FAA’s diversity push includes focus on hiring people with ‘severe intellectual’ and ‘psychiatric’ di

Once again you have provided exactly ZERO evidence that any person with severe intellectual or psychological disabilities would be involved in any step of that process. The guy sits at the desk and stamps the certification (and presumably DOES the certification before stamping it) has to have his office cleaned. The person who cleans the office works for the FAA. Is there some kind of problem if that person has "severe intellectual or psychological disabilities"? What about the person that helps maintain the building by changing lights or fixing doors? In the building cafeteria, does the cashier have to pass the same intellectual background as the person doing the certification? You keep talking about positions that affect travel safety but do not even mention the positions that do not affect travel safety. Why?

 

I don't have to prove that, and that is not the question. By pusruing this, making it a priority- they are setting the stage. You are assuming that due diligence will apply consistently, that some dedicated diversity worshipper with authority will not put a person in a job they can't handle.
That however is virtually inevitable if it's possible.

May not have occurred to you, but the condition in America right now comes from putting people in power that are unqualified and incompetent, and make more stupid decisions than wise ones.
Many if not most of our politicians are NOT following the rules. NOT acting in the best interests of the people. NOT serving the country first. And- not even ashamed of screwing their job up or seeing a reason to change. Apparently, you haven't figured out that this is preventable. Or- do you care?

 

Specific laws of targeted disabilities does not mean those "who suffer with severe intellectual, psyhiatric problems and other mental or physicial conditions." It is codified in law. Specifically, it is part of 29 USC 791 and subsequent regulations. It could include a person with a loss of a limb, such as a disabled veteran for instance, or someone who was never a soldier/airman/sailor. It also includes deafness, and other types of disabilities per the ADA. However, if you read the ADA and the law, the disability cannot detriment the work involved to the benefit of the employer. thus a blind man cannot become a pilot, but a blind person can become a customer service representative, right? And if a blind man has 20 years of customer service experience whereas your grandson who has no experience whatsoever but is fit as a fiddle, do you really think I would hire your grandson and not the blind person for the customer service rep job? Again, you figure it out yourself.

All I can say is more faux outrage by a policy that has been in place since the 1990s when the ADA and other laws have been passed.

 

then you don't know how the hiring process in the federal government works. It is based on a point system. there are points for everything ranging from military service, aka veteran, to knowledge/experience to other categories. But disabilities is not one of them in the initial and upper level stages, but it can be a factor among "best qualified" for that position in hiring.

 

To be honest with you, I think Biden and his woke-a-holics will squeeze intellectually disabled or disturbed people into any job they can think of.

 

“Can be a factor among “best qualified.”” That is the out. Get ready for quotas, set asides and what ever excuses to let people with problems get responsible positions. As a person who lived through quotas from the day I I took my first job interview from college, I’ve had plenty of experience.

 

The quotations including intellectual and psychiatric problems are from the FAA, not the critics of it. The shift of importance is changes in the mindsets and focus of leadership. Ten years ago, you could depend on most agencies for making competence the top priority. Today, it often seems to not be on the list at all. Unfortunate you have not been in a position to see these things, obviously for some time. Must hurt.

 

That's so disgusting

 

Should they be prioritized?

 

That's what he says, so you agree.

 

Ok, I'll bite... like what?

 

And you are assuming that it WILL happen.

Instead of assuming, do you have any proof that it HAS happened? If not then you are just fear mongering.

 

That's up to the FAA. When I was a defense contractor, they had people with disabilities performing sys admin duties with no issues.

 

I agree. We have far too many people who are scientifically illiterate making decisions about science.

There is no qualification to be in Congress other than age and residence.

This is why we have, as Speaker of the House, a man who is a young earth creationist. Who also believes that the COVID pandemic was a hoax.

The Republican Party has shown over and over and OVER that they reject science.

 

Irony, hypocrisy...

 

Perhaps you have never heard the rule in "Murphy's laws", which says-

"Whatever can happen, WILL happen."

Every engineer knows this is true.
The entire mission of the FAA is to eliminate the potential for what can happen being a disaster.
They do that so that an airliner and a couple hundred people aren't lost because there was a weak link in the process.


There are hundreds of thousands of places and jobs where the conditions of performance are not so critical.

When you are running a janitorial service, the objective is clean floors, and you have flexibility because failure does not bring fatal consequences.
When you are running anything that can have fatal consequences, the objective is to never allow the conditions where that can happen to exist.
You do not compromise, because lives depend on it.

 

First of all it is "Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong"
Secondly it is a humorous observation, not some kind of hard and fast scientific law.

Again, you have not shown where anyone's safety has been put at risk with this policy. You have not even shown where it is LIKELY that's someone's safety has been put at risk.

You are not presenting facts, you are presenting "what ifs" (and highly unlikely "what ifs" to boot) in an attempt to slander the Biden administration.

 

There is no proof that the sun will come up in the morning either, but you fully accept it will.
That reference to what ever can happen will comes from the experience of engineers trying to develop new approaches to doing things. What can happen is not always visible; but in crucial situations it matters as much as any other factor, but has greater power because you dismissed the probability as insignificant.

The people on the left consistently try to argue things that are just common sense. There's no good motive for that, and the consistency of that tells me the lack of good motive is equally consistent.

You are arguing against common sense for the sake of argument. Not the benefit to people, but for the sake of picking another political argument. That too- is obvious.
And Biden doesn't need slander- any person with good values and a clear mind knows exactly what he is. Only the sheep fail to recognize the obvious.
Pointing out incompetence is not slander; it's observing facts.

 

You are picking an argument to paint liberals in a bad light, that much is obvious.

 

The liberals need no help putting themselves there. It's like taking a picture of what's there- not painting something imaginary.

 

Should they be prioritized for hiring?

 

Not even close

We have pointed out again and again that the policy of hiring those people with disabilities is not going to compromise the safety of anyone. You have shown no examples of that happening, you have not even shown examples of it POTENTIALLY happening and yet here we are, 5 pages into this, and you are still making the non existent claim.

The idea that the FAA would put hiring of someone with a disability a priority over the safety of travelers IS imaginary. It is something that does not exist that you are painting onto the canvas of reality in order to make your political opponents look bad.

 

As long as they are qualified to do the job, then yes.

 

Why should be they be prioritized?

 

Because they have a more difficult time getting work else where.