Jetstar Aiming for 50% Gender Spilt in Interview Candidates
Titan, you said it perfectly.
Oicur has a point that the intuitive that JQ is talking about here is simply reporting back why there wasn't equal representation. IE only 20% of applicants were female so that's why only 20% of those being interviewed are female.
"Captain Georgina Sutton, has been working hard to recruit more women in traditionally male-dominated fields."
"it has had a policy in place to aim for an even split between male and female candidates for interviews and shortlisted for jobs."
"Incentives and quotas have helped reverse this situation,"
Those are statements of action. Support of quotas etc.
There are only 2 possibilities. People are 'working hard' to simply write reports on the gender balance of applicants, which seems a rather strange turn of phrase not to mention entirely pointless activity when they have no control over the gender balance of applicants;
Or they are 'working hard' to artificially increase the number of women represented at interview and shortlist level. ie, exactly what they said they are doing.
I don't believe for a second this is a passive program.
I agree with rennurpp.
I am not against females becoming pilots, I'm against unfair practices that give them (or any group, males included) an advantage when they may not be the best person for the job.
If they are equally qualified, (experienced) equally talented no problems. A quota system is not a fair system.
If they are equally qualified, (experienced) equally talented no problems. A quota system is not a fair system.
“incentives and quotas have helped reverse this situation”.
It’s interesting how we all take away a different message from the same quote.
Yes they have helped, however I suspect the intent behind the comment was one of historical reflection as apposed to policy objective, don’t you?
As I said before, quotas ARE NOT LEGAL in the private sector in Australia and QF/JQ know that to apply one would be instant trouble.
This is an industry dragged down by conservative grumpy old white men with little ability to adapt to change and I for one would love to see the power balance change. Hell, if Jetstar want to apply a quota to get more . . . . .. martians into the job then lets give it a try.
“If I were a minority (sex/ethnic or other)”
Which sex in Australia is considered a minority? Its not uncommon during this debate to hear women (accidently) referred to as a minority. With such a mindset, it’s no wonder that in 2016 we still have only 5% in the cockpit.
“A quota system is not a fair system”
And the vast majority of women want the job based upon their individual merit, not as a result of legislation.
Which is why there are not nor will be any pilots allocated jobs via quota.
It’s interesting how we all take away a different message from the same quote.
Yes they have helped, however I suspect the intent behind the comment was one of historical reflection as apposed to policy objective, don’t you?
As I said before, quotas ARE NOT LEGAL in the private sector in Australia and QF/JQ know that to apply one would be instant trouble.
This is an industry dragged down by conservative grumpy old white men with little ability to adapt to change and I for one would love to see the power balance change. Hell, if Jetstar want to apply a quota to get more . . . . .. martians into the job then lets give it a try.
“If I were a minority (sex/ethnic or other)”
Which sex in Australia is considered a minority? Its not uncommon during this debate to hear women (accidently) referred to as a minority. With such a mindset, it’s no wonder that in 2016 we still have only 5% in the cockpit.
“A quota system is not a fair system”
And the vast majority of women want the job based upon their individual merit, not as a result of legislation.
Which is why there are not nor will be any pilots allocated jobs via quota.
Nunc est bibendum
In the context of the numbers of CPLs held by men and women, women are in the minority. There is nothing derogatory about that, it's simply a statement of fact within the context that we're discussing.
Similarly, men are a minority of primary/ infants teachers. They'd be in the overwhelming minority of early childhood teachers. Again, statements of fact.
Similarly, men are a minority of primary/ infants teachers. They'd be in the overwhelming minority of early childhood teachers. Again, statements of fact.
and QF/JQ know that to apply one would be instant trouble
“incentives and quotas have helped reverse this situation”.
It’s interesting how we all take away a different message from the same quote.
Yes they have helped, however I suspect the intent behind the comment was one of historical reflection as apposed to policy objective, don’t you?
No, I don't. Considering they've literally said its their stated policy objective.
As I said before, quotas ARE NOT LEGAL in the private sector in Australia and QF/JQ know that to apply one would be instant trouble.
Refer morno
This is an industry dragged down by conservative grumpy old white men with little ability to adapt to change and I for one would love to see the power balance change. Hell, if Jetstar want to apply a quota to get more . . . . .. martians into the job then lets give it a try.
So are you advocating quotas or not? If so, explain to me how you go about implementing them without also implementing a program of discrimination.
“If I were a minority (sex/ethnic or other)”
Which sex in Australia is considered a minority? Its not uncommon during this debate to hear women (accidently) referred to as a minority. With such a
mindset, it’s no wonder that in 2016 we still have only 5% in the cockpit.
Oh grow up would you. As Keg corrected you, Women are a minority (by your own admission no less) in the context of applications for airline positions. Just as men are a minority in Nursing. Its a fact, not a condemnation of the capabilities of women.
“A quota system is not a fair system”
And the vast majority of women want the job based upon their individual merit, not as a result of legislation.
Good.
Which is why there are not nor will be any pilots allocated jobs via quota.
Another wild assertion from someone clearly fond of them (I did enjoy you single-handedly resolving the nature vs nurture debate that's raged for 200 years earlier in the thread)
It’s interesting how we all take away a different message from the same quote.
Yes they have helped, however I suspect the intent behind the comment was one of historical reflection as apposed to policy objective, don’t you?
No, I don't. Considering they've literally said its their stated policy objective.
As I said before, quotas ARE NOT LEGAL in the private sector in Australia and QF/JQ know that to apply one would be instant trouble.
Refer morno
This is an industry dragged down by conservative grumpy old white men with little ability to adapt to change and I for one would love to see the power balance change. Hell, if Jetstar want to apply a quota to get more . . . . .. martians into the job then lets give it a try.
So are you advocating quotas or not? If so, explain to me how you go about implementing them without also implementing a program of discrimination.
“If I were a minority (sex/ethnic or other)”
Which sex in Australia is considered a minority? Its not uncommon during this debate to hear women (accidently) referred to as a minority. With such a
mindset, it’s no wonder that in 2016 we still have only 5% in the cockpit.
Oh grow up would you. As Keg corrected you, Women are a minority (by your own admission no less) in the context of applications for airline positions. Just as men are a minority in Nursing. Its a fact, not a condemnation of the capabilities of women.
“A quota system is not a fair system”
And the vast majority of women want the job based upon their individual merit, not as a result of legislation.
Good.
Which is why there are not nor will be any pilots allocated jobs via quota.
Another wild assertion from someone clearly fond of them (I did enjoy you single-handedly resolving the nature vs nurture debate that's raged for 200 years earlier in the thread)
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,967
Received 93 Likes
on
54 Posts
"Captain Georgina Sutton, has been working hard to recruit more women in traditionally male-dominated fields."
Which is why I just don't believe the above quoted statement as coming from her!
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Somewhere in the ether between life and death
Age: 65
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all up to HR, regrettably
G'day
At one interview I was asked how I would function with a person who was not of my race/gender/ethnicity/religion/preference in pets etc. etc... and I replied that, fortunately, I was blind. This led to the immediate questioning of my riposte, because obviously I had an ATPL. (The question had been put to me by the HR (Human Reject) representative.
My answer was, and still is, that what you do on a flight deck, your knowledge,your manipulative skills, your ability to function as a member of ALL the crew is exclusive of your melatonin or what you have between your legs, nor which book of lies you read.
Once while I was in-between jobs I was interviewed by Brisbane Transport for an "RPT" position, successfully. A few days into the training we had the seemingly compulsory HR lecture, which every airline person has endured. Questions such as; "What is wrong with having a poster that gives 10 reasons why beer is better than a woman?". Well it's discriminating against us wine drinkers for starters.
I was pleasantly surprised when she didn't ask such rubbish, instead she started quoting stats like:
Males and females are roughly 50-50 in the population. Indigenous Australians are 5%, yet in our organisation the ratios are 82% male, 18% female, and 2% of them are indigenous. So how do we fix that?"
Coming from many airlines I instantly suggested that we drop the standard, and she was horrified. "NO! We advertise in different avenues, we make the jobs attractive to the non-usual applicants, yet we still maintain our standards. We get more applicants without discrimination due to higher exposure." I muttered something about Sunstate and the 1990s, but zipped my lips.
The job was driving buses, and Bob Hawke called us all "glorified bus drivers" at one stage. Oh he was so wrong! Every Brisbane bus depot has a hot kitchen that is subsidized, and open from the first sign-on. They also have a fully equipped gym, with a personal trainer who comes in once a week, and when you make an appointment they will evaluate you, and give you a regimen. There are also "quiet rooms" where you can sleep if you are on a split shift, and entertainment rooms where you can just catch a movie. Showers and ablutions are there: it goes without saying.
Unlimited sick leave, yes, unlimited. However if your sick leave falls into a pattern such as every Friday and Saturday night, you will be counselled twice, before being fired. Sure the money is crap, but for a short time it was nice to see how a management ethic that valued staff with actions and not words could be implemented.
Cut to the chase, that HR lady in BT knows more than any KPI driven exec in any Australian aviation company, and bus drivers won't put up with the crap airline pilots get. In your nose Bob Hawke!
Have a good one & all
Ned
At one interview I was asked how I would function with a person who was not of my race/gender/ethnicity/religion/preference in pets etc. etc... and I replied that, fortunately, I was blind. This led to the immediate questioning of my riposte, because obviously I had an ATPL. (The question had been put to me by the HR (Human Reject) representative.
My answer was, and still is, that what you do on a flight deck, your knowledge,your manipulative skills, your ability to function as a member of ALL the crew is exclusive of your melatonin or what you have between your legs, nor which book of lies you read.
Once while I was in-between jobs I was interviewed by Brisbane Transport for an "RPT" position, successfully. A few days into the training we had the seemingly compulsory HR lecture, which every airline person has endured. Questions such as; "What is wrong with having a poster that gives 10 reasons why beer is better than a woman?". Well it's discriminating against us wine drinkers for starters.
I was pleasantly surprised when she didn't ask such rubbish, instead she started quoting stats like:
Males and females are roughly 50-50 in the population. Indigenous Australians are 5%, yet in our organisation the ratios are 82% male, 18% female, and 2% of them are indigenous. So how do we fix that?"
Coming from many airlines I instantly suggested that we drop the standard, and she was horrified. "NO! We advertise in different avenues, we make the jobs attractive to the non-usual applicants, yet we still maintain our standards. We get more applicants without discrimination due to higher exposure." I muttered something about Sunstate and the 1990s, but zipped my lips.
The job was driving buses, and Bob Hawke called us all "glorified bus drivers" at one stage. Oh he was so wrong! Every Brisbane bus depot has a hot kitchen that is subsidized, and open from the first sign-on. They also have a fully equipped gym, with a personal trainer who comes in once a week, and when you make an appointment they will evaluate you, and give you a regimen. There are also "quiet rooms" where you can sleep if you are on a split shift, and entertainment rooms where you can just catch a movie. Showers and ablutions are there: it goes without saying.
Unlimited sick leave, yes, unlimited. However if your sick leave falls into a pattern such as every Friday and Saturday night, you will be counselled twice, before being fired. Sure the money is crap, but for a short time it was nice to see how a management ethic that valued staff with actions and not words could be implemented.
Cut to the chase, that HR lady in BT knows more than any KPI driven exec in any Australian aviation company, and bus drivers won't put up with the crap airline pilots get. In your nose Bob Hawke!
Have a good one & all
Ned
“No, I don't. Considering they've literally said its their stated policy objective.”
Please point me in the direction where JQ state that quotas are their policy objective. Your evidence thus far does not carry water.
"Incentives and quotas have helped reverse this situation,"
“Those are statements of action. Support of quotas etc.”
Commenting on past practices in other locations does not imply support for such practices in this industry for now or the future. Why on earth would JQ publicly ANNUNCIATE a policy that is ILLEGAL?
More importantly, JQ is motivated by dollars; in this case, making sure that there is a plentiful supply of pilot applicants in the future. A quota DOES NOT solve this problem for JQ at all.
Simply forcing a woman into a job in preference to a man does not solve future crewing needs for an airline.
People are not learning to fly in anything even close to the numbers they once did and JQ is simply providing a framework to figure out why it is that only 5% of pilot applicants are female.
Also, by fostering an industry that does not attract applicants from almost HALF of society’s members is also effectively providing a preferential treatment to MEN. It makes it much easier to get an airline job when HALF of your potential competitors don’t even apply.
“So are you advocating quotas or not?”
Do you approach everything in life with such a black and white view? No, in the case of airline pilots, no I don’t. I have not even suggested that I do.
As I have said before, quotas are not legal in the private sector and in an airlines case not even beneficial.
Please point me in the direction where JQ state that quotas are their policy objective. Your evidence thus far does not carry water.
"Incentives and quotas have helped reverse this situation,"
“Those are statements of action. Support of quotas etc.”
Commenting on past practices in other locations does not imply support for such practices in this industry for now or the future. Why on earth would JQ publicly ANNUNCIATE a policy that is ILLEGAL?
More importantly, JQ is motivated by dollars; in this case, making sure that there is a plentiful supply of pilot applicants in the future. A quota DOES NOT solve this problem for JQ at all.
Simply forcing a woman into a job in preference to a man does not solve future crewing needs for an airline.
People are not learning to fly in anything even close to the numbers they once did and JQ is simply providing a framework to figure out why it is that only 5% of pilot applicants are female.
Also, by fostering an industry that does not attract applicants from almost HALF of society’s members is also effectively providing a preferential treatment to MEN. It makes it much easier to get an airline job when HALF of your potential competitors don’t even apply.
“So are you advocating quotas or not?”
Do you approach everything in life with such a black and white view? No, in the case of airline pilots, no I don’t. I have not even suggested that I do.
As I have said before, quotas are not legal in the private sector and in an airlines case not even beneficial.
Last edited by oicur12.again; 19th Apr 2016 at 23:42. Reason: spelling error
Nunc est bibendum
I'd love to see the stat of the percentage of female CPL holders that are employed in aviation compared to the percentage of male CPL holders employed in aviation. I reckon a much higher percentage of females that gain their CPL find employment than would males.
I call BS on this. 'Fostering an industry'? The 'industry' doesn't discriminate, people do and I've not come across a single person who has discriminated against a woman in my 25 years in the industry.
I recently facilitated a mentoring day with UNSW 3rd year aviation degree students. 5 out of the 23 were female. It's the 21st century. What these days is 'actively discouraging' females from becoming pilots? You're the one that made the allegation that it's the industry that prevents women from starting training as aviators. I'd be interested as to what you think this may actually be.
I worked with a lot of kids in the Air Force cadets. In our senior ranks we often found that we had a much higher representation of female cadets compared to the ratio when they joined. Interestingly though, whilst these young women were very capable, few of them were interested in careers as aviators. They were given the same exposure to aviation activities as their male colleagues, they were encouraged the same as their male colleagues. Given how they performed on promotional courses you could extrapolate that and suggest that they'd be more successful in gaining flying scholarships. Despite encouraging them to apply, they simply weren't interested at the same rate as their male colleagues.
So maybe it actually is the industry, not due to the industry not fostering the interest, maybe some women just aren't interested in aviation as an industry.
Also, by fostering an industry that does not attract applicants from almost HALF of society’s members is also effectively providing a preferential treatment to MEN. It makes it much easier to get an airline job when HALF of your potential competitors don’t even apply.
I recently facilitated a mentoring day with UNSW 3rd year aviation degree students. 5 out of the 23 were female. It's the 21st century. What these days is 'actively discouraging' females from becoming pilots? You're the one that made the allegation that it's the industry that prevents women from starting training as aviators. I'd be interested as to what you think this may actually be.
I worked with a lot of kids in the Air Force cadets. In our senior ranks we often found that we had a much higher representation of female cadets compared to the ratio when they joined. Interestingly though, whilst these young women were very capable, few of them were interested in careers as aviators. They were given the same exposure to aviation activities as their male colleagues, they were encouraged the same as their male colleagues. Given how they performed on promotional courses you could extrapolate that and suggest that they'd be more successful in gaining flying scholarships. Despite encouraging them to apply, they simply weren't interested at the same rate as their male colleagues.
So maybe it actually is the industry, not due to the industry not fostering the interest, maybe some women just aren't interested in aviation as an industry.
Please point me in the direction where JQ state that quotas are their policy objective. Your evidence thus far does not carry water.
Jetstar : "For the past year, it has had a policy in place to aim for an even split between male and female candidates for interviews and shortlisted for jobs"
First math lessons, now English. I should start charging.
More importantly, JQ is motivated by dollars; in this case, making sure that there is a plentiful supply of pilot applicants in the future. A quota DOES NOT solve this problem for JQ at all.
JQ is simply providing a framework to figure out why it is that only 5% of pilot applicants are female.
Changes to culture to give women the confidence to pursue a non traditional field takes years, decades. You cherry picked past this point last time, but lets try again.
What is J* actively 'working hard' on, to alter the gender split for interviews and shortlist jobs right now?
Keg has already called you on the 'fostering the industry' tripe.
Lastly;
Originally Posted by OIC
[Do you support Quotas?] - No, in the case of airline pilots, no I don’t. I have not even suggested that I do.
Originally Posted by OIC
Hell, if Jetstar want to apply a quota to get more . . . . .. martians into the job then lets give it a try.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Overlooking one's abilities because he/she is not of the required gender is blatant discrimination, regardless of what quota's are in place.
I am not at all surprised by this crap. Just another experimentation in mismanagement. How it is allowed to continue in this day and age is mind numbing. Especially as apprentice careers are being destroyed at the red rat.
I am not at all surprised by this crap. Just another experimentation in mismanagement. How it is allowed to continue in this day and age is mind numbing. Especially as apprentice careers are being destroyed at the red rat.
“For the past year, it has had a policy in place to aim for an even split between male and female candidates for interviews and shortlisted for jobs”
This DOES NOT constitutes a quota. A quota allocates actual jobs, interviews and short lists DO NOT. They are wishes, preferences if you will. Targets. But nothing more. Most companies have them and many fail to achieve them.
“Its not something for the future, its been happening for a year.”
Great, that’s fantastic; JQ started a program a year ago with a long-term view to help encourage women to join the industry?
“Changes to culture to give women the confidence to pursue a non traditional field takes years, decades.”
Yes, even generations. Which is why JQ have put in a framework to start this ball rolling. I have never suggested that JQ have enacted policy that will yield changes to the cockpit make up immediately.
“Hell, if Jetstar want to apply a quota to get more . . . . .. martians into the job then lets give it a try.”
Please tell me you are not interpreting this clearly tongue in cheek comment as confirmation of my enthusiasm for quotas in this situation? You just don’t get nuance or humor do you?
“I'm seriously starting to think you're someone I know trolling me for laughs”
You know what they say about someone who resorts to name-calling. Thank you sincerely for this comment. It’s the escape clause I have been looking for.
This DOES NOT constitutes a quota. A quota allocates actual jobs, interviews and short lists DO NOT. They are wishes, preferences if you will. Targets. But nothing more. Most companies have them and many fail to achieve them.
“Its not something for the future, its been happening for a year.”
Great, that’s fantastic; JQ started a program a year ago with a long-term view to help encourage women to join the industry?
“Changes to culture to give women the confidence to pursue a non traditional field takes years, decades.”
Yes, even generations. Which is why JQ have put in a framework to start this ball rolling. I have never suggested that JQ have enacted policy that will yield changes to the cockpit make up immediately.
“Hell, if Jetstar want to apply a quota to get more . . . . .. martians into the job then lets give it a try.”
Please tell me you are not interpreting this clearly tongue in cheek comment as confirmation of my enthusiasm for quotas in this situation? You just don’t get nuance or humor do you?
“I'm seriously starting to think you're someone I know trolling me for laughs”
You know what they say about someone who resorts to name-calling. Thank you sincerely for this comment. It’s the escape clause I have been looking for.
I do. Do you know what they say about people who can't read? Did I call you a name? Where is it?
And for the umpteenth time, you've again evaded answering my question.
Imagine my surprise. The rest of your post is as easily debunked as the others, but I won't bother.
Goodbye.
And for the umpteenth time, you've again evaded answering my question.
Imagine my surprise. The rest of your post is as easily debunked as the others, but I won't bother.
Goodbye.
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstar Aiming for 50% Gender Spilt in Interview Candidates
That is most definitely 'Sexism'.
Its not new though.
Has been happening for years. Maybe not a 50% split regardless of what split the Applicant are though.
Thread Starter
So maybe it actually is the industry, not due to the industry not fostering the interest, maybe some women just aren't interested in aviation as an industry.
I would like to see some of the Air Force Stats as that provides a much friendlier environment for a career and lifestyle than GA to airlines would.
What ratio does the Air Force have applying and what ratio is then recruited?
For all those trying to suggest that is a good idea, how would you feel as a bloke missing a recruiting window and be stuck in a low paying job just because a woman who had inferior experience to you (but still make the minimums) got an interview and you didn't? Airline recruiting comes in waves and it is easy to just miss out for whatever reason then be on the backburner for a long time without even getting a shot.
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,967
Received 93 Likes
on
54 Posts
Which is why I just don't believe the above quoted statement as coming from her!
Given further information now; Maybe I was wrong.
Wouldn't be the first time.
instead set about being a very good pilot and one with good interpersonal skills to boot