ATC Hiring Changes Draw Protest

jamisjockey

Banned
Jan 10, 2010
2,832
30
48
What are you talking about bro....the hours you spend In FAA APPROVED TOWER SIMULATORS FAA APPROVED RADAR SIMULATORS FAA APPROVED EN ROUTE SIMULATORS all the same used at the actual facility in OKC and having a Control Tower Operating test Score of 100 already doesn't make you more qualified. I don't understand how you think a 35% success rate for OTS compared to a 75% success rate for CTI doesn't make you more valuable.

What orifice did you yank those numbers from?
 

ColdAilment

Senior Member
May 26, 2012
275
2
18
So does this mean that there will be a huge preference given to the guys with actual ATC experience and CTO's?
 

RobertB

Senior Analyst
Aug 18, 2008
869
6
18
What are you talking about bro....the hours you spend In FAA APPROVED TOWER SIMULATORS FAA APPROVED RADAR SIMULATORS FAA APPROVED EN ROUTE SIMULATORS all the same used at the actual facility in OKC and having a Control Tower Operating test Score of 100 already doesn't make you more qualified. I don't understand how you think a 35% success rate for OTS compared to a 75% success rate for CTI doesn't make you more valuable.
Did your CTI school give you these numbers?!?
 

RobertB

Senior Analyst
Aug 18, 2008
869
6
18
Lol...I am curious about this too. If the FAA is beginning to stray away from CTI grads, I believe they have a reason, and it isn't that "data" you provided us with.
Exactly... The FAA is doing it for a reason. The only "published" reports comparing potential controllers have been in regards to well qualified v qualified on the ATSAT. I can tell you that CTI graduates are not certifying in higher percentages than OTS hires. In fact, it is probably exactly the opposite, but not as big of a difference as 75 v 35 percent.
 

h4xit

Trusted Contributor
Dec 9, 2010
688
13
18
Exactly... The FAA is doing it for a reason. The only "published" reports comparing potential controllers have been in regards to well qualified v qualified on the ATSAT. I can tell you that CTI graduates are not certifying in higher percentages than OTS hires. In fact, it is probably exactly the opposite, but not as big of a difference as 75 v 35 percent.
Exactly. Even in that CTI facebook group they propose that CTI certifies more reliably than OTS, but no one can produce a study, probably because there isn't one.
 

Jax

Senior Analyst
Nov 17, 2010
869
32
28
N90-EWR
No doubt that an individual either has what it takes or does not.. However, one cannot argue with simple statistics.. CTI candidates have and will continue to succeed throughout training at a higher rate than OTS candidates.. Why was the CTI program created if it were to provide no benefit? I am happy this issue does not apply to you, but it does not mean your statements belittling CTI schools are valid.
This is false. Here at N90 CTI's washed out at the same rate as OTS hires.
 

Jax

Senior Analyst
Nov 17, 2010
869
32
28
N90-EWR
It comes down to the individual. Working as an RPO at N90, I've seen CTI hires succeed and I've seen VRAs succeed. I've also seen CTIs shit the bed and VRAs shit the bed. I've seen controllers with many years of radar experience do worse than a CTI student fresh out of the academy. You can all argue about who is more qualified until you're blue in the face but ultimately it comes down to the individual. Just because somebody went to college for 6 years studying law doesn't mean they'll make a great lawyer.

The issue isn't who makes a better controller. The issue is that we were told by our federal government that there are 2 paths to become an air traffic controller. Military or CTI. And many, like myself, followed the CTI path. I agree that VRAs should be considered more qualified, whether or not they actually are, because of the time they dedicated to serving our country. But I don't agree with being thrown into a pool with a bunch of OTS people who 2 months ago thought an air traffic controller waved orange sticks at airplanes. There's no sense of entitlement. I don't think I deserve a job simply because I completed a CTI program. But I do think that the FAA should have, at least, filtered through the remaining VRAs and CTIs before pulling this shit.
This is pretty spot on!

I do believe that the CTI program was a failure, and there was a need to go back to OTS hiring, but they should had filtered the remaining VRA's and CTI's already in the system before pulling the plug.

I worked with your father for over 2 decades. Looking forward to working with you upstairs soon.
 

h4xit

Trusted Contributor
Dec 9, 2010
688
13
18
I do believe that the CTI program was a failure, and there was a need to go back to OTS hiring, but they should had filtered the remaining VRA's and CTI's already in the system before pulling the plug.
^ this would have been nice.
 
Dec 23, 2013
44
2
8
USS Enterprise (NCC-1701)
When life throws you curve balls, sometimes you just gotta cup the balls , stroke the shaft, and swallow the gravy
Indeed. This makes Phillyhandjob's phillygravy™ get all steamy and frothy. Time for some new bedsheets ;)

Yes, CTI was poorly managed and should have had more oversight. The FAA should have been more involved in screening candidates before graduation. Have some instructors show up and run some rudimentary PVs...something other than that ridiculous AT-SAT. Is burning the whole ship down the right thing to do? Perhaps. It would have been nice if they had given everyone a heads-up so that people had the chance to not waste their time.

To quote what an HR rep told Phillyhandjob circa 2011: "The CTI program is the only civilian path for becoming a controller in the forseeable future. I wouldn't wait around for OTS." Why promote the program when you're performing studies to get rid of it?
 

gump

Newcomer
Jun 22, 2008
23
0
1
Let me see if I can put this whole, “I’m better qualified than you” theory of ATC hiring to rest.

Air Traffic Control is a very serious occupation. Unfortunately, one of the most demanding of jobs is controlled by the government. That in itself is not a overwhelming detriment, because it’s not the only downside. The Government is bound to strict hiring practices. This is fine, as long as you are hiring Mail Carriers or Secretaries or even Federal Judges. Great jobs, but those occupations, I don’t think, can hurt anybody. ATC is in too big of a job pool. And if you are not any good, you CAN hurt people. And that brings me to this observation/opinion:

There is only one safe/logical way for the system to work. This is it: The ATCS (Air Traffic Control Specialist) goes through a well-tested, well-proven timeline of events. The progression does not start with a “Hey, I think I’m going to be an Air Traffic Controller.” epiphany. It is more akin to the ATC job telling YOU that you MIGHT be a good fit. The only way to find that out is…the Military. They will put you in a program and let you know if you fit into ATC. I have done this job for a very long time, and can tell you that “under-fire” is the only way. Be damned any school (including any military school). You can have guys run around the room holding up plastic airplanes all day and it doesn’t do anything for anybody.

The Military is the only way for several reasons:
1) The training is way tougher than anything the FAA hands out. This is how the job (and you) finds out if your skin is thick enough. And it better be, or you will get spanked.

2) You get a chance to see if you like ATC. Once you are in the FAA and start making big money, if you discover you don’t like ATC, you’re screwed. You are NOT giving up that check (and neither is your spouse).

3) Keeping in line with #2: Introduction to ATC while in the Military not only gives you and the job an opportunity to see if you are compatible, you find out if you truly LOVE running airplanes. If you can stand the rhythm, the hectic pace and the multi-tasking. If you find that you do have ATC in your blood, you would not be so concerned about WHERE you go to run traffic. You just want to run traffic. All this business about wanting to be at a facility two blocks from Mommy’s house shouldn't matter to you. You just want to plug in.

By showing up with no experience in a job this demanding, or any job this taxing, is not a good idea. But in the FAA, it can be brutal. If you become the trainee of an “Old Salt”, and you have “mic fright” or you’re timid or thin-skinned, things are not going to go well for you. You are insulting your trainer. How dare you show up looking for $100,000 and you don’t know which one is number one, a C182 or a T-38.

Sports analogy: In ATC, the FAA is “The Bigs”. You wouldn't go knocking on the New York Yankees’ door because your Dad said that he thought you had a nice slider. Would you?

Final note: I’m not saying that ATC has to be 100% prior military. That would be asking a lot. But I think that the occupation needs to be heavily loaded with “under-fire” experience. No other place to get that other than Military ATC.
 

danny.p

Newcomer
Feb 22, 2014
1
0
1
everyday, millions of high school's student are told to go to college, pay to get a university degree, and then get a job afterwards...many cant find a job afterwards. sounds familiar? why promote getting a job afterwards when they cant find one? They are in the same position as the CTI graduates.
 

cburden86

Junior Member
Jul 20, 2011
82
0
6
Cleveland, OH
Let me see if I can put this whole, “I’m better qualified than you” theory of ATC hiring to rest.

Air Traffic Control is a very serious occupation. Unfortunately, one of the most demanding of jobs is controlled by the government. That in itself is not a overwhelming detriment, because it’s not the only downside. The Government is bound to strict hiring practices. This is fine, as long as you are hiring Mail Carriers or Secretaries or even Federal Judges. Great jobs, but those occupations, I don’t think, can hurt anybody. ATC is in too big of a job pool. And if you are not any good, you CAN hurt people. And that brings me to this observation/opinion:

There is only one safe/logical way for the system to work. This is it: The ATCS (Air Traffic Control Specialist) goes through a well-tested, well-proven timeline of events. The progression does not start with a “Hey, I think I’m going to be an Air Traffic Controller.” epiphany. It is more akin to the ATC job telling YOU that you MIGHT be a good fit. The only way to find that out is…the Military. They will put you in a program and let you know if you fit into ATC. I have done this job for a very long time, and can tell you that “under-fire” is the only way. Be damned any school (including any military school). You can have guys run around the room holding up plastic airplanes all day and it doesn’t do anything for anybody.

The Military is the only way for several reasons:
1) The training is way tougher than anything the FAA hands out. This is how the job (and you) finds out if your skin is thick enough. And it better be, or you will get spanked.

2) You get a chance to see if you like ATC. Once you are in the FAA and start making big money, if you discover you don’t like ATC, you’re screwed. You are NOT giving up that check (and neither is your spouse).

3) Keeping in line with #2: Introduction to ATC while in the Military not only gives you and the job an opportunity to see if you are compatible, you find out if you truly LOVE running airplanes. If you can stand the rhythm, the hectic pace and the multi-tasking. If you find that you do have ATC in your blood, you would not be so concerned about WHERE you go to run traffic. You just want to run traffic. All this business about wanting to be at a facility two blocks from Mommy’s house shouldn't matter to you. You just want to plug in.

By showing up with no experience in a job this demanding, or any job this taxing, is not a good idea. But in the FAA, it can be brutal. If you become the trainee of an “Old Salt”, and you have “mic fright” or you’re timid or thin-skinned, things are not going to go well for you. You are insulting your trainer. How dare you show up looking for $100,000 and you don’t know which one is number one, a C182 or a T-38.

Sports analogy: In ATC, the FAA is “The Bigs”. You wouldn't go knocking on the New York Yankees’ door because your Dad said that he thought you had a nice slider. Would you?

Final note: I’m not saying that ATC has to be 100% prior military. That would be asking a lot. But I think that the occupation needs to be heavily loaded with “under-fire” experience. No other place to get that other than Military ATC.
no
 

aprout88

Newcomer
Sep 20, 2012
23
0
1
Colorado
As a former military controller, I would love to say all military controllers (esp. Marine controllers) are the best. Thats just not true though. Plenty of lousy controllers slid through the cracks in the military. If you didn't see it then you were probably one of them. I worked with some great controllers in the military but I also worked with some that would probably get worked under the table by some of the bright young men and women i've met through college.