Pilot deviations and a new FAA reality

"Robert Briggs" wrote in message
...

Don't all government employees have to pass the same employment test?
FAA applicants are only given 5% for prior military service and an
additional 5% for a Purple Heart, so there can be a maximum 10%
advantage given to those applicants. But other than that, the playing
field should be level.


Modest credit for prior military service seems fair enough (if it
is *relevant* service, at least), but how does *getting injured*
make you a better candidate?


What in the previous message suggested points were given for getting
injured?

Chip Jones wrote:

For example, I scored a 98 on the
civil service controller entrance exam. To this was added an extra 5% for
military service, which gave me a 103 on a test where 100 was the top score.
This put me in the top percent of the huge pool of applicants. However, it
didn't appear to do anything to speed up getting hired. I sat around for
months.

I scored an 89 on my test sometime in 1986. First day on the job was
11/8/88, hired by the Great Lakes Region. Lots of sittin' around waiting.

What in the previous message suggested points were given for getting
injured?


The credit for a purple heart.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

What in the previous message suggested points were given for getting
injured?

The Purple Heart is awarded for injuries received as the direct result of enemy
action.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Robert Briggs wrote:

FAA applicants are only given 5% for prior military service and
an additional 5% for a Purple Heart ...

Modest credit for prior military service seems fair enough (if it
is *relevant* service, at least), but how does *getting injured*
make you a better candidate?

What in the previous message suggested points were given for getting
injured?

The bit about the Purple Heart.

From http://www.purpleheart.org/Awd_of_PH.htm:

2-8 b. (4)

Examples of enemy-related injuries which clearly justify
award of the Purple Heart are as follows:

(a) Injury caused by enemy bullet, shrapnel, or other
projectile created by enemy action.

(b) Injury caused by enemy placed mine or trap.

(c) Injury caused by enemy released chemical,
biological or nuclear agent.

(d) Injury caused by vehicle or aircraft accident
resulting from enemy fire.

(e) Concussion injuries caused as a result of enemy
generated explosions.

Yes, I omitted the qualification regarding enemy action, but the
basic question remains.

How does *getting injured* make you a better candidate?

Imagine two guys going through the same battles together, one of
whom gets hit by an enemy bullet while the other isn't. Now, I
can see how their *experience of battle* may be relevant when
applying for a job, but I don't see how a single bullet wound
makes the one better suited than the other.

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

What in the previous message suggested points were given for getting
injured?


The credit for a purple heart.


A Purple Heart is not awarded for injuries received while serving in the
military, it's awarded for wounds received in combat.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

What in the previous message suggested points were given for getting
injured?

The Purple Heart is awarded for injuries received as the direct result of
enemy
action.


Correct.

"Robert Briggs" wrote in message
...
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Robert Briggs wrote:

FAA applicants are only given 5% for prior military service and
an additional 5% for a Purple Heart ...

Modest credit for prior military service seems fair enough (if it
is *relevant* service, at least), but how does *getting injured*
make you a better candidate?

What in the previous message suggested points were given for getting
injured?

The bit about the Purple Heart.


The Purple Heart is awarded for injuries received due to enemy action.



From http://www.purpleheart.org/Awd_of_PH.htm:

2-8 b. (4)

Examples of enemy-related injuries which clearly justify
award of the Purple Heart are as follows:

(a) Injury caused by enemy bullet, shrapnel, or other
projectile created by enemy action.

(b) Injury caused by enemy placed mine or trap.

(c) Injury caused by enemy released chemical,
biological or nuclear agent.

(d) Injury caused by vehicle or aircraft accident
resulting from enemy fire.

(e) Concussion injuries caused as a result of enemy
generated explosions.

Yes, I omitted the qualification regarding enemy action, but the
basic question remains.


Exactly.



How does *getting injured* make you a better candidate?


It doesn't. Nor does military service.



Imagine two guys going through the same battles together, one of
whom gets hit by an enemy bullet while the other isn't. Now, I
can see how their *experience of battle* may be relevant when
applying for a job, but I don't see how a single bullet wound
makes the one better suited than the other.


I don't see how either one is a better candidate than one with no military
service.

A Purple Heart is not awarded for injuries received while serving in the
military, it's awarded for wounds received in combat.


All well and good; the context of the OP (which I don't have handy) implied
combat, but I suppose I could remember incorrectly. It does not make the
person a better candidate, I suspect the additional points are a sort of "thank
you for your sacrifice" thing.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...

A Purple Heart is not awarded for injuries received while serving in the
military, it's awarded for wounds received in combat.


All well and good; the context of the OP (which I don't have handy)
implied
combat, but I suppose I could remember incorrectly.


I do have it handy, you remember incorrectly.

"Modest credit for prior military service seems fair enough (if it is
*relevant* service, at least), but how does *getting injured* make you a
better candidate?"