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

41–50 of 724 posts

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#41

Post by scott_w »

aydyn wrote: post #36
scott_w wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then maybe you should see how it’s done in other countries and companies. I’ve worked on hiring and we’ve never once lowered our standards just to get in a black candidate. What I’ve seen done is conscious outreach to increase diversity of applicants, changing language to increase applications from women, blind reviews where you can’t see the name or details of the applicant (to minimise subconscious bias). All of th…

[flagged]

Since your response is to call me a liar, I won’t dignify the rest of your comment with a thoughtful reply.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#42

Post by spectraldrift »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #35
spectraldrift wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's focus on the article and evidence rather than personal details or dismissive labels. Personal attacks don't add to the discussion and go against HN guidelines for civil and substantive debate.

You are right. My bad. Please disregard the first line. The tapes thing still holds, tho. They have tapes. Care to comment on those?

I disagree with the actions of the rogue employee who leaked those instructions, that's clearly wrong and illegal, and it's right to call that out. However, I believe there is some misunderstanding because sharing those answers doesn’t mean the FAA lowered the bar. What happened was akin to someone unethically telling people how to cheat to get an interview referral at google- yet the actual subsequent qualification process, the rigorous training and certification, including the AT-SAT remained unchanged. The FAA still demands the same high standards from all candidates once they enter the pool.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#43

Post by garbagewoman »

gundmc wrote: post #28
spectraldrift wrote: post #5

The article presents a dramatic narrative that implies the FAA deliberately lowered its hiring standards by replacing the traditional system with a biographical questionnaire. It’s clear from the account that many qualified CTI graduates (note: CTI schools are third parties) were unfairly filtered out from the applicant pool, and there’s documented evidence of a cheating scandal that casts further doubt on the proces…

It's less about lowering standards and more about artificially disqualifying thousands of qualified candidates based on their race.

if people who have been historically quantifiably discriminated against and disqualified based on that discrimination, how can that imbalance be corrected?

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#45

Post by aydyn »

scott_w wrote: post #41
aydyn wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Since your response is to call me a liar, I won’t dignify the rest of your comment with a thoughtful reply.

I didnt call you a liar, I am claiming that people are not always truthful to themselves. Purposeful ignorance is an easy out.

For example, you made a factually incorrect claim about blind hiring, and its considerably easier to ignore that since addressing it devastates your larger point.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#46

Post by widowlark »

garbagewoman wrote: post #43
gundmc wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's less about lowering standards and more about artificially disqualifying thousands of qualified candidates based on their race.

if people who have been historically quantifiably discriminated against and disqualified based on that discrimination, how can that imbalance be corrected?

By helping to make them qualified to pass the tests.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#48

Post by jsnell »

spectraldrift wrote: post #5

The article presents a dramatic narrative that implies the FAA deliberately lowered its hiring standards by replacing the traditional system with a biographical questionnaire. It’s clear from the account that many qualified CTI graduates (note: CTI schools are third parties) were unfairly filtered out from the applicant pool, and there’s documented evidence of a cheating scandal that casts further doubt on the proces…

How many people (in absolute and relative terms) from each cohort passed/failed the training program and how long did they take to do so? Did the numbers change with the two policy changes described in the article?

If there was no change (or an increase) in the absolute numbers of passing graduates, that would support what you're saying. If there was a drop in the absolute numbers, it implies that there's at the very least fewer competent controllers. (And changes in the relative numbers tell us about whether the efficiency of the program changed.)

Given the litigation and FOIA requests around this, it seems like this data should be floating around, and should be fairly conclusive for one side.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#49

Post by pjc50 »

scott_w wrote: post #6

This is a truly excellent article and shines a light on a real problem and how it affects people in a real way. It’s an example of something that I’d seen rumblings of in left leaning media: that DEI was being implemented in the laziest and stupidest possible ways (though the ire was mostly directed at marketing efforts by corporations). A story of a smaller, not that harmful, example of this laziness and stupidity:…

> that DEI was being implemented in the laziest and stupidest possible ways

This is .. certainly something that might be happening, but it's also something that a lot of people are lying about. It's become increasingly difficult to find out what actually happened once it's been filtered through media, social media, activists, and algorithmic propaganda.

What happens if every single instance of "DEI overreach" is overreported, but incidents of actual racism aren't?

> slammed by left leaning media for taking positions to address the public’s concerns in a way that’s more thoughtful that how the Tories were handling it, as the far right in the country has toxified the issue for them.

Again, something a lot of people are lying or selectively reporting about. Which is why it's become toxic in the first place. You could occasionally see the same people who were complaining about Rotherham not being investigated complain when other allegations of sexual assault were being investigated ("cancel culture"). Or not investigated, such as the Met police rapist.

Investigations of the form "what actually happened here, who was actually responsible, what should have been done differently, and what could be done differently in the future" simply get destroyed by very loud demands for racially discriminatory violence, culminating in rioters trying to burn people alive in a hotel.

Re: The FAA’s Hiring Scandal

#50

Post by p3rls »

bamboozled wrote: post #47
ars wrote: post #13

[flagged]

Trump was also likely referring to the female pilot of the military helicopter. His new head of the military doesn't think women should be in active duty roles, so this would make sense.

Are you thinking of frontline roles? No active duty women would be absurd, but I am not familiar with this Hegseth or whatever his name is I suppose it's possible
Post reply on HN