FAA Diversity: For anybody in denial.....

[32andBelow]

If you fairly compare each process from start to finish I’d bet my third nut that the attrition rate for undergrad > med school > residency > surgeon fellowship is wayyyy higher than OKC > OJT. Speculation though.

They are different beasts so it’s tough to compare pipelines. And I’d also bet that air traffic has a much higher percentage of absolute retards compared to brain surgeons haha

And you can probably train someone to be a brain surgeon via ojt but I don’t think anyone on earth would think that’s a good idea. They say the academy is like an AA degree you do in 3 months. Yet they don’t give a fuck if anyone has ever been successful passing an academic course before. Not to mention we make ourselves look so replaceable when the bar is so low. Make it make sense.

 

[alaskanmike]

And you can probably train someone to be a brain surgeon via ojt but I don’t think anyone on earth would think that’s a good idea. They say the academy is like an AA degree you do in 3 months. Yet they don’t give a fuck if anyone has ever been successful passing an academic course before. Not to mention we make ourselves look so replaceable when the bar is so low. Make it make sense.

I'd say military special forces washout rate is extremely higher than ATC and they pick up the same folks, straight outta high school with some McDonald's part time experience and delivering newspapers; hell, some are college drop outs. They live up to a standard, regardless of race, ethnicity, sex, whatever else you want to throw at it. You either can do it or you can't; no college prep work is going to prove that you are capable in special forces or ATC.

 

[ATCNOMAD]

FAA DEIA Strategic Plan FY2021-2025....

"Nine steps to consider for FAA D&I initiatives:

1) compile data of your workforce;
2) identify needs and/or areas of concern;
3) address policies or practices that affect diversity, equity, and inclusion;
4) identify business objectives;
5) procure buy-in and support from senior-level management;
6) implement initiatives like changes in policies and practices, targeted recruiting, employment-sponsored diversity, equity, and inclusion awareness events;
7) communicate initiatives;
8.)measure and disseminate outcomes; and
9) review and adjust as needs and the workforce change."

Here's just some examples of what im talking about...

-the FAA's Minority Serving Institution Internship program which targets African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans, Native Americans, Women.. virtually any group but white men.

-HBCU initiative program aimed to recruit students into the agency based on racial preference

-Airport Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program... provides preference for FAA/DOT contracts to small business owned by.. yupppp you guessed it... basically anybody but white men.


The legal jargon which underpins these programs is specifically written to skirt the lines of EEO and anti-discrimination laws, but in practice, they provide preference and access based solely on skin/gender. It's effectively college affirmative action for the FAA/DOT... speaking of which.. remember how affirmative action was struck down as unconstitutional because it sought to benefit groups based on race and gender?

***pikachu shocked face***

When it comes to ATC how can DEI even work, matter or make a difference when passing the academy and then making it through OJT is what makes an actual controller. The academy and OJT has nothing to do with DEI. At the most DEI is creating more diversity at the OPPORTUNITY of becoming a controller. For whatever reason that important fact has been completely missed by everyone on this tread lol.

These aren’t my claims, guy. I am simply telling you what the FAA itself has said. "There is a trade-off (adverse impact) between diversity and predicted job performance." ....Tell everyone that you didn't comprehend anything in this thread without telling us "I didn't comprehend anything in this thread."



32andBlow: tHere'S nO fOrCed DivErSitY...

DEI Office: Do i mean nothing to you?

FAA-wf - Sign In ....Plain as day. Page 6. "TARGETED RECRUITMENT."

There are tens of thousands of employees in the FAA besides controllers. They aren't hired like ATC. You are claiming it is impossible under a system of hiring anyone who passes a test...... That's not how everyone is hired you absolute dunce. Internship programs for blacks only. Recruitment opportunities only provided at HBCUs and minority institutions. These are just a couple examples of how the FAA is hiring its engineers, pilots, inspectors, lawyers, computer scientists, doctors, finance specialists, security officers....

You seriously might be the most clueless person on this site.

View attachment 9312

Well in his defense this post is about ATC. And how can DEI even work, matter or make a difference when passing the academy and then making it through OJT is what makes an actual controller. Other jobs like pilots and engineers have to pass training as well. At the end of the day DEI at most adds diversity to the people getting the opportunity at the job. But once the opportunity is there, doing the requirements to really get the job is all based on merit. Getting excepted to BUDS doesn't make you a Navy Seal

 

[PooseMaGoose]

When it comes to ATC how can DEI even work, matter or make a difference when passing the academy and then making it through OJT is what makes an actual controller. The academy and OJT has nothing to do with DEI. At the most DEI is creating more diversity at the OPPORTUNITY of becoming a controller. For whatever reason that important fact has been completely missed by everyone on this tread lol.

“More diversity of opportunity.”

No such opportunistic limitations exist based on an applicants race, sex, religion, etc.. to say anything else is conflating race (etc.) with actual factors that create/limit opportunity in any area of life.. like socioeconomic status.

All else being equal, a kid raised by a family that is situated in an economically advantageous position will almost always have additional opportunity than a kid raised in a lower income setting. But to conflate racial lines with economic lines (or any other classification that ACTUALLY matters) is not only racist, it’s incorrect. Races are not synonymous to socioeconomic rungs.

Any black kid raised in a family that has two parents at home and strong income will have more opportunity in life than any white kid who was raised by a single parent on welfare.

I’m all for providing access to those who need it, but to pretend that those lines should be drawn racially vs socioeconomically is just pathetic… but the racial grift is just far too profitable for those in power, it’s not going anywhere.

So I’ll forever be asking, why does it matter to have the “correct amount” of each race working as controllers (whatever the fuck that means)? We do not institutionally or legally restrict who can get this job outside of the standard security/medical/age requirements. 100% of low income people could use more access to opportunity. You cannot say the same about any race. So what the hell are we doing?

 

[Spoony90]

For what it’s worth, I’m full blooded and first generation Mexican and I’ve definitely been targeted and bullied at work. So I don’t see why they want us so bad. To have someone to treat bad?

 

[Phillytroll69]

“More diversity of opportunity.”

No such opportunistic limitations exist based on an applicants race, sex, religion, etc.. to say anything else is conflating race (etc.) with actual factors that create/limit opportunity in any area of life.. like socioeconomic status.

All else being equal, a kid raised by a family that is situated in an economically advantageous position will almost always have additional opportunity than a kid raised in a lower income setting. But to conflate racial lines with economic lines (or any other classification that ACTUALLY matters) is not only racist, it’s incorrect. Races are not synonymous to socioeconomic rungs.

Any black kid raised in a family that has two parents at home and strong income will have more opportunity in life than any white kid who was raised by a single parent on welfare.

I’m all for providing access to those who need it, but to pretend that those lines should be drawn racially vs socioeconomically is just pathetic… but the racial grift is just far too profitable for those in power, it’s not going anywhere.

So I’ll forever be asking, why does it matter to have the “correct amount” of each race working as controllers (whatever the fuck that means)? We do not institutionally or legally restrict who can get this job outside of the standard security/medical/age requirements. 100% of low income people could use more access to opportunity. You cannot say the same about any race. So what the hell are we doing?

Obviously there's a logic hole and nobody is going anywhere in this conversation. Admittedly, you've agreed socioeconomic factors should be considered. I agree. Socioeconomically, statistically, factually, minorities are more likely to be in this group. You say it's racist because, I'm assuming, it leaves out whites. I can actually concede your point, it should be aimed at underprivileged socio economic groups. (A majority of which are minorities)I've attached a racist image of slave stuff for you to look at too. Hugely racist by your standards.

Here are some racist facts, blacks are poorer then whites (meaning socioeconomically we should be aiming towards them)

Household income percentage distribution by race and ethnicity 2022 | Statista

In 2022, about 23.1 percent of Asian private households in the U.S.

www.statista.com

heres life in some parts of the us, recently

But I don't want to think I've missed your question and am dodging your point so lets break it down-

So I’ll forever be asking, why does it matter to have the “correct amount” of each race working as controllers (whatever the fuck that means)?
Because it was decided things aren't even, and your boss decided it and the facts matter, not your feelings.

We do not institutionally or legally restrict who can get this job outside of the standard security/medical/age requirements.
This came into practice into 1964, about 60 years ago. Racist sons and daughters still lurk around every agency and there are still tons of discrimination (Significant EEOC Race/Color Cases(Covering Private and Federal Sectors))


100% of low income people could use more access to opportunity. You cannot say the same about any race. So what the hell are we doing?
We are using facts that blacks are poorer than whites due to numbers of years where one race didn't get paid for their work.

between my links I've now covered dinosaurs, tectonic plate theory, American history, but, at the end of the day the simple fact is you won't go to court because you don't care that much (even if you're right)

 

[Bandit117]

When it comes to ATC how can DEI even work, matter or make a difference when passing the academy and then making it through OJT is what makes an actual controller. The academy and OJT has nothing to do with DEI. At the most DEI is creating more diversity at the OPPORTUNITY of becoming a controller. For whatever reason that important fact has been completely missed by everyone on this tread lol.

You’re basing that on the belief that standards are upheld equally when it’s well documented that they are in fact, not.

 

[ATCNOMAD]

“More diversity of opportunity.”

No such opportunistic limitations exist based on an applicants race, sex, religion, etc.. to say anything else is conflating race (etc.) with actual factors that create/limit opportunity in any area of life.. like socioeconomic status.

All else being equal, a kid raised by a family that is situated in an economically advantageous position will almost always have additional opportunity than a kid raised in a lower income setting. But to conflate racial lines with economic lines (or any other classification that ACTUALLY matters) is not only racist, it’s incorrect. Races are not synonymous to socioeconomic rungs.

Any black kid raised in a family that has two parents at home and strong income will have more opportunity in life than any white kid who was raised by a single parent on welfare.

I’m all for providing access to those who need it, but to pretend that those lines should be drawn racially vs socioeconomically is just pathetic… but the racial grift is just far too profitable for those in power, it’s not going anywhere.

So I’ll forever be asking, why does it matter to have the “correct amount” of each race working as controllers (whatever the fuck that means)? We do not institutionally or legally restrict who can get this job outside of the standard security/medical/age requirements. 100% of low income people could use more access to opportunity. You cannot say the same about any race. So what the hell are we doing?

You can DEFINITELY conflate racial lines with economic lines, and blacks are the worst argument you could have used. 17% of blacks live below the poverty line when it's only 8% for whites. Depending on how far back you go, 60%-70% of black children grow up in single family homes while 25%-35%% of white children grow up in single parent homes. I would add the staggering incarceration %'s but I don't want to get too far off topic. The crazy thing is the black poverty level is actually the lowest it's been in years if not ever, and it's due to the kind of opportunities DEI has created. Now I agree a kid raised by a family that is situated in an economically advantageous position will almost always have additional opportunity than a kid raised in a lower income setting. That is the entire point, lol. To help the kids that are overwhelmingly statistically being raised with less advantages.

You’re basing that on the belief that standards are upheld equally when it’s well documented that they are in fact, not.

1 that's been an issue for YEARS and way before DEI
2 That's a standards issue, not a DEI issue.

 

[Bandit117]

1 that's been an issue for YEARS and way before DEI
2 That's a standards issue, not a DEI issue.

It becomes a DEI issue when even local leadership is afraid to apply the same standards to people because their skin color or sex is different.

There’s been some shady stuff in the recent past as well. I’ve seen academy washouts get unsolicited tech ops job offers they didn’t apply for because their race or sex was what the agency wanted after they failed their PVs or basics. The white males in the class who washed didn’t get any job offer and there was no talk about any retention or lateral movement for them. The most egregious was a Hispanic female. She was nice, but not very bright. She couldn’t understand how a plane could fly without the pilots looking out the windows. Crashed and burned at the academy, in basics. They told her she would come back a few months later for a tech ops indoc class. I’m sure someone who can’t understand the abstract of how an airplane could navigate will be perfectly able to understand electronic theory.

 

[PooseMaGoose]

Obviously there's a logic hole and nobody is going anywhere in this conversation. Admittedly, you've agreed socioeconomic factors should be considered. I agree. Socioeconomically, statistically, factually, minorities are more likely to be in this group. You say it's racist because, I'm assuming, it leaves out whites. I can actually concede your point, it should be aimed at underprivileged socio economic groups. (A majority of which are minorities)I've attached a racist image of slave stuff for you to look at too. Hugely racist by your standards.

Here are some racist facts, blacks are poorer then whites (meaning socioeconomically we should be aiming towards them)

Household income percentage distribution by race and ethnicity 2022 | Statista

In 2022, about 23.1 percent of Asian private households in the U.S.

www.statista.com

heres life in some parts of the us, recently

But I don't want to think I've missed your question and am dodging your point so lets break it down-

So I’ll forever be asking, why does it matter to have the “correct amount” of each race working as controllers (whatever the fuck that means)?
Because it was decided things aren't even, and your boss decided it and the facts matter, not your feelings.

We do not institutionally or legally restrict who can get this job outside of the standard security/medical/age requirements.
This came into practice into 1964, about 60 years ago. Racist sons and daughters still lurk around every agency and there are still tons of discrimination (Significant EEOC Race/Color Cases(Covering Private and Federal Sectors))


100% of low income people could use more access to opportunity. You cannot say the same about any race. So what the hell are we doing?
We are using facts that blacks are poorer than whites due to numbers of years where one race didn't get paid for their work.

between my links I've now covered dinosaurs, tectonic plate theory, American history, but, at the end of the day the simple fact is you won't go to court because you don't care that much (even if you're right)

You can DEFINITELY conflate racial lines with economic lines, and blacks are the worst argument you could have used. 17% of blacks live below the poverty line when it's only 8% for whites. Depending on how far back you go, 60%-70% of black children grow up in single family homes while 25%-35%% of white children grow up in single parent homes. I would add the staggering incarceration %'s but I don't want to get too far off topic. The crazy thing is the black poverty level is actually the lowest it's been in years if not ever, and it's due to the kind of opportunities DEI has created. Now I agree a kid raised by a family that is situated in an economically advantageous position will almost always have additional opportunity than a kid raised in a lower income setting. That is the entire point, lol. To help the kids that are overwhelmingly statistically being raised with less advantages.

Every liberal: “minorities can’t make it without help.. so I’m willing to discriminate on the basis of race to fix the issue of racial discrimination.”

This is the soft bigotry of the liberal mind..

1. You don’t view people as equal. (If you did, you would give equal treatment)

2. You don’t think minorities are capable of making it without a handout… thus confirming your unequal view of people on skin color.

3. You’re willing to do EXACTLY what you claim to historically advocate against to artificially install the end result you want (equal outcomes/equity.)


Bottom line:

Let’s assume you get EXACTLY what you wanted with the wave of a wand this very moment. All groups are represented perfectly across all institutions and everyone has equal wealth.. equal outcomes in every aspect. POOF like magic it’s here!!! …guess what. We will wake up the next day and we will immediately have unequal results because PEOPLE MAKE DIFFERENT CHOICES. People choose different paths. People assume different risk levels. People live according to different moral codes thus giving widely different results.

Your utopia of equity is over before it began. The only way forward is to treat people equally under the law regardless of group identity and to expect different end results.

I truly pity people who think like you. Seriously. It must be a mental prison to see fucking EVERYTHING through the lens of race. Hell, you can’t even glance out a window and see individuals with unique thoughts and perspectives… you look out and see members of groups divided by melatonin. What a miserable life.

Come join us sane people over here where we literally don’t give a shit about how you look as long as you can do a good job. It’s amazing.

 

[AB19]

Conservatives act like there hasn't been any racism by the government since slavery ended lmao

 

[32andBelow]

Conservatives act like there hasn't been any racism by the government since slavery ended lmao

They say that democrats did that.

 

[ATCNOMAD]

Every liberal: “minorities can’t make it without help.. so I’m willing to discriminate on the basis of race to fix the issue of racial discrimination.”

This is the soft bigotry of the liberal mind..

1. You don’t view people as equal. (If you did, you would give equal treatment)

2. You don’t think minorities are capable of making it without a handout… thus confirming your unequal view of people on skin color.

3. You’re willing to do EXACTLY what you claim to historically advocate against to artificially install the end result you want (equal outcomes/equity.)


Bottom line:

Let’s assume you get EXACTLY what you wanted with the wave of a wand this very moment. All groups are represented perfectly across all institutions and everyone has equal wealth.. equal outcomes in every aspect. POOF like magic it’s here!!! …guess what. We will wake up the next day and we will immediately have unequal results because PEOPLE MAKE DIFFERENT CHOICES. People choose different paths. People assume different risk levels. People live according to different moral codes thus giving widely different results.

Your utopia of equity is over before it began. The only way forward is to treat people equally under the law regardless of group identity and to expect different end results.

I truly pity people who think like you. Seriously. It must be a mental prison to see fucking EVERYTHING through the lens of race. Hell, you can’t even glance out a window and see individuals with unique thoughts and perspectives… you look out and see members of groups divided by melatonin. What a miserable life.

Come join us sane people over here where we literally don’t give a shit about how you look as long as you can do a good job. It’s amazing.

You are very confused, my friend. No one is saying
"minorities can’t make it without help.. so I’m willing to discriminate on the basis of race to fix the issue of racial discrimination.”

What IS being said is statistics prove that 100s of years of systematic racism has put minorities very, very far behind the power curve in America. So far behind that additional opportunities are needed to help them catch up since they are unfairly behind due to the 100s of years of past racism. It's not viewing minorities as unequal. It's more so understanding that they WERE viewed as unequal in the past, which has now destroyed a large percentage of their present day lives and futures. I agree with you that all groups being represented perfectly across all institutions is unrealistic, I also agree that everyone having equal wealth is unrealistic. But the current gap is also unrealistic. It's not a coincidence that the groups that suffered the most systematic racism are the least successful and the least represented in high earning jobs present day. You can't starve someone for months, then allow them to eat well for a couple days and tell them to run a race against someone who has always been well fed. Also, I DO see individuals for their unique thoughts and perspectives, but I also know history lol. For whatever reason, you downplay the 100s of years of systematic racism and the ripple effect/ domino effect it created that still cripples a large percentage of minority communities till this day

It becomes a DEI issue when even local leadership is afraid to apply the same standards to people because their skin color or sex is different.

There’s been some shady stuff in the recent past as well. I’ve seen academy washouts get unsolicited tech ops job offers they didn’t apply for because their race or sex was what the agency wanted after they failed their PVs or basics. The white males in the class who washed didn’t get any job offer and there was no talk about any retention or lateral movement for them. The most egregious was a Hispanic female. She was nice, but not very bright. She couldn’t understand how a plane could fly without the pilots looking out the windows. Crashed and burned at the academy, in basics. They told her she would come back a few months later for a tech ops indoc class. I’m sure someone who can’t understand the abstract of how an airplane could navigate will be perfectly able to understand electronic theory.

If leadership is afraid to apply the same standards to people because their skin color or sex that's a major leadership problem. Not a DEI problem. You are simply using bad leadership as an excuse. That girl or anyone else who got offered the tech jobs still have to make it through training, or they simply wash out again. Once again DEI is simply giving an opportunity, that's it. I've seen white males wash out and get tech jobs, so what.

 

[RegisteredUser]

You are very confused, my friend. No one is saying
"minorities can’t make it without help.. so I’m willing to discriminate on the basis of race to fix the issue of racial discrimination.”

What IS being said is statistics prove that 100s of years of systematic racism has put minorities very, very far behind the power curve in America. So far behind that additional opportunities are needed to help them catch up since they are unfairly behind due to the 100s of years of past racism. It's not viewing minorities as unequal. It's more so understanding that they WERE viewed as unequal in the past, which has now destroyed a large percentage of their present day lives and futures. I agree with you that all groups being represented perfectly across all institutions is unrealistic, I also agree that everyone having equal wealth is unrealistic. But the current gap is also unrealistic. It's not a coincidence that the groups that suffered the most systematic racism are the least successful and the least represented in high earning jobs present day. You can't starve someone for months, then allow them to eat well for a couple days and tell them to run a race against someone who has always been well fed. Also, I DO see individuals for their unique thoughts and perspectives, but I also know history lol. For whatever reason, you downplay the 100s of years of systematic racism and the ripple effect/ domino effect it created that still cripples a large percentage of minority communities till this day

So we SHOULD give special privileges based on race, is that what you are saying?

 

[dingalings99]

You can DEFINITELY conflate racial lines with economic lines, and blacks are the worst argument you could have used. 17% of blacks live below the poverty line when it's only 8% for whites. Depending on how far back you go, 60%-70% of black children grow up in single family homes while 25%-35%% of white children grow up in single parent homes. I would add the staggering incarceration %'s but I don't want to get too far off topic. The crazy thing is the black poverty level is actually the lowest it's been in years if not ever, and it's due to the kind of opportunities DEI has created. Now I agree a kid raised by a family that is situated in an economically advantageous position will almost always have additional opportunity than a kid raised in a lower income setting. That is the entire point, lol. To help the kids that are overwhelmingly statistically being raised with less advantages.

17% of blacks 8% whites below the poverty line ok roger

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045223

335 million Americans

75.5% are white = 252,925,000 whites

13.6 are black = 45,560,000 blacks

- 17% blacks under poverty line, 17% of 45m is 6,378,400 blacks

- 8% whites under the line, 8% of 252m is 20,160,000 whites

So when are we gonna do this equality of outcome stuff for the whites

I just scrolled down more on the site and saw that the "white alone not Hispanic is
58.9%" , whatever that means but let's do the math anyway

58.9 of 335m Americans and 8% of that number is 15,785,200 whites under the line so...

Note: I am not white

 

[ATCNOMAD]

17% of blacks 8% whites below the poverty line ok roger

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045223

335 million Americans

75.5% are white = 252,925,000 whites

13.6 are black = 45,560,000 blacks

- 17% blacks under poverty line, 17% of 45m is 6,378,400 blacks

- 8% whites under the line, 8% of 252m is 20,160,000 whites

So when are we gonna do this equality of outcome stuff for the whites

I just scrolled down more on the site and saw that the "white alone not Hispanic is
58.9%" , whatever that means but let's do the math anyway

58.9 of 335m Americans and 8% of that number is 15,785,200 whites under the line so...

Note: I am not white

These kind of things are looked at per capita and not by total numbers.

So we SHOULD give special privileges based on race, is that what you are saying?

More like opportunities they would usually not have, and based on being underprivileged. Just happens that due to events throughout our counties history, some races are disproportionately more underprivileged than others.

 

[dingalings99]

These kind of things are looked at per capita and not by total numbers.

Why not? Serious question I am not a math or stats guy. I don't understand how all that works and how a per capita # supersedes raw numbers, especially when you are talking about equity and all that

 

[Somenewguy]

So we SHOULD give special privileges based on race, is that what you are saying?

Listen up jack. I'm fed up with the malarkey.

People who support these programs believe the following:

There are systemic barriers to those in certain groups in this country. Those groups include minorities and women. They also include financially disadvantaged families. These groups all tend to receive LESS opportunities than the historical majority (white males). In addition, non-white and non-male groups have faced significant discrimination in the workplace and community involvement.

The people who support these programs also believe the following:

That we should try to help the disadvantaged groups by giving them more opportunities to succeed. This comes in many different forms - targeted job solicitations, groups/clubs that support awareness and unity, loan programs, etc.

If you're upset that able-bodied white males aren't getting access to the same programs, then you're missing the point in the first place. These people already have an advantage because they are (on average) living through a much different experience. The financial support, social networks, housing, education, policing, and general safety of the white-male community puts one in a better starting position for life.

Some white people get upset because they think that acknowledging that racism exists implies that they are the responsible party. Society isn't trying to hold you accountable for the sins of the past. The attempt being made is an acknowledgement that we are not all starting in the same place, or even traversing the same world. Even so, we should all be given a chance to succeed.

You can say "what about" to individual scenarios but laws are written to help society as a whole and these programs address the overall trends in our country.

To answer your question: Able bodied white males already enjoy special privileges in this country. If you think otherwise it's because you haven't looked at any available information outside of your OANN/mewsmaxxx bubble.

 

[ATCNOMAD]

Why not? Serious question I am not a math or stats guy. I don't understand how all that works and how a per capita # supersedes raw numbers, especially when you are talking about equity and all that

It's a better understanding of how each individual shares in aggregated figures accounting for population size and wealth distribution. To put it simple, another way of saying "per person"

 

[AB19]

Why not? Serious question I am not a math or stats guy. I don't understand how all that works and how a per capita # supersedes raw numbers, especially when you are talking about equity and all that

Would you rather live in a small town where 1% of people get murdered or a city .01% that's the difference. Note the city has 300 murders and the small town has 30