How gender bias in recruiting can hurt an individual (male)

A very sad and frustrating case of apparent gender discrimination in Defence Force Recruiting has been brought to my attention.

Of course, gender bias has been the rumour, the reporting and Chief of Army’s admittance for ages – but it really hits home when you come across a concrete example…

A bloke, who shall remain nameless, tells me he has tried for several years to get into the Army as a helicopter pilot. In fact, he first applied more than five years ago.

Back then, he says he achieved very high scores on all tests given to him by Defence Force Recruiting, from his first YOU Session, through additional testing for aircrew roles, then psych, medical and eventually the Aviation Screening Program, where he says he also scored very well – after which he was told he could apply for helicopter pilot, if he passed officer selection.

However, he was also told to go away and get this course and that course under his belt in civvie street, to improve his chances at the officer selection board.

He says he passed the suggested courses (at great personal expense – financial and mental) with ‘high distinctions’.

Then he was told his recruitment test results had expired simply because of the time that had passed, so he had to do it all again. And again passed with flying colours (pun intended).

This time it was suggested he should go do a leadership course or get leadership experience (“with SES for example”) to improve his chances at officer selection [though I thought leadership was what they taught at ADFA and RMC?].

In any case, SES wouldn’t take him on because they knew he wanted to ‘go army’ ASAP and they didn’t want the expense of training a leader only to lose him to another organisation.

In the mean time, our bloke got talking to some girls he met at aviation screening, some of whom freely admitted they “barely scraped through” – but all were selected and have since gone to pilot school to fly for the RAAF.

Now, for clarity, neither I nor this bloke are suggesting that these women are not competent pilot candidates. They did actually get through selection above the minimum standards required. They will also only get through pilot training and into employment if they pass their courses. But, our bloke did most certainly score better than at least some of these females at aviation screening and did not progress to training.

Anyway, he says he has no self delusions about being the best candidate – some blokes he got tested with did actually get through.

But then again, one bus-load of new trainees he saw departing the recruitment office for their first day of training “had about 10 women to every guy in the group. It only struck me later what was going on”.

He also says he would have been satisfied to have been told if he wasn’t suitable, but says that at all stages he was praised and encouraged and ‘mentored’ in the direction of pilot, pretty much to the exclusion of all other available jobs.

At one point, desperate just to get in, he enquired about other options, such as Aircraft Fitter as a digger instead of an officer – but was flatly told that that trade was currently only open to female applicants.

Anyway, time marched on and now, on the wrong side of 30, our bloke is “at wits end as to whether I should keep trying or not”.

He’s also been told his second application has expired simply because of time and he has to start the whole recruitment process all over again.

Trouble with that is, this high-scoring bloke only has this one last chance to get in because he (and everyone else applying) is only allowed three attempts at the process. It doesn’t matter a hoot that he hasn’t failed in any single aspect of recruitment testing thus far.

Sadly, however, on this impending third and final attempt it may also not matter how highly he scores. Apparently, gender really does count – and this bloke, and hundreds like him, have the wrong X and Y ticks in those boxes.

Of course, it’s not just our bloke’s first-hand experience that suggests capable men are being discriminated against in the recruitment process. Then Chief of Army Lieutenant General Angus Campbell told a Senate Estimates hearing early last year that (and I paraphrase), ‘space at the head of the queue for all employment categories is held open specifically for women and if those spaces are not filled by women within six weeks of recruitment, only then will they be opened to men’.

 

WHAT DO YOU THINK? Your thoughts or experience in this regard are welcomed via comments below or on social media – or, if you wish to remain anonymous, feel free to write to editor@militarycontact.com and we can add your comment on your behalf, without revealing your identity.

 

FILE PHOTO (2014): An Australian Army Tiger armed reconnaissance helicopter fires its chin-mounted chain gun at Puckapunyal. Photo by Sergeant Brian Hartigan.

.

.

.

.


. . .
...
...
. .
10137 Total Views 3 Views Today

Brian Hartigan

Managing Editor Contact Publishing Pty Ltd PO Box 3091 Minnamurra NSW 2533 AUSTRALIA

8 thoughts on “How gender bias in recruiting can hurt an individual (male)

  • 25/03/2019 at 6:04 pm
    Permalink

    I totally agree with this article! I, myself have been trying for 2 years now to get into the RAAF as a Firefighter. Scored very well, passed all medicals and physicals and was highly recommended for the job roll at the interview stage. I am also a part-time civiy fire fighter and have been so for 5 years.

    I have spoken to people in the same position as I and found that the male applicants wait for 2+ years where as women wait 6months to a 1year tops. How can this be fair? I don’t mind who gets in but I always thought it was first in first served?

    Reply
    • 25/03/2019 at 6:57 pm
      Permalink

      I sympathise with your plight mate – I think this situation stinks.
      But, I will disagree with your ‘first in first served’ thing. I think it should be ‘best suited is first recruited’ – regardless of gender.
      Also, FYI, I recently heard on the radio where civilian fire departments (I think it was NSW) are contemplating reducing their 90kg-dummy-pull to 65kg so that more women can pass the physical.

      Reply
  • 27/01/2019 at 4:40 pm
    Permalink

    Regarding Gender bias in recruiting. What a crock of shit. I retired from the permanent Navy in ’91after 25 years service, then 24 years in the Reserves, (inactive), and I am so pleased I got out when I did. Political Correctness will ruin our once proud Defence Force. I have no problem with females entering any branch of the service, but when promotion due to gender is favoured above experienced males, it becomes a laughing matter through out the entire Armed Forces. Experienced and well trained males will see no end to this, and I can see droves of these servicemen leaving for Civvy Street. What a terrible shame.

    Reply
  • 27/01/2019 at 3:04 pm
    Permalink

    It is a key responsibility of the Head of the Army to put the best possible fighting force into the field of battle irrespective of gender. If we are going down the path of polical correctness and work on gender ratios then any force will not be the best we can put forward, it will be second rate. Our Defence force needs to be the best available. Your article on PC is leading our defence force to be a second rate army.
    As a Vietnam Vet and father of a Iraq Vet, we want ensure that our fellow soldiers are the besr and have our backs covered in combat. I am not pushing a male only stance, but highlighing that only the best qualified will do irrespective of gender. It is evident from your article that females are prefered over maless despite ability.
    I suggest the Head of Army get some real life experience on the “two way rifle range”

    Reply
  • 27/01/2019 at 1:17 pm
    Permalink

    Got a simple solution to this “Politically Correct” crap, tick both boxes and say you identify as both. Can’t discriminate then.. As for excluding men from being enlisted just to increase the % of women in defence, this is a clear example of sex discrimination and if it was happening to women the outrage would be deafening.

    It simply should be that the best candidate for the job gets through regardless of sex, age, race, etc etc

    Reply
  • 27/01/2019 at 9:51 am
    Permalink

    Comment received via editor@militarycontact.com from an author who wishes to remain anonymous…

    This whole episode stinks of political correctness, and the General should be sacked for allowing this bullshit to happen.

    Reply
  • 25/01/2019 at 8:05 pm
    Permalink

    Comment received via editor@militarycontact.com from an author who wishes to remain anonymous…

    My impromptu speech at OSB was from the 2015 white paper by the RAAF asking for 30% females in the RAAF by 2025. Currently I believe it is around 10% maybe even a little less. With those sorts of increases in such a short time, there will be corners cut, no doubt about it. And given that a female pilot ROSO is now 5 years (rather than our 10/11) then that will likely lead to a lot more pilots coming and going (and likely short-staffed at points too if they only get half the required years of flying out of 30% of pilot grads!)

    Reply
  • 25/01/2019 at 5:13 pm
    Permalink

    Comment received via editor@militarycontact.com from an author who wishes to remain anonymous…

    Reference the gender bias in recruiting, I’m not surprised. As a recent medically discharged member, the reasons I was getting for why I couldn’t stay, was a laughing matter in itself and it wasn’t just happening to me alone (further detail if interested).
    Another rumour I was hearing was that if recruiting officers were taking men over women, they were immediately removed from recruiting and sent back to a unit.
    In general, it was also noticed that women were given more of a chance to go on promotion courses, courses in general, exercises and, more importantly, deployments. Towards the end of my career, the rapid promotion of women was getting to a laughing point as a lot were getting promotions with extreme lack of experience and knowledge and whenever they were put into a position to show leadership, they constantly relied upon men whom had the experience and could do it with there eyes closed.
    In the end, I and many like me were happy to discharge due to the fact that Defence is becoming a laughing stock and it’s going to be really scary with what the future holds for it with this new softer generation…. Especially for Army.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.