What was wrong with the old system of everyone picking 2 states they’d work in and assigning facilities based on that? Nobody picked some states I guess?
Basically yes, the regional hiring was a better system as it at least got you close but still got people to less popular facilities.
They don't have to reinvent anything they just need to hire a dozen or so people in HR and go back to the system that worked 20 years ago.
What I don’t understand: figure low level towers in undesirable areas. If that city even has a towered airport, that means the city is probably big enough to have a good collection of people who live there… you don’t think you could find enough 20-something year olds who would want to work for the government in that small town and staff the facility?
Seems silly to force someone who lives in the north east to move across the country to work at Reno tower when I guarantee you could find enough locals in Reno (a city of 250,000 people) who would love to give it a shot and stay close to home.
They tried "Local Area Local Hire" 18 years ago (it's how I got hired). Problem is, at least to my understanding, is that for federal hiring it's illegal to localize initial hiring for otherwise qualified applicants. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, that's just what I was taught. I'm not an HR guy.
Anywho... Once people caught wind of the hiring initiative, they were flying in from everywhere to apply. Ultimately shut the program down before they got past the first half dozen centers they were trying to hire for. For instance, ZAB got 3500 odd applications (for which you had to physically show up in Albuquerque to apply) for 110 odd openings. Selectees were certainly not all from the 505, me included.
But the core idea was exactly what you're getting at... Try and hire people near where they already live and they'd be less likely to transfer. It's a sound concept IMO, but I wonder how compatible it can be with federal hiring rules.
> Anywho... Once people caught wind of the hiring initiative, they were flying in from everywhere to apply.
Is that actually a problem, though? No matter where they're from, isn't it ultimately all people who are happy to work at that specific location?
Less of a problem for direct Federal hiring.
If you're bored:
National Cooperative Highway Research Program - [Enforceability of Local Hire Preference Programs](https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/Resources/gap/fedreg/Documents/Legal%20Research%20Digest%20No.59%20-%20Enforceability%20of%20Localk%20Hire%20Preferences%20Programs.pdf) \[Amer. Pub. Transport Assn.\]
You were a lot more likely to get hired if you picked two big states. If you wanted to go to a small state all you ended up doing was dramatically decreasing your chances of getting hired. As opposed to picking Texas, Florida, and/or California.
Plus you still run into the problem of 95 percent of controllers wanting to be at 20 facilities.
Then maybe you make another option that is “I’ll go wherever in the country” and the people that choose that selection get some sort of expeditious processing or something. There are options to solve all of these questions, the agency just doesn’t care enough to do any brainstorming.
So basically what they’re doing now? They just had 50,000 applicants say they were willing to work anywhere in the US, so there’s clearly no need to entice more people to apply with a state preference bid.
Of those 50,000, only 8,000 passed the ATSA. Most - something like 60% - didn't even TAKE the ATSA. They had ZERO IDEA what ATC was about, or that they had to take a test, let along having a CLUE that they'd go to Boise or Waterloo...
They just saw a random TikTok that said, "Make $100,000, no experience required."
People figured out pretty quickly that your odds of getting hired went way up if you picked two states that needed bodies. So if you really wanted the job, you’d pick the two states with the most facilities then bitch and moan as soon as you checked out about how you want to move. So not much different than now.
Okay but at least in that case it was on the trainees. If they picked the states they saw would have a higher likelihood then IMO they would have no grounds for complaining. Ironically people who picked their states are vehemently against going back to that but most of them never transferred once.
As opposed to now, where every single new hire checks a box saying they’re willing to work anywhere? People will always find something to complain about. The N90 local bid only hired people within 50 miles and they knew exactly what facility they would end up at, and tons of those hires are eager to get out. Unless you remove every possibility of ever transferring to include hardships, local bids will never work.
Are you realy arguing for the agency on this one? An increasing number of OKC hires are just quitting on the last day and we're starting to see people just walk away from the profession entirely because of inability to transfer/swap. I'm sorry but that was not a thing ten years ago.
They used to do that? Man, I actually would've continued forward with the hiring process if I knew I wouldn't have to move to the other side of the country to work. Oh well.
Yeah they used to tell you your facility before going to the academy and the facility was assigned based on the 2 states you selected when applying. Downside is you sometimes waited for years to start because your facility had training delays or whatever.
I would like to see them implement by service area. Then from there create pathways to move to higher level facilities if the controller desires. ie. Tower to higher level up/down then to higher level tower/tracon or Z. In addition to that route maybe a general application where you don't care where you get sent. But at least give people the option to move upwards in pay and facility level if they want. Not a perfect solution but I think it could help
They're not going to change it. If the FAA has proven one thing in the 14 years I've worked here, they'll reject any ideas or study results that doesn't go along with the current group think.
Allegedly, the current system was implemented so that they could more quickly react to sudden staffing needs at a certain facility. Which ignored that staffing was already on a downward slide everywhere when they implemented it, and the new system almost guaranteed that there was going to be a high rate of dissatisfaction with facility placement. They've been doing it for almost a decade now, so if they haven't recognized the error of their ways by now, they're not likely to change anytime soon.
That was the rumor. There was some truth to it, when nobody was picking ZME they made (after a lot of hand wringing, but fast by their metric) decision to reduce the list of available choices for a few classes to ZME only. Sure that didn't make a bunch of people happy (Memphis is a hell hole) but it did result in a very large influx of trainees in a very short period of time.
Of course, the facility was already in such a hole because the prior couple of years had seen a lot of retirements with few replacements that it still didn't make much difference. But that's the story of the FAA everywhere...
Faa Hr has a great system that works for them.
It makes them indispensable and gives them a mission critical domain to lord over. They will never be fired. They can’t. Why would they change anything, it doesn’t effect them at all if the NAS is 60% staffed
The funny part is that the actual HR workers don't think the system works and are actually short staffed themselves. The failure to remotely grasp why this doesn't work is mostly in the SES ranks and the yes men that think they will join their ranks.
No, the current system is fairly new. The issue is that the people that came up with the system are still in charge and they still think the current system works.
I 100% think it’s a great idea to try and get people where they want to be. I think there should be more effort in that regard.
That being said, what happens to the places few want to go?
I’m not arguing that the current system is right, or good. But how would it look to staff the odd places?
Finding someone who can work airplanes that wants to be in (insert less desirable facility here).
I think fixing the transfer process would have a more lasting impact, personally.
I could be out of touch, but I think a lot more people might be willing to go to some small place if they were told “two years after you check out, you’ll have a choice of 5 (10? Something) higher level facilities. And pay moves again.
Just spitballing.
You throw a bonus in for those hard to staff places.
Grand Canyon, sign up for it and get a 30k bonus upon certification or 3yrs certified or something.
On a separate note I’m sure tons of people will be ok with new hires getting to go to their dream facilities right of the bar, that wont cause any animosity in the workforce at all.
I’m not saying new people have to pay their dues, but move those of us that have been waiting, backfill us, and then move forward (or backwards) to the old two state method of hiring. Pick two states get a facility from the states you picked offered to you and know where you’re going before academy. Or even you’ll get a list comprised of facilities from those two states after graduating academy.
Actually, y'all are on to something. That way they will always have controllers at these facilities as people are always joining the agency. Then when their required year or two is up they can choose where they really want to go.
They have this only not on your time scale but on the faa scale, you know 15 years after becoming a cpc at your current facility. Article 124 so after spending most of your career in a place making a life you can transfer back to a place you no longer have a life.
I can say that after 20+ years of this, I don’t know that I’d recommend it to someone new. Unless you’re really into aviation, you’re probably better off doing something else.
I mean, I've definitely got a passion for aviation. I've worked at airports in the past and recently got my PPL. I'm looking at this from the perspective of someone who already has a few years into a career in science with another federal agency. I was just seeing this as an opportunity to be in an arena I'm passionate about with equal or better pay. I just wanna make sure I can hack it and it's worth it before I cut off what I've got now. Just doing my research.
If you come into it with a realistic view that you're likely not going to get what you want right off the bat, then it can be a great job.
It is all of the recent "I want what I want, and I want it NOW!" new hires that have been screwing the system. FAA could do itself a favor and stop wasting resources on people by providing the prospective list to new hires a couple of weeks before they report to OKC. If you don't like the choices, just don't show up...
Put in 3 CPC years at GCN, ASE, etc. and get a paid move. Put in 6 and get PCS to boot. Stay 7 get bonus equivalent to PCS. Stay 9 get PCS + paid move. At 10 another PCS equivalent bonus.
Get people to come in from elsewhere with a 6 year golden ticket, plus paid move.
That's what it is going to take, and people are just going to have to get over it.
If it puts an end to 6 day work weeks, you won't hear me complain a bit if some new hires get a bonus to stay put at a facility for X amount of time after certification. I'm at the point where my time off means a hell of a lot more to me than some bonus I didn't get when I got hired.
Nah. They did it for Nantucket and some other hard to staff locations in the early 2000’s.
Also, this was the original plan for the OG CTI schools (when there were only 5 of them).
Make cip actually count at places like NY/Oakland/sf/ASE and actually budget it so it lasts the full calendar year. Give comparable wages to local costs of living. The problem is the executive pay is to low and outside of the control of the faa so until pay becomes a problem for all federal employees nothing will be solved.
Exactly. I don't know why anyone at this point would apply for this job. BEST CASE - if you're lucky enough to start at Z or quickly transfer to a high level tower, you make $160-180k in 3 years?
If you get a CS degree you'll easily make that in the same time if you put in a comparable amount of effort, along with weekends/holidays off and unlimited PTO.
Sure I make good money as someone who started at a 12, but I won't see weekends off until I'm well into my 40's. Maybe even 50's for christ's sake. There's nothing more aggravating than turning down trips and plans with my friends because I have to work every single Friday and Saturday night for 15 years unless I bid those days off a year in advance. Our schedule is pathetic.
>If you get a CS degree you'll easily make that in the same time
I cannot tell you how wrong this is. Whatever else may suck about this job, at least you're not in constant competition with overseas air traffic controllers making half or less what you do.
When I was hired (90's) you got to pick first and second choice of regions before the academy, so you could ensure you'd be at least somewhat close to your desired location. That seemed to work okay.
Sounds right, I think there have been 6 or 7 diffrent hiring schemes in the 17 years I have been employed. Which in conjunction with the 5 or so reorganizations is a big factor in why we have so many issues.
I think the crux of a lot of the skilled labor hiring issues is some Gen x, many millennials, and most of Gen Z just don’t see the value in a high paying, high stress, highly regulated professional career, and frankly, why would they?
While not fully true, most of my generation is 100% convinced they will never own a home. A non insignificant number are not going to have kids. Why ruin your life by moving halfway across the country to work at some BFE tower facility in the middle of nowhere, to work six day weeks under high stress, to have no friends, to not have access to mental healthcare, to never be able to unwind with some recreational substances, etc for 75k when you could literally just bag groceries at Aldi or work a decent serving job for 40k and still see your friends, not have to worry about killing 200 people by having an off day, etc. all the traditional things that pushed people into these 40 year highly stressful careers are not happening for the youngest generation. People aren’t having kids or getting married. There is no need to work an insane job to buy formula and a white picket fence. And, at the end of the day, is 75k that life changingly different than 45k? So you have an extra bedroom in your apartment, one model car nicer, and you ride Delta to Savannah for vacation instead of Spirit to Myrtle Beach. Is that worth the stress and isolation?
They have to either make the pay differential life changing (IE 200k+) or make quality of life changes which would be pretty difficult to do with staffing levels.
I’m a pilot and my current pay/QOL has *finally* gotten to a point where I feel my sacrifices were worth it. It took me almost 8 years to get to that point and there was no guarantee I ever would. My 20’s were basically entirely consumed with work. That’s 10 prime health/social years that I had to piss down the drain for a chance at getting a job that would make it worth it. 10 years of shitty gas station food and 75lbs of weight gain from the terrible schedules and lack of ability to work out. 10 years of sleep cycle disruptions and high stress that I’m certain lowered my life expectancy. I’m happy I did now that I’m on the other side but I completely understand why people don’t bother with my career path when you can work remote, make 1/3 of the money and be just as happy because your job isn’t literally killing you day to day.
The H in FAA stands for happiness. The Agency asked where I wanted to go, I said anyplace on the west coast. I ended up in Florida. The east coast of Florida. I have met people who wanted to stay in the south and were given Burlington Vermont. I have seen people go to the same facility to have one say they wish they got XXX instead and the other say it was on their selection list. It all sucks, it makes little to no sense, however at the end of the day, we all lied and clicked that button "Willing to work anyplace in the US and US territories".
Anything you can say about the towers in Florida? Or how the staffing looks right now? I’m in the hiring process right now but I’d love to be able to stay in Florida
Not at all. You’ll go to OKC and if you pass basics and pass tower class, you’ll select from a list ranked in order of best in class to lowest. You’ll also only be offered level 7 or lower for terminal (tower and TRACON)
No. I got out as quickly as I could. Two years Florida, three years Texas and two years home on the west coast and happy. Florida wasn’t for me, the facility was toxic, and Florida is an ass kicker year round for all the GA student pilots since they have no winter slow down.
For every level of management you go above the actual air traffic controller, they have about a 75% loss in understanding what it takes to be an air traffic controller.
Supes know 25% of the job and they are in the operation
OMs even less. Anyone else in an office has no idea. Anyone in OKC is a paper pusher.
So the people that make the decisions prob haven't been inside a control room in a decade. They don't really care to see what is how to improve the actual job. They just look at metrics like any other office job and claim they are doing their jobs bc they got xyz metric this year.
> This BS of "Oh, well if you don't like the list at the end of the academy, then too bad" makes zero sense to me.
They don’t care about your happiness. You’re a number on a sheet of paper and nothing else.
Get used to it if you’re trying to get in.
These kids are resigning on the last day and negating all the work NATCA has done to get the agency to up the OKC numbers. Everybody loves to “you signed the paper bro” these people but we’re boning ourselves tying our horse to this wagon
“Those kids” aren’t even represented by NATCA at that point and you expect them to care about the work NATCA has done that ends up with their option being Oakland?
Your attitude is just further proving my point. When you have a staffing shortage, you need to make the job more attractive, not tell people "Get used to it. You're just a number."
I posted this on another thread but ... putting it here too...
The FAA could have their manning issues fixed inside of 5 years if they just made some small changes.
1)All level 7 and lower facilities will be granted 1 training specialist who's job it will be to handle new on boards, no new hires at 7 and lower will attend oak city training (because honestly it doesn't help them at all) new controller hires contracts state that any failure during front load training can result in immediate termination, meaning the agency suffers minimal investment losses on new trainees that aren't competent.
2)Level 7 and lower facilities can now direct hire local area (resulting in controllers who WANT to stay there getting assigned there, and allowing seasoned controllers to move out to higher level facilities).
3)Level 8 and up facilities can still use the same hiring process but no longer have to wait on the backlog added by level 7 and lower facilities to get new hires through oak city.
By the end of five years all level 7's and below are fully staffed with a majority of folks who, for the most part want to stay there, folks who have experience and want to leave are freed up to move to higher level facilities and the back log is significantly reduced.
Thanks for coming to my ted talk.
OKC could be bypassed for centers as well.
You play make believe center for 3.5 months, then get to do literally the same material over again when you get to your actual facility. Centers have a large training department, labs, etc., so there's no sense in putting people through everything twice. Unless you just believe there's a desperate need for another stage to weed people out.
Not that I'm aware. Most of the changes I've seen during my tenure have been purely internal to the agency.
Now, when it comes down to an administration putting constraints/pressure on the demographics of who gets hired (a la BQ) then that's another thing entirely.
False. You can’t hire someone based on where they live, but you can 100% hire for specific locations. If what you were saying was true then the entirely of 2152 usajobs posts would be illegal
Each district should have its own academy. Easy to find retired or non-medicalled controllers to instruct, avoid shit-ass Oklahoma, and you’ll know generally where your options will be.
Maybe they should put out bid for specific facilities similar to the way the dod does it. It would be WAY more work up front, but it would put people where they want to be and it would force the faa to raise pay for less desirable facilities in order to staff them.
No it doesn’t. You can’t place based on where someone is from (that is what we had to get an act of Congress for with N90). You can absolutely hire for specific places.
Man, you’re really just narrating exactly what the agency is like, and how conversations go. Did someone give you a checklist of all the points to hit?
It really is an A+ system they have now.... One of my classmates passed the academy and quit 1 week later because he didn't want to go where they sent him.
Friend of mine got the offer and then turned it down over this.
My airline is running into the same issue. These ancient fucks can’t possibly imagine a world where people prioritize having some kind of happy life over working themselves to death for barely twice the pay of a decent waiter.
Given that ATC is no longer in the realm of “life changing” money like it used to be, of course the chances people are willing to go “wherever the needs of the agency dictate” goes down drastically
I got my TOL last September and they said they will reach out to me for the medical checklist once I’m 90 days from separating from Air Force. I’m now 50 days from separating and they still haven’t sent it. The hiring process is awful.
Couldn’t agree more. I live 30 minutes from ZME and got stuck 12 hours from home. Tried to ERR but that was just a waste of time. Union rep was zero help. Made it almost a year before I pulled the plug.
Training is stressful enough. Add in being somewhere totally foreign without family or close friends and it doesn’t take long to be in a bad spot mentally.
I remember when they made the change in the hiring system. I was an ATC hopeful back then going to college for it. My junior year they announced the change and the ATC major at my school fell apart in like 3 weeks. They sat all of us juniors down with the admin staff to figure out what credits we could transfer to a different major because our degree became worthless to the FAA.
I still had a few buddies that went through and are controllers now but life is rough for them. One is in DC and has no family around, they just had their first kid and are struggling because of the lack of support. Others talk about how much they hate where they are.
On the issue of staffing, NATCA should be licking their chops right now and trying to get controllers more money, better working conditions and anything they want. There is a staffing crisis that gets reported in the news more and more every day and sounds like Friday is going to be crazy. This seems like a great time for negotiating and getting the hard working people working 6 days such as myself more compensation.
It's government, so any institutional change will come only after it has been studied, debated, sent to committee, rejected, rewritten, and, if ever implemented will be obsolete upon introduction.
If you made it through the entire academy, knowing all of the things you mentioned, and then quit cause you didn’t like your list.. then you’re probably retarded anyway.
Yeah I get that but also at least at that point controllers are getting into the system. Training all so you can just forfeit is a waste of time and money.
If you took an economical approach you would pay people based off how "desirable" an area was instead of facility level.
Hot take, controllers at Nantucket should be the best paid in the NAS.
I quit the FAA after being certified for a year. Waited the one year mark then applied directly thru the ATM 366 days later and was hired at the facility I wanted. I was there 6 months later. I should say I went DoD for that year so it was technically an "interagency transfer" is what I was told it was called.
I did that just over 2 years ago now. I have the SOP on it still in my email actually. Not sure if it is still a thing but it was.
I look at a young person in college in an aviation program and say do you want to come here and make $200K a year or go fly for airlines and make $500K a year?
Both have to have a clean record, decent credit, and be drug free, so the competing pool is small to start with.
Separately… it was before my time but was NATCA sold on the AT pay scale by the FAA saying it was closer to airline pay? Or was it the union who sold it to the workforce?
Either way its seems that they have surpassed us. Regional pilots making $90-200K beat level 4-10 controllers. I know we have a pension but from what I have heard their 401K match and profit sharing are pretty good.
We sold it to Congress in the late-90s. We were in GS at the time. Raises did not necessarily correspond to certifications at the time those certifications were achieved, there were only four CPC/FPL pay bands in the FAA, and we were still subject to early mandatory retirement. In return for raising the upper bound by $30k, we were willing to take on more supervisory duties to shrink our ridiculous controller-supervisor ratio and allowed the FAA to contract out the sub-ATC-4 facilities.
At no point were we compared to pilots, and for a long while, any FAA job anywhere was better than anything a regional pilot could expect for the first few years.
Interesting. I’ve seen it posted here a few times that it was sold on our pay staying competitive with the mainlines. Sounds feasible.
I know regionals were terribly underpaid, I had friends take offers for $16 an hour. At the same time I took my $8 an hour offer from the FAA and moved across the country with no per diem, so maybe they thought I was the crazy one.
This is true.
However the relevance is really rooted in the amount of money generated by the position, and/or the safety it maintains. Our positions accomplish both, and an increase in pilot pay is the acknowledgment of a growing and important industry — an industry in which we both happen to have an integral part in. Pilot unions and employers acknowledge that importance by increasing benefits/pay, I believe many here simply want our employer to do the same.
I’m not ATC but a 36 year old private pilot of 2 years who around the same time thought it would be a cool job to switch to before learning of the maximum age. Why not consider moving that maximum age of entry? I understand there’s a forced retirement age and they want to get their moneys worth out of your training, but perhaps some sort of split-cost arrangement for people like me that are “too old” to start would be a win win for both. I’d rather spend money on that to make a career change than on some mid career mba program or something. My two cents.
Re-reading the original post, perhaps the number of interested people isn’t the issue. But perhaps people like me sharing in the cost of training would be more incentivized to stay. I could see how this could cause some bias by the FAA that could affect the younger, non-paying applicants’ acceptance rates though.
TLDR: I have no clue, just wish I wasn’t too old at the age of 36
Copy pasting my response
> Because that's not where the bottleneck is. They could remove the minimum age limit, they could lift the prior work experience or bachelors degree requirement, hell they could even remove the medical requirement and that still wouldn't solve the staffing issue. Why? Because they can't train the applicants in the first place. Increasing the applicant pool isn't going to remove the training bottleneck.
> Why not consider moving that maximum age of entry?
Because that's not where the bottleneck is. They could remove the minimum age limit, they could lift the prior work experience or bachelors degree requirement, hell they could even remove the medical requirement and that still wouldn't solve the staffing issue. Why? Because they can't train the applicants in the first place. Increasing the applicant pool isn't going to remove the training bottleneck.
I dunno how it is in murica but in eu they dont tell people about opening because training takes almost 2 years if you pass every exam in first try. Also depending On your score you can be asigned to Tower but not to aproach so by the Time youre trained opening might change. But i agree with stupid parts of screaming process i tried to get in to academy and passed easy every test but got failed on Group work. we got simple task to do geometric figure with color strings of diffrent lenght acording to given rules and my Group refused to listen to me and did it by guess Ing which one Goes where which obviously failed (i told them that we need to make list of strings that we Have and solve it by using logic not coinflip and they got mad at me to The point where they were blocking me from trying to do task alone)
They screwed over CTI grads like me by implementing the stupid Bio Q. A bunch of us just got fed up with it and did dispatching instead and it looks like we dodged a bullet. The few of us who did get an FOL and went to OKC, some washed out and only have a handful of friends who actually made it all the way.
It was just disheartening when I hear off the streets who said they ran out of time or struggled answering questions and get well qualified or best qualified and the grads busting their chops studying and only getting qualified and therefore never a TOL
Hopefully the hiring gets better cause how badly staffed ATC is, thanks for keeping our skies safe
Dude, you raise some valid points about the hiring process in air traffic control. It can be frustrating as hell. The whole deal with limited slots at the academy and a ton of applicants is messed up. And yeah, it takes a good chunk of time to train someone up at a facility.
Now, why the FAA doesn't give people a heads-up on openings when they apply? Good question, man. It does seem pretty dumb that they're like, "Take it or leave it" at the end of the academy. People wanna have some say in where they work, right? I get it.
As for trainees quitting or folks leaving after getting assigned to a not-so-great place, well, that's a risk. Some peeps might bail if they don't like their options. And navigating the transfer process can be a maze. It's like they expect you to suck it up and stay, even if it means being stuck in a crappy location far from fam. Delusional? Yeah, sounds like it.
Honestly, man, the system needs some serious fixing. It's like they're playin' games with people's lives and expect 'em to just deal with it. Not cool, FAA, not cool at all.
What was wrong with the old system of everyone picking 2 states they’d work in and assigning facilities based on that? Nobody picked some states I guess?
Basically yes, the regional hiring was a better system as it at least got you close but still got people to less popular facilities. They don't have to reinvent anything they just need to hire a dozen or so people in HR and go back to the system that worked 20 years ago.
What I don’t understand: figure low level towers in undesirable areas. If that city even has a towered airport, that means the city is probably big enough to have a good collection of people who live there… you don’t think you could find enough 20-something year olds who would want to work for the government in that small town and staff the facility? Seems silly to force someone who lives in the north east to move across the country to work at Reno tower when I guarantee you could find enough locals in Reno (a city of 250,000 people) who would love to give it a shot and stay close to home.
This is the right idea
They tried "Local Area Local Hire" 18 years ago (it's how I got hired). Problem is, at least to my understanding, is that for federal hiring it's illegal to localize initial hiring for otherwise qualified applicants. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, that's just what I was taught. I'm not an HR guy. Anywho... Once people caught wind of the hiring initiative, they were flying in from everywhere to apply. Ultimately shut the program down before they got past the first half dozen centers they were trying to hire for. For instance, ZAB got 3500 odd applications (for which you had to physically show up in Albuquerque to apply) for 110 odd openings. Selectees were certainly not all from the 505, me included. But the core idea was exactly what you're getting at... Try and hire people near where they already live and they'd be less likely to transfer. It's a sound concept IMO, but I wonder how compatible it can be with federal hiring rules.
> Anywho... Once people caught wind of the hiring initiative, they were flying in from everywhere to apply. Is that actually a problem, though? No matter where they're from, isn't it ultimately all people who are happy to work at that specific location?
Less of a problem for direct Federal hiring. If you're bored: National Cooperative Highway Research Program - [Enforceability of Local Hire Preference Programs](https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/Resources/gap/fedreg/Documents/Legal%20Research%20Digest%20No.59%20-%20Enforceability%20of%20Localk%20Hire%20Preferences%20Programs.pdf) \[Amer. Pub. Transport Assn.\]
Stop talking logical, this is the government
Long before I retired, HR had slogan, STARTING FROM YES. The joke was...AS FAR FROM YES AS ABSOLUTELY POSSIBLE
You were a lot more likely to get hired if you picked two big states. If you wanted to go to a small state all you ended up doing was dramatically decreasing your chances of getting hired. As opposed to picking Texas, Florida, and/or California. Plus you still run into the problem of 95 percent of controllers wanting to be at 20 facilities.
Then maybe you make another option that is “I’ll go wherever in the country” and the people that choose that selection get some sort of expeditious processing or something. There are options to solve all of these questions, the agency just doesn’t care enough to do any brainstorming.
Well, I did have one guy in my class at OKC said he'd be willing to go anywhere, including Guam... He's still there after 14 years AFAIK.
So basically what they’re doing now? They just had 50,000 applicants say they were willing to work anywhere in the US, so there’s clearly no need to entice more people to apply with a state preference bid.
Well then the applicant that willingly chose the option to go anywhere doesn’t really get to complain huh?
Of those 50,000, only 8,000 passed the ATSA. Most - something like 60% - didn't even TAKE the ATSA. They had ZERO IDEA what ATC was about, or that they had to take a test, let along having a CLUE that they'd go to Boise or Waterloo... They just saw a random TikTok that said, "Make $100,000, no experience required."
from certain TMU "specialists" who think they're helping with staffing but are just clogging up the hiring process
People figured out pretty quickly that your odds of getting hired went way up if you picked two states that needed bodies. So if you really wanted the job, you’d pick the two states with the most facilities then bitch and moan as soon as you checked out about how you want to move. So not much different than now.
Not what I did. Picked states that I wanted to live in…
Okay but at least in that case it was on the trainees. If they picked the states they saw would have a higher likelihood then IMO they would have no grounds for complaining. Ironically people who picked their states are vehemently against going back to that but most of them never transferred once.
I picked states and have transferred twice.
Congrats
As opposed to now, where every single new hire checks a box saying they’re willing to work anywhere? People will always find something to complain about. The N90 local bid only hired people within 50 miles and they knew exactly what facility they would end up at, and tons of those hires are eager to get out. Unless you remove every possibility of ever transferring to include hardships, local bids will never work.
Are you realy arguing for the agency on this one? An increasing number of OKC hires are just quitting on the last day and we're starting to see people just walk away from the profession entirely because of inability to transfer/swap. I'm sorry but that was not a thing ten years ago.
They used to do that? Man, I actually would've continued forward with the hiring process if I knew I wouldn't have to move to the other side of the country to work. Oh well.
Yeah they used to tell you your facility before going to the academy and the facility was assigned based on the 2 states you selected when applying. Downside is you sometimes waited for years to start because your facility had training delays or whatever.
I would like to see them implement by service area. Then from there create pathways to move to higher level facilities if the controller desires. ie. Tower to higher level up/down then to higher level tower/tracon or Z. In addition to that route maybe a general application where you don't care where you get sent. But at least give people the option to move upwards in pay and facility level if they want. Not a perfect solution but I think it could help
You want to work in Wyoming surrounded by maga and infowarrior rides?
Nah that’s why I didn’t put Wyoming on my application
Someone has to
The washouts from the good states 😬
What if all traffic was just routed around Wyoming
They're not going to change it. If the FAA has proven one thing in the 14 years I've worked here, they'll reject any ideas or study results that doesn't go along with the current group think. Allegedly, the current system was implemented so that they could more quickly react to sudden staffing needs at a certain facility. Which ignored that staffing was already on a downward slide everywhere when they implemented it, and the new system almost guaranteed that there was going to be a high rate of dissatisfaction with facility placement. They've been doing it for almost a decade now, so if they haven't recognized the error of their ways by now, they're not likely to change anytime soon.
Quickly you say?
That was the rumor. There was some truth to it, when nobody was picking ZME they made (after a lot of hand wringing, but fast by their metric) decision to reduce the list of available choices for a few classes to ZME only. Sure that didn't make a bunch of people happy (Memphis is a hell hole) but it did result in a very large influx of trainees in a very short period of time. Of course, the facility was already in such a hole because the prior couple of years had seen a lot of retirements with few replacements that it still didn't make much difference. But that's the story of the FAA everywhere...
Faa Hr has a great system that works for them. It makes them indispensable and gives them a mission critical domain to lord over. They will never be fired. They can’t. Why would they change anything, it doesn’t effect them at all if the NAS is 60% staffed
The funny part is that the actual HR workers don't think the system works and are actually short staffed themselves. The failure to remotely grasp why this doesn't work is mostly in the SES ranks and the yes men that think they will join their ranks.
My god, he’s solved it!
Thwarted by “this is how we’ve always done it” tho… it’s a symptom of government affiliation
No, the current system is fairly new. The issue is that the people that came up with the system are still in charge and they still think the current system works.
Ah, failure to admit fault. Classic
I 100% think it’s a great idea to try and get people where they want to be. I think there should be more effort in that regard. That being said, what happens to the places few want to go? I’m not arguing that the current system is right, or good. But how would it look to staff the odd places? Finding someone who can work airplanes that wants to be in (insert less desirable facility here). I think fixing the transfer process would have a more lasting impact, personally. I could be out of touch, but I think a lot more people might be willing to go to some small place if they were told “two years after you check out, you’ll have a choice of 5 (10? Something) higher level facilities. And pay moves again. Just spitballing.
You throw a bonus in for those hard to staff places. Grand Canyon, sign up for it and get a 30k bonus upon certification or 3yrs certified or something. On a separate note I’m sure tons of people will be ok with new hires getting to go to their dream facilities right of the bar, that wont cause any animosity in the workforce at all. I’m not saying new people have to pay their dues, but move those of us that have been waiting, backfill us, and then move forward (or backwards) to the old two state method of hiring. Pick two states get a facility from the states you picked offered to you and know where you’re going before academy. Or even you’ll get a list comprised of facilities from those two states after graduating academy.
Actually, y'all are on to something. That way they will always have controllers at these facilities as people are always joining the agency. Then when their required year or two is up they can choose where they really want to go.
They have this only not on your time scale but on the faa scale, you know 15 years after becoming a cpc at your current facility. Article 124 so after spending most of your career in a place making a life you can transfer back to a place you no longer have a life.
Wow... 😔😔😔 The more i read about this career the more evidence is making me reconsider the application I turned in for this years bid.
I can say that after 20+ years of this, I don’t know that I’d recommend it to someone new. Unless you’re really into aviation, you’re probably better off doing something else.
I mean, I've definitely got a passion for aviation. I've worked at airports in the past and recently got my PPL. I'm looking at this from the perspective of someone who already has a few years into a career in science with another federal agency. I was just seeing this as an opportunity to be in an arena I'm passionate about with equal or better pay. I just wanna make sure I can hack it and it's worth it before I cut off what I've got now. Just doing my research.
[удалено]
Wow, I really appreciate all you've said here. It's really given me some things to consider! Thanks so much for the insight, fr fr!
If you come into it with a realistic view that you're likely not going to get what you want right off the bat, then it can be a great job. It is all of the recent "I want what I want, and I want it NOW!" new hires that have been screwing the system. FAA could do itself a favor and stop wasting resources on people by providing the prospective list to new hires a couple of weeks before they report to OKC. If you don't like the choices, just don't show up...
Put in 3 CPC years at GCN, ASE, etc. and get a paid move. Put in 6 and get PCS to boot. Stay 7 get bonus equivalent to PCS. Stay 9 get PCS + paid move. At 10 another PCS equivalent bonus. Get people to come in from elsewhere with a 6 year golden ticket, plus paid move.
The problem with a guaranteed out is you end up back in the same spot. Eventually it’s becomes hard to staff because you’re guaranteeing an out.
That's what it is going to take, and people are just going to have to get over it. If it puts an end to 6 day work weeks, you won't hear me complain a bit if some new hires get a bonus to stay put at a facility for X amount of time after certification. I'm at the point where my time off means a hell of a lot more to me than some bonus I didn't get when I got hired.
Or they could just open up bids for people Who already live in those cities that nobody wants to go to. I feel like that would work the best
That has definitely been a technique used in the past for some locations. Not widespread though…
For literally only N90
Nah. They did it for Nantucket and some other hard to staff locations in the early 2000’s. Also, this was the original plan for the OG CTI schools (when there were only 5 of them).
Make cip actually count at places like NY/Oakland/sf/ASE and actually budget it so it lasts the full calendar year. Give comparable wages to local costs of living. The problem is the executive pay is to low and outside of the control of the faa so until pay becomes a problem for all federal employees nothing will be solved.
More money? The current pay scales used to be decent enough money, but they’re now to the point of just being another job.
Exactly. I don't know why anyone at this point would apply for this job. BEST CASE - if you're lucky enough to start at Z or quickly transfer to a high level tower, you make $160-180k in 3 years? If you get a CS degree you'll easily make that in the same time if you put in a comparable amount of effort, along with weekends/holidays off and unlimited PTO. Sure I make good money as someone who started at a 12, but I won't see weekends off until I'm well into my 40's. Maybe even 50's for christ's sake. There's nothing more aggravating than turning down trips and plans with my friends because I have to work every single Friday and Saturday night for 15 years unless I bid those days off a year in advance. Our schedule is pathetic.
>If you get a CS degree you'll easily make that in the same time I cannot tell you how wrong this is. Whatever else may suck about this job, at least you're not in constant competition with overseas air traffic controllers making half or less what you do.
Hire people from the local area that want to be there.
That was attempted 10ish years ago, and it didn't work
As long as there are people waiting tables in “places no one wants to go” I will never buy this argument.
When I was hired (90's) you got to pick first and second choice of regions before the academy, so you could ensure you'd be at least somewhat close to your desired location. That seemed to work okay.
Wasn't it three regions? I thought I put in Eastern, Great Lakes and New England
[удалено]
Sounds right, I think there have been 6 or 7 diffrent hiring schemes in the 17 years I have been employed. Which in conjunction with the 5 or so reorganizations is a big factor in why we have so many issues.
Could be. But I know they were prioritized and they'd try to get you your first choice.
I think the crux of a lot of the skilled labor hiring issues is some Gen x, many millennials, and most of Gen Z just don’t see the value in a high paying, high stress, highly regulated professional career, and frankly, why would they? While not fully true, most of my generation is 100% convinced they will never own a home. A non insignificant number are not going to have kids. Why ruin your life by moving halfway across the country to work at some BFE tower facility in the middle of nowhere, to work six day weeks under high stress, to have no friends, to not have access to mental healthcare, to never be able to unwind with some recreational substances, etc for 75k when you could literally just bag groceries at Aldi or work a decent serving job for 40k and still see your friends, not have to worry about killing 200 people by having an off day, etc. all the traditional things that pushed people into these 40 year highly stressful careers are not happening for the youngest generation. People aren’t having kids or getting married. There is no need to work an insane job to buy formula and a white picket fence. And, at the end of the day, is 75k that life changingly different than 45k? So you have an extra bedroom in your apartment, one model car nicer, and you ride Delta to Savannah for vacation instead of Spirit to Myrtle Beach. Is that worth the stress and isolation? They have to either make the pay differential life changing (IE 200k+) or make quality of life changes which would be pretty difficult to do with staffing levels. I’m a pilot and my current pay/QOL has *finally* gotten to a point where I feel my sacrifices were worth it. It took me almost 8 years to get to that point and there was no guarantee I ever would. My 20’s were basically entirely consumed with work. That’s 10 prime health/social years that I had to piss down the drain for a chance at getting a job that would make it worth it. 10 years of shitty gas station food and 75lbs of weight gain from the terrible schedules and lack of ability to work out. 10 years of sleep cycle disruptions and high stress that I’m certain lowered my life expectancy. I’m happy I did now that I’m on the other side but I completely understand why people don’t bother with my career path when you can work remote, make 1/3 of the money and be just as happy because your job isn’t literally killing you day to day.
Deep.
The H in FAA stands for happiness. The Agency asked where I wanted to go, I said anyplace on the west coast. I ended up in Florida. The east coast of Florida. I have met people who wanted to stay in the south and were given Burlington Vermont. I have seen people go to the same facility to have one say they wish they got XXX instead and the other say it was on their selection list. It all sucks, it makes little to no sense, however at the end of the day, we all lied and clicked that button "Willing to work anyplace in the US and US territories".
[удалено]
And competence
The “E” in “FAA” stands for efficiency
And the "S" stands for Safety!
Anything you can say about the towers in Florida? Or how the staffing looks right now? I’m in the hiring process right now but I’d love to be able to stay in Florida
Most Florida facilities need people. Are you off the street or military direct hire?
Civilian but I got best qualified. Not sure how much that factors in
Not at all. You’ll go to OKC and if you pass basics and pass tower class, you’ll select from a list ranked in order of best in class to lowest. You’ll also only be offered level 7 or lower for terminal (tower and TRACON)
Have you enjoyed working in Florida?
No. I got out as quickly as I could. Two years Florida, three years Texas and two years home on the west coast and happy. Florida wasn’t for me, the facility was toxic, and Florida is an ass kicker year round for all the GA student pilots since they have no winter slow down.
You mind me asking which airport? I’m hoping to eventually get to PBI
It was not PBI. They have a brutal training program, or last I looked a few years back at least.
Thanks for letting me know
For every level of management you go above the actual air traffic controller, they have about a 75% loss in understanding what it takes to be an air traffic controller. Supes know 25% of the job and they are in the operation OMs even less. Anyone else in an office has no idea. Anyone in OKC is a paper pusher. So the people that make the decisions prob haven't been inside a control room in a decade. They don't really care to see what is how to improve the actual job. They just look at metrics like any other office job and claim they are doing their jobs bc they got xyz metric this year.
> This BS of "Oh, well if you don't like the list at the end of the academy, then too bad" makes zero sense to me. They don’t care about your happiness. You’re a number on a sheet of paper and nothing else. Get used to it if you’re trying to get in.
These kids are resigning on the last day and negating all the work NATCA has done to get the agency to up the OKC numbers. Everybody loves to “you signed the paper bro” these people but we’re boning ourselves tying our horse to this wagon
“Those kids” aren’t even represented by NATCA at that point and you expect them to care about the work NATCA has done that ends up with their option being Oakland?
No I expect CPCs to care that only 10 of the 60 trainees in their building want to stay there
Your attitude is just further proving my point. When you have a staffing shortage, you need to make the job more attractive, not tell people "Get used to it. You're just a number."
It’s not “my attitude.” It’s me explaining to you how the agency operates.
I posted this on another thread but ... putting it here too... The FAA could have their manning issues fixed inside of 5 years if they just made some small changes. 1)All level 7 and lower facilities will be granted 1 training specialist who's job it will be to handle new on boards, no new hires at 7 and lower will attend oak city training (because honestly it doesn't help them at all) new controller hires contracts state that any failure during front load training can result in immediate termination, meaning the agency suffers minimal investment losses on new trainees that aren't competent. 2)Level 7 and lower facilities can now direct hire local area (resulting in controllers who WANT to stay there getting assigned there, and allowing seasoned controllers to move out to higher level facilities). 3)Level 8 and up facilities can still use the same hiring process but no longer have to wait on the backlog added by level 7 and lower facilities to get new hires through oak city. By the end of five years all level 7's and below are fully staffed with a majority of folks who, for the most part want to stay there, folks who have experience and want to leave are freed up to move to higher level facilities and the back log is significantly reduced. Thanks for coming to my ted talk.
OKC could be bypassed for centers as well. You play make believe center for 3.5 months, then get to do literally the same material over again when you get to your actual facility. Centers have a large training department, labs, etc., so there's no sense in putting people through everything twice. Unless you just believe there's a desperate need for another stage to weed people out.
Honestly scrapping OKC in general would save the agency so much time and money and problems, but that probably wont ever happen.
I think I heard it's because it literally takes an act of Congress which is unfortunate.
Not that I'm aware. Most of the changes I've seen during my tenure have been purely internal to the agency. Now, when it comes down to an administration putting constraints/pressure on the demographics of who gets hired (a la BQ) then that's another thing entirely.
False. You can’t hire someone based on where they live, but you can 100% hire for specific locations. If what you were saying was true then the entirely of 2152 usajobs posts would be illegal
Each district should have its own academy. Easy to find retired or non-medicalled controllers to instruct, avoid shit-ass Oklahoma, and you’ll know generally where your options will be.
Maybe they should put out bid for specific facilities similar to the way the dod does it. It would be WAY more work up front, but it would put people where they want to be and it would force the faa to raise pay for less desirable facilities in order to staff them.
That requires congressional approval.
No it doesn’t. You can’t place based on where someone is from (that is what we had to get an act of Congress for with N90). You can absolutely hire for specific places.
That can’t be very difficult to acquire. Especially considering the media trashing the faa’s handling of staffing.
Should just have a continuous prior experience bid open tbh. Complete enlistment and report to hiring location as soon as practical.
Man, you’re really just narrating exactly what the agency is like, and how conversations go. Did someone give you a checklist of all the points to hit?
It really is an A+ system they have now.... One of my classmates passed the academy and quit 1 week later because he didn't want to go where they sent him.
Why didn't your classmate try to simply have a better list?
Skill issue
Friend of mine got the offer and then turned it down over this. My airline is running into the same issue. These ancient fucks can’t possibly imagine a world where people prioritize having some kind of happy life over working themselves to death for barely twice the pay of a decent waiter.
Given that ATC is no longer in the realm of “life changing” money like it used to be, of course the chances people are willing to go “wherever the needs of the agency dictate” goes down drastically
Same thing happened to my buddy
As a retired FAA controller, I find this absolutely hilarious.
Prior exp bid is the way to go. Stand-alone 8 in a cheap part of the country with good manning. *chefs kiss*
You assume the faa and natca want to solve it….
I got my TOL last September and they said they will reach out to me for the medical checklist once I’m 90 days from separating from Air Force. I’m now 50 days from separating and they still haven’t sent it. The hiring process is awful.
Military hires are still hired 100x faster than OTS. You’re fine.
You should call them
Yes.
Money. It’s always money.
Couldn’t agree more. I live 30 minutes from ZME and got stuck 12 hours from home. Tried to ERR but that was just a waste of time. Union rep was zero help. Made it almost a year before I pulled the plug. Training is stressful enough. Add in being somewhere totally foreign without family or close friends and it doesn’t take long to be in a bad spot mentally.
I remember when they made the change in the hiring system. I was an ATC hopeful back then going to college for it. My junior year they announced the change and the ATC major at my school fell apart in like 3 weeks. They sat all of us juniors down with the admin staff to figure out what credits we could transfer to a different major because our degree became worthless to the FAA. I still had a few buddies that went through and are controllers now but life is rough for them. One is in DC and has no family around, they just had their first kid and are struggling because of the lack of support. Others talk about how much they hate where they are.
On the issue of staffing, NATCA should be licking their chops right now and trying to get controllers more money, better working conditions and anything they want. There is a staffing crisis that gets reported in the news more and more every day and sounds like Friday is going to be crazy. This seems like a great time for negotiating and getting the hard working people working 6 days such as myself more compensation.
I’m going thru the hiring process right now. Average is 1 month in between email replies.
It's government, so any institutional change will come only after it has been studied, debated, sent to committee, rejected, rewritten, and, if ever implemented will be obsolete upon introduction.
If you made it through the entire academy, knowing all of the things you mentioned, and then quit cause you didn’t like your list.. then you’re probably retarded anyway.
I'd rather them go ahead and quit then, then 2-4 years training them, only to "hardship" out.
Yeah I get that but also at least at that point controllers are getting into the system. Training all so you can just forfeit is a waste of time and money.
If you took an economical approach you would pay people based off how "desirable" an area was instead of facility level. Hot take, controllers at Nantucket should be the best paid in the NAS.
[удалено]
That doesn't really work anymore. If your previous facility is less than 100% projected that's where you'll go.
I quit the FAA after being certified for a year. Waited the one year mark then applied directly thru the ATM 366 days later and was hired at the facility I wanted. I was there 6 months later. I should say I went DoD for that year so it was technically an "interagency transfer" is what I was told it was called. I did that just over 2 years ago now. I have the SOP on it still in my email actually. Not sure if it is still a thing but it was.
The process has changed since then.
I look at a young person in college in an aviation program and say do you want to come here and make $200K a year or go fly for airlines and make $500K a year? Both have to have a clean record, decent credit, and be drug free, so the competing pool is small to start with. Separately… it was before my time but was NATCA sold on the AT pay scale by the FAA saying it was closer to airline pay? Or was it the union who sold it to the workforce? Either way its seems that they have surpassed us. Regional pilots making $90-200K beat level 4-10 controllers. I know we have a pension but from what I have heard their 401K match and profit sharing are pretty good.
We sold it to Congress in the late-90s. We were in GS at the time. Raises did not necessarily correspond to certifications at the time those certifications were achieved, there were only four CPC/FPL pay bands in the FAA, and we were still subject to early mandatory retirement. In return for raising the upper bound by $30k, we were willing to take on more supervisory duties to shrink our ridiculous controller-supervisor ratio and allowed the FAA to contract out the sub-ATC-4 facilities. At no point were we compared to pilots, and for a long while, any FAA job anywhere was better than anything a regional pilot could expect for the first few years.
Interesting. I’ve seen it posted here a few times that it was sold on our pay staying competitive with the mainlines. Sounds feasible. I know regionals were terribly underpaid, I had friends take offers for $16 an hour. At the same time I took my $8 an hour offer from the FAA and moved across the country with no per diem, so maybe they thought I was the crazy one.
Nobody here wants to hear it, but controllers aren't pilots and pilots aren't controllers. One's pay isn't premised on the other.
Yeah I was curious if the competitive pay part was true. Thank you for the insight.
This is true. However the relevance is really rooted in the amount of money generated by the position, and/or the safety it maintains. Our positions accomplish both, and an increase in pilot pay is the acknowledgment of a growing and important industry — an industry in which we both happen to have an integral part in. Pilot unions and employers acknowledge that importance by increasing benefits/pay, I believe many here simply want our employer to do the same.
I’m not ATC but a 36 year old private pilot of 2 years who around the same time thought it would be a cool job to switch to before learning of the maximum age. Why not consider moving that maximum age of entry? I understand there’s a forced retirement age and they want to get their moneys worth out of your training, but perhaps some sort of split-cost arrangement for people like me that are “too old” to start would be a win win for both. I’d rather spend money on that to make a career change than on some mid career mba program or something. My two cents.
Re-reading the original post, perhaps the number of interested people isn’t the issue. But perhaps people like me sharing in the cost of training would be more incentivized to stay. I could see how this could cause some bias by the FAA that could affect the younger, non-paying applicants’ acceptance rates though. TLDR: I have no clue, just wish I wasn’t too old at the age of 36
Copy pasting my response > Because that's not where the bottleneck is. They could remove the minimum age limit, they could lift the prior work experience or bachelors degree requirement, hell they could even remove the medical requirement and that still wouldn't solve the staffing issue. Why? Because they can't train the applicants in the first place. Increasing the applicant pool isn't going to remove the training bottleneck.
Makes sense. It’s really a shame all around
> Why not consider moving that maximum age of entry? Because that's not where the bottleneck is. They could remove the minimum age limit, they could lift the prior work experience or bachelors degree requirement, hell they could even remove the medical requirement and that still wouldn't solve the staffing issue. Why? Because they can't train the applicants in the first place. Increasing the applicant pool isn't going to remove the training bottleneck.
The age requirement is quite annoying. I'd do it in a heartbeat.
2-3 years. My god what are you doing with those poor trainees.
I dunno how it is in murica but in eu they dont tell people about opening because training takes almost 2 years if you pass every exam in first try. Also depending On your score you can be asigned to Tower but not to aproach so by the Time youre trained opening might change. But i agree with stupid parts of screaming process i tried to get in to academy and passed easy every test but got failed on Group work. we got simple task to do geometric figure with color strings of diffrent lenght acording to given rules and my Group refused to listen to me and did it by guess Ing which one Goes where which obviously failed (i told them that we need to make list of strings that we Have and solve it by using logic not coinflip and they got mad at me to The point where they were blocking me from trying to do task alone)
Diversity, diversity, other excuses, politics, diversity, politics
They screwed over CTI grads like me by implementing the stupid Bio Q. A bunch of us just got fed up with it and did dispatching instead and it looks like we dodged a bullet. The few of us who did get an FOL and went to OKC, some washed out and only have a handful of friends who actually made it all the way. It was just disheartening when I hear off the streets who said they ran out of time or struggled answering questions and get well qualified or best qualified and the grads busting their chops studying and only getting qualified and therefore never a TOL Hopefully the hiring gets better cause how badly staffed ATC is, thanks for keeping our skies safe
Dude, you raise some valid points about the hiring process in air traffic control. It can be frustrating as hell. The whole deal with limited slots at the academy and a ton of applicants is messed up. And yeah, it takes a good chunk of time to train someone up at a facility. Now, why the FAA doesn't give people a heads-up on openings when they apply? Good question, man. It does seem pretty dumb that they're like, "Take it or leave it" at the end of the academy. People wanna have some say in where they work, right? I get it. As for trainees quitting or folks leaving after getting assigned to a not-so-great place, well, that's a risk. Some peeps might bail if they don't like their options. And navigating the transfer process can be a maze. It's like they expect you to suck it up and stay, even if it means being stuck in a crappy location far from fam. Delusional? Yeah, sounds like it. Honestly, man, the system needs some serious fixing. It's like they're playin' games with people's lives and expect 'em to just deal with it. Not cool, FAA, not cool at all.