NATS Heathrow jobs

[hammerthrower]

NATS are recruiting externally for LHR...

https://krb-sjobs.brassring.com/TGnewUI/Search/home/HomeWithPreLoad?PageType=JobDetails&noback=0&partnerid=30041&siteid=5720&jobid=1046336#jobDetails=undefined

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

I wonder why they don't advertise for Air Traffic Controllers rather than Aerodrome Controllers?

[Musket90]

Maybe it's because Heathrow do Aerodrome Control only and MATS Part 1 refers to the same. I agree though that Air Traffic Controller sounds better but I suppose they have to be specific in what type of control it is.

[ZOOKER]

And 'Air Traffic Control Officer' sounds even better.

I note that enquiries should be addressed to the 'Talent Acquisitions Team'.

Who reads the CVs.......Ant and Dec?

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Agreed S. Sounds like more management yuckspeak!

[2 sheds]

And 'Air Traffic Control Officer' sounds even better.
but pompous!

2 s

[ZOOKER]

Not really, Sheds.

After all, you have:-

Police Officers.
Customs Officers.
Immigration Officers.
Highways England 'Traffic Officers'.....It says so on the cars.

Not to mention the multiplicity of military titles.

A search for 'Local Government Officer' throws up a list of numerous 'non-job' titles.

I think U.K. ATCOs are up there with the best of them.

[pax britanica]

Picking up on the 'talent Acquisition team' (can you take these people seriously) I suggest tha tas anyhting to do with LHR is of national interest the job is done properly

After a shortlist is drawn up applicants go through a series of exercises on the London Control ATC sim and are judged by a panel consisting of Simon Cowell, Heathrow Director, Gonzo and Chevron.

The eventual top two candidates compete in a run off on how many landings/or take offs they can manage in a 30 minute period in poor weather. The panel votes and turns it over to the public for on line voting so that looks, regional accents, hard luck stories and sense of humour usage can be taken into account

Simples

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

I note that in his profile 2 sheds gives his occupation as "ATCO".

[Gonzo]

Air Traffic COntroller.

[cossack]

I'm glad the application was available in large print. My eyes ain't what they used to be.

[Talkdownman]

a panel consisting of ....Heathrow Director, Gonzo and Chevron
Oi. chevvron knows narthing about Heathrow. Some of us were specially selected for a sentence there...

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

And no remission for good behavyer..

[250 kts]

But why are they recruiting externally rather than making it a promotion opportunity from their other airfields? I'm sure there must be people who will be staying with NATS but having to move from the likes of Edinburgh where they have lost the contract. Or is it also that they have managed to drive the manpower into the ground at their airport contracts. Either way NATS appear to have screwed up their whole staffing for airports.

[GASA]

All their airports are short staffed. Also not that many people want to go to Heathrow, either because they don't want to work there or they don't want to live in London. I'm not trying to have a go at Heathrow or anything but I genuinely don't know many folk in the company who would put that as a choice. It's the busiest airport but that doesn't mean all staff aspire to work there.

[Talkdownman]

not that many people want to go to Heathrow, either because they don't want to work there or they don't want to live in London
Once upon a time Nats ATC staff were contractually 'mobile' and had no choice in the case of compulsory postings. In 1986 at least sixteen staff were compulsorily posted into Heathrow because of a spate of trainees failing to validate.

[chevvron]

Oi. chevvron knows narthing about Heathrow. Some of us were specially selected for a sentence there...

I'm more qualified than some pencil pusher from HR who has never had any ATC experience, but as I've never actually worked there (I was told I was shortlisted for Thames Radar at one time as were several other Farnborough controllers) I would be loathe to select possible trainees especially as I would 'weed out' any graduates right at the beginning.

[chevvron]

Oi. chevvron knows narthing about Heathrow. Some of us were specially selected for a sentence there...
Hm I note you say 'a' sentence; if memory serves me right you served 2 terms of punishment sorry rehabilitation there.

[Talkdownman]

Hm I note you say 'a' sentence; if memory serves me right you served 2 terms of punishment sorry rehabilitation there.
Nope. Just one continuous term of seventeen years, and without any remission for my good behaviour. I escaped from Heathrow when I returned from parole only to find my job had unknowingly been relocated during my absence to StalagLuft WD. (But that's nats HR communications skills for you...). At least it wasn't a 'life' sentence, like some other institutions...

[chevvron]

Funny I could have sworn Farnborough got you from Heathrow and after a few years you went back but to Thames Radar.
Then came the flood.

[Talkdownman]

Regardless, not wanting to 'work at Heathrow', or not wanting to 'live in London' was no excuse. Nats staff just had to get on with it. Yes, 'one or two' of the compulsory postees managed to wriggle out of it, we know who they were. Heathrow can't be short of staff, they have recently paid off voluntary redundancies. Surely Nats wouldn't do that if they were short, now would they...

[Brian 48nav]

Malcy was North Bank on A Watch at LATCC before his holiday at Farnborough. We both turned up at Heathrow on 3rd November 1986. Is it still celebrated as an extra day off or Public Holiday?

I actually volunteered, grudgingly, for LL. The 1983 shift pay agreement and subsequent push for station/post grading by both the union and management meant that it made sense to leave Boscombe in order to improve my pension, as I was 27 when I joined CAA and it was before the days when one could transfer pension entitlement from your previous employer to the CAA scheme. Not that I had any to transfer!

Sorry for the thread drift folks, back to my rocking chair!

[Gonzo]

Do we know if this is a 'starting from' salary, or a 'starting at' salary.... They are quite different.

[chevvron]

Do we know if this is a 'starting from' salary, or a 'starting at' salary.... They are quite different.

Seems to me Gonz it's the usual thing; get rid of the more experienced ones who are near the top of the payscale 'cos they're too expensive and replace them with someone with little experience who starts at the bottom and is therefore cheaper to employ.
It's as if the ones holding the purse strings don't realise it could take a newbie 12 months or more to gain a C of C.

[Cleared For A Coffee]

Hmmmm, 56k in SE England / London. I thought career progression meant a pay RISE!

The large SE airports' motto should be 'Come and work a lot bloody harder, for less!'.

I'm being facetious but is it really too much to ask for experienced people to be paid what they are on at the moment when they move to these bigger units, rather than start below the pay scale of ATCOs? New ATCOs fair enough, but don't lump everyone into the same bracket. (I could have got this completely wrong and there is a lower bracket for ab-initios!). KK are doing it too.
If you move from one Regional to another they match your pay or increase it. I'm sure they know what they're doing and this isn't a race to the bottom of Ts&Cs all round....

Im not doubting 56k is great for any 'real world' job. But Heathrow!?

Not every regional will match your pay or increase it... I can think of one in particular

[chevvron]

Do we know if this is a 'starting from' salary, or a 'starting at' salary.... They are quite different.

I think in general if you're joining NATS from outside, you start at the bottom of the payscale for whatever band the station is irrespective of experience.

[Gonzo]

I think it's petty clear, the advert says 'Minimum salary FROM 56k" "Maximum salary dependent on experience"

If you have the experience you can negotiate.

[Talkdownman]

if you're joining NATS from outside, you start at the bottom of the payscale for whatever band the station is irrespective of experience.Also applies if rejoining Nats after broken service, which is why I declined its invitation to re-join for 'London LARS' purposes.

[Gonzo]

Hello.....is this thing on?

Bueller?

Bueller?

.....

[250 kts]

Also applies if rejoining Nats after broken service, which is why I declined its invitation to re-join for 'London LARS' purposes

I think this has now changed. IIRC you would come back 2 spine points below where you were when you left.

The 56K is the bottom of the ATCO2 scale for someone who has just validated but it does rise pretty quickly from then onwards..

[Talkdownman]

I think this has now changedHopefully that is as a result of me telling The Chancers to 'stick it'. After over 40 years service I found Nats HR's treatment to be insulting. They even had the temerity to tell me that if I accepted their pitiful offer I may not continue part-time with my then employer. I told delusional Nats that it would be they who would be part-time as far as I was concerned! They wouldn't accept that. Their loss. They had no idea back then (2003-07) how to treat staff and ex-staff reasonably. I do hope that has improved, because it certainly wouldn't have been difficult to improve!

[chevvron]

Hopefully that is as a result of me telling The Chancers to 'stick it'. After over 40 years service I found Nats HR's treatment to be insulting. They even had the temerity to tell me that if I accepted their pitiful offer I may not continue part-time with my then employer. I told delusional Nats that it would be they who would be part-time as far as I was concerned! They wouldn't accept that. Their loss. They had no idea back then (2003-07) how to treat staff and ex-staff reasonably. I do hope that has improved, because it certainly wouldn't have been difficult to improve!
A similar attitude prevailed in 2008 when I was approaching retirement. Knowing Farnborough would be at least temporarily short staffed when I left, I offered to stay on part time doing 2 weekdays per week totalling 20 hours gross ie half my previous contractual time.
This wasn't good enough for HR who insisted I do shifts and weekends totalling 20 hours gross, so I declined the offer and went.
And even after all these years, Farnborough are still apparently short of staff.

[Satellite Man]

Hmmmm, 56k in SE England / London. I thought career progression meant a pay RISE!

The large SE airports' motto should be 'Come and work a lot bloody harder, for less!'.

I'm being facetious but is it really too much to ask for experienced people to be paid what they are on at the moment when they move to these bigger units, rather than start below the pay scale of ATCOs? New ATCOs fair enough, but don't lump everyone into the same bracket. (I could have got this completely wrong and there is a lower bracket for ab-initios!). KK are doing it too.
If you move from one Regional to another they match your pay or increase it. I'm sure they know what they're doing and this isn't a race to the bottom of Ts&Cs all round....

Im not doubting 56k is great for any 'real world' job. But Heathrow!?

Are you saying ATCOs are making only 56k net at London Heathrow when they join??? 56k per year? :eek:

Come on, you gotta be kidding! (I hope it's a joke or something)

[whitelighter]

Are you saying ATCOs are making only 56k net at London Heathrow when they join??? 56k per year? :eek:

Come on, you gotta be kidding! (I hope it's a joke or something)

Until your third anniversary with the company post validation salary is more like £34-£38k.
And that is gros, before tax and pension deductions. As is the £56k.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

£34k? My pension is more than that and I only had just over 30 years service!

[LostThePicture]

I would be loathe to select possible trainees especially as I would 'weed out' any graduates right at the beginning

Wow. Just wow. 68 years old and still so narrow-minded... :ugh:

LTP

[Squawk 7500]

Wow. Just wow. 68 years old and still so narrow-minded... :ugh:

LTP

+1

If the company has improved in any way recently, it's that clowns like that are no longer in employment!

[NudgingSteel]

Quote:
I would be loathe to select possible trainees especially as I would 'weed out' any graduates right at the beginning
Wow. Just wow. 68 years old and still so narrow-minded...

LTP

And another +1 for the comments on this one.

What an utter lack of respect for the number of successful and time-served ATCOs who also happened to have spent 3+ years working to get a degree. I always wanted to work in aviation - but I was canny enough to know that only around 3% make it all the way through ATCO selection to a job at the end.

With over 25 years of holding a "yellow book" (and loving it all, BTW), I might not be using my degree...but I sure as hell resent hearing that it would have been enough to have me "weeded out" :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[chevvron]

Suffice to say that in my 34 years of experience as an ATCO, those trainees with degrees have been in my experience the most difficult and take the longest time to train.
I have no idea why. They eventually 'make the grade' but it is a long uphill struggle compared to those who entered the profession without degrees.

[good egg]

Suffice to say that in my 34 years of experience as an ATCO, those trainees with degrees have been in my experience the most difficult and take the longest time to train.
I have no idea why. They eventually 'make the grade' but it is a long uphill struggle compared to those who entered the profession without degrees.

Maybe it was your training style?

[chevvron]

Possibly. Maybe those with degrees need special handling of some sort which was not covered in the OJTI course which I attended.

[whitelighter]

I have a degree.
College start to validation at a London airport in 1 year and 5 weeks.
Perhaps I was lucky and had good OJTIs without a chip on their shoulder.

Now I am an OJTI and I don't feel the need to sniff this kind of back ground out. For me, regardless all trainees get the same chance. If they have made it through a rating course then they deserve my best efforts and no prejudgement.

[good egg]

Possibly. Maybe those with degrees need special handling of some sort which was not covered in the OJTI course which I attended.
At least one other NATS OJTI has agreed with my views on these pages many moons ago.

I dare say others have found the opposite to be true.

I'd certainly agree that OJTI training, and at times selection, is not what it should be. There's no end to learning, both as an ATCO and as an OJTI.
I think it's important not to prejudge people based on their background. You can judge them certainly, and I'm sure we all do (whether "qualified" to or not!), but these judgements should be based on observations rather than preconceptions.
Being able to understand the trainee's (or indeed any colleague's) viewpoint and being able to communicate effectively in a "challenge and be challenged" environment is where we ought to be by now.
The environment and culture of units/watches still varies tremendously but, hopefully, all are moving in the same (correct) direction...

[ZOOKER]

I did 18 months as an 'non-state' ATCA, back in the mid 1970s when NATS had stopped external recruitment. I left in 1976 to do a science degree, and joined NATS as an ATCO cadet when courses resumed, 3 years later.

I remember on our graduation course, having an interesting presentation, when we were told our scores in the selection procedure, and discussed them with the 'head of ATC SL2', (or whatever it was called), who oversaw our selection process.

During this, I remember J.E.P. saying something like...'remind me, Zooker, where you a direct entrant, an ex-ATCA, or a graduate?'

"I was all 3", I replied.

"Oh, yes I remember that interview", he said.

I think graduates may be harder to train as they are more likely to question things, and look for details which are irrelevant and often not there. Quite a few ATCOs have attained OU degrees after validation, and one at our unit even attained a Law Degree.........A tremendous achievement in itself.

[chevvron]

I think graduates may be harder to train at they are more likely to question things, and look for details which are irrelevant and often not there.
Thinking back, that's probably what it is.

[DaveReidUK]

An eye for detail certainly isn't a characteristic you would want to encourage in a controller. :O

[ZOOKER]

It's an interesting one. Perhaps I didn't word it too well Dave.

I heard the same comments, made here by chevvron, way back, but I can't remember where, or by whom, unfortunately.

I remember early on during our course, sitting in the airport canteen (which overlooked the apron), trying to explain to a fellow-student, who was a psychology-graduate, the difference between a Trident and a B727, both of which were parked outside. It was an interesting conversation.

My own OJTI experience didn't involve any specific problems with graduates. The hardest ones were 2 young students who simply wouldn't get stuck into the book-work. One was more concerned with TV, football and computing, the other with his new car and his girlfriend. A great shame, because both could have made it.

We also has 2 u/ts who sailed through CATC, top-marks on everything, but couldn't do it with real aeroplanes. Both ended up as first-rate ATSAs though.

[Gonzo]

I really don't think any statement on graduates v non-graduates from any one person, perhaps even any one unit, can be statistically significant.

Firstly there is the fact that the nominal 'degree' doesn't exist. A law graduate is going to have learned vastly different skills during study than a drama graduate, than a archaeology student, than a physics student, than a rural resource management student.

If I picked the multi-year time periods carefully, I could, with conviction, say that no ab initio trainee from the college is good enough to validate at LHR Tower. I could point to 'evidence' that would back that up.

If I picked a different, but adjacent, multi-year time period, I could, with conviction, say that valid en-route and TMA controllers are not good enough to validate at LHR Tower. I could point to 'evidence' to back that up.

Does NATS (or specific units) base selection processes on that sort of assertion? No, of course not, because we look for a set of skills and behaviours, and we are usually broad minded enough to understand that those skills and behaviours occur in many people, regardless of levels of education, or wealth, or ethnicity, or gender.

The only way of assessing success is to judge against a standard. We do not, when faced with a similar candidate to one who has just been judged as not suitable, dismiss that candidate just because s/he is of a similar background/education/etc etc.

[Satellite Man]

Until your third anniversary with the company post validation salary is more like £34-£38k.
And that is gros, before tax and pension deductions. As is the £56k.

That's a shame of a salary for an ATCO at Heathrow. Who volunteers to work at Heathrow for that kind of money?

In air traffic control salaries and working conditions are going downhill in many places, mainly because many colleagues are no longer willing to fight for their rights, for recognition for this profession, workload and productivity. Companies managing airports and airlines are reaping all the profits and now, with low fuel costs, air traffic is going up faster and consistently. I am surprised there are not more air traffic control strikes in Europe. At least the French still resort to industrial action.

[whitelighter]

That is for a newly qualified ATCO, and at Heathrow it would be the top of that range.

[NudgingSteel]

I really don't think any statement on graduates v non-graduates from any one person, perhaps even any one unit, can be statistically significant.

Firstly there is the fact that the nominal 'degree' doesn't exist. A law graduate is going to have learned vastly different skills during study than a drama graduate, than a archaeology student, than a physics student, than a rural resource management student.

If I picked the multi-year time periods carefully, I could, with conviction, say that no ab initio trainee from the college is good enough to validate at LHR Tower. I could point to 'evidence' that would back that up.

If I picked a different, but adjacent, multi-year time period, I could, with conviction, say that valid en-route and TMA controllers are not good enough to validate at LHR Tower. I could point to 'evidence' to back that up.

Does NATS (or specific units) base selection processes on that sort of assertion? No, of course not, because we look for a set of skills and behaviours, and we are usually broad minded enough to understand that those skills and behaviours occur in many people, regardless of levels of education, or wealth, or ethnicity, or gender.

The only way of assessing success is to judge against a standard. We do not, when faced with a similar candidate to one who has just been judged as not suitable, dismiss that candidate just because s/he is of a similar background/education/etc etc.

Excellently put sir.

[Brian 48nav]

Blimey Gonzo, I'm starting to worry about you - you sound far too intelligent and reasonable to be an ATCO!

Reminds me of back in the 90s a newly validated Tower Controller at LL had to suffer a watch change to my watch, so I pulled his leg by saying, 'You would never have validated on our watch!', 'Why not?'said our hero. 'Because all us old farts can't stand seeing men wearing earrings!'.

He is still a mate so tolerated my warped sense of humour - still wears a bloody earring though!