Rosstafari
Likes tacos
As long as we're shooting the breeze on these...
This is one of the classic rumors, one that repeats itself every few months. It's completely wrong, and anybody who wants to grind through gathering together individual test scores and comparing them to who gets selections will find that people in the 85-89 range are picked just as often as 90-94 and 96-100.
Which, incidentally, supports one of the few "official" things that we dug up several months ago... that applications are grouped according to Qualified and Well Qualified, with no regard to percentage score. *gasp*
The confusion on this one comes because there used to be Qualifieds who'd get selected. But that was a lonnnng time ago, at the combined PUBNAT3/4 panels at the latest, which was last January. Why'd it happen then and it isn't happening now? Simple: numbers. The FAA was still at the point where they thought that they'd be able to cram thousands of people through the system yearly, which, of course, was impossible. Once the system started to get backlogged with PUBNAT2 hires, they slowed things down -- hence the lessened number of PUBNAT openings (which are accounting for the huge increase in applicants, by the way... other sources, like reinstatements, CTO, VRA and CTI don't change significantly year to year, although CTI is growing a bit).
With the system slowing to a crawl, more people applied to fewer openings. One rumor is that 9000 people applied to PUBNAT8. I've never seen it substantiated, but it's not unreasonable to believe. Of course, that means that the FAA now can be more selective with who they pick, and as the AT-SAT is the sole determination to the skill level of an OTS applicant (and CTI, for the most part, unless you consider grade requirements), that's the bar they're judged by. With thousands of people applying to hundreds of openings, there's just no reason for them to pick Qualified applicants. Why would they? They can't even take all of the Well Qualifieds. On a related note, it's also why it's ludicrous to turn down any offer that the FAA gives you.
It's kind of like that scene in Dumb and Dumber, where she tells him that it's a one in a million shot, and he misunderstands goes, "So you're telling me there's a chance!" Well, technically, a Qualified could get hired. In practice, no, it's not going to happen. It's not to anyone's benefit to choose ignorance in the name of "staying positive" on that one... if you scored below 85, you should either plan for a retake in a year or change your career ambitions.
Another perennial rumor that comes up every few months. It almost always comes from a cranky CTI grad who's frustrated at seeing OTS people get in who didn't "earn" their right to be there. Don't misunderstand me as characterizing all CTIs like that... it's a very small minority. But that's usually where it comes from.
Anyway, all of the other hiring sources combined don't come close to meeting the need that will be created by mandatory retirements. That's what caused the staffing crisis in the first place, and it's why the FAA's "hiring plan" is continuing several years into the future. There's absolutely no way to meet that need without OTS hires. Period.
Some people will point at the reduced rate of PUBNAT openings as "evidence" that PUBNATs are ending. Well, duh. Of course they're slowing down. The system couldn't handle hiring so many trainees at once and its backlogged, so they're not going to keep cramming people in when they can't accommodate them. That's not the same as "no more PUBNATs", though. It's just typical FAA ineptitude... first they didn't plan for the crisis, then they reacted to it by trying to push in more people than the system could handle. Ugh.
Chalk this one up there with the silly "hiring freeze" rumor that started on JC a few months back. Remember that one?
This rumor came from a well-spoken CTI student who shared it on StuckMic about a week ago. Sounds believable to me, and people who've received letters from the most recent panels haven't received PEPC invites, so it may be the case. It wouldn't be a surprise. Too bad, though, because it was a nice way to meet other applicants.
Anyway, the lesson here is to not get sucked into every rumor that you see on the boards. In a vacuum of information like this one, people'll make up stuff to fill the space. The post count next to someone's name is often a good indication of how reliable their information is, but not always. Just don't go putting your eggs into the basket of some yahoo who you heard on a forum.
This is one of the classic rumors, one that repeats itself every few months. It's completely wrong, and anybody who wants to grind through gathering together individual test scores and comparing them to who gets selections will find that people in the 85-89 range are picked just as often as 90-94 and 96-100.
Which, incidentally, supports one of the few "official" things that we dug up several months ago... that applications are grouped according to Qualified and Well Qualified, with no regard to percentage score. *gasp*
The confusion on this one comes because there used to be Qualifieds who'd get selected. But that was a lonnnng time ago, at the combined PUBNAT3/4 panels at the latest, which was last January. Why'd it happen then and it isn't happening now? Simple: numbers. The FAA was still at the point where they thought that they'd be able to cram thousands of people through the system yearly, which, of course, was impossible. Once the system started to get backlogged with PUBNAT2 hires, they slowed things down -- hence the lessened number of PUBNAT openings (which are accounting for the huge increase in applicants, by the way... other sources, like reinstatements, CTO, VRA and CTI don't change significantly year to year, although CTI is growing a bit).
With the system slowing to a crawl, more people applied to fewer openings. One rumor is that 9000 people applied to PUBNAT8. I've never seen it substantiated, but it's not unreasonable to believe. Of course, that means that the FAA now can be more selective with who they pick, and as the AT-SAT is the sole determination to the skill level of an OTS applicant (and CTI, for the most part, unless you consider grade requirements), that's the bar they're judged by. With thousands of people applying to hundreds of openings, there's just no reason for them to pick Qualified applicants. Why would they? They can't even take all of the Well Qualifieds. On a related note, it's also why it's ludicrous to turn down any offer that the FAA gives you.
It's kind of like that scene in Dumb and Dumber, where she tells him that it's a one in a million shot, and he misunderstands goes, "So you're telling me there's a chance!" Well, technically, a Qualified could get hired. In practice, no, it's not going to happen. It's not to anyone's benefit to choose ignorance in the name of "staying positive" on that one... if you scored below 85, you should either plan for a retake in a year or change your career ambitions.
Another perennial rumor that comes up every few months. It almost always comes from a cranky CTI grad who's frustrated at seeing OTS people get in who didn't "earn" their right to be there. Don't misunderstand me as characterizing all CTIs like that... it's a very small minority. But that's usually where it comes from.
Anyway, all of the other hiring sources combined don't come close to meeting the need that will be created by mandatory retirements. That's what caused the staffing crisis in the first place, and it's why the FAA's "hiring plan" is continuing several years into the future. There's absolutely no way to meet that need without OTS hires. Period.
Some people will point at the reduced rate of PUBNAT openings as "evidence" that PUBNATs are ending. Well, duh. Of course they're slowing down. The system couldn't handle hiring so many trainees at once and its backlogged, so they're not going to keep cramming people in when they can't accommodate them. That's not the same as "no more PUBNATs", though. It's just typical FAA ineptitude... first they didn't plan for the crisis, then they reacted to it by trying to push in more people than the system could handle. Ugh.
Chalk this one up there with the silly "hiring freeze" rumor that started on JC a few months back. Remember that one?
This rumor came from a well-spoken CTI student who shared it on StuckMic about a week ago. Sounds believable to me, and people who've received letters from the most recent panels haven't received PEPC invites, so it may be the case. It wouldn't be a surprise. Too bad, though, because it was a nice way to meet other applicants.
Anyway, the lesson here is to not get sucked into every rumor that you see on the boards. In a vacuum of information like this one, people'll make up stuff to fill the space. The post count next to someone's name is often a good indication of how reliable their information is, but not always. Just don't go putting your eggs into the basket of some yahoo who you heard on a forum.
