NavCanada hiring practices vs the airlines

[Gilles Hudicourt]

I have not looked into it but it seems that at NavCanada, one has to pay to get an interview, pay to get tested, pay to get trained when NavCanada is the only employer that can benefit from the applicant, his application, his testing and his training. Its like receiving applications has become a for profit business at NavCanada.

If true, can private corporations such as airlines, who are there to make a profit, be criticized for their selection process, for having applicants pay for interviews, for the selection process, for the type rating, for the line training, if Government Corporations such as NavCanada set the tone by having such practices?

Like I said in my introduction, do not crucify me if I erred about what I just wrote about NavCanada, am not even certain about it.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Unlike pilots, controllers get all their training essentially for free. When they start on the job training they get paid even though they provide no value to NavCanada because they must be paired with a senior controller for up to a year.

In pilot terms that would be like getting a free PPL and then getting a good salary while doing your build up time for your free CPL with a guaranteed job when you graduate.

In addition the advantage of a monopoly provider is you know they are not going to go bankrupt and lay you off. When you get ATC license you have about the surest thing to a job for life available in aviation.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

But still if you apply, its $250 for writing the aptitude exam and then $4500 for the initial course, during which there is no salary.

Does any other country do this ?

[amraam]

NavCanada is not a Crown Corporation...

amraam

[Bede]

Most fire departments charge application fees.

I heard Toronto fire department had 5000 applicants one year.

[Legacy14]

deleted

[Panama Jack]

If nobody would be willing to pay for flight training or bonds, companies would be forced to source pilots from the military, overseas (if permitted by immigration laws) or run their own cadet pilot schemes. This has happened elsewhere in the world, in part, because flight training is prohibitively expensive and/or inaccessible for a majority of the population. Economics dictate how this plays out.

As far as NavCanada goes, it makes no sense for an applicant to self-sponsor himself on the off-chance that he "might" get hired by the only employer of a trade. And although NavCanada does probably have some controllers who head overseas, they likely do have a good retention rate with good return on training investment.

[Jack Klumpus]

Don't know then entails, but aspiring police officers have to pay for their training at The ontario police college. I'm not sure if they get their money back.

[Thunderbyrd]

All you need to know about NavCanada:

YWG Center Enroute Controller Pass rate is less then 4%. And that's from OJT only, not even the initial class of trainees.

Gilles, NavCan is a private company, not a government agency.

You have to pay for the initial aptitude testing that NavCan contracts out.
You have to pay to get yourself to wherever the interview is being held.
You have to pay 'tuition' for the ATC class.
They do not pay you until you hit the floor for OJT, which takes about 12 months or so. So a year unpaid going to school.
When you are on OJT you get payed peanuts, like 35,000 I think. OJT is about 12 months long.

You can be let go for almost any reason, but overtime protection tends to be the real reason that people get cut from the program.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

All you need to know about NavCanada:

YWG Center Enroute Controller Pass rate is less then 4%.

You can be let go for almost any reason, but overtime protection tends to be the real reason that people get cut from the program.

This is a grave injustice to those who invested their time (1 to 2 years) and money (thousands when living and travel is included) to qualify and are let go for a false reason. If true, is MAFIA an appropriate word ?

So what is the proportion between those that begin the inititial course and complete the OJT sucessfully ?

How often does NavCanada invest $35000 on the salary of a good candidate, only to have him needlessly wash out ?

This is reminiscent of 1960s stevedores, not 21st century Air Traffic Controllers.

Whats next ? Paying the instructors cash under the table in order to buy a pass ? How about sex for success ?

[sh*t magnet]

All you need to know about NavCanada:

YWG Center Enroute Controller Pass rate is less then 4%. And that's from OJT only, not even the initial class of trainees.

Gilles, NavCan is a private company, not a government agency.

You have to pay for the initial aptitude testing that NavCan contracts out.
You have to pay to get yourself to wherever the interview is being held.
You have to pay 'tuition' for the ATC class.
They do not pay you until you hit the floor for OJT, which takes about 12 months or so. So a year unpaid going to school.
When you are on OJT you get payed peanuts, like 35,000 I think. OJT is about 12 months long.

You can be let go for almost any reason, but overtime protection tends to be the real reason that people get cut from the program.

Sounds like an unsuccessful trainee who has difficulty accepting the fact that they couldn't do the job...

[armchair]

From what I read there seems to be a significant portion of ATC candidates who are dropped after 12 to 24 months from initial decision to go for it, and committing time and money. The wasted time has a psychological toll, as 12 months seems like an eternity when you are young, and a wasted outlay of several thousands of $$ feels like a mountain of cash for any 19 to 25 y old. Once dropped after their bubble burst, who knows what these bitter, broke and disillusioned young men and women may turn to.

This, combined to the P2F schemes for the seemingly new standard of pilot career tracks (see some of the links posted on the germanwings crash on P2F programs...), is a terrible omen of the state of human resources in our industry. I did not even know it was that bad in the ATC world. Pretty soon DND will start charging military pilot and ATC candidates for their training.

The recruitment must be more effective in terms of time and quality, in order to quickly release those who are not suitable and at risk of failing, and to achieve near 100% pas rate. This is more fair to the candidates, and the program retains the best available recruits.

There are real and potentially terrible consequences for these new HR trends, most driven by the mighty dollar and the never-ending desire to provide low-fares to a travel-hungry population, and cheap airlines.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Sounds like an unsuccessful trainee who has difficulty accepting the fact that they couldn't do the job...

Would it be fair at this point to ask how much overtime you do at NavCanada? Its the same logic you applied to the other poster.

Attacking the credibility of a poster that states too much truth is a tactic I am too familiar with and one I have often been subjected to. Lets allow everyone to state what they have to say, and if someone states something that is false, misleading or incorrect, lets set the record straight with facts, like the real number of washouts vs those who succeed.

Back to the subject. Imagine an airline had a problem with 95% fail rate of the pilots it hired and was spending a fortune on simulators, instructors, paying the salaries of the new hires etc. The 95% fail rate was not really related to the aptitude or the quality of the candidates but rather because some insiders were profiting by artificially maintaining an understaff situation ? Would the solution be to stop paying the new pilots during their training and charging them for the course or dealing with the root cause of the high failure rate ?

[Illya Kuryakin]

If you're having a less than 4% pass rate, or a 95% wash out rate, your instructors totally suck! Translated....you're doing something WRONG!
Illya

[Gilles Hudicourt]

If you're having a less than 4% pass rate, or a 95% wash out rate, your instructors totally suck! Translated....you're doing something WRONG!
Illya

or CROOKED!

[Gilles Hudicourt]

http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/559405 ... ost8934037

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

Sounds like an unsuccessful trainee who has difficulty accepting the fact that they couldn't do the job...

Would it be fair at this point to ask how much overtime you do at NavCanada? Its the same logic you applied to the other poster.

Attacking the credibility of a poster that states too much truth is a tactic I am too familiar with and one I have often been subjected to. Lets allow everyone to state what they have to say, and if someone states something that is false, misleading or incorrect, lets set the record straight with facts, like the real number of washouts vs those who succeed.

Back to the subject. Imagine an airline had a problem with 95% fail rate of the pilots it hired and was spending a fortune on simulators, instructors, paying the salaries of the new hires etc. The 95% fail rate was not really related to the aptitude or the quality of the candidates but rather because some insiders were profiting by artificially maintaining an understaff situation ? Would the solution be to stop paying the new pilots during their training and charging them for the course or dealing with the root cause of the high failure rate ?

The cry of overtime protection is often heard but never substantiated. In general the comment comes from individuals that either couldn't see why they were unsuccessful or refused to acknowledge them. This comment holds about as much water as someone that says TFW pilots are being hired because the Canadian ones don't want the jobs. It is a perception created to justify a position.

In my opinion there are some flaws with the training program that lead to the low success rates. The first is the selection process, I believe that the demographic that is required can't be targeted because of the structure of the training program. Forcing people into a long period without pay prevents candidates with life experience from applying. The guy with a few years of experience in real world life and stress doesn't normally have the resources to spend the time required without pay. Those that try, end up working a second job supporting a family while trying train. This is not a formula for success.

The candidates that we do get tend to be in the very early 20's. Unfortunately a good portion of these belong to the "me" generation of self indulgence. They don't understand the need for hard work and expect the solutions to be handed to them. This generation is also often missing the aspect of teamwork, CRM in ATC is not just between 2 people but a number of individuals. Lack of maturity is perhaps the biggest factor in unsuccessful training.

I have trained both pilots and controllers. I only once encountered an individual that could not be taught to fly. I can not say the same about controllers. Controlling is not about a mechanical skill, it is about judgement and decision making. A flight test for a pilot does not delve too deep into judgement, you are tested on skills and ability but rarely on go no go decisions. These tend to be developed over time through the education of self preservation and bad decisions that didn't bite back.

When training a controller we do not have the option to hope that someone will grow into a good controller over time. Once licensed they are responsible for more than just themselves. A newly licensed pilot spends time developing those judgements, those that don't will not succeed professionally. When looking at success rates of commercial pilots we don't look to the number of actively working ATPL's vs total number of people that have started a student pilot training record. Looking at quoted ATC success rates is much the same.

<Edit>

As for the 4% quoted number, I can't comment to accuracy of it. But then again neither can the poster. It is a number pulled from someplace. Sort of like this..... 50% of trainees don't have an appendix. Meaningless and not verifiable.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I went to University for 4 years, I did not expect to get paid a salary while at school. I spent about 18 months in total completing my CPL/MEIFR/QFI training and I did not expect to be paid a salary, and unlike ATC I did not have any certainty of getting a job when I finished.

Frankly I am struggling to see a problem that is in need of a solution. Like pretty much every other occupation, you make an upfront investment in your education which will eventually lead to employment.

[AuxBatOn]

I don't see it any differently than people pursing other ab-initio training (to become a plumber let's say).

If someone wants to change career to a plumber career at 30, he'll have to take a hit for a couple of years and go back to school. Same with ATC, except you are paid after a couple of months. Not a bad gig.

The issue I have is that the employer is also the trainer and has exclusivity on said training. If you want to work for NavCan, regardless of your previous ATC experience (other country or military), you have to take the full training (and pay for it).

[Illya Kuryakin]

If the overtime protection thing is an issue, use contract personal to teach, test and check out new controllers? Simple fix. Nothing to lose by NOT washing out 95% of your students. Looked it up. USA wash out rates are 15-20%.
We rant all the time about rest intervals for flight crews.....why are controllers even getting overtime? They do their hours...go home.
Illya


http://www.nbcnews.com/id/42381483/.../ ... ashes-out/
Apr 1, 2011 - 1 in 5 air traffic control trainees washes out ... of air traffic controllers hired by the Federal Aviation Administration in recent years washed out ... FAA had previously estimated a 9 percent attrition rate for new controllers in 2009.