United Airlines hiring goals

[OneYonge]

How did America beat us on this one?

When is the Canadian aviation industry going to adapt these brilliant forward-thinking hiring quotas?

It seems like we have some catching up to do.

United.jpg (93.29 KiB) Viewed 2230 times

[simply_no_one]

I'm sure the public will be thrilled to know their pilot was a diversity hire.

[montado]

God bless America and 50/50 progressiveness. Going to work will be so much better.

73F09204-D0E4-42EA-8F39-9EC6A13046CC.jpeg (820.15 KiB) Viewed 2156 times

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Honestly I have nothing against the goal - as long as it doesn't include "diversity hires".

It is entirely possible to encourage applications from disparate groups of people without giving hiring priority to them. If one of the issues they see is a lack of interest from women and minorities, there is nothing wrong with seeking out more applicants from them.

So long as the hiring standards remain the same, I have no issue with seeking out more applicants from under-represented demographics.

I'm an ideologue though. It doesn't always work out that way,

[simply_no_one]

Honestly I have nothing against the goal - as long as it doesn't include "diversity hires".

Sorry to break it to you but they already exist. I've worked with a few.....

[Old fella]

Honestly I have nothing against the goal - as long as it doesn't include "diversity hires".

Sorry to break it to you but they already exist. I've worked with a few.....

So did I(worked with a few), it was a pleasurable experience and all were outstanding individuals. One ended up in charge of a section( deservingly so) after I left.

[simply_no_one]

Honestly I have nothing against the goal - as long as it doesn't include "diversity hires".

Sorry to break it to you but they already exist. I've worked with a few.....

So did I(worked with a few), it was a pleasurable experience and all were outstanding individuals. One ended up in charge of a section( deservingly so) after I left.

Must have been different people.

[fixnfly]

Honestly I have nothing against the goal - as long as it doesn't include "diversity hires".

Sorry to break it to you but they already exist. I've worked with a few.....

I've worked with a few too. Jazz, Encore and Georgian offered employment to diversity award winners. These are college graduates that are solely hired based on the fact that they're part of an ethnic minority or a woman, disregarding college grades or flight test results/ability. Each groundschool includes a couple of these new hires as long as they can pass the sim eval. Its been ongoing for a couple years now, so I'm surprised more people don't know about it, especially with how progressive Jazz/Westjet is. Although I applaud the airlines for encouraging women and ethnic minorities to get into aviation, I think straight up offering them employment opportunities because of their circumstances of birth is unfair to those who have worked harder and are more qualified for the position not to mention sometimes unsafe. I would also argue it borders on the definition of discrimination.

[simply_no_one]

For the record I've flown with many women and minorities who were all great to work with. That's not what makes you necessarily a diversity hire.

But the few I worked with who clearly were not there based merit, wheeoooo... Some should never have made it to the line let alone past a PPC.

[GATRKGA]

I've flown with a lot of white pilots that sucked, as well as some black pilots who taught me something.

Get the visible minority to apply and give him/her/he-she a fair shot, but for the love of God, if the white man knows his shit, hire him too.

There's nothing that breeds systemic racism more than giving a preferential hand to someone just because of the colour of their skin or their gender. That will cause higher levels of conflict and misdirected anger, than not.

I'm a halfie, would I get 50% of the HR points in United's hiring process as a result? That's what I'd be curious to know.

[ayseven]

The real issue is how they voice their policies in the US. Absolutely everything is run by lawyers first, so when they get sued, the company always wins. It has been a lawyers' and accountants' world for a while now. We are not so afraid of the legal implications of everything, because our system is geared towards the people with the most money anyways.

[altiplano]

I think straight up offering them employment opportunities because of their circumstances of birth is unfair to those who have worked harder and are more qualified for the position not to mention sometimes unsafe. I would also argue it borders on the definition of discrimination.

Borders on? No border here, it is text book discrimination. More specifically, when you discriminate based on race it is racism.

[OneYonge]

It is entirely possible to encourage applications from disparate groups of people without giving hiring priority to them.

They could have just said that but instead they attached a number to it. That is a quota.

And if they can count, it looks like 50% white men, 50% everyone else.

[redbusdriver]

God bless America and 50/50 progressiveness. Going to work will be so much better.
73F09204-D0E4-42EA-8F39-9EC6A13046CC.jpeg

why couldn't our new(ish) uniforms here at ac be like that

[gswartz]

From Tucker Carlson, April 7:

United Airlines is mandating affirmative action quotas in its flight schools.

This is a big change for the country.

When Coca-Cola embraces some equity scheme, you can understand why: they’re hoping that by hiring more Black executives, no one will ask how many Black Americans have gotten diabetes from drinking Coke. For Coca-Cola, equity is purely a defensive PR move, and it makes sense.

But airlines are different. An airline pilot transports hundreds of people at a time in a thin-walled metal tube going nearly 600 miles an hour, 35,000 feet off the ground. Flying a commercial airliner is dangerous. Like performing heart surgery, no matter how many times you’ve done it, it’s inherently high stakes. People die if you screw up. In the airline business, as in medicine, not killing people is all that matters. So, how will racial and gender quotas make United Airlines safer? That’s the only question that matters. The company’s CEO went on CBS recently to explain.

CBS REPORTER: Only 7% of United pilots are women – one of the highest percentages in the industry. And only 13% of its pilots are people of color.

SCOTT KIRBY, UNITED CEO: They simply don’t have the access or the opportunity.

REPORTER: In an exclusive interview with CBS News, United CEO Scott Kirby is announcing a new effort to bring balance to the flight deck.

KIRBY: We’re excited to be announcing this academy to address the structural issues with the makeup of our pilots.

"Only 7% of United pilots are female!" fretted CBS. "Only 13% aren’t White!" OK, but why exactly should we care about those numbers? An airline pilot’s job is to land the plane safely. Everything else is irrelevant. If 100% of United pilots were Black women, or Malaysian Muslims, or for that matter, White men from Alabama, not a single sane person would complain about it as long as the airplanes didn’t crash. Safety is all that matters.

But you’ll notice the CEO of United didn’t mention safety. Safety is no longer that airline’s top concern. Identity politics is. United will dispute that characterization, of course. In fact, they disputed it in a statement to "Tucker Carlson Tonight" Wednesday.

"United Airlines will continue to uphold its high standards," they told us. But they’re lying. We know they’re lying — and you know it too — because in the airline business, there’s only one standard that matters, and it’s not race or gender. It’s competence. The way people look is totally irrelevant. How they perform is all that matters. Once you forget that, airplanes tend to crash.

Everyone knows that’s true, very much including the people who run this country. Many of them don’t fly United. They don’t fly commercial.

They use NetJets, the largest private airline in the world. Has NetJets embraced equity or hiring quotas? Of course not. Check out the NetJets website if you have a minute. They’ll tell you exactly what they’re looking for in an airline pilot they hire. Here’s the first line: "We seek individuals who demonstrate an unwavering dedication to safety." That’s the first requirement on their list. We couldn’t find any mention of race and gender. That shouldn’t surprise you, because once again, race and gender are literally irrelevant to who flies your airplane. Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry and the rest of our private-jet-dependent ruling class know that perfectly well. They won’t be demanding quotas at NetJets any time soon. Their families fly on NetJets airplanes.

So if hiring on the basis of irrelevant criteria will, over time, get people killed, why are they demanding it? Because they don’t care. They’re ideologues. They’re suffering from an incurable brain disease called wokeness. Reality means nothing to them. It’s merely an impediment to their plans.

The new head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, a Black supremacist called Kristen Clarke, admitted as much. As she told us a few years ago, equity is more important than safety:

CARLSON, MARCH 2018: Do you think that airlines should apply the same diversity rules you are calling for here? That they shouldn't take the people who score the highest on the pilot tests, but that they should hire also on appearance, the way people look?

CLARKE: Every workplace, whether you're talking about airlines –

CARLSON: Oh, so pilots, too? Heart surgeons, too?

CLARKE: Federal agencies should hire the best, but place a premium on diversity..

CARLSON: But what's very important, the way that you look or what you are capable of doing? So, like, when you are flying a plane, how important is it what you look like, your appearance?

CLARKE: Incredibly important.

CARLSON: Appearance is incredibly important.

CLARKE: It's also important that we place a premium on diversity.

What you look like is an essential quality, it’s "incredibly important" in an airline pilot. This is deluded, but it’s also pretty clearly a racial attack. Kristen Clarke is saying — the CEO of United is saying — that we need to replace the pilots currently flying airplanes because they’re the wrong skin color. Only diseased people think like this. Imagine if we applied this same standard to other professions. How about professional sports?

African-American men account for roughly 6% of the American population, yet about 75% of players in the National Basketball Association are Black men. That doesn’t sound like equity. It sounds like what Kristen Clarke refers to as disproportionate representation.

So what if, to remedy that lack of equity, the NBA announced tomorrow that going forward, at least half of its players had to be White, Asian, Hispanic or female to better represent the fans in the stands? How would we respond to that? We’d understand immediately, and we would say so, that it’s a racist policy. No one had even alleged that NBA players were doing a bad job. We’d all assumed, correctly, as we do with airline pilots, that the players were hired in the first place because they were the very best players the NBA could find. But nevertheless they had to be replaced because they were the wrong race and gender.

That’s sick. You think it couldn’t happen? Why wouldn’t it happen? By the logic of identity politics, it has to happen. NBA players make a lot more than airline pilots. At some point, someone will notice that. That’s the whole problem with this diseased way of thinking. You don’t want to live in a completely racialized country, where a person’s genetics are the most important thing about them. Where you are dehumanized and reduced to your DNA. But that’s exactly the society they’re creating. And what’s the result of what they’re doing? Every action provokes a reaction. That’s the most basic principle in physics. When you attack people for qualities they can’t control, over time you will make them radical. That’s guaranteed.

You’ve got to wonder if it’s ever occurred to the morons pushing this equity garbage that everyone on earth has an identity. If you make identity politics mandatory, and they have, how long until you get White identity politics? Ever consider that, you reckless fools? How long before there is no national identity at all, only warring tribes fighting each other for the spoils? Does anyone want to raise children in a society like that? Only the racists want that. But that’s exactly where they’re pushing us, and at high speed.

A couple of years ago, we reported that the Federal Aviation Administration had lowered its standards in order to bring equity to air traffic control. As part of that initiative, the FAA began administering something called a "Biographical Questionnaire" to applicants. This is significant for all the people tempted to believe United, or the U.S. Military, when they say that they're not lowering standards by bringing equity to the process. They are, by definition. Candidates were asked whether they got mostly A's in high school. If they answered "yes," they got five points. Candidates were also asked if they'd been unemployed for the past three years. If they answered "yes" to that question, they got 10 points. They got double the points for three years of unemployment as they did for getting straight A’s.

How does that make us safer? That’s a rhetorical question, obviously. It merely divides and endangers us. But that’s equity.

This article is adapted from Tucker Carlson's opening commentary on the April 7, 2021 edition of "Tucker Carlson Tonight."

[digits_]

Has there been any research on what percentage of young woman actually *want* to be (airline) pilots? If only 7% of women indicate they want to become a pilot, then there is nothing going on. Same with people of color.

If it turns out that more women than men want to be pilots, then something is going on. In that case, it would be more effective to give people access to pilot training. Provide more funding if you really want to do something. Give chances at the start of the training, but don't touch the selection process. That won't improve pilot quality.

[photofly]

There's nothing that breeds systemic racism more than giving a preferential hand to someone just because of the colour of their skin or their gender.

Uh-huh? Centuries of, er, giving a preferential hand to people, is what got us to where we are today?

Can't speak with certainty, but pretty sure many people from visible minorities will quite happily have a taste of being given "a preferential hand", regardless of what kind of racism you think it will or won't breed. Because it can't be a lot worse than the systemic racism they face today.

Then we can talk about all those "preferential hands" offered to women, too, and the terrible terrible toll that has clearly taken on the representation of the majority sex in positions of authority.

Anyone from a visible minority want to comment? Or is it only us white folks debating on AvCanada. Gee, guess it must be all that "giving a preferential hand" that made it so.


On the subject of selection criteria for airline pilots: y'all think the men selected, are selected on merit? Hilarious.

[digits_]

5% of the CPLs issued by the FAA are for female pilots: https://skiesmag.com/news/women-in-avia ... ard-facts/
7% of the united pilots are women (according to the info posted above)

I think we need a program for them to hire an appropriate amount of men. They should hire *less* women to keep it fair.

If women have no desire to become pilots, why force them? Or is there a discrimination issue going on at flying schools where women are denied flight training service? If that's the case, giving women preferential treatment during airline interview processes won't help.

[fish4life]

Giving a scholarship to underprivileged groups are one thing but they should be targeting the poorest areas for this. If that results in more minority pilots that’s great but I’m pretty sure there are just as many rich white girls as there are rich white males.

I don’t see male only nursing scholarships.

These scholarships should be just that a scholarship and shouldn’t be tied to employment, maybe hire the top 50% of the people in the program at the end.

[photofly]

I think we need a program for them to hire an appropriate amount of men. They should hire *less* women to keep it fair.

Fewer, not less. Have you learned nothing on AvCanada since you joined?

If women have no desire to become pilots, why force them?

Do you think that there might be a systemic reason why fewer women exhibit a desire to become pilots?

Is there something about being a pilot that means that women shouldn't aspire to it? (Hint: no.)

Is it regrettable that fewer women aspire to a career that would suit them equally as well as it would suit a man? (Hint: yes.)

Is it appropriate to take action to encourage women to aspire to this career? (Hint: yes.)

Do you not think that the fact that there are so few women pilots, is one reason why very few girls consider it as a suitable career choice? (Hint: yes.)