USA Air Traffic Controllers - Still safe to travel to the USA?

[Renato1]

In what looks to be the biggest sanity scandal in US history, their FAA apparently decided four years ago to start discrimination against hiring the best people for the job of becoming air-traffic controllers - excluding pilots and anyone else with aviation experience, excluding people with a science background, preferring people who had been unemployed for three years etc etc - for the sake of Diversity.

I think I might give travelling to the USA a miss till this is resolved.

Following are the reports relating to the matter.

and

Any thoughts?
Regards,
Renato

P,S, - When I saw the first of these reports, I did do a mental check that it wasn't April Fools day.

 

[Himeno]

Tucker Carlson and Fox 'News'?

I'd want a better source.

 

[Renato1]

Tucker Carlson and Fox 'News'?

I'd want a better source.

Equal third highest rating cable news show in the USA.
2.6 million nightly viewers.

I think he has more resources available than most other sources you think better.
Regards,
Renato

 

[Mick1969]

In what looks to be the biggest sanity scandal in US history, their FAA apparently decided four years ago to start discrimination against hiring the best people for the job of becoming air-traffic controllers - excluding pilots and anyone else with aviation experience, excluding people with a science background, preferring people who had been unemployed for three years etc etc - for the sake of Diversity.

I think I might give travelling to the USA a miss till this is resolved.

Following are the reports relating to the matter.

and

Any thoughts?
Regards,
Renato

P,S, - When I saw the first of these reports, I did do a mental check that it wasn't April Fools day.

I’m so glad I survived my multiple trips out of the USA over the past few years.

 

[Hvr]

Tucker Carlson and Fox 'News'?

I'd want a better source.

Equal third highest rating cable news show in the USA.
2.6 million nightly viewers.

Quantity does not correlate to quality.

 

[Himeno]

Equal third highest rating cable news show in the USA.
2.6 million nightly viewers.

I think he has more resources available than most other sources you think better.
Regards,
Renato

Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity are as creditable as Alex Jones.

 

[Renato1]

Quantity does not correlate to quality.

True, but there are only two possibilities.

Possibility No 1. Tucker Carlson's report is factually incorrect, in which case all that the FAA and the current and former officials named have to do is say,
"Your report is incorrect, and here are the criteria we use for selecting air traffic controllers".
And then let the other news networks know all this, in order to discredit both Tucker Carlson and his report, and to reassure and restore faith with the flying public.

Possibility No 2. Tucker Carlson is correct.

Possibility No 1 has not been done yet, despite the people involved having had several days to do so. We shall see what happens.

Meanwhile, here is another interesting article from a former traffic controller who recommends not flying in the USA unless one has to.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/06/affirmative_action_in_the_control_tower.html

Regards,
Renato

 

[opusman]

Fox news, lol.

 

[RooFlyer]

Fox news, lol.

Well, yes, I thought that ... but as a flyer, I'm also interested if there is anything to it.

 

[opusman]

All ATCs would need to pass the same exams and have the same qualifications, whether they started as pilots or cleaners.

Where is the evidence that being a qualified pilot or having a degree in science makes you a good air traffic controller?

Where are all these pilots who want to move across into the exciting world of air traffic control anyway?

If it were a problem then after four years presumably we should be seeing increased accidents or near misses at US airports - are we?

As Himeno says, I would want another source before paying any attention at all.

Fox News : Reinforcing Your Prejudices since 1996

 

[odysseus]

It's such a Fox news style story.

Even the title is typical clickbait: "Is the FAA sacrificing your safety for diversity?"

 

[Renato1]

All ATCs would need to pass the same exams and have the same qualifications, whether they started as pilots or cleaners.

Where is the evidence that being a qualified pilot or having a degree in science makes you a good air traffic controller?

Where are all these pilots who want to move across into the exciting world of air traffic control anyway?

If it were a problem then after four years presumably we should be seeing increased accidents or near misses at US airports - are we?

As Himeno says, I would want another source before paying any attention at all.

Fox News : Reinforcing Your Prejudices since 1996

As the American Thinker article I linked to states,
"A few things happened in the next few years. First, the FAA stopped reporting aviation incidents, including near mid-air collisions and runway incursions. When safety incidents are under-reported or deceitfully downgraded, the system starts to look like perfection, and the FAA will gladly report, as it frequently does, that it is "The Safest System In The World."

If true, it might be kind of hard to find the objective evidence you think exists.

Though the question really should have been - before departing on a radical new selection system - where is the evidence that someone unemployed for three years, whose best subject in high school was English, and who has no knowledge of aviation, is the among the best applicants for the job?

I wonder if they recruited at Starbucks and Walmart?

Not sure why you'd want another source before paying any attention at all - since you appear to affirm there is nothing wrong with the new system of selecting air traffic controllers.
Regards,
Renato

.

 

[dajop]

ANot sure why you'd want another source before paying any attention at all - since you appear to affirm there is nothing wrong with the new system of selecting air traffic controllers.
.

The thing is the story is only based on hearsay at the moment, and you've got a lawyer bringing a law suit and a well known conservative commentator pushing their usual agenda, using over dramatic language.

I always think it is worth maintaining an open mind and questioning the motivations of those pushing anything in the media (regardless of which side of politics or which media outlet), and there are always two sides to every story. Worth considering - usually the real story is much more boring than media commentators make out (whose main interest is getting ratings/clicks etc for commercial gain), and the truth is probably less dramatic.

Also is difficult to draw firm conclusions on such limited information (you have an opinion, but understand that the information seems to have drawn out different opinion from others). Don't forget irrespective of criteria used to select ATC's there is intensive training that takes place before they go "live" so to speak.

And seriously you are giving travel to the US a miss because of this? Do you ever head to Europe (I know you do from your other posts), do you know the hiring procedures and competency of the ATC's of all the countries you pass over enroute to Europe?

 

[opusman]

Not sure why you'd want another source before paying any attention at all

Because Fox News is full of cough.

The scariest thing about flying to America is all the gun-toting red-neck Fox News watchers who live there.

 

[Renato1]

The thing is the story is only based on hearsay at the moment, and you've got a lawyer bringing a law suit and a well known conservative commentator pushing their usual agenda, using over dramatic language.

I don't think that is correct. You can say that about the first clip.

But the second clip is based on assertions in the first clip, plus the failure of anybody in authority to refute those assertions - when it should be extremely simple to do so. Carlson has invited them to his program to address the matter, and they have declined - when under normal circumstances one would have expected them to be demanding the right of reply on his program. They could either have explained that he was factually incorrect, or that he was correct but explain why their new selection criteria is superior to the old one.

Regardless, I think it of interest to highlight something regarding air travel currently being raised in a major news program in the USA (Carlson's viewer numbers are now more than three times greater than CNN's)

If the claims are incorrect and Tucker Carlson has been misled, I am sure he will correct it and offer an apology. He says he will always do so, and in fact did so on another story earlier this year.
Regards,
Renato

 

[Renato1]

Because Fox News is full of ****.

The scariest thing about flying to America is all the gun-toting red-neck Fox News watchers who live there.

Thanks but I'm still not sure why you'd want another source before paying any attention at all - since you don't appear to find anything wrong with the new ATC selection criteria that Carlson reported on.
Regards,
Renato

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Renato - only you can decide if you are going to cancel all your future travel to America based on a news report. For me, I have zero concerns.

 

[mannej]

This wouldn't be the first time such a report has hit the media. I can recall a couple of years ago a similar type of report based on the fact that the flight a lawyer was on had to go around due to the runway not being cleared in time. Again it was fairly sensationalised that this was symptoms of massive ATC issues, forgetting the fact that it does happen from time to time.

I feel your logic may be a touch knee-jerk, but that is your prerogative whether your remove your plans to travel to the US due to this.

 

[dajop]

Regardless, I think it of interest to highlight something regarding air travel currently being raised in a major news program in the USA (Carlson's viewer numbers are now more than three times greater than CNN's)

Having 3x number of viewers, does not say anything about accuracy or quality, it is merely a measure of the ability of a program to engage with and retain viewers, usually through telling interesting or emotionally provacative stories (or in some cases appealing to and re-inforcing prejudices to make people feel good) rather than just reeling of facts. You only have to look at AFF, some of the most read threads are not always the highest quality or most factual!! But they do tend to hit a "raw nerve" with many contributors to the forum.

In any event, it seems, according to this 2016 Forbes article, that the issue may have been resolved 2 years ago, with Congress putting "significant limits" on the diversity hiring program:

The announcement should come as good news to graduates of college controller training programs, known as Collegiate Training Initiative or CTI programs, many of whom were unable to secure positions with the FAA in recent years because of a controversial hiring experiment by the FAA which put a candidate's biographical background ahead of his or her aviation credentials. Congress put significant limits on that initiative this year, prohibiting the FAA in its reauthorization act (known as the FAA Extension, Safety and Security Act of 2016) from using biographical data when hiring experienced controllers, graduates of CTI programs or eligible veterans. The FAA can still use biographical information when hiring from the general public.

 

[Renato1]

Having 3x number of viewers, does not say anything about accuracy or quality, it is merely a measure of the ability of a program to engage with and retain viewers, usually through telling interesting or emotionally provacative stories (or in some cases appealing to and re-inforcing prejudices to make people feel good) rather than just reeling of facts. You only have to look at AFF, some of the most read threads are not always the highest quality or most factual!! But they do tend to hit a "raw nerve" with many contributors to the forum.

In any event, it seems, according to this 2016 Forbes article, that the issue may have been resolved 2 years ago, with Congress putting "significant limits" on the diversity hiring program:

Thanks, but my point about Carlson's viewer numbers relates not to the accuracy of his reports, but to the fact that a huge percentage of cable news viewers in the USA have now seen his reports.

Thanks for the Forbes article you linked to.

Assuming Carlson's time line is correct and the Forbes article is correct, it means that the discrimination against the best applicants was in full force from 2014 to 2016, and remains so to this day for applicants coming from the general public.

Does this not prove that Carlson's reports are substantially correct, and that the matter has not been resolved?
And that Congress knew about the matter, and has gone along with it in part?
And that one media organistion did report on the matter in general terms, but without going into the detail of what the "biographical information" selection criteria entailed in practice - as Carlson has done - thus effectively covering it up?
Regards,
Renato