Update to VATUSA Policy 07/05 - Senior Controller (C3)

[Justin A. Martin]

Perfect...thanks guys!

[Paul Biderman]

I've always looked at it this way. Having an INS rating doesn't mean I can instruct outside my home ARTCC. It's just a rating. The ARTCC I'm visiting would have to give me permission to instruct their controllers. Teachers can't walk into any school and teach. They teach where they're employed. That doesn't mean they aren't a teacher when they leave work.

[Alex Bailey 969331]

I see it as common courtesy to not use my instructor rating if controlling at another ARTCC. Policy or no policy, I don't do it.

[Bo Gercke 845743]

This is so confusing, and maybe someone can hlep me out here. I know I haven't been around the network all that long (2000, or so), and haven't done as much as most on the network, so feel free to set me stright here. What is the purpose of this policy? Why are we implementing a policy that no other region (globally) is implementing? Why are we not implementing it for every other rating? Have there really been that many attempts made at "defrauding" VATUSA or a controller rating?

 

I'd really be interested in hearing some sort of explanation for this.

[Bryan Wollenberg 810243]

Bo, the reason behind the policy is so that there are universal (within VATUSA) standards for the C3 rating. There are no global standards for the rating. Before the policy, ZLA could have promoted anybody it wanted to C3 for absolutely any reason. Maybe at the same ZBW or whoever made their controllers go through some rigorous requirements before being promoted to C3.

 

While I guess all that would have been fine too, VATUSA presumably set out to create standards for what the C3 rating should entail. It all helps to make sense out of an otherwise senseless rating.

[Bo Gercke 845743]

Great points Brian, but it begs a few questions. Seemingly the most important would be why have a rating that is "pointless"? If it's pointless, than, well, it is what it is, if you know what I'm sayin'. Why are we not addressing the more important issue of doing away with a pointless rating instead of creating more, for a lack of better words, beaurocratical (it's a word now!) processes to deal with it. Sort of contrary to being efficient, or streamlined.

 

The second issue that I am sort of baffled by is why this application process is being submitted to the top of VATUSA, vice going to the regional level. If the purpose of the regional director is to oversee their respective regions, why does this application need to go to the top? Surely the Director and his co-horts have enough busy business to keep them busy for months on end w/o needing to deal with the headache of saying, "Ahhhh, yep, he has enough hours...", "Ahhhh, yep, he does too!" and giving the alpha omega signoff on said application.

 

Maybe I'm stuck in 2003 where things worked ok, the wheel went round and round, there was a long list of controllers who had been around since SATCO, and the general feeling of VATSIM was that it was a fun hobby that people came together and got online, and controlled virtual traffic. I believe that VATSIM, more specifically VATUSA, has become so muddled with policy, procedure, and process that it's worse than doing this ATC thing for real. And I thought the military was a political minefield! I find that troubling. If the management of VATUSA, and VATSIM in general, think that creating more of these processes and procedures is going to be adventageous and productive to the success of VATSIM, I think that the loss of many of the long term experienced controllers says something different. I'm think you have a very firm understanding of what I'm talking about by being witness to the exodus of many seasoned controllers at ZLA, and not leaving just ZLA, but the hobby altogether. Sad.

 

I guess it's really hard for me to expect anything different when you have staff positions being held, on average, for 6-8 mos, though. There was a time that you could not find a vacant staff position at any level in VATUSA. Today, the landscape is entirely different. Is there no one else that finds this concerning?

 

One last question: What have we done to ourselves, and what have we become??!!

[Brad Littlejohn]

 

 

Maybe I'm stuck in 2003 where things worked ok, the wheel went round and round, there was a long list of controllers who had been around since SATCO, and the general feeling of VATSIM was that it was a fun hobby that people came together and got online, and controlled virtual traffic. I believe that VATSIM, more specifically VATUSA, has become so muddled with policy, procedure, and process that it's worse than doing this ATC thing for real. And I thought the military was a political minefield! I find that troubling. If the management of VATUSA, and VATSIM in general, think that creating more of these processes and procedures is going to be adventageous and productive to the success of VATSIM, I think that the loss of many of the long term experienced controllers says something different. I'm think you have a very firm understanding of what I'm talking about by being witness to the exodus of many seasoned controllers at ZLA, and not leaving just ZLA, but the hobby altogether. Sad.

 

The very same thing could be said about the FAA. And by your admission here, I guess that being a seasoned controller, I should be long dead and gone by now, as I've been around since SATCO as well.

 

I'm glad I've never been a conformist.

 

BL.

[Bo Gercke 845743]

It's true Brad that the same thing could be said for the FAA. Funny that you have compared what I do for a living, earning a paycheck, in essence, being required to deal with the daily BS of policy, politics, and games, with a game; a hobby, and something that I do for fun, and to blow off steam.

 

Thank you for so beautifully illustrating my point.

 

Because you are one of the few who has been around since SATCO, who still actively controls, and are involoved in the ARTCC, it does not negate the fact that there has been a m[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ive exodus of people from this hobby because of the increasing beaurocratic demands of this organization.

[Gerry Hattendorf 935415]

Hey Bo,

 

I can understand what your saying, but since I joined in 2005, I've seen seasoned controllers leave, waves of new pilots that think this is an extension to the 'ZONE', reeking havoc at times.

 

However, I've also noticed that most all the new members who want to learn our hobby are very open to learning this network. From the (v)tower chair at LAS, I meet a lot of new pilots that at first file a flight plan GPS direct, not because their out to pi$$ us off, but want to fly online, and interact with our community. I can also add there are very many committed ATC members, that haven't submitted their pink slips either.

 

When a new pilot sends a FS (spaghetti) flight plan, or a 'GPS DIRECT' I have no trouble asking them to find the charts (links provided) and walk them through the charts. Does this happen in RL? 95% No, as these folks have Pilot Certs, but this is a LEARNING ENVIRONMENT.

 

Now the emphasis on the LEARNING ENVRIONMENT is not meant to look like you don't understand this concept, of course you do, my point is we (as ATC), need to not just teach the rules of the VATSIM game, but to hope to impart RW aviation knowledge to these upcoming members, that might not only be inspired by this network, but will become the future professionals in the upcoming years.

 

As we both have real world experience in commercial aviation and ATC, I hope you see what VATSIM has done to restructure the ATC ratings to make ATC an easier path, but at the same time trying to teach RW lessons that could carry over into our future controllers/pilots of the future.

 

Now that I've steered this topic 180, let me try to get wings level and return to my [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned heading. The new GCP that was effective 01/01/08, made some extra work for us, and personally I like the previous 'ratings', but the C3 is considered an 'extraordinarily' rating, and so be it.

 

Bottom Line: We have some kick a$$ controllers, traffic is good, and have some very healthy ARTTCC/FIRs'/VA's with excellent training programs, from the basic pilot level through ATC.

 

I've been here this long, and enjoy contributing to VATSIM, be it working the scopes, or writing code for websites or mini-apps (nothing like Ross has contributed), and plan to remain an active member for years to come!

[Brad Littlejohn]

It's true Brad that the same thing could be said for the FAA. Funny that you have compared what I do for a living, earning a paycheck, in essence, being required to deal with the daily BS of policy, politics, and games, with a game; a hobby, and something that I do for fun, and to blow off steam.

 

Thank you for so beautifully illustrating my point.

 

Because you are one of the few who has been around since SATCO, who still actively controls, and are involoved in the ARTCC, it does not negate the fact that there has been a m[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ive exodus of people from this hobby because of the increasing beaurocratic demands of this organization.

 

I'll leave your second point to Gerry's comment above my post. His thoughts not only echo my own, but he has very succintly put an emphasis on what needed to be said.

 

On to your first point. While I have illustrated your point, your statements are equating to the pot calling the kettle black. It is ironic that you complain about what you are calling the problem here, while the same exact thing is happening in your profession. It really doesn't give much room to talk. In fact, if what you are saying is true, wouldn't that put you in the same position as your paid profession? And if so, and you wanted to resolve said problem, take it through the proper channels, NATCA, FAA, or otherwise?

 

Perhaps you're not a conformist as well..

 

Anywho, back to the scopes for this veteran 'seasoned' ZLA controller.

 

BL.

[Ian Elchitz 810151]

If the management of VATUSA, and VATSIM in general, think that creating more of these processes and procedures is going to be adventageous and productive to the success of VATSIM, I think that the loss of many of the long term experienced controllers says something different. I'm think you have a very firm understanding of what I'm talking about by being witness to the exodus of many seasoned controllers at ZLA, and not leaving just ZLA, but the hobby altogether.

 

Bo,

 

While I agree with many aspects of your statement, you appear to be inferring that "the exodus of many seasoned controllers at ZLA" is a direct result of management practices of VATUSA and/or VATSIM.

 

I'd be willing to bet that for every controller who did in fact leave the hobby for these reasons, there are two others who left for completely different factors. These might be related to a new job, significant other, family commitments, monetary struggles, geographical complexities, health issues, lack of remaining challenges, replacement hobbies, or straight burnout.

 

It's perfectly natural for any social group to experience a certain level of attrition. In ZLA's case I'd say that while the attrition quantity is perhaps higher than other places, this is simply because the number of people in the facility is larger than most other facilities and the rate would be somewhere close to the average experienced across the entire network.

 

Things are far from perfect now, but they were also far from perfect back in 2003 - or even as far back as '99 when I started hanging out here. Many things we see here today are similar to what we saw back in 2003: increasing amounts of new pilots, controllers who wanted things done by the book, facilities implementing procedures and training that were exponentially growing in complexity, high turn over rates in staff positions at EVERY level, and staff positions at every level filled by people who have been ineffective for far too long but unwilling to give up the reigns. At the same time we still have a lot of people who pour their heart and soul into the community in various, selfless ways - and above all we have a high percentage of people who log on every night to fly or control, treat one another with respect, and have a great time.

 

Additionally, we have the same old group of people who whine, moan, and complain about everything under the sun - but never lift a finger to actually do anything productive to help solve the problems.

 

Ya - I'd have to say that the good old days of 2003 weren't actually any better than they are today. In fact I'm positive that if I warped back to 2003 I'd be quite unhappy when compared to today's version of the community.

[Bo Gercke 845743]

Thanks for the replies and I'll hit them in order.

 

Gerry,

 

You make a great point in saying that this is a Learning Environment. It is, and as such, it's limited in the scope of realism that can obtained. I'm not going to crack that egg here, but I'm fairly certain that we both agree on the limitations of realism on VATSIM.

 

I'm not quite seeing how this restructuring makes things "easier", but in fact creates more workload. Sure it's a great accomplishment, and I remember when I got my C3, and the sense of accomplishment that I had. My basis here is that, as an organization, we need to streamline. This is one of those annoying processes that COULD possibly affect getting things done. We, as an organization, have become so bloated with nonsensical politics and policy that it is interfering in dealing with issues that really need attention, I.E. the ARTCC's and creating an environment where there is support for the ARTCC's from the organization.

 

Brad...

 

I am not much of a conformist, in that I think that leadership is more important than management, development more important than p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]iveness, and personal growth more important than stagnation. I believe that it is important to connect with the people in your organization, and set a vision for the organization, vice "be the captain of your own ship". In that regard, yes, I am very much out of the box, and a non-conformist.

 

Since we need not spend much time on my personal life, I will share with you that I have 158 days left in the military. At that point, I can hang up my headset, and pursue other opportunities for myself, or I can go work at one of the many contract towers and fields in the country, or overseas. I am looking at all options, at this point. So to answer your question, yes, I am in the same position in my paid career, and looking to make a change. I have no desire to spend my life battling with the federal government, and military, to fix what is broken. A "change in management" is needed there, as well.

 

Ian...

 

Great points, all of them. I think that for the sake of this thread, I'm going to try to get it back on track, and I'll hit your points in an email, or a different thread.

 

I still would like to hear from those who initiated, and implemented this policy. Why did you do it, and what is the purpose in creating a policy for a "pointless" rating?

 

Thanks.

[Alex Bailey 969331]

I think we are blowing up a rather non-important issue here. The GRP was established to streamline the ratings system so that a Senior Student (Approach) rating in the USA is the same in China. Due to this policy, the C-3 rating was established as having very vague guidelines that left interpretation to the regions or divisions. Thus, we have a VATUSA policy on how to obtain the rating rather than handing out a C-3 rating because the ATM likes the controller (believe me, it happens).

 

So I would be very careful to make comments regarding an overhaul in leadership and not to fix what isn't broken. Remember, this is a little rating and a little policy that really doesn't mean much in the entire picture of what you would see as being VATUSA. I think it is premature to judge the system as being corrupt because of a policy, which is valid and legitimate in every aspect, that has been established. It is mentioned in the GRP that it is an "above and beyond" rating, and now Gary/VATUSA have established guidelines for it.

 

I can see many more issues of much more importance than this one to waste our time arguing about. The policy was a must, now we have it, and it doesn't effect anyone in a negative way at all. Business as usual, continue...

Edited May 8, 2008 at 05:16 PM by Guest

[Bo Gercke 845743]

Alex...

 

Thanks for the reply. As far as I've observed, I'm the only person on this thread with any questions about the implementation of this policy. I disagree that "we" are blowing it up, or taking it out of proportion. I am simply posing the question "WHY?" and looking for an explanation. Sure, I could use the medium of email to go directly to Gary, or Karl, but I am relatively certain that I am not the only one asking why. I figure that since I am asking a question that could potentially benefit others, that it's a valid question to ask on the forum. Whether I agree with it, or disagree with it is irrelevant at this point. I want to understand what lead to it, and why we did it.

 

As far as "handing out the cert because an ATM has motives..." Since I was an ATM, I feel that I am in a position to speak on this. I used the tools available to me to make my facility run as effectively as possible while working within the rules. If "giving" a controller a C3 to make them meet certain qualifications for available staff positions I did so. I believe that it is important to develop leaders, and allow them to advance their experience in the hobby as they feel they want to. Was it within my scope of authority to do so? Absolutely. The issue that arises out of this is that either we reduce our qualifications for available staff positions to C1 or above, or make the C3's or above. Obviously I'm more in favor of making it higher because of the depth of running an ARTCC and leading a group of 50+ volunteers in an organization.

 

I am very close to perceiving your statement about "being very careful about my comments" as an indirect threat. This type of positional bullying is precisely the issue that has been brought up many times by many people regarding the style of leadership in VATUSA. Alex, I am a volunteer. Here of my own accord, doing a hobby that I enjoy. Your pithy threats to, in effect, tell me to tow the company line, keep my mouth shut and don't make waves is absolutely contrary to making positive change within a organization. If I was sitting with you in a coffee shop having this conversation, would you just wave your hand at me and say,

"I can see many more issues of much more importance than this one to waste your time arguing about. The policy was a must, now we have it, and it doesn't effect anyone in a negative way at all. Business as usual, continue..."? I can [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ure you that you would not. Why would you do it here, on this medium?

 

I will not address this any further on this forum but will be taking your post through the proper channels.

 

I would encourage you to re-read my post to understand that I was not talking about VATUSA in that paragraph, rather the situation that I face in my current place of employment.

 

Again, I am simply looking for the question of WHY to be addressed by those who initiated, and implemented this policy...

 

Thanks.

[Alex Bailey 969331]

I wasn't trying to threaten you in any way at all, and I do apologize. I see a lot of people making indirect comments about the leadership around here, and I tend to jump the gun in ways that I shouldn't. My comment of watching what you say directly about the leadership was more tongue-in-cheek, but I didn't want to see someone hop on here and start bashing you for seemingly being against the leadership.

 

Hopefully that clears it up. Just understand that when bringing in comments about management and how to run an organization with a simple question of "why" the C-3 policy is implemented, it could be easily seen from an outsider that you might be leading into an argument or opposing the progress of the division. This has happened recently, which puts people on edge. It also seems I may have misunderstood your post and you took my response as being directed at you in particular, which it wasn't, but I was referring to the following statement you made:

 

Maybe I'm stuck in 2003 where things worked ok, the wheel went round and round, there was a long list of controllers who had been around since SATCO, and the general feeling of VATSIM was that it was a fun hobby that people came together and got online, and controlled virtual traffic. I believe that VATSIM, more specifically VATUSA, has become so muddled with policy, procedure, and process that it's worse than doing this ATC thing for real. And I thought the military was a political minefield! I find that troubling. If the management of VATUSA, and VATSIM in general, think that creating more of these processes and procedures is going to be adventageous and productive to the success of VATSIM, I think that the loss of many of the long term experienced controllers says something different. I'm think you have a very firm understanding of what I'm talking about by being witness to the exodus of many seasoned controllers at ZLA, and not leaving just ZLA, but the hobby altogether. Sad.

 

I guess it's really hard for me to expect anything different when you have staff positions being held, on average, for 6-8 mos, though. There was a time that you could not find a vacant staff position at any level in VATUSA. Today, the landscape is entirely different. Is there no one else that finds this concerning?

 

Sorry if what I have said offended you, and I would be more than happy to clarify or remove any comments of that nature from my post.

 

Regards,

[Bo Gercke 845743]

Thanks for the apology...Accepted.

 

I do not need you to remove, or edit anything that you have posted. I appreciate your input, and value what you have to say.

 

Frankly, I don't care much about what "outsiders" have to say, to be really blunt. They are on the sidelines watching, I am on the field participating. If the leadership is worried about some sort of coup d'etat by its members, someone has got the leadership thing all wrong. In addition, I have been around the organization long enough to see changes, both good and bad occur. Whether I agree, or disagree, is moot, but knowing WHY we are doing something is something that needs to be more clearly communicated by the leadership. It creates unity, and a vision for the organization. It unifies people around a common goal. It would make the forum a much more "hospitable" place. The forum is the barometer of this particular organization. Further, good communication takes the pressure off the leadership to have to explain these changes and implementations more than one time. If, for example, I say, (putting on the VATUSA1 hat)

 

"We are working on a policy that does XXXXX, and here's why...." People (the organization) would have time to adjust and accept it, (and maybe!) add some contribution to it that the drafters of the policy didn't think of. Then when it's implemented, the organizations' reaction is,

"Oh yeah, they've been talking about that for days,weeks, months." Should you have someone, like me, who says,

"Hey, wait a minute! WHY!!??" You have a whole organization behind the leader that can say,

"Dude, where have you been? We've been talking about this for days, weeks, months!! You could have given input into this when it first came about. Here's the link!"(removing VATUSA1 hat)

 

It does not make it democracy, nor does it mean that the input will be heeded, but at least there has been an opportunity to give input, and voice possible concerns or issues. And, most importantly, make people (volunteers) feel included in the process of contributing positively to the organization. Everybody wins!

 

In response to my quote about 2003, I feel very strongly that we have become more tangled in policy and processes that it hinders our leaders from leading. The power has been removed from those who require it to accomplish goals in their respective ARTCCs, and have been given to a select few who aren't interested in the success of the ARTCC, but more interested in the individual success of the organization. What is being missed in that is that if the ARTCCs (which requires the proper leadership) are running smoothly, than the organization runs smoothly. It is not a trickle down effect, rather a trickle up effect. Because of the loss of many of the people who are experienced, and have longevity in the organization, we are required to bring on less qualified people to run the ARTCCs, thus requiring more oversight, policy, and procedure. It takes an exceptional leader to lead an all volunteer organization with 50+ people. It takes an even more exceptional leader to not only lead that organization, but rebuild it from the ground up, which is often the case after an ATM resigns, or is removed.

 

It is true that most staff positions, within the ARTCC, are vacated within 6-8 months, on average. The reasons are as Ian stated in his post, but it creates a loss of momentum in that respective ARTCC. For an ATM to resign after 6-8 mos because of burnout says that the organization is not supporting its people.

 

Thanks for reading...

[Luke Kolin]

It takes an exceptional leader to lead an all volunteer organization with 50+ people. It takes an even more exceptional leader to not only lead that organization, but rebuild it from the ground up, which is often the case after an ATM resigns, or is removed. It is true that most staff positions, within the ARTCC, are vacated within 6-8 months, on average. The reasons are as Ian stated in his post, but it creates a loss of momentum in that respective ARTCC.

 

This is something that has always disturbed me greatly when it comes to VATUSA - that lack of organization continuity and to me it's the sign of a sick (as in diseased, not perverse) organization. Outside of a very small number of ARTCCs (ZLA springs to mind but I imagine there may be others) it seems like any progress that is made under a particular ATM or team gets thrown out the window when there is turnover in leadership. New policies, new web site, new everything. How can an organization ever progress forward over the medium or long term when it appears to start from scratch (or pretty darn close to it) every few months?

 

I have no idea what happened during the last VATUSA transition, but this outsider sees some interesting movements forward (like the Academy) with an eye to doing things on a country-wide basis, and then once the new administration took over everything seemed to start from scratch. Maybe this time things will be different and I think everyone on every side of the scope hopes so, but the history is not encouraging. And we're not going to know if things are different until Gary is gone and his successor is able to build on top of whatever has been done, not redo it from scratch.

 

I would also agree that it's exceptionally difficult to find a good leadership team to manage a large, disparate organization. However, it's striking that VATUSA seems to have a large number of titled positions, almost inversely proportional to its results. Having seen large (2,000+ member) community organizations be effectively led by groups of a dozen or so people, it seems like VATUSA is distributing its good people in a sub-optimal way.

 

Luke

[Bryan Wollenberg 810243]

This is something that has always disturbed me greatly when it comes to VATUSA - that lack of organization continuity and to me it's the sign of a sick (as in diseased, not perverse) organization. Outside of a very small number of ARTCCs (ZLA springs to mind but I imagine there may be others) it seems like any progress that is made under a particular ATM or team gets thrown out the window when there is turnover in leadership. New policies, new web site, new everything. How can an organization ever progress forward over the medium or long term when it appears to start from scratch (or pretty darn close to it) every few months?

 

This is actually a very good point. ZLA has been lucky in that regard. We have generally a very tight-knit group of folks in the ARTCC, and don't really see the bickering, general BS, and disagreements that you see in some other places. It seems that when a staff member leaves certain ARTCCs, it's under bad circomestances. We experienced that once too, and quite honestly, it made us stronger. We're not into all the political nonsense when it comes to running ZLA. We just love getting out and controlling the traffic. Leave the other nonsense to somebody else...

 

 

"We are working on a policy that does XXXXX, and here's why...." People (the organization) would have time to adjust and accept it, (and maybe!) add some contribution to it that the drafters of the policy didn't think of. Then when it's implemented, the organizations' reaction is,

"Oh yeah, they've been talking about that for days,weeks, months." Should you have someone, like me, who says,

"Hey, wait a minute! WHY!!??" You have a whole organization behind the leader that can say,

"Dude, where have you been? We've been talking about this for days, weeks, months!! You could have given input into this when it first came about. Here's the link!"(removing VATUSA1 hat)

 

Bo, I [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ure you that this policy was discussed amongst the ARTCC and VATUSA staffs. The latest administration is actually doing a really good job about consulting the ATMs/DATMs, etc., and taking our input when it comes to the general operations of VATUSA. I agree with you though, that more things could be brought to the general public. One thing in particular that has always boggled my mind, is we (controllers) sit and debate, for example, about what types of events pilots would like. Why not just ask the enormous amount of pilots we have here, and try to get a general concensus?

 

I never did understand that, but that's neither here nor there. As I've said many times over, the C3 is a completely usless rating now. There are very few people who actually think the rating makes sense, and even fewer who can explain why it still exists. But in any event, it's there, it's policy, and we have to live with it. What VATUSA has done is [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ign some qualitative/quantitative requirements for the rating. It falls in line with creating specific criteria within VATUSA for every rating.

[Andrew Doubleday]

This is actually a very good point. ZLA has been lucky in that regard. We have generally a very tight-knit group of folks in the ARTCC, and don't really see the bickering, general BS, and disagreements that you see in some other places. It seems that when a staff member leaves certain ARTCCs, it's under bad circomestances. We experienced that once too, and quite honestly, it made us stronger. We're not into all the political nonsense when it comes to running ZLA. We just love getting out and controlling the traffic. Leave the other nonsense to somebody else...

 

Smartest move I ever made joining "The Republic" (Star Wars)... This place (ZLA) is like a well-fortified castle consisting of extremely motivated and p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ionate individuals who actually know and care about what they are doing... I'm thrilled to be a contributor to this place... I can actually log on at night, enjoy controlling realistically, trust whoever is working above/next/below me, and lastly, not have to worry about any political crud like I dealt with daily for the past two years at ZAU... Why you may ask? Because while the rest of VATUSA was concerned with politics and such, ZLA focused on designing a magnificent training program that would work with their wealth of knowledge and turned it into a powerful, well-oiled machine which is instilled in the heart of the facility now (and guess what? Now we're instilling it in the pilots through the pilot cert program!)... nothing I've seen anywhere else in VATUSA yet!

 

/mini rant

 

No disrespect meant to anyone... just the reality of it all. I think everyone could learn a lesson or two from this place (in management and policy writing). Huge public thanks from the bottom of my heart to the members of ZLA who have kept it real throughout the years...

 

 

Regards,

 

-AJ

Edited May 9, 2008 at 01:57 AM by Guest

[Stephen Sculley-Beaman]

I know exactly what you mean Andrew. I went on my 'extended vacation' from ZAU right after that started. Ironically, I went to ZLA. It was like...not gonna go there.

[Harold Rutila 974112]

Page 3 was fun.

[Bo Gercke 845743]

Page 3 was fun.

 

LOL!! Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ic.....

[Harold Rutila 974112]

How do we know if the app was received? I sent one in last week, then sent one in again tonight. There was no confirmation message or anything of that sort. Thanks!

[Brian Sperduto 856560]

How do we know if the app was received? I sent one in last week, then sent one in again tonight. There was no confirmation message or anything of that sort. Thanks!

There is a confirmation that your application is received, if you are redirected back either your p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]word is wrong or you do not meet the requirements. Only C1 Controllers can apply for this rating, if you are an I1 or above it does not apply to you.

[Bo Gercke 845743]

My guess here Brian.... And it is only a guess.... He might be asking for one of his students who approached him with the issue. Crazy, I know.....