NCEPT debate thread

Dolan said:

There was also a ton of controllers who got an instant free ERR on the first panel because their facilities were staffed very well on paper due to how many people were working temp assignments. Anyone have the results of that first NCEPT handy?

Click to expand...

Included in the attached minutes

This has long been debated, but just to update you guys, they are actively tracking the success rates of controllers transferring higher then 3 levels up. All facets are currently lumped together (Tower/TRACON/Center). Whenever they've been asked about a 3 level cap they've always said, "We'll have to wait until the data is in."
At the moment the data is skewed (it takes less time to washout of a higher level facility if you're incompetent) and the center transfers needing more time to certify.
Current stats for greater then 3 level transfers. Numbers of people still in training are not all greater then 3 level transfers

March 2016 - 1 successful vs 5 unsuccessful (28 still in training)
June 2016 - 5 successful vs 8 unsuccessful (63 still in training)
September 2016 - 2 successful vs 6 unsuccessful (54 in training)
December 2016 - 1 successful vs 3 unsuccessful (51 in training)

You can make the educated assumption that if they're tracking greater then 3 level jumps, if a cap is put in place, it will be a 3 level cap similar to what is currently in place with hardships. At any rate, I'd assume the decision on a cap is still years away in order for them to get a complete sample size.

I think the only way you will get the people on board with that is if in restricting people to 3 level cap moves you strictly commit to sending all new hires to low-level facilities and stop making bidding out this dog eat dog blood bath it currently is... I don't think people will mind making a few moves in their career if they wanna chase the money so long as it's not pulling teeth trying to move around. And that falls on hiring deficiency. You could have an excellent set of rules and regs regarding transferring... But if you're always understaffed it isn't going to matter anyway.

NATCA hasn’t worried about “people on board” for some time now. Why start again now?

I’ll submit the err as well now but I think without a doubt it’s stupid on NATCA and poor management by the FAA to give preference to one Employee’s happiness, wants and welfare over TWO employees happiness, wants and welfare especially when we are asked and expected to keep quiet on the stupid and inappropriate actions that the they both cover up. That’s a whole different rant though.

Also it seems like a lawsuit could be had by showing that NATCA/FAA has set a precedence about how important seniority is about everything up until this issue. Tenor counting for everything but a swap that is literally one for one seems like this could stir a whole other pot nobody has thought of.

Think of it from FAA perspective... Why would the FAA let 2 addequately staffed facilities swap, using up a release, before allowing someone the chance to take a spot at a needy high priority facility. Swaps used to be a great Ace in the hole... Now damn near useless...

Naw. That’s bullshit. Those needy places are getting their bodies from facilities practically regardless of the staffing numbers from the prior facilty. I’ve seen multiple people from zme skip any wait on leaving to go to Oakland center. I imagine it’s the same way for N90 and other so called “needy” places. As far as the swap goes, my thought is the needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few. 2 happy employees is always greater than one happy employee no matter how it’s spun. A swap should never be considered a release especially when it’s between 2 level 12 facilities. It’s not like we’re swapping for pay in the southern region artcc environment.
I can nderstand its logical and it’s not gonna happen on that merit alone.

The problem with a swap is that they aren’t receiving a CPC. There is no assurance the individuals will certify. It states right on the contract:

“The Parties recognize that mutual transfers under this Article are solely in the best interest of the employees”

Granted it goes on to talk about PCS, but this sums up the FAAs perspective on SWAPs. And I can’t help but agree. Employee happiness isn’t something we are entitled too. Just having the opportunity to swap is pretty cool. Think of the money they will be paying to:
1: Change of Station 8 days
2: Save pay where applicable
3: Pay raises where applicable
4: Cost to retrain both individuals (Think Terminal to Enroute 2-3 years!)
5: Resources used to retrain that could be used on increasing staffing and performances instead.
Etc.
SWAPs shouldn’t be a staffing number loophole for people to exploit, much as we would like it to be.

NCEPT is not about a happy employee. You have the wrong idea of the FAAs purpose. They are trying to redistribute controllers to even out the staffing numbers and eventually bring all staffing levels up to a manageable level. Just my 2c.

It should be based on an individual basis. Again. Level 12 enroute facilities for both interested in the swap inside the same region. Base the swap off statistics of enroute to eroute swap cpc-it and tell me the washout rate. It barely exist. The party recognizes its in the best interest of the employee tells me its about their happiness. Also they are the breaking the contract mutually agreed upon... it states clearly.... “Approval will not be unreasonably denied nor will release dates be unreasonably delayed. The Parties recognize that mutual transfers under this Article are solely in the best interest of the employees and therefore employees will not be entitled to receive any PCS funds.”
Moving the Faciltiy swap to after all other errs are granted and finding numbers that do not pertain to the above reference of the contract is directly breaking the negotiated contract.

Some might not find a lack of staffing “unreasonably denied”. If it stated regardless of staffing numbers you would have a point. It is considered individually. After ERRs. Most here would probably agree that movement to improve overall staffing of the NAS is far more important than your happiness.

Most enroute to enroute CPC IT’s that I have seen come through take 5-8 months average. Not years. Outside of learning new LOA’s 5 miles and 1000 ft are still 5 miles and 1000 ft and if they can’t do the job at one place then they won’t be able to the same job at another place. Change of station leave will happen if we both get ERR’s. Also the NCEPT and the the transfer MOU came to exist because the faa management were not allowing ERR’s based on staffing numbers because they were promoting and lowering the staffing numbers that could have been ERR’s.

You should just email your reps this info. We get it, you're upset but there are people that have been stuck for 5-7 years and still not getting picked up.

wikdevo said:

You should just email your reps this info. We get it, you're upset but there are people that have been stuck for 5-7 years and still not getting picked up.

Click to expand...

Yeah I’m upset. And I’m going on 8 Years now with nothing. So I’m fed up. It’s time to change the broken system.

The swap provision is garbage. I sent many an angry email about that when I was in your shoes last year. They did in fact take what used to be an easy totally legitimate process for accomplishing career goals and effectively eliminate it from use.

theadam said:

Yeah I’m upset. And I’m going on 8 Years now with nothing. So I’m fed up. It’s time to change the broken system.

Click to expand...

You knew (or should have known) that someone from ZTL would be ineligible to swap with since they were below the national staffing average. Especially since ZTL has been below the average since July/August of this year.
Since that time, nothing has been kept secret or changed with how swaps are dealt with.

@breakaway2000
do you have a list of facilities that haven't selected and/or released anyone since NCEPT began?
If not, I might spend some time next week and look through all the panels.

Stinger said:

@breakaway2000
do you have a list of facilities that haven't selected and/or released anyone since NCEPT began?
If not, I might spend some time next week and look through all the panels.

Click to expand...

Are you talking about on the positive or negative side?

On the positive side, I believe everyone that has been eligible has released someone at some point. MCO probably leads the way with only 1 person accepting a TOL and that was to F11. Even the typical garden facilities of DEN, CLT, IAH, etc have had people leave.

On the negative side, I haven't looked back and analyzed it, I would also be curious as to how many facilities haven't been able to release anyone since the NCEPT started.

breakaway2000 said:

Are you talking about on the positive or negative side?

On the positive side, I believe everyone that has been eligible has released someone at some point. MCO probably leads the way with only 1 person accepting a TOL and that was to F11. Even the typical garden facilities of DEN, CLT, IAH, etc have had people leave.

On the negative side, I haven't looked back and analyzed it, I would also be curious as to how many facilities haven't been able to release anyone since the NCEPT started.

Click to expand...

I didn't think about the positive side, but that's interesting too.
I was thinking about facilities that haven't been eligible to release anyone yet, and facilities that haven't been able to select anyone (for any reason, either not having people to rank or people they rank are chosen by higher priority.)

XRadar said:

New here, tried to read all the posts to see if it was mentioned, eyes glazed over...Forgive me if this has been mentioned.
It seems here at a level 9 we are screwed by NCEPT. The new hires are going to the lower levels, and thus those facilities have numbers to let people go. So now you can leave your 6 and go to a 12. 12 needs people, they take them. Guess who is below numbers and not getting any new blood? 8-9 facilities! There should be a cut-off for progression. Leave a 6, best you can do is 9, maybe 10. We are stagnant here and nobody is leaving, nobody is coming in either.

Click to expand...

If you're below the natl avg proj then you get picks in the first round and 8-9s are allowed to staff to 100% proj in the 2nd. So if you're not getting inbounds it's cuz no one wants to go there, I understand your frustration. But the system has really just started working beginning with the Sept 2017 NCEPT. Before that it was a catastrophe. 6-12 jump is more difficult now because there's real competition finally. But you guys are missing the point this is not about making us happy it's about triage. And we as controllers should be well suited to understand priority.
I am also in favor of a 3 level cap but it's not that simple. They'd have to tell a CPC at a fat facility they can't transfer to a Center that needs people cuz it's 4 levels but they'll send new hires there.

adub said:

You listed JNU.. yes, they are dead in the winter.. but during the summer they are busier than most other facilities operating, often with 2 local controllers and having more aircraft buzzing around their airspace than a level 8. Don't use a level by itself to determine its necessity. JNU is a major airport for the area in Alaska and is a life line of supplies to communities around that don't have any other access but by air.

Click to expand...

Shout-out to this dude who went in for JNU. Nobody ever really believes the density during summer...


Besides that, I have literally nothing of value to add to this conversation. Carry on.