Female pilot accident rates

"NoPoliticsHere" wrote in message
om...
"John Mazor" wrote in message
...

Which, as has been pointed out here, is hardly a scientific method, and
furthermore, many involved accidents where the pilot gender was
irrelevant.

What people like you can never seem to understand is that I am not
against women (pilots or otherwise), but I am against political
correctness, quotas, etc. I'm actually happily married to a woman,
have a good relationship with my mother, and generally get along
as well with them in everyday life as with men.

And what you refuse to admit is that the "proof" you offered for PC/quotas
in the cockpit doesn't prove anything, for all the reasons noted here. Feel
free to make any case you want against PC, but it has to withstand the
rigors of close examination. For example, like you, I could make a
number-based case of gender discrimination simply by noting the small
percentage of pilots who are women - the MCPs are blocking the cockpit door!
But of course, that argument wouldn't withstand examination, either.

"John Mazor" wrote in message ...

And what you refuse to admit is that the "proof" you offered for PC/quotas
in the cockpit doesn't prove anything, for all the reasons noted here.

I never claimed to admit any '"proof"' of anything; your word not mine.
I only stated an observation (possibly accurate). But when people
start trying to put words in my mouth, I don't see much point in debating.

Feel
free to make any case you want against PC, but it has to withstand the
rigors of close examination.

If you aren't aware by now that quotas exist (based on race & gender),
then what could I say?

For example, like you, I could make a
number-based case of gender discrimination simply by noting the small
percentage of pilots who are women - the MCPs are blocking the cockpit door!

No, you could only make a reasonable case by showing that it is common
practice for qualified women being turned down for pilot positions.
If you will re-read what I've written, mine was only an observation.
I do not intentionally fish out, or seek news stories where women have
been involved in crashes. It was just my OBSERVATION that in numerous
newsworthy crashes in the recent past, a woman has been in the cockpit.
When I also combine my observation with the FACT of the gender/race-based
quota system in this country, can't you see how easy it is to connect dots?
Probably not I'm sure.

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

"NoPoliticsHere" wrote in message
om...
"John Mazor" wrote in message
...

And what you refuse to admit is that the "proof" you offered for
PC/quotas
in the cockpit doesn't prove anything, for all the reasons noted here.

I never claimed to admit any '"proof"' of anything; your word not mine.
I only stated an observation (possibly accurate). But when people
start trying to put words in my mouth, I don't see much point in debating.

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?

Feel free to make any case you want against PC, but it has to withstand
the
rigors of close examination.

If you aren't aware by now that quotas exist (based on race & gender),
then what could I say?

I'm not aware of any "quotas". While having wome and minority pilots might
be deemed advantageous in terms of corporate image, and managements may have
taken pains to ensure that no discrimination exists at the hiring level,
that's hardly setting a quota. Are you saying that airlines have told their
people they must hire X number or X percentage of women and minority pilots?
Really? Which airlines? (I will admit that my knowledge is limited to U.S.
airlines.)

For example, like you, I could make a
number-based case of gender discrimination simply by noting the small
percentage of pilots who are women - the MCPs are blocking the cockpit
door!

No, you could only make a reasonable case by showing that it is common
practice for qualified women being turned down for pilot positions.

Thank you for agreeing with my point.

If you will re-read what I've written, mine was only an observation.
I do not intentionally fish out, or seek news stories where women have
been involved in crashes. It was just my OBSERVATION that in numerous
newsworthy crashes in the recent past, a woman has been in the cockpit.
When I also combine my observation with the FACT of the gender/race-based
quota system in this country, can't you see how easy it is to connect
dots?
Probably not I'm sure.

I have railed against PC for decades. It exists. But your example doesn't
stand up, for all the reasons previously discussed.

You praised Jose for carefully parsing the logic for not using your real
name on the Web, so you do understand the process, but unless you are
willing right now to admit that your "observation" is worthless, you are
unwilling to parse the logic that has been presented to you in this thread.

Find something else to illustrate PC. And take it elsewhere.

"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....

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

"NoPoliticsHere" wrote in message
om...
"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

Thank you for the interesting link. The case he cited involved a new hire,
not eligible yet for union representation, so it wouldn't have registered on
my radar.

(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,

Ah. So when he says "I have flown with many minorities and females and have
not observed their level of competence to be any less than what I had seen
in the years preceding diversity" that's not true, just CYA. You want to
have the anecdote represent the truth but dismiss the wider observation.
(You do remember that word, "observation"?)

And all of his observations are just that, anecdotal. I've had my own
anecdotal observations over the years, and they include plenty of marginal
or incompetent pilots who happened to be male and gamed the system.

The only way to resolve this is a systematic scientific study. There are
studies that measure gender differences in various types of skills and
abilites, but I'm not aware of any that compare rates for training wash-outs
or accidents where pilot performance played a role. If you know of any, I'd
be happy to link to it.

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.

To the extent that it happens, I certainly can't agree with it. But again,
we're still in the world of anecdotal observations. So you have made a case
that it can happen, but then, plenty of incompetent males pilots game the
system, too.

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.

That's a gross oversimplification. For example, as he pointed out himself,
a perfectly competent pilot who was hired to fly the "steam-gauge" B-727
cockpit might have a hard time transitioning to all-glass cockpits. Old
pilot joke, a modern twist on the even older one about what are the three
most common last words on the CVR: 1. "What's it doing???" 2. "What's it
doing NOW???" 3. "Why the hell did it do THAT???"

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.

Which is why employers must carefull read the pilot's records from previous
employment. The FAA now requires them to get those records before hiring.

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.

Anecdotal observation, as previously discussed. If it floats your boat to
say "Gotcha!" on the anecdotes, go for it, but again, that's hardly an
indictment of female pilots as a class, any more that anecdotes about male
pilots who game the sytem are an indictment of male pilots as a class.

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?

"I have been told." Well, now we have an anecdote of unknowable accuracy,
but even if perfectly accurate, it still is an anecdote.

So we've gone from your broad insinuation about women pilots in general to a
few anecdotes. But let us come full circle on this exchange and have you
answer the question that you sidestepped at the top:

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?

"I don't know" is an acceptable answer.

"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.

Yes, I do stand behind it. The evidence is quite compelling in support
of the idea that there would be a higher percentage of incompetent
female/minority pilots, considering the political factors involved,
which I have illustrated to you through real-life, real-world cases;
which include the words of a veteran airline pilot who has spine enough
to speak frankly on the subject.

I cannot PROVE anything because I am not privy to any good, serious
statistics on this, if they even exist. But I noticed in the writings
of the 747 captain that airline pilots apparently even have a term
for these incompetent female pilots who've been hired by the
airline: "weak sister" pilots. So tell me, just what did he mean
by that?

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

On 31 Oct 2004 09:45:55 -0800,
(NoPoliticsHere) wrote:

"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.

Yes, I do stand behind it. The evidence is quite compelling in support
of the idea that there would be a higher percentage of incompetent
female/minority pilots, considering the political factors involved,
which I have illustrated to you through real-life, real-world cases;
which include the words of a veteran airline pilot who has spine enough
to speak frankly on the subject.

I cannot PROVE anything because I am not privy to any good, serious
statistics on this, if they even exist. But I noticed in the writings
of the 747 captain that airline pilots apparently even have a term
for these incompetent female pilots who've been hired by the
airline: "weak sister" pilots. So tell me, just what did he mean
by that?

And, in research, what you have been stating is referred to as
"anecdotal evidence"---one or two or even a dozen credible observers
make statements regarding individual events which are then stretched
to become generalizations of a class. In a different area of
discrimination this might be called stereotyping.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On 31 Oct 2004 09:45:55 -0800,
(NoPoliticsHere) wrote:

"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.

Yes, I do stand behind it. The evidence is quite compelling in support
of the idea that there would be a higher percentage of incompetent
female/minority pilots, considering the political factors involved,
which I have illustrated to you through real-life, real-world cases;
which include the words of a veteran airline pilot who has spine enough
to speak frankly on the subject.

I cannot PROVE anything because I am not privy to any good, serious
statistics on this, if they even exist. But I noticed in the writings
of the 747 captain that airline pilots apparently even have a term
for these incompetent female pilots who've been hired by the
airline: "weak sister" pilots. So tell me, just what did he mean
by that?

And, in research, what you have been stating is referred to as
"anecdotal evidence"---one or two or even a dozen credible observers
make statements regarding individual events which are then stretched
to become generalizations of a class. In a different area of
discrimination this might be called stereotyping.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org

The problems as I see it that the observation that protected class, female
and minority, may be less qualiifed it based on anecdotal evidence. Yet,
I suspect that political consideration prevent any statistical evidence from
being available. So anecdotal evidence may be all that exists.

There is a problem with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
mentality, and thats the assumption that a proportional number of qualified
protected class members in fact do exist. This is an assumtion which has
not been proven and is politically imposible to challenge. From the
biological perspective no two groups are have equal abilities in anything.
Sprinters tend to be black. Swimmers white, and garbage men male.

The difference is that we don't have the EEOC attempting for force
proportional equity on to basketball players or garbage men. If the EEOC
did the result might be equally absurd.

David

"David Lentz" wrote in message .. .

The problems as I see it that the observation that protected class, female
and minority, may be less qualiifed it based on anecdotal evidence. Yet,
I suspect that political consideration prevent any statistical evidence from
being available. So anecdotal evidence may be all that exists.

There is a problem with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
mentality, and thats the assumption that a proportional number of qualified
protected class members in fact do exist. This is an assumtion which has
not been proven and is politically imposible to challenge. From the
biological perspective no two groups are have equal abilities in anything.
Sprinters tend to be black. Swimmers white, and garbage men male.

The difference is that we don't have the EEOC attempting for force
proportional equity on to basketball players or garbage men. If the EEOC
did the result might be equally absurd.

I'd say you hit that nail squarely on the head!

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

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On 31 Oct 2004 09:45:55 -0800,
(NoPoliticsHere) wrote:

"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.

Yes, I do stand behind it. The evidence is quite compelling in support
of the idea that there would be a higher percentage of incompetent
female/minority pilots, considering the political factors involved,
which I have illustrated to you through real-life, real-world cases;
which include the words of a veteran airline pilot who has spine enough
to speak frankly on the subject.

I cannot PROVE anything because I am not privy to any good, serious
statistics on this, if they even exist. But I noticed in the writings
of the 747 captain that airline pilots apparently even have a term
for these incompetent female pilots who've been hired by the
airline: "weak sister" pilots. So tell me, just what did he mean
by that?

And, in research, what you have been stating is referred to as
"anecdotal evidence"---one or two or even a dozen credible observers
make statements regarding individual events which are then stretched
to become generalizations of a class. In a different area of
discrimination this might be called stereotyping.

Actually, the term fits this situation, thanks for pointing it out.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org