UAL MEC Endorses 14.7% Paycut

[FL717]

I can see that you are one of those who believe that nothing happened in history before you existed. How about this for a different prespective: Your income determines where you live; where you live determines what kind of school and quality of education your kids would go to and recieve; which determines their job and income. Which, of course, determines where they would live and school and so on. You see the closed-loop relationship here? Then perhaps what happened 30 years ago affected by some misguided policies have some impact on the workforce today. I regret that you fail to see the importance of diversity and to realize the potential that women and minorities can bring to the workforce. Perhaps you should get that chip checked on your shoulder. BTW, women still get paid 40% less, that is "here and now".

I thought that this was a thread about UAL Paycuts... but hey... if you want to get something off your chest.... I'll help.

First off... your post that I quote above is exactly the original mantra of "Affirmative action" and has been attempted by many to "break the cycle" that you describe, albeit that it was originally concepted for African-American families in the urban employment setting, and became a much broader concept.

With that said... let me redirect your "chip" back to the relevance of "Airline Pilot Pay", and my opinion on this policy.

1. United Pilots (like most) are union and ALL Pilots regardless of gender or nationality are paid the same.... so there is no discrimination and your "Women Pay comparison" point on this thread, or any thread regarding union labor pay is moot.

2. There is an very good argument for the case of, and many good places to be made for, the "breaking the cycle" with Affirmative Action..... HOWEVER....... the Cockpit of of an Commercial Aircraft is not, and should NEVER be one of those that places.... period.

I've read your original post once again, and while your "point" is valid... I can find no relevance to the topic of this thread, and can only conclude you have a misguided "chip".

 

[Schwanker]

Perhaps you should get that chip checked on your shoulder. BTW, women still get paid 40% less, that is "here and now".

Trash8Mofo,

Funny, I looked at our contract, as well as pay scales at other airlines. I can't find the part where a female 757 FO makes 40% less then a male FO. Maybe you can help me here?

Also, Trash8Mofo, did males receive preferential treatment on interview selections over the last several years of Majors hiring?

Thanks for the help. I can see that I sorely need the education you are ready to provide.

 

[46Driver]

Trash8Mofo,

Funny, I looked at our contract, as well as pay scales at other airlines. I can't find the part where a female 757 FO makes 40% less then a male FO. Maybe you can help me here?

Also, Trash8Mofo, did males receive preferential treatment on interview selections over the last several years of Majors hiring?

Thanks for the help. I can see that I sorely need the education you are ready to provide.

I was thinking the same thing: I didn't see separate pay scales at my company for males and females. Nor did I see separate pay scales in any military or civil service guides. Maybe that whole 40% thing is skewed by the NFL: football players making millions while cheerleaders make just a few thousand. Then again, the girls at Vivid Video make big bucks compared to the "actors"....

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Rez--Most ALPA members weren't in the crew rooms bitching over the past 30 years, they were saying "screw those guys from 'XXX airlines' they can't compete and they need to go out of business for the good of the industry".

I don't know where you were in the early '90's but that's what I saw from ALPA since I joined in '87 and heard from ALPA members who had been in Council 2 and 3 since the early 60's.

To be successful as a union you have to be willing to put something on the line. Hank Duffy failed. Randy Babbitt failed. Duane Woerthless is left to turn out the lights. You lead from the front. If Hank had called for a SOS over random drug testing, we were willing to go. If he had called for a SOS over security screening, we were willing to go. If they had called for a SOS when it was clear that Lorenzo was stealing EAL blind, we were willing to go. If Babbitt had called for a SOS when Icahn was stealing TWA blind, we would have been forever grateful to our brothers who put it on the line to support our cause. What we got was averted eyes in the terminal and snide remarks on the jumpseat...from our "brothers".

We were stopped because the leadership of ALPA did not have the wherewithall--the backbone, to be a union. ALPA is an association...with a really expensive magazine. USAir, UAL and whoever heads down the 1113 highway is reaping what they have sewn.TC

Agreed.... your post indicates that if all three ALPA Prez did the same is that part of the associations MO. ALPA's successes were greatests on the political front....

It seems that ALPA national wants to be a "work together' player in the national arena (issues you mentioned) rather than one to bring a gun to a knife fight (teamsters? And if the teamsters, we know their success rate in representing pilots).

My issue is, pilots don't care about anything till you start messing with thier wallet. Only then can you get thier attention, but then it is too late, you just can't get them up to speed in that short of time... Oh and then ask them to volunteer some time or come up with solutions and suddenly the latest reality show is waaaay more important....

 

[Stifler's Mom]

Give it a rest.

From walking through the terminals and crew rooms, it is evident that probably more than 90% of any pilot group is made up of "white males".

I had a Captain whining about how females had it much easier than men in our society. I asked him if he would rather be a man or a woman in this country. His answer whithout hesitation was "man". Conversation over.

Our payscales are based on seniority. "Corporate America" has the problem you are all talking about, not the airlines.

 

[Ty Webb]

While 90% of the pilots you may see are white males, the simple fact is that until recently, there just weren't many women pilots available to hire. That has been changing.

I think a more relevant comparison would be the percentage of female applicants that are selected for interviews versus their male counterparts, at the same experience level.

In other words, 90 males meet "the minimums". 10 females meet the same minimums, and there are 30 interview slots open, how many of the females will get the call?

I don't have a problem with women pilots. . . . far from it. I enjoy flying with them, as long as they are "chipless". I just feel it is pretty obvious that preferential hiring discriminates against me. . . . . and I am not afraid to say it.

 

[GuppyPuppy]

Which assumption is that you are referring? Is is the fact that women do get paid about 40% less, or minorities were more so discriminated against in the 60s and 70s? Are these not facts? Or was it the statement that said a "silver-platter handed to them" not impling that those who were hired do not deserve as such.

Please enlighten me as to why, way back in 1999, that the US Airways application window had closed before summer started...unless you were a female. Is this not a fact?

I will enlighten you all who don't remember this. US Airways had closed their application window around June 1999 yet were still conducting interviews as they had thousands of applications on file. A friend of mine (white male) wanted to apply, but couldn't. Later that summer one of our female first officers at Brand X Airlines got a special fax number from another female F.O. who had just interviewed. During her interview she was asked if she knew any other female pilots who would be interested in working for US Airways and, if so, to have them fax their resume directly to the hiring office, even if they hadn't yet applied. Well, this friend of mine faxed in her resume and promptly received an application, along with an interview date.

Do you think that anyone DESERVED the right to apply to a company when the application window was closed for most? Wasn't it Martin Luther King who is quoted as saying something like "I look forward to the day when a person is not judged by the color of their skin, but the content of their character"? Smart man. I hope his dream comes true someday.

The fact is that even today airlines will look at a person's gender or race when determining who to interview. Females are in one stack, males in another. Whites in one stack, minorities in another. Military pilots in one stack, civilian in another. Part 121 in one stack, corporate in another.

I know of several female pilots who were hired at United without even one minute of turbine experience. One I know of had just 700 hours total time. Another one I know finally passed her initial checkride...on her sixth try! I'd be afraid of losing my job if I failed my checkride once! Do you think she DESERVED a job there? I don't care who you are, nobody should be allowed that many chances to pass a checkride. Now, I may be going out on a limb here, but I contend that this particular pilot got so many chances solely because of her gender.

No chip here. Anyone stupid enough to get into this industry DESERVES exactly what they get, myself included.

GP

 

[capt. megadeth]

Please enlighten me as to why, way back in 1999, that the US Airways application window had closed before summer started...unless you were a female. Is this not a fact?

I will enlighten you all who don't remember this. US Airways had closed their application window around June 1999 yet were still conducting interviews as they had thousands of applications on file. A friend of mine (white male) wanted to apply, but couldn't. Later that summer one of our female first officers at Brand X Airlines got a special fax number from another female F.O. who had just interviewed. During her interview she was asked if she knew any other female pilots who would be interested in working for US Airways and, if so, to have them fax their resume directly to the hiring office, even if they hadn't yet applied. Well, this friend of mine faxed in her resume and promptly received an application, along with an interview date.

Do you think that anyone DESERVED the right to apply to a company when the application window was closed for most? Wasn't it Martin Luther King who is quoted as saying something like "I look forward to the day when a person is not judged by the color of their skin, but the content of their character"? Smart man. I hope his dream comes true someday.

The fact is that even today airlines will look at a person's gender or race when determining who to interview. Females are in one stack, males in another. Whites in one stack, minorities in another. Military pilots in one stack, civilian in another. Part 121 in one stack, corporate in another.

I know of several female pilots who were hired at United without even one minute of turbine experience. One I know of had just 700 hours total time. Another one I know finally passed her initial checkride...on her sixth try! I'd be afraid of losing my job if I failed my checkride once! Do you think she DESERVED a job there? I don't care who you are, nobody should be allowed that many chances to pass a checkride. Now, I may be going out on a limb here, but I contend that this particular pilot got so many chances solely because of her gender.

No chip here. Anyone stupid enough to get into this industry DESERVES exactly what they get, myself included.

GP

I agree with you. It is not right. I don't agree with Affirmative Action now and I never will. I didn't get into this industry saying "oooh I want to be an airline pilot and since I am female, I deserve to and will get a job quicker." Personally, I wish they would do away with that b.s. because even to this day when I meet a pilot, I still have that thought in the back of my head wondering if they think I am an "undeserving". If the airlines didn't preferentially interview/hire females/minorities I wouldn't have to feel that way.

That being said though, last year I was at a commuter whose sister airline gave us preferential interviews. I applied and never got called. In the meantime, white males with less experience then me were called and went straight into a 757. I was happy for them. It all worked out in the end for me.

I don't think it is as prevalent as it was back in 1999. I remember hearing about the US Airways stuff. Guppy, it was probably a blessing in disguise for your friend.

 

[GuppyPuppy]

Guppy, it was probably a blessing in disguise for your friend.

Agreed!!!

 

[thruthemurk]

Pilot hiring at UAL

I would like to throw a few additional points onto this thread that may be news to some. It is amazing how many pilots I fly with that just assume United decided to up the hiring of females/ minorities because it was the right thing to do.

They actually lost a discrimination lawsuit in the late 1980's and for 2 years had to hire one non "white male" for every white male hired. There is not much question about the fact that their hiring practices had been discriminatory prior to this - along with virtually all major airlines, and for that matter all airlines in general.

For better or worse the ATP qualified pilots in the United States at the beginning of this two year window were approximately 93% white male. One pilot was hired from the 93% for every pilot hired from the 7%. Of course many pilots were hired without ATP's as well - both white male and non.

As a result they hired hundreds of pilots who had considerably less experience than they otherwise would have - even if they had not been discriminating. Fortunately, most of the pilots they hired were up to the task and after training and experience on the line made great airline pilots. Many of us "know" that if hired with 350 hours we could have risen to the challenge of airline piloting with good training and guidance. If you are on the track - you are doing what you can to build the resume until hired but the basic "goods" are there.

Unfortunatly, there is also a not insignificant number of these pilots who were unable to rise to the level of reasonable competence and they have forever been a thorn in the side of United - many forced to sign letters agreeing to never push for a flying seat for the the guarantee of continued employment. In some cases, others hired under the program were resentful as well because they would sometimes be assumed incompetent until they flew and proved otherwise.

It is interesting that this judgement only lasted 2 years, and while they continued to hire a broad spectrum of pilots after that time frame - the numbers were a better reflection of the available pilot pool as a whole.

Despite this there are countless number of bitter rejectees who curse the injustice of their white maleness blocking them from the "holy grail". One look at the pictures of the new hire classes gracing the halls of TK in Denver quickly dispel this excuse. Overwhelmingly white male except for the classes of 1989 and 1990 - and even those were well represented.

Of course, as the turbine turns many past "injustices" become blessings in disguise.


I do not believe in discrimination, original or reverse - and only present the above for historical illumination.

white male,
murk