NCEPT debate thread
- Thread starter DeltaEEZulu
- Start date
rugbydog11
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 610
There are situations in which a person could devline an offer... Maybe a pregnancy or a family living situation, so a permanent ban would not be acceptable, but a 1 year would be in my eyes. If you turn down because of something similar to the above mentioned scenarios, the situation would not magically disappear after 2 or 3 months gor the next NCEPT panel.
rugbydog11
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 610
Sorry for typos, on my phone.
breakaway2000
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 1,693
It delayed me 2 years.
Granted, I know I'm at the extreme end and it would never happen, but how many of those situations arise in the few weeks prior to the panel meeting vs occurring well before and the person not caring enough about their co-workers to remove their ERRs? With a current pregnant wife, I don't believe that's a viable excuse. With Cat 1 releases having a 3-6 months window and Cat 2 releases having a 1 year window, you have an ample window to either move to your next location and find a new OBGYN/hospital or have the kid and still not move til they're 6+ weeks old. Not to mention you have 3 months of FMLA leave at your disposal which you can use prior to the birth or after (it's a wonderful thing).
As far as family situations go, if it's a viable hardship, that would occur outside of the NCEPT. I have absolutely no way of getting this data, but I'd have to imagine the % of people who are lucky enough to get back "home" aren't actively trying to bid out and leave family.
Stinger
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 1,496
Positions offered: it mentions that former FAA developmental controllers rehired within 1 year of separation are eligible.
So anyone that has failed out of facilities in the last year are eligible to go direct N90 I guess.
Edit: probably not I guess...still need 1 year of post certification experience. Gotta only be a handful of people that achieve cpc and then get NESTed out of their next two facilities.
Last edited:
CaptainObvious
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 2,133
But it also says field failures won't be considered. I was rather confused by the posting
Mike Kilo
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 2,840
Is that from NCEPT? Or a person backing out of a round where only one could be released?
Barring "Hardship" circumstances I don't care the reason you decline. If you want to stay it's not unreasonable in the grand scheme to wait two years to put paperwork out. And if they are hardship criteria and you stay out for that you shouldn't need to move inside of that time frame anyway (as mentioned above). There are 13 people who have declined offers so far, and that may have blocked others from their facilities being released. Say they drop below numbers due to a retirement next month, well they could be below a cat two for years like P80 and many other facilities.
breakaway2000
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 1,693
A person backing out and we could only release one.
- Messages
- 253
- Facility
- ZTL Atlanta Center
I say make them go with no return rights. Good luck at N90 or LAX, see ya!
rugbydog11
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 610
I am probably pretty moderate on this issue, but if something is to arise between accepting the TOL and the placement date that causes a person to no longer be able to move, it shouldn't blacklist them forever. I think it should be awarded to anyone in the facility they are currently at willing to accept that date at that receiving facility. There is obviously not one correct solution to this problem, but people intentionally blocking others by putting in N90/LAX with 0 intention of going is what needs to be punished.
Mike Kilo
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 2,840
I agree there shouldn't be a ban forever (just the guy who screwed me, and didn't go because he didn't think about the ATL lifestyle) lol. But one or two years isn't unthinkable. That could mean one or two years someone else is stuck because of their choice.
Dontbotherme
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 876
I'm curious who those 3 are here. A few come to mind
3 rules would fix this process (or really, really help it)
1. From time of CPC, (12 months/18 months) before you are eligible to put in ERR paperwork or the rule becomes, it takes you X amount of days to certify from the day you reported to the facility, you are then obligated to put in the same amount of days as CPC before your paperwork can be submitted. Second option would take more effort to enforce but it's an option.
2. You decline an ERR, You become ineligible for 12-18 months
3. For N90, or C90, CPCs that want to transfer there get priority, but for now, continue to fill both of them with AAC grads. Yes, you are going to lose a lot of them, but that's the cost of business. 20,000 people applied this last panel, I'm sure plenty of them would be willing to give those facilities a try
1. From time of CPC, (12 months/18 months) before you are eligible to put in ERR paperwork or the rule becomes, it takes you X amount of days to certify from the day you reported to the facility, you are then obligated to put in the same amount of days as CPC before your paperwork can be submitted. Second option would take more effort to enforce but it's an option.
2. You decline an ERR, You become ineligible for 12-18 months
3. For N90, or C90, CPCs that want to transfer there get priority, but for now, continue to fill both of them with AAC grads. Yes, you are going to lose a lot of them, but that's the cost of business. 20,000 people applied this last panel, I'm sure plenty of them would be willing to give those facilities a try
Dontbotherme
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 876
A80-From 2010 until the end of 2016 (no one that was in a training status at the end of 2016 was counted).
VRAs Successful: 6
VRAs Washed Out: 8
Since that list was published (people who bid lines for 2017)
VRAs Successful: 2
VRAs Washed Out: 4
So a 40% success rate currently. (Not counting any VRAs still in training)
- Messages
- 3,162
I get the hate directed at people who turn down a selection, but the anger should really be directed at the proper targets. The ones who created a system in which you as an individual have zero influence on the factors for any type of career progression.
Also re: military controllers. As someone who has been an active duty, dod civ, and FAA controller, I can say with great confidence most are absolute garbage. The military dumbs it down as much as possible to remove any thought process from the job, and pilots are taught the world revolves around them. You will never see civilian pilots get away with the things military pilots do at thier home stations. I saw someone say once that military ATC is like ATC with training wheels, and I think it's a good description. The Environment that mil ATC grow up in is not comparable to the civilian side. The thing that separates the successful and the unsuccessful ones outside is the willingness and ability to learn, just like every other new hire.
Also re: military controllers. As someone who has been an active duty, dod civ, and FAA controller, I can say with great confidence most are absolute garbage. The military dumbs it down as much as possible to remove any thought process from the job, and pilots are taught the world revolves around them. You will never see civilian pilots get away with the things military pilots do at thier home stations. I saw someone say once that military ATC is like ATC with training wheels, and I think it's a good description. The Environment that mil ATC grow up in is not comparable to the civilian side. The thing that separates the successful and the unsuccessful ones outside is the willingness and ability to learn, just like every other new hire.
Last edited:
Dontbotherme
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 876
My Proposal:
1) Stop all new hires from going to 9s and higher and send them all to the academy before they go to the field
2) Close/consolidate the slowest 10% of facilities and offer those affected employees full PCS moves to available openings at level 9s and below (use seniority to sort the list)
3) Have a rotating list of top ten priority facilities, each month, that allows for automatic releases (no longer than a year) to anyone willing to go from a facility outside of the top ten. The top five facilities will offer paid moves.
4) If you turn down an ERR offer, you are penalized one full year from the time you declined the offer from submitting any move paperwork
1) Stop all new hires from going to 9s and higher and send them all to the academy before they go to the field
2) Close/consolidate the slowest 10% of facilities and offer those affected employees full PCS moves to available openings at level 9s and below (use seniority to sort the list)
3) Have a rotating list of top ten priority facilities, each month, that allows for automatic releases (no longer than a year) to anyone willing to go from a facility outside of the top ten. The top five facilities will offer paid moves.
4) If you turn down an ERR offer, you are penalized one full year from the time you declined the offer from submitting any move paperwork
breakaway2000
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 1,693
For some perspective, I spoke with someone who was on the taskforce who evaluated N90 and their training program a few years ago, one stat has stuck with me all this time. CPC's who transferred to N90 from level 7 towers and below with no radar experience had a 97% wash out rate. They simply don't have the time and resources to work with people directly out of the academy.
Interesting statistic. How does that compare to academy grads that would go through Basics, RTF, and then TSEW before going there?
breakaway2000
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 1,693
I wish I had access to the full report. I can't even cross reference the washout stat from the last page, all I could find today dated back to early 2015 in terms of N90 placement.
If I was to make an educated guess, I'd imagine they'll only pull controllers with experience from a handful of military approach controls with a proven track record of success at N90, C90, A80, etc. via this current direct hire bid.
