Trump's Theory about the Plane Crash

[NameChangedForThis1985]

Just watched his press conference in absolute disbelief. He's just blamed the air traffic controllers as apparently under the Biden administration they recruited people into the role who weren't intellectually capable. He actually blames diversity criteria and basically box ticking.... 'hiring people with severe intellectual and psychiatric disabilities' - that's a direct quote.

As someone with ASD, anxiety and depression who works in a high level, highly skilled role, I am angry on behalf of anyone like me.

The man is a dangerous liar.

(edited by MNHQ)

And how would you select people who have passed the colour blind cognitive tests but you only have a limited number of spaces available?

How do you avoid discrimination - and is it acceptable to try to improve the diversity of a workforce if someone has passed the tests and has the aptitude and ability to carry out the job?

Did you mean me here?
If so, that was precisely my point. That if the person was black, there’s absolutely nothing to say that they were a DEI hire, but that all these people complaining about them apparently being told to hire more black people will likely jump to that conclusion.
The poster I was replying to was complaining that their hiring process had apparently changed because the department was ‘too white’. I was saying that on that basis, if it turns out that the person wasn’t white, are they then going to assume it was a DEI hire and that this was the cause of the crash?

I think you should get background on what was happening, it was actually pretty egregious: https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-a-quick-overview

Would be happy to discuss it once you get a sense of the issue

And how does someone who is from a minority group prove that they were hired because of their ability and not because of their group?

People in a minority group are often faced with the expectation from others that the only reason they got hired is because of their group and not because of their ability. Unlike other people. They have to work harder just to prove to others that they deserve to be there. And if something goes wrong, then the group gets the blame.

I'm discussing in general.

If someone has the aptitude to do a job, passes the tests etc - and the company wants a more diverse workforce, is it wrong to offer someone from a diverse background the role compared to someone else who could also do the job?

Or - how do you offer jobs without discriminating against people?

You can have 2 applicants, equally competent/skilled - one a white male, one a black woman...hiring the black woman because they're underrepresented in the industry is not a bad thing.

DEI doesn't automatically mean the person with protected characteristics is an imbecile 🙄

This is why you should NOT be supportive of DEI regardless. People will make assumptions when it comes to life or death risks (like in aviation or medical care)

Only color-blind, standardized cognitive testing will ensure that anyone in these positions have been vetted thoroughly and are highly competent. People need to trust the process, that it selected for competency and not for diversity.

….. the way the FAA went about things completely undermines the public’s trust.

OTOH - without DEI, people were discriminated against and minority groups faced discrimination

I don’t think diversity should be an end goal tbh BUT if you feel there is a pipeline problem, by all means try to address it. But if they can’t pass the tests, why stress endlessly about it?

Cognitive testing is still the best predictor of job performance, there is data on that. I don’t think diversity goals fits very well into the picture because suddenly you are adding a factor that is unrelated to job performance

If someone can pass the test, which is clearly important, then having a more diverse workforce can bring benefits to organisations.

A bigger picture is reasons for not being able to pass a test or even be qualified - which can unpick lots of reasons with people who have advantages in life and those who don't have such advantages.

I (like you) have no idea of the facts here.

However, if it does emerge that Trump was correct (which was the question I was answering) then it won't be because of Trumps intellect finding the solution. It will be because Trumps response to everything is "DEI" and just by basic statistics he could be right one time.

Do you think that your background in life plays no role in how you might perform a job later?

Now Trump is saying the helicopter was flying too high. Just waiting on the DEI angle on that!....

A really Presidential approach to communicating following a tragedy.

The irony of low comprehension on a Trump thread is physically painful.

Mr President speaks again

I will need to see actual verifiable proof that this is indeed the case. Not randoms on social media asserting something to bolster an agenda.

The FAA hires for many, many positions. I believe the standards are quite high, even with the initiatives (which, by the way, have been in place since 2013, without incident and giving Trump every opportunity to reverse them in his first term) for air traffic control and pilots.

I'm actually sickened and disgusted that people, husbands, wives, children, military members, died in this incident and the bloated pig is stirring up hatred on social media.

I will actually defend the poster - I think it was @Princessconsuelabananahammock9(?).

People are very emotional right now and, to be fair, @SerendipityJane you do have a very dry sense of humour (which I appreciate)

Ok but if they cannot pass the tests, why should that be my problem? Why should my life be at risk because YOU have an issue with the demographics of that field? Should be a non-issue.

Fix the root issue at an earlier stage, don’t try to patch it up at this late stage. This isn’t some university DEI department, it is an industry that literally has thousands of peoples lives at stake

Do you think it's a societal problem if people face societal issues (and this is in general and not specific to aviation) and education and other societal issues limit their potential in life?

The Substack post I linked has screenshots from court documents. Did you even look at it?

Yeah, I know woodgrain's work. I don't consider that definitive. I'll wait for the investigation (with the faint hope that it's not manipulated to suit an agenda).

Adding: and even if you do take it at face value, it involves an awful lot of extrapolating to point the finger at direct impact on this situation. There are a lot of factors at play here, starting with the Reagan firings, to the pandemic, to the state of that airport, which some lawmakers had previously warned about. I will say, as an American, I have specifically chosen not to fly in or out of that particular airport

Sure, but my issue is that you are trying to fix this at a very advanced stage and in some situations, it can cause real harm!

Like I said, this isn’t a college DEI department or HR. This is your life and my life. Why should we be put at risk so somebody can hit their diversity targets?

Maybe you aren;t getting what I think:

Anyone hired for such a role should be able to do the job and should be able to prove they can do the job - by doing and passing an aptitude test.

Anyone hired for such a role should be able to do the job and should be able to prove they can do the job - by doing and passing an aptitude test.

Let's say you have an aptitude test which produces a score from 0-100.

Do you think it is acceptable for those with a lower score to be recruited over those with a higher score if they have an underrepresented characteristic?

I do not. I only think it is OK in cases of a genuine tie.

Those supporting affirmative action on this thread are acting like there is a binary able/unable to carry out a role issue, but we should be focussed on those who will do the role best regardless of characteristics.

Let's say you have an aptitude test which produces a score from 0-100.
Do you think it is acceptable for those with a lower score to be recruited over those with a higher score if they have an underrepresented characteristic?

Yes, if there is a baseline of 60 that all applicants have to achieve and there is evidence that people on 65 have faced systemic hurdles that people on 66 have not, since that means that all other things being equal the people on 65 probably have more raw talent and will achieve more once the systemic barriers are removed.