Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

tracingwoodgrains.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 724 posts

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#371

Post by Aurornis »

tremon wrote: post #349
ImJamal wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I deliberately hire whites more than other races nobody would deny that is discrimination. If I deliberately hire more minorities than whites, that is not discrimination?

If your candidate pool is 80% white and you hire 25% minorities, is that discrimination? I have seen people argue (rabidly!) both ways on that question.

Discrimination involves deliberately factoring the applicant's class into hiring decisions.

Discrimination isn't determined by looking at single digit percentage differences in aggregate statistics.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#372

Post by xcrunner529 »

PaulHoule wrote: post #161
s3r3nity wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cheating element is only _part_ of it, and the dominant regime at the time downplayed / ignored the DEI elements because that was supported by their ideology...like a sacred cow. Litigating "disparate impact" cases across any category became a successful attack vector against capitalist structures, and supported by Democratic leadership. This isn't "slapping a new coat of paint for propaganda," but rather exposin…

If I had to blame anything on the Democrats it is this: Valuing competence is one thing. Valuing diversity is another thing. You can have neither, either one, or both. The democrats make a conspicuous show of not valuing competence in addition to making some noises about diversity. Nobody said Barack Obama was an affirmative action case, no, he was one of the greatest politicians of the first quarter-century. On the…

But you also have MTG who literally believes “they” control the weather so I’m not sure exactly why you single democrats out here or even the it to any kind of ideology specific consequence.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#373

Post by xcrunner529 »

dmix wrote: post #357
fallingknife wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not yet. The SC has ruled it illegal for university admissions but it somehow still remains allowed for corporate hiring. Even then, just because the court has ruled on it doesn't mean it will actually stop. The DEI people are snakes and will continue to find more sneaky ways to implement their illegal racist quotas and more newspeak to describe it in a "legal" way.

It’s also still deeply embedded in education. DEI might be less popular in the workforce but in primary and secondary education stuff like lowering standards, ignoring test failures, removing gifted classes, merging special needs classes in mainline, changing classroom conflict resolution to not remove disruptive kids from classrooms, etc are all still going strong and increasing in prevalence. That will have a rippl…

Athletes are the original DEI. And Trump (the president!) didn’t have good grades.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#375

Post by cycomanic »

vladgur wrote: post #273
ryandrake wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the vast number of small and medium sized companies who quietly opened their hiring funnel up to a wider audience, would be considered good implementations. Not all companies reached for quotas and other hamfisted efforts that detractors constantly point to.

DO you have examples of companies whose funnels were not open to "wider audience" prior to DEI? Lets say this century. Tech has been meritocratic for decades with few exceptions.

There are tons of studies that have shown that if your name is sounding like you're from a minority your chances of being invited for an interview are significantly lower. Similar if you include photos.

As a side note, it's quite ironic that engineers often tend to complain about performance metrics and that they are being gamed, not really a good measure of merit..., but the same people turn around and argue that the everything should be a meriocracy.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#376

Post by macrocosmos »

rdtsc wrote: post #298

> The FAA investigated, clearing the NBCFAE and Snow of doing anything wrong in an internal investigation Ah yes, we carefully investigated ourselves and we have not found anything wrong. Thank you for your concern. > Our organization, he said, “wasn’t for Caucasians, it wasn’t for, you know, the white male, it wasn’t for an alien on Mars,” and he confirmed that he provided information “to minimize the competition.”…

You’re upset that reality aligns with the rhetoric? Why not just accept that maybe there is something to the rhetoric?

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#377

Post by ailun »

mistermann wrote: post #331
ailun wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your post added nothing to the conversation except insults though. I would have been interested in hearing an alternative perspective on why GP's post was reductive because as far as I know it's accurate.

>Your post added nothing to the conversation except insults though. You are describing your experience, but stating it as if it is a universal fact. A relevant post from this morning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42946854

I guess I'll save a click for other readers. The post linked is completely unrelated to the subject of this thread. This person isn't interested in real conversation.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#378

Post by snailmailstare »

alcima wrote: post #276
Jimmc414 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when this came to light many years ago it was treated as a cheating and recruitment scandal. But only recently has it been reframed as a DEI issue. Respectfully, thats not accurate. The article actually shows that dei considerations were central to the original changes, not just recent framing. The FOIA requests show explicit discussions about "diversity vs performance tradeoffs" from the beginning. The NBCFAE role…

Was deeply aware of it at the time - was not really a DEI issue even then - it was pure cronyism.

If we step away from the traffic controllers nonsense for a moment, the actual problem sounded like a military pilot to me. It's my understanding that people who have a family line of pilots go into that funnel knowing a specific nepotism related result occurs such that when it comes time to become a commercial pilot you are probably from such a family.

I have no idea if helicopter pilots work the same way or are starting to work the same way, but whenever I see a BS move like this I think that there's probably an opposite interpretation that doesn't fit what their demographic wants to hear.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#379

Post by ivewonyoung »

jmye wrote: post #358
throwaway-blaze wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem here is that the notion that "DEI is just a loose label for having less discrimination in the workforce" is always hidden behind by people who want to use it for more forceful discrimination. It would serve those who truly just want to make sure our society all starts from the same starting line to come up with a new term, one that encompasses meritocracy as the goal along with generous helping hands alon…

> The problem here is that the notion that "DEI is just a loose label for having less discrimination in the workforce" is always hidden behind by people who want to use it for more forceful discrimination. Nah. The problem is dishonest hucksters who want to broadly label everything , regardless of applicability, as bad in an effort to provide their supporters with an easy “anti-X” bumper sticker. DEI advocates came u…

> DEI advocates came up with DEI to do precisely what you suggest - the right wing rebranded it as “everyone hates white men”

Ironic that you're posting this on a story that shows DEI was applied in exactly the opposite way you're claiming, because certain people passed the AT-SAT at higher rates so they had to be eliminated from consideration before they could even take it.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#380

Post by Aurornis »

K0balt wrote: post #68

Working effectively in ATC without burnout hanging over your head constantly favours a certain amount of neurodivergence. A certain kind of delight in detail, delight in predictable progression of system. The overload needs to invigorate , not fatigue. This doesn’t make ATC professionals better people. It doesn’t make them smarter. It doesn’t make them superhuman. It makes them better at a certain specific kind of wo…

Neither the FAA situation nor the article are about neurodiversity.

> We need to stop treating neurodiversity as if it’s a scale from good to bad. It’s just a kind of diversity.

In the situation of hiring people for specific jobs, filtering for a perceived "neurodiversity" would have no scientific basis.

Fortunately, hiring doesn't work this way. The idea is to hire for people who are qualified for and capable of the job, not to try to evaluate questionable proxies like neurodiversity.

Post reply on HN