Another nail in the MACC morale coffin.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anotherthing.
I am not a re-tread as 'they' like to call them but I'm glad I went straight to MACC especially because of the attitude and culture that you clearly prove (you'll say "cat amongst the pigeons" was only being devil's advocate but reads quite indicatively as your belief).
I don't know the exact figures or the rough ones. I do know of the percentage that were, the vast majority validated without a problem and some had been treated quite disgracefully by (a minority of nasty) mentors before the 'chop' at AC (West Drayton and Swanwick).
Their validation can be attributed to the more compassionate and decent treatment at MACC or the extra hours of live training accrued at both units (probably both). They are fine operators and should not feel ashamed at failing down South and are your equal unequivocally. Not many gripes at TC training though.
I am not a re-tread as 'they' like to call them but I'm glad I went straight to MACC especially because of the attitude and culture that you clearly prove (you'll say "cat amongst the pigeons" was only being devil's advocate but reads quite indicatively as your belief).
I don't know the exact figures or the rough ones. I do know of the percentage that were, the vast majority validated without a problem and some had been treated quite disgracefully by (a minority of nasty) mentors before the 'chop' at AC (West Drayton and Swanwick).
Their validation can be attributed to the more compassionate and decent treatment at MACC or the extra hours of live training accrued at both units (probably both). They are fine operators and should not feel ashamed at failing down South and are your equal unequivocally. Not many gripes at TC training though.
Last edited by 9th Dan Vectors; 23rd Feb 2008 at 10:01. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 2,001
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good post Dan.
Could it be that the "minority of nasty mentors" feel that an artificially-generated lack of 'newly valids' allows more opportunity for their own AAVAs?
Surely "a minority of nasty mentors" is not acceptable at the flagship unit of a "World Leader in Air Traffic Management" and is something that The Red Barron should investigate without delay.
Come on Paul, smoke 'em out!
Could it be that the "minority of nasty mentors" feel that an artificially-generated lack of 'newly valids' allows more opportunity for their own AAVAs?
Surely "a minority of nasty mentors" is not acceptable at the flagship unit of a "World Leader in Air Traffic Management" and is something that The Red Barron should investigate without delay.
Come on Paul, smoke 'em out!
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely "a minority of nasty mentors" is not acceptable at the flagship unit of a "World Leader in Air Traffic Management" and is something that The Red Barron should investigate without delay.
Come on Paul, smoke 'em out!
Come on Paul, smoke 'em out!
But shouldn't the OJTI competence scheme be flushing them out ??
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan and Zooker
You really do see skull-duggery in everything don't you? The 'cat amongst the pigeons' was me being genuinely inquisitive.
I couldn't give a gnats todger if someone is a retread once, twice or three times over.
In fact I will go as far as to say that I have the utmost respect for ATCOs who have the spirit and determination to get back up on their feet, face the prospect of having to start afresh at a new unit, with new faces, a new environment, yet still manage to validate. That takes guts and in my book (for what its worth) is a bloody good trait.
My question was merely trying to point out that 'big, bad, nasty' NATS often bends over backwards to help people out - none more so than trainee ATCOs. This is overlooked when other issues come up.
Why do NATS re-tread people? It makes sound business sense - a pot of money, time and effort has already been spent on these people - it is in NATS and the trainees interests to try again. Obviously not everyone gets the 2nd (or 3rd) chance as it is deemed that they are, unfortunately, not a 'good bet'.
This same business sense is being applied to the 2 centre stategy, many of the reasons for certain decisions have been stated above, particularly well by PPRuNe Radar.
9th Dan Vectors - we agree on some things... AC have had (in the not too distant past) a poor reputation for training. This seems to be getting better (a lot of people have put in a lot of effort to bring this about). I'm glad to say that TC (where I work), has generally had a better reputation.
I also wholeheartedly agree that a big factor as to why people who get moved succeed is because they have had the benefit of the extra training... extra time however gained is beneficial.
As for the more compassionate training - quite probably true... when you are faced with a trainee you know has failed elsewhere, it would only be a complete w
ker who would not try to build their confidence up with lots of 'positive stroking'.
Maybe because (and this is not egotism), LAC/LTC/EGLL are not usually given 're-treads' from other units, this explains why some people have less compassion than at units such as MACC. It's not a great excuse, but quite possibly a valid one.
By the time MACC or wherever have got their hands on the trainee, the poor bugger has had the crap kicked out of their self confidence - as much by self flagellation than by what has occured in the OPs room.
What I do not agree with you with is:
You don't know me, but I am probably one of the most amenable people you could meet... I worked my nuts of to even get to start live training (by the skin of my teeth due, in no small part to the incompetence of the system - as was finally acknowledged by the system)...because of this I have very strong opinions about the quality of training (something I have extensive previous experience in as well and can therefore actually comment on with some knowledge).
I do not have a superior attitude; but I do have opinions that may not sit with some people re banding issues etc (for instance do a search for my login name and you will see that although I think banding was done very badly, I do believe that there should be pay differentials between some units).
Zooker - you are talking out of your rear end I am afraid when it comes to
complete and utter horsesht and completely ridiculous for several reasons, amongst which:
ATCOs working at units that rely heavily on AAVAs get severely shafted (as you should know as MACC is one of them). The low number of staff means that sectors cannot always be opened and the ATCOs on duty are made to work much harder, with less breaks. To the office worker, this might sound fair enough - 90 minutes with a 30 minute break sounds easy until you realise that for that 90 mins you are working your socks off. Keeping that sort of routine up is mentally and ultimately physically exhausting
One of your colleagues said earlier that MACC relies on AAVAs - why is that? Is it because -
Of course it isn't; it's because you do not have enough people due to the fact that the training pipeline has not provided you with the raw material - exactly the same as in LAC.
It's widely recognised that the service delivery of the college has, in the past, fallen short... that's why there is such a clamour to improve things, both for the college instructors, the students and the units.
As for -
You are partially correct. However it is not the Red Barrons job to gun them down - it is the job of the watch and unit training teams.
The very generalisation you give that I or my colleagues are unprofessional is a complete insult and the exact opposite of the truth.
We do have people who should not be OJTIs - just the same as any other unit, but they are in the minority fortunately. I can vouch for my colleagues on my watch at TC that we work bloody hard to try to do the best for the student - None of the poeple I work with on a day to day basis enjoys it when we have to mark people down, but sometimes you must.
I'm sure OJTIs on every other watch feels the same way - apart from the few 'bad apples' that crop up everywhere. To genrealise as you do is not just an insult, its an immature comment
You really do see skull-duggery in everything don't you? The 'cat amongst the pigeons' was me being genuinely inquisitive.
I couldn't give a gnats todger if someone is a retread once, twice or three times over.
In fact I will go as far as to say that I have the utmost respect for ATCOs who have the spirit and determination to get back up on their feet, face the prospect of having to start afresh at a new unit, with new faces, a new environment, yet still manage to validate. That takes guts and in my book (for what its worth) is a bloody good trait.
My question was merely trying to point out that 'big, bad, nasty' NATS often bends over backwards to help people out - none more so than trainee ATCOs. This is overlooked when other issues come up.
Why do NATS re-tread people? It makes sound business sense - a pot of money, time and effort has already been spent on these people - it is in NATS and the trainees interests to try again. Obviously not everyone gets the 2nd (or 3rd) chance as it is deemed that they are, unfortunately, not a 'good bet'.
This same business sense is being applied to the 2 centre stategy, many of the reasons for certain decisions have been stated above, particularly well by PPRuNe Radar.
9th Dan Vectors - we agree on some things... AC have had (in the not too distant past) a poor reputation for training. This seems to be getting better (a lot of people have put in a lot of effort to bring this about). I'm glad to say that TC (where I work), has generally had a better reputation.
I also wholeheartedly agree that a big factor as to why people who get moved succeed is because they have had the benefit of the extra training... extra time however gained is beneficial.
As for the more compassionate training - quite probably true... when you are faced with a trainee you know has failed elsewhere, it would only be a complete w
ker who would not try to build their confidence up with lots of 'positive stroking'. Maybe because (and this is not egotism), LAC/LTC/EGLL are not usually given 're-treads' from other units, this explains why some people have less compassion than at units such as MACC. It's not a great excuse, but quite possibly a valid one.
By the time MACC or wherever have got their hands on the trainee, the poor bugger has had the crap kicked out of their self confidence - as much by self flagellation than by what has occured in the OPs room.
What I do not agree with you with is:
attitude and culture that you clearly prove
I do not have a superior attitude; but I do have opinions that may not sit with some people re banding issues etc (for instance do a search for my login name and you will see that although I think banding was done very badly, I do believe that there should be pay differentials between some units).
Zooker - you are talking out of your rear end I am afraid when it comes to
Could it be that the "minority of nasty mentors" feel that an artificially-generated lack of 'newly valids' allows more opportunity for their own AAVAs?
t and completely ridiculous for several reasons, amongst which:ATCOs working at units that rely heavily on AAVAs get severely shafted (as you should know as MACC is one of them). The low number of staff means that sectors cannot always be opened and the ATCOs on duty are made to work much harder, with less breaks. To the office worker, this might sound fair enough - 90 minutes with a 30 minute break sounds easy until you realise that for that 90 mins you are working your socks off. Keeping that sort of routine up is mentally and ultimately physically exhausting
One of your colleagues said earlier that MACC relies on AAVAs - why is that? Is it because -
the "minority of nasty mentors" feel that an artificially-generated lack of 'newly valids' allows more opportunity for their own AAVAs?
It's widely recognised that the service delivery of the college has, in the past, fallen short... that's why there is such a clamour to improve things, both for the college instructors, the students and the units.
As for -
Surely "a minority of nasty mentors" is not acceptable at the flagship unit of a "World Leader in Air Traffic Management" and is something that The Red Barron should investigate without delay.
The very generalisation you give that I or my colleagues are unprofessional is a complete insult and the exact opposite of the truth.
We do have people who should not be OJTIs - just the same as any other unit, but they are in the minority fortunately. I can vouch for my colleagues on my watch at TC that we work bloody hard to try to do the best for the student - None of the poeple I work with on a day to day basis enjoys it when we have to mark people down, but sometimes you must.
I'm sure OJTIs on every other watch feels the same way - apart from the few 'bad apples' that crop up everywhere. To genrealise as you do is not just an insult, its an immature comment
