Jetstar Aiming for 50% Gender Spilt in Interview Candidates
Far easier for females to get jobs in this industry. Take Wrightsair in the outback of SA for example, I recall seeing an article in the paper a few years back about how there were 6 females working for this small operation. Can't blame Trevor Wright using this as a talking/selling point but I wonder how many hundreds of fresh male CPLs had their resumes put in the bin only to have these girls shortlisted for the simple fact they have lady parts.
The pay gap in most industries is real by the way, for no reason at all.
Hi, could you give an example of 'an industry' in Australia or please refer me to Australian Enterprise Agreement that stipulates a woman getting paid less than a man in the same position?
Cheers
Hi Smash Bugger.
I didn't actually ask for you to provide me with a link to the 'Gender Pay gap fact sheet', otherwise I would of said 'could you please provide me a link to the Gender Pay Gap Fact sheet'.
No, what I did ask is for is a link to an Australian Enterprise agreement that details a male employee being given a different rate of pay than a female for the same job description.
Seeing as you are so good at using this Google thing I suggest you also type in the term 'Why the gender pay gap is a myth', there are some excellent counter arguments I'm sure a reasonably intelligent person as yourself can comprehend, cheers
I didn't actually ask for you to provide me with a link to the 'Gender Pay gap fact sheet', otherwise I would of said 'could you please provide me a link to the Gender Pay Gap Fact sheet'.
No, what I did ask is for is a link to an Australian Enterprise agreement that details a male employee being given a different rate of pay than a female for the same job description.
Seeing as you are so good at using this Google thing I suggest you also type in the term 'Why the gender pay gap is a myth', there are some excellent counter arguments I'm sure a reasonably intelligent person as yourself can comprehend, cheers
Nunc est bibendum
I accept your point yet what other methods can be used to redress the balance?
In what way are women discriminated against from gaining entry into our industry? Zero
In what way is it implied that our industry isn't suitable for women? Zero.
Are there programs that specifically target women to encourage them into the industry? Yes.
Yet despite all this you support hiring not on merit but on identity. Insanity.
Smash bugger and oicur12, well done for standing up to the bullies, with well researched, logical and well thought out opinions.
As you may have noticed, those who are protesting most are those who seem to be black and white thinkers, or deliberately misunderstand what is stated. They also engage in some of the classic 'errors of reason' i.e. the black and white thinking, straw man argument or begging the question. To those who use these arguments, and there are a few on this thread, have a read of this The Most Common Logical Fallacies to realise why your arguments are not nearly as effective as you think they are.
Jetstar stating that they want more women at interviews does not necessarily mean they will choose women applicants over men, it may mean that they will make an effort to go into schools or advertise the career options in areas have not done so in the past, in a manner in which appeals to women rather than men.
In my years of professional aviation I have noticed that those who bitch the most at women being in their domain are those who bitch about everything being unfair on them (whilst not recognising that their failings are theirs alone, not the responsibility of others).
It is valid to say that a woman should not get a job just because of her gender, but it is equally valid that girls have been discouraged from higher paying aviation jobs by society for many years and something needs to be done to even up the balance. It is a worry that children still seem surprised when they meet a female pilot - this means the conditioning starts early.
As you may have noticed, those who are protesting most are those who seem to be black and white thinkers, or deliberately misunderstand what is stated. They also engage in some of the classic 'errors of reason' i.e. the black and white thinking, straw man argument or begging the question. To those who use these arguments, and there are a few on this thread, have a read of this The Most Common Logical Fallacies to realise why your arguments are not nearly as effective as you think they are.
Jetstar stating that they want more women at interviews does not necessarily mean they will choose women applicants over men, it may mean that they will make an effort to go into schools or advertise the career options in areas have not done so in the past, in a manner in which appeals to women rather than men.
In my years of professional aviation I have noticed that those who bitch the most at women being in their domain are those who bitch about everything being unfair on them (whilst not recognising that their failings are theirs alone, not the responsibility of others).
It is valid to say that a woman should not get a job just because of her gender, but it is equally valid that girls have been discouraged from higher paying aviation jobs by society for many years and something needs to be done to even up the balance. It is a worry that children still seem surprised when they meet a female pilot - this means the conditioning starts early.
Weasel Words.
Howard mastered the government being "committed" to doing something. It doesn't mean it will be doing it, and there is no accountability if it doesn't. This approach has been adopted by all and sundry since. You can't be accused of breaking a promise made with a commitment.
Jetstar is no different. The company is aiming for something which on the surface sounds good. It doesn't have to reach the 50% goal, and if it doesn't, it still looks good for trying.
Howard mastered the government being "committed" to doing something. It doesn't mean it will be doing it, and there is no accountability if it doesn't. This approach has been adopted by all and sundry since. You can't be accused of breaking a promise made with a commitment.
Jetstar is no different. The company is aiming for something which on the surface sounds good. It doesn't have to reach the 50% goal, and if it doesn't, it still looks good for trying.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exec to recruiting manager:
"Please explain why only 20% of your short list is female."
Response:
"Oh, is it? I'm sorry, I wasn't paying any attention to gender. That would be illegal."
Remember the Nuremberg defence? Following orders is no excuse to break the law.
"Please explain why only 20% of your short list is female."
Response:
"Oh, is it? I'm sorry, I wasn't paying any attention to gender. That would be illegal."
Remember the Nuremberg defence? Following orders is no excuse to break the law.
As a male I have absolutely no problem with this 'policy'.
There is no doubt whatsoever that women are up against it in most walks of life in this 'developed' western society and if you have any doubt about that then you're either too young and idealistic or too myopic to be convinced of any other truth than that which you think is right.
Most of the protesting viewpoints posted here purporting to be voices of reason merely show what a closed mindset women are up against with the slightest opportunity given to redress any imbalance - and it is surely an unjustified imbalance - in our industry is guffawed down with brouhaha and calls of sexism.
There is no doubt whatsoever that women are up against it in most walks of life in this 'developed' western society and if you have any doubt about that then you're either too young and idealistic or too myopic to be convinced of any other truth than that which you think is right.
Most of the protesting viewpoints posted here purporting to be voices of reason merely show what a closed mindset women are up against with the slightest opportunity given to redress any imbalance - and it is surely an unjustified imbalance - in our industry is guffawed down with brouhaha and calls of sexism.
Amazing.
Women are a minority in aviation, no question. We should discard more qualified and experienced men for lesser female candidates to help this. A 50/50 split is what we should be aiming for! Why? Because its equitable right?
But what about left handed people? A bit over 10% of the population is left handed. What are we doing to ensure they are adequately represented?!
How many Hindu lesbian black guitar playing over 6 foot vegans are being represented in the airline industry?! Does anyone not think of them!?
This is the problem with this ridiculous attitude. The 'rules' needed to redress the absurd requirement for equity in employment are endless.
The alternative is simple. There is only 1 rule. The best person for the job.
As you may have noticed, those who are protesting most are those who seem to be black and white thinkers, or deliberately misunderstand what is stated. They also engage in some of the classic 'errors of reason' i.e. the black and white thinking, straw man argument or begging the question. To those who use these arguments, and there are a few on this thread, have a read of this The Most Common Logical Fallacies to realise why your arguments are not nearly as effective as you think they are.
I'm dying for you to point out these 'logical fallacies' with actual examples.
Jetstar stating that they want more women at interviews does not necessarily mean they will choose women applicants over men, it may mean that they will make an effort to go into schools or advertise the career options in areas have not done so in the past, in a manner in which appeals to women rather than men.
Do you have any evidence for this?
In my years of professional aviation I have noticed that those who bitch the most at women being in their domain are those who bitch about everything being unfair on them (whilst not recognising that their failings are theirs alone, not the responsibility of others).
Cool story. Totally irrelevant to the thread but 10/10, would read again. I could care less how many women there are in aviation. My mother and my wife are both pilots. Its great. Both of them howeve believe in a meritocracy. Solving perceived discrimination with more discrimination is moronic and serves only to cast a shadow over those women who have achieved legitimately in the field with a suspicion that they simply got their job because of their gender. That is doing a true disservice to women.
It is valid to say that a woman should not get a job just because of her gender (Ya think!), but it is equally valid that girls have been discouraged from higher paying aviation jobs by society for many years and something needs to be done to even up the balance. It is a worry that children still seem surprised when they meet a female pilot - this means the conditioning starts early.
Just as children are surprised when they meet a male nurse. Damn evil society.
I'm dying for you to point out these 'logical fallacies' with actual examples.
Jetstar stating that they want more women at interviews does not necessarily mean they will choose women applicants over men, it may mean that they will make an effort to go into schools or advertise the career options in areas have not done so in the past, in a manner in which appeals to women rather than men.
Do you have any evidence for this?
In my years of professional aviation I have noticed that those who bitch the most at women being in their domain are those who bitch about everything being unfair on them (whilst not recognising that their failings are theirs alone, not the responsibility of others).
Cool story. Totally irrelevant to the thread but 10/10, would read again. I could care less how many women there are in aviation. My mother and my wife are both pilots. Its great. Both of them howeve believe in a meritocracy. Solving perceived discrimination with more discrimination is moronic and serves only to cast a shadow over those women who have achieved legitimately in the field with a suspicion that they simply got their job because of their gender. That is doing a true disservice to women.
It is valid to say that a woman should not get a job just because of her gender (Ya think!), but it is equally valid that girls have been discouraged from higher paying aviation jobs by society for many years and something needs to be done to even up the balance. It is a worry that children still seem surprised when they meet a female pilot - this means the conditioning starts early.
Just as children are surprised when they meet a male nurse. Damn evil society.
Originally Posted by Smash
So how about you just take your Uncle Maths and your perceived victimisation and instead set about being a very good pilot and one with good interpersonal skills to boot which will make any quota or policy irrelevant anyway - you'll surely make it through any selection process on those grounds alone.
So, relax everyone, Smash has got it figured out.
Last edited by das Uber Soldat; 21st Apr 2016 at 02:51.
If groups stopped worrying "how many x are employed by industry y" and simply hired the best person for the job, the world would be a better place. Trying to engineer "equality" into an industry that holds no appeal (yet lacks any barriers for entry/progession/success) for a subset of the population is a waste of resources.
Incidentally, in my experience in multi-crew, I have found that those who seem to have an innate dislike for female pliots are...female cabin crew. 
In my years of professional aviation I have noticed that those who bitch the most at women being in their domain are those who bitch about everything being unfair on them (whilst not recognising that their failings are theirs alone, not the responsibility of others).
Thread Starter
it may mean that they will make an effort to go into schools or advertise the career options in areas have not done so in the past, in a manner in which appeals to women rather than men.
If you want more women in aviation you have to increase the participation rate of women which as Keg pointed out earlier may never happen for a myriad of reasons.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: aus
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading all this baloney, I think it's made my point. A divisive, poorly executed, poorly communicated nonsense policy that will be lost like tears in rain with the next trendy thought bubble.
Nunc est bibendum
Irony: accusing people of engaging in logical fallacies such as straw man arguments and then actually putting forward your own straw man.
Brilliant.
Brilliant.
In South Africa, the discrimated against demographic were up arms about the lack of representation in South African airways.
They were hired in the same numbers as their 'white counterparts, (50/50), but where not getting through the exams or training.
They were up in arms in the media that they were being discrimated against, and the standard was too high and should be lowered.
This was despite the fact most of their 'other' colleagues generally passed.
The best person should be the best person for the job regardless of any other factor.
After all, you don't want a 'quota' warming the window seat on a dark stormy night when things go bad, and your family is onboard.... In fact, it doesn't even have to be dark and stormy as demonstrated by Air Asia, asiana and numerous others....
They were hired in the same numbers as their 'white counterparts, (50/50), but where not getting through the exams or training.
They were up in arms in the media that they were being discrimated against, and the standard was too high and should be lowered.
This was despite the fact most of their 'other' colleagues generally passed.
The best person should be the best person for the job regardless of any other factor.
After all, you don't want a 'quota' warming the window seat on a dark stormy night when things go bad, and your family is onboard.... In fact, it doesn't even have to be dark and stormy as demonstrated by Air Asia, asiana and numerous others....
Thread Starter
From the Economist May 2014.
SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS (SAA) has been taken to task by Solidarity, a trade union, over its discriminatory hiring practices for pilots. The union is angry with the state-owned carrier's decision not to admit Daniël Hoffman to its cadet pilot programme for the second year in a row. Mr Hoffman, whose theory and psychometric tests were described as exceptional by Solidarity, is a white male. That puts him at a handicap against other applicants because of the airline's self-professed bias towards hiring black, coloured (mixed race), Indian or white female pilots.
In 2012, Solidarity submitted two near-identical applications for SAA's cadet pilot programme. There was just one difference: one applicant was white, the other was black. The white candidate received a swift rejection letter; the black one was accepted onto the programme. SAA defended its policy at the time by noting that 85% of its serving pilots were white. A spokesperson for the airline told Beeld, an Afrikaans-language daily newspaper, that whites will only be hired once efforts to find applicants of other races are exhausted. The subsequent media furore forced SAA to ditch its policy, but Solidarity suspects it is still being implemented behind the scenes.
Most commercial pilots in Africa are not indigenous to the continent. This has nothing to do with whites being better at flying and everything to do with the better opportunities they have historically enjoyed. They usually come from richer backgrounds and have better access to education, which gives them a head-start. SAA is therefore trying to level the socio-economic playing field by shifting things back in favour of disadvantaged blacks.
Affirmative action is a central pillar of government policy in South Africa. The government has launched various Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) programmes in an attempt to reverse the injustices of history. Most white South Africans concede that some form of post-apartheid redress is inevitable. As long as it is pursued fairly, such re-balancing should benefit society. But a blanket ban on training white male pilots seems crass. Putting aside the prestige and compensation that pilots enjoy, their job is one of the most demanding and socially responsible functions in any economy. Millions of South Africans entrust their lives to commercial pilots each year. Elevating arbitrary criteria such as skin colour above objective, performance-based measures should be roundly condemned.
There are better solutions. Ethiopian Aviation Academy, a subsidiary of Ethiopian Airlines, another large African carrier, is training indigenous pilots in record numbers. The academy already processes 1,000 trainees per year, and it plans to quadruple this figure over the next decade. Applicants are drawn not just from Ethiopia, but from across East Africa and beyond. These graduates should, over time, turn the tide from majority-white to majority-black flight crews on the continent. SAA’s cadet programme, meanwhile, selected just 40 candidates last year (none of them white males).
Pilots may not be the only victims of SAA's policies. When the airline had to select a new boss last summer—its fifth in as many years—Nico Bezuidenhout, an experienced white airline executive, was among the front-runners. He lost out to Monwabisi Kalawe, a black executive with no prior experience in the industry. One year on, Mr Kalawe is reportedly being investigated over four allegations of impropriety; the airline insists he has done nothing untoward. Most South Africans simply want their flag carrier to be run by a competent, experienced manager. Likewise, most passengers simply want a competent, experienced pilot to land them safely on the ground. Skin colour should be a non-issue
In 2012, Solidarity submitted two near-identical applications for SAA's cadet pilot programme. There was just one difference: one applicant was white, the other was black. The white candidate received a swift rejection letter; the black one was accepted onto the programme. SAA defended its policy at the time by noting that 85% of its serving pilots were white. A spokesperson for the airline told Beeld, an Afrikaans-language daily newspaper, that whites will only be hired once efforts to find applicants of other races are exhausted. The subsequent media furore forced SAA to ditch its policy, but Solidarity suspects it is still being implemented behind the scenes.
Most commercial pilots in Africa are not indigenous to the continent. This has nothing to do with whites being better at flying and everything to do with the better opportunities they have historically enjoyed. They usually come from richer backgrounds and have better access to education, which gives them a head-start. SAA is therefore trying to level the socio-economic playing field by shifting things back in favour of disadvantaged blacks.
Affirmative action is a central pillar of government policy in South Africa. The government has launched various Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) programmes in an attempt to reverse the injustices of history. Most white South Africans concede that some form of post-apartheid redress is inevitable. As long as it is pursued fairly, such re-balancing should benefit society. But a blanket ban on training white male pilots seems crass. Putting aside the prestige and compensation that pilots enjoy, their job is one of the most demanding and socially responsible functions in any economy. Millions of South Africans entrust their lives to commercial pilots each year. Elevating arbitrary criteria such as skin colour above objective, performance-based measures should be roundly condemned.
There are better solutions. Ethiopian Aviation Academy, a subsidiary of Ethiopian Airlines, another large African carrier, is training indigenous pilots in record numbers. The academy already processes 1,000 trainees per year, and it plans to quadruple this figure over the next decade. Applicants are drawn not just from Ethiopia, but from across East Africa and beyond. These graduates should, over time, turn the tide from majority-white to majority-black flight crews on the continent. SAA’s cadet programme, meanwhile, selected just 40 candidates last year (none of them white males).
Pilots may not be the only victims of SAA's policies. When the airline had to select a new boss last summer—its fifth in as many years—Nico Bezuidenhout, an experienced white airline executive, was among the front-runners. He lost out to Monwabisi Kalawe, a black executive with no prior experience in the industry. One year on, Mr Kalawe is reportedly being investigated over four allegations of impropriety; the airline insists he has done nothing untoward. Most South Africans simply want their flag carrier to be run by a competent, experienced manager. Likewise, most passengers simply want a competent, experienced pilot to land them safely on the ground. Skin colour should be a non-issue
It's discrimination alright. Nobody is denying it. Only some types of discrimination are unlawful. Discrimination in favour of employing women in some industries doesn't come under that category - a sign of the times we live in I suppose.
Last edited by chuboy; 22nd Apr 2016 at 04:09.
I have discovered a horrifyingly unacceptable statistic - male nurses make up only 8% of the nursing population. This outlandish statistic MUST be rectified to "redress the balance" - I propose:
- No HECS debt for male nurses
- Individual mentors provided to male nurses as they complete their studies
This female dominated industry must be forced to artificially increase the percentage of males within its ranks to be "equal".
Seriously, I'm done with this hogwash...
Guess we will have to agree to disagree...
- No HECS debt for male nurses
- Individual mentors provided to male nurses as they complete their studies
This female dominated industry must be forced to artificially increase the percentage of males within its ranks to be "equal".
Seriously, I'm done with this hogwash...
Guess we will have to agree to disagree...