Air crash deaths...
Since I don't have a Twitter account on my phone, I wasn't able to read beyond his first post. Maybe he explains it in a later post, but I don't understand how he can draw any conclusions based on airplane deaths, unless he's talking about private pilots.
Major commercial airlines in the United States have had one? passenger death in the last 20 years. A few additional maintenance workers or bystanders have died, and if you include charter airlines, the number rises to about 100.
That's a really low number to come up with a statistically significant sample, especially given a majority of the deaths come from just 3-4 fatal events. Furthermore, many of the accidents have nothing to do with the pilots at all-- theyre maintenance issues.
If we're talking about foreign airlines, that introduces many additional issues. Foreign airlines, especially in third world countries, often do not maintain their aircraft or train their pilots to the same standards, and foreign airlines often higher, many less white pilots as a percentage. But in this case, it has nothing to do with the socioeconomic backgrounds of the pilots and has everything to do with the circumstances of the airlines.
In any case, I suspect analyzing airline fatalities as a function of race to be roughly as useful as a dice roll. Certainly, it has very little mapping to hiring Americans from diverse backgrounds into organizations. If he's talking about private pilots, maybe there's something there, but again, it would be really hard to draw conclusions.
A much simpler thing to look at is this. If you agree that there are still a significant number of racist people in the United States, or you agree that people of darker skin tones are more likely to be impoverished as a percentage of their income, then you must admit that for jobs that require significant education, people of those backgrounds are less likely to have that education.
If you also assume that there are some talents, skills, or discipline that allow people to exceed in those jobs ( such as self-control, intelligence, etc), then that means that there are likely a large number of "diamonds in the rough" who simply haven't gotten a chance to shine.
Recruiting into that talent pool, which has much lower competition from your competitors, is a competitive advantage compared to recruiting from a highly competed for, educated talent pool-- provided you are willing to pay the up front training costs associated with a less educated pool of recruits.
It's not political. It's not rocket science. It's smart business.