The Failure of FAA Diversity

"FAA Civil Rights" wrote in message
...

Absolutely! When you have an organization(FAA)that promotes people into
management based on their sex or skin color,will not hold you accountable
for poor performance(Unless you are a white male), protects you if you are
a certain sex or skin color, pays you way more than you know or do, gives
you time off to F off and celebrate "Diversity" on the tax payer dime of
course it will attract and keep a "certain" type of person.


The FAA no longer holds white males accountable for poor performance.

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 07:32:30 +0000 (UTC), emboldened by anonymity,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:

True. I took the ATC exam once and thought this terribly unfair. Until I
met the applicants and thought that they didn;t give them nearly
enough...

I can understand your feelings, but is the FAA a charity organization
or a performance based organization? Both you say? If the blanket
test score increases granted veterans and wounded US solders isn't
limited to tests for positions that do not affect flight safety, I see
charity as anathema for performance. There is no question that
charity-based hiring undermines performance, IMO.

Is it appropriate to lower personnel performance standards, that
affect all who fly from airline passengers to airmen, in the name of
charity? IMNSHO, charity is a noble human trait, but charity, and the
emotion upon which it is based, have no place in matters of life and
death that affect millions. As an airman, surely you can appreciate
this.

It would behove the government to find a more appropriate means of
compensating those who have formally served their country, that
wouldn't potentially lower flight safety. When emotion (or religion)
trump pragmatism, the results are often less than optimal.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"FAA Civil Rights" wrote in message
...
Absolutely! When you have an organization(FAA)that promotes people into
management based on their sex or skin color,will not hold you accountable
for poor performance(Unless you are a white male), protects you if you are
a certain sex or skin color, pays you way more than you know or do, gives
you time off to F off and celebrate "Diversity" on the tax payer dime of
course it will attract and keep a "certain" type of person.


The FAA no longer holds white males accountable for poor performance.



Sorry, my mistake. I meant productive white males.The
sycophants and ass kissers are given a free pass.

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 07:32:30 +0000 (UTC), emboldened by anonymity,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:

True. I took the ATC exam once and thought this terribly unfair. Until
I
met the applicants and thought that they didn;t give them nearly
enough...

I can understand your feelings, but is the FAA a charity organization
or a performance based organization? Both you say? If the blanket
test score increases granted veterans and wounded US solders isn't
limited to tests for positions that do not affect flight safety, I see
charity as anathema for performance. There is no question that
charity-based hiring undermines performance, IMO.

Is it appropriate to lower personnel performance standards, that
affect all who fly from airline passengers to airmen, in the name of
charity? IMNSHO, charity is a noble human trait, but charity, and the
emotion upon which it is based, have no place in matters of life and
death that affect millions. As an airman, surely you can appreciate
this.

It would behove the government to find a more appropriate means of
compensating those who have formally served their country, that
wouldn't potentially lower flight safety. When emotion (or religion)
trump pragmatism, the results are often less than optimal.



Oh I didn't mind. Liek i said, the applicants I should have been given
50% extra just for geting their names right. Even then they didn't have
a snowball's chance in hell.

At least the higher score would have made them feel better. Well, at
least the few that could have spelled their names right and realised
that a 52 was abigger number than a 2

seriously, there were some dumb people there.


Bertie

FAA Civil Rights wrote in
:

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"FAA Civil Rights" wrote in message
...
Absolutely! When you have an organization(FAA)that promotes people
into management based on their sex or skin color,will not hold you
accountable for poor performance(Unless you are a white male),
protects you if you are a certain sex or skin color, pays you way
more than you know or do, gives you time off to F off and celebrate
"Diversity" on the tax payer dime of course it will attract and keep
a "certain" type of person.


The FAA no longer holds white males accountable for poor performance.



Sorry, my mistake. I meant productive white males.The
sycophants and ass kissers are given a free pass.


Who wants to start a pool for when this guy ends up on either Fox news or
america's dumbest criminals?

Bertie

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 07:32:30 +0000 (UTC), emboldened by anonymity,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:

True. I took the ATC exam once and thought this terribly unfair. Until I
met the applicants and thought that they didn;t give them nearly
enough...

I can understand your feelings, but is the FAA a charity organization
or a performance based organization? Both you say? If the blanket
test score increases granted veterans and wounded US solders isn't
limited to tests for positions that do not affect flight safety, I see
charity as anathema for performance. There is no question that
charity-based hiring undermines performance, IMO.

Is it appropriate to lower personnel performance standards, that
affect all who fly from airline passengers to airmen, in the name of
charity? IMNSHO, charity is a noble human trait, but charity, and the
emotion upon which it is based, have no place in matters of life and
death that affect millions. As an airman, surely you can appreciate
this.

It would behove the government to find a more appropriate means of
compensating those who have formally served their country, that
wouldn't potentially lower flight safety. When emotion (or religion)
trump pragmatism, the results are often less than optimal.


Government "Diversity" Hiring and "Charity" Hiring should
read this powerful quote.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live
under robber barons than under omnipotent moral
busybodies(Civil Rights and EEO empires).

The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity
may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for
our own good will torment us without end, for they do so
with the approval of their own conscience." ---C.S. Lewis

FAA Civil Rights wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 07:32:30 +0000 (UTC), emboldened by anonymity,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:

True. I took the ATC exam once and thought this terribly unfair.
Until I met the applicants and thought that they didn;t give them
nearly enough...

I can understand your feelings, but is the FAA a charity organization
or a performance based organization? Both you say? If the blanket
test score increases granted veterans and wounded US solders isn't
limited to tests for positions that do not affect flight safety, I
see charity as anathema for performance. There is no question that
charity-based hiring undermines performance, IMO.

Is it appropriate to lower personnel performance standards, that
affect all who fly from airline passengers to airmen, in the name of
charity? IMNSHO, charity is a noble human trait, but charity, and
the emotion upon which it is based, have no place in matters of life
and death that affect millions. As an airman, surely you can
appreciate this.

It would behove the government to find a more appropriate means of
compensating those who have formally served their country, that
wouldn't potentially lower flight safety. When emotion (or religion)
trump pragmatism, the results are often less than optimal.


Government "Diversity" Hiring and "Charity" Hiring should
read this powerful quote.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live
under robber barons than under omnipotent moral
busybodies(Civil Rights and EEO empires).

The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity
may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for
our own good will torment us without end, for they do so
with the approval of their own conscience." ---C.S. Lewis



Lewis Carrol, more like.


Bertie

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 07:32:30 +0000 (UTC), emboldened by anonymity,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:

True. I took the ATC exam once and thought this terribly unfair. Until I
met the applicants and thought that they didn;t give them nearly
enough...

I can understand your feelings, but is the FAA a charity organization
or a performance based organization? Both you say? If the blanket
test score increases granted veterans and wounded US solders isn't
limited to tests for positions that do not affect flight safety, I see
charity as anathema for performance. There is no question that
charity-based hiring undermines performance, IMO.

Is it appropriate to lower personnel performance standards, that
affect all who fly from airline passengers to airmen, in the name of
charity? IMNSHO, charity is a noble human trait, but charity, and the
emotion upon which it is based, have no place in matters of life and
death that affect millions. As an airman, surely you can appreciate
this.

It would behove the government to find a more appropriate means of
compensating those who have formally served their country, that
wouldn't potentially lower flight safety. When emotion (or religion)
trump pragmatism, the results are often less than optimal.

Government "Diversity" Hiring and "Charity" Hiring should
read this powerful quote.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live
under robber barons than under omnipotent moral
busybodies(Civil Rights and EEO empires).

The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity
may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for
our own good will torment us without end, for they do so
with the approval of their own conscience." ---C.S. Lewis

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

I can understand your feelings, but is the FAA a charity organization
or a performance based organization? Both you say? If the blanket
test score increases granted veterans and wounded US solders isn't
limited to tests for positions that do not affect flight safety, I see
charity as anathema for performance. There is no question that
charity-based hiring undermines performance, IMO.

Is it appropriate to lower personnel performance standards, that
affect all who fly from airline passengers to airmen, in the name of
charity? IMNSHO, charity is a noble human trait, but charity, and the
emotion upon which it is based, have no place in matters of life and
death that affect millions. As an airman, surely you can appreciate
this.

It would behove the government to find a more appropriate means of
compensating those who have formally served their country, that
wouldn't potentially lower flight safety. When emotion (or religion)
trump pragmatism, the results are often less than optimal.


It's not the FAA that gives veterans preference points, it's the federal
government.

On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 09:14:05 -0500, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
:

It's not the FAA that gives veterans preference points, it's the federal
government.

Perhaps there should be some exclusions implemented for those jobs
that have potential life-safety impact.