Canberra wants more women in Aviation careers
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Usually firmly on the ground
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
The way we're going. there will be nobody left in the kitchens 
The following users liked this post:
The following 3 users liked this post by das Uber Soldat:
I have to say that I think it’s a good thing to have programs like this. There are so many girls who’ve not even considered aviation as a career because 1) they don’t know about it or 2) they see it being so male dominated that they are worried they’ll be not accepted. This basically means there is about 50% of the population to tap into for employment meaning we can have enough Australian staff without seeking them from overseas.
Whilst I know this forum is mostly an anonymous gabfest, do take a look at the comments on this post thus far and think about whether if you were a girl wanting to join the industry and doing some research, do you think these comments would encourage or discourage them?
Whilst I know this forum is mostly an anonymous gabfest, do take a look at the comments on this post thus far and think about whether if you were a girl wanting to join the industry and doing some research, do you think these comments would encourage or discourage them?
There are so many girls who’ve not even considered aviation as a career because 1) they don’t know about it or
That is up there with the ridiculous statement “ you can’t be it if you can’t see it”.
There are no additional barriers to women entering aviation than men. Equal opportunity exists already. Why should we expect a 50% ratio?
The following 3 users liked this post by Icarus2001:
Really? Women don’t know there are two pilots up the front of a passenger jet?
That is up there with the ridiculous statement “ you can’t be it if you can’t see it”.
There are no additional barriers to women entering aviation than men. Equal opportunity exists already. Why should we expect a 50% ratio?
That is up there with the ridiculous statement “ you can’t be it if you can’t see it”.
There are no additional barriers to women entering aviation than men. Equal opportunity exists already. Why should we expect a 50% ratio?
what about that woman/girls who’ve never been on an aircraft to hear one of those rare things known as a female pilot? Tell me, how do they know?
The following users liked this post:
and there you have it folks….took all of about two seconds to incite the rage….. perhaps this relates to my second point as to why woman don’t want to work in aviation?
what about that woman/girls who’ve never been on an aircraft to hear one of those rare things known as a female pilot? Tell me, how do they know?
what about that woman/girls who’ve never been on an aircraft to hear one of those rare things known as a female pilot? Tell me, how do they know?
So why do you think a girl isn’t looking up thinking the same thing about wanting to fly it? The world is so full of information these days that is virtually impossible to not be able to find the relevant information about a potential career.
I think it’s all a crock. There’s many good females in aviation, maybe the reason there isn’t a 50/50 split is because 50% of females aren’t interested in flying?
The following 6 users liked this post by morno:
and there you have it folks….took all of about two seconds to incite the rage….. perhaps this relates to my second point as to why woman don’t want to work in aviation?
I fly with plenty of women pilots and not one I have asked is in favour of quotas. Almost all of them NEVER play the female card, they just get on with the job.
PPRuNe Handmaiden
I have done a few school careers days in the past 10 years. The number of teenage females who did not know piloting was available to them was startling. They honestly think that they can't do it.
It's not the hours etc, after all, cabin crew do fairly similar hours etc and there's no shortage of ladies wanting to be cabin crew.
Retraining a female pilot after she's returned from maternity leave is no more expensive than retraining a male pilot post heart attack/cancer/significant injury.
To this day, refuellers etc still ask to see the captain when I am standing right in front of them. No point in asking the male cabin crew, he doesn't know how the fuel panel works.
It's not the hours etc, after all, cabin crew do fairly similar hours etc and there's no shortage of ladies wanting to be cabin crew.
Retraining a female pilot after she's returned from maternity leave is no more expensive than retraining a male pilot post heart attack/cancer/significant injury.
To this day, refuellers etc still ask to see the captain when I am standing right in front of them. No point in asking the male cabin crew, he doesn't know how the fuel panel works.
Retraining a female pilot after she's returned from maternity leave is no more expensive than retraining a male pilot post heart attack/cancer/significant injury.
Retraining a female pilot after she's returned from maternity leave is no more expensive than retraining a male pilot post heart attack/cancer/significant injury.
So you're saying that women don't have heart attacks? Do men have 3 or 4 heart attacks that they have to be re-trained after? If you're trying to whinge about the percentage of female pilots it'd pay to come up with rational arguments.
What a dumb comment. Like, really dumb.
So you're saying that women don't have heart attacks? Do men have 3 or 4 heart attacks that they have to be re-trained after? If you're trying to whinge about the percentage of female pilots it'd pay to come up with rational arguments.
So you're saying that women don't have heart attacks? Do men have 3 or 4 heart attacks that they have to be re-trained after? If you're trying to whinge about the percentage of female pilots it'd pay to come up with rational arguments.
It’s a moot point anyway as it’s illegal to discriminate in employment based on maternity status.
The following users liked this post:
PPRuNe Handmaiden
Of course you need to retrain all pilots post illness/injury. The common trope re female pilots is that we cost a fortune to retrain post pregnancy. That is a big assumption that all women want to have babies. Here's a kicker. We don't. Yes, women get cancer and have heart attacks. I didn't say we didn't.
Dumb statement? How many men have been asked "are you going to have children?" at a job interview? Yep, illegal question. However, I was asked this question 3 times in one job interview for a Qantas regional back in mid 1999.
Fortunately the percentage of females learning to fly in the UK has begun to increase which is great news for flying schools. To be honest, the flying schools need all the competent students they can get. The number of competent people learning to fly is quite low, especially compared to the 1980s. It's so dire in the UK some airlines (British Airways) have even opened up funded cadet schemes.
Any campaign that attracts a wider audience is a good thing. So long as it's not at the expense of competency. I don't condone lowering the bar or having quotas. Shining a light on a previously unknown career option is useful - for every one.
Dumb statement? How many men have been asked "are you going to have children?" at a job interview? Yep, illegal question. However, I was asked this question 3 times in one job interview for a Qantas regional back in mid 1999.
Fortunately the percentage of females learning to fly in the UK has begun to increase which is great news for flying schools. To be honest, the flying schools need all the competent students they can get. The number of competent people learning to fly is quite low, especially compared to the 1980s. It's so dire in the UK some airlines (British Airways) have even opened up funded cadet schemes.
Any campaign that attracts a wider audience is a good thing. So long as it's not at the expense of competency. I don't condone lowering the bar or having quotas. Shining a light on a previously unknown career option is useful - for every one.
The following 4 users liked this post by redsnail:
I'm in the 'it takes a village' camp. Only women can bear children, so women have different needs as far as time away from the workplace goes. So if you're in business, plan and allocate accordingly. It's a cost that society needs to bear. If you want more young taxpayers to support your boomer retirement, then you're gunna have to pay. In this case, if airfares have to go up $0.73 to cover, then so be it. Couldn't give a hoot if the pilot population is 50/50 and all of them want children. If that's the case it will actually create more pilot jobs.
Comparing it however to men having heart attacks
Comparing it however to men having heart attacks
There are plenty of woman in aviation but they are usually on the other end of the microphone. The biggest problem with being a pilot in the current age is the rostering and its family unfriendly expectations. I have flown with female pilots who really struggle with the demands of the roster once they have children. I have also flown with plenty of male F/O's who find the rostering difficult but it is rarely to the point that they consider giving flying away. ATC however doesn't seem to have quite the same problems. If the government and the airlines want to attract more females then they have to make the "work-life balance" statements actually mean something. Getting rid of some of the HR pilot haters would be a good start.
The following users liked this post: