The reporter has raised a concern regarding reduced training standards for new Air Traffic Controllers (ATCs) at [Location].
The reporter believes that there are trainee controllers sitting their final endorsement checks despite notes in the trainee reports from on-the-job instructors (OTJIs) indicating that the trainees are not yet ready.
The reporter provided an example where they became aware that one trainee was put forward to final check despite concerns from multiple OTJIs over the previous fortnight about their work rate and appreciation for the traffic picture. However, the check went ahead and was conducted on a day where a significant weather event occurring elsewhere meant there was minimal to no traffic, and the controller was successfully checked.
The reporter provided a second example where they were made aware of a new endorsement given despite the controller issuing a descent clearance to one aircraft and having a different aircraft read it back, which was not detected. The line leader was advised but advised the Check Controller to moderate the check to a pass.
The reporter is concerned that these types of errors would ordinarily result in trainees undergoing further training/supervision prior to being endorsed. However, the reporter believes the current lack of ATCs is resulting in a push from Airservices to endorse controllers before they are ready. The reporter states that one manager said, 'We have been checking to the wrong standard. We need to lower our expectations or people won't pass'.
The reporter acknowledges that new controllers cannot be expected to be perfect but the reporter believes that the check standard has dropped from pre-COVID standards.
Airservices appreciates the opportunity to respond to the concerns raised in the REPCON relating to the training and assessment of Air Traffic Controllers. We take any suggestion that ratings and endorsements are being issued where the individual does not meet the required standard very seriously. As an approved (Civil Aviation Safety Regulation) Part 172 service provider, we have a robust training and checking regime which requires trainees to meet a specified level of competency and ability. This regime includes oversight by Authorised Managers and Service Standards. Unfortunately, there is not sufficient information available to allow us to review the claims in detail. However, in upcoming unit reviews undertaken by Service Standards we will ensure that training is an area which is closely examined.
CASA has not received hard evidence to support specifics of the REPCON claims.
A recent surveillance review determined that staff generally maintained a high competency level.
Recent surveillance interviews confirms that Line Leaders are under significant pressure to maximise roster numbers.
CASA notes the Airservices REPCON response includes 'in upcoming unit reviews undertaken by Service Standards we will ensure that training is an area which is closely examined'. The upcoming Service Standards Unit reviews will be sampled by CASA as part of its ongoing safety oversight program.
CASA will ensure that final field training competence for controllers remains a focus area in
surveillance events.