|
Originally Posted by exfocx
(Post 10613610)
lololololol. Like I said , you can't make this **** up! You automatically slam the woman, what, the father had no say...
I said it was the choice of the COUPLE! Read it again genius. |
Originally Posted by Icarus2001
(Post 10613617)
Where did I slam the woman? Which words? I said it was the choice of the COUPLE! Read it again genius. |
Originally Posted by mmmbop
(Post 10613614)
Cool. So now let's do to men what happened to women and that will set the world straight. :ugh:
Quotas are bs. They have been around in government departments since the 70/80s and have only become worse with time, with many incompetent people becoming Head of a Department due to their gender. Now we have them in a safety related career where the best person for the role should be employed, not the person who has the correct gender. I couldn't care less if that means that male to female ratio is 80:20 or 20: 80, this is about people getting the role because they are talented and right for it, not because they are male and female. Here we go, you post one dumb comment after another! Unless women are incompetent they will easily make the cut. I also think you over estimate what's required for the role, most likely poor self-esteem. The numbers game is to get more into the field over a faster time frame without affecting standards. |
“Quotas are bs”
Maybe they have merit in some fields in some situations but for the topic at hand, yes they are BS. Which is why Qantas have not used them nor have they indicated an intention to do so in the future. “where the best person for the role should be employed” And the best way to employ the best person is to cast the widest net possible, which is what Qantas are trying to do by increasing the participation rate of women. A question for you, back in the days when piloting in Australia (one of the most knuckle dragging nations in this regard) was 100% exclusively male, do you think planes were being crewed by the “best person”? |
Originally Posted by exfocx
(Post 10613631)
Here we go, you post one dumb comment after another! Unless women are incompetent they will easily make the cut. I also think you over estimate what's required for the role, most likely poor self-esteem. The numbers game is to get more into the field over a faster time frame without affecting standards.
|
“who actually holds the correct qualification for the job in the first instance.”
Not answering the question at all. |
How come in 99% of cases it's the woman whose career goes on hold, how come in 99% of cases it's the woman who continues to do the bulk of the housework while also working? |
Originally Posted by Icarus2001
(Post 10610971)
Any announcement of gender parity in the cabin crew ranks? In the hangar? Check in staff? Bag loaders? ...
Gender parity is only for professions wanted by women and only if they're the minority. Call it "selective parity"... |
Originally Posted by bulldog89
(Post 10613706)
Oh no, please no! Gender parity is only for professions wanted by women and only if they're the minority. Call it "selective parity"... |
Originally Posted by Rated De
(Post 10613709)
When will men get XX weeks paid maternity leave?
Paternity leave, on the other hand, is worth seeking equal rights for! |
Is paternity leave not available now? Can of worms this entire topic. Best human for the job, no problemo, however it’s not how it works. For eternity ones connections or whatever’s gets them through the door, then it is up to the individual to produce the goods. No self respecting trainer, examiner will pass anyone unless you meet the standard (ok there will be minor exceptions as in everything in life). Is it fair? However if you were on the side that got the leg up, what would you do? Take the moral high ground or??? Now tell me on here, how many of you got that first break due to connections of some sort? I will admit my first break NO but certainly my second and third got me speaking to the right people. The world is a forever evolving place.......... |
Originally Posted by Global Aviator
(Post 10613716)
Is paternity leave not available now? Can of worms this entire topic. Best human for the job, no problemo, however it’s not how it works. For eternity ones connections or whatever’s gets them through the door, then it is up to the individual to produce the goods. No self respecting trainer, examiner will pass anyone unless you meet the standard (ok there will be minor exceptions as in everything in life). Is it fair? However if you were on the side that got the leg up, what would you do? Take the moral high ground or??? Now tell me on here, how many of you got that first break due to connections of some sort? I will admit my first break NO but certainly my second and third got me speaking to the right people. The world is a forever evolving place.......... |
Since when in the past was it best person for the job? Oh, you all mean Best Man for the job!
In the past the industry was able to cut out over 50% of the pop (women) when it came to selecting pilots and the number of holes in the ground was what it was, did people go around screaming that we weren't selecting the best person for the job, did they, or have I missed something? So, how will that change when you choose to include women. And for the intellectually challenged who keep going on about gender parity driving the **** cart etc, I'm sure women would LOVE that, it would mean an automatic improvement in their life as it would mean better pay and better jobs and they are OVER represented in all those ****ty job areas. |
Originally Posted by josephfeatherweight
(Post 10613700)
In a thread full of made-up, BS statistics, this is one of the bigger piles of manure I've read. Not the case in my household or in 76.8% of my colleagues' households.
I would say less than 10% of men I know do anywhere near equal to what women do. Not only is it my experience, but it's what survey after survey confirms. |
Originally Posted by Orange future
(Post 10613642)
A question for you, back in the days when piloting in Australia (one of the most knuckle dragging nations in this regard) was 100% exclusively male, do you think planes were being crewed by the “best person”? |
Your seriously deluded or an outright liar, your pick! I would say less than 10% of men I know do anywhere near equal to what women do. Not only is it my experience, but it's what survey after survey confirms. |
Originally Posted by exfocx
(Post 10613610)
lololololol. Like I said , you can't make this **** up! You automatically slam the woman, what, the father had no say, he couldn't take unpaid leave and do the childcare? You prove my point Icarus, you automatically assume the woman is responsible for parenting and the man isn't, and that's the issue and it's wide spread throughout the community, women are EXPECTED to do it all and if they have children they are accused of "wanting it all'!
So if you want to be a mother be a responsible mother and look after the child the way nature intended. Let the man go out and work and be protector of his family. To those women who choose not to have families, good for you if you want to be a professional pilot but then you earn it on merit, no quotas or AA to help you along and discriminate against men, especially if at your assessment the men did a better job than you. |
Originally Posted by exfocx
(Post 10613628)
Icarus, the Tone Deaf pilot! Choice, what sort of stupid comment is that? Women, as the stats show, Have.No.Choice, or maybe, they're just really accommodating people, that they do nearly all the heavy lifting. Dumb or what!
Grow up...if you can’t off to your little safe space you go! |
Daddy fantastic...
I agree 100% |
Cutting out the emotional BS, there is one real problem that concerns me.... That is the confidential memo to managers requiring a justification report to senior management if a female pilot is recommended for disciplinary action, downgrading, failure to perform other adverse findings or termination. THAT is the dangerous and expensive side to “quotas”, not the recruitment side. It costs lots of money to bribe anyone but white males into accepting job loss for non performance because you have, as a manager, to guard against discrimination lawsuits. That is, of course, if you can convince senior management whose kpi’s include “diversity” that you have a non performing member of a protected species in the first place. To put that another way, you will know you are operating an unbiased system when failure rates are equal. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 08:07. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.