What Doc said!!! INCREDIBLE!!!! Maybe a little less Jesus and a little more telling what you really think instead!!!!
I hope I didn't offend anyone....
Hiring child-bearing age females
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
Airmanship Police
- Rank 2
- Posts: 73
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 6:10 pm
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
I hope you did.Airmanship Police wrote:What Doc said!!! INCREDIBLE!!!! Maybe a little less Jesus and a little more telling what you really think instead!!!!
I hope I didn't offend anyone....
-
Iliopolus_1
- Rank 0
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 11:06 am
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
Watch out, the censor is rampant again tonight
-
PositiveRate27
- Rank 7
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:27 am
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
pdw wrote:Are there some actual statistics to summon ... for this interesting thread ?
Yes PDW, the surface winds were out of the south east at 7kts. Undercutting cold air from the north west likey made for higher density than anticipated, making the vagine more fertile... Or so we thought, we are likey to be proved wrong of this in the coming days.
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
Now you're just trying to become a master at getting threads thrown out in a hurry ... where the original poster had genuine interest in the subject. If you really look at it closely, it is a fairly serious issue for all involved.
But never mind that ... what's important is that there must some statistics on this by now. I remember the wife had spent a fair bit of time at her job prior to the maternity leave and it was perfectly OK with management when the time came to quit. I'm just thinking that aviation is a bit different when it comes to duties as a pilot.
But never mind that ... what's important is that there must some statistics on this by now. I remember the wife had spent a fair bit of time at her job prior to the maternity leave and it was perfectly OK with management when the time came to quit. I'm just thinking that aviation is a bit different when it comes to duties as a pilot.
-
iflyforpie
- Top Poster
- Posts: 8132
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: Winterfell...
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
Please don't speculate... let's wait for the official report to come out.PositiveRate27 wrote:pdw wrote:Are there some actual statistics to summon ... for this interesting thread ?
Yes PDW, the surface winds were out of the south east at 7kts. Undercutting cold air from the north west likey made for higher density than anticipated, making the vagine more fertile... Or so we thought, we are likey to be proved wrong of this in the coming days.
-
AirSprint HR
- Rank 3
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:15 pm
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
"You have two candidates with equal credentials."
This is the problem with your question. There are never two equal candidates in my experience. You hire the most qualified person for the job, regardless of male/female.
AirSprint HR
This is the problem with your question. There are never two equal candidates in my experience. You hire the most qualified person for the job, regardless of male/female.
AirSprint HR
-
shimmydampner
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 3:59 pm
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
Oh good lord, I can't believe the amount of effeminate hand-wringing and spineless squirming on display here. It's nauseating.
Look, this is simple. Frank and Fannie apply for the same job and tick all the same boxes in the evaluation process. However, you worry that Fannie wants to procreate in the foreseeable future, making her length of service with the company likely much shorter than Frank's. That is an important consideration for you, and so the scale tips in favour of Frank. He's the number one contender. He gets the job because he is equally qualified but better for your company. Simple. Of course, in the rare event that anyone asks, you never ever verbalize that it was Fannie's probability of getting knocked up that gave Frank the final leg up, even though in reality it's perfectly legitimate. Instead you throw out some managerial-type bullshit about how you felt his persona would better synergize with the ongoing company paradigm shift.
At the end of the day, a company has to hire the candidate that is most suitable, across the board, for them. Hiring the #2 candidate because you and afraid of offending them is patently more unfair than not hiring them because their goals are incompatible with the job.
Look, this is simple. Frank and Fannie apply for the same job and tick all the same boxes in the evaluation process. However, you worry that Fannie wants to procreate in the foreseeable future, making her length of service with the company likely much shorter than Frank's. That is an important consideration for you, and so the scale tips in favour of Frank. He's the number one contender. He gets the job because he is equally qualified but better for your company. Simple. Of course, in the rare event that anyone asks, you never ever verbalize that it was Fannie's probability of getting knocked up that gave Frank the final leg up, even though in reality it's perfectly legitimate. Instead you throw out some managerial-type bullshit about how you felt his persona would better synergize with the ongoing company paradigm shift.
At the end of the day, a company has to hire the candidate that is most suitable, across the board, for them. Hiring the #2 candidate because you and afraid of offending them is patently more unfair than not hiring them because their goals are incompatible with the job.
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
AirSprint HR,
You are correct, no two candidates are ever equal. But when you are comparing two candidates, you will always have likes or dislikes of each individual. Is child rearing given much consideration when listing pros and cons of a potential employee? (I understand that a direct answer in writing on a public forum is not prudent).
To keep this thread loosely in line with Doc's original thread, A question could be, How much weight do you give to the child rearing (not necessarily bearing) factor. This takes gender somewhat out of the equation as both parents are often very involved in rearing the child. It is not just the maternity leave that will be the issue. Parents often struggle keeping up with a work schedule because of things like child care. It is not easy finding childcare for parents who work at odd hours or if (when) kids get sick.
In the original thread, Doc asked; How parents handle raising kids and building a career in aviation. He stated that his wife worked a "day job" and there were still challenges. He recognized that while starting a career in aviation, "day jobs" are not common, and thus there must be many challenges.
My Question now is, do employers consider these challenges when hiring new pilots? I am not expecting a straight out answer from people in hiring position (although I do appreciate your participation AirSprint Hr) as I know you must keep your but covered. Shimmy is right that you are better off to not verbalize your reasons for your decisions, and I would never expect someone to put it in writing on a public forum. But I think it is important to talk about it, as I am sure this situation is a widespread-reality.
You are correct, no two candidates are ever equal. But when you are comparing two candidates, you will always have likes or dislikes of each individual. Is child rearing given much consideration when listing pros and cons of a potential employee? (I understand that a direct answer in writing on a public forum is not prudent).
To keep this thread loosely in line with Doc's original thread, A question could be, How much weight do you give to the child rearing (not necessarily bearing) factor. This takes gender somewhat out of the equation as both parents are often very involved in rearing the child. It is not just the maternity leave that will be the issue. Parents often struggle keeping up with a work schedule because of things like child care. It is not easy finding childcare for parents who work at odd hours or if (when) kids get sick.
In the original thread, Doc asked; How parents handle raising kids and building a career in aviation. He stated that his wife worked a "day job" and there were still challenges. He recognized that while starting a career in aviation, "day jobs" are not common, and thus there must be many challenges.
My Question now is, do employers consider these challenges when hiring new pilots? I am not expecting a straight out answer from people in hiring position (although I do appreciate your participation AirSprint Hr) as I know you must keep your but covered. Shimmy is right that you are better off to not verbalize your reasons for your decisions, and I would never expect someone to put it in writing on a public forum. But I think it is important to talk about it, as I am sure this situation is a widespread-reality.
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
To continue...
Shimmy talked about the responsibility to hire the best candidate for the company. I agree, to do anything less, would be letting the rest of the company down. Every employee at the company is relying on people to make the best decisions so that it is strong and stable.
So if you are in the unenviable position where you are making these decisions, how do you handle someone coming in after the fact and making accusations of human rights violations. It seems to be the norm these days, this is how you handle things (it was the first response from many on this forum.)
I guess the first thing you could do is not hang your c@ck out in the wind on a public forum participating in discussions like this. I guess these are the reasons it is hard for new people in this business to get direct answers from people who are steering the ship. I commend many of the steerers as they are often damned if they do or damned if they don't. But they are still doing and don'ting.
Back to my earlier statement about; It is funny the things we cant talk about.
Shimmy talked about the responsibility to hire the best candidate for the company. I agree, to do anything less, would be letting the rest of the company down. Every employee at the company is relying on people to make the best decisions so that it is strong and stable.
So if you are in the unenviable position where you are making these decisions, how do you handle someone coming in after the fact and making accusations of human rights violations. It seems to be the norm these days, this is how you handle things (it was the first response from many on this forum.)
I guess the first thing you could do is not hang your c@ck out in the wind on a public forum participating in discussions like this. I guess these are the reasons it is hard for new people in this business to get direct answers from people who are steering the ship. I commend many of the steerers as they are often damned if they do or damned if they don't. But they are still doing and don'ting.
Back to my earlier statement about; It is funny the things we cant talk about.
-
AirSprint HR
- Rank 3
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:15 pm
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
"Is child rearing given much consideration when listing pros and cons of a potential employee?"railroad wrote:AirSprint HR,
You are correct, no two candidates are ever equal. But when you are comparing two candidates, you will always have likes or dislikes of each individual. Is child rearing given much consideration when listing pros and cons of a potential employee? (I understand that a direct answer in writing on a public forum is not prudent).
To keep this thread loosely in line with Doc's original thread, A question could be, How much weight do you give to the child rearing (not necessarily bearing) factor. This takes gender somewhat out of the equation as both parents are often very involved in rearing the child. It is not just the maternity leave that will be the issue. Parents often struggle keeping up with a work schedule because of things like child care. It is not easy finding childcare for parents who work at odd hours or if (when) kids get sick.
In the original thread, Doc asked; How parents handle raising kids and building a career in aviation. He stated that his wife worked a "day job" and there were still challenges. He recognized that while starting a career in aviation, "day jobs" are not common, and thus there must be many challenges.
My Question now is, do employers consider these challenges when hiring new pilots? I am not expecting a straight out answer from people in hiring position (although I do appreciate your participation AirSprint Hr) as I know you must keep your but covered. Shimmy is right that you are better off to not verbalize your reasons for your decisions, and I would never expect someone to put it in writing on a public forum. But I think it is important to talk about it, as I am sure this situation is a widespread-reality.
- No consideration given to child rearing in our evaluation process.
"My Question now is, do employers consider these challenges when hiring new pilots?"
- We don't.
To expand... Everyone is different and hiring based on the chance that someone will start a family and leave your company is a very short-term approach. People may leave for a variety of reasons and all that you can hope for as an employer is that they help make you a better company while they are there. In my experience, if you treat people well while they go through that time of their life, you have a better than even chance that you will keep them long-term if they decide to return. Also, some of our best people have come from recommendations of those who were short-term employees. In short, hire the best talent when you can, treat them well, and your company will benefit in the long-term.
AirSprint HR
Edited for spelling.
Last edited by AirSprint HR on Thu Nov 21, 2013 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
PositiveRate27
- Rank 7
- Posts: 597
- Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:27 am
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
pdw wrote:Now you're just trying to become a master at getting threads thrown out in a hurry ... where the original poster had genuine interest in the subject. If you really look at it closely, it is a fairly serious issue for all involved.
But never mind that ... what's important is that there must some statistics on this by now. I remember the wife had spent a fair bit of time at her job prior to the maternity leave and it was perfectly OK with management when the time came to quit. I'm just thinking that aviation is a bit different when it comes to duties as a pilot.
PDW, I'd like to apologize. I should not have written that. I was called off reserve yesterday morning at 3am to fly half way across the country and I was tired, frustrated and a bit punchy. Excuses aside, my post was uncalled for and inappropriate. I'm sorry, wont happen again.
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
This is a very good response, from someone who makes hiring decisions.AirSprint HR wrote:
... To expand... Everyone is different and hiring based on the chance that someone will start a family and leave your company is a very short-term approach. People may leave for a variety of reasons and all that you can hope for as an employer is that they help make you a better company while they are there. In my experience, if you treat people well while they go through that time of their life, you have a better than even change that you will keep them long-term if they decide to stay. Also, some of our best people have come from recommendations of those who were short-term employees. In short, hire the best talent when you can, treat them well, and your company will benefit in the long-term.
AirSprint HR
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
Let's see...
Women live longer and the number of women in prison represents a fraction of number of men in prison. People who smoke have higher incidences of heart disease and cancer. Smokers are always in one of two modes: smoking, or looking for a chance to smoke. People who drink heavily (also known as "most pilots I know") have health problems ranging from liver damage to heart disease to dementia. Natives make up 2% of the population but 21% of the prison population. Jews, especially the orthodox variety must not work after sundown on Friday till sundown on Saturday. Vegetarians and the harder core vegans are tough to feed on the job as they have special needs. STDs can make if very difficult to work. And how about shingles? Or the flu?
You could apply this silliness to pretty much any of the cases above and more. Why let a little thing like a chromosome become a big deal when hiring? By the way, a girl flew me back home today in the A319 I rode in. She didn't have a single baby the entire flight.
Women live longer and the number of women in prison represents a fraction of number of men in prison. People who smoke have higher incidences of heart disease and cancer. Smokers are always in one of two modes: smoking, or looking for a chance to smoke. People who drink heavily (also known as "most pilots I know") have health problems ranging from liver damage to heart disease to dementia. Natives make up 2% of the population but 21% of the prison population. Jews, especially the orthodox variety must not work after sundown on Friday till sundown on Saturday. Vegetarians and the harder core vegans are tough to feed on the job as they have special needs. STDs can make if very difficult to work. And how about shingles? Or the flu?
You could apply this silliness to pretty much any of the cases above and more. Why let a little thing like a chromosome become a big deal when hiring? By the way, a girl flew me back home today in the A319 I rode in. She didn't have a single baby the entire flight.
-
Colonel Sanders
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7512
- Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 5:17 pm
- Location: Over Macho Grande
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
Did you get her contact info? I can help her with that if she wants.She didn't have a single baby the entire flight
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
You know that you can't ask a potential employee their marital status, right?railroad wrote:Let me expand on it. You have two candidates with equal credentials. One is a 25 year old male, married a year ago to his 23 year old wife. No kids yet. The other candidate is similar age and single (male). After the interview, you feel they are both respectable young men with the values and morals you are looking for in an employee. Only difference is the individual`s position regarding the likelihood of bearing children in the near future.
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
You can't ask directly, but if you don't know the answer to this, and several other questions "you can't ask directly" you will never make it with the KGB!AirFrame wrote:You know that you can't ask a potential employee their marital status, right?railroad wrote:Let me expand on it. You have two candidates with equal credentials. One is a 25 year old male, married a year ago to his 23 year old wife. No kids yet. The other candidate is similar age and single (male). After the interview, you feel they are both respectable young men with the values and morals you are looking for in an employee. Only difference is the individual`s position regarding the likelihood of bearing children in the near future.
-
Boreas
- Rank 5
- Posts: 376
- Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:06 pm
- Location: The haunted corners of familiar rooms
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
Dude, don't listen to them. No one else can throw the winds in here like you. Go for it!iflyforpie wrote:Please don't speculate... let's wait for the official report to come out.PositiveRate27 wrote:pdw wrote:Are there some actual statistics to summon ... for this interesting thread ?
Yes PDW, the surface winds were out of the south east at 7kts. Undercutting cold air from the north west likey made for higher density than anticipated, making the vagine more fertile... Or so we thought, we are likey to be proved wrong of this in the coming days.
-
Boreas
- Rank 5
- Posts: 376
- Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:06 pm
- Location: The haunted corners of familiar rooms
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
As for hiring females of 'child-bearing age', DON'T! That is if you can get away with it.
Why would you want to reduce your profit?
Hire single males that already have a TR or that are willing to pay for one. Better yet,
hire guys that are willing to pay-to-fly for the first 500h or so. Ideally, they'll be foreign,
hired on a contract through a third party and 'paid' - if they ever get to that stage -
using some tax-free off-shore account.
I've seen this industry in Europe and Asia, so I'm only 1/3 kidding...
Why would you want to reduce your profit?
Hire single males that already have a TR or that are willing to pay for one. Better yet,
hire guys that are willing to pay-to-fly for the first 500h or so. Ideally, they'll be foreign,
hired on a contract through a third party and 'paid' - if they ever get to that stage -
using some tax-free off-shore account.
I've seen this industry in Europe and Asia, so I'm only 1/3 kidding...
-
Tail-Chaser
- Rank 4
- Posts: 211
- Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:24 pm
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
I still don't understand why this isn't common sense.AirSprint HR wrote: In short, hire the best talent when you can, treat them well, and your company will benefit in the long-term.
AirSprint HR
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
Maybe this positive effect will compensate for the possible/implied negative effect for hiring young womenflydream wrote:I'd hire the girl, to have a shot at getting her pregnantrailroad wrote:
One is male, the other female. Who do you hire?
I'm far, far away
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
I think the original point to this thread was valid and I have often wondered if this exact question was going through the interviewer's mind during any of my job interviews. Some job interviewers do ask "round about questions" to try to sniff out the personal situation, and some have not, in my own experience. Personally, I think it may not be fair, but it is a realistic concern for smaller operators closer to their operating costs with smaller staff, that this can be a real concern. For larger operators, I don't believe it should be an issue and it would be discriminatory. (Yes, to clarify... it is discrimination in any case, I'm just saying it is "understandable" in the case of small operators).
I was quite interested in reading this thread, as us females (at least me) also wonder this and its unfortunate that it has been a bit hijacked with cracks about getting the female pregnant. This is a taboo topic in our employment environment, but now that its out there, it is of interest.
One idea that has not been mentioned, is women in aviation tend to be willing to wait to have kids until later in life, or once established in a bigger/ long term company. I had the same drive to succeed in my career as any other pilot and knew having a baby in my early 20's while working an entry ground job way up north wasn't going to get me a flying career.
Just as an FYI, I have been asked point blank that if I get the job I'm not gonna go off and get knocked up, right? So that does happen too, lol. I think currently that is happening less and less.
I was quite interested in reading this thread, as us females (at least me) also wonder this and its unfortunate that it has been a bit hijacked with cracks about getting the female pregnant. This is a taboo topic in our employment environment, but now that its out there, it is of interest.
One idea that has not been mentioned, is women in aviation tend to be willing to wait to have kids until later in life, or once established in a bigger/ long term company. I had the same drive to succeed in my career as any other pilot and knew having a baby in my early 20's while working an entry ground job way up north wasn't going to get me a flying career.
Just as an FYI, I have been asked point blank that if I get the job I'm not gonna go off and get knocked up, right? So that does happen too, lol. I think currently that is happening less and less.
-
Liquid Charlie
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1461
- Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 7:40 am
- Location: YXL
- Contact:
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
You can take it one step farther -- As a candidate questioned to what his wife does for a living or profession - if she is self employed -- a professional or someone who does not qualify for parental leave - the candidate can take the full parental leave -- so now the situation is the same and therefore gender is a non issue for hiring -- closest thing men come to being pregnant 
-
careerpilot?
- Rank 3
- Posts: 177
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 7:27 pm
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
You left it wide open for this...Liquid Charlie wrote:You can take it one step farther -- As a candidate questioned to what his wife does for a living or profession - if she is self employed -- a professional or someone who does not qualify for parental leave - the candidate can take the full parental leave -- so now the situation is the same and therefore gender is a non issue for hiring -- closest thing men come to being pregnant
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/ne ... -baby.html
Apologies for the obvious thread jack, but I couldn't resist.
Re: Hiring child-bearing age females
Shouldn't you expand this? If your going to try and get someone to come on here and say they work in HR and have actively discriminated against women then shouldn't you be honest when searching out what causes pilots to leave your company for reasons other than new tin or more money?
When interviewing two male candidates, who are otherwise equal you should not pick the heavier one, as he is more likely to lose his medical from diabetes, a heart issue, or some other future medical ailment.
When interviewing two male candidates, who are otherwise equal you should not pick the one whose family owns or operates a business, as he may leave you in the future to work at that business. Further to that, you should not hire the candidate who appears to have ANY skills in ANY other discipline other than flying, as he may leave to you to pursue a different career path.
When interviewing two male candidates, who are otherwise equal you should not pick the one who knows how to type, as he may spend his future spare time cranking out the next "50 Shades of Grey" and leave you to live the lavish life of a rock star author.
I'm a guy, and I just don't get male pilots who look down at female pilots. There's more than enough shitty male pilots in this country to discredit any argument that they are worse pilots. And don't give me that "they're not strong enough to lift barrels or huck freight in the bush bulls&!t either, plenty of skinny armed male pilots cruising the vast blue expanse. There's more then enough accident reports out there to show that its whats above your shoulders that gets you home safe not whats below your belt.
Will they have babies? who knows maybe, but your male employee is more likely to lose his licence over a heart issue or diabetes than a woman, so its all a crap shoot. My Ops Manager had just finished telling me how desperately short of pilots rated on my type of machine he was when I told him I was taking off half the summer for Pat leave (and unintentionally screwing him in the process), you know what he said to me? "Congratulations man, that's awesome, when is she due? your gonna love it, most guys here don't take enough Pat leave"
Maybe the question isn't which one you should hire but whether either one of them should want to work there in the first place.
When interviewing two male candidates, who are otherwise equal you should not pick the heavier one, as he is more likely to lose his medical from diabetes, a heart issue, or some other future medical ailment.
When interviewing two male candidates, who are otherwise equal you should not pick the one whose family owns or operates a business, as he may leave you in the future to work at that business. Further to that, you should not hire the candidate who appears to have ANY skills in ANY other discipline other than flying, as he may leave to you to pursue a different career path.
When interviewing two male candidates, who are otherwise equal you should not pick the one who knows how to type, as he may spend his future spare time cranking out the next "50 Shades of Grey" and leave you to live the lavish life of a rock star author.
I'm a guy, and I just don't get male pilots who look down at female pilots. There's more than enough shitty male pilots in this country to discredit any argument that they are worse pilots. And don't give me that "they're not strong enough to lift barrels or huck freight in the bush bulls&!t either, plenty of skinny armed male pilots cruising the vast blue expanse. There's more then enough accident reports out there to show that its whats above your shoulders that gets you home safe not whats below your belt.
Will they have babies? who knows maybe, but your male employee is more likely to lose his licence over a heart issue or diabetes than a woman, so its all a crap shoot. My Ops Manager had just finished telling me how desperately short of pilots rated on my type of machine he was when I told him I was taking off half the summer for Pat leave (and unintentionally screwing him in the process), you know what he said to me? "Congratulations man, that's awesome, when is she due? your gonna love it, most guys here don't take enough Pat leave"
Maybe the question isn't which one you should hire but whether either one of them should want to work there in the first place.
