United Airlines hiring goals

[Dh8Classic]

... unappealing especially to women who may not have [as much of] the drive, ambition, financial means or the family/network support [that men have] to pursue flying as a career.
....
You see Photofly, it is very simple. Do you honestly believe that this is somehow biased?

You really can’t help yourself, can you?

Please explain. I'm serious.

[photofly]

Your bias is that you assume women have less drive, ambition, means, or family support to achieve their goals than men.

Women’s lack of success in all sorts of fields has always been attributed to their lack of ambition, or support, or means. Women going into law, medicine, engineering - any traditional male dominated field. It was always said that these were mostly male endeavours because women didn’t have the ambition, or the drive. Or their families wouldn’t support them. Until, when some of the real barriers were peeled away, the proportion of women entering, qualifying in, and excelling in all these fields shot up.

I see not a shred of evidence that women are less ambitious or have less drive than men. There are very many unambitious Un-driven women, any many unambitious undriven men too.

If you strip away some of the real barriers to women becoming pilots I think you’ll find the same thing will happen. One way to expedite that is to have more successful female role models,

[ant_321]

. If a young girl or person of a visible minority feel they can’t work in aviation that is an indication of poor parenting not poor hiring policies.

I think that’s the first time I’ve heard that it’s the parents of an under-represented group that are actually to blame, so kudos to your wife for the originality of that.

Things like promoting aviation as a viable career for anyone in high schools for example.

don’t you think it lacks credibility to tell girls in school that hey can be airline pilots, when so few women are airline pilots?

The first question on any intelligent girls lips is going to be “if it’s such a good career for women, why are all airline pilots in fact men?”

Are you going to tell her it’s because of her hormones?

You may also find it interesting to hear she feels that being a woman has aided her career greatly. She has had opportunities that no man would ever have. From scholarships that were only available to women to paid trips to attend women in aviation events where she met great connections. And one last quote from her and I promise I’ll stop speaking for her, “it’s not 1960. Woman can do whatever they want and they want. Men and women are different, they make different career choices.”

Anyways, I’m done with this thread. You obviously have your mind made up and I’m sure an anonymous internet dude isn’t going to change it.

[C-GGGQ]

... unappealing especially to women who may not have [as much of] the drive, ambition, financial means or the family/network support [that men have] to pursue flying as a career.
....
You see Photofly, it is very simple. Do you honestly believe that this is somehow biased?

You really can’t help yourself, can you?

Yeah that was dumb. Financial means family support etc are exactly the type of actual hindrances that keep people (not just women) from pursuing a pilots career. This is not however fixed by role models and predatory hiring practices. As many hve said before this is fixed grass roots level. Getting small girls interested, lowering the price of training through either scholarships or the dreaded cadet schemes so hated here. These are frankly easy fixes that will do more than a company saying “we’ll hire 50% women” to actually get the license numbers up to parity

[Dh8Classic]

Your bias is that you assume women have less drive, ambition, means, or family support to achieve their goals than men.

Women’s lack of success in all sorts of fields has always been attributed to their lack of ambition, or support, or means. Women going into law, medicine, engineering - any traditional male dominated field. It was always said that these were mostly male endeavours because women didn’t have the ambition, or the drive. Or their families wouldn’t support them. Until, when some of the real barriers were peeled away, the proportion of women entering, qualifying in, and excelling in all these fields shot up.

I see not a shred of evidence that women are less ambitious or have less drive than men. There are very many unambitious Un-driven women, any many unambitious undriven men too.

If you strip away some of the real barriers to women becoming pilots I think you’ll find the same thing will happen. One way to expedite that is to have more successful female role models,

I never said anything of the sort. Why do you make things up.

But lets face it:

Job is wrapped up in a lot of unappealing circumstances, especially to women
Very few women even view flying as a career option in the first place
Cost of training, tough schedules, little time to raise family among obstacles

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Your bias is that you assume women have less drive, ambition, means, or family support to achieve their goals than men.

Women’s lack of success in all sorts of fields has always been attributed to their lack of ambition, or support, or means. Women going into law, medicine, engineering - any traditional male dominated field. It was always said that these were mostly male endeavours because women didn’t have the ambition, or the drive. Or their families wouldn’t support them. Until, when some of the real barriers were peeled away, the proportion of women entering, qualifying in, and excelling in all these fields shot up.

I see not a shred of evidence that women are less ambitious or have less drive than men. There are very many unambitious Un-driven women, any many unambitious undriven men too.

We haven't peeled that bias away in aviation yet. In law and medicine we have, engineering less so. I still ask the same question: if we accept that the field is less appealing to women, we must ask the question why.

You are correct in asserting that there is nothing that makes women less suitable to the field than men, unlike could be argued for firefighting or soldiering or childcare or nursing. I still ask, why is it so?

[photofly]

You may also find it interesting to hear she feels that being a woman has aided her career greatly. She has had opportunities that no man would ever have.

I think that’s pretty good evidence that things like scholarships don’t actually achieve the objectives they aim for.

I don’t think women are dissuaded from entering aviation by the lack of scholarships, and I don’t think that scholarships persuade many extra women to enter the field.

Scholarships for women are likely to benefit the few women who would have entered the field anyway, such as your wife.

I think more role models - significantly more - would have a much bigger impact. Scholarships are cheap and easy, and make people feel good. You just have to throw some dollars in a pot. Real change is difficult, and hard.

[photofly]

These are frankly easy fixes that will do more than a company saying “we’ll hire 50% women” to actually get the license numbers up to parity

United hasn’t said that. They said that of their 5000 expected hires in the next period, half will be women or visible minorities. Not that half of their pilot population will be women or minorities.

Your easy fixes don’t work.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

They said that of their 5000 expected hires in the next period, half will be women or visible minorities. Not that half of their pilot population will be women or minorities.

I'm sorry you honestly lost me there. Are you speaking of the difference between all employees and pilot employees?

[Dh8Classic]

These are frankly easy fixes that will do more than a company saying “we’ll hire 50% women” to actually get the license numbers up to parity

United hasn’t said that. They said that of their 5000 expected hires in the next period, half will be women or visible minorities. Not that half of their pilot population will be women or minorities.

Your easy fixes don’t work.

Maybe United should just accept that:
- Job is wrapped up in a lot of unappealing circumstances, especially to women
- Very few women even view flying as a career option in the first place
- Cost of training, tough schedules, little time to raise family among obstacles
- if the job were just concerned with flying, there would be a lot more women. But the job isn't just flying, it's wrapped up in a whole lot of other unappealing circumstances, unappealing especially to women who may not have the drive, ambition, financial means or the family/network support to pursue flying as a career.
- Flying has to be something that you really, really want, because even gender issues aside, it's a very challenging and demanding career.

and that is why they have so few female applicants compared to men. Is there really any bias in stating this reality?

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Job is wrapped up in a lot of unappealing circumstances, especially to women
Very few women even view flying as a career option in the first place
Cost of training, tough schedules, little time to raise family among obstacles
if the job were just concerned with flying, there would be a lot more women. But the job isn't just flying, it's wrapped up in a whole lot of other unappealing circumstances, unappealing especially to women who may not have the drive, ambition, financial means or the family/network support to pursue flying as a career.

Flying has to be something that you really, really want, because even gender issues aside, it's a very challenging and demanding career.

and that is why they have so few applicants compared to men. Is there really any bias in stating this reality?

A) This is your opinion, and you appear to be accepting it as fact.
B) Yes, there is, or we wouldn't still be arguing the matter.

[photofly]

Maybe United should just accept that:
...
and that is why they have so few applicants compared to men. Is there really any bias in stating this reality?

The bias is in thinking that men are implicitly and irredeemably more driven or ambitious than women, and that anyone - United, or boys and girls at school thinking about jobs - should suck it up and accept it.

Should I tell my daughter that genetically speaking she’s less likely to be ambitious or driven than her brother, and therefore should set her sights lower? If I did, I would be creating the very bias I’m blaming on biology.

That is what you’re are doing - and that, when girls hear it from a million sources (of which you are one) is systemic discrimination.

[C-GGGQ]

These are frankly easy fixes that will do more than a company saying “we’ll hire 50% women” to actually get the license numbers up to parity

United hasn’t said that. They said that of their 5000 expected hires in the next period, half will be women or visible minorities. Not that half of their pilot population will be women or minorities.

Your easy fixes don’t work.

I literally said “hire 50% women”

[photofly]

Which is true. But then you said “to get the licence numbers up to parity” - which isn’t.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Should I tell my daughter that genetically speaking she’s less likely to be ambitious or driven than her brother, and therefore should set her sights lower?

No. You should find for her a deserving (female aviator) role model.

[photofly]

I don’t know if she wants to be a pilot. She doesn’t know if she wants to be a pilot. How can she have a chance of deciding she wants to be an airline pilot (in which case I can find her a mentor) if she hears from existing, successful airline pilots (who are all men) that girls don’t want to be airline pilots pilots because they’re not driven enough?

[Dh8Classic]

.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Should I tell my daughter that genetically speaking she’s less likely to be ambitious or driven than her brother, and therefore should set her sights lower?

No. You should find for her a deserving (female aviator) role model.

I don’t know if she wants to be a pilot. She doesn’t know if she wants to be a pilot. How can she have a chance of deciding she wants to be an airline pilot (in which case I can find her a mentor) if she hears from existing, successful airline pilots that girls don’t want to be airline pilots pilots because they’re not driven enough?

Well I'm not a parent, so take my opinions with a grain of salt. It is your job as a parent to find her passions, and to encourage them. She may have many passions, in which case you would need to introduce her to many possible mentors. Aviation may be among those passions, but you don't know that yet. My parents did the same for me when I was unsure of my path. Introduce your children to people who could inspire them before they've made up their mind. If you find the right people for them, they will choose their own path, and you will be a proud parent either way.

Sadly, it will be far easier to find for her a role model should she wish to be a teacher, than it will be should she wish to be a pilot. I think that is the crux of this discussion. In her case, she's lucky to have a pilot for a parent if she wishes to become an aviator. Few young girls are so lucky. I wasn't.

[Dh8Classic]

- Job is wrapped up in a lot of unappealing circumstances, especially to women
- Very few women even view flying as a career option in the first place
- Cost of training, tough schedules, little time to raise family among obstacles
- if the job were just concerned with flying, there would be a lot more women. But the job isn't just flying, it's wrapped up in a whole lot of other unappealing circumstances, unappealing especially to women who may not have the drive, ambition, financial means or the family/network support to pursue flying as a career.
- Flying has to be something that you really, really want, because even gender issues aside, it's a very challenging and demanding career and that is why they have so few applicants compared to men.

Is there really any bias in stating this reality?

A) This is your opinion, and you appear to be accepting it as fact.
B) Yes, there is, or we wouldn't still be arguing the matter.

Maybe United should just accept that:
...
and that is why they have so few applicants compared to men. Is there really any bias in stating this reality?

The bias is in thinking that men are implicitly and irredeemably more driven or ambitious than women, and that anyone - United, or boys and girls at school thinking about jobs - should suck it up and accept it.

Should I tell my daughter that genetically speaking she’s less likely to be ambitious or driven than her brother, and therefore should set her sights lower? If I did, I would be creating the very bias I’m blaming on biology.

That is what you’re are doing - and that, when girls hear it from a million sources (of which you are one) is systemic discrimination.

Debating you guys is like debating someone in grade school. Of course I knew you would leap all over me with your ridiculous bias claims(when it is you with the bias - probably strictly for political reasons. Also known as Pretend-I-Care).

That is why I deliberately quoted a female airline pilot interviewed by CNN a few years back and took the quotes from her. The statements are very true but now you are going to somehow come up with another made-up excuse in the face of reality, even though it is obvious that she is right(and so am I)

Hmmmm, I wonder what the excuses will be. I can't wait.



Meet Captain Angela Masson. A retired American Airlines pilot and head of the International Society of Women Airline Pilots who made these quotes you feel are so biased.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/03/1 ... ne.pilots/

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

Debating you guys is like debating someone in grade school. Of course I knew you would leap all over me with your ridiculous bias claims(when it is you with the bias - probably strictly for political reasons. Also known as Pretend-I-Care).

Assigning made up names to imagined logical fallacies is also a logical fallacy, now that you're attacking my ability to have a reasoned argument. It's an appeal to emotion or to our lizard brain. [edit] I don't believe I accused you of bias. If upon retrospect I have, I stand to be corrected. [/edit]

That is why I deliberately quoted a female airline pilot interviewed by CNN a few years back and took the quotes from her.

I read that just now, and I thank you for it. And believe it or not, I do agree with most of what she said.

The statements are very true but now you are going to somehow come up with another made-up excuse in the face of reality, even though it is obvious that she is right(and so am I)

Well now, if you're attacking my ability to have a reasoned argument, I can identify in that sentence not one, but two errors:

• You are presupposing my further argument
• You are assuming you are correct

Meet Captain Angela Masson. A retired American Airlines pilot and head of the International Society of Women Airline Pilots who made these quotes you feel are so biased.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TRAVEL/03/1 ... ne.pilots/

They're not necessarily biased, but they are anecdotal. Perhaps they are representative, but you have provided no evidence of that. Personally I agree with you that they are, at least, representative of the female pilot experience. But you have provided no data, only a single anecdote.

Please do not insult my ability to conduct a reasoned and rational argument. I'd like to think I'm pretty good at it. I do not assume I am right, and I do not assume your next argument. If you would like to continue a rational debate, I would ask the same in return.