Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Rep. Angie Craig drops college requirement for staffers

kare11.com

11–20 of 314 posts

Re: U.S. Rep. Angie Craig drops college requirement for staffers

#11

Sort of related, ontario is dropping university requirements for police: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ontario-eliminating-edu... I wonder if it's coincidence or the start of a trend back to sanity about job qualifications. Ironically, by becoming almost ubiquitous, university education also becomes irrelevant.

Police should definitely be more highly educated, we see the result of them not being so in the US

Re: U.S. Rep. Angie Craig drops college requirement for staffers

#12
post #7

[flagged]

> Don't even need to show a birth certificate Fun fact: Trump rode birtherism all the way to the presidency, then never showed his own birth certificate.

Don't forget the funnest fact: His taxes. But he did submit a very clean bill of health from his primary physician!

Re: U.S. Rep. Angie Craig drops college requirement for staffers

#13

Sort of related, ontario is dropping university requirements for police: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ontario-eliminating-edu... I wonder if it's coincidence or the start of a trend back to sanity about job qualifications. Ironically, by becoming almost ubiquitous, university education also becomes irrelevant.

AKA: If everyone is super, then nobody is

[flagged]

Re: U.S. Rep. Angie Craig drops college requirement for staffers

#16
post #10

It's such a silly requirement. One of the few local government jobs I tried to applied for denied me immediately because I don't have a degree. The requirement is built on top of a decades-long lawsuit about political patronage, where agencies are required to write very explicit hiring rules. I imagine modifications to the hiring rules for college degree requirements would require a lot of legal review before they ma…

Personally, I found local government east to get into. When I worked for a state government it was easy as hell to get (but compensation was abysmal in a rather poor state)

But man federal jobs. I don’t think I’ve ever seen as good an example of choosing beggars. There are even jobs I’d be 100% willing to take the massive paycut for, but I will never qualify because I don’t satisfy the bureaucratic box tickers.

Re: U.S. Rep. Angie Craig drops college requirement for staffers

#18
post #9

I've never heard any justification for having "college education" as a job requirement. Or at least no justification that didn't amount to "keep out people who aren't like us", or "pretend to be competent", or "posture as exclusive".

A college degree is a signaling mechanism that you are willing to stick it out until the end in a large bureaucratic environment and not quit.

An Ivy League degree is a signal that “you’re one of us”.

Re: U.S. Rep. Angie Craig drops college requirement for staffers

#19

Sort of related, ontario is dropping university requirements for police: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ontario-eliminating-edu... I wonder if it's coincidence or the start of a trend back to sanity about job qualifications. Ironically, by becoming almost ubiquitous, university education also becomes irrelevant.

I don't think there's anything sane about the Police reducing their job requirements when we see how ripe for abuse the position is and how unstable it has become in the US based on similar reductions.

I also don't really understand how university education is "almost ubiquitous"; I see that the prevalence of Bachelor's degrees amongst adults is under 40%. Is the claim that the demographic of 21-32 would have a percentage like 70% or what?

Re: U.S. Rep. Angie Craig drops college requirement for staffers

#20
University education has a been a "baseline" to determine qualified candidates. It also sorta implies broadened horizons, overall mature thought process, and several other qualities that are desirable the advisors/staffers.

What other alternatives exists to University education that impart the same level of knowledge and understanding to an individual that can be consistently measured?

If education is expensive, then making it less expensive seems to be the natural solution than eliminating its requirement. Seems this is another virtue signaling in the name of equity that is taking the country back than forward. Reminds me of UCs' eliminating SAT in the name of equity, or how Palo Alto and Culver City (both in California) eliminated AP (Advanced Placement) courses because not everyone can take those.

Post reply on HN