PDA

View Full Version : extra curricular validations


Save my bacon
4th Oct 2002, 17:38
Can anyone clarify the situation regarding NATS radar controllers wishing to validate a tower licence outside NATS?

I know plenty of guys have done it in the past - but keep hearing that it is no longer 'allowed'. Are NATS still okay with controllers seeking work elsewhere in their own time? What exactly is the SCRATCOH issue?

Also if you have never previously validated a TWR licence what are the added complications?

Any info appreciated

1261
4th Oct 2002, 18:15
If it's more than a year since you did the course the minimum retraining requirement will be an APC (i.e. back to CATC for a week); if it's more than five years you'll almost certainly have to do the rating course again.

The former is causing us all sorts of problems with folks who do their radar validation first. We can do a radar APC locally, TWR can only be done at the college (some of the bigger units may be able to do it in-house if they have ADC simulators).

I suspect that SRG will not allow controllers to hold validations at two units any more either - I know a couple of London guys who used to do Wycombe Air Park on the side are no longer able to!

Loki
4th Oct 2002, 19:24
I`m certain that it`s not an SRG issue. After the ban comes into effect, I know of one person who will continue to operate at a non NATS unit during his days off, for free.

DtyCln
4th Oct 2002, 20:00
It's not an SRG issue it's an issue of secondary employment. You have to obtain permission from your principle employer, ie NATS because they essentially pay you and you are their asset. If you are an ATCO at EGLL for instance and you do Wycombe Air Park on the side as many ATCO's used to, you are opening up the possibility of having a serious incident at Wycombe and having you Aerodrome Rating pulled or suspended resulting in you no longer being able to work at EGLL whilst the incident is investigated. Ie NATS loses you as an asset because your ATC Licence, which NATS probably paid for, is suspended. That is the reason.

If you wanted to drive cabs or do porn movies on the side thats ok, because any problems you get into are unlikely to effect your ATC availability.

There was also a questionable issue of time restraint if taking part in 2 occupations whose hours are limited by law, eg commercial flying and ATC. Your SCRATCOH days off are to rest and recuperate etc, unlikely if you are flying commercially for reward, ie payment. Flying likewise has hours restrictions for fatigue and SRG are likely to question your rest time off flying if whilst on rest you are doing CLN westbound on a Mon morning.

niknak
4th Oct 2002, 21:37
I think it is as much an SRG issue as anything else.

They've been against secondary validations for a long time. I used to work for Highlands and Islands in Haggisland and held dual validations, in theory for the purpose of leave relief, but in practice it was because of the major recruitment problem that they had.
Great for the extra dosh and air miles, but it does nothing for the brain when you finish on day 3 at one unit and go to work at the other unit on day 4.
As a result of this, I ended up making a simple - but potentially very serious mistake - because I applied one set of procedures for airfield A whilst working at airfield B.
Due to the lack of any positive action by HIA, I filed a report with CHIRP, the end product being HIA being heavily leaned upon by SRG, and the end of duel validations in all but the most desperate of cases.

In the vast majority of cases it would now be very difficult for any atco to take secondary atco employment due to SCRATCOH, but you can, as many do, go and do an unregulated number of hours at a FISO unit, and get well paid for doing so.
An atco could also do as much flying as they wished, regardless of how dim a view SRG took of it, the only responsibility the atco has is to ensure that they are fit for duty.
Additionally, SRG could never regulate secondary employment outside the atc sphere.

HEATHROW DIRECTOR
5th Oct 2002, 08:00
There are certainly a number of "London area" NATS ATCOs working at non-state ATC units as Tower and AFISO controllers. The fact that the first "additional voluntary" duty ("Overtime" in English) has already happened would seem to reduce any argument SRG might have against doing ATC on rostered days off.

Spitoon
5th Oct 2002, 10:05
What I've never understood is why, after a cycle at some of the more demanding units in the UK, anyone would want to go and do much the same thing on their days off.

eyeinthesky
5th Oct 2002, 11:00
Whilst there is an issue of rating suspension at one unit affecting (note spelling!) your usefulness to NATS at another, the whole issue has got laughably muddled.

1) SRATCOH controls your ATC hours very closely. Therefore the question of fatigue is relative. If NATS are asking you to volunteer for overtime within the SRATCOH limits now that they need you to do so, how can they object to you doing duties voluntarily under the same scheme at another (non-NATS) unit? Is one more fatiguing than the other?? (Probably the NATS unit is.)

2) The regulation of hours is far stricter in preventing fatigue than someone who is building an extension on their house (or serving on a stand at the Boat Show...). There is no suggestion that this should be stopped.

3) It now emerges that it is OK to do ATC at another unit (within SRATCOH) provided you are not paid for it!!

So: Is it fatigue?
Is it the risk of an incident?
Or is it yet another half-considered policy which NATS is following with no real idea what they are talking about whilst trying to dictate what we do with our leisure time?

I suggest it's the latter.:mad:

Loki
5th Oct 2002, 12:31
eyeinthesky:

I think you`ve got it right. I personally wouldn`t dream of doing yet more ATC work though I can understand why an area controller might want to spend a few hours in a control tower somewhere.

It is in my opinion an example of the control freakery of NATS (bordering on Stalinism) that they should seek to control our lives so completely. I believe that I am required to seek their approval for any secondary employment no matter what its nature might be. Do other employers behave like this?

Save my bacon
5th Oct 2002, 16:43
thanks very much everyone for that info!!

that's pretty much answered all my questions, I think that all considered it's probably too much hassle to go down that road......which is a shame

i'll have to focus my time on finding a different escape route instead!

Numpo-Nigit
5th Oct 2002, 18:38
It seems to me that, regardless of the "wishes" of NATS, if you quietly do some time at a non-NATS unit (within the legal restrictions imposed by SCATCROH, of course) then how are NATS going to know?

Even if they find out subsequently, they'll hardly sack a valid controller in these times of desperate shortage - will they? Just a rap across the knuckles and a "don't get caught again" lecture probably.

It is still your time off after all!!!

055166k
5th Oct 2002, 19:30
What a great set of mails! This could mean the end of the IAT and the passenger carrying commercial traffic can have all the slots back at the absolute peak demand spike at the start of the summer hols. Sorry mate your slot is tomorrow due to formations of incredibly difficult- to-control funny things departing Fairford at the rate of six per hour!!!

Numpo-Nigit
6th Oct 2002, 11:51
055166k

Maybe I'm being a bit slow, but having read and re-read your post, I'm still not sure quite what or who you're upset with.

I can see a connection between IAT and the original subject of ATCOs working at units other than their normal place of employment, but am I not correct in assuming that NATS are well aware of this activity? It's hardly a secret - they even publish it in "Not Airway" or whatever the propaganda sheet is called this week.

What was the bit about slots and IAT about, though? That had me really mystified. Please explain.

NN

055166k
7th Oct 2002, 08:19
IAT traffic that wished to use airways was regulated . On sector 23[G1-Bristol sector ] the rate was six per hour; those were six slots that had an impact on Heathrow/Gatwick/Stansted/Luton/Bristol/Cardiff/Lyneham/Brize Norton/Filton/Southampton/Bournemouth traffic for example. There is only so much capacity and if it is taken up by airshow traffic then there is none left for other users. Anyhow don't plan to use any of the west end sector airspace [Bristol/Brecon/Strumble/Berry Head/Lands End] on Wednesday night as it may be closed.

mine's a double
7th Oct 2002, 19:17
Save my Bacon, how are your nails?

Dan Dare
13th Oct 2002, 22:06
I think that as IAT is "unrewarded" then it comes outwith NATSs definition of secondary employment so NATS ATCOs can legitimately continue to control funny formations without difficulty from NATS management.

It does seem odd that they would take issue if there was any reward - yet another example of the mentality of those managing us:(

Roger Dee
17th Oct 2002, 10:59
Does anyone know if Shearwater or CATC do a type of revalidation of the APR course, rather than the full monty. It is about 5 1/2 years since I last sat in front of a glowing tube.

Thanks

R D

niknak
17th Oct 2002, 11:37
R.D.

I know a recent instance of an ATCO in the same position as yourself, who joined a radar equipped unit.
Said unit carried out a programme of simulator and practical training that had been previously approved by SRG, which proved successful, and the candidate then undertook MER and validated.
The SRG requirements were very stringent, and had the person involved not met the standard, they would have had to do the whole course again, (at their own expense).

Unless you can find an employer to do the same for you, your only option would be to do an assessment for prior competence, (which Shearwater and the mob at Rudloe Manor, whose name escapes me, certainly can do, I don't know about CATC), and hope to get a maximum of 50% dispensation from doing the full radar course.

I know the full course is very expensive, but after 5 years out of it
doing anything but the full course would be a real challenge.