7.09(g)(ii) Successful Candidates and Training Consolidation

[Chriss Klosowski]

We disagree with this point, the training consolidation period should be a minimum, not a maximum. This encourages rating tourism in divisions to process fast ratings. Where has the thought of member retention gone to?

[1341101]

I agree - this is tied to 6.05(j)(ix) and 9.01(d) which talk about different requirements for controllers that have utilised of live training resources - should definitely be revised here.

Edited October 18, 2021 at 06:58 AM by 1341101

[Matthew Bartels]

2 hours ago, 1341101 said:

I agree - this is tied to 6.05(j)(ix) and 9.01(d) which talk about different requirements for controllers that have utilised of live training resources - should definitely be revised here.

This clause has absolutely nothing to do with the clauses you mention. Those two deal directly with people who want to get a rating and leave immediately. They can not do this now unless they “pay the piper” and control their 100 hours or get waived by the ATC facility who trained them.

 

This clause acknowledges that a controller may need some time to work their position and get comfortable with their new rating prior to requesting training for the next one. There absolutely can not be a set minimum here as if a facility wants to allow a student to start training for the next rating immediately, they should be allowed to do that. What we don’t want is for a facility to say you need 1000 hours as an S2  before we will start training you for your S3. Hence why a maximum is set.

[Suprojit Paul]

23 minutes ago, Matthew Bartels said:

This clause acknowledges that a controller may need some time to work their position and get comfortable with their new rating prior to requesting training for the next one. There absolutely can not be a set minimum here as if a facility wants to allow a student to start training for the next rating immediately, they should be allowed to do that. What we don’t want is for a facility to say you need 1000 hours as an S2  before we will start training you for your S3. Hence why a maximum is set.

In which case both a minimum and a maximum needs to be set. If you leave these out this will simply encourage rating mill divisions to process trainees as quickly as possible. By this rule, someone could in theory go from being an OBS to C1 in four days which I would not put past certain divisions to allow.

I understand that the maximum is there to prevent divisions from setting unreasonable maximum hour requirements, however not every place has the same level of traffic as VATUSA. For example, if you had a person training on Addis Ababa, they would need a lot more hours on the network to gain the same level of exposure as someone would on New York.

This maximum needs to be revised upwards to between 100 to 150 hours to accommodate divisions with different traffic levels and allow divisions and subdivisions more flexibility to set the hour requirements as they see fit. In addition, to stop rating mill divisions, I propose a minimum of 25 to 50 hours to be set.

[Phil Dowling]

12 hours ago, Suprojit Paul said:

In which case both a minimum and a maximum needs to be set. If you leave these out this will simply encourage rating mill divisions to process trainees as quickly as possible. By this rule, someone could in theory go from being an OBS to C1 in four days which I would not put past certain divisions to allow.

 

Hi Suprojit.

It occurs to me, in this instance.  If you observe this kind of behaviour, then you would escalate this to the RVP for that division.  I don't think a global policy needs to dictate a minimum in order to deal with one bad egg if they exist.  That is punishing the whole for the errant behaviour of one.  I feel it would be far more appropriate to escalate it and allow the RVP to work with that division to resolve the issue.

Phil

Edited October 18, 2021 at 11:10 PM by Philip Dowling
Speeling errors