Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




SonicFlyer
06-03-2018, 09:07 PM
This is making the rounds on Fox News...




Tucker Carlson: "Is the FAA sacrificing your safety for diversity?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh9SxqsQdpo


Selfmade92
06-04-2018, 09:08 AM
Well it's fox news, so probably not much to it. :D

badflaps
06-04-2018, 02:21 PM
I remember something about a UND grad not being accepted for training. It escalated from there. On the bright side, when you are in a lengthy hold you can discuss b-ball stats with the controller.:D


EasternATC
06-04-2018, 03:34 PM
Sort of old news, but I guess it took this long to get to trial and get in the news again. I did not watch all of the video, but the story is essentially true.

After the initial ruckus over this several years, the Air Traffic Org. made some corrections. The executive presiding over this was encouraged to retire, and he did.

Hetman
06-04-2018, 04:30 PM
Well it's [any so-called "news" outfit that claims to be unbiased], so probably not much to it. :D

Fixed it for you.:D :D

Packrat
06-05-2018, 06:44 AM
Hey, it Faux News..."Fair and Balanced." They should also add: "Slavishly believed by Trumpies everywhere."

Hetman
06-05-2018, 02:26 PM
Hey, it Faux News..."Fair and Balanced." They should also add: "Slavishly believed by Trumpies everywhere."


Heh. I just won a bet. $1.00. You, Packrat, are nothing if not predictable.

crewman
06-06-2018, 07:47 PM
$5 for me 👍

Dolphinflyer
06-06-2018, 09:06 PM
Fox is beyond worthless.

RhinoPherret
06-09-2018, 03:11 AM
Ah yes. The good old news fan boys that must chime in because they are experts on what is unbiased news.

As I have asked many times over, please enlighten us with your choice of a news source that is not biased so we that we may all become as enlightened as you are.

We must all drink from the same designated (anointed) news source, right?

ShyGuy
06-09-2018, 03:58 AM
BBC World News

Adlerdriver
06-09-2018, 04:56 AM
BBC World News
Nope - try again. Thatís just a more polite version of CNN with an accent. :D

WhistlePig
06-09-2018, 05:26 AM
This is making the rounds on Fox News...




Tucker Carlson: "Is the FAA sacrificing your safety for diversity?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh9SxqsQdpo

The questionairre is only used to help identify candidates that have been overlooked in the legacy search process, it doesn't take the place of an interview or qualifications. Tucker knows this, he also knows how to stoke the fears of his audience for ratings.

METO Guido
06-09-2018, 05:29 AM
BBC World News
As regular BBC viewers are aware, it carries a left centric, socialist bias. It also covers the Mideast & Africa regions far more consistently & intensively than rivals here. Like the others, they rely heavily on opinion based commentary over expensive, boots on the ground, investigative journalism. Mainstream news revenue account execs steering content in a competition for ratings share. Many those still watching traditional news programs increasingly choosing what they want to hear over anything else.

Strip this news item from your prejudice about its source, the story in question has merit.

badflaps
06-09-2018, 06:08 AM
MSNBC lost me with Pruitt's moisturizer lotion, surely there must be more relevant news.:rolleyes:l

tomgoodman
06-09-2018, 06:30 AM
MSNBC lost me with Pruitt's moisturizer lotion, surely there must be more relevant news.:rolleyes:l

He shouldaí used alligator grease, like the Karankawas did here in the swamp. It repels mosquitos, and reporters too. :p

Flightcap
06-10-2018, 07:49 PM
Every news agency out there has bias. We already know there will be bias involved regardless of the agency that reported the story. The question to be asked is whether the story has basis in fact. That's the more relevant discussion.

aiir
06-10-2018, 08:37 PM
I have a twitter account mostly to keep up with politics and world news. Half of my sources are left leaning and the other half are right leaning. This is the best method that Iíve found to remain in the loop without being unconsciously swayed.

Anyone who religiously follows a specific source of news without giving serious thought and consideration to the other side is doing themselves a disservice. I can pick a religious follower of either FOX or CNN off the street and before they utter their first world Iíll know every point of their argument and I can almost bet that not a single original thought will come out of their mouth. They are not keeping up with the news, they are keeping up with a specific viewpoint. It is in fact a sad state of affairs when our news outlets are so polarized, but I guess it is what it is. I blame a lack of education, most people are so uneducated, itís amazing. They do very little reading, therefore those whom are very well read have an easy time swaying them left or right while they sit patiently like a blade of grass waiting for the wind to blow on them.

METO Guido
06-11-2018, 05:42 AM
They are not keeping up with the news, they are keeping up with a specific viewpoint. It is in fact a sad state of affairs when our news outlets are so polarized, but I guess it is what it is. I blame a lack of education, most people are so uneducated, it’s amazing. They do very little reading, therefore those whom are very well read have an easy time swaying them left or right while they sit patiently like a blade of grass waiting for the wind to blow on them.

Troublesome hurdle. How do you report when your dispatch is primarily a PR entertainment piece?

By comparison, something discussed at length in print, the role of the press during the last period of transformational social adjustment (late 60's) makes today's media effort look pretty listless. Bias is present always. But the fight then, IMHO, had less to do with pretentiousness over dogma & ideology than commitment to uncovering the truth, wherever a story went.

kevbo
06-11-2018, 01:10 PM
Very few people like being bewildered, most find it frightening. That is what it takes to learn anything new once you become an adult.

rickair7777
06-11-2018, 02:17 PM
Very few people like being bewildered, most find it frightening. That is what it takes to learn anything new once you become an adult.

That can be very true... if you stop learning and settle into a cognitive rut. If you embrace life-long learning and self-improvement, a new type rating after age 40 (or 60) isn't such a big deal.

AirBear
06-11-2018, 03:36 PM
I used to watch CNN a lot, it's OK but they tend to beat a story to death. And they grossly overuse the "Breaking News" banner. Recently I've started watching "Newsy". More abbreviated news format, they don't over-cover a story:

https://www.newsy.com/

Mostly younger reporters. And they have an "Intelligent Debate" or something like that where a few experts on both sides of an issue have a respectful debate over the issue.

rickair7777
06-13-2018, 01:13 PM
I used to watch CNN a lot, it's OK but they tend to beat a story to death. And they grossly overuse the "Breaking News" banner. Recently I've started watching "Newsy". More abbreviated news format, they don't over-cover a story:

https://www.newsy.com/

Mostly younger reporters. And they have an "Intelligent Debate" or something like that where a few experts on both sides of an issue have a respectful debate over the issue.

Thanks. I've been using NPR after CNN got stuck on the trump soundtrack, but was looking for another outlet to balance things a bit. I've about given up on NY Times, kind of gone off the deep end on some things.

Excargodog
06-13-2018, 02:26 PM
The very ink of history is merely fluid prejudice.

Mark Twain

Glenntilton
06-14-2018, 03:26 AM
Fox is beyond worthless.

Not really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=495&v=vTq0EPQ4LJU

AirBear
06-14-2018, 11:44 AM
Thanks. I've been using NPR after CNN got stuck on the trump soundtrack, but was looking for another outlet to balance things a bit. I've about given up on NY Times, kind of gone off the deep end on some things.

NPR is pretty good, I like listening to their radio stations. And I have their news app on my phone. But they don't have a continuous news channel on TV that I'm aware of.

I agree CNN is 80-90% Trump coverage, but then the President seems to have this "gift" for making himself newsworthy :eek:

tomgoodman
06-14-2018, 12:15 PM
Several years ago, a major network announced a change in their corporate organizational structure: henceforth, the head of the News Department would report to the Vice President, Entertainment.
This was just acknowledging a new reality. :rolleyes:

HIFLYR
06-17-2018, 03:26 PM
The questionairre is only used to help identify candidates that have been overlooked in the legacy search process, it doesn't take the place of an interview or qualifications. Tucker knows this, he also knows how to stoke the fears of his audience for ratings.

Actually it was the first hurdle to get over in the hiring process:

The Federal Aviation Administration says it changed the process and added a personality test, called the Biographical Questionnaire, as the first hurdle in hiring controllers in order to get the best possible job candidates.
https://www.newsday.com/news/nation/faa-s-bid-to-expand-air-traffic-hiring-pool-hits-turbulence-1.11725723

JohnBurke
06-17-2018, 05:16 PM
I agree CNN is 80-90% Trump coverage, but then the President seems to have this "gift" for making himself newsworthy :eek:

It's what happens when the circus is in town.

Vicente
06-20-2018, 12:44 PM
Can confirm federal government always tries to be at the forefront of diversity hiring. Family works in federal government so Iíve seen the offices. Itís been like this since the Kennedy administration.

jDSTJD
06-21-2018, 05:06 AM
I have a twitter account mostly to keep up with politics and world news. Half of my sources are left leaning and the other half are right leaning. This is the best method that Iíve found to remain in the loop without being unconsciously swayed.

Anyone who religiously follows a specific source of news without giving serious thought and consideration to the other side is doing themselves a disservice. I can pick a religious follower of either FOX or CNN off the street and before they utter their first world Iíll know every point of their argument and I can almost bet that not a single original thought will come out of their mouth. They are not keeping up with the news, they are keeping up with a specific viewpoint. It is in fact a sad state of affairs when our news outlets are so polarized, but I guess it is what it is. I blame a lack of education, most people are so uneducated, itís amazing. They do very little reading, therefore those whom are very well read have an easy time swaying them left or right while they sit patiently like a blade of grass waiting for the wind to blow on them.

In my opinion this is the smartest way to approach your news and information intake. I agree that there is a disappointingly high number of people in this country who are not sufficiently educated, at least with respect to the issues being addressed by and through the media, and that goes for the audiences of all of the major news sources. By this I do NOT mean to sound pretentious! I just believe this to be true based on casual conversations I have with people about various issues in which many people only talk in the talking points of the groups that they listen to who happen to promote that person's views, perceptions or feelings on an issue from an instinctual level, rather on the basis of objective facts. They usually cannot explain the underlying reasons for their opinion on an issue. If you do not take the time to actually research issues and learn the subject matter and the history behind the issues being addressed through policy initiatives in order to develop the opinion that you reach, you cannot know whether the policy you choose to support is actually the best policy that will benefit you and others.

I really try to find ways to avoid falling into this category. I watch more CNN then FOX NEWS and MSNBC. Some of MSNBC's commentators go way off the deep end in liberal slant and the same goes for FOX NEWS and their conservative slant but a lot of what Fox puts out there I just can't stomach. I used to rely on CNN for more of a middle ground approach but recently they've gone a little too far to the left as well at times and it just irks me. So I have to make sure I get as much information as I can from various sources to try to reach my own opinions based on my personal level of exposure to the issues, knowledge in general based on my education and common sense. Because of this I can usually sense when a news outlet is just promoting a particular political agenda and not providing objective news. This is why I consider myself a moderate and independent and not blindly loyal to either political party. Neither one of the major political parties offer policies that completely match my points of view on everything and I agree and disagree with various positions taken by both sides. Whichever group's policy position makes the most sense to me is the one I will support. I truly don't understand why more people don't take this approach. I think if they did we would get so many more things done and more people would feel comfortable working with others to accomplish common goals.

Now I hope this post goes through because some of my other ones have not and I spend a lot of time and effort crafting my posts so that they add to the discussion.

kevbo
06-21-2018, 10:36 PM
Chomsky did an interesting study on US corporate media. Now I look more to independent and international sources.

JohnBurke
06-24-2018, 02:12 PM
Fox news tends to appeal to a lower intellect.

Hetman
06-25-2018, 02:35 AM
These days, all news appeals to a lower intellect. Pick your poison.

tomgoodman
06-25-2018, 05:44 AM
Lower intellect is all our planet has these days. Darwin head-faked us. :p

Packrat
06-25-2018, 07:16 AM
Albert Einstein observed that the difference between genius and stupidity is that there are limits to genius. The challenge for the wiser heads of all generations will be to limit the stupidity as we move on.

Hetman
06-25-2018, 08:14 AM
Packrat, I have fussed at you on more than one occasion. I am, however, in complete agreement with both you and the esteemed Mr. Einstein.

As for limiting stupidity: Yah, good luck with that, on both sides of the aisle.

tomgoodman
06-25-2018, 10:47 AM
The challenge for the wiser heads of all generations will be to limit the stupidity as we move on.

But wouldnít that reduce our sales of Brawndo? :D

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kAqIJZeeXEc

jDSTJD
06-26-2018, 06:18 AM
Albert Einstein observed that the difference between genius and stupidity is that there are limits to genius. The challenge for the wiser heads of all generations will be to limit the stupidity as we move on.

This is a wonderful statement by Einstein from an idealistic standpoint but how do we accomplish this from a practical standpoint? Its kind of hard to do this when it's getting more and more common for people to classify those who've tried to educate themselves and others as "elitists". Is there anything that can be done to turn this ship around or are we just stuck with yelling at the television?

crewdog
06-30-2018, 01:17 AM
No. Carlson is hyping a problem from 2014 that was fixed in 2015 and improved on in 2016, WSJ ran an editorial a couple days later, and the right wingnut machine didn't fact check the story and just repeated it as gospel.

But if they said the problem had been fixed, they'd be nothing for you to be outraged about and get distracted from what's really going on.




Op Ed submission from NATCA President Paul Rinaldi to the Wall Street Journal:

In his article “The Airport Control Tower Is No Place for Racial Redress” (The Wall Street Journal, June 5, 2018), Jason Riley, wrongly suggests that the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) current air traffic controller (ATC) hiring process is making the U.S. National Airspace System unsafe by prioritizing racial diversity over the safety of the flying public. Mr. Riley argues that by implementing a screening test known as the Biographical Questionnaire (BQ) or Biographical Assessment, the FAA introduced “potentially dangerous hiring procedures” in order strike a better “racial balance.” Nothing could be further from the truth.


U.S. air traffic controllers do an amazing job managing the world’s busiest, most complex airspace and are one of the primary reasons why we are enjoying the safest period in aviation history. Aviation safety is our number one priority.


I am very familiar with the FAA’s BQ. After FAA’s initial implementation of the BQ in 2014, the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA), the union that represents air traffic controllers, worked with the FAA to validate the BQ on the incumbent workforce in 2015. That second iteration of the BQ is the initial screening test that was designed to compare common personality traits that controller applicants share with the current ATC workforce. Once applicants pass the BQ, they still must undergo in-depth FAA review and pass a separate aptitude test known as the Air Traffic Skills Assessment (AT-SA). Unlike the BQ, which is biographical in nature, the Skills Assessment is a cognitive aptitude test that vigorously tests an applicant’s ability to perform the role of a controller.


If applicants pass the BQ and the AT-SA, as well as a thorough medical screening and security investigation, they then must successfully complete four months of initial qualification training at the FAA Academy in Oklahoma City. Historically, only about half of all candidates who make it to the Academy are successful. Finally, those who are successful at the Academy must complete two to three years of on-the-job training at an air traffic control facility to become fully certified. Only about 80-percent of ATC trainees successfully complete this on-the-job training.


As a result of this extensive testing, screening, and training process, controllers are some of the most highly-vetted, highly-skilled, highly-trained professionals within the nation’s workforce. NATCA is proud to represent these controllers and the many other aviation safety professionals throughout the federal government and private sector.
Mr. Riley’s article also argued that the FAA’s revised hiring practices stopped giving hiring preference to applicants with degrees from air traffic collegiate training initiative (CTI) schools or military experience. While that may have been true for a time, that is no longer the case. In 2016, NATCA worked with members of Congress to pass bipartisan legislation that: (1) creates a separate hiring pool among CTI graduates and military veterans; and (2) exempts applicants from taking the BQ if they have prior air traffic controller experience, graduated from a CTI school, or are military veterans. That same legislation also provided a maximum entry age-waiver and clean slate path for all applicants with prior controller experience, CTI graduates, and military veterans to reapply if they were initially passed over by the FAA in its February 2014 vacancy announcement, which included the original BQ.


Our union takes controller hiring issues very seriously. U.S. air traffic controller staffing levels have reached a 29-year low of fully certified controllers. One of the top issues on which NATCA advocates with the FAA and members of Congress is improving ATC staffing. We also continue to advocate for a stable, predictable funding stream for the FAA in order to adequately support ATC services, staffing, hiring and training, modernization, preventative maintenance, and critical infrastructure improvements.


Claims that any of the men and women doing this essential and challenging work are putting public safety at risk – because of FAA hiring processes or any other reason – wrongly and unfairly malign the reputations of these great aviation safety professionals. The American flying public can take comfort in knowing that U.S. air traffic controllers are second to none in doing the work they do to keep the U.S. National Airspace System safe.







From the Team Update today:
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
Last Friday evening, and again on Monday evening, there were Fox News segments on the FAA's 2014 air traffic controller hiring changes. Those were followed by a Wall Street Journal editorial on the same subject. All three asserted that the FAA's revised hiring process has made the National Airspace System (NAS) unsafe by prioritizing racial diversity over the safety of the flying public. However, what has been lost (or intentionally omitted) in each piece is the fact that the FAA's hiring processes have changed again since that shift occurred in 2014. Although NATCA is not involved in the hiring of air traffic controllers, we raised concerns with the FAA when it expunged a list of CTI graduate applicants and instituted the biographical assessment/questionnaire (BA/BQ).



Approximately a year before changing its hiring process the first time, we received a briefing from the FAA on a Barrier Analysis it had conducted. The Barrier Analysis concluded that there were barriers in place that made it more difficult for minorities to make it through the hiring process. Two examples of barriers that were identified were: (1) the phrasing of questions on the AT-SAT, the entrance exam at the time, and how that test was being scored; and (2) that the Centralized Selection Panels (CSPs) were inconsistent.


Although NATCA did not oppose seeking to remove the identified barriers, we strongly opposed the FAA expunging the approximately 3000 ATC applicants who were already in the pipeline and who would have been part of the next scheduled CSP. The FAA determined that those applicants would need to go through a new hiring process.



The FAA's new hiring process for the Feb. 10, 2014, announcement included:
No interviews or selection panels;
A biographical assessment before the AT-SAT;
The AT-SAT (while the FAA developed a revised test), but only for those who passed the biographical assessment;
National hiring and placement; and
Facility assignment upon Academy graduation.



Part of the FAA's new process included the biographical assessment/questionnaire (BA/BQ), which applicants must pass in order to proceed to the AT-SAT. The AT-SAT has now been replaced by the Air Traffic Skills Assessment test (AT-SA). NATCA had neither seen nor heard of the BA/BQ until the 2014 vacancy announcement. When we asked the FAA leadership about this new test, they indicated that they needed a test to narrow the applicant pool, because they expected large numbers of applications due to the lack of hiring in 2013 as a result of sequestration. They added that they did not have the resources to process packages or administer the AT-SAT to all applicants. Their expectations about the applicant pool proved correct. The FAA received over 28,500 applications during the Feb. 2014 announcement.



The primary issue for NATCA, at the time, was the validity of the test, when more than 26,000 of the applicants (about 92 percent) did not pass the BA/BQ. Many qualified applicants had been eliminated. Many who failed were experienced controllers from the Federal Contract Tower program (FCTs), prior FAA controllers, military controllers, pilots, and CTI graduates. NATCA's concern was that the test had not been validated on the incumbent workforce, and we raised our concerns with the integrity of the test to the FAA.



Although the FAA would not eliminate the BA/BQ from its hiring process, we strongly encouraged leadership to improve the test and have a sample of the current workforce validate it. They agreed to do that for the 2015 vacancy announcement, and we saw a much better passage rate as a result.



The FAA continues to set its own hiring policies based on many factors, including its obligations under pertinent laws. Although NATCA is not involved in those decisions, we always have maintained that the FAA should hire the most qualified candidates and place them in facilities where they have the highest likelihood of success during their training.
Despite validating the BA/BQ on the incumbent workforce, we still had major concerns with the FAA's inability to meet its hiring goals between 2011 and 2015, and its unwillingness to maximize the throughput capacity at the Academy in Oklahoma City. We raised our collective voice louder about staffing as our facility staffing levels continued to deteriorate. The FAA was not yet moving quickly enough to hire replacements for the growing number of retirement-eligible controllers, nor improve the placement and transfer processes for movement between facilities.



In the fall of 2015, NATCA took this issue to the media and to Congress by asking for and participating in a roundtable discussion with the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee (T&I). At that point, the FAA had not met its hiring goal for 5 consecutive years and was at a 27-year low of CPCs.



Since that time, the FAA has started moving in the right direction and has worked to determine why it was not meeting its hiring goals. The FAA opened an experienced controller vacancy announcement on Dec. 21, 2015, and has continued to do so in 2016, 2017, and 2018. The FAA also has consistently posted an all sources vacancy announcement each year since 2014. FAA leadership also assembled a "tiger team" from within the Agency including members from FAA Finance, HR, Medical, Security, and the ATO to review, and then mitigate or eliminate bottlenecks in the hiring process. The FAA and NATCA also collaboratively developed and implemented a process for moving experienced controllers from low- and mid-level facilities to higher-level facilities (NCEPT).


This was a good start to the much-needed increased focus on hiring and placement, but we continued to recommend that the FAA change the BA/BQ or eliminate it altogther. The FAA disagreed and continued administering the BA/BQ.



As a result, just prior to the NATCA in Washington (NiW) event in 2016, NATCA was able to get H.R. 5292 "Air Traffic Controller Hiring Improvement Act of 2016" introduced by Reps. Carlos Curbelo (R-FL-26) and Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY-18). H.R. 5292 was broadly-supported, bipartisan legislation that changed the hiring process by exempting CTI students, military veterans, and experienced controller candidates from the BA/BQ. The NiW attendees and NATCA's Government Affairs staff, during visits and followup with members of Congress, secured over 260 co-sponsors on the bill. Due to this strong support, we were able to incorporate the language in H.R. 5292 into H.R. 636, "FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016" (Pub. L. 114-190, sec. 2106).



H.R. 636 also included language that increased the maximum entry age from 31 to 35 for experienced controllers and granted them preferential consideration. Finally, the law allowed applicants who were disqualified under the February 10, 2014, announcement because of their BA/BQ score to reapply on or before Dec. 31, 2017, and provided that group an entry age waiver. There is currently a pending lawsuit concerning the FAA's changes to its hiring process in 2014.



Today, NATCA remains engaged at all levels on the issue of hiring and placement, as controller staffing continues to be a major challenge and one of our primary concerns at both the national and local levels. We have accepted several invitations to testify before Congress on issues related to staffing and stable, predictable funding, including before the House T&I Subcommittee on Aviation for a hearing titled "A Review of Federal Aviation Administration's Air Traffic Controller Hiring, Staffing, and Training Plans" on June 15, 2016.



As the FAA has started to meet its modest hiring targets, and staffing levels appear to be leveling-off, we are concentrating on improving NCEPT and training at both the Academy and within facilities in order to improve staffing throughout the NAS.


The next general public (all sources) vacancy announcement is scheduled to be open on or about June 27, 2018. We will disseminate that information far-and-wide once it is posted.




In solidarity,
Paul Rinaldi, NATCA President
Trish Gilbert, NATCA Executive Vice President"

kevbo
06-30-2018, 09:54 PM
I wish mechanics could get that kind of attention from the FAA and congress. These guys are trying to gut the existing training and experience requirement. Industry wants US based mechanics on par with their South American peers.