A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Refusing to Handle You"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181  
Old August 3rd 05, 04:29 AM
Warren Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Allan9" wrote in message
. ..
Maybe that's the manner your QA operates. We did tell the user we would
investigate and would ask them if they wanted us to get back to them with
what we found. If they did we did. Internal people actions were handled
in house. All the user needed to know was the situation was resolved.
Al


"All the user needed to know was the situation was resolved."

That's a typical FAA bureaucratic QA management answer. You gave the user
lip service. Sounds like your QA is the same as everyone else's.

Chip, ZTL


Ads
  #182  
Old August 3rd 05, 05:19 PM
Allan9
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Well Warren all I can say to you is bid a QA job and try to correct what you
perceive as a problem. If you choose not to then you are part of the
problem. The phrase you choose to exploit was meant to say in a nice way
that if you required remedial training it would be handled inhouse. All the
user would need to know was the situation was resolved. If you think that's
bureaucratic there's nothing I could say to you. There are a lot of people
that "care". Based on your we-they response I'd say you are part of the
problem
Al


"Warren Jones" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Allan9" wrote in message
. ..
Maybe that's the manner your QA operates. We did tell the user we would
investigate and would ask them if they wanted us to get back to them with
what we found. If they did we did. Internal people actions were handled
in house. All the user needed to know was the situation was resolved.
Al


"All the user needed to know was the situation was resolved."

That's a typical FAA bureaucratic QA management answer. You gave the user
lip service. Sounds like your QA is the same as everyone else's.

Chip, ZTL



  #183  
Old August 4th 05, 04:16 PM
Warren Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Allan9" wrote in message
.. .
Well Warren all I can say to you is bid a QA job and try to correct what
you perceive as a problem.


Hello AL? We don't have "QA bids" in most places because the
traffic-dodging cowards that work in QA are all "permanent" staff. At my
facility, I am of neither the correct gender or racial profile to be a QA
"specialist" anyway. Just wondering, as a C90 QA demigod for four years,
how much ATC currency did you have to maintain? Down here, no one in our QA
office has worked air traffic in over fourteen years.

If you choose not to then you are part of the problem.


What problem? The "problem" that Potomac wouldn't work this aircraft
contrary to SOP and LOA on a direct routing through busy terminal airspace?
Or am I part of the overall "problem" that caused you to selflessly take a
QA/staff/management bid? Very altruistic of you. I'm sure that like all
the other strap hangers and feather merchants, you went ATC staff because
you are one of the "good" people who "care", and not at all because you
sucked as a controller and were facing 25 years in a career you couldn't
handle.

The phrase you choose to exploit was meant to say in a nice way that if you
required remedial training it would be handled inhouse.


Which phrase, said in a "nice" way, am I exploiting?

You're the guy giving lip service to the user about the "situation being
resolved." The simple truth is that in this instance of the aircraft being
piloted by Mike, which started this thread, there is no QA issue. Not one.
The ZDC controller failed to get Potomac Tracon to buy off on a route
through busy terminal airspace. That's every day ATC. It a tactical issue.
Michelle suggested to Mike that he call QA at Potomac because Potomac was
somehow at fault for not accepting the route, aka "refusing" to handle the
flight.. I pointed out to her what a waste of time this would be in this
situation, to which she responded that her calls had resulted in discipline
of a "rude" and just "plain wrong" controller. You and I both know that
what Michelle posts is bunk. Her calls probably didn't make it out of the
Potomac QA office. Remember the ADIZ? Potomac QA is likely buried in
paperwork for incidents, OE's and OD's stemming from the mess around DC. I
seriously doubt that they have any time at all to track down "rude"
controllers and give them days off for bad (but safe and procedural)
service.

And by the way, if I required "remedial" training, where else would it be
handled besides "inhouse"? Yall send your 70 Chicago controllers somewhere
for remedial? C90 too small to self-train, or what?


All the user would need to know was the situation was resolved. If you
think that's bureaucratic there's nothing I could say to you.


Indeed.


There are a lot of people that "care". Based on your we-they response I'd
say you are part of the problem
Al


What problem?

Chip, ZTL





 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Flap handle activated Climb/Cruise switching Andy Smielkiewicz Soaring 5 March 14th 05 05:54 AM
You Want Control? You Can't Handle Control! -- Was 140 dead ArtKramr Military Aviation 0 March 2nd 04 09:48 PM
G103 Acro airbrake handle Andy Durbin Soaring 12 January 19th 04 12:51 AM
How do you handle your EFB in the cockpit? greg Instrument Flight Rules 5 November 17th 03 04:47 AM
Need door handle for 1959 Cessna 175 Paul Millner Owning 0 July 4th 03 07:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.