AVCANADA

Thanks for the reply...

Well I know that teminal ratings have been given at the ACC that i work in in the last 12 months. Appartently one "slipped thorough the cracks"...or so we were told. Prior to 12 months ago...when you trained for terminal work, you got a terminal endorsement. Only recently has this changed....out here anyway. Not sure what you mean by "different terminals" but everyone has a different view on what constitutes terminal work. In this case i mean the "full monty"...3 miles, ADR, Class D, Class C, etc. The "story" from Transport is that the requiement for the Termianl rating is under review...so what! NavCanada managers have signed and sent the application to transport and they refuse to process it...not denying it...just refusing to process it....there is a difference. If you process it then you must give a reason why you are denyng the rating.......i.e. dont meet the training requirements, etc.

Now lets forget for a minute that everyone in charge in TC in the ATS department used to be with NavCan, and lets forget that appently the submission for the change to not give out terminal ratings (only submitted to TC in the last 12 months or so) was done by a NavCan manager....what is the possible reasoning why this change is so darn important that TC has their back up? Given that Navcan submitted the change proposal...my bet is there is a "dollar figure" attached to this somewhere...or somewhere in the future for Controllers with TCU ratings. CATCA has been their normal "silent under the sheets" selves as well. This whole thing stinks at the top.

Well I know that teminal ratings have been given at the ACC that i work in in the last 12 months. Appartently one "slipped thorough the cracks"...or so we were told. Prior to 12 months ago...when you trained for terminal work, you got a terminal endorsement.

Only recently has this changed....out here anyway. Not sure what you mean by "different terminals" but everyone has a different view on what constitutes terminal work. In this case i mean the "full monty"...3 miles, ADR, Class D, Class C, etc. The "story" from Transport is that the requiement for the Termianl rating is under review...so what!

NavCanada managers have signed and sent the application to transport and they refuse to process it...not denying it...just refusing to process it....there is a difference. If you process it then you must give a reason why you are denyng the rating.......i.e. dont meet the training requirements, etc.

Now lets forget for a minute that everyone in charge in TC in the ATS department used to be with NavCan, and lets forget that appently the submission for the change to not give out terminal ratings (only submitted to TC in the last 12 months or so) was done by a NavCan manager....what is the possible reasoning why this change is so darn important that TC has their back up? Given that Navcan submitted the change proposal...my bet is there is a "dollar figure" attached to this somewhere...or somewhere in the future for Controllers with TCU ratings. CATCA has been their normal "silent under the sheets" selves as well. This whole thing stinks at the top.

3. The 16 hour terminal is now being "dismantled". Due to low traffic levels, the terminal is being amalmagated with the enroute specialty. No airpsace classification change. Termial service will be provided thoughout most of the day but now with the option to fold the terminal into the enroute and just run enroute standards during slow traffic periods. However...prior to being amalmagated all of the controllers in the enroute specialty went to the ITU for a conversion course which met CARS standards, OJI training which met CARS standards and signed off qualifed in that 16 hour Terminal specialty prior to it being absorbed into the enroute specialty.

Braun...are you saying that none of the staff in you ACC (thats been there more than 5 years) that work a full 24 hour terminal does not have a TCU endorsement on thier license. Shocked if that was true.

"...also some very busy periods that TCU serive is warrented."

Kevin V....NC has still made a commitment to the users to provide Termial Control Service. The 3 major carriers frequent the airport. The Terminal is to be "dismantled" because there are larger periods of low traffic levels and also some very busy periods that TCU serive is warrented. NC is staffing an enitire specialty for this. Remember it is all about SPW (shifts per week) to the bean counters. When amalmageted to the enroute specialty..the enroute specialty can now open and close the TCU on traffic demand..and not have to provide staff (spw) to keep it open for the full 16 hours. This is the plan for 2 terminals in the ACC.

AS for CATCA...how can transport just say we are not processing your application when you have met the requirements; just becasue it is "supposedly" (show me the NPA, show me the gazette, show me the meeting for the CARAC? Yes..I know they can say anything they want...they are the police.

I am curious how those providing terminal control service using 3nm, can do so under CARS without the appropriate rating?

Why not call NavCanada or TC and ask?

The ex-termminal people and being retrained to work in other specialies in the building.

ShadowFax.....You hit the nail right on the head! Not one of these "new guys"...and i am guessing less than 10 years in....realize the consequences of the path that they and others are being led down. And yes...there has been a letter sent to TC asking just that...how can you provide TCU service without the enodorsement....no response. Dont need to ask NC...they are not the regulator.

CARS is the law...not NC's or TC's opinion.

As for Braun and Kevin V...not trying to take shots at you guy's at all...but the opinion that you you have expressed goes part in parcel with the attitude of most of our younger membership these days. i.e. "lets be happy with what we get". Off topic....but....that is why the last 2 contracts the membership voted for less than cost of living raises and a reduction in pensinable benefits....lose lose. That will catch up to us...when nurses make more than a tower controller. Take it for what it is worth.

If you don't think that the upper managment are smarter and have been bean counters than the people who represent us...think again....and it "IS" tied in with yours and my lack of TCU rating.

Here is some free advice. If you really truely and honestly believe that you are not allowed to run 3 miles (you are working a terminal somewhere right?), take a stand for yourself and tell the company that you refuse to work it as you do not believe you are allowed under CARS to provide the service without a terminal rating.

Can we move on to a new thread now?

Area, Terminal, Oceanic - it's all the same right?

VFR - IFR - ATC is ATC right?

ATC - FSS - ATS is ATS right?

US ATC = no license at all - just another FAA employee.

Enter full automation (cough) and the shift to ATManagement - soon to be no Canadian License required? Just another employee - with no medical restrictions - like pesky sick leave? Bye bye bargaining power?

Hmm - no consequence at all.....

I am curious how those providing terminal control service using 3nm, can do so under CARS without the appropriate rating?

Fact is we were just audited by Transport. They pick up everything. Every little inconsistency in paperwork and training. How could they have possible missed this?

Well i've worked 3 terminals now and none of the people in those units have that endorsement. Obviously a lot of them are senior to me...

...how can transport just say we are not processing your application when you have met the requirements; just becasue it is "supposedly" (show me the NPA, show me the gazette, show me the meeting for the CARAC? Yes..I know they can say anything they want...they are the police.

Justification for Change:

The increase in the volume and complexity of air traffic in Canada over a number of years has necessitated the sub division of large and complex air traffic control facilities into smaller work units by the air navigation services provider. By so doing, air traffic controllers in Area Control Centres (ACC) are no longer required to maintain the knowledge and skills requirements for the entire ACC, at that location. The work within these large facilities has been apportioned by geographic area, surveillance capability, type of equipment in use, airspace strata, traffic flows, skills and knowledge requirements or any combination of these or other factors. The current Regulations and Standards do not facilitate the endorsement of air traffic controller licences with ratings, other than by location and type of rating (airport, terminal, area, oceanic). The proposed amendment to Subpart 402 and Standard 422 will provide a simple yet effective framework for the continued issuance of the existing rating types to air traffic control licenses. The intent of this modification is to ensure that the privileges of an air traffic controller licence and rating are exercised only within a control area or speciality where the individual has been fully trained and certified.

With the physical transfer of the Ottawa Terminal Control Unit (TCU) to Montréal ACC, there are no more stand alone TCUs in Canada. They have all been amalgamated into different ACCs. Since these terminal control functions are now fully integrated into the ACCs, a proposed change will remove the “Terminal Control Rating” from Subpart 402 and Standard 422, and ACC controllers, with the exception of “Oceanic Control” will now require an “Area Control Rating”. This will allow the service provider more leeway in cross training in the ACCs. The verification of training records will allow Transport Canada to confirm that air traffic controllers are qualified to exercise the privileges of their licences in their respective specialties.