Jump to content

VATNA Policy Approval Question, attempt #2


Recommended Posts

http://vatna.net/docs/NA_Policy_0105.pdf

Since apparently the moderators are locking threads now, I will ask again...

 

Reference this policy from VATNA...

 

If an ATM wants to write a LOA, prior to its implementation, does said LOA need to be approved by anyone other than the ATMs?

 

Yes or No question.

 

James Jason Vodnansky

810003

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see what the issue is...

I have seen several occasions where unwritten rules were used on people.

 

Whats wrong with having the rules approved, they need to be in line with VATSIM anyways?

I think 99% of the rules and regulations are perfectly fine as they are, its the ones that aren't that need to be fixed.

 

I don't see where all the rules have been thrown out the window... policies need to be uniform across the network. No one should be allowed for example, to exclude anyone below a C1 from anywhere. Rules are supposed to be inclusionary not exclusionary... we need to remember we are here to get people controlling... not setting up fifedoms to leep people away.

 

I for one thing a review of rules is fine, as long as its uniform and that ATMs have the right to appeal if they feel wronged.

Richard Green

VATSIM Supervisor

SB Testing & Support Team

VRC Testing & Support Team

Link to post
Share on other sites

The policy does not address ATC coordination, such as LOAs between centers or procedural matters. It only addresses rules such as transfers, visiting controller policy, position restrictions and other rules related to how members are treated.

Craig Merriman

VATSIM North America Region RCRP Member

Flagman - NEMA - NorthEastern Midget [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ociation

The Winged Warriors!

Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't the impression that I was given from my regional director per our conversation last night...

 

Here's how it started:

 

VATUSA8: Andrew, as per VATNA1, any policy not written in the Regional Division site is not valid. If you want your TRACON SOPs to be valid, you'll have to get them OKd by VATNA1

 

So, you're now telling me that I do NOT need to send my policies to you for approval?

Andrew James Doubleday | Twitch Stream: Ground_Point_Niner

University of North Dakota | FAA Air Traffic Collegiate Training Initiative (AT-CTI) GraduateGPN_Horizontal_-_Tertiary.thumb.png.9d7edc4d985ab7ed1dc60b92a5dfa85c.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
The policy does not address ATC coordination, such as LOAs between centers or procedural matters. It only addresses rules such as transfers, visiting controller policy, position restrictions and other rules related to how members are treated.

Richard Green

VATSIM Supervisor

SB Testing & Support Team

VRC Testing & Support Team

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, you're now telling me that I do NOT need to send my policies to you for approval?

 

As stated by Craig:

It only addresses rules such as transfers, visiting controller policy, position restrictions and other rules related to how members are treated.

 

YES. You need to send him your Policies for approval. Actually, according to the policy, you send the policy to the Division Director (Right now, VATUSA2). He takes it from there.

 

NO. You do not need to send him your SOP (Procedures) and LOA (Procedures).

 

You see it from the horse's mouth. VATUSA8 was obviously mistaken in his interpretation. We're having something of a communications breakdown around here.

Edited by Guest

Steve Ogrodowski

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe this policy needs to be rethought or reworded because my regional director was obviously misinterpretting the policy then (not that I entirely blame him).

 

Have a look at the policy... what Craig is saying and what the policy says are two totally seperate things just about...

 

AD

Andrew James Doubleday | Twitch Stream: Ground_Point_Niner

University of North Dakota | FAA Air Traffic Collegiate Training Initiative (AT-CTI) GraduateGPN_Horizontal_-_Tertiary.thumb.png.9d7edc4d985ab7ed1dc60b92a5dfa85c.png

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew -

 

I completly agree with you on the fact that the policy needs to be rewritten.....

 

The way it currently is worded to me says that how your controllers tie their shoes is to be approved, but in my conversation with Craig today when I voiced my concerns he [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ured me that my interpetation was wrong and that after he leaves works (since he can't fix it at work) it will be corrected to more accuratley reflect the intent of the policy.

 

In all honesty I doubt this would even be an issue if a few ATMs would just abide by the CoC/CoR when it comes to ratings.

Richard Green

VATSIM Supervisor

SB Testing & Support Team

VRC Testing & Support Team

Link to post
Share on other sites
The way it currently is worded to me says that how your controllers tie their shoes is to be approved, but in my conversation with Craig today when I voiced my concerns he [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ured me that my interpetation was wrong and that after he leaves works (since he can't fix it at work) it will be corrected to more accuratley reflect the intent of the policy.

 

Really? I don't see it that way at all. The five bullet points, I think, make clear what the intention is...and whether there is a question on the definition of "Rule," the intent can be seen to ensure all Rules are within the scope of VATSIM Regs. And there is a further background paragraph about why the DD must approve policy anyways.

 

But, if Craig will be revising the policy, that's fine...the only thing I understand was misleading was of the term "Rule" and whether it could be applied to SOP/LOA as well. Personally, I think it is quite clear as it is...but that's just me.

Steve Ogrodowski

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But, if Craig will be revising the policy, that's fine...the only thing I understand was misleading was of the term "Rule" and whether it could be applied to SOP/LOA as well. Personally, I think it is quite clear as it is...but that's just me.

 

Steve the policy was quasi-clear...

 

The issue was that "I" wanted to know for my own well-being that the intent of the changes wern't as sinister or draconian as Jason wants us to think.

 

I did the right thing... I went to the source and ASKED him the question. I didn't post [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umptions or try to stir up a horner's nest.

 

The vast majority of the issues that people complain about on these forums are:

1. Miscommunications

2. Misunderstandings

3. People twisting things for their own political or personal reasons

 

There are times when a beef should be aired here but thats only when the chain of authrotiy has been followed to the top.

 

Some people tend to jump the gun as a matter of habit rather than exeception.

Richard Green

VATSIM Supervisor

SB Testing & Support Team

VRC Testing & Support Team

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Since I've been out of some people's hair for a while:

 

Does VATNA have any meeting minutes that deal with the discussion of this policy change?

 

Thanks

 

Should he? If you have a point, make it. But it had better elevate this conversation or I lock it as I have the other attempts to take this down the drain.

Kyle Ramsey

 

0

Link to post
Share on other sites
Since I've been out of some people's hair for a while:

 

Does VATNA have any meeting minutes that deal with the discussion of this policy change?

 

Thanks

 

Should he? If you have a point, make it. But it had better elevate this conversation or I lock it as I have the other attempts to take this down the drain.

 

Wow. . . feel free to e-mail me Kyle. I already see where Craig replied to the original poster. Just looking towards reading the minutes - that is, if they exist, if they don't, then so be it.

 

Does He? I don't know, you tell me. I was simply asking if there were any meeting minutes available where this policy was discussed. A number of other VATxxx regions (even the BoG) post their meeting minutes. Was only asking if there was one available.

 

My point has been made.

CMEL.CSEL.IA.AGI.CFI.CFII.MEI.CRJ2.FO.Furloughed

Part of the Acey 80

 

811983.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...