Future Staffing Problems

Status
Not open for further replies.
Every CTI grad is exactly as good, at air traffic as a CPC, as they would have been if they didn’t go to CTI. Anyone that’s sharp and dedicated will figure it out. Need both though.
To me it’s more about it’s a group of people that went out of their way and decided it was something they wanted to persue for many years. So there’s a bit more passion there. Not that they are better or worse.

Well they cut off the CTI path in the Feb 2014 bid. That was 9 years ago. Most CTI people are probably aged out by now if they haven't been hired yet.
Yah that’s what I’m talking about. Now we are filling in the world of the hiring change and the results are what they are. But it seems like a lot think the current group isn’t so good sometimes. But our ancestors probably felt the same way about us so who knows
 
Maybe in a boomer but they have finally worked through the whole mass CTI backlog and most peuple are coming from either weak cti school that are still open or off the street and it’s starting to show. But maybe it’s just a back in my day take.
I’ve heard this argument before. Where is the data that shows what we have now is better than cti/military hires. Bc seems like right now we are severely understaffed and back then we were staffed better. I’d like documentation that shows that didn’t work and this is working better. Then I’ll shut up.
 
I’ve heard this argument before. Where is the data that shows what we have now is better than cti/military hires. Bc seems like right now we are severely understaffed and back then we were staffed better. I’d like documentation that shows that didn’t work and this is working better. Then I’ll shut up.
I’m pro the old system…
 
This actually requires all FACREPs not to be lackeys or suits.
This also requires the workforce to understand staffing, writing the schedule and the actual Needs of the facility not the desires for a better break rotation. I’ve seen facreps get ousted because of this bullshit. It doesn’t always mean they are a lackey, but no people don’t want to spend the time and facrep sometimes don’t want to explain it and go behind peoples backs.
 
I’ve heard this argument before. Where is the data that shows what we have now is better than cti/military hires. Bc seems like right now we are severely understaffed and back then we were staffed better. I’d like documentation that shows that didn’t work and this is working better. Then I’ll shut up.
It will take me forever to find this study, but I'll try. There's a study that looked at training success rates at centers and found the two main factors in success were age (younger is better) and being an IFR rated pilot. CTI degree had no impact on becoming a CPC, and actually past high school, education had no impact at all.

EDIT: Found the study quicker than I thought.

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1050265.pdf

EDIT: First link was wrong, lol
 
Last edited:
It will take me forever to find this study, but I'll try. There's a study that looked at training success rates at centers and found the two main factors in success were age (younger is better) and being an IFR rated pilot. CTI degree had no impact on becoming a CPC, and actually past high school, education had no impact at all.

EDIT: Found the study quicker than I thought.

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1050265.pdf

EDIT: First link was wrong, lol
Its more nuanced than that in the study. They admitted that there was such a discrepancy between CTI curriculums that they couldn't draw strong conclusions about the efficacy of the program as a whole. That was CTI's downfall. Depending on the program you had some graduating with a CTO and others who had never heard of a VOR.
 
It will take me forever to find this study, but I'll try. There's a study that looked at training success rates at centers and found the two main factors in success were age (younger is better) and being an IFR rated pilot. CTI degree had no impact on becoming a CPC, and actually past high school, education had no impact at all.

EDIT: Found the study quicker than I thought.

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1050265.pdf

EDIT: First link was wrong, lol
Was the result of this study the reason they changed the Biographical Questionnaire in 2014? The version where the agency was sued for purposely weighing questions such as:

"In the three years prior to applying to this job, the number of formal suggestions I have submitted to my employer(s) was:
A. Not employed (10 points)
B. 0 (8 points)
C. 1 (6 points)
D. 2 (4 points)
E. 3 or more (2 points)"

"My peers would probably describe me as a person who:
A. Never takes chances (1 point)
B. Hardly ever takes chances (2 points)
C. Sometimes takes chances (3 points)
D. Often takes chances (4 points)
E. Very often takes chances (5 points)"

"My previous supervisor would most likely describe the amount of time I needed to complete assignments as:
A. A great deal (5 points)
B. More than average (4 points)
C. Average (3 points)
D. Less than average (2 points)
E. Don't know (1 point)"

"The number of months I was unemployed during the three years immediately before applying to this job is:
A. 0 (6 points)
B. 1 to 2 (10 points)
C. 3 to 4 (0 points)
D. 5 to 6 (8 points)
E. 7 or more (4 points)"

"In the three years immediately before applying to this job, the number of different full or part-time jobs I applied for was:
A. None (0 points)
B. 1 to 2 (4 points)
C. 3 to 4 (3 points)
D. 5 to 6 (5 points)
E. 7 or more (1 point)"

"The number of different high school sports I participated in was:
A. 4 or more (5 points)
B. 3 (4 points)
C. 2 (3 points)
D. 1 (2 points)
E. Didn't play sports (1 point)"

"Of the following, the college subject in which I received my lowest grades was:
A. Science (0 points)
B. Math (0 points)
C. English (0 points)
D. History/Political Science (15 points)
E. Did not attend college (0 points)
 
Last edited:
Was the result of this study the reason they changed the Biographical Questionnaire in 2014? The version where the agency was sued for purposely weighing questions such as:

"In the three years prior to applying to this job, the number of formal suggestions I have submitted to my employer(s) was:
A. Not employed (10 points)
B. 0 (8 points)
C. 1 (6 points)
D. 2 (4 points)
E. 3 or more (2 points)"

"My peers would probably describe me as a person who:
A. Never takes chances (1 point)
B. Hardly ever takes chances (2 points)
C. Sometimes takes chances (3 points)
D. Often takes chances (4 points)
E. Very often takes chances (5 points)"

"My previous supervisor would most likely describe the amount of time I needed to complete assignments as:
A. A great deal (5 points)
B. More than average (4 points)
C. Average (3 points)
D. Less than average (2 points)
E. Don't know (1 point)"

"The number of months I was unemployed during the three years immediately before applying to this job is:
A. 0 (6 points)
B. 1 to 2 (10 points)
C. 3 to 4 (0 points)
D. 5 to 6 (8 points)
E. 7 or more (4 points)"

"In the three years immediately before applying to this job, the number of different full or part-time jobs I applied for was:
A. None (0 points)
B. 1 to 2 (4 points)
C. 3 to 4 (3 points)
D. 5 to 6 (5 points)
E. 7 or more (1 point)"

"The number of different high school sports I participated in was:
A. 4 or more (5 points)
B. 3 (4 points)
C. 2 (3 points)
D. 1 (2 points)
E. Didn't play sports (1 point)"

"Of the following, the college subject in which I received my lowest grades was:
A. Science (0 points)
B. Math (0 points)
C. English (0 points)
D. History/Political Science (15 points)
E. Did not attend college (0 points)
Is this for real? Holy crap
 
Was the result of this study the reason they changed the Biographical Questionnaire in 2014? The version where the agency was sued for purposely weighing questions such as:

"In the three years prior to applying to this job, the number of formal suggestions I have submitted to my employer(s) was:
A. Not employed (10 points)
B. 0 (8 points)
C. 1 (6 points)
D. 2 (4 points)
E. 3 or more (2 points)"

"My peers would probably describe me as a person who:
A. Never takes chances (1 point)
B. Hardly ever takes chances (2 points)
C. Sometimes takes chances (3 points)
D. Often takes chances (4 points)
E. Very often takes chances (5 points)"

"My previous supervisor would most likely describe the amount of time I needed to complete assignments as:
A. A great deal (5 points)
B. More than average (4 points)
C. Average (3 points)
D. Less than average (2 points)
E. Don't know (1 point)"

"The number of months I was unemployed during the three years immediately before applying to this job is:
A. 0 (6 points)
B. 1 to 2 (10 points)
C. 3 to 4 (0 points)
D. 5 to 6 (8 points)
E. 7 or more (4 points)"

"In the three years immediately before applying to this job, the number of different full or part-time jobs I applied for was:
A. None (0 points)
B. 1 to 2 (4 points)
C. 3 to 4 (3 points)
D. 5 to 6 (5 points)
E. 7 or more (1 point)"

"The number of different high school sports I participated in was:
A. 4 or more (5 points)
B. 3 (4 points)
C. 2 (3 points)
D. 1 (2 points)
E. Didn't play sports (1 point)"

"Of the following, the college subject in which I received my lowest grades was:
A. Science (0 points)
B. Math (0 points)
C. English (0 points)
D. History/Political Science (15 points)
E. Did not attend college (0 points)

It was probably factor but I don't know for sure. I know that there are NO studies that show CTI degree makes a positive difference in successfully becoming a CPC.

There were two things the FAA was trying to fix. One was that having veterans in a separate pool screwed them over, with 10 point guys beating out 5 point guys. The other was that the CTI pool got hired at a higher rate than any other pool (even the CTO pool). Even though there was no evidence that being CTI mattered.

Ths FAA overreacted but they weren't completely shooting from the hip.
 
It was probably factor but I don't know for sure. I know that there are NO studies that show CTI degree makes a positive difference in successfully becoming a CPC.

There were two things the FAA was trying to fix. One was that having veterans in a separate pool screwed them over, with 10 point guys beating out 5 point guys. The other was that the CTI pool got hired at a higher rate than any other pool (even the CTO pool). Even though there was no evidence that being CTI mattered.

Ths FAA overreacted but they weren't completely shooting from the hip.
My guess cti were more capable and “better” at filling out the application and going through the process than a bunch of jar heads and ged recipients.
 
Was the result of this study the reason they changed the Biographical Questionnaire in 2014? The version where the agency was sued for purposely weighing questions such as:

"In the three years prior to applying to this job, the number of formal suggestions I have submitted to my employer(s) was:
A. Not employed (10 points)
B. 0 (8 points)
C. 1 (6 points)
D. 2 (4 points)
E. 3 or more (2 points)"

"My peers would probably describe me as a person who:
A. Never takes chances (1 point)
B. Hardly ever takes chances (2 points)
C. Sometimes takes chances (3 points)
D. Often takes chances (4 points)
E. Very often takes chances (5 points)"

"My previous supervisor would most likely describe the amount of time I needed to complete assignments as:
A. A great deal (5 points)
B. More than average (4 points)
C. Average (3 points)
D. Less than average (2 points)
E. Don't know (1 point)"

"The number of months I was unemployed during the three years immediately before applying to this job is:
A. 0 (6 points)
B. 1 to 2 (10 points)
C. 3 to 4 (0 points)
D. 5 to 6 (8 points)
E. 7 or more (4 points)"

"In the three years immediately before applying to this job, the number of different full or part-time jobs I applied for was:
A. None (0 points)
B. 1 to 2 (4 points)
C. 3 to 4 (3 points)
D. 5 to 6 (5 points)
E. 7 or more (1 point)"

"The number of different high school sports I participated in was:
A. 4 or more (5 points)
B. 3 (4 points)
C. 2 (3 points)
D. 1 (2 points)
E. Didn't play sports (1 point)"

"Of the following, the college subject in which I received my lowest grades was:
A. Science (0 points)
B. Math (0 points)
C. English (0 points)
D. History/Political Science (15 points)
E. Did not attend college (0 points)
Well I guess I finally understand why I didn't get past this questionnaire back then.
 
I am convinced that nobody knows shit. In my years in the agency I have seen smart people wash out. People that looked like they were crackheads that turned out to be incredible controllers. Military guys that sucked ass. Military guys that were good. Cti grads that sucked and cti that were good. Ots good and bad as well. One thing I know for certain. Management sucks.
 
I am convinced that nobody knows shit. In my years in the agency I have seen smart people wash out. People that looked like they were crackheads that turned out to be incredible controllers. Military guys that sucked ass. Military guys that were good. Cti grads that sucked and cti that were good. Ots good and bad as well. One thing I know for certain. Management sucks.
Last two sentences smack ?
 
I am convinced that nobody knows shit. In my years in the agency I have seen smart people wash out. People that looked like they were crackheads that turned out to be incredible controllers. Military guys that sucked ass. Military guys that were good. Cti grads that sucked and cti that were good. Ots good and bad as well. One thing I know for certain. Management sucks.
Preach
 
Its more nuanced than that in the study. They admitted that there was such a discrepancy between CTI curriculums that they couldn't draw strong conclusions about the efficacy of the program as a whole. That was CTI's downfall. Depending on the program you had some graduating with a CTO and others who had never heard of a VOR.
This is it. I know of CTI schools that kept track of the people who applied, got in, passed Academy, and CPC-ed and they have AWESOME results. I also know of some who had TERRIBLE results. Of course most CTI schools don't even exist anymore. It could have been really good if it was more regulated in what was to be taught, but it was completely up to the director of each program, some of which were never even controllers.
 
I was talking to a coworker the other day, and he was saying they recently approved funding for a major staffing boost. He said there is a plan in place to hire the most controllers in the next 4 years than anytime since the Reagan era. Something like 5-6k I think, with the majority of hires being in the next 2 years. I can’t find any information on this online, does anyone know how accurate this is?
 
I was talking to a coworker the other day, and he was saying they recently approved funding for a major staffing boost. He said there is a plan in place to hire the most controllers in the next 4 years than since the Reagan era. Something like 5-6k I think, with the majority of hires being in the next 2 years. I can’t find any information on this online, does anyone know how accurate this is?
I dunno but isn’t this less than a year since the last bid?
 
I was talking to a coworker the other day, and he was saying they recently approved funding for a major staffing boost. He said there is a plan in place to hire the most controllers in the next 4 years than anytime since the Reagan era. Something like 5-6k I think, with the majority of hires being in the next 2 years. I can’t find any information on this online, does anyone know how accurate this is?
We know there was an audit on manning across the NAS. There's another thread for it called "CRWG." We don't know when or what the results will be for this audit, but many are speculating that target numbers at most facilities will be increased considerably. This would mean they would have to hire a lot more people.
 
We know there was an audit on manning across the NAS. There's another thread for it called "CRWG." We don't know when or what the results will be for this audit, but many are speculating that target numbers at most facilities will be increased considerably. This would mean they would have to hire a lot more people.
They need to decrease them in a lot of areas and let people actually transfer
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom