further to my last...after chatting to people in work I think the problem was not the fact it was in loaded, but where in the mag it was placed. ie just below were links to stickitupthere.com(don't bother it's crap!) and several ads trying to sell top class skunk seeds and heroin poppy seeds...
Perhaps if it were next to pornalikes it wouldn't be as offensive and more people would see it?(tongue in cheek before anyone starts)
roger

Well, it looks like I failed my humor test C U J. No hard feelings I hope?

I would feel better if our future students read Loaded rather than the current crop that applied after reading the Daily Mail.

All those lies from 'The Mail' obviously don't help make good ATCO's.

The magazine that adverts are advertised in doesnt matter. At the end of the day its the quality of the applicant that matters not the mag they read. Although being a bloke i think it would look strange on my application...............

"So where did you hear about this position"

answer

"Vogue"......................:D :D :D

Yep.........looks like I failed your test too C U JImmy........owe you a pint M8.

As for foo fighting......well.........:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I think it is a good idea to widen the area for potential students.The whole structure of the job has changed since I joined.The days of the ATCO being a demobbed wireless operator /air gunner(male probably conservative,big and small c ) are behind us and I for one am pleased to see that someone somewhere has recognised the fact that knowing a 737-400 has more doors than a 737-200 is not exactly the sort of "qualification"needed to get through a course and validate.We want to attract people who are capable and by recognising the fact that capable people can and do read ALL sorts of publications is a good start.In the same magazine there was an advert for both the Royal Navy and the Royal Marines .I suspect that those organisations have also arrived at the same conclusion.Quality exists all over the place a little thinking outside of the box is a good idea.

Great place to put the advert.............

While I was looking for it I found LOTS of web sites I haven't been on yet...................



:D :D :D

The emailed 'apology' (which the manager of recruitment didn't even have the decency to send personally) seemed to suggest that it was someone in recruitment who was offended by the advert.

Personally, I think anyone who found it offensive is rather narrow minded and prejudiced.

Certainly didn't offend me - they can write their adverts on the walls of public toilets for all I care, as long as we get the right people through the system.

....so how did whoever was offended by it know about the advert?
B****y pathetic, some nob in NATS thinking he had to apologise to all the staff.

In light of the subsequent dialogue.

Has anyone spared a thought for the poor readers of loaded, who have had their publications image tarnished by the advert of a "now" cheap and nasty company called NATS,how could they!!!!!

The magazine's reputation will never be the same again.

Disgusting behaviour!

AREA 52:D