Global Ratings Policy

[Adrian Williams 1]

One of the challenges I find is trying to square Division policy with VATSIM policy, with no apparent system for local vACC's to seek clarity outside of the Division as to whether the Division's approach is correct. With specific reference to Section 3 ATC Assessment, does anyone know if the reference to ATC training department relates to Division or vACC or both. https://www.vatsim.net/documents/global-ratings-policy

[Amos Ng 2]

As far as I remember, each Division has the autonomy to set their own training policies, but of course these will need to get the approval from usually the region director. 

Each division as far as I remember, with regards to issuing controller ratings, follows almost similar rules, as stated in the policy above.

All other ratings other than S1, and up to C3, requires you to pass the theory test for that rating, then give you some time to train for your CPT/OTS by issuing a solo validation, before you take said CPT/OTS and pass it, before you are granted the rating you were working towards.

Edited Tuesday at 10:45 PM by Amos Ng

[Alistair Thomson 12]

10 hours ago, Adrian Williams said:

With specific reference to Section 3 ATC Assessment, does anyone know if the reference to ATC training department relates to Division or vACC or both.

Section 3 is a global mandate. So Divisional arrangements must comply with the overall VATSIM policy:. The answer is therefore not exactly "both" since Divisional policy necessarily complies with VATSIM overall policy, and my understanding of "both" implies that a Divisional policy, maybe in conflict with the overall VATSIM policy, might stand. Therefore"both" implies the possibility of conflict, and that is not going to work. However, local modifications of policy which don't run counter to VATSIM policy are allowed, and encouraged, and indeed are almost always necessary.

[Adrian Williams 1]

13 hours ago, Alistair Thomson said:

Section 3 is a global mandate. So Divisional arrangements must comply with the overall VATSIM policy:. The answer is therefore not exactly "both" since Divisional policy necessarily complies with VATSIM overall policy, and my understanding of "both" implies that a Divisional policy, maybe in conflict with the overall VATSIM policy, might stand. Therefore"both" implies the possibility of conflict, and that is not going to work. However, local modifications of policy which don't run counter to VATSIM policy are allowed, and encouraged, and indeed are almost always necessary.

Thanks Alistair. Your answer is lawyer like :)  and very helpful. I would add that in my experience some staff at Divisions level do not pay due regard or are not fully informed about the Global Policy. So you can have a position where a Division policy is more restrictive than the Global Policy. In such a situation there is no apparent mechanism to challenge the Division's interpretation/policy.

[Adrian Williams 1]

14 hours ago, Amos Ng said:

As far as I remember, each Division has the autonomy to set their own training policies, but of course these will need to get the approval from usually the region director. 

Each division as far as I remember, with regards to issuing controller ratings, follows almost similar rules, as stated in the policy above.

All other ratings other than S1, and up to C3, requires you to pass the theory test for that rating, then give you some time to train for your CPT/OTS by issuing a solo validation, before you take said CPT/OTS and pass it, before you are granted the rating you were working towards.

Thanks