U.S. ATC shortages; Already a Crisis?

[SINGAPURCANAC]

My two cents( Euro cents of course)...
Since the same problem exists at many location all over the World not only in USA I would like to give my opinion .
We can't reduce time for OJT. We can't reduce requirements for initial selection . We can't reduce number of operation, because it is driven by some other players. We could make improvement in operational side of job but it couldn't work after some level of traffic.
So where is problem?And What are the solution?
I think that main problem is HR!
They are guilty for staff shortage. It is their task. Primary one. to predict number of staff and qualifications required for particular position.
I don't know why but HRD is the last one who knows that someone leaves company . They even don't realize that it will happen in future again.
And suddenly company stays without people.
Recently one HRM said( and stayed alive): What kind of problem with ATCOs?
We could find them whenever we want, for less money!
As long as they think such way there wouldn't be better !
I could write about HRDs hundred of pages but it is enough for this thread.

[slatch]

I see the current situation of the US ATC system to be something like the current Pilot situation. It is not so much a lack of people; it is a lack of competent experienced controllers that will become the problem. The FAA has proved they can hire all the people they need. They have set a system of schools graduating more than enough people to make up for the loses that are occurring. Combine that with the controllers coming out of the US military there is no lack of numbers. The problem is that there is little screening going on. After the strike in 1981 the FAA hired a large number of controllers, then, the percentage that made it from being hired to full performance in a center was around 20%. ( 50% washed out in OKC during initial training, 60% of those that made it to centers also washed out.) The CTI students have a almost 0% wash out rate in their schools, all they need is to show up. The FAA has a train to succeed attitude that just give trainees more time to train and allows them to memorize the sector so they can check out. The wash out rate is much less than it should be in my opinion. In our facility controllers with less than a year as a certified controller are giving OJT. While controllers with 10 to 20 years experience don’t train much because management thinks they are too hard on the trainees and are delaying certifications. Because of all of this, many controllers are making it through the system that would never have made it in the past. Throw in pay freezes, a generous pension plan (CSRS) for controllers hired before 1984, low morale and lousy working conditions, no wonder record numbers of controllers eligible to retire are leaving. I do believe retirements will slow down in 2009 when FERS retirement controllers start becoming eligible. FERS benefits are not as generous and many controllers will probably work extra years to build up their retirement.

[ferris]

Slatch

By what you are saying, you should have all the bodies you need. Yes, you'll be having more incidents, experience levels will be decreasing, but the seats should be filled.
Everyone ( NATCA/Jetwhine/anyone you care to talk to in the industry over there) is saying that isn't the case? The incident rate is increasing, AND you are short of bodies?

[slatch]

There is no shortage of people trying to get the jobs and getting hired, we have over a 100 trainies in our facility. The problem is the training program is being mismanaged. There were years we had almost no trainies.. The current desire of management to get everyone through and the percived shortage has hurt training. It used to take around 4 years to become FPL. Now it is taking only 2 years for some. On the surface you say hey, that is great. The problem is the trainies are not spending enough time seasoning on sectors as associate controllers. When Trainies used to spend a year or so seasoning they were exposed to different situations and observed differnet controllers control techniques. This allowed them to gain some experiance. Now while being rushed through the program they train on one sector, get certified, season for a week or so and then repeat the cycle. What we get are clones of the training team with very little experiance. And when the training team are unexperianced controllers each generation is worse than the last. Hence the increase in incident rates. So what does the FAA do to make this work, they split sectors to make them easier, they require two controllers were one used to be fine. The FAA's failure to keep a steady stream of trainies over the years is the main reason behind this current situation. Sure they would have had a few years with more controllers than they wanted/needed but which situation is worse. There are enough controllers the FAA just fails to train them properly and put them in the right place making some facilities understaffed. NATCA, which i am a member, is a typical union, they say what ever suits their cause and twists the facts to suit their needs. They lost a major battle over the last contract and are doing whatever they can to try to make up for it. Bottom line is the FAA misjudged how many experinced controllers would retire in 2006, 2007 and probably 2008. They did not ramp up the hiring and training soon enough.

[KeepItRolling]

Slatch,

That sounds familiar.

ASA would be plesaed to know that their staffing solutions are "Worlds Best Practice".


KIR

[AirNoServicesAustralia]

I guess a question that needs to be asked here is "Even if the US has enough people applying to be ATCOs to fill the gaps, would it be cheaper and more effective to poach some already qualified controllers from other countries who have suitable experience?". I don't know but if you factor in the wash out rates maybe it would make sense to import some guys.

Also for Rusty Nail, you may want to add the UK to that list of closed shop ANSPs. This has been discussed before on here and the response from the Brits was that they have extremely exacting standards and as such they can't take ATCOs from other places like Australia, NZ and Seffrica.

Not wanting to get knee deep in the handbags at thirty paces confrontation between Battler39 and the rest, but the initial post by Ferris made complete sense to me. That is there is a real (not percieved) shortage of controllers in Australia, resulting in sectors being without any Air Traffic Control service for whole shifts (take note that this is forced to be without, not without due to any choice made by controllers). He also says this has come about from the managers only caring about their next bonus objective and not about the troops they were supposed to be managing. He then says that the thread originator (an American working in America not the Gulf) needs to do the right thing if they are so short staffed that safety is compromised.

Clear to me, and I really don't understand the venom in the reponses.

[GetTheFlick]

That sounds familiar.

ASA would be plesaed to know that their staffing solutions are "Worlds Best Practice".

Of course it sounds familiar. Where do you think Bill Pollard learned it ? Back in 1981.... ?

I could have written what Slatch wrote. As a matter of fact, I'm pretty sure I did -- back in 1985 or so. Give him another 5-10 years and he'll figure out the real meaning of "institutional memory." He'll also figure out it's real easy to lose. And once you do, it doesn't come back.

The Morning After

Here we go again...repeating history.

[WhatUMean]

DFS a UK store that sells furniture and on permament sale that must end soon!