EAA Board of Directors - a lack of diversity

[gmoore]

In the current issue of Sport Aviation - June 2018 - there is an article on the 2018 EAA Elections. The article gives bios about the options we have for electing six Class I directors at the organization's annual business meeting.

I gotta say - that is one big group of old white guys! Shouldn't the board be a better reflection of the population? Maybe some people of color? Maybe some women? Maybe someone under 50?

EAA will be a better organization with a more diverse group at the top. I suppose it may be too late to fix that this year - but let's make it a priority to bring some diversity to the board as soon as possible.

-g

[mazdaP5]

I'd like the board to be the best people for the job.

[waltermitty]

Ever notice what the folks you see flying look like?

[Kyle Boatright]

In the current issue of Sport Aviation - June 2018 - there is an article on the 2018 EAA Elections. The article gives bios about the options we have for electing six Class I directors at the organization's annual business meeting.

I gotta say - that is one big group of old white guys! Shouldn't the board be a better reflection of the population? Maybe some people of color? Maybe some women? Maybe someone under 50?

EAA will be a better organization with a more diverse group at the top. I suppose it may be too late to fix that this year - but let's make it a priority to bring some diversity to the board as soon as possible.

-g

I'm color, age, and gender blind on these things. I try to elect the best candidate(s).

[Bill Berson]

I would like to see the board run by homebuilders of any color or age.

[WLIU]

I am not aware of any barriers to running for a position on the EAA Board other than becoming an active and visible volunteer and satisfying the nomination process.

EAA has actually been very color-blind since its incorporation. One of the early members was Neil Loving. He was the first black man to qualify for the National Air Races at Cleveland in the 1950's. If you have not read Neil Loving's story you should. And his racer is in the EAA Museum.

EAA is based on excellence and achievement, both of which are required to build your own personal airplane. At the Oshkosh convention you see many different colored faces. Its a great melting pot.

As noted previously, the makeup of the EAA Board reflects the makeup of the aviators at your local airport. Aviation is self-selecting. All you have to do to become a member of the community is to step forward and volunteer. Action is important more than talk. I belong to IAC Chapter 35. What's your chapter?

Best of luck,

Wes

[CarlOrton]

Good point, Bill...

[gmoore]

Hi Walter - I notice all the time - the owner of the plane I fly is Indian, my go to school for flight training is owned and operated by a woman (with several female instructors) and many of the people I know that fly are in their 20's and 30's. The implication that only old white guys fly is simply incorrect.

[waltermitty]

Hi Walter - I notice all the time - the owner of the plane I fly is Indian, my go to school for flight training is owned and operated by a woman (with several female instructors) and many of the people I know that fly are in their 20's and 30's. The implication that only old white guys fly is simply incorrect.

Did I say that? My guess is that 90% of those flying are "old" White guys.

[CHICAGORANDY]

"
My guess is that 90% of those flying are "old" White guys. "

And the next 3-5% would be younger Caucasians (male and female). About the same demographics as many discretionary income very expensive hobbies. Golf and yachting come to mind.

I would quickly add that NO hobby pursuit of which I am aware has a 'race' barrier. All are welcome and indeed encouraged to pursue fun activities. The more the merrier IMHO.

[Frank Giger]

The minute we elect officers to run the organization solely on race or sex (or whatever) is the exact second it will begin to fail.

"Sorry, you could have done a great job ensuring the ATC doesn't get privatized and put into the hands of Commercial Aviation, but you're an old white dude and we decided to hire a black chick instead. Because diversity."

[gmoore]

"Sorry, you could have done a great job ensuring the ATC doesn't get privatized and put into the hands of Commercial Aviation, but you're an old white dude and we decided to hire a black chick instead. Because diversity."

wow

[dougbush]

EAA Forums rule 21:

21. Please do not use the EAA Forums community to make or pursue complaints and concerns about EAA, its employees and agents, programs and services, organizational policies, customer service failings, etc. Please submit feedback to the appropriate location in the organization, and we will endeavor to be as responsive as possible: mailto: feedback@eaa.org

[BeagleOne]

Nope. Diversity for the sake of diversity is pointless, and will not make EAA a better organization. If the best people for the job are all old white guys, then so be it. If the best people for the job are all young black gals, then so be it.

[gmoore]

I wasn't aware of that rule 21 - my apologies.

[DaleB]

How many people outside of the demographic in question (Caucasian males over, say, 40) have run for the BoD?

[FlyingRon]

Jim Clark was on the board of late. He's a great guy who I've known for decades from when he was VP of Gould and later AT&T. I suspect now he's a bit busy having taken over running a state university down south somewhere (SC?).

Of course, both Vintage and Warbirds are headed by women. They get seats on the board by virtue of holding the president slots in those sub organizations.

[Floatsflyer]

I gotta say - that is one big group of old white guys! Shouldn't the board be a better reflection of the population? Maybe some people of color? Maybe some women? Maybe someone under 50? EAA will be a better organization with a more diverse group at the top. I suppose it may be too late to fix that this year - but let's make it a priority to bring some diversity to the board as soon as possible.

Yes, the BOD should ideally be a reflection of the population at large. But the truth is that EAA as a 175,000 strong member organization is itself not even close to this ideal. I don't profess to have any insider info on the demos of the membership but based on observational evidence at Oshkosh and not any emperical data, EAA is Wonder Bread and old Wonder Bread at that. Negligible people of colour. There are a significant number of women at Osh but I have no idea if they are EAA member pilots/aircraft owners or the wives, girlfriends, sisters or mothers of pilots. I would suspect mostly the latter. Age is of 2 groups-older and much older.

So EAA, for better or worse is a reflection of itself. Could it improve itself in it's attention to diversity? Absolutely. Should it do so? Of course it should if for no better reason than to promote and develop a policy of being seen to be inclusionary on the basis of race, gender and age. And not just pay lip service during 1 week per year but throughout the entire organization top down throughout the year.

[Floatsflyer]

At the Oshkosh convention you see many different colored faces. Its a great melting pot.

Wes

I trust this is just your opinion, because it is definitely NOT fact. And your opinion does not make it fact. I don't know what Oshkosh you are attending and seeing but it is not the same one as me. I've been attending since 1981 with some off years and then from 1996 straight and for the entire week. I never saw a person of colour until 2010 and that was at the Hondajet exhibit and they were 2 African American sales reps for the company. Maybe, I've seen 2-3 since then and that's all people of colour, not only black.

Your observations tell me I must be ignoring or missing huge areas of the convention grounds.

It ain't no melting pot or even a mosaic as we say here in Canada.

[CHICAGORANDY]

General Aviation's only real 'barrier' to full entry (getting a license, then owning or renting a plane) is financial. Programs and advertising to present the notion of learning to fly should include all demographics but the reality is the current reality. Look online at any of the scores of pictures of the crowds at AirVenture from any year. I can't find any that show for example black people at anywhere near the 12% level that corresponds with that group's presence in the USA. In my years conducting trams I'd guess the participation level of "non-white" people at the convention is under 10%. In fairness I have not noticed any protest groups or marches by people of color demanding entry into either the EAA organization or Airventure as an event. That is because ALL are welcome who can afford the price of entry.

[Mayhemxpc]

OK, so I felt driven to run the numbers. According to FAA data for active pilot certificates in 2017 (and not counting student pilots), only 5% are held by women. This has been pretty much the case for three decades or more, despite the emphasis on encouraging women in aviation. With regard to pilot age, over half (51%+) are over 50.

For student pilots: Only 1/3 of student pilots are under 24; 1/3 25 to 34; so that means 1/3 of student pilots are 35+. This could indicate learning to fly comes with higher disposable income, but that middle third is also often when extra expenses for raising children come in.

Anyway, yes, we are predominantly old and overwhelmingly male. That two major divisions of EAA are led by women chosen by their membership groups (and in my opinion, led quite ably) -- and are therefore on the Board -- is noteworthy.

[Kurt Flunkn]

Yuck. Just hire the most qualified people period. The rest is pseudo science borrowed from the corporate world and social justice warriors.

[MtnMarcus]

JESUS.....Enough with the diversity BS! Hire the best person for the job

[Floatsflyer]

JESUS.....Enough with the diversity BS!

Jesus ain't got nuttin' to do with it!!

[rwanttaja]

Jesus ain't got nuttin' to do with it!!

Yeah, but maybe the head of HR is named Jesus Hernandez....

Ron Wanttaja

[FlyingRon]

Yeah, but maybe the head of HR is named Jesus Hernandez....

Ron WanttajaGod damn it sister, let him try.

[waltermitty]

Jesus is the yardma . . .grounds maintenance engineer.

[DaleB]

Guys, is this really necessary? What is this, junior high?

[Bill Berson]

I would like to see the board run by homebuilders of any color or age.

What I meant to say is that the board seems to be just corporate executives, more appropriate for GAMA instead of homebuilders and recreational pilots that should control EAA.

[CarlOrton]

What I meant to say is that the board seems to be just corporate executives, more appropriate for GAMA instead of homebuilders and recreational pilots that should control EAA.

Now *that* position I agree with wholeheartedly!

However, being pragmatic, I can somewhat understand why they choose corporate execs. In the quest for dollars, it's somewhat easier to send Jane Doe, former CFO of XYZ Corp to a Ford, John Deere, etc., to pitch our request than it is to send a name revered by us, but relatively unknown in the corporate environs.

[rwanttaja]

The other aspect, I think, is that the positions are non-paid, so you need people who are able and willing to travel and attend meetings as necessary without it being a financial hardship or endanger their normal employment. Easy enough for Captains of Industry, a bit harder for us Buck Privates of Wage Slavery.

Ron "But I'm sure they love their privates" Wanttaja

[Bill Berson]

I don't see why more than two onsite meetings a year are needed, with one at Airventure. It's more important to get those that live the EAA mission full time.

[cub builder]

Now *that* position I agree with wholeheartedly!

However, being pragmatic, I can somewhat understand why they choose corporate execs. In the quest for dollars, it's somewhat easier to send Jane Doe, former CFO of XYZ Corp to a Ford, John Deere, etc., to pitch our request than it is to send a name revered by us, but relatively unknown in the corporate environs.

Carl hit the nail on the head. It's all about who can bring the most bucks to the table. Our chapter nominated someone as a candidate for the board once. He was well qualified, but when he attended a meeting of candidates, the EAA muckety mucks made it clear that he would not be on the board because he couldn't bring enough $$ to the table. Just follow the money. I really don't have a commentary on whether this is right or wrong, but it is the reality of the EAA Board. Like politics, follow the money, and you'll usually find the answer.

As for diversity, just select the most qualified. But that's not really what the EAA does either.

-Cub Builder

[Bill Greenwood]

I am not familiar with the other divisions, but Connie Bowlin has been president of warbirds and as for as I know has been as good or better as any of our male presidents.
As for the board being mostly businessmen, first of all, despite anyone's interest in lower end types of aviation, EAA is a big business and needs to take that into account in major decisions. Sponsors are important, look at all the gators provided and tractors to pull the trams, etc.

[jethro99]

The problem with hiring those best qualified for the job means that certain types will be less likely to get hired. Those less likely types will then complain and cause a fuss.

I am not likely to be hired by the NBA or the NFL any time soon. Can't run, can't jump, can't throw, can't shoot. Those organizations, particularly the NBA, are in drastic need of some diversification.

[Floatsflyer]

The problem with hiring those best qualified for the job means that certain types will be less likely to get hired. Those less likely types will then complain and cause a fuss.

I am not likely to be hired by the NBA or the NFL any time soon. Can't run, can't jump, can't throw, can't shoot. Those organizations, particularly the NBA, are in drastic need of some diversification.

There is no problem hiring the best qualified who are ALSO a minority, persons of colour, female, and a young person.

Your equivalency of the issue of inclusion with professional athletes is nonsensical.

[waltermitty]

I wonder how many young, Black, female pilots are out there who build airplanes?

[CHICAGORANDY]

I believe her name is Deronda? I could be mistaken.

[Floatsflyer]

I wonder how many young, Black, female pilots are out there who build airplanes?

Careful Walter your racism is showing.

Hey Walter, I wonder how many young, WHITE, female pilots are out there who build airplanes?

Hey Walter, are you aware that there are 3 female pilots on the Board of Directors. They're all WHITE and according to their bios none of them have built an airplane. Do ya like apples Walter? How do you like them apples?

[Frank Giger]

Well, it's a question of whether one wants diversity for the sake of diversity or not.

I do not.


There is no problem hiring the best qualified who are ALSO a minority, persons of colour, female, and a young person.

Agreed. But when one makes a priority out of selection based on race, sex, sexual orientation, etc., isn't that racist? Shall the EAA put out a notification that says "whites need not apply?" And if they did, how would that be in the best interest of serving the organization and it's goals?

It is no more right to hire someone because they are black or gay or young or whatever than to only hire straight white males because they are straight white males.

[Bill Berson]

Sure it is racist to pick by race. The only solution to perceived bias is to random pick by lottery, with no prior knowledge of race, sex, age, height, etc.

[Low Pass]

OK. Speaking of "diversity," what's with the EAA pushing issues with women and minority (races)? There's nothing on the EAA website among "top issues" that says push diversity issues. Is this just creeping political correctness, or did I miss a hidden top issue or one of EAA's Values?

[Floatsflyer]

OK. Is this just creeping political correctness, or did I miss a hidden top issue or one of EAA's Values?

Nope, it's long standing, fundamental human being correctness. I think you missed seeing the forest for the trees.

[Frank Giger]

Nope, it's long standing, fundamental human being correctness. I think you missed seeing the forest for the trees.

Not if the trees are selected only by type, not quality, for making spar wood out of.

If a candidate is the best qualified, race or sex or whatever shouldn't be a consideration. And simply because one is of a certain race, sex, or whatever does not elevate their qualifications in and of themselves.

This is the danger of "diversity for the sake of diversity;" first, the metric for qualification is changed from merit to racial or other group membership; second, it cheapens the qualifications of those who are truly the best, but happen to be part of a "diversity" group, as one never knows why they were hired - was it because they were the best, or to fill a quota?

[Floatsflyer]

Not if the trees are selected only by type, not quality, for making spar wood out of.

If a candidate is the best qualified, race or sex or whatever shouldn't be a consideration. And simply because one is of a certain race, sex, or whatever does not elevate their qualifications in and of themselves.

This is the danger of "diversity for the sake of diversity;" first, the metric for qualification is changed from merit to racial or other group membership; second, it cheapens the qualifications of those who are truly the best, but happen to be part of a "diversity" group, as one never knows why they were hired - was it because they were the best, or to fill a quota?

If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.

Why do you believe that a meritocracy can't include the values of diversity? Why do you believe that merit and diversity are mutually exclusive? That's ridiculous.

[waltermitty]

Maybe we could start with the NBA.

[Kyle Boatright]

If I agreed with you, we'd both be wrong.

Why do you believe that a meritocracy can't include the values of diversity? Why do you believe that merit and diversity are mutually exclusive? That's ridiculous.

Please explain how to create a meritocracy and do that while pushing diversity. At face value, it seems like you either have a pure meritocracy or you don't.

[mazdaP5]

Sure am glad we started talking diversity and political correctness on the EAA forums...

[Low Pass]

Sure am glad we started talking diversity and political correctness on the EAA forums...
Well, a thread titled diversity seemed appropriate.

But I'm still interested in an answer regarding the political correctness that EAA seems to believe will help put more pilots in airplanes and hold the line on FAA regulations. Guess I need to reach out to board members and see if they're gutsy enough to actually talk about it.

[Floatsflyer]

Please explain how to create a meritocracy and do that while pushing diversity. At face value, it seems like you either have a pure meritocracy or you don't.

I believe you and others here are confusing diversity with affirmative action. These policy initiatives are disparate concepts.

[streffpilot]

Sure am glad we started talking diversity and political correctness on the EAA forums...

I'm just here for the laughs and the entertainment.

Best resume is best resume.....

[Low Pass]

I believe you and others here are confusing diversity with affirmative action. These policy initiatives are disparate concepts.I disagree. They are absolutely related. To expend special or extra effort to recruit people of a select race or gender is directly related and similar to making special accommodations for people of a select race or gender.

[mazdaP5]

I disagree. They are absolutely related. To expend special or extra effort to recruit people of a select race or gender is directly related and similar to making special accommodations for people of a select race or gender.

Or worse, to exclude others because their race or gender do not line up with diversity goals.

Unless you believe that the EAA board is purposefully excluding POC, then the entire subject is more or less just rabble rousing. If EAA is purposefully excluding POC, then there truly is an issue. They aren't, BTW.

[Floatsflyer]

I disagree. They are absolutely related.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!! That's like saying red and blue are the same colour.

[jethro99]

If the best candidate that applies for a given job every time a job is posted is white, and the company wants to hire the best of those that submitted a job application, the company ends up with all white employees.

From the company's standpoint this is good. From the governments stand point it is bad. The government will declare it is bad for the employer. The government apparently knowing better what the company needs than what the company believes they need.

Decades ago when applying for an airline position I was constantly rejected since there was always some ex Air Force type with thousands of heavy jet hours in front of me. Every time. I never thought that I should have been able to fill a claim due to the airline always selecting the more qualified over me.

[Birdmann]

I am a diversity guy, my wife is another race. I am an engineer and aviationist for long time. All most everyone here doing the building are old white guys. No one is excluding women or other races, they just arent participating, Think about it, basketball players are mostly Black, should we have a similar rule for them?
However i agree with you. So how do we handle that?

[Mark17]

Yuck. Just hire the most qualified people period. The rest is pseudo science borrowed from the corporate world and social justice warriors.

Kurt- I am a “social justice warrior” as you put it. I am also in agreement with you completely on hiring the most qualified people period regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or any other category anybody can think of. I’m also a firm believer in social justice issues. Everyone deserves dignity, a sense of purpose, pride and a positive role in our community. We are fortunate enough to live in the wealthiest country on the planet. As such no one in our country should be homeless, hungry, sick or a societal outcast. Everyone deserves basic human rights and those are rights. If the Jeff Bezos’s of the world would simply pay what they are supposed to pay in taxes, as opposed to manipulating the system to pay zero in corporate taxes and then on top of it, receive 789 million in corporate welfare, maybe we could make America Great Again by ending homelessness, hunger and provide world class health care for ALL Americans regardless of income, class or social status. As a pilot, lifelong EAA member and proud American I stand up for what I believe is right. I think we can all work together as EAA members to help make not only EAA a better place but our world as well. We are all super fortunate to be in positions to own, operate and fly aircraft. Clearly to be able to do what we do, we have the financial capabilities that others might not. As such it’s our moral obligation to help when and where we can. For me, that means volunteering my time and aircraft to take disadvantaged kids up to Northern Minnesota in my 182 Amphib for a month every summer for floats, Fishing and fun. We work on life skills, Sea Plane Flying, Fishing, surfing, wakeboarding and in general have an amazing time. It’s not only great for the kids but it’s great for my girlfriend and I as well. I do what I can to have a positive impact on my community and I’m a firm believer in all of us doing the same thing. It’s simply the right thing to do. I follow the golden rule and I am my brothers keeper. It’s that simple. As EAAers and pilots, we all have that moral obligation and that’s what being a Social Justice Warrior means to me.

[Kurt Flunkn]

SJW. I'm sorry to hear that....

[WLIU]

I will offer the observation that everything in aviation is colored by the experience of leaving the earth in a flying machine. Mother Nature and the laws of physics do not care what your race, religion, gender, financial success, position on social justice, how kind you are to other, or any other "soft" achievement is, all that matters is your skill in operating the machine and ability to make successful decisions about weather, mechanics, and other "hard" factors. Excellence is what gets you into the sky and back down to the ground successfully. Everything in aviation is colored by this. Including who self-selects to lead aviation organizations. Coloring flying decisions based on what we want rather than what Mother Nature and the laws of physics give us simply increases the accident rate. Moving fuzzy decision making into the operation of aviation organizations puts already fragile organizations on the path to extinction.

Best of luck,

Wes

[Floatsflyer]

I will offer the observation that everything in aviation is colored by the experience of leaving the earth in a flying machine. Mother Nature and the laws of physics do not care what your race, religion, gender, financial success, position on social justice, how kind you are to other, or any other "soft" achievement is, all that matters is your skill in operating the machine and ability to make successful decisions about weather, mechanics, and other "hard" factors. Excellence is what gets you into the sky and back down to the ground successfully. Everything in aviation is colored by this. Including who self-selects to lead aviation organizations. Coloring flying decisions based on what we want rather than what Mother Nature and the laws of physics give us simply increases the accident rate. Moving fuzzy decision making into the operation of aviation organizations puts already fragile organizations on the path to extinction.

Best of luck,

Wes

Nice speech. But the laws of nature and physics have diddily squat to do with diversity initiatives which are created and administered by progressive HUMAN BEINGS.

[Kyle Boatright]

Nice speech. But the laws of nature and physics have diddily squat to do with diversity initiatives which are created and administered by progressive HUMAN BEINGS.

Floats, a couple of other times in this thread, you've disagreed with people about diversity vs affirmative action vs a meritocracy. But you haven't offered your definition of diversity, or why you think it it is better or just different than affirmative action or a meritocracy which is blind to race/gender/whatever. Can you expand your ideas so I (we?) understand where you're coming from?

[Marc Zeitlin]

Floats, a couple of other times in this thread, you've disagreed with people about diversity vs affirmative action vs a meritocracy. But you haven't offered your definition of diversity, or why you think it it is better or just different than affirmative action or a meritocracy which is blind to race/gender/whatever. Can you expand your ideas so I (we?) understand where you're coming from?I've tried to stay out of the mud with the pigs :-), but these are good questions that deserve a reasoned answer. Here's mine - floatflyer may have other reasoning:

Here are some articles with links to actual studies and data that indicate the advantages to companies of diversity:

https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/240550
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ekaterinawalter/2014/01/14/reaping-the-benefits-of-diversity-for-modern-business-innovation/#42fb5a042a8f
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/why-diversity-matters
https://www.inc.com/ian-altman/5-reasons-why-workplace-diversity-is-good-for-business.html

There are many more, and these are NOT progressive/left wing publications - they're business publications, and wouldn't promote something that wasn't good for business.

If you view the EAA as a business (which is something that has been complained about here - that it's too MUCH of a business), then diversity can only help the organization grow and be successful, whatever you might think about the moral or ethical values involved. While my progressive side sees value in diversity in and of itself, my capitalist side sees diversity as an opportunity for a more successful business. The facts support the notion that more diverse organizations are more successful.

And I'll ignore "steve"'s poke at liberals on what is supposed to be a non-political forum - we're discussing diversity here, not politics. They're not the same thing.

[Bill Greenwood]

It's not either or, in other words we dont have to choose a good mind only in old white men, as opposed to a lesser candidate in a woman or other then white man. I m sure there are plenty of bright businesswomen or minorities that would be good on the board. If you think women or somehow inferior youve probably never given fair credit to how hard being a Mother is or how hard it is to clean up the disasters men make.

[Mark17]

SJW. I'm sorry to hear that....

I want you to Tell that to my 8 year old friend Jack who witnessed his Dad murder his mom as a 5 year old and has since started smiling and laughing since joining floats Fishing and fun. Get real Kurt and be a part of the soultion and not what’s wrong with our country. Happy to take ya up for some serious 182 Amphib time. We’ll fly in this year on Thursday and you can meet Jack in person.

[Floatsflyer]

To Steve and your #61 post: Edit: I see that our overseer has rightfully and correctly removed your post. Wish they could also remove your attitude.

Thank you for your insightful, intelligent and well-informed contribution to the conversation.

I'm very pleased to advise you that you have been unanimously awarded a Darwin Award. Congratulations, you deserve it.

[Mark17]

In summation, diversity for the sake of diversity doesn't fly here.
7318

Hi Steve, I agree completely that diversity just for the sake of diversity makes no sense. The most qualified person for the job regardless of anything else is just common sense. At the same time that Billboard is just stupid. It’s telling a ton of people with a lot of green money to take their money and spend it elsewhere and believe me, they will. That doesn’t help anyone at all in the Great State of Texas.

I’m what that Billboard is referring to as a “Liberal” but above all else, I’m a proud American. My Grandfather earned a Bronze Star and French Croix de Guerre in the ETO in WWII. He was part of the American Task Force that liberated Dachau Concentration Camp. He also was tasked with rounding up Aero Space Medical Equipment from the Nazis before his Russian Counterparts could liberate it. On one of his missions he came across a Nazi Battalion holding up in a Luftwaffe Hangar. He opened a door on the side of hangar walked inside and it was dark. He bumped into someone and that person said excuse me in German. My Grandpa pulled out his lighter and he realized he had just walked into a Nazi Hornets Nest. 300 Waffen SS to be exact. He then opened the main Hangar Door to let light in and could see all 300 faces staring back at him. In German he said they could surrender right then and there to him or they could wait and surrender to the 2 Russian Divisions that was just over the hill behind the hangar. After some discussion their Commanding Officer approached my Grandpa with his Luger Drawn. My Grandpa wasn’t exactly super confident at this point in his backstory! As the Officer neared my Grandpa he slowly turned the Luger around and handed it to my Grandpa. Following that all 300 piled up their weapons on the tarmac in front of the Hangar and their war was over. There werent any Russian Divisions just over the hill behind the hangar on that day but there was a Brave and think on your feet American with good old fashioned American ingenuity and know how.

My Grandpa passed away in 2004. One of his major life lessons he passed on to me from his experiences in WWII was to protect and look out for society’s most valnurable, disenfranchised and disadvantaged people. He always said never to use “Labels” when talking about people. Always treat people the way I would want to be treated and to Stand up for people that can’t stand for themselves. He said the measurement of a true society is how they treat their most valnurable people. The poor, the sick, the elderly etc. He always said It directly represents who we are as a people, is core and central to our fabric of identity and keeps us grounded. If my Grandfather were alive today and read your post he would have something to say about it. He would tell you that we don’t put labels on people. He would tell you that we’re all Americans and we’re all on the same team and in the fight together. He wanted to see everyone in our country have the right to pursue happiness and live their version of the American Dream. That’s what he fought for in WWII. If my Grandpa were alive today he would be absolutely appalled and horrified at what our Country looks like today. He would take one look at that Billboard and want to rip it down with his bare hands. Right now the entire playing field is so slanted that it makes my Grandpa’s ethos of Every American’s Legitimate right to pursue happiness and their American Dream a total joke. The game is so skewed that it’s impossible for the vast majority of people in our Country to just keep their heads above water nonetheless to pursue their dreams and find happiness. It’s UNAMERICAN and just plain wrong. As my Grandpa said, We’re all on the same team and we’re in this fight together. Labels just divide us and do nothing to help one another.

[Bill Greenwood]

Notice one thing about that billboard if it really is in Texas. The land looks pretty bare, just dirt and not much grass. It is likely in West Texas, where there is a lot of dirt and a lot of oil and gas. And attitudes there are pretty right wing and rural, all of Texas is not like that. I just spent a couple of months in Austin and there most people are well educated and much more modern in attitudes toward women's rights and minorities and similar issues. Its not all rednecks and much of Texas is changing. And remember that Texas is a very big state, it is 1000 miles from the East side to the west side and about the same from south to north. Attitudes and experiences vary a lot from place to place. Some change is slow but steady. There are stiil a lot of people who cling to their guns, but there is also a type of medical marijuana that is now legal for children with seizures. There are some things that have changed since I was a kid there, and racial relations are a main one, most any minority can be served in any restaurant or hotel now, or go to any school, not perfect , but most people accept that as the norm, not so in the 50s. Austin is so booming economically that it attracts lots of overseas people, lots of Aisians now in tech jobs.
As for that billboard, its the right of anyone to express an opinion and be judged for it. The real meaning of freedom of speech is even for people who you disagree with. Hear both sides and let the truth be found, and that;s not a passive or unpatriotic view. Dont be so afraid of the other side's message that you have to run from it.Hear and learn from it, Ie Are tariffs good for steelworkers, but bad for aircraft producers? etc.
Diversity on the EAA board is a fairly narrow issue, it really is not nearly as broad as some big debate like that billboard. And the reason to seek diversity on our board is to enhance EAA not to prove a point. One of the big obstacles to growth of gen aviation or sport type fun aviation is to try to broaden our base, get some young people especially but also more women and minorities.

[Floatsflyer]

Floats, a couple of other times in this thread, you've disagreed with people about diversity vs affirmative action vs a meritocracy. But you haven't offered your definition of diversity, or why you think it it is better or just different than affirmative action or a meritocracy which is blind to race/gender/whatever. Can you expand your ideas so I (we?) understand where you're coming from?

The key difference in practical application:

Affirmative Action policy places formal and legal obligations on a company or organization to hire recognized minorities and women that have been historically discriminated against.

Diversity policy is a voluntary informal action that a company or organization adopts to give consideration to those same groups.


Diversity is an undertaking to understand and accept the differences between groups of people by placing a positive value on those differences. It's about appreciating what makes them different in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, etc, etc. As a workplace or organizational strategy, it entrenches a conscious EFFORT to recruit diverse qualified employees.

Affirmative Action is a formal, legally entrenched policy that REQUIRES a company or organization to FAVOUR or PREFER those same minority groups who have historically been subjected to discrimination with respect to education and employment.

Companies, organizations, government, NGO's can sign on to both, one or the other or none.

[JohnAJohnson]

...I gotta say - that is one big group of old white guys! Shouldn't the board be a better reflection of the population? Maybe some people of color? Maybe some women? Maybe someone under 50?

I never really thought to consider the races of members of the board, cause, well, to do so might be considered racist. However, I believe diversity of thought on a board has merit. My experience is that aviators like to be judged by their actions vs. physical attributes, indoor/outdoor plumbing, or age. In other words, if I were offered a board position because of features beyond my control (color, age, sex), I'd take offense. Wouldn't you?

[jethro99]

Affirmative Action policy places formal and legal obligations on a company or organization to hire recognized minorities and women that have been historically discriminated against.

Affirmative Action is a formal, legally entrenched policy that REQUIRES a company or organization to FAVOUR or PREFER those same minority groups who have historically been subjected to discrimination with respect to education and employment.

Companies, organizations, government, NGO's can sign on to both, one or the other or none.

Perhaps in an all white organization there has never been anyone in particular discriminated against. Perhaps each time there was an opening the best candidate for the job happened to be a white dude. Time and time again.

The company never discriminated against anyone. Along comes the federal government and mandates that lesser qualified candidates needed to be selected just for the sake of diversity. The company therefore has to settle for less than the best.

And when those lesser qualified candidates could not keep up with their peers then the company was forced to retain them anyone. Just for the numbers.

And this is better for the company how?

[Frank Giger]

Bear in mind we're talking about the Board of Directors, not exactly entry level positions.

There is a huge difference from hosting a booth at a job fair in a HBCU to get applicants just graduating from college to apply to a company in order to increase minority hires and recruiting for the top positions.

The author of this thread simply wants "diversity" at any cost at the top of the organization. Screw that.

[DaleB]

I'll ask it again. How many people outside of the demographic in question (Caucasian males over, say, 40) have run for the BoD? I've only been a member for a few years, and I'll be perfectly honest and say I have not paid that much attention.

Policies and attitudes and intentions have nothing to do with it if none of the candidates fall outside the demographic you're trying to avoid.

[Bill Berson]

I doubt anyone "runs" for a position on the board. I assume the CEO picks who he wants in most corporations.
The Chaiman or CEO of EAA holds a vast majority of proxy votes.

[DaleB]

I doubt anyone "runs" for a position on the board. I assume the CEO picks who he wants in most corporations.
The Chaiman or CEO of EAA holds a vast majority of proxy votes.

"Meet the EAA Board of Directors who are elected by membership and help set direction for the organization."

28 white guys, 3 women, 1 black guy.

[Bill Berson]

Only 42 members voted in person in 2017. Third paragraph here:https://www.eaa.org/~/media/files/eaa/about/annual-business-meeting-minutes-2017.pdf

[WLIU]

And 28,000 members sent their proxies in, believing that the current leadership would make good decisions about which candidates deserved the support of those proxy votes.

Here is food for thought. Something like 10% - 15% of the members participated in the election. You can take this as a sign that the majority of EAA members are happy with the direction of the organization and the performance of the directors and staff. Alternately you can think that the majority of the members are apathetic as to these topics. That alternate view seems unlikely given the number of active chapters and the large number of volunteers that actively support EAA programs and Airventure.

Best of luck,

Wes

[Sam Buchanan]

And 28,000 members sent their proxies in, believing that the current leadership would make good decisions about which candidates deserved the support of those proxy votes.

Here is food for thought. Something like 10% - 15% of the members participated in the election. You can take this as a sign that the majority of EAA members are happy with the direction of the organization and the performance of the directors and staff. Alternately you can think that the majority of the members are apathetic as to these topics. That alternate view seems unlikely given the number of active chapters and the large number of volunteers that actively support EAA programs and Airventure.

Best of luck,

Wes

Well.....if Wes's post had appeared near the beginning of this thread.....this most likely would have been a brief discussion.

Well stated.

[Floatsflyer]

Well.....if Wes's post had appeared near the beginning of this thread.....this most likely would have been a brief discussion.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? Wes's post is about voting for about one-fifth of the total number of BOD's. Zero to do with the subject here of BOD diversity(or lack thereof) and the makeup of them. Sheesh!

[Sam Buchanan]

How did you arrive at that conclusion? Wes's post is about voting for about one-fifth of the total number of BOD's. Zero to do with the subject here of BOD diversity(or lack thereof) and the makeup of them. Sheesh!

I was waiting for you to respond.... ;)

[WLIU]

"Zero to do with the..."

I was replying to the comment on how many EAA members voted in person.

That said, the stats also suggest that the membership is not prioritizing diversity of race, religion, or gender in the Board of Directors vs current quality of the programs and the convention. At least not enough to put forward credible candidates and gather votes for those candidates.

I see the barriers to volunteering to serve on the Board of Directors of any large organization like EAA as being ones of having enough personal success to have the financial resources, time, the knowledge, and the desire to help guide the organization. I do not see built-in organization barriers that prevent any particular individual from appearing on a ballot. If you look at every organization like EAA, AOPA, Ducks Unlimited, United Way, etc., you will see that for an individual to move to the upper levels, a resume with the right boxes checked and enough time-in-grade for name recognition, are required. I will note that I am still working on the personal success (read $$) part of the equation so you won't see my on a ballot anytime soon.

Best of luck,

Wes

[Bill Berson]

Here is some diversity: http://inspire.eaa.org/2018/06/27/rc-flying-an-accessible-way-to-enjoy-aviation/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWldJd00ySTNNVEl6TTJNMyIsInQiOiJiZ UkyREZDRFU3YStObnlYWHpyMWdBb1BaSmI5OHJxY09IVGVxbnR SOGVsUEtTOXY0c3JOd004M1hOWjg3S1JlQTFseWp6Qk16em9xM 3NDdjhMWDFoc0tqWTNId2VxWFc3T3BnMFQxNTdIWDdhTDMwdEN 2ZXVnbk4rUUVjN3NMYSJ9

I have only met one board member and I suspect she was nominated after decades of volunteer service.

[FlyingRon]

All this drivel would make sense if the EAA board was an openly competed position. It isn't. The board is entierly selected by EAA leadership because they hold sufficient proxies to swamp any "grass roots" attempt to someone else on the board. You can't even pull a "cumulative voting" scheme that is commonly used to allow minority shareholders to get at least one seat on a corporate board. So what you have is a bunch of aging, overweight, white males, with an occasional token alternate. For instance, the two woman on the board are only there because they occupy reserved seats for the heads of Vintage and Warbirds. The only other exception to the white old male farts rule was Jim Clark and he's gone.

[Bill Berson]

All this drivel would make sense if the EAA board was an openly competed position. It isn't. The board is entierly selected by EAA leadership because they hold sufficient proxies to swamp any "grass roots" attempt to someone else on the board. You can't even pull a "cumulative voting" scheme that is commonly used to allow minority shareholders to get at least one seat on a corporate board. So what you have is a bunch of aging, overweight, white males, with an occasional token alternate. For instance, the two woman on the board are only there because they occupy reserved seats for the heads of Vintage and Warbirds. The only other exception to the white old male farts rule was Jim Clark and he's gone.

I am available if more underweight white guys are needed for diversity. :eek:

[cub builder]

All this drivel would make sense if the EAA board was an openly competed position. It isn't. The board is entierly selected by EAA leadership because they hold sufficient proxies to swamp any "grass roots" attempt to someone else on the board. You can't even pull a "cumulative voting" scheme that is commonly used to allow minority shareholders to get at least one seat on a corporate board. So what you have is a bunch of aging, overweight, white males, with an occasional token alternate. For instance, the two woman on the board are only there because they occupy reserved seats for the heads of Vintage and Warbirds. The only other exception to the white old male farts rule was Jim Clark and he's gone.

FWIW, I don't think the derogatory adjectives add to the discussion. But the jist of your post is right on the mark. The EAA board is there to serve and promote themselves and they do not want outsiders on the board unless they can bring a pile of $$ donors with them. They also will not allow an outsider onto the board as they hold the proxy votes. Anyone that thinks the EAA board is an elected democracy is deluding themselves. That doesn't mean the board doesn't do any good or that a diversity based board would be any better. In fact, the fact that many of the board members can bring a lot of donation $$ to the table is good for the EAA, or at least Airventure Inc.

[Yellowhammer]

The most qualified for the position is the standard at the E.A.A.. The "diversity" attitude will make things not nearly as safe and sound versus having qualified people running the show.

[Floatsflyer]

The most qualified for the position is the standard at the E.A.A.. The "diversity" attitude will make things not nearly as safe and sound versus having qualified people running the show.

I see that you are new to the forum and very, very late to this particular thread party. You can't make unsubstantiated statements like this. You can have an opinion but you can't have your own facts. I know, for some, it's in vogue and all the rage but you can't just make up s**t.

Provide supportable, fact based evidence that proves your contention that "the diversity attitude will make things not nearly as safe and sound versus having qualified people running the show."

[64wing]

Kurt- I am a “social justice warrior” as you put it. I am also in agreement with you completely on hiring the most qualified people period regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or any other category anybody can think of. I’m also a firm believer in social justice issues. Everyone deserves dignity, a sense of purpose, pride and a positive role in our community. We are fortunate enough to live in the wealthiest country on the planet. As such no one in our country should be homeless, hungry, sick or a societal outcast. Everyone deserves basic human rights and those are rights. If the Jeff Bezos’s of the world would simply pay what they are supposed to pay in taxes, as opposed to manipulating the system to pay zero in corporate taxes and then on top of it, receive 789 million in corporate welfare, maybe we could make America Great Again by ending homelessness, hunger and provide world class health care for ALL Americans regardless of income, class or social status. As a pilot, lifelong EAA member and proud American I stand up for what I believe is right. I think we can all work together as EAA members to help make not only EAA a better place but our world as well. We are all super fortunate to be in positions to own, operate and fly aircraft. Clearly to be able to do what we do, we have the financial capabilities that others might not. As such it’s our moral obligation to help when and where we can. For me, that means volunteering my time and aircraft to take disadvantaged kids up to Northern Minnesota in my 182 Amphib for a month every summer for floats, Fishing and fun. We work on life skills, Sea Plane Flying, Fishing, surfing, wakeboarding and in general have an amazing time. It’s not only great for the kids but it’s great for my girlfriend and I as well. I do what I can to have a positive impact on my community and I’m a firm believer in all of us doing the same thing. It’s simply the right thing to do. I follow the golden rule and I am my brothers keeper. It’s that simple. As EAAers and pilots, we all have that moral obligation and that’s what being a Social Justice Warrior means to me.

Mark, while you and I may be on opposite sides of the political debate, I appreciate so much that you have presented your points respectfully and intelligently. Thank you for what you're doing to help get the kids into this wonderful community of aviation. Your tact is classically EAA! I agree that the Amazons of the corporate world should be paying taxes. However, fundamentally I just can't fault their accounting departments for being successful navigators of the tax codes. For me, the problem is with the tax laws and thus it is Congress that should be receiving the heat for drafting legislative Swiss cheese. And that goes for either side of the aisle in both chambers. Similarly, I don't think I should be responsible to pay for others' security as the world is tough enough on most of us.
Consequently, and since you touched on healthcare in your post, I had a thought the other day that I believe could be a good compromise to a pair of current debate topics in the country. The first is the whole free college tuition movement. I vehemently disagree with the concept. However, I understand how supply and demand works, and this is essentially a supply and demand issue. We could talk all day about what the value of a degree is if everyone could get one for free or how we could address the fact that those who paid for their education last year are going to have to compete economically with the kid right behind them that is going to graduate debt free because of the stroke of a legislative pen. How is that fair? I digress.
Anyway, my idea is this: let's make college free for medical students. The grading standards would remain stringent such that only qualified people attain their status as a medical doctor. This would result in a supply increase of quality primary care physicians. In conjunction with this, Universities would only be allowed to raise tuition proportionally to the standard inflation rate. No more free money scooping just because Uncle Sam has his pocketbook open. That should, in theory, help decrease the cost of care due to simple market competition. In conjunction with this, I recommend that there be a margin cap on pharmaceuticals. Developers would be required to show the ledger so that the cost of developing a new drug can be substantiated. In this manner those occasional 5,000% margins could be appropriately brought into the realm of reality. Lastly, since Congress only has the power to regulate interstate commerce (as opposed to intrastate commerce) they need to stop trying to regulate insurers if we're not allowed to purchase policies across state lines. Could you imagine how much prices would drop if we could shop for a policy in 50 states instead of 1? The rebuttal to this whole idea would likely start from the standpoint of: "why shouldn't I get to make a ton of money as a doctor like the last generation did?" I can sympathize with that, but frankly I don't believe you should be able to rake in so much for providing medical care to other human beings. The days of getting rich in exchange for extending someone's life or improving its quality need to be over. You're not going to starve just because you aren't going to make enough to afford a third home and a new pontoon boat. I guess there is a tiny sliver of progressive thought in me when it comes to certain things.

Well I could write about this all day, but figured this is enough for one entry.

Thanks again for what you do. Cheers, friend!

[Mark17]

64wing- First off I’ll fly with you anytime bud and it’s refreshing to get the perspective of someone who is extremely knowledgeable and articulate in voicing their ideas. If you ever find yourself up North let me know and I’d be more than happy to take ya up for some Amphib time and out for some Walleye and Bass Fishing! The world seems a whole lot less complex from 3000 feet and 120 knots:) I whole heartedly agree with you that it’s the fault of congress for creating the laws that allow major corporations and the ultra wealthy to not pay their taxes. This is not only unacceptable, it’s Unamerican. The true problem with our Country as it sits today is we no longer live in a Democracy. Instead we have an Oligarchy. When the top 1/10 on 1 Percent control more wealth than the bottom 60%, that’s a major problem. It means that the 400 richest families in the United States have more wealth than the bottom 150 Million Americans. Think about that. 400 families having more money than 150 Million Americans combined. I can’t even wrap my head around that. That level of concentrated power and wealth is unfathomable to me. Apart from that, Its fundamentally UNAMERICAN and morally wrong not to mention what the real world ramifications look like from a system like this. Just look at the condition of our infrastructure- roads, bridges, sewer and gas, water treatment and the like. The entire country is literally collapsing, blowing up and falling apart. Now don’t get me wrong. I’m all for free markets and capital success. I’m not however all in for a system that’s designed to make the rich richer and everyone else poorer because the ultra wealthy get to play by a completely different set of rules. It would be like if you and I sat down for a game of Monopoly. We’ll kick off the game with you having 5 dollars and me having the entire bank. Yup sounds fair right!? Obviously it’s not but that’s the system we’ve allowed to happen in our country. The Middle Class gets crushed, the Rich get even Richer the poor get wiped off the map. I talked to my Dad the other day about what our country looks like right now to him. He’s 80. Was in both Vietnam and the Persian Gulf. In 1968 he was a Lieutenant in the Navy. He made 13k that year. He bought a brand new Pontiac Catalina when he got back from Vietnam. He paid 4K for it. So on his salary of 13k in 1968 that would of paid for 3 Pontiac Catalina’s that year. I can tell you that a Navy Lieutenant’s salary today will definitely not buy the modern day equivalent of 3 Pontiac Catalina’s. Not even close. His point on it is the cost of living has gone through the roof while salaries have gone way down. We live in the richest society in human history but most of us would never know it. He said that he doesn’t recognize our country and it’s definitely not what he fought for or what his dad fought for in WWII. So here’s where I’m at with all of it. At the end of the day We’re all Americans. We’re all on the same team fighting for the same cause under the same flag. It’s not about Red States and Blue States. It’s not about white vs black, North vs south and rich vs poor. It’s about all of us as Americans coming together for the common good. It’s about trying to make a country that’s fair and equitable for all of us. Working together to make sure everyone has an equal opportunity to find success and happiness. Everyone contributing their fair share so that all of us can rise and prosper together. Everyone deserves that opportunity. I wish we could all just come together and realize that we’re in this fight together and that’s how fights are won on the battlefield. Team work. Unity. Relentless as one. A cohesive fighting force standing shoulder to shoulder with an Unwavering commitment to each other and the mission objective. Everyone contributing what they can to accomplish the greater goal. That’s what it takes to win in today’s incredibly complex and dynamic battle space and that’s what we’re going to have to do as a nation if we want to move forward together as one. So thank you so much for engaging in a constructive and positive conversation on it. It really is refreshing when you can talk with someone that has a true understanding of the issues and offers up well thought out solutions to complex problems! Happy to hear more on it from ya!

[SteveCostello]

I, for one, appreciate that this discussion is happening. Quick personal story (FWIW, I'm a white, not overweight ;), male in his 40s). I attended my first Oshkosh a few years ago. Was there from Wed-Sun. By, Thursday night, there was something... amiss... that I couldn't quite put my finger on. Until the Friday afternoon airshow while I was standing next to a middle Eastern family there to watch the show. It hit me... these folks were the very first non-white people I had seen in nearly 3 days. As I started to pay more attention to this, those were the only non-white people I saw for the remainder of my time there (excluding vendors). I also noticed the incredibly disparity among genders. In the years since, I've noticed a *slight* improvement in these numbers (I had to use BOTH hands to count the persons of color I saw for an entire week... whoo!), though I think that is probably attributable to the fact that I've been going for the entire week and I much more aware of the crowd.

To answer a previous poster's question about why the EAA has been increasing the number of stories and bits about women and PoC in their publications: this is why. While everyone says that people other than white guys are welcome in aviation, and they might actually mean that, the environment is generally not welcoming to a more diverse crowd simply due to lack of representation. No one likes being the only "other" in a crowd. Aviation has loooong been a white male dominated arena, and I, for one, appreciate the EAA's efforts to be more *actively* inclusionary. I think there is a lot more work to be done.

If people want diversity in the EAA board, that's the only way it's going to happen. Getting diverse people involved in aviation in the first place. That's no small feat.

If I can ever get all of my poo in one sock, one of my goals is to get involved in the EAA Eagles program, and put significant effort into getting disadvantaged, primarily non-white kids from North and East St. Louis into the cockpit of a small plane and get them information on how they can actually, realistically get involved in a field that they never even considered.

I don't agree with hiring people to make a quota. Quotas are BS, and help no one. In fact, many are purposely set up for failure. "See... we TOLD you hiring a woman was going to be a bad idea!" Happens all the time (look up the term "glass cliff..." it's a real thing). Getting a diverse audience involved from the get-go is the only path to success.

Oh, yeah... I saw a post a few pages ago claiming they were sorry someone claimed to be a SJW. What a crock. A warrior for ensuring that all people are treated equally, no matter what they look like, where they're from, who they worship or love? Someone who sees that a particular group of people does not have the same opportunities as others, and fights to get them an eventually even, fair standing? Yeah... count me in on that. All day long, and twice on Sunday.

[gmoore]

Well - I gotta say - I never really expected this particular thread would thrive and live as long as it did. I'm the one that kicked it off back in the end of May.

I've spent the morning reading the tread from the beginning - and I decided that since I started it maybe I'd jump in one more time. It's fascinating to see how this thing grew and morphed. Much if it way off topic from my original intention - but then I suppose, that is the nature of this particular type of communication. Much has been attributed to me along the way - some correct some incorrect. I really appreciate everyone's comments and participation. I would suggest that the very longevity of the thread might be evidence that it's an important topic.

To set the record straight - as the author.....
1. Diversity in an organization is positive by most every metric. That statement isn't my opinion - there are countless studies to support that only a google away.
2. Diversity doesn't mean quotas, hiring unqualified people or reverse racism
3. Diversity is hard and complicated and politically charged.

Many of you pointed out the simple truth that aviation is mostly old and white. That there just aren't many women and people of color out there to pick from. And therefore our board reflects that. That's true but not the point.

Many of you pointed out that anyone is welcome to aviation and no one is keeping out women and people of color. That's only technically true. It is not true in practical, real world experiences. It's somewhat of a viscous circle - for generations we've signaled to young women what were appropriate career paths for them - and aviation was never really one of them (as well as many others). That's a hard message to overcome - and simply stating today that you can do if you want - isn't a sufficient solution.

One of the things that diversity (especially at the top of an organization) does is to let those previously disenfranchised populations - see new options, opportunities and possibilities. Just think how powerful a Patty Wagstaff is to young women. To suggest that there simply aren't qualified women and people of color out there is wrong, misguided and perpetuates the problem.

These are big and complex issues that require big and complex solutions.

This isn't just a problem in aviation - I just happened to be a pilot, look at a pilot magazine, and see a board of pilot people and thought that - maybe a comment on the lack of board diversity might interest others :)

Believe me - I don't expect to solve this on a forum thread.

I too - love flying - and naively - I wish that everyone did. That's all I'm really after .............

[FlyingRon]

Like I said, the EAA board is a closed shop. For years it was very Poberezny-centric, but we've somewhat moved past that. Still, in my recollection, we've had what, one black board member (Jim Clark) and two women (Connie Bowlin and Susen Dusenbury). The latter two got their seats on the EAA board because they are directors of the subgroups (Warbirds and Vintage). I don't think anybody who knows either of these women would ascribe their positions to anything other than hard work. I can tell you getting a hold of someone on the IAC, Vintage, or Warbirds boards is a whole ton easier than reaching anybody on the EAA board proper.

Frankly, the EAA board gives the appearance of being nothing other than an old gentleman's club.

[Joda]

....and two women (Connie Bowlin and Susen Dusenbury)....

There is actually a third woman, who is not affiliated with a division. Heather Penney.

Here's where you can see a listing of the EAA board members:

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/about-eaa/who-we-are/eaa-board-of-directors

Here's a link to Heather's info:

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/person/heather-penney?id=3F9A1399716F40548981CDDCB3E08864

You will also notice that several of the folks on the board are not "old gentlemen". There is some younger blood mixed in.

[Mark17]

Steve Costello- I’ll fly with you anytime bud. I commend you for the work you would like to do with disadvantaged youth in your area. I would be Happy to have you out on my boat for some serious Bass and Walleye fishing too! Up here in Northern Minnesota it’s all about the summers and we’ve been working really hard at taking advantage of every warm day we’ve had! If you find yourself up here shoot me a message and I’d be happy to get you up for some 182 Amphib time! One thing that gets lost I think in these diversity discussions is the fact that it’s an ok thing that Oshkosh is what it is. Every year my Dad and I rally up the kids and take them all out for the airshow of all airshows that we as pilots all look forward to like we did Christmas Day when we were 8! I try so hard to include every kid I can in the magic that is the Oshkosh Airshow. This year I’ll have 3 kids for sure and maybe 1 more coming. With every trip I hope that I’m passing on the love of aviation that runs deep within all of us to every kid that comes to the show with us. Whether it’s my nephews, nieces, disadvantaged kids that are involved with our up North floats program or anyone else, I try to encourage everyone to get involved and follow their dreams. Whatever those might be. Last year one of my nephews said he wanted to be a fighter pilot after watching the Raptors perform. The year before another one of my Nephews said he wanted to be a Coast Guard Helicopter Pilot. All of these powerful experiences happen for them because of what the Oshkosh Airshow has become. I don’t have a problem with Oshkosh staying the same as far as the experience we currently have. I also don’t have a problem with seeing many more groups of people represented at the show and in the organization. I just think that the PC movement gets way too carried away on demanding things that the individual groups may not want to do themselves. There’s probably a reason outside of men deliberately keeping women out of Aviation that accounts for the number of women involved in Aviation for example. From the women I know in my own life, not many have asperations to become professional pilots. It’s obviously great and perfectly ok if they did want to do that, but basically none of them do. I don’t see it as a crisis and I certainly don’t discourage anyone from following their dreams. But if that’s not someone’s dream, I wish we would stop pretending and forcing it to be so. It’s a major factor in why we have a president in office right now that is the most dangerous and incompetent in our nations history. People get tired of Way Over The Top Political Correctness and that’s exactly how we as a country got to where we are now. We need to focus our energy as a country on the issues that truly matter. Global Warming. Health Care. Income Inequality. Human Rights. Housing, education and hunger. We are the richest country in human history. We can and MUST do better or we won’t have a planet to live on much less worry about what group is or isn’t represented at EAA. I read an online article by Larry Kirby, a WWII Marine and Iwo Jima Veteran in the magazine, Foreign Policy, as a Best Defense Guest Columnist. I’ll link it. Mr Kirby sums up basically every opinion I have in his piece. It’s a fascinating look at how we got here as a nation and what we can do to truly make our country great again. Check it out and like I said, I’ll fly with ya anytime!

https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/12/a-world-war-ii-marine-looks-back-and-wonders-wheres-the-america-of-sharing/

[Mark17]

Guys- figured I’d put this up for everyone to read- Larry Kirby’s article from 2016 in Foreign Policy- Larry was a Marine in WWII and a Veteran of Iwo Jima. This pretty much sums up every point I have. It’s also a fascinating look into how we got here as a country. Check it out:)

https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/12/a-world-war-ii-marine-looks-back-and-wonders-wheres-the-america-of-sharing/

[saber25]

Thanks for pointing out the article by Mr. Kirby. I've had the same thoughts at 72 and was lucky enough not to be in the Great Depression. I did see combat in Vietnam but at least Mr. Kirby could see an end to his conflict knowing it had a positive outcome.

We are standing on the shoulders of men like Mr. Kirby and his comrades and am ashamed that we are letting him down. I do thank him and his mates for making it possible to live in a country where I could build and fly an RV4 these past 30 years.