NATS ageism ruling
 

BBC NEWS | UK | Air traffic firm ruled 'ageist'

What a joke. Britain has gone mad. Imagine trying to train a 50 year old "newbie" to validation standard!

FFS
 

It is clear that the law needs to be clarified and amended. It may also require NATS and other ATSPs to formulate an evidence based justification for their age limit.
Given the practical understanding that we all have this should not be too difficult.
It should also be quite clear that an individual in the 50+ age bracket would probably be excluded from even any revised age limitation.

Complete and utter lunacy. I wonder what sort of person it was who took the action and what sort of people sat on the tribunal? My immediate opinion is that none of them know anything about ATC. I also wonder who argued the point on behalf of NATS?

Funny the US have just elected a 48 year old as president.This is regarded as young in politics,but way too old for Nats.
I remember getting rejected from BA training purely on age at 26,because I was 6 months too old..Then asked if I wanted early retirement from Nats,6 months later.:confused:
There are some units who wouldn't entertain applicants with tons of experience in Nats,who were over 40.Probably still the case under the surface somewhere.
If the performance of controllers is supposed to decline with age,then why is HMS Gov.idiots making people work on at this high stress job,until they are 55.
If I want to do a Fred the shred,then surely changing the retirement age from 50 to 55 is just as illegal as saying you're too old at 36.

Yahoo

This isn't an ATCO with years of experience looking for a job. This is Joe Public starting training to be an ATCO at the age of 50. I work with lots of ATCOs 50+ who are very good controllers so I am not saying that when you hit that age then the job isn't for you.

Everyone talks about the fact that as your reactions and thought processes become slower with age then you rely on your experience more. The problem is that this fella would have no experience to fall back on.

DTY/LKS - Commonsense posting.

A similar situation applies with medical standards. The requirements for passing an initial Class One are far more stringent than those for an experienced pilot/ATCO of advancing years. A pilot/ATCO of, say 50, could pass his renewal medical with no problem yet would not necessarily pass an Initial.

I trained controllers at home and abroad for most of my career and I firmly believe that NATS is right. If they are prepared to train at great expense in the expectation of employing somebody they must be confident that they can post that person to any unit. Sure, I've seen middle-aged ATCOs validate at busy units but they had much experience to fall back on. On the other hand, I've seen a good few middle-aged ATCOs moved away from busy units simply because they were having age-related problems.

Yahoo

Completely misdirected comment because you were citing a case where you would be an unemployed existing trained ATCO. The complainant in this case wanted to BECOME an ATCO at 50+ which would be in the modern parlance, a big ask, and, in my opinion, highly unlikely.

Did anyone really expect we would be exempt from the loolaa PC brigade and their insidious drivel? The company should try to find a way to fight this.

This I think is the sentence which is causing confusion in the BBC posting and especially to those not previously aware of the case.

My understanding is that the subject of this ruling may have been qualified educationally to train as an air traffic controller but that is all. He did not meet the age requirement as it then stood nor, as far as I know, did he have any previous experience.

For the intransigents above lets try an analogy they might just understand.

I am 53. I am well past my prime in many respects. I work well (I beleive) using my experience but am aware (and am constantly reminded) of my own limitations.

Supposing under the logic used by posters above I decided I now wanted to be a fast jet (or indeed any other kind of) pilot in the RAF. They too, quite properly, have an age limitation - and who in their right mind would accept me?

NATS have lost some great talent in the past because of this stupid rule.....at 35 you are still capable of anything, and those that think differant live in a glass bowl!!!!!!!!!

From the Beeb...
If that is so, then the decision is quite justified. This should encourage any employer, and NATS in particular, to get its act together in respect of aptitude testing.

2 s

So, I imagine literacy will feature in the tests for candidates of any age.

Presumably the recruitment process includes the testing of the cognitive abilities required to be in ATC, so why the big panic if (shock horror) fifty year olds apply? By the very reasoning of NATS they will simply fail these tests and be eliminated. Could it be that the scenario where 'old' people actually pass these tests is being avoided illegally.

Apparently these age limits don't exist in several other countries.

The various rantings about 'political correctness' and 'PC brigade' would seem to indicate that counter arguments to the ruling are in short supply. Most people in Britain support anti-ageism legislation, they aren't crackpot ideas dreamed up by extremists.

to the person who wrote
''..the subject of this ruling may have been qualified educationally to train as an air traffic controller but that is all. He did not meet the age requirement as it then stood..""

there's a personnel site that states that he had a pilots licence. His complaint was against the very age limit which forced him to be rejected, that was the entire nub of the case, he had been illegally disqualified purely on the grounds of age, and no other at that point. The disqualification was made automatically by an on-line application process.

Training ATCOs isn't like training a McDonalds Burger flipper* - it takes years of time & resources. I can't see how some sort of age limit can be avoided, if not purely for common sense!

Imagine (an example that may or may not be realistic) joining CATC age 50 (and being just as bright as someone at age 25 say), fully valid age 53, retire at 60. Thats a :ugh: load of cash per year outlay in training costs for a short time at the front end.

Maybe the age limit needs moving up 5 or 10 years?

RS

*Other quality fast food outlets are available...

Cognitive abilities are innate. The ability to manipulate shapes etc is pretty much something you have or don't. Age does not heavily affect this ability and thus does not really affect the initial recruitment tests.

Training someone of advancing years is totally different. I am sure there may be the odd 50 year old that could possibly pass ATC training.

NATS policy is that every entrant should have the potential to validate at any unit, in any discipline. That policy is a fair one as it is unit demand that decides where students end up.

Some ATCOs who have had illustrious careers are finding it difficult to keep up with the huge increase in traffic and complexity that, until the economic downturn, happened year on year.

How can anyone think that it makes good business sense to employ a new to ATC at 50 years old?

NATS pays for people to train, therefore it has a right to set stipulations.

Maybe 36 is too young a cut off, but with training taking up to 4 years, where is the return of service??

Gla-lax

That infers that you are a pilot. Having flown in a previous career I can assure you that ATC is not an easy option, especially at busy units. I know this for fact, and I didn't have the luxury of flying in semi automated civilian glass-cockpit aircraft. I have a friend in NATS (believe it or not), who followed exactly the same career path as me, and he will echo my sentiments.

Absolute lunacy. If an employer doesn't feel an investment is likely to lead to an adequate return, why on earth should they be made to make that investment?

I got thinking about how "qualified" he was.... does this mean he had 5 GCSE's and a pulse? 'Cos I can't see how he could've completed the assessments!

he didn't get to do any tests, the web site he was using to apply determined that he was over 35 and rejected him. When you said you were surprised he passed the tests you showed the most absurd amount of ageism since you know nothing about the guy other than he is 50!

I don't think length of service is a huge issue, if someone is 25 there's always a high chance they'll want to change direction in the future and do something else. The 35 age limit would allow for a massive 25 years of service, which is a pretty exceptional amount of time in a job these days, so using possible length of service as a reason doesn't really wash.

dty-lks
Of course anything that 'everyone talks about' is true. What bollocks.

radarspod (wah-hey! another spod!)
True, but as the average 22 year old newbie does not now tend to hang around until retirement anyhow you can't just say 60 - 53 beats 60 - 22! Most of our young crop seem to develop this glassy look after about 2 years, stunned to discover that they have hit the top working level and will remain there UFN. I'd say they would be happy to get 5 years service.

I was 36 when I got my first rating, and I'm still a better controller now, 13.5 years later, (nudging 50). The oldest guy was the top of my course, and the first rated. The youngest didn't get out of the college... I'd accept that I would have more difficulty training now, I can see that I just don't learn new stuff as well as I did. But would I be competive with the young trainees we are getting now if I only just started now? No real way of knowing, but I think so.

nats ageism ruling
 

At long last people are waking up to the fact we are a business, i note some of the people that were very uptight about the pension change are quite happy to discriminate against a 50 year old, so what? if you can pass the aptitude tests, pass college and validate (i think it unlikley that at 50+ anyone would) but thats not for us, and as you all seem to agree it makes no economic sense to train such a person, the i'm sure you'll agree it makes no business sense to recieve a pay rise this year, or recieve UHP/SLP oooHH imeann NOS FOR sitting in an office mon-fri.
At long last Mr Baron seems to be getting through to you.

How many experienced Controllers have validated at a new unit, who are over 40 years old?
In the last few years at Swanwick (TC and AC) I believe very few have validated. In TC, I believe the answer is 0.