steakvendor
Member
- Messages
- 110
2019 data isn’t complete. It’s missing the December panel
noSo for the first 3 panals for 2017, are they in order of how they were ranked since there are no manager rankings?
It's more of the same of when the last two ranking lists got posted. Experience doesn't matter in the slightest and it's all about who you know. I think once people realized that they figured NCEPT has been working this way all along. All the names are redacted too so it's hard to move forward with EEO violationsI thought this would get more discussion. Add ages of those at the time of selection and the FAA and NATCA would face major problems! (In my opinion that is)
EEO based on what though. It doesn’t prove that those decisions were made based on race, sex, age, etc. just because you think someone is less qualified experience wise doesn’t make it an EEO claimIt's more of the same of when the last two ranking lists got posted. Experience doesn't matter in the slightest and it's all about who you know. I think once people realized that they figured NCEPT has been working this way all along. All the names are redacted too so it's hard to move forward with EEO violations
Exactly. It’s not a promotion so they don’t have to justify their decisions. It would be very difficult to show any of the actual protected criteria being violated. And with the priority placement, even if one was being discriminatory the way they make selections would skew the data. Not every facility gets who they want anymore.EEO based on what though. It doesn’t prove that those decisions were made based on race, sex, age, etc. just because you think someone is less qualified experience wise doesn’t make it an EEO claim
And including ATMs have full discretion on ranking ERRs. The best use for this is seeing how they rank or making sure you have matching paperwork with what is shown here. If you had in for a facility and the email showing receipt as well as a release but it's not listed for an ATM to rank, that'd be a grievanceEEO based on what though. It doesn’t prove that those decisions were made based on race, sex, age, etc. just because you think someone is less qualified experience wise doesn’t make it an EEO claim
Exactly. I’m a full believer that NCEPT is terrible, but EEO claims is a complete overreachAnd including ATMs have full discretion on ranking ERRs. The best use for this is seeing how they rank or making sure you have matching paperwork with what is shown here. If you had in for a facility and the email showing receipt as well as a release but it's not listed for an ATM to rank, that'd be a grievance
Totally depends on the data you have. If you're able to show that over lots of panels ATM's are ranking people in certain ways you'd have a fantastic start on an EEO case. These manager rankings are exactly what would be needed to show that over time, certain criteria are strongly correlated with how applicants are being picked for a given facility.Exactly. I’m a full believer that NCEPT is terrible, but EEO claims is a complete overreach
Prove that their decision was age/sex/race basedTotally depends on the data you have. If you're able to show that over lots of panels ATM's are ranking people in certain ways you'd have a fantastic start on an EEO case. These manager rankings are exactly what would be needed to show that over time, certain criteria are strongly correlated with how applicants are being picked for a given facility.
Again, names are redacted so you'd still need more data but a few years of ranking information is a great sample size.
That's something that is impossible to prove or disprove. It's also not required to win an EEO caseProve that their decision was age/sex/race based