Diversity and Aviation

Buzz off, loon.

"BushOKDemocratsSTUPID" wrote in message
...
Is it OK for the FAA or Airlines to pass over
white males for black females so the diversity numbers look better?

Just curious how airline and private pilots felt about safety
positions being filled by unsafe and/or unqualified (Other than White
Male)
employees?

Why don't you go crawl back into the sh*t hole you crawled out of, OK?

What a piece!
--
Jim in NC

BushOKDemocratsSTUPID wrote:
Is it OK for the FAA or Airlines to pass over
white males for black females so the diversity numbers look better?

Just curious how airline and private pilots felt about safety
positions being filled by unsafe and/or unqualified (Other than White Male)
employees?

I would really prefer that you were a Democrat. Hey, think about this:
you got fired by Bush!

The mission of the Feds Against Aviation is to harass and antagonize pilots
any way they can. I presume a 'safety position' means they sit, instead of
stand (a dangerous position indeed - you could easily fall).

Isn't it really better for me if those harassing and antagonizing me are
unqualified to do so?

It's a damn good thing they got rid of you, as your harassment is beginning
to annoy me.


"BushOKDemocratsSTUPID" wrote in message
...
Is it OK for the FAA or Airlines to pass over
white males for black females so the diversity numbers look better?

Just curious how airline and private pilots felt about safety
positions being filled by unsafe and/or unqualified (Other than White
Male)
employees?

Sure, just ask Bob Hoover. It was so much better for him that the two young
guys who wanted to have a little fun with him were newcomers just out to
have a good time. He triumphed over those specious accusations so quickly,
easily and cheaply. Or, the fellow selling the Ford alternators with a
blank 337. Or the pilot who was virtually harassed to death by unscrupulous
FAA employees-- the IG finally issuing a report identifying the
unconscionable and illegal conduct of FAA employees as a cause of a fatal
crash.

I worked in government for more than a decade. Many appointments were made
simply because of the race or sex of the person involved. Many of those
hired were utterly imcompetent. In an office environment, especially in
ordinary government functions, imcompetence can be tolerated, perhaps even
glorified.

The OP started out on the wrong foot by using language which generates more
heat than light, but I don't think anyone could argue that the only the best
qualified people should be employed in positions crucial to public safety,
such as ATC positions. I also don't think there is any real argument that
government doesn't make hiring or promotion decisions without (or with
little) regard to competence. If it is posting the payment for your water
bill, a mistake here or there only causes irritation.

Simply slinging epithets doesn't advance the discussion.




"Steve Foley" wrote in message
news:TmiUf.2652$hA2.1657@trndny02...
The mission of the Feds Against Aviation is to harass and antagonize
pilots
any way they can. I presume a 'safety position' means they sit, instead of
stand (a dangerous position indeed - you could easily fall).

Isn't it really better for me if those harassing and antagonizing me are
unqualified to do so?

It's a damn good thing they got rid of you, as your harassment is
beginning
to annoy me.


"BushOKDemocratsSTUPID" wrote in message
...
Is it OK for the FAA or Airlines to pass over
white males for black females so the diversity numbers look better?

Just curious how airline and private pilots felt about safety
positions being filled by unsafe and/or unqualified (Other than White
Male)
employees?

Recently, LWG posted:

I worked in government for more than a decade. Many appointments were
made simply because of the race or sex of the person involved. Many
of those hired were utterly imcompetent. In an office environment,
especially in ordinary government functions, imcompetence can be
tolerated, perhaps even glorified.

I disagree that "incompetence can be tolerated...", it happens, and people
have to deal with it. But, it has *always* happened, whether it be the son
of the owner that runs the company under or the MBA that made a few
critical bad decisions with the same result. It is not an issue of race or
gender.

The OP started out on the wrong foot by using language which
generates more heat than light, but I don't think anyone could argue
that the only the best qualified people should be employed in
positions crucial to public safety, such as ATC positions.

Ideally, everyone in a position crucial to public safety should be the
best qualified. However, that has never been the case, and is not likely
to ever be the case. People are selected for positions for many reasons,
only a few have to do with their actual competence or readiness for the
job at hand.

Neil

I agree with you. I think I could have said it better, perhaps
"incompetence can be accommodated..."

The difference here is that when the son runs the family business into the
ground, it's their loss. When incompetent government employees run things
into the ground, they get promoted. The American taxpayer is the only
resource which is indefinitely extensible. Oil, the oceans and atmospheric
ozone are all finite and fragile. However, my power to pay for everything
from B-2's to lapdances for the homeless to urine-drenched crucifixes has no
limit.


" I disagree that "incompetence can be tolerated...", it happens, and
people
have to deal with it. But, it has *always* happened, whether it be the son
of the owner that runs the company under or the MBA that made a few
critical bad decisions with the same result. It is not an issue of race or
gender.

The problem is the arrogance of those newly annointed with power is
breathtaking. In our metropolitan government, we had the minority managers
fire white males, and then have the unbridled temerity to tell them that was
the only reason they were being let go. I did give them a few points for
candor.

Of course there were the inevitable lawsuits. But not only did the
taxpayers get to pay the salaries of the managers who made the racist
decisions, they got to pay the salaries of the unqualified employees who
were hired by the government, as well as the salaries of the government
lawyers defending the action, and the fees of the lawyers representing the
white male employees, and the damages awarded to employees who were
victimized by this conduct. Government employment is the very antithesis of
the free market, which is why our Founding Fathers intended to keep the
federal government so small.

Ideally, everyone in a position crucial to public safety should be the
best qualified. However, that has never been the case, and is not likely
to ever be the case. People are selected for positions for many reasons,
only a few have to do with their actual competence or readiness for the
job at hand.

Neil

"LWG" wrote in message
. ..

Simply slinging epithets doesn't advance the discussion.


Why would I even consider 'advancing the discussion' with someone who spews
hate. The original poster will never listen.

Steve Foley wrote:

"LWG" wrote in message
...



Simply slinging epithets doesn't advance the discussion.




Why would I even consider 'advancing the discussion' with someone who spews
hate. The original poster will never listen.




Grow some skin. Simply asking if it could be a safety issue hiring black
females
in critical aviation safety positions for diversity numbers over white
males that are more
qualified is not by any means "Spewing hate"

Grow up and Grow some skin you PC brainwashed wimp

Yougottobekidding wrote:

Grow some skin. Simply asking if it could be a safety issue hiring black
females
in critical aviation safety positions for diversity numbers over white
males that are more
qualified is not by any means "Spewing hate"

Simply put, that is not what happened. Using racial epithets is spewing
hate. If you can't tell the difference between profanity and civil
dialogue then you have a real problem.