NATS re-application after previous college 'failure'?

[Jetset Willy]

This may seem a silly question, (or perhaps not...)

A couple of years ago I successfully applied to NATS and was on the Area course at Hurn, but failed the summatives. Whilst excelling at the academic side, it took me a little longer to get my head into the busier sim runs. It all came down to my planning technique, which finally clicked into place half way through the summatives (after someone showed me a different approach, which worked much better for me), but unfortunately it was too late in the day to salvage my trainee career.

Along with everyone else who failed the summatives on that course, none of us were offered a re-course, despite presenting (what I thought) was a very convincing case to stay in the process.

Two years on, I am still frustrated by this (for many reasons from the college which I won't go into here) but am convinced I still have what it takes, and my new approach to the sim runs has been much more successful.

Maybe I should just let it go, but I am desperate to be given another chance with NATS, and the college...so... is there anything to stop me from re-applying from scratch (once recruitment re-opens) and hopefully getting through the selection process a second time? Or would I automatically be barred, on account of being a previous TATC employee? Does anyone know of an occasion where this happened?

I am assuming that if I could put a good enough case to HR (and presumably the recruiting controller) at the final interview stage (when obviously the question of why I left the college previously would arise), I might be in with a shot?

Or am I just crazy, and need to move on? (Yes I know!) :hmm:

Jetset

[anotherthing]

In the airports side there are plenty of people who have re-attended the college after failing the course, having had a small break in-between.

There is some ruling from the regulator about how long you must leave between attempting to re-sit a rating course; I am not sure how this applies to college courses, and whether it makes a difference if it was the basic or advanced course you failed.

Either way, from your post it seems that you are determined, which is a serious plus point.

If the answer you get means you can re-apply now, then forget about your history; tenacity is a good trait... at any interview as long as you are able to admit that you were maybe not up to the task the first time round (don't say you were hard done by!), then there is no reason why you should not get a second chance.

I know of some students who failed the approach course and went on to be assistants. One of them was absolutely useless an an ATSA, very lazy and didn't give a hoot about doing a good job. They were given a second chance at the college (which means their immediate manager when they were an assistant needs shooting because they should never had a recommendation). She passed the course second time round...

Your situation is by no means unique!

[aewaite17]

Jetset, how far did you get originally? A lot of the course structure has been changed of late and you may be in with a decent chance, particularly if you nailed the theory etc.

Best bet is to give T&S or HR a call.... although with recruitment reduced at the moment, you may be waiting a while.

[Bright-Ling]

Whilst excelling at the academic side

Crikey. How did it all go wrong??

Seriously though - good luck if you get there again. But surely you had a training review? I have met a lot of failed controllers who were excellent at the bookwork but couldn't quite get the actual controlling.

Good luck

[Jetset Willy]

Thanks for all the comments guys, I appreciate it. Perhaps the NATS door is not as firmly closed as I thought then, but I guess T&S or HR are the only ones that can decide that, should an opportunity ever present itself again.
Bright-Ling - I take your point lol :) I actually thought I was pretty good at the sims too (well... most of the time :rolleyes:), at least that's what I was told, right up until the doomed summatives. I know I only have myself to blame for messing them up, but I am still a bit baffled by the whole training review process though - it felt like at the basic radar stage, it was more of a box ticking exercise for them... I'm not sure what more I could have possibly said and done at the time to change what I felt was already the pre-determined outcome before I walked in for the 'review', and I certainly wasn't alone in that view, as nobody else at the time was offered a recourse either. But then again, maybe we were all lost causes, beyond hope of any further training and investment, and I am just being unfair of the process and bitter.

aewaite17: do you think the recent changes in the (area) course content has improved the attrition rate? It would be nice to think so. I will never know if that would have made a difference in my situation, but Anyways, that's all in the past now! Time for me to put up and shut up.
Thanks again:ok: