Ladies in the sky
Ladies in the sky
From a hiring point of view- do females get greater preference, I see some ladies getting positions that I would have thought that other colleagues where more suited for? Please leave sexism and misogyny out. Fairness is great, but sometimes I feel that at times it's too fair- if that makes sense.
This topic again?
I've never flown with a woman who I thought only got her job because of her gender. However I've lost count of the amount of males I've flown with and thought - "You're really only here because you're mates with the Chief Pilot or Recruiting staff" or somehow slipped through the cracks of the system.
I see some ladies getting positions that I would have thought that other colleagues where more suited for?
That is a statement that I concur and resonate with, thanks for your perspective, I hadn't thought of it like that exactly. I do remember once reading many years ago that some Aus airlines where going for a 50/ 50 split of male and female pilots. My opinion at the time was that it would ultimately not be fair as I believe there's a large discrepancy between guys and girls in the air, perhaps 80/20??
If only about 5% of pilots are women, and only about 5% of the applicants are women, then one should only fairly expect about 5% of the employees to be female. Quotas should accurately represent the proportion of females actually applying. Isn't this fair?
Yes good and bad in both genders. I have seen quite a few incompetent male pilots get a job just because they were good drinking buddies with someone. But also a few women also got ahead in aviation just for being female. Good and bad on both sides.
Yes good and bad in both genders. I have seen quite a few incompetent male pilots get a job just because they were good drinking buddies with someone. But also a few women also got ahead in aviation just for being female. Good and bad on both sides.
Look at the government now, a couple of senior ministers, including Defence, are gone, and the screeching call is to put women in the job. Not the best person, just a woman. Gotta have 50/50 they say. Horsefeathers.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A previous female instructor I flew with actually acknowledged this and said she might as well ride the wave while it was available to her. (Mind you she was very good regardless of free passes and is now a senior tre).
Trying to even up the ratios in higher end positions, thinking Jetstar Chief Pilot, when they are possibly not ready, never ends well.
Trying to even up the ratios in higher end positions, thinking Jetstar Chief Pilot, when they are possibly not ready, never ends well.
Every single pilot has at least one identity attribute that others can point at and say “you only got your job because of that”.
Gender or ethnicity, or maybe they went to an exclusive private school, or a flying school which was well connected. May have gotten help through their ex military mates or the guys they flew with in GA, might have been a cadet, might have had family connections. Might have been right place right time. Might have been the first one to submit an application, may have a surname starting with “A” and was the first one called. May have been drinking beer with the Chief Pilot at the time.
Trouble is when major carriers recruit the number of applicants usually vastly exceeds the number of positions available. Most people who apply are good people and would make a good fit. So recruiting staff sometimes have to be a bit brutal when they cut numbers down, and unfortunately some people who would’ve made fantastic pilots miss out for what they may perceive to be petty reasons. And sometimes they believe they were victims of others pushing an agenda.
From what I’ve heard (anecdotally) from those involved in airline recruitment (a few years ago when there was recruitment) is % of females who applied roughly matches the percentage of females who were offered a job.
Gender or ethnicity, or maybe they went to an exclusive private school, or a flying school which was well connected. May have gotten help through their ex military mates or the guys they flew with in GA, might have been a cadet, might have had family connections. Might have been right place right time. Might have been the first one to submit an application, may have a surname starting with “A” and was the first one called. May have been drinking beer with the Chief Pilot at the time.
Trouble is when major carriers recruit the number of applicants usually vastly exceeds the number of positions available. Most people who apply are good people and would make a good fit. So recruiting staff sometimes have to be a bit brutal when they cut numbers down, and unfortunately some people who would’ve made fantastic pilots miss out for what they may perceive to be petty reasons. And sometimes they believe they were victims of others pushing an agenda.
From what I’ve heard (anecdotally) from those involved in airline recruitment (a few years ago when there was recruitment) is % of females who applied roughly matches the percentage of females who were offered a job.
Last edited by dr dre; 25th Mar 2021 at 02:55.
Considering how those ministers have been performing on the job recently I can confidently say there was no way they got their jobs on merit or being the “best person for the job”.....
Fairness? Females?
It’s a drop in the ocean compared to the fairness dished out of the old boys clubs, mates looking after mates culture which I have had the pleasure of working alongside my entire career. Some people should not be in the left seat, some people should have long retired. FOs should not carrying people in the left seat.
CPs need to pickup the game. The next generation of CPs will be interesting as we cycle out this old generation. I reckon standards will actually improve. Mates Clubs will vanish. They will be different cultures inside. Sadly I won’t be apart of it .
It’s a drop in the ocean compared to the fairness dished out of the old boys clubs, mates looking after mates culture which I have had the pleasure of working alongside my entire career. Some people should not be in the left seat, some people should have long retired. FOs should not carrying people in the left seat.
CPs need to pickup the game. The next generation of CPs will be interesting as we cycle out this old generation. I reckon standards will actually improve. Mates Clubs will vanish. They will be different cultures inside. Sadly I won’t be apart of it .
Fairness? Females?
It’s a drop in the ocean compared to the fairness dished out of the old boys clubs, mates looking after mates culture which I have had the pleasure of working alongside my entire career. Some people should not be in the left seat, some people should have long retired. FOs should not carrying people in the left seat.
CPs need to pickup the game. The next generation of CPs will be interesting as we cycle out this old generation. I reckon standards will actually improve. Mates Clubs will vanish. They will be different cultures inside. Sadly I won’t be apart of it .
It’s a drop in the ocean compared to the fairness dished out of the old boys clubs, mates looking after mates culture which I have had the pleasure of working alongside my entire career. Some people should not be in the left seat, some people should have long retired. FOs should not carrying people in the left seat.
CPs need to pickup the game. The next generation of CPs will be interesting as we cycle out this old generation. I reckon standards will actually improve. Mates Clubs will vanish. They will be different cultures inside. Sadly I won’t be apart of it .
On the contrary I've flown with women who've told me they feel they need to study extra hard for sims, be extra dedicated at work, be on the ball all the time to not make errors because if they do the "you only got your job because of your gender" comments start.
Quotas should accurately reflect the porportion of "suitable" pilots not just applicants.
Fairness? Females?
It’s a drop in the ocean compared to the fairness dished out of the old boys clubs, mates looking after mates culture which I have had the pleasure of working alongside my entire career. Some people should not be in the left seat, some people should have long retired. FOs should not carrying people in the left seat.
CPs need to pickup the game. The next generation of CPs will be interesting as we cycle out this old generation. I reckon standards will actually improve. Mates Clubs will vanish. They will be different cultures inside. Sadly I won’t be apart of it .
It’s a drop in the ocean compared to the fairness dished out of the old boys clubs, mates looking after mates culture which I have had the pleasure of working alongside my entire career. Some people should not be in the left seat, some people should have long retired. FOs should not carrying people in the left seat.
CPs need to pickup the game. The next generation of CPs will be interesting as we cycle out this old generation. I reckon standards will actually improve. Mates Clubs will vanish. They will be different cultures inside. Sadly I won’t be apart of it .
Make, female, whatever happened to just being a human and getting on with the job irrespective of what sex (or persuasion) you are? Honestly, if I were in charge of recruiting, I wouldn’t give 2 ***** if you’re male or female, capability is where it should be.
Ahh yes, the old “Ansett Club”. What’s that? You want to join our company but you’ll be down the bottom of the seniority list as an FO for 10 years? No problem, we’ll just create a new position within flight ops management for you and you’ll be a captain.
Make, female, whatever happened to just being a human and getting on with the job irrespective of what sex (or persuasion) you are? Honestly, if I were in charge of recruiting, I wouldn’t give 2 ***** if you’re male or female, capability is where it should be.
Make, female, whatever happened to just being a human and getting on with the job irrespective of what sex (or persuasion) you are? Honestly, if I were in charge of recruiting, I wouldn’t give 2 ***** if you’re male or female, capability is where it should be.
I hired on ability and attitude. I couldn’t give a rats who you knew in the place. Most successful with myself were all just humans and sat in the 30-40 year bracket.
With male applicants vastly outnumbering female ones for pilot jobs, it is much more likely that a suitable female will find herself employed as the company can easily knock back 90% of male applicants but cannot knock back female ones at the same rate or they wouldn't have any women pilots.
An operator with a 100% male pilot group which had female pilots apply but had rejected them could face accusations of discrimination, and they know this, hence the acceptance rate for female applicants will be much higher than for males as they need to be represented in the workforce.
A company might be willing to accept an applicant who is 80% of what they consider ideal, but in an employers market might easily be able to fill vacancies with candidates who are 90%. It is quite possible that a lower scoring female would get preference over a higher scoring male as long as she was above the minimum acceptable level, in order to ensure an adequate level of representation.
If 50% of applicants were female and of the same standard as the male applicants, then the rejection rate could be the same and 50% of the workforce would be female. When something you need is in short supply, you can't afford to be too fussy.
An operator with a 100% male pilot group which had female pilots apply but had rejected them could face accusations of discrimination, and they know this, hence the acceptance rate for female applicants will be much higher than for males as they need to be represented in the workforce.
A company might be willing to accept an applicant who is 80% of what they consider ideal, but in an employers market might easily be able to fill vacancies with candidates who are 90%. It is quite possible that a lower scoring female would get preference over a higher scoring male as long as she was above the minimum acceptable level, in order to ensure an adequate level of representation.
If 50% of applicants were female and of the same standard as the male applicants, then the rejection rate could be the same and 50% of the workforce would be female. When something you need is in short supply, you can't afford to be too fussy.
Ahh yes, the old “Ansett Club”. What’s that? You want to join our company but you’ll be down the bottom of the seniority list as an FO for 10 years? No problem, we’ll just create a new position within flight ops management for you and you’ll be a captain.
The ladies I fly with are all indistinguishable from their male colleagues as far as flying goes.
More importantly ALL of them are against a quota for women in ANY field.
If Mr Joyce wants 50% female pilots great. On the same day he brings in that dream I expect to see 50% male cabin crew and 50% female engineers, tug drivers, baggage handlers. Oh and 50% women on the Qantas board and 50% men at check in desks.
If 50% is desirable for parliament and the flight deck then balance it up everywhere!
More importantly ALL of them are against a quota for women in ANY field.
If Mr Joyce wants 50% female pilots great. On the same day he brings in that dream I expect to see 50% male cabin crew and 50% female engineers, tug drivers, baggage handlers. Oh and 50% women on the Qantas board and 50% men at check in desks.
If 50% is desirable for parliament and the flight deck then balance it up everywhere!
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“The ladies I fly with are all indistinguishable from their male colleagues as far as flying goes.
More importantly ALL of them are against a quota for women in ANY field.”
Agree.
Where I work being female hasn’t been an issue for a long time.
Two pilot operations are a great leveller. Either you can do it or you cant. You work together. If you cant your reputation precedes you very quickly. Male or female.
But quotas are a mistake.
I have seen preferential selection go pear-shaped about 30 years ago when this whole discussion started. It ended badly for the individuals involved.
Its been done before and we don’t need to repeat the mistake.
More importantly ALL of them are against a quota for women in ANY field.”
Agree.
Where I work being female hasn’t been an issue for a long time.
Two pilot operations are a great leveller. Either you can do it or you cant. You work together. If you cant your reputation precedes you very quickly. Male or female.
But quotas are a mistake.
I have seen preferential selection go pear-shaped about 30 years ago when this whole discussion started. It ended badly for the individuals involved.
Its been done before and we don’t need to repeat the mistake.
Trust me it’s no joke. Being part of recruitment at a previous operator, I rejected one and said yes to another. The rejection had a sook to my boss who he knew from waaaay back as he told me multiple times in the interview, and ended up getting a free pass in. I wasn’t impressed and they understood that and they never rostered me on with that person. I’m ex AN but over that culture.
I hired on ability and attitude. I couldn’t give a rats who you knew in the place. Most successful with myself were all just humans and sat in the 30-40 year bracket.
I hired on ability and attitude. I couldn’t give a rats who you knew in the place. Most successful with myself were all just humans and sat in the 30-40 year bracket.
The quota system is justified by placing an appropriate number, 50%, of women in all position to break the glass ceiling that is strengthened by women not having role models in these areas. So we place women in these areas to provide role models so that more women see these career options as an viable pathway. A couple of problems with this. As indicated women do not see a lot of careers as viable due to “women not being able to do the job”. So women are given a chance to do the job and due to being placed in a position where they are not suited (with better male candidates being passed by) for have a high failure rate which just reinforces the perception that women cannot do the job. The amendment to the system (generally training) that allows a better chance of success for women. Argumentatively a negative as one once had to achieve a certain standard to continue. Also very argumentative that it was time for training systems to be revamped and not rely on what was a WW11 stringent filter.
There is no reason why a women cannot do any job. Worked with plenty that were excellent professional’s. Also worked with many that were there due to gender. As pointed out there are males that question the selection/training/promotion system as well.
There is no reason why a women cannot do any job. Worked with plenty that were excellent professional’s. Also worked with many that were there due to gender. As pointed out there are males that question the selection/training/promotion system as well.
