dls@genrad.com (Diana L. Syriac) (01/18/89)
Which of these persons would you consider to have the better chance at
becoming an astronaut:
A young engineer with an engineering Bachelor degree, who's been
working as an engineer for 3 years since graduation.
OR
An older engineer who started out as a technician and who now
has 8 years of experience as an engineer, who went to school
nights to get the Bachelor degree because his family couldn't
afford to put him thru college after high school.
If you said the second has a better chance, you'd be wrong. According to
NASA, you're not even considered to be an engineer if you don't have that
little piece of paper called a Bachelor's degree. They require "3 years
of experience in your field AFTER you have a Bachelor's degree".
I've been a Senior Development Engineer for 1 1/2 years, an engineer for 8
years, in the computer field for 13 years, but all that means diddly squat
to NASA, because I had to go to school nights and just got my Bachelor's degree
last June, FINALLY, after 15 years of part time college, full-time job,
and full-time mother.
And before those of you of the male gender say, "Well, how come you didn't
go to school 3 or 4 times a week instead of just 2 times a week", stop to
consider that being a full-time mother includes all housework and shopping,
finding babysitters (which are always difficult to locate), ferrying the
kids to their extracurricular activities, being a brownie leader and a
cub scout leader and a soccer coach all at the same time......and still
finding time for yourself. Would you suggest instead that I tell my kids
that I just don't have time for them (shame on you for even thinking that!)?
My opinion of NASA has gone a long way downhill since last night when I
received the rejection notice and spoke to the person who rejected (no, he
didn't even bother looking at any of the experience, since obviously I
didn't meet the minimum requirements of having 3 years experience in the
field AFTER receiving a Bachelor's degree).
I guess this is a good example of where the RICH YOUNG kid has the advantage
over the POORER more experienced person.
Oh, well, enough of my griping. Back to the real world where actions count
for more than just the words on a piece of paper.
-> Diana L. Syriac, GenRad Inc, Electronic Manufacturing Test <-
->USmail: Mail Stop 6, 300 Baker Ave, Concord, Mass. 01742 <-
->usenet: {decvax,linus,mit-eddie,masscomp}!genrad!teddy!dls <-
->tel: (508) 369-4400 x2459 I'D RATHER BE FLYING!!!! <-logajan@ns.UUCP (John Logajan x3118) (01/20/89)
Diana L. Syriac writes: > (no, he > didn't even bother looking at any of the experience, since obviously I > didn't meet the minimum requirements of having 3 years experience in the > field AFTER receiving a Bachelor's degree). Being in the same boat (except that I still don't have my degree) I can sympathize with your plight. However, this practice is wide spread. Some companies get so many applications that they first select out resumes by color and weight of paper! (I know this is true, my brother did it!) They check for number of pages, layout form, puncuation etc. Only then do the look at content, and then toss them out for a whole other set of picyune reasons. I hate it, but that's life. There are a billion reasons for them to close the door on you, and they will -- because no matter what requirements they make, they will always find someone to fit. So they have absolutely no incentive to make consistent reasonable decisions. It's all automatic. -- - John M. Logajan @ Network Systems; 7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 - - ...rutgers!umn-cs!ns!logajan / logajan@ns.network.com / john@logajan.mn.org -
johnson@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM (Wayne D. T. Johnson) (01/20/89)
In article <15855@genrad.UUCP> dls@genrad.com (Diana L. Syriac) writes: > > According to >NASA, you're not even considered to be an engineer if you don't have that >little piece of paper called a Bachelor's degree. They require "3 years >of experience in your field AFTER you have a Bachelor's degree". > I agree, this is STUPID. As a Software Engineer with 10 years experiance and going to school part time myself, I can really apreciate your position. Its bad enough getting turned down for a job when you don't have a degree but plenty of experiance but this is just plain dumb. How can NASA expect to compete for the all too few (according to Mr. Quayle) engineers in the industry when they do this. Might I suggest a call to your senator, and possibly a letter to Mr. Quayle (I'd tell you to phone him but I wouldn't know where to get the phone number). >And before those of you of the male gender say, "Well, how come you didn't >go to school 3 or 4 times a week instead of just 2 times a week", stop to >consider that being a full-time mother includes all housework and shopping, >finding babysitters (which are always difficult to locate), ferrying the >kids to their extracurricular activities, being a brownie leader and a >cub scout leader and a soccer coach all at the same time......and still >finding time for yourself. Would you suggest instead that I tell my kids >that I just don't have time for them (shame on you for even thinking that!)? > I must commend you on this, not many people could do as well as you did. -- Wayne Johnson (Voice) 612-638-7665 NCR Comten, Inc. (E-MAIL) W.Johnson@StPaul.NCR.COM or Roseville MN 55113 johnson@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM These opinions (or spelling) do not necessarily reflect those of NCR Comten.
phil@diablo.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (01/20/89)
It's not NASA's fault that you wasted your time on things irrelevant
to becoming an astronaut (raising kids).
--
Phil Ngai, phil@diablo.amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil
"In Texas, they run the red light after it turns red."
"In Taiwan, they run the red light before it turns green."colwell@mfci.UUCP (Robert Colwell) (01/21/89)
In article <993@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM> johnson@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM (Wayne D. T. Johnson) writes: >In article <15855@genrad.UUCP> dls@genrad.com (Diana L. Syriac) writes: >> According to >>NASA, you're not even considered to be an engineer if you don't have that >>little piece of paper called a Bachelor's degree. They require "3 years >>of experience in your field AFTER you have a Bachelor's degree". > >I agree, this is STUPID. As a Software Engineer with 10 years experiance >and going to school part time myself, I can really apreciate your position. > >Its bad enough getting turned down for a job when you don't have a degree >but plenty of experiance but this is just plain dumb. How can NASA expect >to compete for the all too few (according to Mr. Quayle) engineers in the >industry when they do this. You guys are going off too far on a tangent here. NASA isn't passing judgment on whether or not you're "really engineers" by putting requirements on education and experience. Part of what you're seeing is that they just don't have to settle for less than a lot of experience and education, because there are a lot of folks still applying to be mission specialists. Remember, Diana didn't say she applied to work there as an engineer, she said she wanted to be an astronaut, and there she is automatically competing with a lot of other folks. NASA is just using an easy first cut at winnowing the entries. Bob Colwell ..!uunet!mfci!colwell Multiflow Computer or colwell@multiflow.com 175 N. Main St. Branford, CT 06405 203-488-6090
kazim@Apple.COM (Alex Kazim) (01/21/89)
I think the problems with resume ignoring depends a lot on the company -- it says whether a company believes in the power of the individual, of people as a valuable resource (Apple), or one that believes that engineers are interchangable (insert large aerospace company here). In my last year at college (a year ago) I had a wonderful experience with both Lockheed and Space Industries Inc. Lockheed sent be back an unpersonal- ized, unsigned rejection note-card, that read something like: Dear Applicant, We got your resume. Go away. Please don't feel bad we didn't send you a real letter, with a real signature, but we get so many resumes. Signed, The Employment Dept At Space Industries, a company headed up by NASA 20-30 year veterans, they wanted me to start work at NASA, and maybe in 5 years I could be a journey man engineer and start making some "real" contributions.... Excuse me? 5 years? And then in 10 more I could be, oh no, a JUNIOR engineer? F*ck that! At Apple, we get about 10000 resumes a month from the industry (excl schools). A letter is sent out when the resume is received, and then another for an interview/rejection. All are addressed (mail merge has been around a while) and all are personally signed. I think it's time NASA personnel department realize engineers just don't grow on trees. We are not interchangeable. People are the most valuable resource in any company. Not money. Is anyone listening? Sigh. ====================================================================== Alex Kazim, Apple Computer My views, ideas, and soapbox ======================================================================
timk@egvideo.uucp (Tim Kuehn) (01/23/89)
In article <24128@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@diablo.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) writes: > >It's not NASA's fault that you wasted your time on things irrelevant >to becoming an astronaut (raising kids). > >-- >Phil Ngai, phil@diablo.amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil >"In Texas, they run the red light after it turns red." >"In Taiwan, they run the red light before it turns green." Come again? Where did you get *that* attitude from? Did you discover time travel and import it from the old South? **Flame Off** The POINT wasn't so much that the original author was raising kids, BUT that NASA was arbitrarily turning down applicants with expereience because they didn't have a "BS" + 3 years, which is -utterly- ridiculos. (BTW - I have a BSc EE + 'n' years) +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Timothy D. Kuehn timk@egvideo | |TDK Consulting Services !watmath!egvideo!timk | |871 Victoria St. North, Suite 217A | |Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2B 3S4 (519)-741-3623 | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
steve@eos.UUCP (Steve Philipson) (01/24/89)
In article <15855@genrad.UUCP> dls@genrad.com (Diana L. Syriac) writes: > >Which of these persons would you consider to have the better chance at >becoming an astronaut: > > A young engineer with [a bachelor's degree and 3 years experience] > OR > An older engineer [with lots of work experience but who only recently > became degreed] Given only those two choices, the first one is clearly the one NASA would choose, as would many large companies. This is not new policy (it pre-dates the shuttle program), so if you really wanted to be an astronaut, you should have looked into the required qualifications and made your decisions on how to lead your life YEARS AGO. Many people have done that, and continue to do that. It's a little late to be protesting about how unfair it all is -- you didn't do your homework, or perhaps you're just not satisified with the result of your decisions. When it comes down to it, neither of the above is a likely choice for an astronaut candidate. There are lots of people with Master's degrees and PhD's who have totally committed themselves to making themselves into good astronaut candidates. There is so much competition between THEM that even they get discouraged and give up after their years of work. I have a few friends who have left NASA after deciding that they just weren't going to get there, and they were highly qualified. The jobs of astronaut or mission specailist are in tremendous demand, so NASA can afford to be very picky with who they select. A degree does not prove that one knows one's stuff, but it is a reasonable first cull to help reduce the task of selecting a few people from thousands or tens of thousands of applicants. BTW, you could probably still get a job with NASA, but your pay won't be as good as you could probably get outside -- even in engineering jobs they are interested in post-degree experience. NASA jobs ARE civil service positions after all... the government likes to have some objective basis by which to classify people. Ability and experience are very difficult to asses, so your background will not help you all that much. It may not seem fair, but it is the way it has been for a long time. >And before those of you of the male gender say, "Well, how come you didn't >go to school 3 or 4 times a week instead of just 2 times a week", stop to >consider that being a full-time mother includes all housework and shopping, >finding babysitters (which are always difficult to locate), ferrying the [...] How incredibly sexist of you Diana! Tell it to Judy Rudnick (if you could). She chose to forego the rewards of family life for her astronaut career, as have many others, both male and female. No-one gets to be everything in life. You made your decisions, now you've got to live with them. Enjoy your family and your career, and keep in mind what they cost you, and what those people who sacrificed having what you have paid to get to where they are. You say your opinion of NASA has decreased because they rejected your application, even though it was in accord with their written policy? What do you want, special consideration for people who chose other priorities first? >I guess this is a good example of where the RICH YOUNG kid has the advantage >over the POORER more experienced person. Yes, there sure seems to be an advantage to having money in this society. Of course, some poor young kid who decides that career comes first has that same advantage for a job with NASA. He/she may end up paying off loans for years, give up many comforts and luxuries along the way, and may be considerably older if and when he/she gets to be a parent. These are just realities of life. It is not my intent to "flame" you just for the heck of it. Your complaints about the injustice of the system were too ill considered to be left without a strong response. There's nothing wrong with your wanting a shot at an astronaut position, but you must realize that your situation is of your own making. Many of us who put our preparation and career first don't have a family around to comiserate with, but those were our choices; we don't blame NASA for depriving of us of that. By all means, keep trying to get in to the program, but be aware that you will have a low probability of selection, largely by reason of the priorities that you personally have demonstrated. -- Steve (the certified flying fanatic) steve@aurora.arc.nasa.gov
phil@diablo.amd.com (Phil Ngai) (01/25/89)
In article <1896@egvideo.uucp> timk@egvideo.UUCP (Tim Kuehn) writes: |The POINT wasn't so much that the original author was raising kids, BUT that |NASA was arbitrarily turning down applicants with expereience because they |didn't have a "BS" + 3 years, which is -utterly- ridiculos. If she wanted to be an astronaut, she should have worked on a BS instead of having kids. With all the highly qualified people who really want to be an astronaut, why should NASA hire anyone who thinks anything (such as kids) is more important than being an astronaut? -- Phil Ngai, phil@diablo.amd.com {uunet,decwrl,ucbvax}!amdcad!phil "In Texas, they run the red light after it turns red." "In Taiwan, they run the red light before it turns green."
logajan@ns.UUCP (John Logajan x3118) (01/26/89)
Steve Philipson, I suggest that when someone is obviously extremely disappointed and bitter, that we ought to refrain from scolding them in public, saying that it is "Their own god damn fault!" especially when our only basis for saying so is that we "believe" that they ought to have known NASA's requirements when they were school children. Better, I think, to use positive encouragement, show by example our methods of overcoming disappointment -- and using the socratic method to draw them along to our point of view. NASA is probably strong enough to survive her criticisms without the need to crush her spirit even further. -- - John M. Logajan @ Network Systems; 7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 - - ...rutgers!umn-cs!ns!logajan / logajan@ns.network.com / john@logajan.mn.org -
alastair@geovision.uucp (Alastair Mayer) (01/28/89)
Boy, some people are dense, or have warped sense of humor. The POINT, as a couple of people tried to clarify, is that NASA will look at a candidate with 0yrs exp + BS + 3yrs exp (in *that* order), but will NOT look at a candiate with >3yrs exp + BS + ? exp (in that order), even if the ">3" is 10. Even if the experience prior to the BS is highly relevant to the position applied for. Sure, such a candidate may have a better chance after 3 yrs has elapsed than someone with 0 prior-to-BS experience, and sure, NASA can set any silly requirements they want. But that wasn't the point. Perhaps the best bet for the person in question is to get a job with a company likely to be sponsoring payloads, and campaign like hell to become the payload specialist. After all, Charlie Walker - who worked for McDonnel-Douglas, *not* NASA - got 3 or 4 shuttle flights - more than most NASA astronauts. The best bet for the rest of us is to get some other active players into the space passenger biz - or find $10 million for a Soyuz ride. -- "The problem is not that spaceflight is expensive, | Alastair J.W. Mayer therefore only the government can do it, but that | alastair@geovision.UUCP only the government is doing spaceflight, therefore | al@BIX it is expensive." |