TRHLIM

mqt said:
But did 0 women pass your initial quality standards or just fewer? Because if even one woman in a given job req met the hiring standards, the hiring manager could game his bonus without lowering the baseline standard of the role. Not exactly great for the men in the req or the company’s long-term potential, but that’s a much different set of considerations than whether or not planes are crashing because we let unqualified women fly them.
Click to expand...

It is true I don't believe we ever would have bluntly stated "we will bring in lesser talented women in order to even out this distribution "

If you are naive enough to think the actions cited above did not lead to less quality talent, then we can just agree to move on
 
sturg33 said:
It is true I don't believe we ever would have bluntly stated "we will bring in lesser talented women in order to even out this distribution "

If you are naive enough to think the actions cited above did not lead to less quality talent, then we can just agree to move on
Click to expand...

I’m not, I’m saying there’s a difference between eroding standards and lowering the overall quality of your workforce. They sound like the same thing, but it’s not really. If you have two pilots applying that both meet the baseline standards to be a pilot but one is better than the other, you are not lowering hiring standards to hire either candidate, even if you’d be making a better strategic or more just decision to hire the other candidate. Just like the example with the engineers, Endeavor Air could prioritize merit in hiring by exclusively hiring the best and brightest pilots by offering more than the market rate for experienced pilots so they do not have to train new pilots, but that’d be bad for profits. As long as the baseline standards are being met, you’re really describing a reduction in marginal utility if you hire the less qualified candidate. I think there’s a good argument to be made that racial or gender diversity in a team is not worth the trade-off of that lowered value in hiring decisions, and I think programs like the bonus program you’re referring to is the exact kind of program that tips the scales toward it being an ineffective policy that does more harm than good. But it just doesn’t prove the erosion of standards in airline pilots.

I know this all sounds like semantics, but the point is that if the pilots are qualified, we should also be looking at other causes, and ignoring the thousands of flights woman pilots have been successfully landing for years to assume it’s DEI that caused the crashes is simplistic and wrong.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mqt said:
I’m not, I’m saying there’s a difference between eroding standards and lowering the overall quality of your workforce. They sound like the same thing, but it’s not really. If you have two pilots applying that both meet the baseline standards to be a pilot but one is better than the other, you are not lowering hiring standards to hire either candidate, even if you’d be making a better strategic or more just decision to hire the other candidate. Just like the example with the engineers, Endeavor Air could prioritize merit in hiring by exclusively hiring the best and brightest pilots by offering more than the market rate for experienced pilots so they do not have to train new pilots, but that’d be bad for profits. As long as the baseline standards are being met, you’re really describing a reduction in marginal utility if you hire the less qualified candidate. I think there’s a good argument to be made that racial or gender diversity in a team is not worth the trade-off of that lowered value in hiring decisions, and I think programs like the bonus program you’re referring to is the exact kind of program that tips the scales toward it being an ineffective policy that does more harm than good. But it just doesn’t prove the erosion of standards in airline pilots.
Click to expand...

Yes it does. If you intentionally chose a worse candidate because of ... whatever ... you are lowering the collective talent bar of your organization. This lowers the standards among the workforce, because now people are working with less talented people than they should be. Additionally, if you want to get into calibrations and distributions of talent, having lesser talented employees brings the quality of performance evaluation lower

the minute an organization says they are prioritizing DEI, they are committing to lowering their standards
 
sturg33 said:
there's a lot of truly retarded idiots with prominent voices in the MAGA party
Click to expand...

True- as much as it seems so- the left doesn’t own the rights to being a moron.

But hey if I was a Lib I’d probably focus on this stuff instead of the incredibly popular stuff to help
Me cope too
 
Tapate50 said:
True- as much as it seems so- the left doesn’t own the rights to being a moron.

But hey if I was a Lib I’d probably focus on this stuff instead of the incredibly popular stuff to help
Me cope too
Click to expand...

The very same polls you guys were touting a few weeks ago are showing Trump as rather unpopular right now.
 
I haven’t cited any. The election was a pretty good poll to go off of, and he can’t run again so sort of irrelevant.

BUT he’s doing exactly what he said he would.

Not sure what that would make him unpopular except that people are surprised by competent governance.
 
Tapate50 said:
I haven’t cited any. The election was a pretty good poll to go off of, and he can’t run again so sort of irrelevant.

BUT he’s doing exactly what he said he would.

Not sure what that would make him unpopular except that people are surprised by competent governance.
Click to expand...

Do you not know how relatively uninformed like 30-40% of the electorate is? Even if either of us believe the other is being lied to, we at least have some relative understanding of why we believe what we believe. The world gets bleak out there regarding literacy. And I don’t mean that pejoratively, it’s not a personal failing to be illiterate. But for millions of people, the best they can do is survive around their 2 jobs or juggling childcare and part time work and school, or any number of situations where someone can just get left behind. When they hear that Donald Trump can make it better for them, it’s not absurd to think they didn’t really know much more than bits and pieces. Republicans rightly got to run on the economy because it is hard to live, and it didn’t get any better in the past 4 years. I think some of that is attributable to the global supply chain disruption, with progressive and conservative majorities alike getting booted en masse this past half-decade. But make no mistake, Biden and the Dems deserved to have this blow up on them. After the COVID stimulus checks and initial child tax credit, they immediately took a victory lap and made the mistake of using things like GDP and unemployment rates as miracles of the Democratic Party because other countries were doing worse in those measures. But because they couldn’t just ****ing admit that it kind of sucks right now, they allowed Donald “Buy My Bible and ****-coin” Trump to run as a ****ing populist candidate AGAIN.

All that said, most Trump voters didn’t vote for EOs for trans people or to strong-arm Canada to push out China or stop Fentanyl or whatever. And to be quite honest, Trump has basically done what the Dems did the past 4 years and began a victory lap for his accomplishments, but can you name one way your life has improved economically yet? I’m well aware this is the Biden economy for the most part, but the person who voted for lower grocery prices and maybe no taxes, there’s not really anything changing. A lot of people are however suddenly flooding the job market and farmers are getting told they won’t get paid for previously approved expenditures or medical research is put on hold. You and I can argue whether or lot those are necessary steps to fixing the problem, but a good portion of your voting bloc is not debating the nuances of these decisions. They’re trying to breathe, and it’s not any easier yet.
 
I’m not the one hyperventilating about it.

I know eggs are high bc of bird flu so I’ve had a direct source and I expect to give someone more than 50 days to fix it

Take a breath
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mqt said:
[tw]1895211777736220970[/tw]

I did not think this Epstein Files debacle could be any funnier.
Click to expand...

Ive lost faith this is ever gonna happen... the constant announcement that BREAKING: they are announcing they are planning to plan to do the plan" is tiresome
 
[tw]1897420465817182505[/tw]

Nah, **** this self-righteous victimhood. Trump and his Administration basically said the Kennedy Center was overrun by wokeness. You don’t get to then blame “woke” artists from bailing from their shows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top