The irony may literally kill me.

And with that, I'm done. There is no point employing logic to combat an illogical position.

Has anyone found any references to how many female CPL graduates there are annually? The day a flying school doesn't accept money from someone based on gender is the day hell freezes over. :ok:

From personal observations once people graduate there is a natural attrition that happens roughly in this order.

• Unwilling to move away from home town, therefore can't find a job
• Unwilling to go beyond emailing resumes to look for work (unwilling to travel remotely)
• Doesn't get a job within a month or two like the flying school that took their money told them they would, throws in the towel
• Unwilling to move to a remote location
• Finds that remote living is a lot different to their hometown so retreats back to hometown
• Finds that working for employers that border on sociopaths isn't that much fun
• Not getting the progression they were promised by the flying school promised they would see as they were parting with 100k
• Realising living in some very expensive locations on near poverty wages and paying back loans is extremely difficult, so they find a job that pays better money
• Finally gets on to a twin, get those magic 500 hours multi and realises the airlines are knocking down the door like the flying school that helped them part with 100k, so they pull up stumps
• Finally get an airline interview and bomb out, loses self confidence and calls it quits
• Gets in to a regional, realises they're still getting paid poverty wages and that it's really not much better than GA
• Fails a jet interview or two, disheartened and realises that there is no way they can support a family on this money, so finds a job that does
• Gets that elusive jet job and gets worked hard and realises that it's still not really better than GA

Each of those has a certain percentage of attrition and is by no means gender specific. Now if say only 10% of CPL/MECIR graduates are female and there is an equal attrition across the above, lets say 40% of the original graduates. That'd leave 6 females and 60 males out of every 100 graduates that'll be up to an airline standard, though I'd probably guess that it is more like a 60% attrition rate on gut feel alone. As we mentioned, there is no way in hell a flying school will not turn down an income source due to sex.

Aviation is hard and sometimes miserable slog and is most definitely not for everyone. I wouldn't say that males are better equipped to handle it than females, it's more that it requires someone with certain personality traits that gets them through.

But as long as fewer than 50% of CPL/MECIR graduates are female then we will always have a disparity of qualified people at the top end, it's pretty simple.

'No evidence has been provided.

Oh, and you've misquoted the Bible as well.'

I provided evidence earlier. I did not misquote the bible, I deliberately modified a well known saying (it's origin in the known form is not the bible). It's called paraphrasing.

Agreed, to have more at the interview you need more going through flying schools which means more girls in school need to be convinced it's a good career. This process would only take a couple of years. Similar arguments were used to justify the lack of equality in the medical profession until recent years - now, more medical students are female than male. Of course, that improves the overall quality of the candidates as they all have to compete with a higher number of quality applicants.

Ironically in order to encourage more women pilots it could be that some of the things quoted earlier as potential reasons that women won't fly might be changed if there were more female pilots, leading to a more family oriented, well balanced career for everybody.

"leading to a more family oriented, well balanced career for everybody."

I think I'm going to use that statement,and insert it in my next argument with crew rostering about the crap schedules they give me,then call my chief pilot and see what he thinks.

As if rostering will change just because there are more woman in the job!Have you seen the rosters the F/A's get? If it has escaped your attention most of them are female. Pilots are pilots and they will be rostered to their maximum limits regardless of gender. The Jetstar CEO (the real one not the pretend one who has just got the boot) was very vocal about ensuring that work did not get in the way of her family time. I haven't noticed any family friendly rosters being a result of any female generated cultural change.

It reminds me of the argument about females being better leaders of countries. Google who was in charge of the belligerents during the Falklands, Yom Kippur and the various India-Pakistan conflicts. I'm also sure that if Hillary gets elected President that the Yanks wont be reducing their defence budget and spending the money on homeless accommodation.

"leading to a more family oriented, well balanced career for everybody."

And therein lies the strength of this person's arguments.
:ok:

The more you lean towards family life, the less it is a good career. Male or female, doesn't matter. Now days you have no idea where you will be in a month and get one weekend off a month. You are not in the family home during the whitching hour approximately 50% of the time and are often out the door hours before the rest of the family rises.
Unlike most shift workers you don't progress from earlies to mids to lates to graveyard with a break between each, you swap randomly between them on an adhoc basis. It is difficult to be a reliable family member and it is the norm to disappoint the kids by being away when special occasions are celebrated.
If we want to convince girls that it is a good career, we should start by making it a good career ....like it used to be before the legal limits became the target.

:D

This definitely requires attention.

Curtain,

“The central question (completely unresolved by credible evidence) is why there is a low level of female participation?”

This is a fair point; the industry is really struggling to figure out why women don’t participate in flying. It is not completely unresolved though, more and more studies are being conducted to find an answer. So far research has identified some issues worth considering:

Lack of support from family or spouse.
Very few women pilot mentors or role models.
Generally less exposure to mechanized hobbies and schooling at a young age.

These are just a few gleaned from brief glances at several studies conducted overseas but there are many reasons starting to emerge as to why women are socialized into avoiding flying. Studies have shown that many girls mistakenly think physical strength is required, or that they will be treated badly in the cockpit. Its up to the industry to correct these misconceptions.

JQ is simply trying to figure out why so few women upstream of the process are selecting the pilot career that is impacting applicant numbers at the coalface. This process will provide the industry with guidance as to how to attract women into the flying school. Maybe more female pilots attending job fairs? Maybe a more visible role for presently employed female pilots within the wider industry? Its up to the experts to figure how best to utilize the data.

“Another way of saying it, is asking two questions, will a quota system…..”

Again, quotas have been covered. They will not solve the problem JQ are facing and I will go on record as saying that JQ will not be writing a policy that discriminates against any group of people. You may read such a goal from the brief information provided by the article but it is not the case. It would prove to be completely counter productive.

“Are you actually a pilot Orange Future?”

Yes indeed, have been for a long time.

“…..people are no longer willing to take such risks”

Indeed a good point. This is why so few people are getting into aviation now, the flying school numbers are minute compared to the 70’s when I became involved. The pay is lower, the cost is higher and the industrial protection is far weaker.

“There is no such thing in the airline world where an individual pilot can go and negotiate a salary….”

Correct. Which is why I made the statement that “at no point have I suggested that female pilots are paid less than male pilots”

Women in the wider airline industry ARE paid less than their male equivalent, especially managers.

Joe

“You are on a professional Pilot forum attempting to condemn an industry…..”

I am not condemning an industry at all, in fact I have been very clear on several occasions: “this argument is not to assign blame. Its not our fault, its not Jetstar's fault.”

My view is that the airline industry is subject to gender socialization just like every other walk of life and I am not going to retreat into my corner and have a dummy spit simply because an airline is trying to attract women into its ranks.


“…..that you don't understand”

I understand the industry very well, however this argument is less about understanding the industry and more about understanding social behavior.

The rest of your post is jumping at shadows, accusing me of making arguments I have not made. For example: “Cite details of present airline recruitment processes that facilitate discrimination”.

I have not suggested anywhere on this thread that airlines facilitate discrimination. Please cut and paste, or use the quote function (something that I am having trouble with and I apologize) to provide an example of where I have suggested that airlines discriminate.

Keg

“Ok. Again I'll ask. What are they?”

I suspect you are seeking a golden bullet, a clearly cut solid tangible example of where women come up against barriers when trying to gain employment as a pilot.

I don’t think these clearly defined obstacles really exist anymore, although they certainly once did.

The focus should shift from trying to find barriers to trying to figure out why do girls not look at the sky and think, cool, a 727, I would love that lifestyle, as I did.

I don’t know the answer, but it’s the answer that the industry is looking for and I don’t think it’s our job to prevent them from figuring it out.

If JQ tomorrow start providing preferential treatment to women to crew their planes to keep the “PC” police happy or to make the chief pilot feel all warm and fuzzy then I will be first to argue the inappropriateness of such a move.


The central part of the argument here is that JQ will either by fumbling accident or sneaky design, make fewer pilots available to crew their planes in the future. This is simply false, as touchy feely as the policy may appear, they are guided by money only and are s%$# scared about low pilot numbers in the future.

To 'make it' as a pilot, you need to be single minded with an eye on the end goal/prize. You need to move on a moments notice anywhere, live out of a suitcase for a long time, have no financial security and any spare money you stumble upon goes back into aviation and booze. Flying becomes your priority and life. Everything else takes a back seat. Starting out in aviation is the ultimate gamble.

I've left girlfriends to move interstate, brought girlfriends with me and left them, sold up, sold out, chewed up, spat out. It's just the nature of it. It's also the nature of the type of person who does make it.

Basically you need to put yourself and your needs first. Sleep, study etc etc. I still find this hard balancing the needs of a family and sometimes a less than understanding wife. (Why do you need sleep? You just sit there. Didn't you sleep In the hotel? Why do you need to study? You're always studying! Shouldn't you know it all by now? You're tired? I'm tired! I've been up with the kids. It's your turn....) etc etc

Often the girls find a bloke and settle down. They don't chase it.

Cadetships are the way to get women into aviation. However I've watched many start a family and never return to line flying. It's too hard on the body to do what we do, and run a family. Especially if the hubby works a lot too. Or worse is a pilot!

Ok this will be fun,hard hat on.
As a response to Sprite's post a few back.
From my experience those that have the required skill set in descending order are .................................
No cant do it due to the requirment to be politically correct and not be labeled racist or sexist but i think most know where I am going from your own experience

Ironically even the cadetships only have 5% of their applicants that are female. If you want to look at an area that attracts female participation look at ATC to find out why.

Isn't that the exact same thing as someone saying " The focus should shift from trying to find the barriers men face in entering early childhood education to trying to figure out why boys don't look at a pre-school and think, cool, loads of babies and toddlers, I would love that lifestyle."

At best, this is obfuscation or a non sequitur, perhaps by using these sort of statements you think that you are setting up a straw man. At worst it is utter nonsense. In nine pages of generally polite (for PPRUNE) discourse no one here has done any such thing.

This thread started from an article containing the following quotes:

Here we have nine pages (mostly) written by people who know the industry, who have well and truly explained the shortcomings of these policies, and explained how the industry works, Including (IMHO) a couple of excellent posts explaining the qualities of successful applicants, including self-motivation.

In seven posts, you've quoted, mis quoted, made vague reference to "studies" without links or citation, demonstrated a perception bias, made assertions without qualification, inferred intentions that were not written in the opening article and demonstrated a lack of knowledge of the aviation industry.

It's clear that you are not a professional Pilot and have nothing to contribute toward the subject of airline recruitment beyond nefarious statements about socialisation.

joe, .. .. .. :D

Framer

“Isn't that the exact same thing as someone saying " The focus should…..”

Yes, it is the same argument although I suspect it would be a lot more difficult trying to guide men into to putting up with babies and toddlers than to guide women into flying jets. But if the childhood education department sees value in increasing the participation rate of men in order to achieve satisfactory staffing levels then good on them.

GG

“Often the girls find a bloke and settle down.”

True, I think it would be much harder for women to be involved in airline flying if plans included raising kids. As a dad I was able to sneak away for trips when the lads were young but my wife was much more entrenched in the whole process, most mothers are.

No one is expecting to see the imbalance shift from 5% to 50%, clearly that is not going to happen. But airlines have a right to try and at least encourage women if possible.

Joe

Is there a reason you are closed minded and aggressive when debating on the Internet? Its not required, most posters here with opinions apposed to mine don’t resort to such childish behavior.

Does it make you feel uncomfortable knowing I am a pilot. Are you aware that many pilots out there have opinions that differ from yours; they just cant be bothered debating someone who is so fragile?

British Airways targeting female pilots with women making up only 5% of those currently employed - Mirror Online

Lufthansa starts campaign to lure more female pilots | Business | DW.COM | 22.08.2013

Women are targeted as new pilots for easyJet - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Severe Asia-Pacific pilot shortage poses significant opportunity for trainers | Financial Post

Women pilots for SIA planes a first for airline, Singapore News & Top Stories - The Straits Times

JetBlue's Creative Solution to the Pilot and Diversity Shortage

Emirates to attract more female Emirati pilots with new academy | GulfNews.com

What have those articles got to do with the actual topic? Nobody is seriously arguing that we shouldn't be encouraging females to apply for flying jobs.

There's a world of difference between actively encouraging a diverse range of applicants, and artificially engineering the M:F ratio at a particular stage of the recruitment process, which has already happened in certain jobs (e.g. police) and looks like a future reality in this industry.

If you can't differentiate between the two, there's no point in continuing the discussion.

Can we talk about the 3 transgender pilots I fly with,.....or is that out of line

I fly with an amputee - more amputees I say.

"one day lad, all this will be yours..."
"What? The curtains?"
"No! not the curtains lad..."

Brilliant.

Melbourne University advertises female-only jobs in bid to remedy gender imbalance in maths - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

:ugh:

And to the muppets (eg oicur12.again) lecturing me that J* actively altering the interview and shortlist numbers is illegal. It isn't.

Equal Opportunity Act allows for positive discrimination

so can a male reassign themselves as a female, apply, get the job then re-reassign themselves as a male?

I think Tuesday is the "Ladies Night" for free drinks. Can someone let me know what day the "Mens night" is? :}

I am concerned at what the future will hold for my children. I have both male and female children.
I am a practicing equalicist!!
Good grief.

Boy oh boy I bet there are a few male maths academics who were aiming for those slots that are fuming right now.I imagine there aren't too many positions available to Melbourne based Maths academics and now there are three less if you were born with a todger.

Bleeding Air

“…..which has already happened in certain jobs (e.g. police)”

See below, the police are subject to very different provisions of the Equal Opportunity Act, it does not imply a similar policy can be employed by JQ.

Uber

“And to the muppets (eg oicur12.again) lecturing me that J* actively altering the interview and shortlist numbers is illegal. It isn't.”

It is illegal.

The example of the university you have supplied in no way proves that JQ can therefore discriminate by applying a quota system to see more women employed.

Exceptions to the Equal Opportunity Act differ widely between schools, universities, sporting clubs, government employees and private sector employees.

Exceptions can be granted based upon a wide range of needs such as health and safety or special needs, just to name a few of many.

For sure, JQ could seek an exception to bias employment of pilots towards women. The request would, however, need JQ to demonstrate a Genuine Occupational Requirement that pilots employed by the company be women. For example, if strength or stamina was an issue.

JQ could not meet any of the exemption provisions, the law is very clear.

Indeed Titan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsdCGV0cY0s

My mummy was a girl and my Daddy was a boy.

Doesn't that make me 50% female?

That's not how I read the law.

Jetstar doesn't need to seek an exemption. Under the Equal Opportunity Act 2010, exemptions are no longer needed in many situations as they were in the 1995 act – they are regarded as special measures.

Special measures are NOT limited to Government departments and Educational institutions. They are available to private companies too. Lets look at the legislation itself.

I see nothing differentiating between a Universities ability to implement a special measure, and that of a private organization such as Jetstar. All they need to do is meet the burden listed in (2) and they're legal. If you believe this isn't the case, please cite the specific legislation.

Women in aviation have suffered historical discrimination (nobody here will deny that), and are numerically under represented in the field. This absolutely is grounds for J* to implement a special measure.

Further, I've asked about 30 times, all of you (2nd person plural) have simply skipped over it. Jetstar say they've been working hard for a year on adjusting the numerical balance of interview candidates and shortlist job positions. What are they actually doing? What evidence do you have for it?

Heard an interesting rumour this morning that this may well extend beyond mere gender balancing at an entry level and is not confined to one group entity.

Challenge to seniority anyone?

Can you elaborate C441?
I'm not sure what you're driving at.
Ta

441 is saying the act may be used to fast track commands outside of the established seniorority list.

To what end?

Das uber,

You call people muppets and then want them to provide the links for you.

I suggest you actually read the 149 page 2010 Act instead of just downloading the 2 page fact sheet.

I am well aware of employment law in Victoria and again, JQ will not be applying quotas.

"What are they actually doing? What evidence do you have for it?"

And i may have answered this before? I dont know what they are doing. Its not my company and not my business. All I know is what is published in the article:

".....aim for an even split....." and "an explanation must be provided" and "striving for better diversity".

Maybe they have started an ad campaign to convince girls considering the industry that it is totally possible. Maybe they are holding aviation forums at girls schools.

Its up to JQ as to how they achieve an "even split", but I assure you, it wont be by applying an employment quota.

Can I ask you das uber, why do you think JQ would want to discriminate against male pilots? What do you think would be the motivation?

Bitter man-hating feminists in executive/HR positions with a chip on their shoulder.

So, lets recap.

Is J*'s stated aim illegal? It isn't.

Why? Because I've shown you specific legislation that enables it. When challenged, you have failed entirely to provide evidence otherwise.

This is why I call people muppets.

http://i.imgur.com/YdEJJB1.jpg

Even better if she sits in a wheelchair, makes a tick at the disabled quota as well ...
When does this BS come to an end?
Pushing every selection to a "gender problem" does not help anything.

Had a fight with my female boss a while ago and was blamed to not accept her as superior because of her gender. I give a damn on it, leadership incapability is leadership incapability and has nothing to do with gender (except for those who got their job only due to quota not talent).

Das Uber,

Kinda pointless going around in circles with your argument based largely on paranoia and siege mentality.

Best of luck, let me know if you find any reds under the bed.