April (Q2) 2019

I agree with quite a few points you've made, but this mentality is a disease that creates young controllers who certify and harbor ill will towards the older controllers, creates a shit facility morale, and then the young controllers get older and reflect the same sentiment back on the new controllers with their "You havent earned shit yet" bullshit.


kind of like how the new people pay more for retirement than an older controller does and then wont even seen that retirement because its unsustainable. the union is meant to advocate for the profession not just their active members. "I got mine screw the rest of you." absolutely is a plague mentality. they have to create an environment with the FAA for the union and the profession to survive long term.

its not apple and oranges. its maybe gala vs granny smith. no one owes you anything even when you are in the union. no one says you are guaranteed movement. no one guarantees you pay raises. is it an employee right to move jobs? not to my knowledge. and I'm not saying any trainee has said this but their first introduction is welcome to OKC and we can send you anywhere if you can make it, good luck in alaska.....how is that not natcas responsibility to take care of people who will ultimately be in the union and help make their life as well as their active members lives better by promoting a more efficient and appropriate initial placement? that's not really that different than current members facility placement and movement. they are absolutely connected unfortunately. allowing the FAA to be solely responsible for staffing and placement is irresponsible.
 
It's not an entirely unreasonable point, though. The union exists to look after the interests of its members, and any union only has so much political capital to expend. If the union uses its time, money, and resources to go to bat for Academy students, it stands to reason that they giving up an opportunity to get something for their dues-paying members.

I personally agree with you, and I think NATCA trying to negotiate better placement for academy grads would be a great way to solve a lot of these problems before they occur. But I can also see a LOT of controllers getting up in arms if NATCA used its political capital to negotiate better conditions for academy students instead of active members.
NATCA already has a monthly meet and greet dinner in OKC for any academy people that want to go. So they are actively spending time on academy students.
 
NATCA national has been vying for a bigger seat at the hiring table for years. It's members at the local level that need to understand that there are higher-level concerns that exist outside of SUX or whatever sister-banging facility they're at. Change the mentality within yourself and then educate others so that we can make this profession as enjoyable as we all thought it could be when we got hired.
 
its not apple and oranges. its maybe gala vs granny smith. no one owes you anything even when you are in the union. no one says you are guaranteed movement. no one guarantees you pay raises. is it an employee right to move jobs? not to my knowledge.

LOL nice apple comparison. I prefer Gala to all others.

i dont want to split the hairs too* finely but... you are actually owed many things when you are in a labor union. There are laws governing it. And same goes for how management interacts with the union's designated representative. If either side is acting in bad faith then you might be SOL as a practical matter, but bad faith is also illegal (almost impossible to prove). Pay raises are as close to a guaranteed as humanly possible after the title 49 (or title 5? i forget which one it was) fix. insofar as NATCA has the ability to negotiate for pay, they do and will. Any arbitrator would give at least some raise to keep up w inflation, etc. , if it got that far. So there will never be a year in anyone on this board's FAA career that goes without a raise, unless you're capped out.

Movement is certain to happen, and therefore has to happen according to some sort of fair/equitable process. Ask someone in the top tier of NATCA leadership how they feel about "representing" academy students, or what do about all the people all over the MMAC crying after every PV --which is terrible-- now that the standards are super tough and back to old school. I think you'd be shocked at their answer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You are right, we are guaranteed some things, sorry I said nothing. I meant to just speak to pay raises and movement. I don’t believe pay raises occurred 2012-2014. Also like you said movement is certain to happen but only based on the nature of retirements and quitters and washouts. But aside from that it’s not guaranteed.

I am certainly not advocating for natca representing academy students because yes it’s a screening process and they don’t pay dues, but the members and leaders should be interested in their placement and the actual process to help out the members.

I prefer gala also.
 
First, there needs to be a flow in facility progression. Sure a lvl 5 tower controller can go directly to a 12 and checkout; however, the controller at a level 8 deserves the opportunity to progress. With the current design, only level 4-5 get to transfer to lvl 11-12 due to the way the staffing numbers work. When those transfers wash, they NEST back to a 4-5.

The top and bottom of the facility levels get the fresh air while mid level facilities are stagnant with disgruntled employees who have spent the past 5 years trying to achieve some level of career progression. Mid level facilities don’t get academy grads, we don’t get NEST, we don’t have a steady flow of arrivals so we don’t release members through NCEPT. Many are turning to the DoD, Management, etc just to escape the cycle of shit they’re stuck in.

There needs to be steady career progression. A 3 or 4 facility cap would ensure that members at every level are given the opportunity to move upwards.

Second, a member should be required to stay at a given location for at least the amount of time it took for them to certify. It’s bullshit that trainers spend 2 years working to get a weak stick controller certified only to have them ERR to a higher level facility 6 months after certifying. You owe those around you at least what it took for you to certify.

Third, there is no reason why a useable CPC aught to leave their assigned facility and go sit and wait for a year before they begin training. Facilities need to identify the optimal number of trainees they can accommodate at once and ensure members stay put until their slot to begin training opens up.

Fourth, time on station and the amount of time in the queue to transfer needs to play a heavy roll in determining priority to leave a facility. If I’ve had in for 10 facilities for the past 3 years, I should leave before the guy who decided to put paperwork in to 1 facility 3 days before the NCEPT meeting.

Lastly, release dates need to be taken completely away from the ATM. At our facility, it is interpreted that must be released within 1 year equals I will keep you for a minimum of 1 year. Shouldn’t be the case. If I accept a job with another agency or simply decide to quit, the ATM doesn’t have a say about when I leave. If NCEPT shows that I can be released, I should get a date that coincides with when I am projected to start training at the new facility and not when my current facility can afford to release me. If they can’t afford to release, I shouldn’t be selected.
 
Third, there is no reason why a useable CPC aught to leave their assigned facility and go sit and wait for a year before they begin training. Facilities need to identify the optimal number of trainees they can accommodate at once and ensure members stay put until their slot to begin training opens up.


This x 1000. This would somewhat solve the great training backlog. Why not leave controllers at lower level facilities (where they're still usable!) and adjust their pay somewhat to keep them from being overly salty waiting for their training start date? Hell even remove them from the official staffing numbers so they don't count towards more releases. It'll open up the slots for their replacements to make it in and start training as well.
 
Great complains, except that NCEPT wasn’t created to achieve the bullet points you mentioned.

Furthermore: mid-level facilities do in fact receive controllers from lower facilities. It’s achieved in the form of hardships, direct hires, and in some cases NEST’ers.
 
I agree there should be a time requirement after cpc, but the equivalent to what it took each individual to check out is too random. I.E. It took me 8 months to certify at a very slow level 5 at minimums on every position. There were many days where I would get 0-1 hour of ojt. People shouldn’t be punished bc of shit training programs at facilities.

If they changed the rule that everyone is guaranteed x amount of hours per week (which I think is being discussed), then that wouldn’t be a terrible idea.
 
I really don't get the new rule. Are there really a significant amount of places that could have been doing that amount of training and just weren't for some reason?

It's also a fairly significant amount of training. I'm at a level 5 and even when staffed well 1-2 hours per day was what we could do with multiple trainees
 
First, there needs to be a flow in facility progression. Sure a lvl 5 tower controller can go directly to a 12 and checkout; however, the controller at a level 8 deserves the opportunity to progress. With the current design, only level 4-5 get to transfer to lvl 11-12 due to the way the staffing numbers work. When those transfers wash, they NEST back to a 4-5.

The top and bottom of the facility levels get the fresh air while mid level facilities are stagnant with disgruntled employees who have spent the past 5 years trying to achieve some level of career progression. Mid level facilities don’t get academy grads, we don’t get NEST, we don’t have a steady flow of arrivals so we don’t release members through NCEPT. Many are turning to the DoD, Management, etc just to escape the cycle of shit they’re stuck in

I don't think a blanket facility cap would be fair to all members. Why should it be fair that a level 9-12 tracon or center CPC can transfer to a level 12 tower only but a level 8 tower CPC can't. How about looking at other factors like type of traffic worked.

I can see the argument about time at facility, but sometimes people aren't picked up because they are putting in for places that can't pick up people. While others are willing to go to any facility.
 
First, there needs to be a flow in facility progression. Sure a lvl 5 tower controller can go directly to a 12 and checkout; however, the controller at a level 8 deserves the opportunity to progress. With the current design, only level 4-5 get to transfer to lvl 11-12 due to the way the staffing numbers work. When those transfers wash, they NEST back to a 4-5.

The top and bottom of the facility levels get the fresh air while mid level facilities are stagnant with disgruntled employees who have spent the past 5 years trying to achieve some level of career progression. Mid level facilities don’t get academy grads, we don’t get NEST, we don’t have a steady flow of arrivals so we don’t release members through NCEPT. Many are turning to the DoD, Management, etc just to escape the cycle of shit they’re stuck in.

There needs to be steady career progression. A 3 or 4 facility cap would ensure that members at every level are given the opportunity to move upwards.

Second, a member should be required to stay at a given location for at least the amount of time it took for them to certify. It’s bullshit that trainers spend 2 years working to get a weak stick controller certified only to have them ERR to a higher level facility 6 months after certifying. You owe those around you at least what it took for you to certify.

Third, there is no reason why a useable CPC aught to leave their assigned facility and go sit and wait for a year before they begin training. Facilities need to identify the optimal number of trainees they can accommodate at once and ensure members stay put until their slot to begin training opens up.

Fourth, time on station and the amount of time in the queue to transfer needs to play a heavy roll in determining priority to leave a facility. If I’ve had in for 10 facilities for the past 3 years, I should leave before the guy who decided to put paperwork in to 1 facility 3 days before the NCEPT meeting.

Lastly, release dates need to be taken completely away from the ATM. At our facility, it is interpreted that must be released within 1 year equals I will keep you for a minimum of 1 year. Shouldn’t be the case. If I accept a job with another agency or simply decide to quit, the ATM doesn’t have a say about when I leave. If NCEPT shows that I can be released, I should get a date that coincides with when I am projected to start training at the new facility and not when my current facility can afford to release me. If they can’t afford to release, I shouldn’t be selected.

Perfect example of point 3 is N90 from the looks of the numbers and what some say on the forums about overcrowding.

I don't think a blanket facility cap would be fair to all members. Why should it be fair that a level 9-12 tracon or center CPC can transfer to a level 12 tower only but a level 8 tower CPC can't. How about looking at other factors like type of traffic worked.

I can see the argument about time at facility, but sometimes people aren't picked up because they are putting in for places that can't pick up people. While others are willing to go to any facility.

Exactly. Some of the people who complain about not being picked up are the ones who put in for the 5 most desirable facilities in the NAS.
 
Perfect example of point 3 is N90 from the looks of the numbers and what some say on the forums about overcrowding.



Exactly. Some of the people who complain about not being picked up are the ones who put in for the 5 most desirable facilities in the NAS.

Wondering what the 5 most desirable facilities in the NAS are?
 
Back
Top Bottom