I do know of one CEO whose personal opinion was against female recruits of certain ages. This was many years ago, and after the EU had introduced very generous maternity leave allowances. There were many more applicants than vacancies, so he could hide his feelings. To him it was quite simple, and this was before all the cadet & P2F stuff: you hire a mid-late 20's experienced female and within a couple of years she's on the baby train. The amount of time off required, on full pay, caused rostering problems and unwanted headaches. (no pun). Once that was over, a few months later it repeated itself. Put 6-10 of these in the mix and it was something he wanted to avoid.
Now, up steps an experienced captain, or one ready for command, late 30 early 40 lady with kids already in tow, and no problem. In she came.

One can understand his pure business thinking. To him was sad but true.

But to take 'positive action' you need to discriminate against those who don't fit into the group that are benefiting from that 'positive action'.

That is exactly the mistake my local police force made-they tried to exclude white males from a recruiting drive. In doing so they fell foul of the legislation.

Ultimately of course only a court could rule on this-I haven’t seen said adverts but did anyone challenge them? Certainly my local police force ended up in the dock so to speak.

If pax don't care about PTF I fail to see why they would care in such case.

iggy is totally correct. Pax care nowt about who's 'up front' as long as the flight is cheap.

But it is the other person in those front two seats who might be wondering if the other person next to them got that position due to competence or to fill a 'quota' for publicity purposes?

However most pax are less than informed; "tell the captain there is fuel dripping from underneath the plane", views condensation, drip drip drip; "the engines are making a clanking sound" hears sound of fan turning in the wind. Travelling as pax I am more than informed and never feel a 'frisson of unease' when welcomed on board by a female voice. Everyone has heard the oafish quips directed at female pilots, not cool and played out years ago. Flown with plenty of females in both seats and can honestly say the majority were as good if not better than their downtrodden white male counterparts, respect. I find that the girls are far more determined to make a successful contribution to the profession than the (sometimes mostly) privileged little boys who's mummies and daddies have remortgaged their house for/given bundles of cash to after 3 years wasted at uni to go and fly big shiny jets. Even today little girls are made to feel that such a profession is not for them, its a boys job. So I fully welcome the 'positive discrimination' as some of you put it (even though it isn't)! More females should be encouraged to fly our aircraft, so what if companies want to promote that idea?

For goodness sake, every application I have seen by airlines have been available and open to applicants who meet the requirements at that time, in no way has it ever said “Females cannot apply”.

Male and female have all been eligible, so I really don’t see the song and dance about women, they are not hard done by, they can apply just like everyone else, nobody is more special than the other.

So you implying that only little boys will have mummies and daddies who remortgage a house for training? Is this why giving 30,000 euro to a female is acceptable and not to a male?

I for one worked my little boys bum off to get to where I am, god how I would have loved to be handed 30 grand for training!

You must have a very strange definition of discrimination if you don't think this is it.

This one... quite clearly implies that "Males cannot apply"!


Any influence in this field should be by parents encouraging their offspring of both genders that they should aim for what they want. From then on they are on equal footing and that is genuine 'gender equality'. Airlines do not limit pilot recruiting to one gender. If there are less woman pilots then it must be a sign that less women want to be pilots. No 'social tinkering' can alter that. But now in the name of some bollocks 'political correctness' you are getting airlines handing out a 30.000 euro 'bung' to a woman solely because she is a woman.

The world has gone bananas. Thanks lefties.

The repetition of a statement which is patently untrue is propaganda.

'Gender pay gap' is simply the median wage of men in full time work, compared to median wage of women in full time work. There is a gap, but why it exists is never discussed.

What it hides is that:

1. What people do for a job
2. The concentration in particular industries of a particular gender
3. Education levels and field of study.

Thus it is disingenuous that all they mention is the 'gap' as it suits a particular agenda.


Is it not surprising that some industries are dominated by one gender? If that work is highly skilled, specialist and even sometimes risky, does that usually attract remuneration differences?
Think of drilling on an oil rig or child care. Would there be a difference is gender presence and remuneration?


This is conveniently ignored.

You are quite obviously talking hoop. EVERY advert for EVERY job in the UK, whether on the tube, the TV or on billboards has a picture of a smiling strong confident woman, sometimes an ethnic woman, sometimes also with an ethnic man in tow.

Girls are constantly told by teachers that there is nothing they can't do. My sons' headmaster recently appointed TWO head girls for the academic year and quite brazenly told the parents he couldn't find a suitable Year 13 boy so didn't see why he should appoint a head boy. (Try doing the same with two head boys and see how long you last in post...!)

It’s amazing how one can spout sexist and racist drivel and it remains uncensored as long as it attacks white males. Pathetic beyond belief. The many females that I have flown with have neither been better or worse than their male counterparts. Also the colour of their skin is completely irrelevant. The majority of pilots regardless of dna have worked hard to achieve their seat at the sharp end. I could not care less except that they do their job proficiently. And I don’t think that my views are unusual. I am sick and tired of this irresponsible pc bollox.

The question many young pilots of a certain gender (pick one) are considering is, having obtained a Commercial Licence do I:

1. Tackle an Instrument Rating
2. Tackle an Instructor's Rating
3. Gender reassign, after all apparently is fluid now!

A tricky proposition where choices costing dollars and progression are concerned

Would there be a difference in life-style, especially home life? Why, oh why, is that always ignored and money, money, money put at the fore in any comparisons? Maybe women are often brighter in choosing careers/jobs that give them a better lifestyle and that just happens to be at the expense of pay. But everybody only fixates on pay. If less women are airline pilots them maybe the cr@p lifestyle has more influence on their choices than anything else?

Exactly.

Ignoring the element of choice is what the system intends. Money does one little good when in the graveyard. Money was compensation for risk and loss (be it mining risk or being away from kin)
Supply of pilots was a function of demography; more supply than demand and down went terms and conditions.

Adversarial IR/HR models are all predicated on endless supply, which no longer holds.

Many have worked out the job offers little 'compensation' for the loss and perhaps one gender worked that out a lot earlier than the other!

Interestingly BA have just published their gender pay gap stats. Apparently 10% male favoured overall, but if you take the pilots out of the equation (94% male) then the pay difference favours women by 1%.

I get that girls are less encouraged in daily life (not media campaigns), but on the other hand IF they make it to flight training and manage to be not catastrophic, the deal is almost set. Just my impression. Very high reward for those who show up.

I go modular, see different ATOs, instructors, career advisors and sometimes airline pilots. Females seem to struggle with similar things than men but one thing very rarely: permanent unemployment.

Men have to make the top whatever percentage applicable to the number of positions hired for. Women have to pass the standard requirements and are very close already.

I will take corrections from more experienced contributers, especially airline insiders, but my impression is that regardless of a womans age, background, ATO or what have you: once licensed and up to basic standard, women have to try hard to get it wrong.

It’s time companies stop amounting to pressure from the growing number of Social Justice Warriors we are seeing in society these days.

The route to the the right hand seat of an airline has nothing to do with your gender. Aptitude is genderless, EASA exams are genderless and flying is, you guessed it, genderless. There is simply no barrier for woman getting into the industry. In fact, right now you’re at a huge advantage if you are a female.

Airlines offering sponsored or subsidised training for females because there’s not as many in the industry is ridiculous, and not to mention, sexist. It’s not positive discrimination; it’s just discrimination. The fact of the matter is that there’s not as many woman interested in aviation. So why are we punishing the males?

As for the “gender pay gap.” Any economist worth their salt will tell you that it is a myth. It does not exist. It’s illegal to pay woman less, otherwise every company would only employ woman. The pay gap is taken from a comparison across all jobs in society and so does not represent a job for job “pay gap.” It’s about time these people got over themselves and started promoting real equality instead of superiority.

I have seen both sides of this. In a previous life I was a turboprop captain and worked for a small outfit where no women were employed. One of the most embarrassing (and a conversation I now feel ashamed even having had) was with a very competent lady pilot who I knew wanted to work there. I had to tell her that we did not take female pilots, which everyone knew to be true. It was just a fact of the guy who ran the airline and is completely indefensible, but that is how it was. I now work for easyJet and we are actively seeking applications from lady pilots. The harsh reality is that the sheer numbers of women pilots easyJet want do not really exist for a whole variety of cultural reasons, that we could debate endlessly. The same argument could be made for black male pilots from West Indian backgrounds. They simply do not exist in any numbers to employ in the first place - again for a whole variety of cultural reasons that are way outside of easyJet's control. The arguments are very difficult - should we employ men and women on an equal basis regarding ability or should we weight the dice in favour of women to correct a clear imbalance? There is no easy answer to this and easyJet will face this very problem. If we take women who are manifestly not as good as their male peers, that is there for the world to see and we are opening the door to big trouble. Do we, however, continue the practice of keeping this a male-dominated profession? I think not. I should also point out that our female captains are often incredibly talented and capable pilots who are a pleasure to observe in action. They just do not exist in the same numbers as their male colleagues, and that is a very hard problem to solve.

We at easyJet have virtually no female Training Captains (we do have a tiny number and are trying to increase it). Why is this? It is certainly not a deliberate policy, but more due to a host of practical problems faced by ladies at key stages in their lives. It is really to do with the fact that at the critical stages of selection for these types of jobs, ladies are typically married and having children. They are often part-time and pre-occupied with being mothers. To get through the Training Captain courses requires massive emotional effort and at critical times many women are simply not able to provide the continued effort required to get through. Often their husbands/partners are in big careers themselves and cannot provide the background support many wives do to husbands going through these courses themselves with young children. I used to have no sympathy for this, but have actually completely transformed my view. Forget company success and 'efficiency' for a moment. We as a society need to have professional women who form part of the breeding population, given that men cannot do so. To that end, we must remove invisible glass ceilings that effectively prevent advancement by skilled women. At easyJet I believe we are genuinely trying to do this, but the practicalities are enormous in doing so. I am not a manager, but merely a casual observer seeing how difficult it is practically-speaking for even the most talented married women with children to succeed at being a Training Captain. I am now of the view that we have to provide a level of support to women that most men do not require, simply because it is the women who have the lion's share of the work in bringing up children. We need to radically change our practices of the past and make it work for these talented ladies to advance up the system. Just my own opinion - and very different from how I used to feel. Others may disagree.

Maybe I'm missing something from your comment,but I can't really see the problem with that.
This job naturally attracts more men than women just like nursing attracts more women than men,and is therefore normal that is a male dominated profession.
A woman who wishes to become a pilot can go to a flight school,get her license and if she's good enough she will get her job,just like any man does.
Basically I don't see any reason why we should forced them to become pilots when the doors are already open (a bit too much nowadays in my opinion)and they clearly tend to chose other career paths.

Men are much more likely to go for the high paycheck, not many women do, work life balance is much more important, plus they feel much more secure at home each night.
Does it matter to passengers if a woman is flying?. In most cases they don't know unless the cockpit door is open boarding. However over the years I have flown as a passenger a great many times and I have NEVER heard a female pilot address passengers ???.

Respectfully not hearing a female flight crew make a PA doesn’t mean one isn’t present, it may happen that she could be onboard and is conducting line training and giving the other person the task of running each sector(s) and hence a PA by a male colleague.

Either way regardless of more or less women is NOT acceptable to discriminate against one gender in favour of the other.

This supposed bias for males making more for a similar but not same job is B.S. If you look at the exact same job in the airlines, the pay is the same.

If the feminazis are so concerned about inequity of pay, then look at porn industry, the women make way more than men. Proof of discrimination in society and I want extra hiring benefits throughout the economy because of it.

From another place:

Society, in general, judges men by how well they provide for their family. Now days that means ‘what does he do for a living?’. It is for many men a defining element of their identity, critical to how they feel about themselves and to how they are received by others.
Men in low paid work are treated very differently while out and about in society than men in well paid jobs. (If you don’t believe me swap out your XF Jag and chinos for a 1993 Corolla and some beach shorts and go about your day.)
Women are usually judged with less emphasise on pay cheque, with personality, looks and family situation carrying more weight than with men.
What does that mean? Men, in general, are more concerned about what a job will pay than women and will quickly dismiss low paid opportunities regardless of how much they would enjoy the work, and will do decades of hard yards to secure higher paid jobs at the expense of health, lifestyle, and family harmony.
I know there are many thousands of exceptions ( on both sides) to the generalisation I’ve written above, but if a quantitative assessment was actually possible, it would favour my ramblings. ( Either that or people just didn’t like my Corolla when I was in between jobs).

And the winner is;

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-ry...-idUKKCN1HA1LY

67% gender pay gap for Ryan Air is certainly large. I propose an easy fix, if they simply paid all cabin crew First Officer salaries, and all Pursers Captain salaries,the gap would be close to zero. Job done, politicians satisfied.

I'd be interested to know the % of female pilots who obtain a job within the first 12 months of completing their fATPL training compared to their male counterparts. I suspect there aren't too many unemployed female pilots looking for work.

I haven't read the previous 4 pages, but everyone seems to be saying the same kind of thing.

If I was a politician I'd be wondering if Manchester City FC pay their female playing staff the same as they pay their male....this is a pretty humungous gender pay gap considering their job title and role within the organisation is exactly the same...

According to the BBC, the gender pay gap at Ryanair Ltd:

I’m not sure which shocks me the most. Is it the fact that the person constructing the survey chose not to compare pay by function or the fact that government policy may be changed as a direct result of this survey. I’m not normally one to defend Ryanair but to the best of my knowledge, they pay by function not according to the tackle between your legs. Furthermore, there are no gender barriers preventing entry into any Ryanair job.

The problem, if there is one, is that girls (of both sexes) decide not to choose to fly aircraft and boys (of both sexes) do not apply to become cabin crew. Whose fault is this? It is certainly not Ryanair’s. They pay the same no matter what your gender. If this is a problem that needs fixing, the solution will not be found with government action based of this survey. In my opinion, the best thing that can happen as a result of this survey is that anyone who believes it has a value should be drowned in public to serve as a discouragement for any other idiot who wishes to waste public time and money.

PM

My observation was questioning Joe Publics prejudices against women pilots, are passengers more reassured hearing a male voice?. My own experience is that women are more careful pilots and less likely to take risks or cut margins

The Reuters news article states that "Ryanair, Europe's largest low-cost carrier, said only eight out of its 554 pilots based in the United Kingdom are women".


Safe to assume that these eight in question are also on direct RYR contracts?


Or are they perhaps working as contractors?


And if the later, then how did they become included in the required disclosure?.


Just want to see if we are comparing equally employed individuals?.

In spain here we have the same Bull!!!! propaganda about the gender gap with the same bull!!!! arguments comparing Jobs between themselves that have nothing to do.
With that in mind i just have to think this is all a colective effort of some kind that is trying to drive europe in a communist direction.

SJw´s and that crap need to get banned and muffled, to this arguments i always answer with a:
" i would never ask for a Male CC to earn the same wage as a female pilot or for a male nurse to earn the same as a female doctor"


And i receive this with either yelling and insults or crickets.

PAY GAP
 

Is not the current preoccupation by Blessed Terrie Maybot, the British Prime Minister, rather off-target in highlighting the perceived gender gap in pay?

It looks good for a Conservative PM to be appearing to take a positive measure on the social justice front, as promised on the steps of number 10.

However, what has happened to the yawning chasm between the dosh shovelled into the trousers of (both genders) senior management and CEOs, amounting to multiples of hundreds of times the average worker-bees' remuneration?

Yes, it's got and is getting wider and the same group of overpaid wallahs get a nice payoff/pension pot/shares even when their incompetence results in the collapse of their company!

As the HR departments of all >250 employee companies slave away to provide this gender data, the real targets are escaping the spotlight which should be shone on their immoral practices. :ugh:

So dopy Theresa wants to do something about the gender pay gap? But she hasn't said what she wants to do. What can she do? So much legislation suffers from unintended consequences, but can you immagine where this could lead? I can: Ryanair pilots will reassign themselves a female gender - apparently, you can do that, in this bull!!!! PC world. Huge strapping blokes in manual jobs will see they lift and carry no more than their weakest female colleague. Men will refuse dirty and dangerous jobs unless there are 50% female colleagues. Mostly male hospital porters will demand to be paid as much as mostly female nurses. The potential chaos is endless.

But again - what exactly does the PM intend to actually do? Maybe she should worry about the gap between her ears instead?

Women make different decisions to men, that’s why it has been eight years between mass shootings in the USA by women and why less women than men work on oil rigs.

My airline published a new salary scheme for pilots recently. There are several categories and brackets but not surprisingly there's no separate category exist for female flight crew.
Gender pay gap is a myth spreaded by SJWs.

Publishing gender pay figures for each job type is perfectly reasonable. Comparing a company as a whole is not.

Let's say you have 10 pilots (9 men, 1 woman) - each on £60k. You also have 10 cabin crew (9 women, 1 man) each on £20k.

There is Zero gender pay gap between pilots. There is zero pay gap between cabin crew. But magically the 10 men average £56k and the 10 women average £24k. Not because there exists a gender pay gap, buy because the men generally chose a career that pays more. Hardly the companies fault!

In 2016 there were 20007 EASA licences issued by the CAA in circulation. Only 1013 of these were held by women. The whole industry needs to change if we are going to attract more females into the profession.