CRWG

[Termine]

You do know that no other position shall be combined to local control is an actual thing right?

That's only if you want to use LUAW, not a general rule for all times. Also, fun fact, it says the LC position must not be combined with any other position—but OS/CIC should not be combined with any other position.

When you're combined up with LC and CIC it's unreasonable for you to effectively make phone calls to airport police and fire, the DEN, adjacent facilities, airline dispatch, etc. while providing appropriate service to aircraft.

So combine CIC into GC instead of LC. And if you're so slow that LC/GC are already combined, then you probably are able to perform those extra duties.

Returning to the topic at hand, I think it's annoying that the agency expects BUEs to staff the desk just because they can't attract and retain enough supervisory personnel. But if they're making staffing the desk a priority, I guess I'm glad they're actually taking that into account when creating BUE staffing numbers.

 

[32andBelow]

That's only if you want to use LUAW, not a general rule for all times. Also, fun fact, it says the LC position must not be combined with any other position—but OS/CIC should not be combined with any other position.


So combine CIC into GC instead of LC. And if you're so slow that LC/GC are already combined, then you probably are able to perform those extra duties.

Returning to the topic at hand, I think it's annoying that the agency expects BUEs to staff the desk just because they can't attract and retain enough supervisory personnel. But if they're making staffing the desk a priority, I guess I'm glad they're actually taking that into account when creating BUE staffing numbers.

There are sucking up an insane amount of sups in the en route facilities. It’s the only way to move and these jobs are getting bid

 

[Seeyoufly]

You do know that no other position shall be combined to local control is an actual thing right?

Huh?

 

[ChuckNovember]

You guys that want to transfer don't want CRWG numbers.* Those at the facilities they want to be at for life do.

This is true. But am I the only one to question the logic of people who think we should split everything all day no matter what just to pump our numbers? How would the public react if they found out there are air traffic controllers in Cleveland sitting at empty sectors for 3 hours of TOP / day? One of the anti-labor tactics of the industrial revolution was to squash the integrity of jobs to the point that people could be quickly and effortlessly replaced. If you're a skilled, experienced worker you have leverage over your employer. If you are doing a job that has been so segmented and simplified that any of the 50,000 yearly applicants can do it you have no leverage. I understand that there are facilities where people are getting their ass kicked day in and day out but if we all start pulling Cleveland-esque bullshit I think it would eventually blow up in our face.

 

[CaptainObvious]

That's only if you want to use LUAW, not a general rule for all times. Also, fun fact, it says the LC position must not be combined with any other position—but OS/CIC should not be combined with any other position.


So combine CIC into GC instead of LC. And if you're so slow that LC/GC are already combined, then you probably are able to perform those extra duties.

Returning to the topic at hand, I think it's annoying that the agency expects BUEs to staff the desk just because they can't attract and retain enough supervisory personnel. But if they're making staffing the desk a priority, I guess I'm glad they're actually taking that into account when creating BUE staffing numbers.

We have controllers working CIC for whole shifts sometimes. And large portions of the shift with an OS as well. They needed to account for that and good thing they did.

 

[HurryUpandWait]

Lol did you see the email just sent our? Yes the FAA published new CRWG as a part of the CWP but only as an appendix because the FAA does not intend to use the numbers to increase hiring. 🤣 You can't make this up.

We have been trying to get the FAA to hire to the current staffing levels for over 10 years now and you all think they will sign off (in less than a month) on hiring to the CRWG staffing levels that increases overall numbers? FAA won't even make the hiring numbers for the "old" levels in the CRWG this year.

 

[5600k2]

I don’t buy that the CRWG numbers will necessarily reduce transfers. If NCEPT is based off of national average staffing percentage then that average would drop with CRWG and in theory transferring would still be possible. Either way more staffing is better and if CRWG is what gets us there I’m all for it. My facility is supposedly 80% staffed right now but it feels like we are at 50%, I think the current numbers are low and don’t reflect the reality of the job.

 

[32andBelow]

I don’t buy that the CRWG numbers will necessarily reduce transfers. If NCEPT is based off of national average staffing percentage then that average would drop with CRWG and in theory transferring would still be possible. Either way more staffing is better and if CRWG is what gets us there I’m all for it. My facility is supposedly 80% staffed right now but it feels like we are at 50%, I think the current numbers are low and don’t reflect the reality of the job.

I think that rail end of the staffing ramps up really quickly on how many people you have sitting around. 50% more would be doubling your staffing.

I just have a hard time believing they will actually lower the percentages required to transfer. If they did you’d think around 50% of places could release and that’s not the case at all

 

[dingalings99]

50% more would be doubling your staffing.

this is the dumbest thing ive seen in months

thank you

 

[FightingIrish2012]

I don’t buy that the CRWG numbers will necessarily reduce transfers. If NCEPT is based off of national average staffing percentage then that average would drop with CRWG and in theory transferring would still be possible. Either way more staffing is better and if CRWG is what gets us there I’m all for it. My facility is supposedly 80% staffed right now but it feels like we are at 50%, I think the current numbers are low and don’t reflect the reality of the job.

It they adopt CRWG and the new national average is 69% not 81%, you will not be able to release at 69%. This happen in 2017-2018, national average was going down each panel due to releases. Then saw it get below 80% then used 85% as the fixed number of currently staffed to be able to release for a couple years.

 

[Phanatical]

release at 69%.

Nice

 

[NatcaGossGirl]

That's only if you want to use LUAW, not a general rule for all times. Also, fun fact, it says the LC position must not be combined with any other position—but OS/CIC should not be combined with any other position.


So combine CIC into GC instead of LC. And if you're so slow that LC/GC are already combined, then you probably are able to perform those extra duties.

Returning to the topic at hand, I think it's annoying that the agency expects BUEs to staff the desk just because they can't attract and retain enough supervisory personnel. But if they're making staffing the desk a priority, I guess I'm glad they're actually taking that into account when creating BUE staffing numbers.

You’re in a whole different part of orders.

 

[CaptainObvious]

We didn’t have a tower associate so how were we supposed to staff it. Also, contract towers work single controller quite often.

 

[Acquired Taste]

You’re in a whole different part of orders.

View attachment 8542

Our entire existence was a significantly reduced traffic level. It should be an uncontrolled airport.

 

[Termine]

You’re in a whole different part of orders.

Touché. But I will second Acquired Taste's point that at some facilities "significantly reduced" is the standard... unless you want to make a distinction between "normal" traffic of four operations per hour and "reduced" traffic of two operations per hour.

 

[Somenewguy]

If it's normal for your facility then it's not significantly reduced. Y'all are some of the smoothest brains I've ever come across.

Your argument boils down to "this rule is inconvenient for me personally, so I would rather do it a lazier way". Which is an awesome argument until somebody dies.

 

[boots]

We have controllers working CIC for whole shifts sometimes. And large portions of the shift with an OS as well. They needed to account for that and good thing they did.

We have that when there are sometimes 2-3 sups in the building. Its ridiculous.

 

[arHuFf69]

My facility now needs 17 CPCs to allow a transfer which hasn’t happened in at least a decade(probably two). I’ll be out of the FAA by the end of 2023, mark my words.

 

[Termine]

If it's normal for your facility then it's not significantly reduced.

Heaven forbid that our singular departure for the hour should have to be worked both on the taxiways and on the runway by the same controller! That would introduce an absolutely unacceptable level of risk to the NAS. We should probably also open CD while we're at it, to make sure the dedicated GC doesn't have to take any of their attention away from scanning LC's empty runway "to the maximum extent possible." And it wouldn't be a bad idea to split off FD from CD, just to ensure no one is operating beyond their skill level.

 

[Somenewguy]

In short, if you have the resources, then yes you should be doing it decombined. If my tax dollars are paying four controllers to sit in the break room while LC mishears a takeoff, landing, or hold short readback because they're managing multiple frequencies then I think thats a disservice to the public who pays your paycheck. I've been at facilities with multiple airplane crashes where a pilot had to key up and tell the controller what's happened. Part of that is just complacency - the "it's only one airplane" effect where people don't respect the job and think it's overkill to do basic job tasks like scan a runway. You seem to also lack respect for performing the bare minimum functions of the job. Sure as one person you can maintain the facade of a fully functioning facility, but you aren't truly accomplishing all agency goals single handedly on a regular basis. You're cutting corners. And I hope that nobody ends up getting hurt because of it.