HR Discrimination and Such
#61
#62
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Position: MD-11 F/O
Posts: 55
Better to spend energy on bettering yourself and networking rather than whining about minorities and woman getting interview calls. For your pleasure, I spent 13 years at 2 regionals and a 135 carrier before I 'got the call'. My phone was dead silent in '07 and '08 when Delta/United/UPS/FedEx and whoever else were hiring. And yes I was well above the mins. Oh yeah, I'm a minority so I should have been a shoe in, right?
In my interview class at fedex there were two females. Neither made the cut. I don't think it's a 'gimme' for anybody anymore.
In my interview class at fedex there were two females. Neither made the cut. I don't think it's a 'gimme' for anybody anymore.
#63
As for tribal affiliation; Contact the tribe and ask what the procedure is for obtaining a CIB card (Certificate of Indian Blood). Once you hold a CIB card, you can apply to become a member of the tribe. Until you've completed both steps it would be foolish to make the claim of Indian heritage on an employment application.
If they specifically ask if you are a registered member of a tribe, answer truthfully. A tribal member might be "more disadvantaged" and thus more deserving of consideration than a non-tribal member, but they can't totally discount your heritage. There are a variety of contentious sub-divisions within the Native American population...they don't even all agree on tribal definitions, and it's become a high dollar issue with all the casinos and derivative revenue.
I'm also certain they can't fire you for claiming heritage that you can prove just because you're not a tribal member. It depends on how they ask the question...if they ask about heritage, tell them how you feel. If they ask about tribal status, obviously you need to be honest.
At some point it would become ludicrous to claim minority status. I'm not quite sure where you draw the line....1/16? 1/32?
#64
My disagreement is based on my recollection of United's hiring practices back in the late eighties/early nineties.
And of course that was the time period that UAL lost the big EEOC law suit and was under a court order to increase minority numbers. I am fairly certain that this conversation is in regards to current practices.
#65
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Position: Cap'n
Posts: 687
There is no "discrimination"..... like many have said on here, classes are 98% white guys at legacies. That sure shows no proof of this so called discrimination claim. I was told this a long time ago, and it is great advice.... "stay in your lane".
Life is much easier that way.
But in this case, it really does not matter as the claim is false in the first place.
Just look around the airport the next time at mainline pilots.
Life is much easier that way.
But in this case, it really does not matter as the claim is false in the first place.
Just look around the airport the next time at mainline pilots.
#68
There is no "discrimination"..... like many have said on here, classes are 98% white guys at legacies. That sure shows no proof of this so called discrimination claim. I was told this a long time ago, and it is great advice.... "stay in your lane".
Life is much easier that way.
But in this case, it really does not matter as the claim is false in the first place.
Just look around the airport the next time at mainline pilots.
Life is much easier that way.
But in this case, it really does not matter as the claim is false in the first place.
Just look around the airport the next time at mainline pilots.
#69
It sounds like a bunch of angry white guys from the 70s and 80s that haven't moved on. If these airlines were really doing this, they'd be leaving themselves open for a massive lawsuit. I've interviewed with a few companies over the last few years and I can't say there's any of this going on. The HR departments are usually professional and it's in the company's best interest to not be doing it like that.
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2012
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 281