people through the system for a more healthy to less healthy facilities. we have to account for developmental is also in the building. so in working together, i am very confident that is how we have laser approach on who we are putting into which facility. >> mr. rinaldi, can you comment on this ba process? when they did the control, do you know how many controllers took the task and what their pass in belgrade was with the ba actual working controllers? >> sure, thank you, sir. the first one in 2014, 20,507 applicants took the btu. 2407 past. so roughly 10% past. and then we found out later ron -- and i'm not a scientist, but all you have to do is read the first page about a biographical assessment that says the test must be validated

with a large group of incumbents. being the only person who represents a large group of air traffic controllers, it was never validated with us. .. is tiring process. do you realize you were talking about military air traffic controller that can't be qualified for civilian air traffic control and you are telling this committee and the rest of the world that you were

justifying that your process is valid in trying to make all of us understand how that's okay, how absurd and ridiculous it is to us that somehow you don't re-group and say look, we have to relook at this and if we have military air traffic controllers that have gone through cti, maybe we've done something wrong here? you are hurting yourself by doing this. very briefly, we are going to go to mr. schuster. >> i want to associate with myself with mr. defazio. he hit the nail on the head and i appreciate that. i also want to make sure the record reflects that in my accomplishes, it has everything he wants except it's not in a failed, the history of america's ben failed government operations and it takes out of that and we've seen around the world that the system works at i just want to make sure that stands in the record. >> i think the chairman.

so the military training program doesn't suffice? military controllers can't pass your processes and cannot work in the civil. >> no, sir, we are hiring any number of former military controllers. in fact, our most recent track to announcement we did also an announcement with opening continuing last december. the air traffic organization could hire 260. sixty. they are all veterans, all former military. >> why can't, why do they fail? sir, the assessment, like any test, predicts success at the academy. it's not flawless like all other tests.

>> so you agree to correct the flaws? >> what we have done is we have done our consultants have done the validation work to ensure that the test is valid. that is legally an obligation we have as an agency, that any selection procedure tool that we use must be validated on the uniform guidelines. >> do you have a comment on this? >> mr. cannon said something about an open continuous bid. that was closed in march. if it was open continuous it would be open all the time so it's actually closed. then i have not opened another open continuous bid for direct hire. the individual that mr. defazio was speaking about isn't actual graduate, a graduate and recommended from the school. his performing air traffic control and is not able to pass it either.

>> all right, thank you. continuing continuing on with the cti schools, mr. cannon, can you explain why the faa decided to use a ba for general public candidates including graduates of cti schools and can you explain why the faa modified the ba so quickly? >> modified the ba and why we use that? >> yes. >> again we created and used the assessment for the 2014 announcement because it takes that screen and it validated for success at the academy and success at the cpc first facility. we modified the assessment in 2015 because between the 2015 and the 2014 announcement, we had enough time to do a job path analysis to take a deeper look at the occupation to see if it had changed. >> why did you use the same contractor for the biographical analysis?

when that contractor failed the first time? he didn't do the job correctly the first time. >> the first time he did not fail to do the job correctly. >> is that your opinion? >> that is certainly not my opinion the tech was never validated with air traffic controllers. more portly they did have time. they had 3000 qualified cti students on a list that they basically expunged. they could have hired them for that year and given us an opportunity to validate the test. >> my executive price president brought this up to the head of hr who is no longer here at this time they basically put their hands up and said we know what were doing, the science doesn't lie. it does lie, the science is flawed. >> thank you for your testimony. ms. bristol, purdue university in my district is one of the 36 schools approved to participate

in this initiative. they no longer receive a bonus, no matter what that looks like, for completing the program paired why do you think that is the right decision not to give priority to the students who are trained to do air traffic control, unless you are a hard i you fan, it's not the place to get that kind of training done. >> what they had was a separate announcement. the only thing we have done is to really look at it closely and we have taken them and they are competing in the pool with the rest. >> there's us shortage sure. why not have them at the front of the line once they been

trained. i don't get it. >> they are actually doing better if you can indulge me for a second per they are doing better than they ever have. just to give you a few examples. in fy 08823 controllers were cti. that's 37%. fy oh nine they hired more and had 19%. then an independent panel review with those commissions and when he was the faa administrator the faa was wrongly criticized and only 33% were cti. in fy 14, 47% of the 1593 people

selected were cti graduates and in fy 15 that number bloomed to 50%. there were 1452 out of 2895 people who were referred. that's a 50% growth doing nothing at all. >> i think the chairman for his time. i yield back. apparently we don't need to have this hearing. >> thank you mr. chairman were having a discussion about whether or not their shortages and there are couple things i want to make sure we focus on. thirteen of 233 critical facilities were found by the iag to be below the facilities planning staffing range. they are below the minimum

levels for cbcs. were talking about some of the busiest terminal airspace in the entire world, chicago o'hare. in the chicago towers, the percentage of retirement eligible controllers range from 43 - 50%. clearly we see problems right now and certainly issues in the future with having shortages. i have great concerns about what has been done with the changes to the system for hiring controllers. i know that i have one of the best cti schools in the country in my district. they're here today and we talked about this yesterday. i want to point out that there

is a 2013 report by the medical institute that says based on training performance, preference for cti graduates over general lack of application seems warranted. another in 2014 that said overall larger proportions achieve professional controller status funded general public hires. i know that in 150 years we are changing 2013 there was an alarming increase in the academy failures in 2015, but it just seems common sense to me as others have noted that it's common sense to hire from cti graduates. can you tell me how veterans and cti graduates performance and training compares with those from the general population? >> congressman, i don't have

those statistics with me. i would have to provide those to you. >> okay, i would very much like to see that because it seems like something we would like to know, especially when we see this increase in academy failures and we want to know who is performing best and really succeeding in the process. i want to associate myself with the comments when he spoke before this panel. we need to figure this out. we cannot have, i understand that because of the current and coming potential shortages that we don't want to slow the system down, but we have to get at how we do this best to keep our aviation safe. we need to get at -- a lot of things they talked about, we

need to get back and understand the alleged cheating that went on to know what happened there. i think the bill that i worked with him on hr 1964 is the is the best way to go about doing this. some of the coal sponsors but for other reasons that were laid out, i think his bill, i prefer that bill. we need to do a much better job here. one question i want to ask, there's probably not any information on it. i'm not sure if it's directly related to what were talking about here, but ms. bristol, around june 4 an incoming commercial flight was unable to reach aircraft controller in chicago midway tower. the flight was diverted to milwaukee. two other incoming flights were directed to enter holding patterns until communications

were reestablished. they remained in committee case and with trey con in elgin so it wasn't any direct safety issue, but i want to know if the faa has determine the cause of this medication difficulty. >> yes, thank you congressman, congressman, we are investigating that matter. we expect to wrap up that investigation in the next two or three days and we will circle back with your office to share that information. it's critical that we get to the bottom of this instance and also getting back -- we need to make sure we find the answer to the question about how cti can better perform and that i will yield back. >> thank you. mr. micah. >> thank you mr. chairman and thank you for letting me go ahead. i do have another obligation shortly. we've been talking about the training of air traffic

controllers for as long as i've been here and we set up a system that is flawed. ms. bristol, how how many people do we have that have a applied to be air traffic control? to we have a waiting list or something? can you answer it mr. cannon? >> how many people do we have? >> we had a list applied to get in. how many do we have on the list currently. i know we had thousands at one point. we still have thousands? >> yes. >> we have thousand. >> yes. >> what's your capacity to run to the school at oklahoma. >> 2000. >> during what period of time? >> that would be during the

fiscal year. >> one year you can do 2000? >> plus we can also put experienced controllers directly into the field. >> your washout rate is still pretty high understand, from those who come out of oklahoma. is that correct? >> who knows the washout rate. >> the failure rate at the academy is around 30%. >> about 30% so a a third wasted. we have dozens of colleges, universities and i don't have it in my district who can teach these courses. why can't faa set the standard for colleges and universities? right now are we paying? we are paying them money to go to the school and this big mechanism and a 30% washout rate rate. are we still paying them to go to school? >> yes or. >> yes, okay. all this money we are spending and we have a washout rate rate and we can't fill the positions. we have plenty of schools that can teach these people if the faa can god of that business and there's a role for oklahoma city

when they come out of the colleges or the military air traffic control or something, they should be tested, they should be brought up to date on the very latest protocols and then they should be dispersed to vacancies, correct? >> yes. >> so we need to get faa out of that business. they are not doing it right. >> we've. >> if the colleges and universities and schools can do this, they will pay for themselves. they come out. someone in the past behind mr. rinaldi, they said the excellent performance of those that come out of the schools with a full education. if faa can't do its job in setting the protocol the standards, the courses in the certifications and get the hell out of the business, don't you think we could do a better job? >> we started this process. we started a control.

>> they need to totally get out of it. it's nice that the legislation is pending but it doesn't solve the problem. the problem is basic and that the structure that we have is fundamental flawed. okay. we need to get out members and introduce legislation that changes the role of oklahoma city and directs faa to set the standards and certification. you can do checks on these people. there is a very small washout rate. their better performers and better equipped in many ways to get on the job and fill those gaps. anybody disagree with me? mr. rinaldi? >> do i disagree with you sir? i think there is a fairness issue when a student goes into a college. i'm paying for two college tuitions right now. they go into a college program to be specifically in air traffic controller and then they come out and they have to take

an assessment. >> to go back into that, i think you can recraft the role of oklahoma city to test them, to to make certain they are confident and to see where their skills best match the vacancies that we have in the system. there is an unfairness, yes, but right now the taxpayer is paying for a washout rate in a system that doesn't get people on the job. we need to transition again to a system that can produce them. why should we pay for this system of failure. i've got to run to another function, but mr. chairman, members of the committee, we need to reform this whole process. anything less, you're just messing around. >> mr. larson.

>> mr. rinaldi, from all accounts the workforce continues to help the mission and providing the safest and most efficient aerospace system in the world. can you point and any lapses in the last year that you would associate with controller staffing levels? >> no, sir. the control is maintaining, first and foremost, the safety of the airspace. if they are working double positions because of staffing issues, i think it would have to be appropriately reduced to make sure they are not in a safety concern. >> so the first option would be to reduce capacity as opposed to trying to keep capacity levels the same if there's an issue on the staff. >> absolute. >> yes. apart from the service reduction associated with sequestration,

can southwest airlines point to any other air traffic control related delays or service reductions? >> we certainly have our suspicions. we rely somewhat on anecdotal data. >> be sure to speak in the microphone. >> we do have our suspicions. we do not have clear insight into a lot of the granular pieces when an air traffic control facility begins to increase spacing and things like that, ground stops, we don't necessarily know what the issue is within that station. we do know of a couple though. a good example, in the chicago center, they have a metering station which has been somewhat shortstaffed. the problem for us is they have adjacent sector vectoring so that the aircraft going into the minneapolis center, they have a protocol, if there's not

staffing at either of those centers, it doesn't happen and it's not happening. what that leads to for us is increased vectoring, increase fuel burn, longer in route times. we pay the penalty. we burn $2 billion of fuel and anytime we can reduce that and use enhance procedures we welcome it. those are the kinds of obstructions. midway tower itself has the same issue. they sometimes cannot staff a ground metering system that they use. so it leads to us for increased time a time. you just sit longer on the ramp burning fuel and delaying pastors. not anything we look forward to. >> thank you just some criticism of the controller workforce ranges as unreliable. can you just remind me a little bit? what's the baseline we are supposed to use and in fairness i will ask mr. rinaldi to

comment on that as well. what's the baseline? >> right now, in the entire system, we've got 14376 folks that are working on the process from the early levels through the top. we are striving to get everyone for our certified professional controllers and arrange in the 80 or 85% rage which we feel would be more healthy. we are focused on helping them, if they desire to go to a facility below that level, help them get there more quickly so we can start getting everybody up to that range. >> mr. rinaldi. >> i would just say that the most accurate assessment of each facility is your onboard staffing of your fully certified

professional controllers. these are the individuals that can plug-in and work any position. these are the individuals that will train the other people in the building that are learning to be controllers. they will fill in with supervisory functions. these are the individuals we take off the boards to help us modernize the system and develop real-time efficiencies in nexgen that is the goal, to actually measure that. what the controller workforce plan manages it just bodies in the building. all too often they give your number and it's misleading at best. they say at atlanta trach on we have 95 people on board but really only have -- if our cbc number is 100 and you have 95 people people on board, you would think were okay, are only five under but were really only at 68 people that can fully work all the positions and those other people, their success rate

in atlanta is less than 40%. you're counting on people who will never be successful in the building. it's a charade to say we are fully staffed there and people will never certified for the number is flawed. if you go strictly by certified professional controllers is the best way to determine it. >> tells us asked the same question of mr. hampton. >> i've got another 15 minutes worth of questions. one for every birthday. >> could you talk a little bit about, have you looked at the right number? >> we don't know what the right number is the let me give you a different perspective. when we visit the field, the facility manager, and he runs that place day-to-day and runs multiple shift. mr. rinaldi is quite correct. the certified controllers, the

utility infielder, he trains controllers to work all segments of the airspace. that gives them tremendous flexibility. i think it's important for the faa to communicate to you guys, to congress, a specific number whether it's in the controller workforce plan. what's the right number at the right facility? particularly at the critical facilities? it doesn't really matter. we looked at this for a number of years. it seems to be a very important number. that's our take on it. it matters to the facility managers, the the guy that runs the facility at atlanta, the most critical facility. >> thank you. >> mr. rinaldi, at the roundtable we held in december you outlined some steps that you thought the faa should take to improve the hiring and training and placement. can you tell us any specific improvement in this area over the last six months?

>> so after roundtable hearing we had in december, the agency actually opened up the continuous bid for a couple months which helped get streamlined to certify the military control what also helped is we came to agreement on what they call and er are policy which is basically a national release policy and moving controllers from mid-level to higher-level facilities where we have the shortage in a very streamlined way so it's not 314 but it's actually a national over look at making sure the system is staff staff correctly and they are getting the resources they need. these are steps we have taken.

hr 5292 will give the agency the ability to continue to hire maximize at the academy and higher straight from the military and give the ability for cti to get right into the academy. i want to commend you and the team for collaboration with mr. rinaldi for those items that are crucial and essential. can you explain the difference between the staffing targets and the ranges included in the faa annual control workforce plan? >> the annual control workforce plan that is out, it's a very high level strategic target. it does give ranges. if the panel low as an indicator of health, if you will, in a facility. when we look at managing facilities every day and how we

move our controllers through the system and inside the buildings, it was clear that we needed a much more tactical tool and that is why we worked with them to laser in individual facilities on how we place and recognize, there's also people moving through the facility at the same time if they become more proficient. the controller workforce plan serves a purpose, but for for day-to-day management in the system, our organization works with that interim target on how we move in place people in the system. >> mr. hampton or mr. rinaldi, care to comment? >> as i said earlier, earlier, the control workforce plan gives you headcount. what we did in our collaborative resource group is actually laser in how many cpc's we want in the

mission the mission's running air traffic control and getting the current training and mandatory briefing items. were doing cic, were helping modify modernization in the system. they are correct, what's a good number to actually move somebody through the system? we came with 85% of cpc number. that's why that number seems to be working for us. when you just went on the controller workforce plan, we could do it was chicago also. about 30% of the people in the building that come in as new developmental's become fully certified. rcpc target is 100. that's the number number we came up with. they would right now say we are within range because the ranges

from 81200. right now there are 83 people there except for the fact that there's only 64 that can work positions. the. the other is in some stage of training. they are counting them as a full. if you are going to schedule that person to work a shift, you certainly would not schedule a group of those 20 people that can't work by themselves all alone on a shift. it's disingenuous to say they're okay, they have 84 people four people on board for the workforce plan to me, it just gives a false depiction of what's actually going on in the facility. it goes right to the cpc number and what accomplishes the mission of moving aircraft control safely through a system. i think that's encouraging that faa is working together. i think it's important in the future that they clearly communicate this committee that what number they are measuring,

particularly at the critical facilities, are we measuring cpc's or the controller workforce plan? i think that's that's an important measurement. i think the positive step in going forward what measurement are we using and that's an important measure that we should measure by peer and i do think what mr. rinaldi said, the cpc, and it's and it's able to express that in ranges, there's a level that is not easy to get here, but i think it's a positive development. i think it's important going forward whether or not we will see the next plan going forward to communicate that. >> thank you. mr. bristol, controllers are working mandatory six-day workweeks in atlanta, chicago, dallas fort dallas-fort worth. according to your agency controller overtime expenditures have jumped from $54 million in 2011 up to 78 million in 2015.

do you share our concern with the pressure being put on controllers, the safety and operational implications of increasing their workloads, and how long can this be kept up this way before we have some kind of breaking point? >> thank you congressman that is one of the priority reasons that we are so focused on moving our experience controllers into some of the most critically staffing challenged facilities. there are different levels of overtime and of every facility. hours can vary. i do not like to see people working more overtime than they need to so that's why it's a priority for me to ensure that we get bodies as quickly as possible and move bodies to support the workforce that's already there.

>> to care to comment? >> overall, nationwide is 2.6%. most managers tell us it is in the 4 - 6% and it's manageable. some of the critical facilities do exceed 10%. new york york trey con is almost 15%. dallas trey con, 12% and atlanta trey con in chicago trey con's are 11%. that shows a level of stress at the facility. it's questionable how long that can be sustained. to show signs of staffing shortages. >> i agree with the numbers that the iag put out. those are accurate. it does fatigue for the workforce if you're working six-day workweeks and ten hour days. it's not something we should rely on for a normal part of our daily operation. >> i now turn to mr. milani.

>> thank you mr. chairman and happy birthday to our colleague, mr. larson proves that the aviation subcommittee is the secret to staying forever young. mr. rinaldi, i appreciate the kind words on the bipartisan legislation that my colleague have introduced to address some of the issues you been addressing this morning. hr 5292 known as the air traffic hiring improvement act, you have done a better job in your testimony than i could have outlining the legislation, but i would love to ask you about a couple of issues that are covered by our bipartisan legislation as i'm sure they may as well. let me also say thank you to your members. if not for the extraordinary work that they do day in and day out that ensure million of us

who travel every year and every week in many cases arrive at our destination safe and sound. thank you for that. thank you for your efforts in advancing my legislation. i may focus you specifically on the new biographical assessment test conducted by faa. could you speak to some of the ways that this test has led to qualified controllers including veterans being rejected from it? i'm not sure people fully understand this issue. >> thank you sir and thank you for your leadership on hr 5292. we really appreciate it. we think it's the right piece of legislation to move forward to help us with the hiring. the biographical assessment was established to help 28000 applicants and it didn't take into account, regardless of any schooling that you would have or any actual on-the-job function

for doing the job been doing for years in the military or years in the faa and really just put everybody into one pool, and i don't know how they graded it. i do know some people that took the test were just told that they passed and were told what they answered incorrectly or correctly. it doesn't seem like a fairness issue. like i started to say earlier, i pay for two child tuition and i would like to know if my child could do the job before i'm actually paying the tuition. actually something as precise as air traffic and control, you can't come out with an air traffic control and then fail an assessment. there's not many other places you can turn to. it's a fairness issue to allow them not to be lumped in with off the street. same with military. they are providing air traffic

control services in the military to actually treat them and put them into the biographical questionnaire seems silly. >> thank you and if you would also expand on how it unnecessarily restricts military and the department of defense civilian and if that's contributing to the staffing crisis we've heard a lot about this morning that were hearing about in places like new york. >> to be in a air-traffic controller in a large trey con is a very hard task. you really can't come out of the academy and make it into one of those busy facilities. the success rate is very, very low. depending on what you're actually, what your job function is in the military, if your tower controller you would probably be best suited to go into a tower environment in the faa. if your range control your best

to go into the academy and learn exactly air-traffic control and civilian world, but really what it comes down to for new york and dallas in chicago and the other busy trey con's, we need to move them through the mid-level facilities. it allows us flexibility to adjust in the low level so they can make it to the big time. it's similar to what we do in baseball with the different ranks. >> i would appreciate if you'd said a different rank about how allowing faa to directly notice vacancies through historically black colleges and hispanic serving institution another minority institution would make sure were promoting a diverse workforce as well as working on the staffing issue.

>> we truly believe in having a very diverse workforce. i think that is how you get the best workforces if you reach from all areas of our community. i think there's a way to do that with hr 5292. you can hire directly out of the military which is very diverse. you can hire from the cti and you can still do off the street hiring. you can have a three-way track to make sure you are making a mark at the faa academy time. you can use it to help someone with no experience. >> thank you very much. thank you very much mr. chairman and like to thank the witnesses for participating. i hear consistently and believe that we have a shortage of air traffic controllers and it seems like we are putting up more more barriers of entry there. i understand the issue of the cost associated with training. is it also a difficulty, the

last mr. cannon this, is there difficulty with folks washing out or getting rid of bad apples bad apples probably isn't the right word. people who are not performing or moving up as mr. rinaldi talked about. anyone going to the academy is not in the bargaining unit at that point. there are some that go that way. >> i would love to see every trainee be 100% successful and move through the academy and into our facilities. and have that kind of trajectory

i think overall, we have a graduated process that we are working with and we are working with students at the academy. >> how'd of a cold is it to get rid of someone who isn't performing once you've hired them? is their probation. after that? >> i don't think hard, how hard is it to get rid of someone. i don't think it's hard. >> so what's the reluctance? why do we put these big barriers on these tests. if somebody is unable to perform and you're able to get rid of them, why do we have these huge barriers to entry at the very beginning, especially for people who have are ready worked in the military or in contract towers and have some experience but it seems like you're shooting yourself in the foot meeting or hiring goals.

>> i take your point and we certainly don't want to put up barriers. we did after the 2014 announcement. we did look back at the initial process we put in place. it was always called the inner process. that's why we pulled the track to out. we did say let's not have people who are to have experience have to go through a biographical assessment. we have incrementally tried to prove what we put it in 2014 and i think there are some improvements there. >> thank you. you came out of the faa and worked in industry now. let's assume president obama or whoever the next president israel point to. how do you fix this problem? >> once we got past no.

>> i don't blame you i wouldn't move out of texas either. >> i appreciate the question. i think we were faced with a similar situation in 2009. we had a massive retirement and had to ramp up and address the problem with the increased training and broader network with more focus on the cti programs and so forth. one of the things when i look back would be stable funding. we know what were going to do, do we know precisely what our needs are? you can work the problem backwards. it's not hard math. >> that's an industry question. are we not paying these people enough? it doesn't look like we have a shortage of applicants. are we not paying our air traffic controllers enough? >> i think our controllers are very well compensated. >> so age retirement in tough screening is what i'm taking

away as the gentle shortage problem. >> let me go back to mr. rinaldi, your union guy. you've been with eric traffic controller so i will promote you to f faa administrator. what you do? >> jump off a bridge. i think hr 5292 is a good start. >> what you do as an faa administrator under current law. >> under current law, i believe the the administer could actually do well with hr 5292 and bypassed cti students that have well-qualified recommendation, they can move forward. the problem is, being the faa administrator, you're given by lots of lines of bureaucratic pressure and hr 5292 will give him or her the ability to do these streamline procedures to hire enough air-traffic controllers. >> or bring them often outside entity.

i yield the of my time. >> were going to go to mr. johnson next but very quickly, mr. cannon, you are hearing a lot about this, but the cti students without any notice, without any ability to grandfather, in some cases spent tens of thousands of dollars to go through the system and the acts fell down and that's it. there's just not a good answer for that. miss johnson. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. thanks to all of the witnesses for being here. as you know, the staffing shortages are impacting critical airports all across united states and especially those in the metro areas that i have to fly to. a good example is 42 fully

certified controllers on staff. this falls below the minimum target of 48. the dallas-fort worth terminal approach controlled tray con handles all the arrivals and departures into and out of dfw, and many other smaller airports. at 17000 feet and below and at a radius of 40 miles from dfw airport, the dfw tray con is also chronically understaffed with only 57 on staff which is far below the target minimum of 78 cbcs. stephanie at the dallas lowell

is also dangerously close to 18 with only 20 fully certified on staff. even if we consider the targets established by the working groups which mr. rinaldi of furred to in his testimony, they both fall fall short of the minimum standard targets regardless of the standards used. this is a dangerous precedent which i mentioned earlier when we hear. my first question is, mr. bristol or mr. hampton, ms. bristol, you said in your testimony discussing support pursuant to our facility transfer, i believe in such transfer that there is a quick and viable alternative to finding certified controllers to fill in at facilities with the greatest need. can either of you speak to some

of the barriers preventing faa from quickly moving staff from facilities above 90% of the specific target. i've asked this question before but i still don't have an answer. what actions are you taking to overcome this challenge? that's one. the retirement is another serious issue facing air-traffic controllers. i've had a number of them come to me to ask me to recommend they be extended. most are about quite a few, especially especially those that are noisy, are never extended. according to the faa own estimates, almost one quarter or 24% of the certified controllers nationwide were ready for retirement as of september 2015.

even more alarming, faa does not sufficiently consider specific information when trying to anticipate trends. i'd like to know whether the reason for this is due to a lack of available data or if the faa has simply failed to act one facility managers were expressing concern. i know i've asked more than one question but i would like an answer to all of them, especially what steps have they taken to address the staffing. >> thank you congresswoman. the team that my organization is working with to play certified professional controllers into other facilities, our teams have met twice now and we've done two rounds that we can look to be moving. some are shorter terms and some are longer.

we have two selections were we going to dallas-fort worth tray con that you had mentioned. that is certainly a high priority for us, looking to expedite the movement of controllers into the more challenging facilities. as far as retirement eligibility, sometimes it's difficult. we can can estimate when controllers can retire. certainly they have to go to their hr office to actually felt paperwork and they are the only organization typically then know for sure when. we know controllers have to retire by the time they are 56 and some cases, especially in our critically challenged facilities, if we have controllers that want to work a little bit longer, we can grant waivers to do that. it's not something that we do very often, but sometimes we do in those critically staffed places. so again, were trying to upset

expedite our processes and stand top of the hiring and go through the entire process with training. it's something that i'm committed to and i know my colleagues in the faa are committed to. it's one has priory. >> what is your percentage of those who request to go beyond requirement? >> it's actually pretty low. >> what is it. >> off and i'd have to get back to. i don't have that number on the top of my head. >> miss johnson, thank you for the question. on the first? the transfer, since the round table when you raise the issue, faa have worked very well. we don't have have the numbers, but faa has taken action and is working to it. we will get back to you and watch very closely on how well the situation is working. given the hiring situation and the question of how that will work, i think that's one of the most important things on how were going to address the critical facilities on the staffing issue. you raise a very important issue

on the retirement issue. overall they've been fairly accurate on the retirement question but it's critical facilities. some of the critical facilities like new york tray con, 39%, houston 34% of their cbcs are eligible to retire. it's careful watching. when these things happen they can have a very dramatic effect on the facility. that is something that we have to watch. i think it bears a an important point that we made working very closely with headquarters with the local facilities. particularly about 23 or 24 critical facilities that we have watched over the years. >> thank you very much. >> mr. davis. >> thank you mr. chairman, and very pleased we are holding this hearing today because it's imperative that we address this shortage in air traffic controllers before it's too late, and i'm very proud to cosponsor my friends bill and i

will let him talk more in detail about hr 5292 because it makes a couple changes to the air traffic controller process. one provision of the bill that i want to focus on that i believe will have an immediate impact is that it raise the entry age for controllers. importantly it will promote the hiring of veterans and many in minority communities. my question to the panel, i'm very frustrated by much of what has been discussed today. you look at chicago tray con that i fly in and out of on a regular basis. the faa, the chicago centers sinners agreed upon number with the faa for controller staff is 321. as of today there are 297 controllers in chicago hundred 97 controllers in chicago center and its projected by 2018 that

number will be under 250. i think the implications in this controller shortage could have a tremendous impact on the safety. we are here to make sure the passengers get from point a to point b safely and come back. my question to the panel and i will start with you mr. rinaldi, if another act of sabotage of what we saw in chicago were to take place in the future, would there be enough resources and manpower left to keep your traffic moving in return the system to full capacity as soon as the repairs are made question that. >> thank you sir, i certainly hope we never experience what we did in chicago of september september 2014. we are down in our staffing numbers since 2014 and it would be a challenge to accomplish what we did back then. >> so in your opinion, basically , much of the air

traffic control system, if we were to see another act of sabotage like this emma would be much more difficult with the staffing levels we have now to do what you did. >> we work very collaboratively with a lot of facilities and most of our facilities across the country are at a 27 year low for cbcs. most of them are very short with certified professional controllers will be a challenge to continue to keep the capacity that we did. >> thank you. thanks to all your members for getting traffic tech to as normal as it can be. a common theme in today's hearing is that controller staffing problems appear to be chronic. the faa missed its controlling hiring targets in the past six years. controller staffing has fallen 10% since 2011. the bureaucratic structure is clearly failing us. in february the february the committee passed the aviation innovation for form and act of

2016 which would separate those functions from the faa and establish an independent not-for-profit provider including the staffing, placement and training of controllers. unlike mr. hampton, mr. rinaldi and others who responsibly yes yes or no, if they believe we would face these long standing problems if atc services were provided by an independent nongovernmental entity. mr. hampton? >> yes. >> mr. rinaldi? >> no. >> no. >> thank you, you'll back. >> mr. carson,. >> thank you mr. chairman, i'd i'd like to hear from everyone. what are your views regarding additional physical barricade outside the cockpit? i've heard opponents point out that this could be effective and

not expensive but was also heard objections, as you know. i'm planning to offer an amendment to add a secondary barrier to all u.s. passenger carrier manufacturers going forward. what you think of this idea for concept? >> sir, my colleagues in aviation safety would probably be more up to speed and involved in that kind of a matter. i would have to do differ to them since they are the experts and have them get back to you and your team. >> thank you for the question. we are working on assignment related to cockpit security and safety. we would be happy to brief you at another time in a less open form about that if you would prefer. that would be better, i'd i'd

feel more comfortable with that. >> thank you. secondly, how how does the explosion of drones into our national airspace factor into air traffic control staffing and management? someone suggested geo- fencing or other techniques to keep the airspace safe from amateur drone operators and keep them out of our airspace. what is the safety plan to avoid drone accidents that could easily her people on the ground or interfere with operations. won't air traffic controllers be needed to keep drone operation safe? how do you see this being packard into our proposal to a? >> our workforce has been dealing with drones for quite some time. we work closely with dod, dhs and other organizations for larger vehicles. the agency expects to pass a small rule into the future and

we will work on a very graduated manner and how we roll those into the national airspace system. were working closely on this issue and i want to ensure that my workforce is trained and they have the proper resources. we have a lot of activity in this area. i would say we are moving in a graduated manner and be sure we have a safe system, as we do today. thank you. >> we specifically made a recommendation to faa last year that controllers needed better training and information on dealing with unmanned aircraft. :

>> your last implication period for veterans to apply was

described long-term. it was for three months. december of '15 to march of '16. number one question is why wouldn't you open that up for them all year long? and is it correct after age 31 you cannot apply? >> the maximum entry age is they cannot have turned 31 by their appointment. >> i remember what was said

about a foolish consistency. why wouldn't you consider a formula whereby 31, unless you had one year of successful service, it should be 32. if you had five years of successful operating experience it could be 36. why are we not coming up with better ideas for the men and women that served us? if they performed well and had a good record of performance why wouldn't we be looking for more ways to expand the opportunity for them to make that decision? which is a tough decision. they have been in the military for some amount of time, they

are trying to decide do i want to go for 20 or enter into the civilian. there is an opportunity here to provide them with a longer-term way to continue their service to the public. it doesn't seem we are looking to create those opportunities that are just there, ready, prepared, experienced, seasoned, they know what they are doing and have done it before. why can't we find better ways to access that pool of talent and men and women who are wanting to serve more in a civilian capacity? >> i certainly agree with you. with regard to the age, i believe there is proposed

legislation that would take the age up to 35. i don't think there is any disagreement because it allows 20 plus years on the back end for retirement for those individuals. with regard to the announcement from december in which 260 of those individuals were selected, i think sometimes there is a misunderstanding of open and continue. it is open every day and there has to be a balance with how many people air traffic can put in those facilities from those announcements. we are working with our customer and will have another announcement out very, very soon. but from that last announcement all of those selections were originals both you and i, there are 260, and they are going

through the security and medical process right now. those individuals are capable of applying on the entry level announcement. they have two bites. if they don't get in they can apply under the entry level announcement as well. we provide to opportunities for them to come into the process. >> well, you know, i appreciate that -- >> the gentlemen's time is expired. >> is my time expired? >> yeah. >> mr. cabella is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, i am going to be brief because my colleague mr. maloney who joined be in filing hr 5292 asked a lot of questions i wanted to raise. i will say earlier a situation was described in atlanta which resembles the situation in miami. the miami international airport

is the main economic driver in south florida. we have 91 positions but only 58 fully certified controllers. exactly what was explained in atlanta is a crisis for us. that is why mr. maloney and i came together to introduce hr 5292. we believe it is going to give the faa a clear mandate, clear direction to saul this hiring crisis once and for all. i would like to ask my colleagues who haven't co-sponsored the legislation, we are up to 122 bipartisan co-sponsors. if you are not on get on. i would like to ask the leadership, on both sides in the house, republican and democrat, to help us advance this legislation because if my colleagues think this tsa line

issue is a problem, if we don't get this right, it will be a much greater problem for our air transportation system in this county. i want to thank you for your comments in support of this legislation, i want to thank you the chairman and ranking member for holding this timely hearing on this matter. thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back. >> you are welcome mr. curbela. thank you. i would like to ask a follow up. mr. hampton, i asked for a yes or no on whether you think the package would affect the hiring process and can you expand on your answer of yes. >> thank you. i think the question is it has been a long-standing issue at faa and i think it is a policy

question and the question is if this was established it would be a priority to address the staffing challenges at the critical facilities. i think an entity focused solely on air traffic stands a better chance addressing it than the current structure. >> thank you. the pass rate was higher than 90% between 2005-2011 but dropped to 79% in 2014 and 65% in 2015. why they determined wie an increasing number of controller candidates are not making the grade, sir? >> that would be mine, sir. >> ms. bristol, i apologize. >> that is okay.

i think it is too soon to say because it takes time for controllers to work through the entire training process but i will say there are also, at the academy, we had curriculum changes between the terminal and on route courses. it had to do with the way we do our performance verification. we wanted to standardize it more so we did want see as many failures in the field. if a trainee can't make it through we would rather see it happen later in the process than earlier because we continue to pay for that employee's development. i think that is contributing and we don't see that necessarily as a bad thing but completely, i don't think we have enough information yet to understand. >> is there any nexus of them passing a biographical

assessment? >> i don't think we know that yet. >> can you look into that? >> thank you. >> i recognize mr.titis now. >> i wonder if you staff specifically researched whether in canada or in great britain they have looked at the under staffing problem or if they have explored under staffing in relation to people not wanting to go to these tough, extensive areas like we have heard is a problem in the u.s. have you studied that? >> no. >> there is ongoing effort by

the faa to modernize the control towers. >> just a reminder you ask -- you can see all of this hearing live on c-span.org we will take you live to conservative business women talking about public conservative solutions benefit women. just getting underway live here on c-span2. >> meet another group of young women that will help women get eager to return to their schools and launch severes and chapters. >> we have a very professional lineup here. i have an admission. i had no idea that adult was a

verb. i was convinced it was a typo. i e-mailed karen agnus who she asked me to explain but she explained learning to adult is a common phrase used by millennial's when they get their first job. i went to google and bumped into a book which was apparently a new york times best seller which i completely missed. the author describes adulting as the act of making correctly those small decisions that fill our day. the steps you take and practice until they become habit. it even has a hash tag. i checked. learning to adult. our panel will highlight the steps they think are the most important to take and practice until they become habit.

all three of these women are successful in their career. they each chose a different path but i think you will find the similar things that fill the day will be similar. i hope they will resonate with you. i will introduce the speakers and we hope we will have 10-20 minutes for q&a at the end of their remarks. first up is katie french tolento. katie is legislative director for senator tom tillis of north carolina. her path to that office is a very interesting one. she served in a variety of roles in the united states senate since 2001 including leading government oversight teams for senators as diverse as the conservative tom coburn of oklahoma and the more moderate susan collins of maine.

serving as the policy lead on public health and women's issues like life and marriage. she was chief speech writer for the rnc during the successful 2010 cycle and a writer of opinion pieces in articles like clear politics and washington time. she is a globetrotting infectious disease person. she advises companies on how to protect employees from malaria. she funded a faith-based program for washington, d.c. girls living in housing. she interrupted here capitol hill career and spent two years as a nun. she said a harvard school of

public health graduate. our second guest is elizabeth collins who is an attorney and serving her second term as the board member of the u.s. privacy and civil liberties oversight board. this board is an independent, bipartisan agency within the executive branch that was put in place after 9/11 to review and analyze actions the executive branch takes to protect the nation from terrorism. they are insuring our liberty concerns are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of the laws, regulati regulations and policies related to the policies that protect us. she has experience at the trial and appellate level and has argued before the court of appeals for the second and ninth circuit, she served four years in the department of justice and in 2008 she was confirmed by the

u.s. united states senate as assistance attorney general for legal capacity and provided daily counsel to the attorney general and deputy attorney general on issues from civil, cril new mexico law, national security and judicial nominations and served as the department's regulatory policy officer. she clerked on the united states court of appeals for the washington, d.c. circuit, and the southern district of texas, and part of that he was the republican chief council for supreme court nominations on the judiciary committee from the senate. he has a ba from the university of chicago and a law degree from harvard law school. and karen merik is an entrepreneur, philanthropist and mom. she developed an app that helps

leaders go them self and businesses. before forming pocket mentor, she was an angel investment at appear advisory form and focused on early enterprises. and before that, so was cofounder and vice president of web methods, a startup that grow to 200 million in revenue worldwide before they were sold in the most successful ipo in 2000. she served on the board of several nasdaq companies and the washington metro airport that runs reagan and dullus and are in charge of the six billion silver line metro. a big project. karen has received numerous awards for leadership and service. in 2011, she was name on the top

one titans list for a magazine. she has been featured in success magazine, forbes, and a number of broadcast and pod casts. she is a graduate of ucla. i went through the bios in detail so you can see the interesting path all three of these women have taken. katie, we will lead off with you. >> thank you so much. it is great to be here. thank you for karen and all of you for bringing me here. it is excited. i am talk about a ritual that occurs among young people all of the time and less young people like myself which is the informational interview. you guys are always trying to get a job and someone refers you to someone and you ask to have coffee with them and hopefully they buy you coffee and you are not buying them coffee.

so i just want to give sort of tips about that process as a commentary on the larger thing we do here in washington and what we are up to in government and especially on capitol hill which is what i know best. what she doesn't know is i am going to use karen as a case study for how to do this right because i first met her five years ago. she looked me up as an alum from her university, which was university of virginia, and she dug up the alum and talked to us. i want to be helpful to the former graduates so we talked and one of the great things karen did is she told me her story about why she was conservative and why she wanted

to work on the hill. the experience she had being conservative and caring about issues and starting new at the university of virginia. uva was awful for conservatives when i was there. it turned me into a marxist. i voted for bill clinton in 1992 and i was a major in socialology. but the main thing is karen came in and didn't ask for a job. or at least i don't think she did. she just wanted to get to know me and i wanted to get to know her. she told me about her experience battling for conservative ideas on the campus, or as we called it the grounds, back then. and she told me why she got in

the business of having strong opinions and advocating for them. that was important. when i talk about other c contrasting experiences we had have you will get an instance of why she is a great case study. my friend from the independent woman's forum wrote a piece on how we talk about women especially young women. i am not singling you you out because i talked just like this when i was young. when i was going up in the '80s and '90s we talked about it sounding like a valley girl. i don't know what you call it now. that is how i remember when i got my first job and i was 16 and answered the phone for whatever. the way you get over as it is

you pretend to be that 1950's secretary on mad men or whatever show, leave it to beaver, where you channel that fake actress and pretend to be them. it feels unnatural and it is going to feel like you are pu n putin -- putting on a character. but it becomes who you will talk. i often ask myself when did i stop talking like these crazy kids? i did and it became a habit to talk more like an adult. this is how adults sound like on adult and your friends sound like your friends. that transition occurs and happens through intentional effort. i would encourage you to record yourself talking to your friends and see what happens. really record yourself with your

iphone and thing about how, if you were working for a senator or a cabinet secretary, would they want to send you into a meeting where people were not happy with that? it is easy. you can send in the kids to talk to the constituents but if you have people mad at you they will not want the valley girl talking. nobody is going to want to send you to the important and difficult meetings. no one is going to want you to represent the senator if you talk like that. i beg you, it is a huge way to improve your professional prospects. put on that fakeness and make it till you make it. it will become a habit one day.

when you are hundred years old like me you will smear up your nose just like i do. the other tip i have is something that karen did and that is don't ask for the job or how that person can help you. just get to know that person. a lot of times people say i want a job like you and i say do you know what i do? why do you want to work on capitol hill or do you want an impressive sounding job for your facebook profile? explain you know what we do or maybe you don't and you are asking questions to figure it out. that is what i would suggest. i don't think anyone knows what we do until you come to the hill. that doesn't say anything about you. this is a job you can only learn on the job, i think. there is no graduate program or undergrad program that teaches

you what we do. i expect people will come in not having the tech iniacal skills that are needed. i am going to -- technical -- be looking to see if someone is smart so i can teach them the skills. and i am looking to see if they are with me ideology wise. karen talked about the battles at uva on trying to be a conservative woman and trying to advocate for conservative principles which had to be the belly of the beast. but what that did was it showed me she is a warrior. so what we do here in policy and certainly in politics is warfare. there is good aspects of that and bad aspects of that. what i mean, so, the good thing about it being warfare is the

comr camaraderie. you don't have to censor yourself. i love that. i can say whatever i think with my colleagues and they agree with me and i don't have to censor myself. that is wonderful. but the risk of warfare of course is that we could destroy each other. if we are not in the trenches with someone who is trust worthy next to us they could destroy me or my boss, more importantly they could damage his reputation or my reputation. we have to really trust people. we have to know they are with us. that is the first litmus test you have to pass. i have to know you are in this for a cause and not just going to washington to wear boring suits. why? we don't get paid anything and have boring wardrobes. don't do it if you are in it for

that. but if you are in it for a bigger cause. if you would put on the suit and scream freedom that is when i want fighting next to me and whoever, harry reid. that is who i want up next to me at midnight preparing our battle. i know that person isn't going to betray by boss or me to the media.

pretty awesome to hear from. >> right. thanks so much, indicatey. let me just -- just to kind of punch wait this. informational interviews. don't ask for help, ask questions. watch how you talk, ladies. and employers look for someone smart, on the right page ideologically, in it for a calls show you can be trusted and show your war paint. >> one more thing. if i find out that you are a warrior and an ally, i will chase you to the end of the earth to hire you.

i tried to hire karen three or four times and he blew me off every time. i always chase people down, try to talk them out of grad plans. come work for me. if you show me you are confident, more than that i can make you confident. if you are a warrior and believe i want you next to me. right? >> that's awesome. >> i just wanted to thank y'all for having me here today. i appreciate the goal of the organization and the excitement of this event which i will hopefully keep the excitement up after lunch which is a great time to talk. these kinds of introductions make me wonder what i have been doing with my life. these are impressive women and i'm taking notes as y'all are talking, and i'm now concerned that every other word will be "you know" or "like." my own kryptonite is you know, and the other way to keep honest

is having a court reporter type it into the record and you raved and it you cringe and you think, i wouldn't really believe me or want to follow me, and i need to be more careful, so i can echo that -- can't echo that strongly enough. i'm going to talk about five points, and i think a prize should go to those of you who can bring together my remarks and katy's remarks because they go a little in difference directions. might be because i have spent a short amount of time on the hill and have come up as a lawyer, have done litigation and policy, but my background is definitely the law. so, there are five words that i would like to leave you with. challenge, civility, reputation, risk, and opportunity. i tried to come up with some sort of cool -- but i stopped at conservative chicks. you guys can come up with a way

to pull this all together. the first point i wanted to start with is challenge. it is great to have this type of atmosphere, the type of'm camaraderie but you should also be challenging yourself and your ideology. it is imperative that you truly come to your own beliefs. it's not a product of your school, it's not a product of your parent us-not a product of your friends. consciously take time periodically, step back and think about why too i believe what i believe? do i still believe what i believe? because the most effective people over time are those that have their core principles and come back to first principles time and time again because it is natural, intuitive, what they believe. so, how does this translate into adulting? it means take jobs that might develop skills rather than being

core within your ideology. it means take jobs that aren't necessarily on the same track as some of the other folks in this room. i just spent five years at a law firm that is one of the most liberal law firms in town and it was a great experience. it was challenging. it wasemanding. and i came out of it with even more firm beliefs than i went into it. but this leads me to my second point, which is civility. civility to me is absolutely key. this translates inside and outside the work place, to a very basic lesson. give people the courtesy of assuming they have arrived at their beliefs the same way you have. through careful consideration. they're not evil. they're not dumb. they're not stupid. they're not uneducated. they've come to it the same way you have. they think it's the right thing to do and will help you in the workplace, particularly if

you're not in a partisan or ideological workplace. there is also a niche for a civil, thoughtful, optimistic conservative. people don't want the shrill one. people don't want the judgey one. people want someone who they think is intelligent, who they think is thoughtful, and, for lack of a better phrasing are might want to have a beer with after work and not the person who they feel thinks they're dumb. and i've been on the receiving end of a lot of those types of looks. the, you can't possibly believe, or, my personal favorite are the sentences that start with, even you must concede. actually i don't. i don't. my favorite one at the law firm was, after the healthcare decision -- which was one of the tough days at the law firm, i was outnumbered. there was active cheering going

on throughout the law firm, and a gentleman who was a close friend of mine, said even you have to admit -- nope. nope. actually believe the federal government is one of limited powers. call me crazy but that is my core belief, and that translates into, i think the supreme court got it wrong. but you say it politely, nicely, and give people the respect of their beliefs. it costs you nothing to do, and it also provides you an opportunity to potentially convert some folks, or at least get them thinking. >> the second point is reputation. this is what you have. and it sticks with you. it absolutely does. and it can be from the good to the bad. i use the example of someone who, after a decade, finally got back in my good graces. it may sound silly but we were in law school, we were all

underwater on everything, and she had volunteered to do something, and then she got too busy and didn't do it, and i had to do it. so fast forward five years, fast forward ten years, and i'm getting calls about whether or not folks should hire her, and i think she is lovely but in the back of my head i just kept thinking she took on a commitment she didn't meet. by the same token -- this also echos things like katy said -- when you meet the folks fully committed, fully trustworth y, die the same thing. i start stalking them, or put my name out there for you. over time i developed a lot of different circles of acquaintances and former jobs and we'll call it's good thing i've had so many jobs and so many opportunities to enlarge the circles, but once i'm on your side on it, if i hear about a job opening, or an opportunity, i'll make the connection and i'll put my word out there for you.

but that's if you're trustworthy and if you're credible. it's very, very hard to rebuild that over time, and it is not worth it. whatever the short-term gain is that you think you're getting, it's not worth it. that both in your personal life and translates into your professional life. one relationship i can point to that typifies this is my relationship with a woman who i think was on this panel last year. rachel brant. we want to law school. we were close friend and she what two areas ahead of me. when i went to go to the department of justice she my bomb and was a phenomenal boston. when he left the department and i took over her job she became a good friend again. now we're the two republicans on this bipartisan -- we're colleagues and friends. this is a relationship that has spanned 18 years and began because we showed up at the journal fair and she was the deputy editor in chief of the

conservative journal at harvard and that's where i wanted to be. so find good people, do good work for them, and it pays out over time. and there's a related part to this. which is do the job you have. there is very little more off-putting than hiring someone who appears to be looking for the next job every time you turn around. do a good job. at the one you have, and the next opportunity will come to you. the next point is risk. don't always go for the conventional stuff. when i came out of my clerkship i had a lot of opportunities. i could go to a big law firm. i was think about going department of justice in the end i went to a very small law firm. it did conservative impact litigation. that to me was what i wanted to be doing. it was important to me, and it was worth the, you're going where, look? i'm sorry, what firm is that? you'll meet a lot of elitists

who feel like you should be doing the conventional thing. understand that the conventional thing may be right for some of you but may not be right for all of you. have the courage to take the risk. what's the worst that happens? a year or two later you have done a good job, made some good relationships. you're going to learn something out of this experience, and then you look for the next one of that might be a better fit. but consider taking the risk. and the final point -- this a little bit more concrete -- take the opportunities that are presented to you. don't worry that you are imposing or that no one wants to hear from you, or they don't care. and this is as simple as if someone sends a farewell e-mail and it's a big office, don't reply all but take 20 seconds to reply back and say, it's been a pleasure working with you. just do it. what's the worst thing that could happen? they delete our e-mail or they get a smile on their face and say it was pleasure working with

her and i'm glad she took the time. 20 seconds to send the e-mail. the second point is put it on the calendar, nothing drives me more crazy than people saying, let's get coffee. okay, when sniff you're out on the street, you see someone go back to your room, go back to your work, go back to wherever you have your calendar and send them three possibilities. great to see you. i could do it monday, wednesday, or thursday, at these times. would any of those work for you? if not, do you have a time when we can do it? it won't happen if you just say, let's meet for drinks, let's meet for coffee. never actually going to happen. this is actually really important if you start in a new job. particularly if you start in a larger area. so in a big law firm where i worked, that was my most recent place, get a lot of, oh, let's have coffee, or let's do lunch, or something, particularly with summer interns and the summer associates. not going to happen unless your

both in front of a calendar you pick the time and it gets done. that's how you 2010 to meet people and demonstrates follow-through. you definitely put yourself into a different category from the person who says let's do coffee to the person you actually have coffee with and the person you get to know better. the third point is if i say to someone, let me know where you end up or let me know if there's anything i can do for you, or just give me an update, please do. i don't say that idly. peek don't say that just to be kind there are other ways to end conversations. i've ended conversations with, good luck. but if someone says to you, let me know how it turns out, let them know. they mean it. again, that puts you into a different category, into the category of the doer, and this will be important as your finishing internships or whatever brings you to d.c. for this summer, or whatever you're doing this summer. find the people who have said,

let me know, and then too let them know. and the final point is, pay it forward. completely agree. none of you should be -- shouldn't be lying copy for another five or ten years. when the next crew comes up and they want the informational discussion or want to have coffee, you pay for them. i have benefited from a long line of folks who have bought coffee for me and i view it as part of my job to then buy the coffee for the next generation of folks. so, hopefully we're leaving some time for some q & a. >> great. awesome. those were terrific. challenge your principles, be grounded in your principles, civility, inside and outside the work place, reputation, it sticks with you. i like that. takes a risk, and take advantage of opportunities offered you and pay it forward. now we have karen. >> thank you so much. goodness. i'm just delighted to be with yaw owl because you all have a lot of courage and you have in

part some of the three things i'm going to talk about. self-awareness or you wouldn't be here. and so i admire that greatly. also, kate and beth, let's have coffee. tomorrow, at 2:30. because i admire everything that you have done. so i want to begin with a story. i am the first woman in my family to get a college education and as bridget complained, i've been extremely blessed. i have had an amazing career. and i have high goals and my career far exceeded anything i imagined because i didn't start college until i was 25. my parents had been divorced. it just wasn't a good time. they cooperate afford to put me through school. our close family had been split asunder and i didn't have the confidence, the time to bite the bullet and support myself in southern california and mutt -- put myself through school.

the rent alone was so expensive. so eventually, though, i got a rent controlled apartment, i did a area of community knowledge and then two years of ucla. finish mid degree in three years because it's hard to live at the poverty level. i came to washington, dc with a degree in political science, and no one was more surprised than me to reelize that policy and politics is so bureaucratic. i did not know that. so i went and used some of the resources i had gained while i put myself through school at the ucla placement and career planning center. went become and used those self-assessment tools and realized, i'm a born entrepreneur. now, i didn't know that until that time. and the reason i knew so much about these resources at the placement and career planning center is that every single day i worked there, five'm hours a day, five days a week while i put myself through school, we had alumni coming in, every day, saying, i've been at this job for two years, it's not what

thought it was going to be. i have this degree in x, y, z, and i don't want to work in this field. so it's very common. do not be surprised. there will be self times throughout your career where you will say, this isn't really what i want to do. and so my first piece of advice for you is, invest in your self-discovery. do it often, do it throughout your career. know what your strengths are. back in when i first graduated from,ly i used the book, what color is your parachute. i bought that book several times in the years since i graduated from ucla and also discovered another amazing self-assess. tool -- there are so many of them but my any favorite is called strengths finder, and you, for 20 minutes and $15, you can find your top five strengths. strengths finder has been taken by 14 million people around the world. it's based on science and

research, and it's really good to be able to articulate what your strengths are. if you don't note what your strengths are no one else will, and as women, in the workplace, crash through the glass ceiling, you need to articulate what your strengths are, and i will tell you this. some are some that you have that you don't realize they're part of who you are, you're pushing them to the side. did that for so many years with any strengths and now i own them and i'm in my zone and i'm thriving itch encourage you to self-discovers. harvard business review did an article about the best leaders, and the best leaders are those who are self-aware and i think you heard strains of that from what beth and katy were talking about. they were aware. they had self-awareness. so the second thing that i realized has been really critical of my career is to invest in your communication skills.

my first professional role, after college, i realized that a lot of people were influential in meetings, and i would have ideas but i didn't have the confidence to present my ideas. so across my desk one day was a post card about a communications seminar, a two-or three day seminar, and i decided to take and it it changed everything. from that point on, i just learned really good communications skills, and from that point on i started to use them in meetings, and one day my boss, who was a lawyer, who was a trained communicator, came up to me and said, where did you learn such great communication skills? and i got numerous promotions, and then after that period of time i ended up starting a business, taking it public on the nasdaq and i communicate all the time and that early seminar helped me greatly. now you have online courses, you have ebooks. you have seminars. and i continued to invest in my communications skills. matter of fact last year i went

to a conference where for three days we were all working on communication skills. we had two hours to write a speech and had to deliver and it it had to be recorded and then our teammates would critique and it we had expert mentors on site. great communicators are not born. if you have some good communication skills they can always be better, and really, nothing will propel you further and faster than strong communication skills. so i highly recommend you do that. the third thing is to invest in your personal development every day do one thing that helps you learn and grow. just yesterday afternoon i was speaking with the ceo of washington first bank. i served on her board of directors. publicly traded bank. she was saying to me, i tell people something, i learn something every day and that's

an attitude of humility we should all have and an attitude that it will bring you success because leadership can success develop daily, not a day. so there a number of ways to invest in your personal growth. you can listen to podcasts. have a morning routine that energizes you where maybe you put your top three goals on a post-it and it's the genesis of what i'm doing with my pocket mentor mobile app, which is a daily read. it's five minutes, on your smartphone, it changes your mindset. if you want to change your work and your life you start by changing your day and it really is one day at a time. fast -- fascinating how much we have been talking about communication skills and i have a free ebooklet about my blog, pocket mentor.com called the second sven seek it credits to highly effective communicators

and one of the most popular articles i've written. and i think it's because people know intuitively that communication skills are important, and by the way, research shows that employers, the people who hire and recruit people, their number one complaint is about communication skills. and i can tell you i recruited some skilled big schools, small schools and not everyone can write well or speak well. so you will stand apart if you do. but the other thing that is interesting is that there's also the research that shows people who are employed who report to someone else their number one complaint about their bosses is poor communication skills. they're inconsistent. they're not clear. they keep changing, and so i think all of us can constantly improve in that area. so let's -- trying to think -- oh, yes, one more thing. over the years i've been

surprised at some of my best opportunities have been presented to me. for example, serve on five public company boards. may by familiar with this statistic. only 17% of public company boards are women. these are people i had no idea they were paying attention to me and what i was doing. and they would call -- they called me up and said i have seen your work, are you interested? and that's virtually unheard of. and that's why i want you to know, and i'll close with this, the most influential person in your career is you. the most influential factor, it's not your family, not your connections. they're important. not where you went to school. that matters. but the most important thing is you. it's your mindset, it's your attitude. it's your integrity. how you do the small things well. it's stepping up to the plate to

do a job that no one else is going to do. it's being polite. it's being friendly. it's being likeable. which you can be liked and be respected at the same time. so i -- of everything else i've said i want you to go away with that idea, that you are the most influential factor in your success. thanks. >> awesome. that was great. [applause] >> thank you, karen. invest in your self-discovery, invest you your communication skills typically, invest in your personal development, leadership and success, develop daily. repetition, repetition, repetition. we have time for about 15 minutes of questions, and do we have microphones? so if you raise your hand, the microphone will come to you, and, karen, are we asking folks to introduce themselves? please introduce yourself when you ask a question. >> hello. thank you for being here today.

i am victoria from the university of kansas and i was wondering if you guy could talk about personal branding. i'm currently working on a congressional campaign and we have been told to mute our social media a little bit so that doesn't interfere with the campaign and with the boss, but also i hear a lot about personal branding. how could i work both those avenues and be successful in both of them. >> i'm happy to talk about how you serve someone else, and also protect your open rep pew -- own reputation and keep that growing, i guess, not just falling behind your boss' shadow. is that what you're asking? [inaudible] >> right. when you're working for an elected official or someone running to be an elected official, your name in the news is a fail. so, if you are going into that

career, that is something you need to recognize from the beginning. and -- but understand you till have a very strong and vibrant personal brand in that world and it's your relationships. so everyone will know you in the world you operate in. your name will be very well-known and your reputation will follow you forever, as beth said, and any grudge someone has against you they won't forget ever. so, i always think about -- people, when they leave the hill especially and become lobbyists or go somewhere else, they're always shocked by how people used to answer and return their qualifies, not because -- their calls not because of them. it's because of their position. and so i've heard that so many times that i've made it's goal for myself is i want to be the kind of person that people will return my calls even when i'm unemployed or an asker, if i'm a

lobbyist or advocate of some sort. you want to always be someone who doesn't take your position of power for granted, so that you return people's calls, you are kind and courteous, i can't imagine anyone in this room would -- just know when you work for someone else and his or her name is in the media, your brand can be still vibrantly built through your relationships and how you treat people, people will know who you are, based on how you treat others, and also how confident you are. everyone knows in this town that staffer importance to the achievements of the elected official and so when they achieve something, they know who staffed that issue for him? they want to know that. who is the lead? who is that person's spokesperson? that was a great quote. so, that is how you do it. but know if you're going into this business, your name is not in the media and you don't want

it to be and won't be allowed to be. >> equivalent of something i was talking about. there can be a niche for different types of viewpoints and different types of individuals, putting the hill aside acan't agree more there are certain times in your life when you are staffing someone else. it is not about you. but your brand is your reputation and you can find time and you can find ways where you will be a distinct quantity. one place i was looking at and getting ready to go into my first real adult job, there was place i was strongly considering and then i realized i probably would have been the sixth conservative woman,up, at the firm and i thought i can't be the seven inch -- the seventh one so go somewhere where you have the opportunity to be distinct. may that translate if you're doing ideology work but thing about other ways to distinguish

yourself and maybe it is because you're the one who does return every phone call, you're the one who proofreads their e-mails and uses complete sentences in their e-mails. i can't emphasize this enough. if i see an emoticon in any formal e-mail -- look at the look of people's faces. it is never okay. it took me two decades to use my first exclamation point in a formal e-mail and i think it was -- i still have some regrets. but make that your brand. make that your brand. that you cross every t, you dot every i, you're the one. i'm not saying being a work-aholic. i'm just saying do what you say you're going to do and do it well. >> anything to add? >> are you -- does your question mean, can you have an online presence of your own? is that what you mean?

[inaudible] >> so you don't want to be quoted in the media. i believe that everyone should have a presence online and you can control it. the one piece of real estate you control. most articles i've been in, whether positive or negative, they have been unintentional lay incorrect. but you own that real estate. so, if you have your twitter account or facebook or whatever, instagram, you own that, and you can be very professional on that and you can be not, i believe -- you don't necessarily have to conflict. i serve on the board of the metropolitan washington airport authority but i speak to the media all the time but never officially talk about the authority. i still am able to put forth my point of view. i'm able to share information that i think is worthwhile. my followers are growing into the thousands across all of my

social media, and i think that everyone should want to own several pieces of real estate and i don't think there should be any conflict at all, if you're not mentioning your, who but being yourself. that will hold you in good stead. and that's why people say, be careful what you say on your personal page and i always do that. i do that. wouldn't want anyone to look back -- i don't want my children to look back for one thing but also if i serve on public company boards and want to continue doing that. i don't want some public company's ceo looking at my facebook saying i've done something that has embarrassed their brand, and if that oneoff your guiding principles -- whatever you put online sent going to embarrass yourself or your future business partners, then i would say -- but i would just offer