Diversity, Equity, Inclusion: My Thoughts - 1/23/2025

I'm going to walk into the DEI minefield. At least just a little. I'm going to try to get in and out as quickly as I can. I probably can't, though.

DEI why?

I oppose DEI hiring. If you ask me, when the Supreme Court outlawed Affirmative Action (because the program imposed systemic prejudice against certain ethnic and racial groups in favor of other), DEI sprung up in it's place as a replacement. If not DEI, then what, Matty P? How about qualifications and merit, and if someone or some organization is proven to be unfairly biasing hiring or enrollment decisions on the basis of race, address that wrong on a case by case basis.

I saw a Facebook friend ask the rhetorical question yesterday, "What's wrong with diversity and inclusion?" Let me answer. Nothing. What's wrong is when diversity and inclusion are higher on the totem pole of enrollment or employment priorities than qualifications, experience, and merit. What's wrong is when hiring standards, performance standards, and academic requirements are diminished in order to ensure some group or another that is for whatever reason deemed incapable of meeting the existing standard won't be left behind. How about bringing that group up instead of lowering standards? Otherwise, you're replacing what you perceive as one wrong on the basis of race or gender with another.

I saw a post today from a lefty on X. He said to MAGA, any minority in a job is "a DEI hire". I think some do think that, unfortunately. Do I? NO, not at all. So to me, what is a DEI hire? A DEI hire is someone who was hired on the basis of race, gender, or other criteria other than potential and merit. This person was hired (or enrolled in a school, same thing) with lesser qualifications and potential than other applicants who were bypassed in the hiring process, or worse, hiring standards were lowered in order to avail the job or school enrollment to them.

I have many friends in the airline industry. I know personally, many highly qualified women and minority airline pilots. But I also know that in many companies hiring criteria were lowered in order to improve numbers. Improve numbers? Yes. The percentage of women and minorities became an important factor in hiring and when not enough women and minorities were filling new hire classes, some airlines, most, actually, dropped their standards to rectify the problem. Both extremes can be a problem, ok? Lowering hiring standards in a safety sensitive job like airline pilot is a major problem, if you ask me. Hire the best people. Want more women and minorities? Train them better. Find jobs in which they can grow into what it is they need to become airline pilots without the asterisk of a lower standard for employment. And to be clear, not all minorities, not by a long shot, are underqualified. I am NOT saying that. But when standards are lowered, when an underqualified or historically underperforming minority or woman has an accident, the whole group is tainted by it.

The other extreme, NOT hiring women or minorities because you think white dudes are best, is equally and inexcusably wrong, too. I once worked at an almost exclusively white airline. I remember, day after day, wondering where the Black people were at. I think of 1000 or so pilots, I only remember one Black guy. Yeah, it was over 30 years ago, and there were less qualified Black people then, but really. Something's wrong there. I remember getting to my job at UPS, how proud I was every day for working with a diverse group that included Black, Asian, Hispanic men AND women. Competent people. Qualified people. NOT DEI hires, ok? My previous employer could have learned a lot from UPS and the folks who did recruitment and hiring there. One got it right. The other, not as much.

Shifting gears slightly, why did so many refer to Vice President Harris as a DEI hire? Two simple reasons. 1) Joe Biden said he was going to choose a black woman. So, he was intentionally NOT considering white women. He was intentionally NOT considering men at all. He narrowed the field to 25% or less (I don't know what that number would be exactly), and for the purpose NOT to select the best person, but to show the world how righteous and wonderful he was to give a woman of color the job. This calls into question, whether you like it or not, whether Kamala was the best choice. That leads me to the other reason. 2) Kamala Harris showed herself daily to be an inferior performer. This started in the 2020 Presidential Primaries, and carried through her failure as border czar, and her horrific performance in the 2024 campaign once she became the Democratic Party nominee. By the way, look at how she was nominated. Did she win a the Primaries? No. No merit at all. She was installed as nominee. If you can't see how that undermines perception of her, and then on the basis of how she performed, undermines the perceptions of other women and minorities, then we can't talk.

I don't think women and minorities are inferior. I don't think every woman, every minority is incapable. I don't think every woman and minority is a DEI hire. But as long as a school's enrollment standards, or a job's hiring practices put race and gender above competence, qualifications, and merit, when people see a woman, minority, or a person who's both, failing in their job, the slight "DEI hire" is going to, unfortunately, be bandied about.

The only thing worse than DEI hiring or enrollment based on race or gender is enrollment based on sexual preference or gender identity. That's another story for another day.