United Airlines hiring goals

[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.

[Dh8Classic]

Hmmm, all those quick replies to my posts suddenly stopped.

Next time you see intentionally fraudulent statements like the one below as was used for gender bias in this thread:

Systemic discrimination is discrimination by a thousand cuts, a million attitudes, a hundred thousand assumptions

Look at reality such as the article I posted. It says: "On a more positive note, the women who do fly these days said that they didn't have a sense of anyone in the industry being unwelcoming or holding them back."

[Dh8Classic]

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.

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.

It was biased when you thought I said it but now you agree with it. So who is biased. How about one ignores the gender of the person making the argument and discuss the content. That is what is rational.

Only a single anecdote the excuse I was waiting for. Actually, I did post something just a few minutes ago about how none of the female pilots felt they were being held back. I guess not when the have airlines like United hiring them based on gender.

Can one get a sex change to move to the front of the line.

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

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.

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.

It was biased when you thought I said it but now you agree with it. So who is biased. How about one ignores the gender of the person making the argument and discuss the content. That is what is rational.

Normally I would agree, but when one considers that the entire point of the article was to describe, specifically, the female experience, I do not believe we can ignore gender.
[edit]Oh, wait. Perhaps I did assume it was biased when I thought it was you saying it, and I am assuming you are male. You may have a point there.[/edit]

Only a single anecdote the excuse I was waiting for. Actually, I did post something just a few minutes ago about how none of the female pilots felt they were being held back. I guess not when the have airlines like United hiring them based on gender.

From what I understand, they're not being held back once they make the flight line. It's getting there that is the issue.

Can one get a sex change to move to the front of the line.

This is an example of what is classically known as the Reducto Ad Absurdum fallacy.

[JeppsOnFire]

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.

There are certain aspects of reality that are extremely hard to research scientifically. And there are those aspects of reality that the mainstream science refuses to research. For both of those, anecdotal evidence is the only evidence available. On the other hand, there are areas of science that deem anecdotal evidence perfectly acceptable. - Quoted randomly from internet.

Trudeau government says their research shows little inflationary pressure. Anecdotally, that is spectacular bullshit.

I search if a new restaurant is a good place to eat, I'm bombarded with useful anecdotal evidence.

Just sayin'

[RedAndWhiteBaron]

There are certain aspects of reality that are extremely hard to research scientifically. And there are those aspects of reality that the mainstream science refuses to research. For both of those, anecdotal evidence is the only evidence available. On the other hand, there are areas of science that deem anecdotal evidence perfectly acceptable. - Quoted randomly from internet.

Trudeau government says their research shows little inflationary pressure. Anecdotally, that is spectacular bullshit.

I search if a new restaurant is a good place to eat, I'm bombarded with useful anecdotal evidence.

Just sayin'

Yes, there are many areas of science that deem anecdotal evidence to be acceptable - but not accepted as truth or fact. Anecdotal experiments must be repeated and confirmed, and therefore, slowly move from the realm of anecdotes, to the realm of evidence. It's a very blurry line.

As for a place to eat, you're bombarded with dozens, if not hundreds, of anecdotes. Together, they comprise a body of evidence. What dh8 provided is but one anecdote and not enough to be considered a body of evidence, at least not in my view.

[shimmydampner]

But there’s no reason why those preferences are to do with what sex you are.

I'd be interested to see credible scientific evidence of this claim.

If we take this argument to its logical conclusion, that the lack of 50/50, male/female representation in any aspect of life is a result of the systemic oppression of nature's propensity to absolute equal outcome on all fronts, we arrive at some interesting conclusions. It removes all possible influences that are not "systemic" and boils every possible outcome of the human experience down to a coin flip. If we start from the assumption that biology can have no bearing on natural inclination/preference, then it must be that a huge number of the population at large are living a lie as this would dictate that only 50% of us are heterosexual. It would be obvious to someone that buys into this horseshit religion, that it is the lack of homosexual representation in the population at large that keeps the other 40% or so of people from admitting to their true preference. Would even the woke police agree that by x date, 50% of all relationships need to be homosexual? If not, why? Just as there is nothing that would dictate that a man or woman should be more or less inclined to be attracted to an aviation career, there is nothing that would dictate that a man or woman should be attracted to a relationship with the opposite sex. You know, because biology is irrelevant. In an interesting twist of "logic", the lack of equity can not possibly be the result of anything less than systemic inequality. Other possible explanations are easily ruled out by assuming that at their core, every human being is exactly the same as every other human being, and if not for systemic pressures, their fate is decided essentially by nothing more than a coin flip.

[photofly]

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 are biased and sexist in the extreme. Why do you imagine that a woman can't repeat the same sexist tropes against women that all the men in the industry in which she works do? Those statements are biased when you say them, when Captain Angela says them, and when Gonk from Mars says them.

The point with these biases is that they're baked in to everything you see, read, do. Everywhere. Of course women believe them. That's what does the damage. Captain Angela is programmed to think that women aren't as ambitious as men, so of course that's what she's going to tell you.

Look at reality such as the article I posted. It says: "On a more positive note, the women who do fly these days said that they didn't have a sense of anyone in the industry being unwelcoming or holding them back."

That may well be true. Ant_321 says his wife told him she had an easier ride to become an airline pilot than men, with female-only scholarships, and other assistance. The problem is not in "being held back" - the problem is in poverty of aspiration. In industry with conveyor-belt date-of-hire seniority It's easy to ensure equality of promotion. Poverty of aspiration begins way earlier when you spoon feed one group of people that they're less driven and less ambitious than another. A sin of which you, and Captain Angela, are both guilty.

Hmmm, all those quick replies to my posts suddenly stopped.

I went to bed.

Here'a another part of the article, which you didn't pick:

But very few women even view it as a job option in the first place, said the female pilots interviewed for this article.

Victoria Dunbar, who teaches in the aviation program at the Florida Institute of Technology, says about 10% of the students in her classes are women. She finds that most of them have something in common: a family member who flew and showed them it was possible at an early age.

"It just seems like the women, if they didn't have it around them as a young child, then it's not something they considered," Dunbar said.

"My experience is that female pilots are excellent. It's not like there's a particular skill or knowledge that guys are better at. I think a lot of women just don't think about it ... as a career field."

A great fix for that would be to boost the number of female role models.

Here's a recent comment from another thread:
viewtopic.php?p=1150518#p1150518

For reference, I am a professional pilot who also happens to be female. In all my years of wearing my uniform in public I have had probably 4 little girls approach me at work or the grocery store on the way home from work and tell me that they didn’t know girls could be pilots. I have had exactly zero little boys tell me they thought their gender limited their ability to be an aviator.

[pelmet]

Personally, I would put a lot more faith in someone who is the head of the International Women’s Airline Pilots Association to explain reality to me than some guy trying to convince me that systemic racism is the reason that women avoid the sewer workers or trash collectors career.

Yet the same people with these arguments in favour of their discriminatory beliefs never once complain about the lack of female representation in those fields or demand something be done about it.

There are endless articles you will find about the so-called systemic racism to publish. Most are by political activists. Unfortunately, a lot of people buy into it. I suspect that the female airline representative of her association knows a lot more than you ever could about (a) how female pilots view the job as a career. (b) how female pilots feel in general to start with about careers, (c) How the industry has treated female airline pilots.

You killed your credibility with the systemic racism being the reason women just are not interested/or willing to clean sewers.

But I have an idea. Perhaps the few female pilots on this board could let us know what the chances are of them ever considering such as job versus the option of another job such as Wal-Mart at 1/3 the pay(yet still survivable on a temporary basis), if those were the only choices.

[photofly]

You do spend a lot of time telling me, in multiple threads, how I keep damaging my credibility. It's a bit of a trope for you. Just an observation. Yet here you are, engaging in a discussion with me, again.

.. to convince me that systemic racism is the reason that women avoid the sewer workers or trash collectors career.

Sexism - not racism - if it's a female/male bias. Racism is to do with ethnicity etc, not sex.

There are endless articles you will find about the so-called systemic racism to publish. Most are by political activists.

Anyone who publishes about systemic bias is a political activist, anyone who is a political activist has an ulterior motive, anyone with an ulterior motive can be ignored - therefore anyone who publishes about systemic bias can be ignored - is that it?

I suspect that the female airline representative of her association knows a lot more than you ever could about (a) how female pilots view the job as a career. (b) how female pilots feel in general to start with about careers, (c) How the industry has treated female airline pilots.

I entirely agree with you on this.

However, I don't think the female airline pilot representative of her association knows very much about how women who are not airline pilots feel - about how those who elect not to start a career as an airline pilot feel. Or how they might feel, if they had more role models.

The female pilots she knows and represents are the ones who have entered the career and succeeded, despite the bias, and credit to them for that. But by definition they're not representative of the women who would benefit from more role models.

One way to encourage the group of women who choose not to start a career as an airline pilot to do so - and therefore to benefit from the industry's treatment of female pilots, about which she has only good things to report - is to create more female role models. United has decided to do something in its power to achieve that. I think it's commendable.

[North Shore]

Beaten to death...