UAL bid/hiring forecast?

[Booker]

No shot at Hvy, but I have heard that so many times in the past few years that I really wonder if it is real or urban legend.

I was waiting for someone to write this post (thanks!). At my old job I personally knew a guy who won a discrimination suit against UA. Evidently he's living very comfortably for a "little commuter boy."

 

[fatboyplt]

I believe Green is quite accurate.

Birdman
BTV

 

[RP170]

Anyone know if they will still give the 2 interview opportunities to prior interns when the hiring begins again?

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

Whine Lover: I would say for most ex-mil guys they're pretty easy to spot.

I was jumpseating (on NWA-Thanx a lot for the ride!) and there was a guy (in civilian clothes) who stood up at the end of the flight near me. He was about my age (40-45). I asked him which branch of the service he used to be in. He was former military (he'd been out for years), and we started chatting about our mil days.

Note-He didn't ask me, "How'd you know?", or anything like that. He knew he looked former military, and I'm sure other mil guys talked to him because they knew, like I did.

Now, how'd did he "look"? I don't know...he just looked military to me.

cliff
grb

 

[ColKurtz]

History behind UAL's hiring practice

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong on the details. Sometime during the 80's UAL was sued by the EEOC for refusing to hire minorities/women. As part of the settlement UAL agreed to take a certain amount of minorities/women who were previously turned down due to their race/sex and disperse them in the seniority list. Furthermore UAL was told that the percentage of minority newhires must be EQUAL or greater to the percentage of minorities that apply. So if 5 percent of all applicants are minoity/females then 5 percent of newhires must be minority/female.

Several years later UAL was AGAIN sued by the EEOC for failing to live up to the prior agreement. Apparently UAL was still not hiring minorities and females in any significant number. Big fine. New agreement was that UAL's percentage of newhire minorities/women would have to be TWICE the percentage that applied. So if five percent of your applicants are minority/female then at least 10 percent of your newhires must be minority/female. So as a result of failing to abide by the first settlement UAL was forced to hire a dispraportionately large percentage of minorities/women to appease the EEOC. Since there weren't thousands of overqualified minority/female pilots in the late 80's/90's we ended up with the situation that has been beeten to death on flightinfo and cockpits across the country.

That's the story I heard, maybe some senior UAL fellow could correct me if I'm wrong. Otherwise lets all give it a long overdue rest.....

Your mostly correct Green. The EEOC actually assigned one of their lawyers to the Denver hiring office. She oversaw the hiring practices with a fine tooth comb. Mandated quotas from Washington!! Last I heard less than 10% of the group are Affirmitive Action pilots.
To all you UAL haters, look at where the blame really belongs here. I know hundreds of qualified white males (possibly thousands) were turned down for no good reason. This bothers many UAL pilots as much as you guys who were shot down. Most of us know good guys who were turned down, guys we recommended. I think things we be more level going forward for the civilian white male types if you're still interested.

Just to chew on, approx 60% of the new hires in 98 and 99 were straight out of the fighter pilot community, a lot of Zoomers and Boat College boys. These are numbers I heard around Denver at the time. I can't guarantee accuracy, but it seems reasonable.


PS Don't vote for a feminist in 2008!!!!!!

 

[skykid]

I know hundreds of qualified white males (possibly thousands) were turned down for no good reason.

Welcome to the airline biz!!! You can say this about any airline worth a dang out there. How many applicants for SWA interview verses how many they hire? How many of those folks would tell you they got turned down for no good reason? I'm not disputing what you are saying ColKurtz, but when you have thousands applying for limited jobs, there are going to a bunch of people who think they got turned down or didn't get interviewed for no good reason. Maybe true, maybe not.