September (Q4) 2019

[CaptainObvious]

Looking for that 1 dream facility, huh?

Hopefully it’s in the Big 11 that can select people ?‍♂️

 

[Stinger]

Using A80 as an example:
The column (AE) of the Placement Tool called "Current % CPC to Trainees" is currently cell N9/(K9+N9) and has a value of 28.7%.
Column N is "ATCS in Training minus LTH" and Column K is "CPC minus Temps minus LTH"
So column AE isn't really the Current Trainee/CPC percentage, it's the current Trainee to All Bodies percentage.
I think they should be at 40.3% (N9/K9) and unable to take any bodies going off the 30% rule in the ncept latest change.

17 facilities meet the requirements using 85% projected and 30% Trainee/CPC (column AE)
9 facilities meet the requirements using Nx/Kx as a new column to get the trainee/cpc percentage.

 

[Mike Kilo]

It would have been nice if they re ran July numbers so we could see a direct comparison with the new priority and staffing level rankings.

 

[Bilt2spl]

Using A80 as an example:
The column (AE) of the Placement Tool called "Current % CPC to Trainees" is currently cell N9/(K9+N9) and has a value of 28.7%.
Column N is "ATCS in Training minus LTH" and Column K is "CPC minus Temps minus LTH"
So column AE isn't really the Current Trainee/CPC percentage, it's the current Trainee to All Bodies percentage.
I think they should be at 40.3% (N9/K9) and unable to take any bodies going off the 30% rule in the ncept latest change.

17 facilities meet the requirements using 85% projected and 30% Trainee/CPC (column AE)
9 facilities meet the requirements using Nx/Kx as a new column to get the trainee/cpc percentage.

Could you possibly list those facilities? “Asking for a friend”

 

[Phillyman2633]

Could you possibly list those facilities? “Asking for a friend”

Turns out it's just LCH, listed 17 times.

 

[Stinger]

Could you possibly list those facilities? “Asking for a friend”

The 17:
A80, ARB, BOS, C90, CMI, CVG, DCA, HCF, JFK, M98, MIA, MSY, NCT, ORD, PNE, SAV, ZUA

The 9:
ARB, BOS, C90, CVG, DCA, JFK, NCT, ORD, ZUA

 

[rhombus]

Using A80 as an example:
The column (AE) of the Placement Tool called "Current % CPC to Trainees" is currently cell N9/(K9+N9) and has a value of 28.7%.
Column N is "ATCS in Training minus LTH" and Column K is "CPC minus Temps minus LTH"
So column AE isn't really the Current Trainee/CPC percentage, it's the current Trainee to All Bodies percentage.
I think they should be at 40.3% (N9/K9) and unable to take any bodies going off the 30% rule in the ncept latest change.

17 facilities meet the requirements using 85% projected and 30% Trainee/CPC (column AE)
9 facilities meet the requirements using Nx/Kx as a new column to get the trainee/cpc percentage.

Quoting the new changes: "A facility will normally not be considered to receive employees if the ratio of CPC- IT/DEV to total number of controllers is at or above 30%."

So the numbers in column AE are correct as they take into account all controllers in a facility. It's just a poorly named column.

 

[Stinger]

Quoting the new changes: "A facility will normally not be considered to receive employees if the ratio of CPC- IT/DEV to total number of controllers is at or above 30%."

So the numbers in column AE are correct as they take into account all controllers in a facility. It's just a poorly named column.

Thanks for the clarification. I had it in my head they were going to look at the CPC ratio.

 

[Homsar]

The new rules dont affect swaps, they will still be about common as they were.

I think they might be a bit more common, since they’re now the “only” way (besides the shady “case by case” criteria) to get into a facility staffed above 85%.

 

[CK]

I was on a Telecon about NCEPT changes. Cat 2 is now 85% staffed and 85% or better projected. Facilities still staff up to the National average, currently 90.7%, the 85% is a tool they are going to use to take a closer look. Is your fac at 85% and the one you want at 90.6%? Well, that move makes no sense to execute. Now, is your fac 98% and the one you want, 89%? Ok, congrats you got picked up.

The 30% Dev to CPC Ratio is also done in some ATC math. example, 22 CPC, 11 Dev. Thats 50% ratio correct? False. Take the total number of Devs and CPC, 11 + 22 = 33. 33 vs 11 Dev is 33% Staffing ration. This is also not a hard line either. It is a tool for NCEPT to take a closer look at the facilities in question. Where is everyone in training? 9 of the 11 waiting on RTF? Training back log. 9 of the 11 about to certify? Well, they will make the move to keep the pipeline moving.

NCEPT will continue to be adjusted as the needs change after EVERY panel.

 

[Move78]

I was on a Telecon about NCEPT changes. Cat 2 is now 85% staffed and 85% or better projected. Facilities still staff up to the National average, currently 90.7%, the 85% is a tool they are going to use to take a closer look. Is your fac at 85% and the one you want at 90.6%? Well, that move makes no sense to execute. Now, is your fac 98% and the one you want, 89%? Ok, congrats you got picked up.

The 30% Dev to CPC Ratio is also done in some ATC math. example, 22 CPC, 11 Dev. Thats 50% ratio correct? False. Take the total number of Devs and CPC, 11 + 22 = 33. 33 vs 11 Dev is 33% Staffing ration. This is also not a hard line either. It is a tool for NCEPT to take a closer look at the facilities in question. Where is everyone in training? 9 of the 11 waiting on RTF? Training back log. 9 of the 11 about to certify? Well, they will make the move to keep the pipeline moving.

NCEPT will continue to be adjusted as the needs change after EVERY panel.

If your facility is 85% and the one you want is 90.6% then it only doesn't make sense to execute if you're the agency and you don't give a fuck about your people. It makes sense if your NATCA because movement is a freedom for your people.
Lines have have have to be drawn. The black and white was a hugely under appreciated aspect of this system.

 

[CK]

If your facility is 85% and the one you want is 90.6% then it only doesn't make sense to execute if you're the agency and you don't give a fuck about your people. It makes sense if your NATCA because movement is a freedom for your people.
Lines have have have to be drawn. The black and white was a hugely under appreciated aspect of this system.

Just using their Logic and words. I'm not at some level 10 or above, im a FacRep at a 5 trying to move on up in this world too. Been trying for two years now, no luck.

 

[PushingTin]

"Leadership is about vision and responsibility, not power. "

 

[Dolan]

Who wants to bet that that guy has a lower back tat

 

[JNev]

Who did the email come from?? So i can follow up and email them

Just checked and PM'd you the email

 

[Flyaboveall]

I was on a Telecon about NCEPT changes. Cat 2 is now 85% staffed and 85% or better projected. Facilities still staff up to the National average, currently 90.7%, the 85% is a tool they are going to use to take a closer look. Is your fac at 85% and the one you want at 90.6%? Well, that move makes no sense to execute. Now, is your fac 98% and the one you want, 89%? Ok, congrats you got picked up.

The 30% Dev to CPC Ratio is also done in some ATC math. example, 22 CPC, 11 Dev. Thats 50% ratio correct? False. Take the total number of Devs and CPC, 11 + 22 = 33. 33 vs 11 Dev is 33% Staffing ration. This is also not a hard line either. It is a tool for NCEPT to take a closer look at the facilities in question. Where is everyone in training? 9 of the 11 waiting on RTF? Training back log. 9 of the 11 about to certify? Well, they will make the move to keep the pipeline moving.

NCEPT will continue to be adjusted as the needs change after EVERY panel.

So it’s not staff up to 85% projected? It’s staff up to the national average (currently 90.7%)? That makes a big difference and adds more facilities to the mix. Can anyone confirm this?

 

[Mike Kilo]

August facility priority and staffing list is out, there are some changes from last month, but I’m not sure if it takes into account their new rules.

 

[Ad1234]

The 30% Dev to CPC Ratio is also done in some ATC math. example, 22 CPC, 11 Dev. Thats 50% ratio correct? False. Take the total number of Devs and CPC, 11 + 22 = 33. 33 vs 11 Dev is 33% Staffing ration. This is also not a hard line either. It is a tool for NCEPT to take a closer look at the facilities in question. Where is everyone in training? 9 of the 11 waiting on RTF? Training back log. 9 of the 11 about to certify? Well, they will make the move to keep the pipeline moving.

Here is the change from the KSN:

- Apply ERR MOU Section 12A. Category 2 as follows: See below.
- Apply NCEPT SOP paragraph 3.5.5 as follows: Consideration of ERR requests will generally occur up to a projected CPC to target of at or below 85%. ERR requests above 85% of projected CPC to target will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Requests to transfer to a Facility Pay Level (FPL) 9 and below facilities up to 100% of the projected CPC to target percentage will only be considered for extenuating circumstances after all other ERR requests have been reviewed. The NCEPT panel may expand consideration up to 100% to include additional FPL facilities. A facility will normally not be considered to receive employees if the ration of CPC-IT/DEV to total number of controllers is at or above 30%


the wording does in fact state Dev to controllers, not CPC. So its not some special math that's how its written.

So it’s not staff up to 85% projected? It’s staff up to the national average (currently 90.7%)? That makes a big difference and adds more facilities to the mix. Can anyone confirm this?

it is not staff up to average, its staff up to 85%.

 

[JNev]

Am I doing this right? I go to the PPT and add 1 (from 3 to 4) to DCA's "Committed ATCS Inbound" (simulating 1 selection at the panel?) and that changes their Projected% to Target from 83.7% to 87.1%. Does this mean they can only select 1 despite the column "Possible Gains to National Average" indicating 3 possible gains?

 

[Shikaka]

Am I doing this right? I go to the PPT and add 1 (from 3 to 4) to DCA's "Committed ATCS Inbound" (simulating 1 selection at the panel?) and that changes their Projected% to Target from 83.7% to 87.1%. Does this mean they can only select 1 despite the column "Possible Gains to National Average" indicating 3 possible gains?

I'm assuming with the new info they're making "dynamic decisions" at the actual panel as well. I would say yes, simply because they're goal is to bottleneck movement and they stated facs above 85% will only be considered on extenuating case by case situations.