6 ms·

Their candidate success rate would probably be higher if they weren’t rejecting the vast majority of their most-qualified applicants for reasons that are clearl

Their candidate success rate would probably be higher if they weren’t rejecting the vast majority of their most-qualified applicants for reasons that are clearly pretextual: https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-a-quick-overview https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-...

tristor 2y ago
That's shocking and disturbing, and is pretty much a textbook example of exactly the type of thing opponents to DEI have been referring to for how DEI and Affirmative Action result in a lowering of the bar. They explicitly structured things so that ATC hiring was pre-restricted for non-cognitive (e.g. merit) reasons, and failed out candidates that scored a perfect score on the cognitive test on the basis of their demographics (they weren't minorities).
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- talldayo 2y ago
  ATC (as well as most government jobs) are a real case of "you get what you pay for". When you bring wages down so low that educated engineers don't want to work your job, your options are to lower the qualifications or leave empty seats. DEI might have contributed to this, but we wouldn't be hiring unqualified people in the first place if America could naturally compete for talent. The lesson learned seems to be less about the dangers of diversity and more about how the feds aren't paying the industry rate for professionals.
  - tristor 2y ago
    Did you read the link that I replied to? Because in that link, what I am responding to, it EXPLICITLY says that the FAA changed the ATC selection process to exclude candidates based on demographics (being not diverse) regardless of their aptitude as tested using a standardized and validated cognitive assessment. These were candidates who had already completed multiple years of schooling and explicitly wanted to be ATCs, so you are talking about a pipeline problem which may or may not exist but is irrelevant to the article I am responding to in the link above my comment. Per that article, candidates who accepted the pay terms and wanted to become ATCs were /rejected/ explicitly because they were not minorities or otherwise able to produce a biographical or demographic reason for acceptance, even when they scored a perfect score on the standardized aptitude assessment. If you have something to refute the article the person above me linked, I'd love to see it because I'm incredibly disappointed in what I read about in that article.
    - gamblor956 2y ago
      No, you read a link that says people suing the FAA claim the FAA didn't hire qualified candidates on diversity. Except that none of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit actually bothered to apply for jobs with the FAA (see this blog post from their own legal team crowing about winning a procedural matter over whether they had standing to sue given that they never applied for a job and thus were never actually rejected by the FAA https://mslegal.org/press-releases/mslf-prevails-over-faas-attempt-to-dismiss-brigida-hiring-preference-claim/ https://mslegal.org/press-releases/mslf-prevails-over-faas-a... )... What actually happened was that the FAA invalidated a bunch of AT-SAT[1] scores to align with its new diversity policy, and a bunch of people who barely passed the first time didn't want to re-take the test again and risk failing. So they did the American thing and sued instead. The FAA has not rejected qualified candidates on the grounds of "diversity." And at any rate, the controller in the DC tower last night was hired during the Trump administration and the Blackhawk pilot that caused the crash wasn't the kind of candidate who would have been selected on DEI grounds... [1] it's like the SAT, but for controller jobs instead of college admissions
      - tristor 2y ago
        Perhaps I misunderstood something, but it seems those claims were supported by the evidence of multiple internal memos retrieved via discovery. Another commenter points out that this practice ended in 2018 due to Congress making it illegal, but prior that the FAA had been issuing a biographical assessment as a basis for hiring decisions, exactly as stated in the article. Your own link has the court opinion confirming my understanding of the article. The fact they won the case on procedural grounds is not relevant to the fact the court is opining in the case that the evidence supports a conclusion that the FAA discriminated against "non-diverse" candidates who were otherwise qualified. I think we can all agree that for a role like ATC, the most important thing is that candidates are competent and capable, because it is literally life or death. I have the strong belief that minority candidates are also competent and capable, so discriminatory against "non-diverse" candidates is reprehensible in the strongest terms. I don't think my position here is unusual, unreasonable, or in any way objectionable, and it turns out Congress agreed and made this practice explicitly illegal.
  - nradov 2y ago
    Educated engineers generally don't want to work ATC jobs regardless of pay because they're not engineering jobs. Controllers are operators, not engineers. There are some working controllers with engineering degrees, but almost nothing in typical engineering coursework is directly relevant to the job.
neuronexmachina 2y ago
It's kind of odd that blog post doesn't mention that the biographical assessment it's talking about was only used between 2014 and 2018.
- abecedarius 2y ago
  It says "In 2016, Congress passed Public Law 114-190, which among other things banned the use of biographical assessments as a first-line hiring tool for air traffic controllers."
Auracle 2y ago
Wow. I thought Trump instantly blaming DEI was ridiculous in this case but I’m somewhat reconsidering. How much less of a shortage of ATCs would we have now if it wasn’t for that debacle?
- talldayo 2y ago
  > How much less of a shortage of ATCs would we have now if it wasn’t for that debacle? Probably not much, considering the biggest constraining factor is pay. For example, San Carlos airport is shutting down ATC entirely because they can't pay anyone enough to live locally to the tower: https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/bay-area-airport-losing-air-traffic-controllers-amid-pay-dispute-with-faa/ https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/bay-area-airport-losing-... There would be no problem filling the seats if the compensation was handsome and attractive. But we all know how federal workers are compensated, even when lives are on the line.
  - JamesBarney 2y ago
    My understanding is ATCs are pretty well paid. With most making 140-150, and many making up to 200k. I could see this maybe being an issue in the bay area but outside of that area that pretty good pay.
  - NaOH 2y ago
    Starting salary is US $90,000 along with government benefits.
  - cjaybo 2y ago
    I think a small airport/airfield in one of the most expensive areas of the country is a bit of an exceptional case. In most places ATC employees make pretty competitive/comfortable wages, so I’m not sure this is the only factor.

tristor 2y ago

That's shocking and disturbing, and is pretty much a textbook example of exactly the type of thing opponents to DEI have been referring to for how DEI and Affirmative Action result in a lowering of the bar. They explicitly structured things so that ATC hiring was pre-restricted for non-cognitive (e.g. merit) reasons, and failed out candidates that scored a perfect score on the cognitive test on the basis of their demographics (they weren't minorities).

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
talldayo 2y ago
ATC (as well as most government jobs) are a real case of "you get what you pay for". When you bring wages down so low that educated engineers don't want to work your job, your options are to lower the qualifications or leave empty seats. DEI might have contributed to this, but we wouldn't be hiring unqualified people in the first place if America could naturally compete for talent. The lesson learned seems to be less about the dangers of diversity and more about how the feds aren't paying the industry rate for professionals.
- tristor 2y ago
  Did you read the link that I replied to? Because in that link, what I am responding to, it EXPLICITLY says that the FAA changed the ATC selection process to exclude candidates based on demographics (being not diverse) regardless of their aptitude as tested using a standardized and validated cognitive assessment. These were candidates who had already completed multiple years of schooling and explicitly wanted to be ATCs, so you are talking about a pipeline problem which may or may not exist but is irrelevant to the article I am responding to in the link above my comment. Per that article, candidates who accepted the pay terms and wanted to become ATCs were /rejected/ explicitly because they were not minorities or otherwise able to produce a biographical or demographic reason for acceptance, even when they scored a perfect score on the standardized aptitude assessment. If you have something to refute the article the person above me linked, I'd love to see it because I'm incredibly disappointed in what I read about in that article.
  - gamblor956 2y ago
    No, you read a link that says people suing the FAA claim the FAA didn't hire qualified candidates on diversity. Except that none of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit actually bothered to apply for jobs with the FAA (see this blog post from their own legal team crowing about winning a procedural matter over whether they had standing to sue given that they never applied for a job and thus were never actually rejected by the FAA https://mslegal.org/press-releases/mslf-prevails-over-faas-attempt-to-dismiss-brigida-hiring-preference-claim/ https://mslegal.org/press-releases/mslf-prevails-over-faas-a... )... What actually happened was that the FAA invalidated a bunch of AT-SAT[1] scores to align with its new diversity policy, and a bunch of people who barely passed the first time didn't want to re-take the test again and risk failing. So they did the American thing and sued instead. The FAA has not rejected qualified candidates on the grounds of "diversity." And at any rate, the controller in the DC tower last night was hired during the Trump administration and the Blackhawk pilot that caused the crash wasn't the kind of candidate who would have been selected on DEI grounds... [1] it's like the SAT, but for controller jobs instead of college admissions
    - tristor 2y ago
      Perhaps I misunderstood something, but it seems those claims were supported by the evidence of multiple internal memos retrieved via discovery. Another commenter points out that this practice ended in 2018 due to Congress making it illegal, but prior that the FAA had been issuing a biographical assessment as a basis for hiring decisions, exactly as stated in the article. Your own link has the court opinion confirming my understanding of the article. The fact they won the case on procedural grounds is not relevant to the fact the court is opining in the case that the evidence supports a conclusion that the FAA discriminated against "non-diverse" candidates who were otherwise qualified. I think we can all agree that for a role like ATC, the most important thing is that candidates are competent and capable, because it is literally life or death. I have the strong belief that minority candidates are also competent and capable, so discriminatory against "non-diverse" candidates is reprehensible in the strongest terms. I don't think my position here is unusual, unreasonable, or in any way objectionable, and it turns out Congress agreed and made this practice explicitly illegal.
- nradov 2y ago
  Educated engineers generally don't want to work ATC jobs regardless of pay because they're not engineering jobs. Controllers are operators, not engineers. There are some working controllers with engineering degrees, but almost nothing in typical engineering coursework is directly relevant to the job.

neuronexmachina 2y ago

It's kind of odd that blog post doesn't mention that the biographical assessment it's talking about was only used between 2014 and 2018.

abecedarius 2y ago
It says "In 2016, Congress passed Public Law 114-190, which among other things banned the use of biographical assessments as a first-line hiring tool for air traffic controllers."

Auracle 2y ago

Wow. I thought Trump instantly blaming DEI was ridiculous in this case but I’m somewhat reconsidering. How much less of a shortage of ATCs would we have now if it wasn’t for that debacle?

talldayo 2y ago
> How much less of a shortage of ATCs would we have now if it wasn’t for that debacle? Probably not much, considering the biggest constraining factor is pay. For example, San Carlos airport is shutting down ATC entirely because they can't pay anyone enough to live locally to the tower: https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/bay-area-airport-losing-air-traffic-controllers-amid-pay-dispute-with-faa/ https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/bay-area-airport-losing-... There would be no problem filling the seats if the compensation was handsome and attractive. But we all know how federal workers are compensated, even when lives are on the line.
- JamesBarney 2y ago
  My understanding is ATCs are pretty well paid. With most making 140-150, and many making up to 200k. I could see this maybe being an issue in the bay area but outside of that area that pretty good pay.
- NaOH 2y ago
  Starting salary is US $90,000 along with government benefits.
- cjaybo 2y ago
  I think a small airport/airfield in one of the most expensive areas of the country is a bit of an exceptional case. In most places ATC employees make pretty competitive/comfortable wages, so I’m not sure this is the only factor.