"John Mazor" wrote in message ...

So do you stand by, or now reject, your hypothesis that your observations
about accidents support a conclusion that because of PC, there are
proportionately more incompetent women pilots than men pilots?

From

http://www.airlinesafety.com/faq/faq7.htm

(The author on the Web page, a 747-400 captain, after first making the
required "cover my butt" statements so the PC police wouldn't come
after him, revealed some of the sobering facts):

-----begin paste-----

But that is the problem. I am aware of some cases where less than
competent female and/or minority pilots have been hired. In other
words, the standards were lowered to meet the numbers requirements
imposed by consent decrees with the EEOC.

In one case, a minority female was given almost 3 times the simulator
hours to pass her DC-10 S/O checkride, but couldn't do it (just about
the easiest position in any airline cockpit). Yet the airline was
terrified at the thought of firing her. Her boyfriend was an employee
of EEOC. She was still in her first (probation) year so union
protection wasn't a factor.

So what did the airline do? They mounted an intensive investigation
into her background (a tactic that could have gotten the airline into
big trouble if they had done it before they hired her), and discovered
she had been fired from 3 other airlines, but failed to reveal that on
her employment application. That was the ammunition needed to justify
her dismissal.

There are other stories, including the letter to AirlineSafety.Com, by
ATC controller John Dill and other letters published in AWST, by
controllers who believe diversity goals have harmed the competency
level of controllers.

I see the EEOC decrees to be the biggest threat against pilot
competency today, not because there aren't competent minority/female
pilots out there to be hired, but because quotas are imposed and
airlines sometimes have to lower their normal standards to achieve
those mandated numbers. If they don't, the EEOC sues them, costing
them many millions of dollars and it will result in the imposition of
even harsher mandates in the future to "remedy their past
discrimination."

----end paste---

And here's more on the subject. Please read it well as I want your
comments.

-------begin paste----------

If the airline has good simulators and good training programs, then
the biggest threat to competency is not in how much time various
pilots get during transition courses, but in how competent they were
when the airline first hired them. Very selective hiring (including
detailed background investigation) is the most effective tool to
heading off pilot competency problems in the future, yet that is the
tool that is called into question the most in "discrimination"
allegations against the airlines. And, the libel law has its effect
too. Previous airlines are afraid to disclose any negative information
about a discharged pilot, because lawyers make hay out of it and sue
the hell out of the employer that dares give a negative reference.

Some years ago, a female pilot alleged a constant pattern of sexual
harassment in the cockpit, naming numerous male pilots as defendants
in a Title Seven Civil Rights lawsuit. Her attorney was a rather
famous female rights specialist who makes extensive use of the media
to win her cases. The female pilot was exposed in the deposition
process when many contradictions were revealed. She finally confessed;
she made the whole thing up. She was a "weak sister" pilot, who had
competency problems and was afraid the airline might try to fire her.
Someone advised her that they wouldn't dare fire her if she made a
sexual harassment/civil rights claim.

Of course, once the truth was disclosed, she was fired. I have been
told she now works as a pilot for another major airline. Want to bet
on, whether or not the previous airline gave her a negative reference?

----end paste----

Well, so much for your PC claims....

-------------------