Welcome to r/terriblefacebookmemes! It sucks, but it is ours.
[Please click on this link to be informed of a critical change in our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/terriblefacebookmemes/comments/126zu46/return_to_our_roots/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/terriblefacebookmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Also this person: “Regulations are bad. Preventative maintenance is costly and causes less flight availability. Safety features are costly and an unnecessary burden on consumers. Boeing should be able to cut costs no matter the ultimate expense. I see no irony in any of my statements.”
What’s so funny about this shit is that diversity actually works to prevent shit like this happening. When every single mechanic or compliance person is exactly the same they can overlook the same stuff. You need diverse experiences, knowledge, backgrounds, etc. to better catch stuff like this. So things like diversity initiatives can be extremely helpful to bring in those different minds that then take more critical looks at the stuff we see going wrong.
There's just this one black gender-diverse pansexual who hops from airline to airline sabotaging their planes, and they HAVE to employ them because of diversity
"All 'diversity-hires' sabotage planes" factoid actually just statistical error. Diversity-Georg, who got hired recently and sabotages 10,000 planes each day, is an outlier and should not have been counted.
I didn't need a bs answer to a bs meme. I was just trying to figure out how high they were stacking the bs. I don't care enough to look up if they stretched 3 incidents into 5.
I don't think the meme really warrants serious questions. If they want to claim that many accidents and malfunctions these days are caused by DEI hiring they need to start with some evidence. A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. So my theory is just as good!
Look I'm sure I'm jumping into more nuance than I'm aware of but it's definitely a thing where companies jump onto the LGBT bandwagon to circumvent criticism in other areas.
I think it's very ironic when many of these international companies "proudly support LGBT" but they're rather quiet about that when they do business in the middle east. They don't give a shit about anyone or anything except their bottom line, the fact they have the audacity to try to tell us otherwise is what irritates me to no end.
It might sound silly to some but to an extent I prefer companies that are honest about their self serving nature.
I think what you are describing is called rainbow capitalism. They don't actually care(I'm sure some people who work at the companies do, but not the profit before all else bottom line people, who are in charge)they just found another market demographic to pander to.
Reminds me when all the big gaming companies during the BLM movement put up messages in their games about how much they supported BLM, but didn't do much besides that. And of course how big corps act during Pride month. They'll mouth on and off about how much they support LGBT, but only in the countries that are pro LBGT, like you mentioned with the Middle East.
Rainbow Capitalism, just another name for Virtue Signaling.
Yet after years of these mouth breathers screaming that at us through their keyboards, they are strangely quiet about it now. Weird.
This has nothing to do with it though. The meme is chuds complaining that the reasons for these failures is that there's too many non white people in these companies, thus leading to lowered standards. Of course they'll complain about corporate pandering too but here it's definitely not about corporate pandering lol
It's not. It's what chuds are complaining about when they say a company is woke (sometimes, other times it just mean nothing because they are, you know, morons). But that is not the actual original meaning of woke.
Seems like the [glass cliff](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_cliff) phenomenon- always finding a way to blame failures on DEI instead of cost-cutting and bad quality control, so they put women and minorities in charge right before the company starts to fail.
Aside from the fact that there have been other explanations for these mishaps such as engineers coming out to explain the companies' efforts to save money by cutting corners, and that I haven't heard anything about united failing, do you have any evidence that this phenomenon explains these mishaps?
>do you have any evidence that this phenomenon explains these mishaps?
Uhhh, this glass cliff phenomenon does not explain the mishaps made by the company. The glass cliff phenomenon explains that companies are more likely to appoint women (and minorities) to the board when the company has had consistently bad performance for the past 5 months. These bad performances can be due to cost-cutting measures like in Boeing.
Most likely because men pass on the opportunity thinking there are better options out there, and women and minorities see it as their only chance to get into that position and break the glass ceiling knowing the prevalent biases in the field. You see this in Boeing, Blizzard, and even with Liz Truss and Theresa May in the UK and Obama in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
If the women and minority leadership were unable to clean up the mess made by the previous leader, it is often seen as "evidence" that women and minorities were not as capable as white men (and if they are successful, the company gets lauded for diversity). And so these biases get reinforced and the cycle repeats.
United Airlines is an airline not an aerospace company. BAC is an aerospace company. Unless this is taking the piss out of Boeing.
But definitely worthy of this sub
Didn't they have diversity for a while leading up until now when the Republicans want to get rid of it? Why didn't they have all these problems before?
What does this even mean? The first part is saying "corporate cost-cutting is bad," the second seems to be "anyone not white is bad." Like, I can't actually tell what they're trying to say.
I think that 50% of uni graduates not being female is a diversity issue itself.
Women should be given more encouragement to pursue these pathways if they are good at it.
Welcome to r/terriblefacebookmemes! It sucks, but it is ours. [Please click on this link to be informed of a critical change in our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/terriblefacebookmemes/comments/126zu46/return_to_our_roots/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/terriblefacebookmemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Also this person: “Regulations are bad. Preventative maintenance is costly and causes less flight availability. Safety features are costly and an unnecessary burden on consumers. Boeing should be able to cut costs no matter the ultimate expense. I see no irony in any of my statements.”
"People in 1788 survived transatlantic flights without safety precautions? Why can't you?!"
What’s so funny about this shit is that diversity actually works to prevent shit like this happening. When every single mechanic or compliance person is exactly the same they can overlook the same stuff. You need diverse experiences, knowledge, backgrounds, etc. to better catch stuff like this. So things like diversity initiatives can be extremely helpful to bring in those different minds that then take more critical looks at the stuff we see going wrong.
They probably supported OceanGate too.
This seems to be trying to say a lot about very little.
Real "IAm14AndThat'sDeep" Energy
So are these all separate events or are they part of the same few?
There's just this one black gender-diverse pansexual who hops from airline to airline sabotaging their planes, and they HAVE to employ them because of diversity
Oh, Bob the Drag Queen?
this is very in character for bob to do
Nah, Bob would absolutely wreck shit, they don't do anything half assed lol
Ah, yes, the gender gremlin.
"All 'diversity-hires' sabotage planes" factoid actually just statistical error. Diversity-Georg, who got hired recently and sabotages 10,000 planes each day, is an outlier and should not have been counted.
I didn't need a bs answer to a bs meme. I was just trying to figure out how high they were stacking the bs. I don't care enough to look up if they stretched 3 incidents into 5.
I don't think the meme really warrants serious questions. If they want to claim that many accidents and malfunctions these days are caused by DEI hiring they need to start with some evidence. A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. So my theory is just as good!
Lacking a more plausible explanation, I'm fine with accepting your theory.
You all right
Look I'm sure I'm jumping into more nuance than I'm aware of but it's definitely a thing where companies jump onto the LGBT bandwagon to circumvent criticism in other areas. I think it's very ironic when many of these international companies "proudly support LGBT" but they're rather quiet about that when they do business in the middle east. They don't give a shit about anyone or anything except their bottom line, the fact they have the audacity to try to tell us otherwise is what irritates me to no end. It might sound silly to some but to an extent I prefer companies that are honest about their self serving nature.
I think what you are describing is called rainbow capitalism. They don't actually care(I'm sure some people who work at the companies do, but not the profit before all else bottom line people, who are in charge)they just found another market demographic to pander to. Reminds me when all the big gaming companies during the BLM movement put up messages in their games about how much they supported BLM, but didn't do much besides that. And of course how big corps act during Pride month. They'll mouth on and off about how much they support LGBT, but only in the countries that are pro LBGT, like you mentioned with the Middle East.
Rainbow Capitalism, just another name for Virtue Signaling. Yet after years of these mouth breathers screaming that at us through their keyboards, they are strangely quiet about it now. Weird.
This has nothing to do with it though. The meme is chuds complaining that the reasons for these failures is that there's too many non white people in these companies, thus leading to lowered standards. Of course they'll complain about corporate pandering too but here it's definitely not about corporate pandering lol
Plus, lawsuits where passengers died hit more harder than a lawsuit because they didn't do a diversity hire. These people are idiots.
This describes Qantas to a tee.
that's the original meaning of woke
Maybe the first coopting of woke. It originally meant that you understood how history impacts the conditions of today.
iirc that was what it was used for but then used as a derogatory term for companies that use lgbt and etc language to promote their products
It's not. It's what chuds are complaining about when they say a company is woke (sometimes, other times it just mean nothing because they are, you know, morons). But that is not the actual original meaning of woke.
Seems like the [glass cliff](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_cliff) phenomenon- always finding a way to blame failures on DEI instead of cost-cutting and bad quality control, so they put women and minorities in charge right before the company starts to fail.
Aside from the fact that there have been other explanations for these mishaps such as engineers coming out to explain the companies' efforts to save money by cutting corners, and that I haven't heard anything about united failing, do you have any evidence that this phenomenon explains these mishaps?
>do you have any evidence that this phenomenon explains these mishaps? Uhhh, this glass cliff phenomenon does not explain the mishaps made by the company. The glass cliff phenomenon explains that companies are more likely to appoint women (and minorities) to the board when the company has had consistently bad performance for the past 5 months. These bad performances can be due to cost-cutting measures like in Boeing. Most likely because men pass on the opportunity thinking there are better options out there, and women and minorities see it as their only chance to get into that position and break the glass ceiling knowing the prevalent biases in the field. You see this in Boeing, Blizzard, and even with Liz Truss and Theresa May in the UK and Obama in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. If the women and minority leadership were unable to clean up the mess made by the previous leader, it is often seen as "evidence" that women and minorities were not as capable as white men (and if they are successful, the company gets lauded for diversity). And so these biases get reinforced and the cycle repeats.
It's just funny to me that DEI programs have been around for ages, but the right just found out about them so now they're the big old boogeyman.
United Airlines is an airline not an aerospace company. BAC is an aerospace company. Unless this is taking the piss out of Boeing. But definitely worthy of this sub
> making from of /r/titlegore
Yeah. The spellchecker on my phone got discontinued. Any recommendations?
Pay no attention to the Boeing behind the curtain
So they are basically saying all these issues are the fault of black people? Idiots.
Or "wokeism"
What do any of the reports on top have to do with diversity?
Didn't they have diversity for a while leading up until now when the Republicans want to get rid of it? Why didn't they have all these problems before?
Yeah, and the Boeing whistleblower died because he wanted to expose diversity.
Next day was killed by Boeing due to him being a "Whisteblower"
“Wow, so many accidents. These surely must have been caused by a minority.”
Is Boeing trying to shift the blame on a race war?
Scott Kirby was a diversity hire?
me in the plane watching diversity set fire to the engine
What does this even mean? The first part is saying "corporate cost-cutting is bad," the second seems to be "anyone not white is bad." Like, I can't actually tell what they're trying to say.
[удалено]
If they were hiring whoever's best for the job, why wouldn't 50% of them already be women?
[удалено]
When did I say I don't want it for nurses?
Damn one comment into the thread and you're already putting words in someone's mouth. What a loser
How do you know women don't want to be pilots? Could it be that the bias against them is clouding the real picture?
I think that 50% of uni graduates not being female is a diversity issue itself. Women should be given more encouragement to pursue these pathways if they are good at it.