I Disappear When You Log In - Register

 

I Disappear When You Log In - Register

^^ The Advertisements above disappear once you log in. Not a member? Register Now, it's free! ^^
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Rookie

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    55

    CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    This was just sent to my email. I am not making any comments about it, only sharing this with the community.

    IMPORTANT INFO ON FAA DISCRIMINATION

  2. #2
    Newcomer

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    7

    Re: CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    Called the FAA today and was told that everyone that was deemed not eligible by the BQ's is out. Sorry no hope for us. They said that you will not be considered even if they don't get the numbers for hire. There is no first round or second round, this is it. The next step would be to flood your US Senators and US House Representatives with emails and calls. They can call for a committee to look into what happened. Next, if you are an ATC-CTI student or are graduating with the degree, I suggest that you file with the EEOC for the FAA. Although this agency is responsible for the boat we are in now, I have to believe that they did not expect the pendulum to swing so far to the opposite side. The final step in being heard is to join the class action law suit. The phone number for the firm is (602) 530-8000. There you can put your name on the list, someone from the firm will call you back, and you can discuss the details. Listen, I understand the need for diversity but at what cost? There should come a time where the most qualified people should be the ones picked for the job, especially when public safety is involved. Good luck to everyone!

  3. #3
    Rookie

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    65

    Re: CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by eileenmpww View Post
    Called the FAA today and was told that everyone that was deemed not eligible by the BQ's is out. Sorry no hope for us. They said that you will not be considered even if they don't get the numbers for hire. There is no first round or second round, this is it. The next step would be to flood your US Senators and US House Representatives with emails and calls. They can call for a committee to look into what happened. Next, if you are an ATC-CTI student or are graduating with the degree, I suggest that you file with the EEOC for the FAA. Although this agency is responsible for the boat we are in now, I have to believe that they did not expect the pendulum to swing so far to the opposite side. The final step in being heard is to join the class action law suit. The phone number for the firm is (602) 530-8000. There you can put your name on the list, someone from the firm will call you back, and you can discuss the details. Listen, I understand the need for diversity but at what cost? There should come a time where the most qualified people should be the ones picked for the job, especially when public safety is involved. Good luck to everyone!
    This is comical, but have you ever heard the expression "be careful what you wish for"? If this is what you wish for 0 CTI grads would have been hired for this bid. There were thousands of prior and current military ATC with actual experience not to mention prior CPCs that all got DQMOT that have way more experience and are way more qualified for the job.

  4. #4
    GS3k's Avatar
    Trusted Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    391

    Re: CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    Taken from the .pdf file on the website ...

    NOTE: There are two text sections – one for the explanation of your grievance‐ the other for the “remedy” requested. Each is limited to approximately 2,000 characters. It is suggested that you use the following for the complaint section: I have been informed that the FAA has decided to significantly alter the selection process that it uses to hire Air Traffic Controllers. Specifically, the FAA has announced that it will no longer use applicants’ existing test results on the Air Traffic Control Selection and Training examination (“AT SAT”), and that it will no longer provide an enhanced selection credit to applicants from colleges that participate in the FAA’s Collegiate Training Initiative program (“CTI”). I previously had taken the AT SAT, and graduated from a CTI program. I was deemed either well qualified or qualified. On the basis of my score on the AT SAT and my matriculation through the CTI program, I had a place on the FAA’s referral or hiring list.

    The FAA has announced that it will no longer use this CTI list; instead, the FAA has drastically altered the selection process, and will use other methodology to create its list of hirees. I have been informed and believe that the FAA has taken this action on the basis of a claimed concern that the present system may have a disparate impact on minority candidates for ATC positions; in short, the FAA believes that the present system may result in the hiring of too many white applicants and not enough black applicants. An employer may not invalidate an existing hiring system, thus upsetting an applicant’s legitimate expectation not to be judged on the basis of race, without a “strong basis in evidence of an impermissible disparate impact.” I believe and allege that by throwing out the present selection system, the FAA has unlawfully discriminated against me and a class of similarly situated applicants, all of whom had certain ranks or places on the CTI list, on the basis of race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. As such I am asserting a class complaint.

    For the remedies section it is suggested that you use the following:

    I am preserving all equitable and legal rights including, but not limited to: “back pay” for the intentional delay and discriminatory conduct; in the event that I am not immediately hired “front pay”; retroactive seniority ; compensatory damages which may include future pecuniary loss, emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other nonpecuniary losses; punitive damages as the FAA’s action was malicious or was done with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of myself as well as those similarly situated; for injunctive relief in order to prevent continued discrimination, if applicable; and for attorney fees and costs.
    Last edited by GS3k; 03-03-2014 at 02:55 PM. Reason: Terrible Formatting

  5. #5
    CutYouUp's Avatar
    Rookie

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    46

    Re: CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    When you mess with an individual's bottom line on the basis of diversification without any sort reasonable explanation or forewarning, you can sure as hell expect some resistance. Even if you side with the FAA on the new hiring policies (which no rational being should), you have to at least respect that people aren't going down without a fight... And a fight is what we all should be doing regardless of CTI, VRA, or if you have already advanced via the FAA's current or previous hiring policies.

  6. #6
    GS3k's Avatar
    Trusted Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    391

    Re: CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    Pretty sure P.Magician posted this in the wrong thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by psykomagician View Post
    Lets review the basis for a lawsuit.
    The FAA changed its hiring critieria; it has the absolute right to do so as a federal agency that's also exempted from Title V (but not merit principles).
    The agency used an assessment tool you don't like or disagree with; what's the basis for challenging that? You can under a Title VII adverse impact claim, but first you have to make a prima facie showing that the instrument had adverse impact on a protected class of persons, aka, non-white, non-male. Got any data on that to even get a lawyer to consider taking your claim?
    Folks with prior experience were screened out; so, what's the injury under the law, the wrongful conduct on the part of agency? So long as the criteria were not based on race, sex, etc. (age is allowed by the way under P.L. 92-272 for controllers), the agency has pretty much a free hand as to what factors it considered more or less important. you might argue the agency was reasoned and rational in its choices of what to consider, but that is a real long shot.
    Here's another angle: internal FAA policy says that any test has to be validated under the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures which can be found in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 29, Section 1607 (29 CFR 1607). So you might claim the FAA didn't follow its own policy about using a validated instrument. But I would bet that the FAA can produce a technical report showing that the BA was validated - that there is a statistical relationship between scores on the BA and important job outcomes, such as making CPC at the first assigned field facility, with current (not 15+ year old) data. But your lawyer could find that out in discovery.
    So what have you got left as the basis for a tort claim? Unless you can show racial discrimination or animus directed specifically at you, I don't think you've got very much, well, actually, anything on which to base a tort claim on.
    Look, we might not like the outcomes here...but the FAA has probably done its homework. How many Ph.D.s do you think the FAA can trot out from CAMI and the consultants to testify as to the statistical validity, the fairness (in terms of race and sex), and utility of the biographical assessment?
    Your hired expert guns can say "The FAA shoulda given more weight to ..." fill in the blank, experience, education, whatever BUT I seriously doubt that a court would overturn the agency's absolute right to determine for itself what weight it will give to what aspects in making selection decisions.
    Basically, all you've got (absent a disparate impact claim if you're a minority or female) is your opinion versus the opinion of a whole raft of people with Ph.D.s and lots of published reports who will be the agency's expert witnesses with studies in hand.
    Personally, I don't think this will ever get to court. But I could be wrong ... but if you're 21 now, well, you're probably more likely to age out than get your day in court (much less win).

  7. #7
    angelorozco101's Avatar
    Moderator

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    205

    Re: CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by eileenmpww View Post
    Called the FAA today and was told that everyone that was deemed not eligible by the BQ's is out. Sorry no hope for us. They said that you will not be considered even if they don't get the numbers for hire. There is no first round or second round, this is it. The next step would be to flood your US Senators and US House Representatives with emails and calls. They can call for a committee to look into what happened. Next, if you are an ATC-CTI student or are graduating with the degree, I suggest that you file with the EEOC for the FAA. Although this agency is responsible for the boat we are in now, I have to believe that they did not expect the pendulum to swing so far to the opposite side. The final step in being heard is to join the class action law suit. The phone number for the firm is (602) 530-8000. There you can put your name on the list, someone from the firm will call you back, and you can discuss the details. Listen, I understand the need for diversity but at what cost? There should come a time where the most qualified people should be the ones picked for the job, especially when public safety is involved. Good luck to everyone!
    So if you failed the BQ you can't re-apply for ATC?
    BQ Failure

  8. #8
    GS3k's Avatar
    Trusted Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    391

    Re: CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by angelorozco101 View Post
    So if you failed the BQ you can't re-apply for ATC?
    Angel, the rumor is that originally they had meant for the B.Q. to disqualify you for a year. That's not the case anymore and you should be able to reapply to the next bid.

  9. #9
    Newcomer

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    0

    Re: CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by chaseus1 View Post
    I see one big flaw in the lawsuit.

    They seem to be basing the claim in large part on the ruling in the Ricci firefighter case. In that case, some applicants for a promotion passed an assessment, and were found qualified for a promotion. The fire department then threw out those results because the eligivble applicants were not diverse, and they were fearful of being sued. They then issued a new assessment test.

    The firefighters that passed the initial assessment sued, and won. The court stated that the city could not show that they would have been sued if the original test results were used.

    I believe a big difference here is that the FAA was under a real threat of being sued. The Barrier Analysis came out with some very hard to dispute numbers over a long period of time (not just showing a lack of diversity on just one bid like in Ricci), there have already been cases against the FAA, and the NBCFAE was pushing the issue, and presumably would have filed a class action. The FAA had no responsibility to maintain a list of qualified applicants forever, either.

    I believe that makes this case much different than the Ricci case. Ultimately, that would be up to the Courts to decide.
    It was in the manner at which the program was changed. Not that the FAA can't change their programs of higher, but on how they changed it. Sure they can change it to whatever they like.
    Primary problem with the quick change, is that it caused serious damages in terms of investment of money and time as well as potential loss of long term employment if an employer notices your resume has air traffic control on it (you need to show transcripts and time periods of what you were doing), they're going to want to know when and how long you'll be working for them.
    It's the sunk costs associated with the participants that caused harm. A proper method of changing the hiring process would to have allowed those individuals with sunk costs to finish out the process they've already completed.
    According to the new process, before anyone considers wasting any investment toward education on Air Traffic Control, should first take the biographical assessment. If I would have taken a bio assessment and failed, I would not have put money, time, effort, and other lost opportunity costs into the CTI program. We understood the AT-SAT would generally come later into our schooling, but AT-SAT was completed within a few classes in the program, often just a one or two full time quarters/semesters into the program before spending more money on something we would be immediately disqualified based on aptitude or personality.
    And double injury was the affirmation upon the positive AT-SAT results further confirming our decision in continuing investing in courses and time to finish the program.
    Prime injury is just wasted individuals' money, time, and effort that could have gone elsewhere. Remedy could be to allow those to complete the former process (which has a time constraint on those like myself on aging out; I find it highly unlikely, unless they do like they did with VRA in which they skipped the interview process and sent almost everyone on the referral list a TOL, CTI pool though has about 4,000 applicants though), or just reimburse some of the opportunity costs lost due to the change in process.

  10. #10

    freshav8tor's Avatar
    Trusted Member

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    343

    Re: CTI Class Action Lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by idahosky View Post
    It was in the manner at which the program was changed. Not that the FAA can't change their programs of higher, but on how they changed it. Sure they can change it to whatever they like.
    Primary problem with the quick change, is that it caused serious damages in terms of investment of money and time as well as potential loss of long term employment if an employer notices your resume has air traffic control on it (you need to show transcripts and time periods of what you were doing), they're going to want to know when and how long you'll be working for them.
    It's the sunk costs associated with the participants that caused harm. A proper method of changing the hiring process would to have
    allowed those individuals with sunk costs to finish out the process they've already completed.
    According to the new process, before anyone considers wasting any investment toward education on Air Traffic Control, should first take the biographical assessment. If I would have taken a bio assessment and failed, I would not have put money, time, effort, and other lost opportunity costs into the CTI program. We understood the AT-SAT would generally come later into our schooling, but AT-SAT was completed within a few classes in the program, often just a one or two full time quarters/semesters into the program before spending more money on something we would be immediately disqualified based on aptitude or personality.
    And double injury was the affirmation upon the positive AT-SAT results further confirming our decision in continuing investing in courses and time to finish the program.
    Prime injury is just wasted individuals' money, time, and effort that could have gone elsewhere. Remedy could be to allow those to complete the former process (which has a time constraint on those like myself on aging out; I find it highly unlikely, unless they do like they did with VRA in which they skipped the interview process and sent almost everyone on the referral list a TOL, CTI pool though has about 4,000 applicants though), or just reimburse some of the opportunity costs lost due to the change in process.
    We heard this from 26k people already.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •