NCEPT debate thread

What is with all the case by case and extenuating circumstances bullshit? Are we supposed to submit a narrative with ERR paperwork?
That was the first thing that stuck out to me. The grimiest part of the whole thing, and that’s saying something.

Here are phrases used in that document:
Generally
Case by case basis
Extenuating circumstances
May expand consideration
Normally not be considered

Just wow.
 
That was the first thing that stuck out to me. The grimiest part of the whole thing, and that’s saying something.

Here are phrases used in that document:
Generally
Case by case basis
Extenuating circumstances
May expand consideration
Normally not be considered

Just wow.

Aka.. lube or no lube?
 
Anyone know on the category II wording for releases if it is at or above 85% or above 85? My facility is literally at 85.0 so it affects me greatly lol
 
I predict another 1000% increase in hardships and another Significant increase in CPCs bidding out as sups. This will not fix but only cause CPC numbers to drop regardless

We’ve already had 2 hardships approved to leave my facility since the last NCEPT panel. Those of us who are trying to ERR “the right way” are screwed. I’ve seen 5 hardships leave my level 7 facility in the past 3 years.
 
For a long time I believed NCEPT was put in place to provide a more comprehensive and streamlined means for staffing and movement. It's clear now that NCEPT was created to stop movement almost entirely. I get it. The old hiring problems have been fixed, for the most part, because of the huge influx of military hires. Now that the agency has the bodies, the goal is to increase total CPC's to replace eligible retirements and general attrition. That's why the recent requirement for minimum hours to train each week has been put in place. Allowing movement will only hinder this goal. NCEPT has nothing to do with anyone getting back to their families or people with experience moving to more challenging and lucrative facilities. NCEPT is a pure numbers game and wherever you find yourself right now is where you're probably going to be for a very long time. The only thing that matters is that the Actual On Board number increases and the DOT sees this.

The thing I can't figure out is why NATCA just buys off on it. There's never a fight against the ATO for much of anything anymore. No fight against the ambiguous language that is used in the recent changes that allows them to do whatever they want. It is strange. You'll never be able to get a straight answer about anything going forward. Even though you've spent years and years and years training developmentals every day all day, you'll never have an opportunity for much of anything else.
 
We’ve already had 2 hardships approved to leave my facility since the last NCEPT panel. Those of us who are trying to ERR “the right way” are screwed. I’ve seen 5 hardships leave my level 7 facility in the past 3 years.

While I see where your coming from, generalizing all hardships as illegitimate is not cool in my opinion. ERR is not necessarily "the right way."
 
While I see where your coming from, generalizing all hardships as illegitimate is not cool in my opinion. ERR is not necessarily "the right way."

Definitely a fair point. For all I know all the hardships I’ve seen are legitimate. But the timing does make one wonder.
 
Putting feelings aside, criticality to the NAS is important. If you guys want to be left alone as FAA then criticality is important. N90 needs people. When flow initiatives increase to NY due to staffing then that catches national attention. Nobody cares if there’s a delay in Montana.
 
Putting feelings aside, criticality to the NAS is important. If you guys want to be left alone as FAA then criticality is important. N90 needs people. When flow initiatives increase to NY due to staffing then that catches national attention. Nobody cares if there’s a delay in Montana.
Except N90 is swimming in trainees many of whom have years delay before actually training. So no, N90 doesn't currently need more trainees.
 
Putting feelings aside, criticality to the NAS is important. If you guys want to be left alone as FAA then criticality is important. N90 needs people. When flow initiatives increase to NY due to staffing then that catches national attention. Nobody cares if there’s a delay in Montana.

If we actually gave a shit about N90s staffing, it would be moved off of Long Island. But, that won't happen.
 
Putting feelings aside, criticality to the NAS is important. If you guys want to be left alone as FAA then criticality is important. N90 needs people. When flow initiatives increase to NY due to staffing then that catches national attention. Nobody cares if there’s a delay in Montana.

"Temporary Change 2" completely invalidates your point.

With it, if I want to transfer from a level 7 facility with 95% staffing to a level 6 facility with 95% staffing with the sole purpose of wanting to be in a geographic area, and the latter facility is rated more critical to the NAS, the transfer still won't be allowed under "Temporary Change 2" based on the staffing numbers. Even a transfer to a Top 20/50/whatever it is these days doesn't matter if the facility is above 85%. That's absolute horse shit.
 
If we actually gave a shit about N90s staffing, it would be moved off of Long Island. But, that won't happen.
It will come to another head eventually, at some point someone is just going to have to take it in the shorts and do the right thing.
 
Back
Top Bottom