more "deserving" (whatever that means) of an interview. I looked at it as being my lucky day when UA decided to grant me an interview. BTW....white male.

As far as the females in my class...I believe all four of them (24 total in class) were Captains at regional airlines. Well qualified, in my opinion.

I can't change the past and neither can any of you. Was it unfair to interview minorities/females with very low flight time? I would have to agree. But, that is in the past. For you to delight in the failure of an airline......aw heck.....I'm going to bed!

Good night!

GP

 

[Palerider957]

Didn't UAL have some kind of program for minorities that brought them from zero time to the right seat of a UAL aircraft, totally free? I remeber it being advetised and written about in "Flying" magazine a few years ago. If I'm not mistaken It was targeted at black females.

Class size was something like 12 at a crack, I don't know how often the classes ran or how many people were brought through. I do remember an extensive article though.

 

[P3-Adub]

Living in the past ???

UAL has not hired anyone in almost 3 years ! Who cares what happened in the past because EVERYTHING has changed.

Sure there were some undesirable practices in the past but one must consider how hard it must have been to get hired back in the 70s if you were not a "white male" applicant ? UALs minimums were raised to 1500 hours and the ATP written passed in 1999 or 2000. All in my class were well beyong those qualifications with experience coming from military, other 121 jet carriers, regional, and civilian backgrounds. The lowest time guy in my class, a white male, F-15 instructor pilot, had only 1,800 hours and was a very sharp individual/pilot. My sim partner was the one newhire that was a female out of 25, she was a great pilot and had captained for a regional. Every captain that I flew with, male or female was very professional and highly skilled. To suggest otherwise is to talk about things one has no first hand experience with. Then again, my slightly less than 3 years before furlough could have not been a good sampling, not so in my opinion. Bottom line if a newhire cannot pass the training they do not make it to the line !

Not really a big concern as it will be a long time before the majors start hiring again. A little surprised that this is still being kicked around given that the last thing UAL will be doing anytime soon is hiring pilots. Are there not a lot of other things to worry about these days ???

Kid Charly,

That UAL captain that denied you jumpseating was adhearing to COMPANY policy by only allowing one jumpseater. A policy that most pilots at UAL would gladly change if they could. To suggest that SHE was not bending in a way that you would have liked is to say that bending the rules at your airline is OK ??? Think about it. If the other jumpseater was an off line pilot that did not have a "write your own" to enable accomodating you, then there was absolutely nothing that captain could have done, sorry. Really, the world is not against you.

 

[buzzer]

Palerider957

No, they didn't.

 

[WyoHerkdriver]

I interviewed with UAL in 97 only because my father is a retired UAL Captain. Like most of my ANG buddies who also interviewed there, I was not hired. I elected not to go to a second interview for the following reasons (these are also the reasons why I could care less of UAL is liquidated).

1) I was treated like a total piece of garbage throughout the interview process by all those involved. The actual interview was so negative in nature that I knew within minutes I was not going to get a job offer. The Captain and HR guy were both arrogant a$$holes. It was a completely different story when I interviewed at TWA.
2) As a pilot working for United Express in Denver, I was looked down upon (as were my coworkers) by arrogant UAL pilots.
3) More times than not when I rode the jumpseat on UAL, I was treated like a second class citizen because I was a "commuter" pilot. On one occasion I was completely ignored by the Captain and FO. From that point on, I made it a point to avoid jumpseating on UAL.
4) Minority hiring practices at UAL - enough said. By the way, a good friend of mine used to work at the UAL training center and he told me some stories that made me shake my head. For example - giving women pilots extra simulator time to get through training (in some cases upwards of 80 hours in the simulator). This type of stuff HAD to contribute to the financial woes UAL currently finds itself in.
5) Many UAL pilots I know are arrogant jerks.

I hate to say it, but for the above reasons I personally don't care for UAL and do not care if they liquidate.

 

[thebluto]

BACK TO MY QUESTION

Folks:
I really tried to steer the thread in a different direction. No one can change any hiring process that happened in the past, whether it needed to be changed or not. Just as no one can change the fact that 19 hijackers permanently changed the airline industry and the New York City skyline, plus a lot of lives lost and changed.

My question is what happens next? Does anyone have any hard facts about UAL's finances? What will it take for them to survive? Is there an economic "D-Day" that will occur in the near future that permanently decides UAL's fate?

 

[acarpe3448]

I don't have any particular knowledge of, or interest in United's preference for certain applicants. My only thaught on this subject is as follows. I interviewed with United in the late 90s and I have to say from my own personal experience that the HR lady and the Captain that interviewed me were the most unprofessional, outright rude a$$ Ho$$$ that I have ever run across. I had been told by friends that had interviewed there before that at some point in the interview that they liked to put you under some stress to see how you handle it. This went way beyond stress test. This was outright abuse of their position. I interviewed at three other airlines before going to Delta, and I must say that they were all very professional and very nice people. The way it is pretty much everywhere except United. I hope you guys keep flying, as a furloughed pilot I know it sucks. But if anyone at United has to loose their jobs I would love to see your HR and pilot interviewers signing up for unemployment benefits. Tell them to give me a call, I'll tell them how it is done.

 

[Redtailer]

xXpress1, please don't quote me on this one but I was told by an HR rep that when they pulled from the stacks that they did it like a card game. Pulled 1 from the top of each stack for the interview and started over again until they got their desired number.

At the time United was interviewing 1000 pilots per year so you can imagine how many times they pulled from each stack.

I do not agree with you that it was legalized discrimination, but it was an effort to right a wrong. Like I said a while ago, no one was in competition with a minority except another minority. That could be both a plus for a minority and a minus depending on who was in the stack. If you were in the minority stack than you received roughly 1 out of 15 interviews. Those are not good odds depending on what was happening at the time.

I also think this thread is relevant to United's future. Because whether you agree with the system or not it will still be in place when they start hiring again so it helps to understand how they do it.

acarpe3448:

You got your wish. They cleaned house except for 1 or 2 people in 2000.

You don;t have to be an HR Guru to understand the concept of "competitively qualified", it's pretty simple, really. A 450tt piston twin driver is not competitively qualified. Can't you just concede that obvious point? And it's not a "second-hand story", I can name names of half a dozen I know personally. My College had a UAL internship program, so believe me, I saw this crap firsthand for four years.

My point is qualifications are relative to timing. You don't have to debate me, just ask any senior Captain that has been around for 30 years or more. In the late 60's early 70's the airlines needed people BADLY. They literally were taking people off the street with NO time, had them get some hours and get a multi-engine rating and then they were placed in the right seat of a B-707 or larger with less than 250hrs. I guess they weren't qualified either. Oh no wait, they were white males, that's ok then. There were hundreds more experienced black males that were not hired aka Tuskegee Airmen. Very few if any made it in to the airlines.

I'm not worried about anyone. Well, I take that back. I am worried about you, a little. Do us all a favor, and have a little face-to-face with a mental health professional, would you? Be sure to bring up your need to demonize those who disagree with you, and your deep-seated hatred for white males . . . . .

Anything else is "a lie"? So much for debate and discourse. Obviously, with you it is just a waste of time, since everyone else's opinion is "a lie"?

So many personal attacks, that's the sign of someone who has lost his point and cannot concede. Everything I gave you can be backed up with hard facts opposed to rumors and stories. If you do not believe how United hires ask Kit Darby, President of AIRInc.
If you don't like the way they do it than tough, but that's no reason to personally attack someone.

Oh and I don't have a "deep-seated hatred for white males". I hate it when people try to use the excuse that they didn't get hired because of X group or Y group. There is so much misinformation that goes around about minorities in this industry it is disgusting and people tend to believe the worst of it without even bothering to check the facts.

Please tell me when was the last time YOU had to take 6 checkrides in your first 6 months at an airline even though you did nothing wrong, but the only reason it was done because you were a minority and others hated that fact? The Chief Pilot finally had enough and told the pilot to just swap bases and he was removing all of the letters from the pilot's file. No one should have to go through that. That was 2 years ago.

 

[embdrvr]

Kind of sad how the whole story began isn't it? Think back to the days when all you needed was a Comm ticket with wet ink and UAL would train you the rest of the way. Then consider how UAL and other airlines of course would not hire vets like the Tuskeegee Airmen. That's what gets to me. Those guys risked life and limb, distinguished themselves in battle, and they couldn't get a job.
It doesn't make the reverse discriminatory practices of the 90's right but it's important to realize why things like equal opportunity hiring practices came about.

 

[flx757]

This entire thread has about as much relevance to anything as does this one.

 

[trainerjet]

Kid Char, it looks like you might be at JetBlue, what a great job!

A quick check of his posts reveal he is not at jetBlue. Besides, their screening process does a good job of weeding out the d!ckheads. My guess is he's either at Ryan or USA 3000.

 

[Ty Webb]

Red Tail-

Ever take a Logic course? Apparently not, because your "reasoning" defies any semblance of logic:


In the late 60's early 70's the airlines needed people BADLY. They literally were taking people off the street with NO time, had them get some hours and get a multi-engine rating and then they were placed in the right seat of a B-707 or larger with less than 250hrs. I guess they weren't qualified either.

The issue is "competitively qualified" . . . recruiting minorities at a lower experience level than the rest of the applicants is discriminating against the "non minority" candidates.

If you do not believe how United hires ask Kit Darby, President of AIRInc.

I suspected you were using sources like Kit. Anyone else rolling on the floor over this one?


Oh and I don't have a "deep-seated hatred for white males". I hate it when people try to use the excuse that they didn't get hired because of X group or Y group.

I don't think I have been discriminated against, but I saw firsthand the bizarre practices at UAL and I certainly have a right to voice my opinion about what I saw.

Please tell me when was the last time YOU had to take 6 checkrides in your first 6 months at an airline even though you did nothing wrong, but the only reason it was done because you were a minority and others hated that fact?

You have lost me here. If that happened to you, sorry, but from what I have observed from your writings in this forum, it seems very likely that it was your personality, not your gender or race that probably got you singled out.

In any event, it very apparent to me that UAL had some ridiculous hiring policies in effect during most of the 1990's. Hopefully, should they survive Chapter 11, they will have learned from those mistakes and move forward. Hopefully, you will do the same.

 

[Redtailer]

The issue is "competitively qualified" . . . recruiting minorities at a lower experience level than the rest of the applicants is discriminating against the "non minority" candidates.

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.
However, if I were to use your logic then United would hire starting from the highest time applicant (15,000 Hrs?) on down. Guess what, they would never get below 7000hrs. Last time I checked that wasn't an acceptable way to hire pilots due to several other factors.

You have lost me here. If that happened to you, sorry, but from what I have observed from your writings in this forum, it seems very likely that it was your personality, not your gender or race that probably got you singled out.

Again with the personal attacks? That says a lot about you.

No, it didn't happen to me. I have had other situations. It's easy to ignore the difficulties that a minority faces in this industry if you are not one. It's easy to sit back and complain about affirmative action when you are not the one being targeted on a daily basis by your peers. It's easy to cry "Reverse Discrimination!" when applying for a major airline job when you are not the one who cannot get a flight instructing or cargo job because of prejudices.
But these are facts most people either cannot see because of their position in society or turns a blind eye to.

The hiring practices were at United for a reason. The alternative was to leave the status quo. If that was done there would still be a very small percentage of minorities in the airlines today.

P.S. I made it to the majors on my qualifications not because I'm a minortiy.

 

[Ty Webb]

You say you made it to a major "on your own merits"?

Sad to say, we'll never know if that is true, will we? And therein lies part of the problem. . . .

 

[Redtailer]

One last thing:

I suspected you were using sources like Kit. Anyone else rolling on the floor over this one?

Where do you get your information from, a cracker jack box?

Everything you claimed is unsubstantiated rumor. If you really want to know how United hires here are just a few of the sources I referenced:

Kit Darby - United Pilot, President of AIRInc.

Capt. Bob Norris (Ret. United Pilot) - Interview service based in SFO with a staff of former United pilots who USED TO DO THE INTERVIEWS.

Cheryl Cage - If you don't know this one then you are a sad case.

That's just to name a few. Before you attack anyone, get your facts straight!!!!