Conservatives angry at Airline CEO focusing on DEI policies implying “too many” White men in industr

[dead0man]

"pilot" is one of the most dangerous jobs (2nd in this article), women, ya know, like men, don't like to do dangerous work if they don't have to.  Men are more apt to feel like they "have to" because men are dumb.  As proof, the most dangerous jobs are are almost exclusively made out of jobs that are heavily skewed to men.  Gross and hard jobs too.  Is it the "Good Ole Boy Network" that keeps women out of the Port-o-Potty cleaning industry?

I can promise you, the mainstream media will never, ever do a story on conservatives complaining about a Mining or Lineman CEO focusing on DEI policies implying "too many men".

[Agafin]

"pilot" is one of the most dangerous jobs (2nd in this article), women, ya know, like men, don't like to do dangerous work if they don't have to.  Men are more apt to feel like they "have to" because men are dumb.  As proof, the most dangerous jobs are are almost exclusively made out of jobs that are heavily skewed to men.  Gross and hard jobs too.  Is it the "Good Ole Boy Network" that keeps women out of the Port-o-Potty cleaning industry?

I can promise you, the mainstream media will never, ever do a story on conservatives complaining about a Mining or Lineman CEO focusing on DEI policies implying "too many men".

Pretty much this. I'll never take these DEI initiatives seriously until they start advocating for more female trash collectors or whatever.

As for the OP, I'd personally be less likely to fly a plane if I knew the pilot was hired thanks to DEI. I don't the slightest bit of a f**k about the gender or race of my pilot, I just don't want to crash so if they were hired for anything other than pure merit, hard pass. If that means 80% white men? great! 80% black latinas? great! Just get me from point A to point B, please and thank you!

[lfromnj]

"pilot" is one of the most dangerous jobs (2nd in this article), women, ya know, like men, don't like to do dangerous work if they don't have to.  Men are more apt to feel like they "have to" because men are dumb.  As proof, the most dangerous jobs are are almost exclusively made out of jobs that are heavily skewed to men.  Gross and hard jobs too.  Is it the "Good Ole Boy Network" that keeps women out of the Port-o-Potty cleaning industry?

I can promise you, the mainstream media will never, ever do a story on conservatives complaining about a Mining or Lineman CEO focusing on DEI policies implying "too many men".

Commercial air line pilot is a pretty safe job. Its really smaller plane pilots especially stuff like rescue planes and the like.

[dead0man]

"pilot" is one of the most dangerous jobs (2nd in this article), women, ya know, like men, don't like to do dangerous work if they don't have to.  Men are more apt to feel like they "have to" because men are dumb.  As proof, the most dangerous jobs are are almost exclusively made out of jobs that are heavily skewed to men.  Gross and hard jobs too.  Is it the "Good Ole Boy Network" that keeps women out of the Port-o-Potty cleaning industry?

I can promise you, the mainstream media will never, ever do a story on conservatives complaining about a Mining or Lineman CEO focusing on DEI policies implying "too many men".

Commercial air line pilot is a pretty safe job. Its really smaller plane pilots especially stuff like rescue planes and the like.

correct, and before you get to be a commercial airline pilot, you have to get the hours up by doing the more dangerous types of flying.

[Person Man]

These people love to embrace the market except when it doesn't benefit them. In this case, DEI is arguing that various barriers to the free flow of goods and services, privilege, should be addressed. Its not like I don't blame them but you can't just be a bitch and expected not be treated like one.

Then again, if some situation turns out to be a sausage or mayo fest and it has absolutely nothing to do with there being innate biases in the process, its all really a matter of personal choice. However, if a business leader thinks that things would improve if different people were brought in, its their choice. And I guess there, that's another instance of people usually championing "choice" being threatened by it.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Just like big Hollywood studios going "woke", big corporations didn't embrace DEI policies because they suddenly saw the light and decided that racism and misogyny are morally wrong. They did it because it's good for business and benefits their top-lines.
For all the noise they do, the bigots like Charlie Kirk, Matt Walsh, and Ben Shapiro represent a constantly shrinking segment of the population and following their advice is going to actually hurt these companies.

[Senator Incitatus]

Another fascinating discussion of How Women Think from The Website with Three Women.

[Person Man]

Just like big Hollywood studios going "woke", big corporations didn't embrace DEI policies because they suddenly saw the light and decided that racism and misogyny are morally wrong. They did it because it's good for business and benefits their top-lines.
For all the noise they do, the bigots like Charlie Kirk, Matt Walsh, and Ben Shapiro represent a constantly shrinking segment of the population and following their advice is going to actually hurt these companies.

This is what "reactionary" is. You don't simply oppose change, but believe that it is the role of the government to aggressively combat change that has already happened.

[Dan the Roman]

Just like big Hollywood studios going "woke", big corporations didn't embrace DEI policies because they suddenly saw the light and decided that racism and misogyny are morally wrong. They did it because it's good for business and benefits their top-lines.
For all the noise they do, the bigots like Charlie Kirk, Matt Walsh, and Ben Shapiro represent a constantly shrinking segment of the population and following their advice is going to actually hurt these companies.

Kirk is a grifter and Shapiro doesn't understand or care. Walsh to a degree actually understands branding and that this is not about making people purely angry but about making stuff cringe. His whole strategy is to associate things he doesn't like with establishment entities - big corporations, celebrities, management - and thereby tar them. The very nature of this thread is a testament to success in associating advocacy for minority groups with the most powerful interests in society.

There has also been a degree of success in associating products being generically bad with corporations being focused on token diversity.

All of this is hobbled by socially conservative positions remaining deeply unpopular, but to say there has not been a successful campaign to make social liberalism cringe and toxic, especially to most libertarian-leaning voters, is to ignore reality.

[RINO Tom]

If any industry needs some diversifying its pilots. 80-90% or pilots are men.

So push young women to have more interest in joining the Air Force or something?  We shouldn’t give two flying $hits what our pilots look like if they land the plane.

[DaleCooper]

Who cares? If you're a liberal, why are you angry that mentally ill conservatives are focusing on DEI instead of doing something much worse like shooting up a school or trying to make our lives worse with awful legislation? If you're conservative, then why are you angry about DEI? Every company that pursues it will suffer because it's a huge waste of money that accomplishes nothing, so United will get theirs in the end.

[Person Man]

Just like big Hollywood studios going "woke", big corporations didn't embrace DEI policies because they suddenly saw the light and decided that racism and misogyny are morally wrong. They did it because it's good for business and benefits their top-lines.
For all the noise they do, the bigots like Charlie Kirk, Matt Walsh, and Ben Shapiro represent a constantly shrinking segment of the population and following their advice is going to actually hurt these companies.

Kirk is a grifter and Shapiro doesn't understand or care. Walsh to a degree actually understands branding and that this is not about making people purely angry but about making stuff cringe. His whole strategy is to associate things he doesn't like with establishment entities - big corporations, celebrities, management - and thereby tar them. The very nature of this thread is a testament to success in associating advocacy for minority groups with the most powerful interests in society.

There has also been a degree of success in associating products being generically bad with corporations being focused on token diversity.

All of this is hobbled by socially conservative positions remaining deeply unpopular, but to say there has not been a successful campaign to make social liberalism cringe and toxic, especially to most libertarian-leaning voters, is to ignore reality.

It's basically the universalization of the Southern Strategy. Imagine running a marketing campaign like a political campaign in a way that is virtually interchangeable. Another Orwellian situation which is adopted from fictional Socialism into real world neofascism. 

[Skill and Chance]

If any industry needs some diversifying its pilots. 80-90% or pilots are men.

90% of truck drivers are men but we only need DEI in great jobs right ?

Do you think maybe, just maybe a supermajority of women don't want to travel every week of their working life?!

[Associate Justice PiT]

"pilot" is one of the most dangerous jobs (2nd in this article), women, ya know, like men, don't like to do dangerous work if they don't have to.  Men are more apt to feel like they "have to" because men are dumb.  As proof, the most dangerous jobs are are almost exclusively made out of jobs that are heavily skewed to men.  Gross and hard jobs too.  Is it the "Good Ole Boy Network" that keeps women out of the Port-o-Potty cleaning industry?

I can promise you, the mainstream media will never, ever do a story on conservatives complaining about a Mining or Lineman CEO focusing on DEI policies implying "too many men".

Pretty much this. I'll never take these DEI initiatives seriously until they start advocating for more female trash collectors or whatever.

As for the OP, I'd personally be less likely to fly a plane if I knew the pilot was hired thanks to DEI. I don't the slightest bit of a f**k about the gender or race of my pilot, I just don't want to crash so if they were hired for anything other than pure merit, hard pass. If that means 80% white men? great! 80% black latinas? great! Just get me from point A to point B, please and thank you!

     And this makes the point quite well why people don't want DEI in hiring pilots. Most people don't care if the receptionist they're talking to was a diversity hire, because that person doesn't have hundreds of lives riding on every decision. A diversity hire in the cockpit is a far harder sell. They can tell us that they are not compromising quality, but it's slightly hard to trust that when it's our skin on the line.

[Skill and Chance]

If any industry needs some diversifying its pilots. 80-90% or pilots are men.

Not sure why the percentage of pilots that are men is at all relevant so long as the companies are hiring the most qualified applicants

From a purely statistical standpoint that doesn’t hold water. No way 80% of pilots are men just because “they make the best pilots” or whatever.

There's probably much less women than men seeking to become pilots

That’s! Why! DEI! Exists!

To try and include and support all kinds of people to seek and stay in the job so the organization can succeed to the best of its ability.

Why do all jobs have to be equally representative?  Certain cultures/families effectively train their children to pursue occupation X from day 1.  Other cultures/families effectively train their children to pursue occupation Y from day 1, to the exclusion of occupation X.  It's a free country!

I do think 80-90% male is high for pilots and has some legacy of a different era, but half of pilots (or truck drivers or sailors) being female is only ever going to happen in a world with fully automated pregnancy/infant care!  

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

"pilot" is one of the most dangerous jobs (2nd in this article), women, ya know, like men, don't like to do dangerous work if they don't have to.  Men are more apt to feel like they "have to" because men are dumb.  As proof, the most dangerous jobs are are almost exclusively made out of jobs that are heavily skewed to men.  Gross and hard jobs too.  Is it the "Good Ole Boy Network" that keeps women out of the Port-o-Potty cleaning industry?

I can promise you, the mainstream media will never, ever do a story on conservatives complaining about a Mining or Lineman CEO focusing on DEI policies implying "too many men".

Pretty much this. I'll never take these DEI initiatives seriously until they start advocating for more female trash collectors or whatever.

As for the OP, I'd personally be less likely to fly a plane if I knew the pilot was hired thanks to DEI. I don't the slightest bit of a f**k about the gender or race of my pilot, I just don't want to crash so if they were hired for anything other than pure merit, hard pass. If that means 80% white men? great! 80% black latinas? great! Just get me from point A to point B, please and thank you!

     And this makes the point quite well why people don't want DEI in hiring pilots. Most people don't care if the receptionist they're talking to was a diversity hire, because that person doesn't have hundreds of lives riding on every decision. A diversity hire in the cockpit is a far harder sell. They can tell us that they are not compromising quality, but it's slightly hard to trust that when it's our skin on the line.

For me, this is why I want DEI in hiring, to expand the pool of applicants so as to get more competition and better pilots. But, I guess you feel comfortable only with a white male flying the plane.

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

If any industry needs some diversifying its pilots. 80-90% or pilots are men.

Not sure why the percentage of pilots that are men is at all relevant so long as the companies are hiring the most qualified applicants

From a purely statistical standpoint that doesn’t hold water. No way 80% of pilots are men just because “they make the best pilots” or whatever.

There's probably much less women than men seeking to become pilots

That’s! Why! DEI! Exists!

To try and include and support all kinds of people to seek and stay in the job so the organization can succeed to the best of its ability.

Why do all jobs have to be equally representative?  Certain cultures/families effectively train their children to pursue occupation X from day 1.  Other cultures/families effectively train their children to pursue occupation Y from day 1, to the exclusion of occupation X.  It's a free country!

I do think 80-90% male is high for pilots and has some legacy of a different era, but half of pilots (or truck drivers or sailors) being female is only ever going to happen in a world with fully automated pregnancy/infant care!  

Can you find a single post here or on a DEI website even that calls for all jobs to be equally representative?  You're making a strawman argument.

[Skill and Chance]

"pilot" is one of the most dangerous jobs (2nd in this article), women, ya know, like men, don't like to do dangerous work if they don't have to.  Men are more apt to feel like they "have to" because men are dumb.  As proof, the most dangerous jobs are are almost exclusively made out of jobs that are heavily skewed to men.  Gross and hard jobs too.  Is it the "Good Ole Boy Network" that keeps women out of the Port-o-Potty cleaning industry?

I can promise you, the mainstream media will never, ever do a story on conservatives complaining about a Mining or Lineman CEO focusing on DEI policies implying "too many men".

Pretty much this. I'll never take these DEI initiatives seriously until they start advocating for more female trash collectors or whatever.

As for the OP, I'd personally be less likely to fly a plane if I knew the pilot was hired thanks to DEI. I don't the slightest bit of a f**k about the gender or race of my pilot, I just don't want to crash so if they were hired for anything other than pure merit, hard pass. If that means 80% white men? great! 80% black latinas? great! Just get me from point A to point B, please and thank you!

     And this makes the point quite well why people don't want DEI in hiring pilots. Most people don't care if the receptionist they're talking to was a diversity hire, because that person doesn't have hundreds of lives riding on every decision. A diversity hire in the cockpit is a far harder sell. They can tell us that they are not compromising quality, but it's slightly hard to trust that when it's our skin on the line.

For me, this is why I want DEI in hiring, to expand the pool of applicants so as to get more competition and better pilots. But, I guess you feel comfortable only with a white male flying the plane.

Recruiting more people of underrepresented backgrounds into flight training programs is great.  However, advancement needs to be 100% based on training performance from that point forward.  People are nervous about whether the latter will be upheld in practice.  

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

"pilot" is one of the most dangerous jobs (2nd in this article), women, ya know, like men, don't like to do dangerous work if they don't have to.  Men are more apt to feel like they "have to" because men are dumb.  As proof, the most dangerous jobs are are almost exclusively made out of jobs that are heavily skewed to men.  Gross and hard jobs too.  Is it the "Good Ole Boy Network" that keeps women out of the Port-o-Potty cleaning industry?

I can promise you, the mainstream media will never, ever do a story on conservatives complaining about a Mining or Lineman CEO focusing on DEI policies implying "too many men".

Pretty much this. I'll never take these DEI initiatives seriously until they start advocating for more female trash collectors or whatever.

As for the OP, I'd personally be less likely to fly a plane if I knew the pilot was hired thanks to DEI. I don't the slightest bit of a f**k about the gender or race of my pilot, I just don't want to crash so if they were hired for anything other than pure merit, hard pass. If that means 80% white men? great! 80% black latinas? great! Just get me from point A to point B, please and thank you!

     And this makes the point quite well why people don't want DEI in hiring pilots. Most people don't care if the receptionist they're talking to was a diversity hire, because that person doesn't have hundreds of lives riding on every decision. A diversity hire in the cockpit is a far harder sell. They can tell us that they are not compromising quality, but it's slightly hard to trust that when it's our skin on the line.

For me, this is why I want DEI in hiring, to expand the pool of applicants so as to get more competition and better pilots. But, I guess you feel comfortable only with a white male flying the plane.

Recruiting more people of underrepresented backgrounds into flight training programs is great.  However, advancement needs to be 100% based on training performance from that point forward.  People are nervous about whether the latter will be upheld in practice.  

Well, some easily frightened social conservatives seem to be. I don't think you - or I - should presume to speak for anybody else though.

Do you seriously believe this is all just 'some legacy of a previous era'?

One of the issues regarding DEI in pilot training is the number of trainers who openly express sexist views or who are implicitly sexist.

3. Perceptions
Several studies have shown that female pilots tend to be judged more negatively when they make errors.

More than sexist comments, separate studies have shown that female pilots are judged as being less competent. This trend in responses was observed whether the respondents were male or female, or pilots or non-pilots.

https://pilotinstitute.com/women-aviation-statistics/

From what was written in point 2, it seems point three is clearly referring to women being judged more negatively when they make similar errors.

The only logical conclusion of this is that women who are in, say, the top 10% of pilots in training are drummed out, while men who are in, say, the bottom 40% stay in and graduate. (Maybe not that bad.) The only logical conclusion of that is worse, not better, graduate pilots.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     We're talking past each other; I don't think anyone here is against instructors treating women fairly and holding them to the same standards as men. The issue is ensuring that this does not end in them being held to a lower standard. Along those lines, United has said they want half of the pilots they train in the next decade to be women or minorities; this is not too concerning from a public safety standpoint if half of those who apply qualify as such, but I don't know what the spread of pilot applicants looks like.

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

Just like big Hollywood studios going "woke", big corporations didn't embrace DEI policies because they suddenly saw the light and decided that racism and misogyny are morally wrong. They did it because it's good for business and benefits their top-lines.
For all the noise they do, the bigots like Charlie Kirk, Matt Walsh, and Ben Shapiro represent a constantly shrinking segment of the population and following their advice is going to actually hurt these companies.

Kirk is a grifter and Shapiro doesn't understand or care. Walsh to a degree actually understands branding and that this is not about making people purely angry but about making stuff cringe. His whole strategy is to associate things he doesn't like with establishment entities - big corporations, celebrities, management - and thereby tar them. The very nature of this thread is a testament to success in associating advocacy for minority groups with the most powerful interests in society.

There has also been a degree of success in associating products being generically bad with corporations being focused on token diversity.

All of this is hobbled by socially conservative positions remaining deeply unpopular, but to say there has not been a successful campaign to make social liberalism cringe and toxic, especially to most libertarian-leaning voters, is to ignore reality.

I agree with this 100%. The only thing I would add is that you left out the word 'elite/elitist.'

I mentioned a radio show/podcast previously called American Radio Journal that is mostly financed by the Kochs, the second wealthiest family in the world worth an estimated $118 billion, that rails against supposed 'elites/elitists' every week.

I have to add though, for all of Elon Musk's faults, other than a second hand claim in the New York Post, he seems to have enough self awareness to not rail against 'elites.'

Speaking of the New York Post/Fox 'News'/the Wall Street Journal though, which also often rails against 'elites', Rupert Murdoch and family are the 99th most wealthy according to Forbes, worth only $17 billion.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was jealously that caused the Murdoch Post to come out against Elon Musk.

[Benjamin Frank 2.0]

    We're talking past each other; I don't think anyone here is against instructors treating women fairly and holding them to the same standards as men. The issue is ensuring that this does not end in them being held to a lower standard. Along those lines, United has said they want half of the pilots they train in the next decade to be women or minorities; this is not too concerning from a public safety standpoint if half of those who apply qualify as such, but I don't know what the spread of pilot applicants looks like.

1.There is no evidence that this would lead to a lowering of standards, more competition should make it possible to raise standards, not lower them. This concern is fearmongering.

2.You're for instructors treating women fairly? What mechanism do you support, if not DEI, to help ensure that?

And again, this isn't just for these supposed 'glamorous' jobs like airline pilots (basically just sky bus drivers, not that I have a problem with bus drivers, but I don't consider it to be glamorous either), but it includes areas like plumbing and other trades and truck driving where women have in the last few years launched class action law suits citing discrimination in hiring or unchecked sexism on the job from coworkers.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

It's really insane to me how there's a large movement of people who point at any shortcoming of an institution in the United States and somehow immediately conclude it's due to "DEI". It's complete nonsense.

The funny thing is people on the left take the dumb pills and, instead of challenging this idiotic premise, instead insist on defending the practice of DEI itself. This thread is a great example! It's so stupid to me that I have to wonder if these complaints are meant as some sort of rhetorical trap to trick liberals into taking a less persuasive argument.

There's no credible evidence connecting "DEI" to any sort of negative change in performance in any of the airline or transportation industries, regardless of whether you think asking your new hires to listen to Robin DiAngelo is a good idea.

Yeah the fact that anti-DEI has become red meat for the stupidest conservative cultural warriors is one of the things keeping it going. After a lot of people who knows it doesn't work cowardly refuse to say that or push it because they're afraid of being seem as the same kind of whacko who tweets innescantly about.

Like over here we see an attempt to spread this same talking points with one of the most absurd conflations of an administrative desk job with being a pilot.

https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1747329671166075039?t=RUsDfMcmzb_IyVRus_...

[Horus]

What is even going on? I'm confused. What I'm sort of getting is lots of conservatives are scared to fly now? Cool with me, maybe prices will go down and I can get an extra vaca this year.

[GP270watch]

I can promise you, the mainstream media will never, ever do a story on conservatives complaining about a Mining or Lineman CEO focusing on DEI policies implying "too many men".

 There was a woman who desperately wanted to be a lineman and had to sue to advance in her position with Con Edison(NYC area). She had all the qualifications and experience, aced all the tests, went and got degrees related to the field and was still denied and she believed it was because she was a Black woman.

A highly regarded African-American Con Ed worker who was the first woman to become a line constructor — a worker who fixes utility poles — has sued the company, alleging an old boys club has kept her from being promoted.

Monica Harwell, 53, says she’s unsuccessfully applied for over 50 promotions since 2000 despite earning an associate’s degree in electrical engineering and a master’s in organizational leadership, among other degrees.

“They’ve always said, ‘This is the career path, you got do this.’ I did it!” said Harwell, who lives in Jersey City.

“And I’m getting beat by people with less years’ experience and no degree.”

Meanwhile, white men with less experience and education get promoted to positions for which she often wasn’t granted an interview, her suit alleges.

EXCLUSIVE: Highly educated black woman claims Con Edison won’t promote her, fights alleged bias in lawsuit