NATS single ratings, ex-cadets and the ATCO shortage.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Here there and everywhere
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NATS single ratings, ex-cadets and the ATCO shortage.
NATS have now started their single ratings courses with course 200 and I here tell that there are already tower only rated students at EGLL and EGKK, with more in the pipe line to stay.
I also heard that Prospect are against it and the company will not re-hire any of their old cadets who have single ratings and were fired.
Anyone know why prospect and the company are against re-hiring their ex-cadets who are as equally qualified if not more experienced in radar than the new kids from the college and is the reason for this down to the performance of the new trainees?
I don't know about anyone else but this seems a little wasteful to me, especially when you read about the shortage of ATCO's floating round.
I also heard that Prospect are against it and the company will not re-hire any of their old cadets who have single ratings and were fired.
Anyone know why prospect and the company are against re-hiring their ex-cadets who are as equally qualified if not more experienced in radar than the new kids from the college and is the reason for this down to the performance of the new trainees?
I don't know about anyone else but this seems a little wasteful to me, especially when you read about the shortage of ATCO's floating round.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: SE UK
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's got to do with the new legislation on ATCO licensing (but happy to be corrected)
If you don't start training within 6 months of completing the course, you lose the rating and have to go back to the college to do an Assessment of Previous Competency.
If a student who previously failed a course was looking to get back in to the college more than 6 months after leaving, they'd have to do the course again anyway. So if someone had to go back to the college, why rehire when NATS can get fresh faces and give them a chance?
In the old structure, people who failed were dealt with under the rules at the time. There are now new rules in place but no means of 'backdating' the scheme.
There are more complex and financial reasons behind it, and I've got mates who are in the same boat, but thats what's been decided.....
If you don't start training within 6 months of completing the course, you lose the rating and have to go back to the college to do an Assessment of Previous Competency.
If a student who previously failed a course was looking to get back in to the college more than 6 months after leaving, they'd have to do the course again anyway. So if someone had to go back to the college, why rehire when NATS can get fresh faces and give them a chance?
In the old structure, people who failed were dealt with under the rules at the time. There are now new rules in place but no means of 'backdating' the scheme.
There are more complex and financial reasons behind it, and I've got mates who are in the same boat, but thats what's been decided.....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Here there and everywhere
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fully understand the licencing implications and that the new course will prepare the cadets better than the old course, however the students that are already at EGLL and EGKK were on the old style course weren't they?
I can also see where your coming from in giving new people a chance but an APC costs around £1000 at any reasonable priced college, where as an Aerodrome Rating from scratch costs around £12000.
A total saving of £11000 pounds in training costs per student leaving the new blood to be trained straight to Area and solving the ever increasing shortage problem at the Airports and NERC.
Lets face it, with the NATS over and above standard of training, they must have had some talent to get an Aerodrome rating in the first place musn't they? Plus the majority of airports have been surviving on ex-NATS area cadets anyway.
I can also see where your coming from in giving new people a chance but an APC costs around £1000 at any reasonable priced college, where as an Aerodrome Rating from scratch costs around £12000.
A total saving of £11000 pounds in training costs per student leaving the new blood to be trained straight to Area and solving the ever increasing shortage problem at the Airports and NERC.
Lets face it, with the NATS over and above standard of training, they must have had some talent to get an Aerodrome rating in the first place musn't they? Plus the majority of airports have been surviving on ex-NATS area cadets anyway.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think about ALL the ways a cadet can fail and then you'll realise NATS will be happy not to take some back. Open the door to some, then how can you discriminate against the rest? Best just leaving them ALL alone, safer legally probably.......but thats JUST MY OWN thoughts on the matter. 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Wivenhoe, not too far from the Clacton VOR
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And will you all stop calling them "CADETS". Its sooooo non-PC don't y' know? They are "TRAINEES".
Still, we've re-invented what used to be called the Licence Tech Course, then renamed as the Foundation Course, now called the Introductory Course. Given time the wheel will turn full circle and we will re-invent the three year multi-rated CADET COURSE.
Still, we've re-invented what used to be called the Licence Tech Course, then renamed as the Foundation Course, now called the Introductory Course. Given time the wheel will turn full circle and we will re-invent the three year multi-rated CADET COURSE.
Side saddled
"I fully understand the licencing implications and that the new course will prepare the cadets better than the old course" - Explain, please!!
Yellowplane
No, not an Approach Rating - an A.P.C. - see above.
"I fully understand the licencing implications and that the new course will prepare the cadets better than the old course" - Explain, please!!
Yellowplane
No, not an Approach Rating - an A.P.C. - see above.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Between a Rock and a Hard Place
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about those NATS employees that are now single rated under the harmonised licence (with the merging of the Area Radar Control Rating into the APS rating)? Or those that did ADC and APR courses but were posted to TC, LL/KK Twr only or Aberdeen where the chances of using your tower ticket are measured in years?
NATS has been screwing up peoples licences and career prospects for years, and wasting a huge abounts of money dual rating folk at the college and then posting them to units where one or the other will never get used! The company is now full of single rated guys through no fault of their own, so why not look at recruiting the single rated guys they trained in the first place?
The fact that NATS shys away from rehiring single rated ex employees is that the NATS HR machine is too proud to admit that NATS NEEDS more valid controllers than CATC is producing. All very well having the numbers coming into CATC, but when they fail to validate what was the point in the first place?
When will NATS eventually drag itself out of the old Civil Service days and realise that all it is successfully doing is continuing to cut it's nose off to spite it's face? A controller with even a single validation is surely a more valuable asset than a stude from the college that fails to validate having had thousands of pounds thrown at them!
Come on NATS, grow up!!!!
NATS has been screwing up peoples licences and career prospects for years, and wasting a huge abounts of money dual rating folk at the college and then posting them to units where one or the other will never get used! The company is now full of single rated guys through no fault of their own, so why not look at recruiting the single rated guys they trained in the first place?
The fact that NATS shys away from rehiring single rated ex employees is that the NATS HR machine is too proud to admit that NATS NEEDS more valid controllers than CATC is producing. All very well having the numbers coming into CATC, but when they fail to validate what was the point in the first place?
When will NATS eventually drag itself out of the old Civil Service days and realise that all it is successfully doing is continuing to cut it's nose off to spite it's face? A controller with even a single validation is surely a more valuable asset than a stude from the college that fails to validate having had thousands of pounds thrown at them!
Come on NATS, grow up!!!!
Last edited by Ops and Mops; 26th Jul 2004 at 12:20.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UAE
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would be interested to know what percentage of Atco`s at non Nats units are ex-Nats. At my own unit aproximately 70% of us are ex-Nats.
Nats have saved other units tens of thousands of pounds in training over the years by not attempting to recycle trainees when in the days before continual assessment it only took one bad day to end a couple of years work.
Nats have saved other units tens of thousands of pounds in training over the years by not attempting to recycle trainees when in the days before continual assessment it only took one bad day to end a couple of years work.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Here there and everywhere
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 sheds
When I said I understood the licencing implications I meant that I know full well that after six months you are required to do an APC but my point is it still costs less than doing the rating from scratch.
I think I'm probably wrong though in thinking that the course will give the ADR only students any basic knowledge of radar techniques such as identification and how to issue headings because you don't need to know that stuff.
Especially if your going to one of the major London Airports!
When I said I understood the licencing implications I meant that I know full well that after six months you are required to do an APC but my point is it still costs less than doing the rating from scratch.
I think I'm probably wrong though in thinking that the course will give the ADR only students any basic knowledge of radar techniques such as identification and how to issue headings because you don't need to know that stuff.
Especially if your going to one of the major London Airports!
