Hacker News Reader

Comment by rayiner | Hacker News Reader

What makes you think this wasn’t indicative of how the agency was run?

The test was shut down because it was obvious and egregious: https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-.... But the people who designed it didn’t resign.

View on HN

Innuendo is a weak argument. Show evidence for your claims; it is not sufficient to demand other people somehow prove your feelings are wrong.

The evidence is shortages and safety incidents and that hiring scandal. Now we're able to use instinct and "innuendo" (as you call it) to find more rot

But what evidence is there that the shortage was caused by those 'DEI' policies? For example, in 2013 the FAA Academy was shut down for most of the year (April - December) due to the sequester. They had planned to hire more than 1300 controllers that year but hired fewer than 600.

Additionally, part of the changes that brought along the biographical questionnaire had another major change: they opened up positions to the general public--meaning a candidate didn't need to go through one of the college-affiliated programs anymore. However, that also meant that people had to find their way through the on-boarding process, which at least initially was not well developed and many candidates failed to complete the necessary steps to move the process along.

I'm arguing that DEI/"biographical" standards are indicative of greater rot. The one and only priority of the FAA should be the safe and efficient operation of our nation's airways.

That we would sacrifice any amount of safety/efficiency in pursuit of other goals is a major problem.

I also apply this thinking to other fed gov programs (eg NSF, DoD, etc)

Edit: in other words, how many lives should we sacrifice in our civilian air travel to achieve equity?

I don’t agree with you that safety was sacrificed in the name of diversity or equity.

We sacrificed those lives to save money. End of story.

Encouraging talented people from underrepresented or marginalised groups to apply, for example through DEI programs, will help find the best candidates to ensure safe and efficient operation.

But that’s not what they were doing. They gerrymandered a biographical test to achieve a particular racial balance.

What you’re describing is the motte of DEI. And that’s great. But it often turns into the bailey of “racial preferences or quotas.” Which is illegal.

You need to demonstrate a causal connection.

How do you not know that? Where did you go to high school?

While you conduct those studies the adults in the room will go get things done

I highly doubt adults use "instinct" as an accessory to the scientific method.

Not for the laboratory, but yes for running complex operations in the real world. E.g. logistics, war, agriculture

What evidence have you that it was a present problem?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com