Self Selecting
04-10-2023, 12:57 PM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,345
For example……..there’s a poster at one of our domiciles…of a certain individual….”good leading the way”. He’s a disgusting human being with a COMPANY-wide reputation. But….he fits the profile for what the casting department wanted. Tell me how that’s ANY better than casting the beautiful, blond, blue-eyed FA for all the magazine ads in the ‘70s. It’s not BETTER, it’s the SAME. But….discrimination should fix the problem of discrimination….right?
04-10-2023, 01:03 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,361
04-10-2023, 05:42 PM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2022
Posts: 148
Part of the miscommunication that’s happening here is that we’re talking about two different things.
First was the MEC statement on non-discrimination, which was the subject of the original post. This was extremely benign & generic and- as discrimination is against the law, anyway- tantamount to me making a commitment to not cooking meth in my basement. Exactly no one should care about this; but I do love the irony that I’m a fragile snowflake for not being offended by it.
The second topic seems to be the existence of a DEBI committee at ALPA. Again, not the topic originally in question, but fine. Now, we could attempt to have the nuanced adult conversation about the social theories upon which DEI is based, gaps in representation, concerns of overreach, etc., that has as yet eluded these forums; but in the meantime, the pragmatic reality is that a large part of this is just litigation insurance. Everyone here should be wise enough to understand that relying solely on “organic diversity”- an interesting term used to describe an industry that’s historically drawn over 90% of its labor from a single demographic, but I digress- opens any group up to potentially damaging & costly accusations. Some of you guys are so fired up on principle that you’d spend your entire war chest in court rather than having the dreaded DEI label attached to anything you’re associated with. Please grow up, take your own advice, & focus on the actual battle at hand- our contract.
First was the MEC statement on non-discrimination, which was the subject of the original post. This was extremely benign & generic and- as discrimination is against the law, anyway- tantamount to me making a commitment to not cooking meth in my basement. Exactly no one should care about this; but I do love the irony that I’m a fragile snowflake for not being offended by it.
The second topic seems to be the existence of a DEBI committee at ALPA. Again, not the topic originally in question, but fine. Now, we could attempt to have the nuanced adult conversation about the social theories upon which DEI is based, gaps in representation, concerns of overreach, etc., that has as yet eluded these forums; but in the meantime, the pragmatic reality is that a large part of this is just litigation insurance. Everyone here should be wise enough to understand that relying solely on “organic diversity”- an interesting term used to describe an industry that’s historically drawn over 90% of its labor from a single demographic, but I digress- opens any group up to potentially damaging & costly accusations. Some of you guys are so fired up on principle that you’d spend your entire war chest in court rather than having the dreaded DEI label attached to anything you’re associated with. Please grow up, take your own advice, & focus on the actual battle at hand- our contract.
Also, since the union is already formed from the very same people who are vetted and hired by the company, a very intersectionally aware company; I wonder how much value a D and I committee has that my union dues are paying for. Frankly, that’s a fair question. One that was probably answered on the first thread since there are mandates for businesses to have such statements and was probably learned by the original op who was unnecessarily castigated by the childish and small behavior of the op of this thread.
04-10-2023, 06:55 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,785
Part of the miscommunication that’s happening here is that we’re talking about two different things.
First was the MEC statement on non-discrimination, which was the subject of the original post. This was extremely benign & generic and- as discrimination is against the law, anyway- tantamount to me making a commitment to not cooking meth in my basement. Exactly no one should care about this; but I do love the irony that I’m a fragile snowflake for not being offended by it.
The second topic seems to be the existence of a DEBI committee at ALPA. Again, not the topic originally in question, but fine. Now, we could attempt to have the nuanced adult conversation about the social theories upon which DEI is based, gaps in representation, concerns of overreach, etc., that has as yet eluded these forums; but in the meantime, the pragmatic reality is that a large part of this is just litigation insurance. Everyone here should be wise enough to understand that relying solely on “organic diversity”- an interesting term used to describe an industry that’s historically drawn over 90% of its labor from a single demographic, but I digress- opens any group up to potentially damaging & costly accusations. Some of you guys are so fired up on principle that you’d spend your entire war chest in court rather than having the dreaded DEI label attached to anything you’re associated with. Please grow up, take your own advice, & focus on the actual battle at hand- our contract.
First was the MEC statement on non-discrimination, which was the subject of the original post. This was extremely benign & generic and- as discrimination is against the law, anyway- tantamount to me making a commitment to not cooking meth in my basement. Exactly no one should care about this; but I do love the irony that I’m a fragile snowflake for not being offended by it.
The second topic seems to be the existence of a DEBI committee at ALPA. Again, not the topic originally in question, but fine. Now, we could attempt to have the nuanced adult conversation about the social theories upon which DEI is based, gaps in representation, concerns of overreach, etc., that has as yet eluded these forums; but in the meantime, the pragmatic reality is that a large part of this is just litigation insurance. Everyone here should be wise enough to understand that relying solely on “organic diversity”- an interesting term used to describe an industry that’s historically drawn over 90% of its labor from a single demographic, but I digress- opens any group up to potentially damaging & costly accusations. Some of you guys are so fired up on principle that you’d spend your entire war chest in court rather than having the dreaded DEI label attached to anything you’re associated with. Please grow up, take your own advice, & focus on the actual battle at hand- our contract.
04-10-2023, 07:46 PM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,345
I didn’t say that is what is happening, Captain StrawMan….. I am using hyperbole to explain how much I DON’T care what is done. But hey, that sort of spin and deflection is pretty common these days.
04-11-2023, 08:46 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,361
This is embarrassing for me. Thanks for being cool about it & remembering to call me captain, though.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
November Seven
Flight Schools and Training
37
04-10-2018 08:19 AM
