Cranky on the Web: The Idiotic Attacks on Airline Diversity


How right-wing influencers turned airplanes and airports into culture war battlegroundsNBC News
The fact that there was even enough chatter to write this article makes me angry. The author did a good job of choosing one of my quotes that was not laced with obscenities. When it comes to diversity, airlines have historically not done scored well, especially in the cockpit. Today, airlines want to create opportunities for people of all backgrounds and colors so they can expand the pool of applicants.

Some of the comments against these plans seem to suggest airlines are picking people based solely on color and not skill and that safety will suffer. That is not true. Accusations like that only harden the historical belief by minorities that they do not belong. Airlines are doing the right thing by opening up the tent to make sure people from all backgrounds can access opportunities.

What’s the Difference Between Business Class and First Class?Condé Nast Traveler
Yes, First Class still exists. My quote is at the bottom, but really, the point of First Class is the exclusivity of it all. Nobody really needs it.

Get Cranky in Your Inbox!

The airline industry moves fast. Sign up and get every Cranky post in your inbox for free.

65 comments on “Cranky on the Web: The Idiotic Attacks on Airline Diversity

  1. I’m not currently worried about the airlines, but the FAA has (by its own admission) been using “biographical tests” to filter non-minority candidates for ATC training. The biographical test had questions like “high school subject in which I received my lowest grade” (“correct” answer is “science” ???), which obviously have no valid predictive value in ATC competence. The “correct” answers were systematically leaked to minority candidates so they would pass this screen. See the documents from various court filings here:

    1. An assertion based on a Twitter post by a poster who describes himself as “I am not a professional. I am a law student with a part-time job on… a podcast about internet nonsense, and a side hobby of sticking my nose where it doesn’t belong.” Wow.

    2. Please keep the discussion here rational. This was a post crafted to get the right-wing outrage machine rumbling, and not to provide useful information for discussion. I have no idea if the content and grading of the test are being reported correctly here, but it is all beside the point, because the test in question was abolished in 2018. There hasn’t been a “biographical test” since then.

  2. MSM spins the article to their liking.

    DEI should NEVER be pushed to fly planes- perform surgerys etc. AIrlines should hire the BEST and never based on color/religion or sexual orientation. I don’t give a quack if you are purple with pink hair. If you are the best candidate you are for me!

    Would you really want to be on plane where the person was not the best? Just got the job because of DEI? I wouldn’t.

    1. Cranky Claire – That’s exactly what is NOT happening here. NBC, the MSM you seem to hate, is writing a clear-eyed article about what people are saying. Again, this has nothing to do with safety being compromised.
      Please try to get outside the bubble and see that.

      1. CF, it is no surprise that you take the left’s position on this topic. I’ve read your works for years and you consistently adhere to the left and attack the right. The error in your logic here is that you are claiming that it is not about racsim or compromised safety but you don’t offer any explanation how it is not. The policy to have 50% of cadets be female and “of color” while ignoring the complexity and history of pilot demographics IS pure racism/sexism. We could analyze the history of why most pilots are white and male until the cows come home but the simply fact is, people who have the most interest in becomig a pilot are typically white and male. It is not because airlines are racist. Just like those interested in professional basketball tend to be black. Or those interested in childcare tend to be women. Is there anything wrong with that? Do you also think 50% of childcare workers should be male? The reason why there is uproar over pilots is because being a pilot is a sexy job and pilots are overpaid. So if the barrier to becoming a pilot is about wealth (of lack of), then why not simply create opportunities for low income individuals regardless of skin color? The reason is that it is not about that, it is about the left’s racist agenda.

        1. Ty – Using talking points to suggest the left is racist isn’t going to help you win any arguments. Since I get attacked from the left and the right, I guess I’m doing something properly, because my beliefs don’t fit into one side like a cookie cutter. If you want to have an actual conversation, then I suggest you stop with the bullshit about left and right and focus on the issue at hand. That’s what I’ll do now…

          > The error in your logic here is that you are claiming that it is not about racsim or compromised safety but you don’t offer any explanation how it is not.

          On safety, you seem to think that bringing more people of color into a training program somehow means they automatically get hired regardless of safety. The safety regulations have not changed, and if someone of color flames out, they flame out just like anyone else. This is solely about bringing more people into training programs.

          I don’t see how it’s racist to try to make the tent bigger. This is not about hiring someone of color or female instead of someone who is white.
          The pathway for white men is there for anyone who wants this. This is creating an additional pathway for women and people of color. They all get hired in the end, if they can meet safety regulations.

          > We could analyze the history of why most pilots are white and male until the cows come home but the simply fact is, people who have the most interest in becomig a pilot are typically white and male. It is not because airlines are racist.

          I don’t know how you can say that when women and people of color haven’t been afforded the same opportunity to show an interest. If airlines can fill 50% of their classes with people of color, then obviously there is an untapped interest in becoming a pilot. The airlines are right to try to bring everyone in, and because of the history that has been absolutely biased toward white men, efforts are needed to ensure others have a chance. If what you say is correct that women and people of color don’t actually want to be pilots — something I find very hard to believe — then it will play out when these schools are unable to get people to enroll.
          But that’s not what’s happening.

          > Just like those interested in professional basketball tend to be black.
          Or those interested in childcare tend to be women. Is there anything wrong with that? Do you also think 50% of childcare workers should be male?

          Nobody is saying that 50% of pilots should be people of color or women.
          What people are saying is that people of color and women should have the opportunity to compete for those jobs, and so schools are trying to make that a possibility. If you really think white people do not have the opportunity to play professional basketball, then there should be something to make sure they have that opportunity. (I don’t believe that, personally, but that’s not the point.) And if men don’t have the opportunity to work in childcare because they are men, then people should create opportunities for them. (I think this is different in that men have the opportunity but there is a stigma about it, so work should be done to fight that stigma so that they don’t feel like they can’t go into that area.)

          1. Thank you!

            The foundation of our country is opportunity. As in opportunity to attain whatever your skills, ability and work effort permit. Who cares the demographics of the person flying the airplane? The only concern should be about whether they can fly the airplane safely and soundly.

            I have a great deal of confidence in the major airlines’ ability to find pilots who are the best at safely flying airplanes, regardless of background or demographic.

            The US Airline business is built on the concept of safe, effective transportation. Nobody is going to challenge that for any reason, including but not limited to making unqualified diversity hires.

        2. Ty,

          I find it ironic that you accused Cranky of ignoring the history of the demographics of pilots and than say, “people who have the most interest in becomig a pilot are typically white and male.”

          Do you really think there is a gentic propensity to be a pilot based on race? Or do you think that the history of how minorities and women have been treated might have something to do with it?

          Please explain exactly how these efforts to widen the pipeline are racist, because I don’t see it, but I am not immune from missing something.

          Also, how do you explain your position that widening the pipeline reduces safety?

    2. WELL NOW. In an ideal world EVERYONE would be hired on merit and merit alone. There would be 100% no recruiting personnel who NEVER acted on personal bias, prejudice, or assumption about other people who are “different” but, qualified when they make hiring decisions. If this was true, then there would be a much higher percentage of women and minorities already in higher paying positions in the airline industry. This isn’t how human nature works because racism/genderism, etc. will never be fully eradicated and there will ALWAYS be someone in recruiting willing to act on those biases whether explicitly or implicitly.

    3. OK, I’ll bite….

      If airlines hired only the BEST, why are pilots overwhelmingly white men (certainly at *least* double the 29% of the total US population that is white and male)? Are white men overwhelmingly the best, or are there societal pressures, prejudices (both conscious and unconscious), and a whole host of other advantages that make airlines far more likely to hire a white man over an equally-good candidate who is not a white man and deny opportunities to minorities to become the best?

      And if you read the article, it talks about “efforts by airlines to find more job *applicants* who are women or nonwhite” (emphasis added). To increase diversity, you need to have a diverse applicant pool. Then you select the best applicants from that pool, and (amazingly!) more diverse applicant pools tend to lead to more diverse hiring.

      Really, what a lot of hiring research in many fields (including mine, academia, which is similarly white-male dominated, including me) has shown is that by failing to attract a diverse pool of applicants, organizations are in fact denying themselves access to the best talent. If you have a situation where 71% of the population is applying for your jobs at a very low rate, you’re not getting the BEST.

      1. Alex, you need to understand how statistics work. Just because airlines hire the best and pilots are mostly white or male does not necessarily mean all white men are inherently better pilots. It means that the pool of candidates are mostly white and male. The reason for this is not because of racism or sexism, but because most people INTERESTED in becoming a pilot tend to be white or male. Just like how most nurses are female. Is there anything wrong with that? Do we also need to disqualify most women from nursing school just so we can get up to 50% male nurses? If you want to make the candidate pool more “equal”, then let it happen naturally, dont force it because it is called discrimination.

        1. >>It means that the pool of candidates are mostly white and male. The reason for this is not because of racism or sexism, but because most people INTERESTED in becoming a pilot tend to be white or male.

          So what is wrong with encouraging others to also become interested in beocming a pilot? If a person has never been exposed to that career field, they may not even consider it. When you open the door and people of different backgrounds learn about how great the career field is, you stimulate interest from a larger portion of the population. Airlines need pilots and should be looking everywhere to get them. The FAA and airlines are not lowering the standards to becoming qualified, but there’s no reason a POC, woman, gay person, etc. can’t learn the same skills as a white person and succeed in the job. It’s not simply about creating a more diverse workforce, it’s about creating a large enough workforce to fill all the empty jobs. If you have 1,500 hours, can complete training, and have a pulse, an airline will hire you right now regardless of race or gender.

        2. I’m a 63 year old woman. When I was younger, as a female, I was encouraged to pursue traditional female careers: “Stewardess,” hairdresser, secretary, etc. It never occurred to my dad that maybe I wanted to be a private pilot like him and perhaps pursue an airline pilot career. Or that maybe I wanted to take over the family farm business someday.

          Reading the stories of lady pilots, I read about how they had to overcome sexist attitudes/stereotypes coming from some men and even from some women in order to pursue their career goals. And then there was the sexual harassment on the job….It wasn’t easy to endure all of this but they didn’t want to give up on their career goals.

          We are 50% of the world’s population, but yet because of decades of bias coming from sexist attitudes/stereotypes and being encouraged to seek “female careers” is why today only 8% of the US airline pilots are female.
          It certainly isn’t because women are somehow just naturally not interested in becoming pilots.

          1. my 10 y/o daughter is 100% interested in being a pilot. I’m white latino (born and raised in Central America) and my wife is white. While her interest might change, she just LOVES planes and I try to the best of my knowledge to teach her about the magic (some call it physics) that allow 80 tones to take into the air ? -very right wing here.-

  3. Airlines aren’t pushing out caucasian people in favour of minorities. That’s ridiculous, especially at a time of **staffing shortages.**

    Either the airlines are saying this (DEI) to encourage more applicants, or they aren’t doing anything and certain people are wasting their time.

    This situation is dumb. Why can’t we get mad at the government for the stupid 3/4 hour tarmac rule?

  4. I guess this is where many of us will disagree. It wasn’t the “right-wing” who started *anything*. Its hard to NOT react when an airline CEO makes comments like “we are working to get 50% of our crews to be female or minority” — and that’s a horrifying quote when you realize that flight schools and student pilot makeups are significantly well below those numbers. Which means they are going to be installing less qualified people (ie ‘racism’) and passing up the stereotypical white male, to meet some quota.

    the problem with the NBC headline and article is the MSM (which leans left) would not DARE question anything dealing with DEI or minorities. Only the right-wing media will, which then makes this appear to be a right-wing issue.

    The ONLY cure to this is by having MORE air shows, more career days – and get kids interested in aviation. Start sponsoring more career days and have kids & high schoolers meet with real pilots and actually *want* to get on that career path at a young age….

    Heck, remember the photo Frontier Airlines posted of their new hire pilot class and how the left absolutely *flamed* them???

    This isn’t a left or right wing issue; or at least it shouldn’t be. But some of the quotes coming out of C-Suites and executives sure make it soud like it is pure racism, and people are running with it.

    1. haolenate – I have no idea how you can see this as “pure racism.” The absolute fact is that the vast majority of pilots are white men. They have all the opportunities they need to get into the pilot ranks through a whole bunch of different paths. What United did was create an academy that will focus on creating opportunities for women and minorities who don’t have those opportunities normally. It’s creating a pathway for people who don’t have the same opportunities available. This is not racism. This is about expanding the tent.

      1. @Cranky I would respectfully disagree aith your comment. A person of color or a female from an upper income background is not being held back. If you want to create a program that bennifits students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, I would be fine with that.

        1. Brian W – If that’s the case, then why are the numbers so overwhelmingly full of white males? There is not a level playing field here.

          1. Why is the NBA so overwhelmingly full of Black men? Perhaps the answer to your question is the same as the answer to this one is.

            Yet it cannot be said for fear of retribution.

            1. stogieguy7 – No, please, let’s hear the full thesis on that, because I don’t think the answer is the same.

            2. Are you suggesting that the players in the NBA are mostly Black because of discrimination against whites?

    2. Haolenate,

      Your comment is an odd one. Did you read the article? Where are you getting the idea that airlines are choosing less qualified candidates based on minority status? The airlines are trying to get more minorities in the pipeline, so more minorities will make the cut, not chosing less qualified candidates.

      1. I’m just pointing out that the media is doing a good job at trying to cause divide/split and not even realizing that while we’ve been trying our damndest to claim to ERASE racism, what Kirby is saying they want to do is purely racist. And the NBC article, which I’ve read, does just that – makes the right wing look like idiots for pointing out the obvious, that the left wing MSM ignores or believe is perfectly fine.

        “Kirby said the company was committed to ensuring 50% of their graduating pilot classes would be women or people of color.”

        Tell me how that does not involve racism by giving preference to race or gender for hiring or entry. Especially since the numbers right now probably hover around 8 to 10%.

        Racism goes both ways, here’s the definition (which seems to change every few years): prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

        In order to produce 50% of pilot classes as WOMEN or non-whites, that’s going to force lowering of standards or finding subpar candidates. They just are not there. It means passing up people who are NOT part of that category to fill those spots.

        And when we start scraping the bottom, as Atlas Air found out, you kill people. Atlas’s FO flying the 767 into the ground in Houston was in fact a minority who was pushed thru the system and not questioned or really double checked. Airlines are resistant to reduce their headcounts when it comes to those who “check one of the boxes”. I know the recruiter who dealt with him at one of his previous employers! Airlines are pressured to keep a certain percentage of workers who fit the EEO checkboxes.

        The only way to FIX THIS race & gender problem is by trying to appeal to people when they’re younger and get them interested in flying as a career. Scott’s message to get to 50% is fairly damning if you really look at the numbers, they just don’t exist. I think I was reading somewhere that one major airline’s workforce, when they looked at BIPOC and females, the *total* percentage was just over 30%. Scott is purposely talking about *pilots*, where the numbers are barely over 10% when you look at non-white males.

        He’s either trying to appease the woke or someone politically. And it fed the flames of the right-wing media. I’m in the court of life that you shouldn’t have to mark your gender or race on a form to get a job. Because that’s what was pounded into my head in the 80s & 90s that we are “colorblind”. Now I’m being told I can only be colorblind as long as 50% of the graduating class of pilots are not white. How is *that* not racism?

        1. OK, I am disengaging here. Because you are starting to sound like you don’t think minorities and women need the standards lowered to qualify. Not the kind of discussion I want to be part of.

          Kirby never said, insinuated, or hinted a t lowering standards. That’s all on you.

        2. Last time I checked, pilots of all backgrounds (AF 447, 9L 3407, etc.) have done a pretty good job of flying airplanes into the ground. The bigger issue with 5Y 3591 was the lack of a centralized FAA database that allowed the cross checking of pilot experiences. The NTSB recommended this following the Colgan crash and yet it took the FAA 12 years to implement it. Both the Captain on Colgan (who failed multiple upgrade attempts) and Atlas FO probably should not have been in their respective seats.

          Regarding UA, I don’t think it’s a bad thing to encourage young people (or even older people) to pursue Aviation as a profession, especially if it’s not a group that’s been represented. Aviation’s a profession that historically has been out of reach to BIPOC and I love how Tuskegee Next and other programs are encouraging under represented youth to pursue aviation. Having the goal UA has not shown to reduce aviation safety and will only serve to increase the pool of available pilots.

  5. For those complaining about United effort to bring more women and minorities into their training program… Are you trying to tell us you think that white male graduates of these programs are better qualified than minorities and women?

    Perhaps you should think about what your position really is.

    PS united isn’t doing this out of the kindness of their heart, or for some woke culture. BS. Having a larger, hiring pool of qualified pilots helps the airline.

    1. John G – I think they could be doing it both out of self interest and because they honestly think it’s the right thing to do – the two don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

  6. Regarding airline diversity, I subscribe to FlightAware’s Weekly Aviation News & Photo Newsletter, and many commenters love to point at the Federal Government’s policy, (meaning Biden’s) of DEI as the fundamental cause of most of the aviation safety incidents reported on, with the recent exception of anything that can be pinned on Boeing. I just posted the NBC news article on the Flightaware website. Let the fun begin!

  7. There has always be opposition in America to the expansion of opportunity for qualified people of color. Maybe one day there will not be, but that article and several of the posts on here proves we continue to see our nation heading in the wrong direction to that end.

  8. I think 99% of the public is missing (deliberately?) the point, and the solution.

    Several underqualified people have caused airplane accidents. This is a fact.

    If we’re classifying people by race in order to hire them, why on earth would we not look at the race/gender of who is flying when an accident happens? Why should this be taboo?

    If minorities or women are causing more accidents, we can figure out why: less aptitude? less rigorous vetting?

    If they’re not causing more accidents, than we have a good answer to put fears to rest.

    And maybe we could discuss the non-safety, lower stakes issue of how bias and/or lack of awareness may be hindering proportional representation in aviation.

    I suspect that people on both sides of the argument don’t want to look at actual data, they’d rather just do *feels* and yell about culture battles.

    1. Regarding your statement “Several underqualified people have caused airplane accidents.”, presuming this is regarding commercial incidents, what specific accidents are you referencing? I’m not aware of any involving untrained or uncertified aircrew.

      1. I just know I want the best and most qualified person to fly my plane, period. Not the best white, not the best black, not the best brown, not the best purple. I want the best. The rest of them can fly the politically correct crowd.

        1. My point is that, if you read and comprehend the NBC news article, United’s diversity, equity and inclusion program (or that of any other airline), that’s properly implemented, will produce government certified flight personnel that are qualified to safely fly passenger service commercial aircraft for which they are type certified. NOTHING WILL CHANGE REGARDING LOWERING STANDARDS SO MORE PEOPLE GET TO BE A PILOT!

          There are specific qualifications that must be met in order to be accepted for this training. I am 100% certain that NONE of them involve anything remotely related to “political correctness”,


            The standards haven’t been lowered, but if you are unaware that the standards were never a factor before since no one was actually hired with anything even NEAR the minimums, then you don’t understand the industry. We now have 121 pilots in Boeing and Airbus aircraft with 0 jet time, and minimal experience in other areas. It’s happening all the time. I’m not claiming it has anything whatsoever to do with race, but it happened.

            So I guess you’re saying that it’s impossible that training departments-potentially afraid of the repercussions of failing a statistically excessive high number of female or minority new hires, will push through under qualified folks no matter hire many ‘extra tries’ this takes.

            Perhaps this is an issue of needing to RAISE the standards, but the discussion should definitely be had.

            As a minority, with long experience in the industry, I wish I was anywhere close to your 100% certainly that the system won’t accidentally let through folks who shouldn’t be there.

            1. I’m not saying that it’s impossible, however I believe that it’s extremely unlikely. I am not aware of any of any requirement that anyone who enters flight training for, and subsequently becomes, a pilot licenced and type certified for FAA part 121 commercial operations has to have previous experience flying jet aircraft. The FAA has already tried to RAISE the standards by increasing the minimum number of flight hours to 1500, even though virtually every other country believes 300 is adequate.

              Therefore,I still don’t understand how the system can “accidentally let through folks who shouldn’t be there”. If the entrance criteria haven’t changed and the training, licencing and certification process are unchanged, there should be no issues. My understanding is that the DEI program is not a quota system. In this regard, the current incidence rate of any so-called “unqualified” pilots that get through, WILL NOT INCREASE.

      2. We need to use words very carefully here. You say:
        “I’m not aware of any involving untrained or uncertified aircrew”

        That’s not what I said.
        “Several underqualified people have caused airplane accidents.”

        Because accident/incident aircrew records aren’t released, this data isn’t publicly available. It should be. If you have a candid conversation with any 121 training department leadership they will all tell you that new hire pilot standards in the past few years have decreased significantly. Multiple extra simulator sessions and longer IOE check flights are very common. People who would have failed training in years past are pushed through. This is data, not opinion. I’m not claiming that it is racially motivated, but if you’re against disclosing demographic failure data, accident/incident data, or other relevant metrics which could be used to improve the process because you don’t want to hurt feelings, you might want to ask yourself why.

        1. In my opinion nothing you are saying supports a claim that a DEI program will increase the number of unqualified pilots in commercial aviation. If airlines are under pressure to get more pilots through training,don’t you think *the well-publicized pilot shortage* might have something to do about it? If the airlines are so desperate to get pilots that they would push marginal pilots out the door, DEI will provide a bigger pool of candidates from which to choose the most qualified.

  9. Just like in all industries, airlines are currently in the necaderous position of complying with corporate ESG requirements. Although there is no data to suggest that DEI initiatives have compromised public safety, only time will tell. All future incidents will be scrutinized through that lens by many – we can only hope that there will be 100% transparency in said investigations and root cause analyses.

  10. Airlines should be hiring the most competitive pilots. Using gender and race filtering is a deviation from competitiveness. Black people and women don’t need a halting hand and it’s a misuse of company resources.

    The airline pilot career, just like any other higher profile career that requires extended delayed gratification to achieve, are typically successfully accomplished by individuals that come from families that instill strong hard working values. It’s not the governments job nor corporate responsibility to play big daddy and help disadvantaged minorities who didn’t grow up in strong families.

    1. Johnny – I don’t now why people seem to continue to confuse these things, but this has nothing to do with who airlines are hiring. It expands the pool of available talent and all of them will likely be hired. Nobody is being pushed ahead of others because of their race. I imagine I speak for a whole lot of people when I say that suggesting that minority families don’t instill strong hard working values is remarkably offensive.

      1. Expanding the pool? The pool is the number of people certificated and qualified for employment as an airline pilot. Of that pool management needs to be choose the most competitive. Choosing pilots based on any other metric is a dilution of corporate value to stakeholders.

        If you want to expand the pool raise your salaries to attract a larger pool. Going out of your way to create in house flight schools and co-sign the debt that your less competitive candidates you’ve recruited sign on for isn’t optimal usage of corporate resources.

        I can assure you there will be a pilots who will drop out, washout, or simply be crappier pilots at higher rates in this DEI flight school simply due to the fact that you’re not filtering for competitiveness and desire. Sure there are some folks that can’t get a loan for flight training and I totally support helping talented and competitive individuals who lack the financial means to get started. Co-signing their loans is a good bet. But co-signing someone just because they’re black or female doesn’t make them competitive asset. Saying they’re qualified isn’t the same as saying as competitive.

        In regards to minority families not instilling hard working values, I never said that. You did. Strong work ethics are color blind. There are plenty of female and black aviators that have a strong work ethic and are competitive, and they come from good families that instilled them with those values. Unfortunately because of DEI people will start to doubt those good pilots when seen at the airport. It’s not fair.

        And then there’s statistics. The rate of homicide, crime, single motherhood, school dropout is much higher among “minority” communities. Then you got these Eastern Europeans that come to the US, legally might I add, without any money and bust their butts to become good members of society. Why? Good families.

        1. What makes your comments so remarkable is that your pre judgement on people completely misses what United is trying to accomplish. Qualified pilots from an expanded pool of candidates. It’s that simple. You let everyone know your character and  pre judgements about people of color out there for no reason, but I bet you are good with it.

          1. Corporate governance aside, do you think it’s morally right to hire someone based on DEI initiatives ahead of someone who’s a white male in a seniority based position?

            This happens all the time. Minorities and female regional first officers were getting scooped up by mainline ahead more experienced and competitive white male regional captains. Is this what you call expanding the pool?

            I’m all for expanding the pool for competitive individuals without financial means. There are more poor white people than there are black. It should have nothing to do with race. Sorry, not sorry.

          2. And again, you keep saying qualified. Qualified isn’t good enough. United and the rest needs to focus on hiring the most competitive, regardless of race and gender!

        2. Sounds like you think only white prospective pilots need apply. It’s sad to think in 2024 that expanding the pool of candidates and hiring qualified candidates still  means only white to you.

          1. Sounds incorrect. I said most competitive. Regardless of skin color. No selection based on racial quotas. Doesn’t get anymore racial agnostic than that.

            Yet you people keep insisting expanding the pool means targeting females/minorities. Have the airlines been ignoring females/minorities in the past? Of course not. There’s just simply far less females and minority folks that want to be pilots and are competitive!

          1. I doubled down on being racial and gender agnostic.

            Apparently not wanting to “expand the pool” to females and blacks is racist, even though the job has always been available to everyone.

        3. There aren’t enough people who are becoming airline pilots currently. You posted on this website, so you are probably aware there is a significant pilot shortage. Every carrier is doing everything they can to get their hands on more trained pilots, so starting an aviation school is definitely a step in the right direction.
          Is DEI the solution? Well, there are flying pilots all over the world. I’ve flown airplanes operated by Delta, KLM, Emirates, Etihad, Turkish, ANA, United, Air France, Kenya Airways, Singapore Airlines, Copa, Martinair, Pakistan International Airlines, Air China, China Eastern, China Southern, Kuwait Airways, British Airways, Thai Airways, US Airways, Southwest, Spirit, Frontier, Virgin Atlantic, and Westjet. I also flew a small intra-Africa carrier on a trip to Tanzania in 2016 and a charter flight aboard a Cessna 206 grand caravan.
          I’m still sitting here without any aviation injuries, without having ever been in a plane crash, and this despite flying a wide range of airlines from the very best to ones that could be considered risky by Western standards. I am appalled at some of the stunts they have pulled in the DEI area, especially in the aviation community. None of this means that these airlines won’t be doing their best to get qualified pilots. But right now, the gateway is lowered because of a lack of good pilots. The key is to get more competition for those school spots and yes, eliminate the DEI component for pilot training. But don’t ever assume that pilots from minority backgrounds are incompetent. They’re flying overseas, are they not?

          1. I never said blacks people cant fly airplanes. All I said is that the numbers and the numbers. In the USA most pilots are white. If black or women want to become pilots they would. For companies to specifically hire a pilot just because they represent a minority demographic race or gender over a white man who’s resume is more competitive is bigoted and prejudicial. That is NOT how you expand the pool. The pool gets expanded by helping people of all races who struggle financially to become pilots, who represent good bets in the future. People who exemplify good academics and work ethics would be good candidates for student pilots. Race and gender does not matter.

            You also expand the pool by improving pilot pay and contracts. Attract more would be professionals to the job.

            Liberals who push DEI are the racists.

            1. Johnny – I feel like a broken record, but I’ll say it once again. There is no preferential hiring in this plan. This is about preferential placement into a new training program to help create opportunities for those who haven’t had them before. They still have to qualify like everyone else in order to get hired. You seem very fixated on something that is not happening.

              Also, you make the very incorrect assumption that this is entirely based on family dynamics and that certain minorities don’t need an extra boost just to get into the conversation. White men have long had a very clear and demonstrable advantage in many areas, and this is one of them. It is not as easy as saying “here’s money, poor people” and then everything is made right. I say this as a white man, so it’s arguing against my own selfish benefit to expand the pool of people to be considered for anything. But it is also inherently unfair and cruel to not allow people of all races and genders to have fair opportunities. As another white man who feels similarly said to me, “we’ve had a good run.”

              I am well aware that I won’t change your mind on this, but I’m confident that when the history books are written, this will be on the right side of history. Policy is meant to help make up for past injustices by trying to create a more even playing field when it can. This policy does just that without hurting anyone else.

            2. “If black or women want to become pilots they would”. That is incredibly naive.

              Also, you keep repeating your concern that higher qualified white men are loosing jobs to less qualified others. As has been pointed out over and over again this isn’t happening, and no one has said they want it to happen. You are getting this idea from commentators who are intentionally misrepresenting the world to rile you up. Reality is a much better base for discussion.

            3. “If black or women want to become pilots they would” is an incredibly naive statement. But it makes sense in your alternate reality where qualified white male pilots are loosing jobs to less qualified other people.

              How many times do you need tk be told that isn’t happening, and no one in the industry has said they don’t want it to happen.

      2. You stired up a hornets nest. Its really hard to talk to people these days and get beyond the steady stream of media punch lines. As seen here people just repeat the same line over and over and won’t pause to listen. Jumping from the actual things airline industry leadership is saying to “hiring less competent pilots” is quite a jump.

        This single tacking happens on both sides of the spectrum, but it particularly ugly when it’s tainted by racism.

        1. Aliqiout – Yes, and nothing that gets said here will change opinions, sadly. The ability for discourse to have an impact is limited when you’re just writing comments in a blog. But that’s just how things go these days, and I’ll keep tilting at windmills, I guess.

  11. With all due respect, you liberals are purposely misdirecting my statements to fit your agenda. MY agenda is clear, fair employment and career opportunities for everyone.

    “I feel like a broken record, but I’ll say it once again. There is no preferential hiring in this plan.”

    This is wrong. United said they specifically wanted half of their internal flight school recruits to be POC and women. Flight school graduates get a place on their affiliate United Aviate regional airlines and flow to United mainline. In affect, thats a job offer from day 1.

    In addition, as i’ve stated previously, legacy carriers such as United have always prioritized POC and women over white males in their pilot hiring process. I’ve seen first hand with minority and female pilots get legacy job offers with less competitive resumes than their white male counterparts. Is that fair? How is that not racist?

    “White men have long had a very clear and demonstrable advantage in many areas, and this is one of them.”

    Can you explain how white men have had a clear and demonstrable advantage? I’d like to know where one might be able to collect this advantage cause as a white male I sure as hell havne’t gotten it! I didn’t grow up rich. I’m a first generation american, parents came to this country poor. The only advantage ive received is a two parent household with strong work ethics. This advantage isn’t unique to the caucasians.

    “If black or women want to become pilots they would”. That is incredibly naive.

    Also, you keep repeating your concern that higher qualified white men are loosing jobs to less qualified others. As has been pointed out over and over again this isn’t happening, and no one has said they want it to happen. You are getting this idea from commentators who are intentionally misrepresenting the world to rile you up. Reality is a much better base for discussion.”

    Please explain how thats naive. what is holding black people back form accomplishing a professional airline pilot career? Also, I never said that white people were losing their jobs to less qualified applicants. What I specifically said… less qualified DEI applicants are getting priority over white males, which is not fair in a seniority based position predicated on date of hire. It is morally wrong and does not correlate with american values nor the interest of the traveling public that wants their pilots to be the MOST COMPETITIVE pilots the airline can find. Saying one isn’t good enough!

  12. I’m calling total BS on your story. I recently had an hour long conversation with a senior person with the United Aviate program. He laid it bare and his frustration is well justified. Student ARE picked because they are minorities. Almost every student is WEEKS behind because they cannot read much less do math. The staff is having to recycle many students. Think about that next time you’re attempting to land in IFR conditions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Cranky Flier