Ammunition for Canadas ATC trainees?

[Alex YCV]

invertedattitude, question: Where do you work (if you don't mind saying) and what was your training process like?

[invertedattitude]

invertedattitude, question: Where do you work (if you don't mind saying) and what was your training process like?

There are those on here who know where I work, but I'd prefer not to just openly say it, and I'd ask those who do know to refrain from openly talking about it, although it should be realtively easy to figure it out from other posts on this site, I am an IFR controller however.

My training? It still stands in my mind by a factor of about 10, to be far more stressful than actually working as an Air Traffic Controller. Not only do you have the incredible pressure of trying to make it into a highly coveted career which will basically change your life forever, you also enjoy constant studying when you're not sleeping/working, you still study while you're eating by the way.

The stress is one more of uncertainty, and just trying to be the best you can be. Thankfully there's no pressure to "beat the other guy" since if everyone qualifies there's a job for everyone, so you work together.

At my centre the training and instruction was great, and my OJT instructors were fantastic and I worked very well with them.

It seems like a long road, lost sleep, constant anxiety about not screwing up that next sim run, and once on the floor catching everything, and doing it better than the day before, and doing it perfect at the same time. (As close as one can anyway)

I've said it before, if they offered me a million bucks to train again I would say no.

I will say this, the job is a helluva lot easier once you're qualified, but that being said, while I wasn't in a large class, I was the only one unfortunately to get a license.

[thatdaveguy]

all this talk about the company providing assistance is absurd.

i could see maybe a $4/day allowance to pay for things like shampoo..but that's insanity what the americans want to offer.

HOWEVER, the IFR training program could *really* use some financial help.

[Braun]

Why is it absurd? Not try to pick a fight just curious.

[invertedattitude]

I think providing the same assistance the VFR/FSS students get would be acceptable

IE Paid accomodations (NCTI still get food for free too?)

Consider the IFR course is longer as well.

[Jerricho]

Not supposed to call it NCTI any more.

[CD]

Back in the day, it was TCTI... but that's not what we called it after 8 months of 'living in'...

[invertedattitude]

Not supposed to call it NCTI any more.

Oh?

[NJ]

It's The Training and Conference Centre. No acronym.

[CD]

They had better update their website...

NAV CANADA TRAINING INSTITUTE (NCTI) - Overview

[justplanecrazy]

Training and Conference Center.... TCC???

Remember when they tried to stop Canadians from calling the 1 dollar coin the loonie and all the hype about not calling the 2 dollar coin by a nickname?

If we can't use acronyms why not just call it what it is. Nav Canada's money making hotel while they leave the students to fend for themselves builiding.

I think that anyone trying to become an IFR controller today shouldn't be hired. If they're dumb enough to think that paying tuition, food and lodging and not getting anything in return after 2 years commitment except for the 20% that actually end up with a steady paycheque is a good idea... then I really don't think they're smart enough to keep the planes seperated.

As far as the company seeing that side of the argument and how many lives they ruin in training... it'll be a cold day in hell when that happens.

[justplanecrazy]

Some very rough math:

$70 per diem
30 trainees at each ACC
7 ACC's
250 Training days per year per student

equals $3.675 Million per year.

Add all the other expenses that are already present.

That's starting to add up to quite the expense. Then factor in the check out rate. Let's say that this method boosts check out's to 40%.

So that's 84 licences of our initial 210 students. $3.675 divided by 84 equals $43750 per student, just on per diem's.

Looks like a lot of money saved on paper but you're forgetting that by the time an IFR controller finishes his training they have over 1/4 of a million dollars invested in them. If you had a more qualified applicant pool, for every trainee that makes it, you are saving over $250,000 in lost training expenses. if you have 10 more trainees make it, you've just saved close to the extra expenses handed out, not to mention not putting the 80% that don't make it into a huge hole of debt.

This doesn't make mention to the poor bastards that are currently getting turfed out of Pearson 4 years after getting a job with the company with no guarantee of a future position. Each of these employees showed the company that they can do the job, all had licences at other units and probably have over $1,000,000 invested in training costs. Yet the company doesn't want the trainees to not have the motivation of losing the job that they've had for 4 years prior, so they leave the carrot dangling for 4+ years. And some of you think this is a company that cares about their employees. If it wasn't for our union, we'd be getting paid slightly more than a McDonald's drive through employee, working longer hours than a Thai prostitiute in the white house on independance day.

Anybody hear anything about the direct stream that they have going to Pearson? When do they actually start in the tower? If any of them make it, I'd be shocked. To anyone thinking about going through this course... think again.

[NJ]

A small per diem is chump change compared to what it actually costs to train people. However, as long as people still apply for IFR, then there's no incentive to change present training methods.

Looking down the road, people with actual work and life experience will no longer be able to apply for the IFR jobs because the risk is simply too great. So the people that will apply and attend the schools are local kids who still live at their parent's. With the diminished pool of applicants, the already low checkout rate will plunge even more. After the baby boom controllers retire, staffing will be further reduced, and the existing guys will max out on OT every cycle. The critical shortage of IFR controllers will create flow control throughout entire FIR's. People will be too exhausted to properly train students. Then the already subpar trainees will have subpar training. Then the vicious cycle will continue. It sounds like doom and gloom, but it's a logical progression.

Oh, but I'm glad we've cornered the hotel and conference market of Eastern Ontario. Those quilters need facilities too

[Braun]

A small per diem is chump change compared to what it actually costs to train people. However, as long as people still apply for IFR, then there's no incentive to change present training methods.

I totally disagree. I don't know about how staffing is all over canada in the centers but I do know some of the subunits in YUL are understaff and need employees. Sure maybe part of that is management, maybe not, but I do know some are short. How does it benefit the company to pay for training and to have a candidate CT'D after spending thousands of dollars. When what they could do, is create a better incentive for more people to apply and then maybe, just maybe the candidate quality will increase and maybe more checkouts. Purely speculative but hey.

[invertedattitude]

Being short-staffed on paper is not the same thing as "having enough staff to handle the traffic"

They are two completely different things.

[thatdaveguy]

The facility formerly known as NCTI is now the Nav Canada Training and Conference Centre.

There is no approved acronym. In fact, usage of any acronym is strictly forbidden. We are not to weaken the branding of the facility's new name.

All Nav Canada employees received an email warning us to abide by this.

[Popeye]

Hey guys, I'm new to the board and I've been reading more than contributing, but I think I can add some substance to what has mostly been a flame war while being a crucial element of NC's training program.

The FAA announcement is certainly interesting as it allows us to compare what is being provided elsewhere for ATC training, but it is also comparing apples and oranges as the FAA and NC operate in very different regulatory environments in terms of labour standards.

NC being a private enterprise of federal jurisdiction, its labour standards are determined by Part III of the Canada Labour Code.

In 2004, the Parliament instituded the Federal Labour Standards Review Commission, headed by Commissioner Harry W. Arthurs, former of Dean Osgoode Hall Law School and University Professor Emeritus and President Emeritus of York University. Among other distinctions, in 2003 he has been awarded the Bora Laskin Prize for his contribution to labour law.

The final report, Fairness at Work: Federal Labour Standards for the 21st century, was released in October 2006. One of the finding of the report relate directly to the issue being discussed here and can be found at pages 260-261 of the report. Of particular interest is the recommendation (#11.5) made to the Minister of Labour, The Honourable Jean-Pierre Blackburn, P.C., M.P.. It goes as follows:

RECOMMENDATION 11.5 Employers who require their employees to attend training sessions should pay during their participation.

The Commissioner explains this position as follows:

A second suggestion was that Part III should ensure that workers required by their employer to attend training programs be paid while doing so. While most firms apparently do pay, I was advised that some do not. Failure to pay for required training is, arguably, a violation of the statute as it presently0stands. However, if the statute does not now require payment, it ought to. An employer should not be able to take advantage of its superior bargaining position to intrude on workers’ personal time without compensating them for the intrusion. This is especially true when the employer will reap the benefit of the worker’s enhanced skills and knowledge.

He goes even further, and more specific to the issue at hand in this thread:

If an employer requires existing employees to retrain, or enters into an agreement with prospective or probationary employees guaranteeing them regular jobs upon successful completion of a specified training program, the employer should pay both the training costs and the employee’s wages during the training period.

This report can be downloaded freely from this URL:

http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/labour/employ ... report.pdf

The Canada Labour Code and Regulations can also be obtained at this adress:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/showdoc/cs ... :l_III//en

Feel free to consult these resources and comment!

[bigfssguy]

Geez popeye forget NC, you should write the LSAT! Good work though!

[lilfssister]

Popeye, the main problem with the above is: you are not an employee of Navcanada during initial training, therefore it would not apply. JMHO

[NJ]

Hello and welcome to the posting side of things, Popeye. All our training as employees is paid for. The problem is that ATC trainees aren't employees until they graduate from the training course. Until then they are students at schools that not all banks or provincial governments recognize as accredited post-secondary institutions.

Once you're an employee everything is paid for. As a VFR controller, I can take the course at an ACC and retain my salary and return rights to my previous position.

[Braun]

Being short-staffed on paper is not the same thing as "having enough staff to handle the traffic"

They are two completely different things.

Correct, but if it's short and no trainees checkout it will just keep getting shorter and eventually maybe you won't have enough to handle the traffic.

[NJ]

Correct, but if it's short and no trainees checkout it will just keep getting shorter and eventually maybe you won't have enough to handle the traffic.

Yeah, and unpaid training is another roadblock to having the best applicants available.

[Braun]

That's what I said 2 posts up, .

[Alex YCV]

Looking down the road, people with actual work and life experience will no longer be able to apply for the IFR jobs because the risk is simply too great. So the people that will apply and attend the schools are local kids who still live at their parent's. With the diminished pool of applicants, the already low checkout rate will plunge even more. After the baby boom controllers retire, staffing will be further reduced, and the existing guys will max out on OT every cycle. The critical shortage of IFR controllers will create flow control throughout entire FIR's. People will be too exhausted to properly train students. Then the already subpar trainees will have subpar training. Then the vicious cycle will continue. It sounds like doom and gloom, but it's a logical progression.

I am trying to be one of those exceptions, leaving long term self emplyment (more than 10 years) to move into ATC. But I can tell you that the process as it sits already isn't very encouraging for anyone who has already gone past school age.

If you are going IFR, you have to be in the position to live without any real income for about 18 months, and because of the lead time to the course, you have to be able to pretty much put your life on hold for upwards to 36 months (up to 18 months to get in after approval, and then the whole training period). Once you are in training, taking a part time job or work outside of your IFR work would be pretty much a short cut to failing and getting CTed pretty quickly.

If you are going VFR, things are at least better for you. Spend 6 - 10 months in Cornwall, with no income but at least your expenses are reasonable. Then you go out in the field and collect at least a starting salary until you check out.

Now, the testing processes aren't particularly tilted one way or another, but the referal process really is. The two references required are pretty much the types of references someone would have working at an entry level job or still being in university, perhaps involved in sports or some sort of club / group / situation. I would think that anyone who has made it up to, say, middle management in a company or perhaps is running their own business would have a hard time getting the types of references SHL is looking for.

It does in the end tilt things to one end, and certainly would discourage anyone with real life obligations from getting involved.

Does anyone have any stats regarding age versus abilty to checkout, example?

[NJ]

But you totally disagreed with me supported paid training 3 posts up