C3 Rating

[Kevin Kelm]

Hello all,

I have a question about the C3 controller rating. I've heard from various sources that VATUSA no longer awards the C3 rating, and was curious on what the exact reason was. If I am incorrect or misinformed, please let me know. I would like to apply for this rating and the GRP appears to fully support it, but there isn't much information available.

Thanks,

Kevin Kelm

[Daniel Hawton]

VATUSA doesn't support it with the reasoning being there is no direction as to the exact requirements to qualify for the C3.

[Kevin Kelm]

VATUSA doesn't support it with the reasoning being there is no direction as to the exact requirements to qualify for the C3.

I assume if there was a necessity for a direct value, VATSIM would assign it in the GRP, right? The GRP simply states: "The rating of Senior Controller (C3) may be awarded by any VATSIM Division to give recognition of seniority,performance or any additional role beyond that of a normal Controller (C1) as determined by the local Region/Division."

Personally, I am bringing this issue up because I feel I meet and exceed these qualifications stated above, but am unable to obtain this rating within this division. The C3 rating is not meant to be a rating in which is automatically obtained by a controller by a given metric, say a specific number of hours, but to be awarded for "seniority, performance, or duties performed beyond that of a normal controller".

[John Cierpial]

Kevin,
Think about how subjective that statement you quoted is. What defines seniority? 6 months with an ARTCC? 1 year? 5 years with the Division or VATSIM? Think how many if's there are in the first part of that quote alone.

In addition, who cares about the rating? It's not like a C3 can control more or do more than what a C1 can, so why is it a necessity to get the C3 rating?

[Salvatore Barcia]

Kevin,
Think about how subjective that statement you quoted is. What defines seniority? 6 months with an ARTCC? 1 year? 5 years with the Division or VATSIM? Think how many if's there are in the first part of that quote alone.

In addition, who cares about the rating? It's not like a C3 can control more or do more than what a C1 can, so why is it a necessity to get the C3 rating?

+1

[Bruce Clingan]

The key word Kevin is "may".  It is the divisions decision whether or not to award it, and as a division the leadership has chosen not to award it.  It is not fair to everyone to have a subjective award of a rating, and it de-values the idea of the rating if there was a reason for awarding it later on.

I know someone who under a previous DD became a staff member for an ARTCC, requested that the DD make him a C3, got his rating and left.  He has not been an active member of the ARTCC since.  This is exactly what I think the division is trying to avoid.

[Kevin Kelm]

Kevin,
Think about how subjective that statement you quoted is. What defines seniority? 6 months with an ARTCC? 1 year? 5 years with the Division or VATSIM? Think how many if's there are in the first part of that quote alone.

In addition, who cares about the rating? It's not like a C3 can control more or do more than what a C1 can, so why is it a necessity to get the C3 rating?

The sole purpose of the C3 rating is to reward excellence in controlling on the VATSIM network. Why does there have to be a defined metric? If its a special award rewarded by a division to a controller, why does their have to be a set "standard". Its like saying the medal of honor or silver star, or a rank in general should be awarded based off of years in service.

I understand it is at the discretion of the division to utilize the rating or not; I am not arguing that. But as a controller on this network for almost nine years, I feel myself, and the rest of us should have a say in how the division is ran.

[Tom Seeley]

You have a say, you're exercising it by posting your desire to be promoted here. If you want more of a say, I would urge you to apply when there is a staff vacancy in VATUSA.

With regard to the C3 rating, you are incorrect when you say "The sole purpose of the C3 rating is to reward excellence in controlling on the VATSIM network." Read the excerpt you yourself posted again:

"The rating of Senior Controller (C3) may be awarded by any VATSIM Division to give recognition of seniority, performance or any additional role beyond that of a normal Controller (C1) as determined by the local Region/Division."

There is nothing in that wording that specifies "excellence in controlling". Performance is ONE of the possible criteria mentioned by VATSIM but even that doesn't specifically cite "excellence" and it could be any number of things.  This division under its most recent prior director determined that there was too much ambiguity in the rating across the network, and suspended the awarding of the rating as is its right. There are still other divisions in VATSIM that do award the C3. It's always possible to transfer to one of those if that meets your purpose.

[Ira Robinson]

The sole purpose of the C3 rating is to reward excellence in controlling on the VATSIM network. Why does there have to be a defined metric? If its a special award rewarded by a division to a controller, why does their have to be a set "standard". Its like saying the medal of honor or silver star, or a rank in general should be awarded based off of years in service.

I understand it is at the discretion of the division to utilize the rating or not; I am not arguing that. But as a controller on this network for almost nine years, I feel myself, and the rest of us should have a say in how the division is ran.

I realize I haven't been around as long as some others but I must admit that I am a little confused by your request.  First you suggest that the award should be considered for "excellence in controlling".   Then you ask why there should be a set standard.  I don't know that
I know how to define "excellence in controlling" without at the least having something to compare it to.

You further cite the GRP:
"The rating of Senior Controller (C3) may be awarded by any VATSIM Division to give recognition of seniority,performance or any additional role beyond that of a normal Controller (C1) as determined by the local Region/Division."

Well If I understand you correctly you are also saying that it is not an award that should be given solely for years of experience.  So I am curious what you are basing it on because as I said earlier I am pretty new here and I don't know you, so for the benefit of the newbie in the room tell me why you feel you deserve recognition based on the GRP for, as stated, "performance or any additional role beyond that of a normal controller"

As someone who hasn't been here for nine years I too feel that we should have some input into division policy and am willing to listen to your argument and perhaps take up your cause.  But so far the only argument you have made is that the Division reconsider its position on the awarding of the certification, not that you are deserving of consideration.

Make your case sir.

Ira

[Scott DeWoody]

In that statement, it was originally intended for persons such as, but not limited to persons such as the Event Coordinator, Facilities Manager, etc... those that contributed above and beyond that of normal controller duties, but as others have mentioned, VATUSA decided to not use it any more because of it's abiguity.

I think... I may be wrong, wouldn't be the first time.

[Kevin Kelm]

Allow me to clarify, my point in saying "excellence in controlling", was to encompass all of those ideas I quoted (seniority, performance etc); I didn't wish to re-quote the same exert again; sorry.

How do you put a "measure" on performance? Seniority you can, yes, but as I said before, I don't think its necessary to place a set metric, such as time on the rating. We trust in the VATUSA staff to regulate all of our operations while controlling, do we not trust them to make judgement calls on who qualifies for a C3 rating and who doesn't based on things such as but not limited to: staff positions held, instruction/mentor hours, and the obvious total time controlling? Controlling on VATSIM is 100% a volunteer job; instructor/mentoring/acting as a staff member are simply roles that while you may receive some joy from, serve the sole purpose of keeping the system running.

Referring to my sentence above, just because you cannot easily place a judgement on something like performance, that does not mean the entire rating should be ignored. I think it is necessary to continually reward those who stick around on the network and go "above and beyond" the call of duty. How does VATUSA go about incentifying those to become staff members to help run the day-to-day operations of each ARTCC; it's very difficult. In my opinion, this is part of the reason why the turnover rate is so high.  Like I said earlier, we trust VATUSA to regulate every part of what we do; but we don't trust them, and apparently they don't trust themselves, to make judgement calls on such an issue.

Will awarding a C3 rating somehow change the mind of a controller considering hanging up their headset? Maybe, maybe not, but my intent is that if VATUSA already has tools to use to reward things like good behavior, dedication, and effort in time on the network; why aren't they using them? "Too broad" is the only reason? Are they worried about hurting feelings? If they are that worried about it, then fine, set a "1000 hour" control limit, or a "time in staff/instructing etc" limit, or whatever it may be. As said before, if we trust them to regulate all of our activities, can't we trust them to make calls either by case-by-case basis (maybe via a controller application for the rating), or by trusting them to set a metric of some fashion? I don't necessarily want it to be a set rule, but heck, if they are that nervous about its vagueness, then make it xxxx hours controlling, staff positions etc; just don't waste the chance to reward experience and dedication; at least utilize a tool that VATSIM has already provided.

On a different note, Happy Thanksgiving all!

[John Cierpial]

Kevin,
When reading through your response, it appears you want the C3 rating to serve as a reward of some sort, correct? This is part of the reason I don't understand the reason for a C3 rating.  All of the other ratings on this network are ones you have to fulfill a set criteria in order to receive (S2 proficiency at local tower services for example), whereas C3 does not have anything like that. Instead, it would be given out when a staff member feels like it, contributing to the subjectivity and ambiguity of the rating that myself and others in this thread have pointed out.  

Additionally, it sounds like the C3 rating is another flashy title that someone can add to their signature block. When I see signatures in emails or on forums such as:
John Smith
VATSIM Senior Controller
XXX ARTCC Events Coordinator
Assistant to the assistant of assistant webmasters
President of ZZZ VA
etc. it tells me that people are viewing this as a game where the idea is get as many objectives as possible to get the highest score.  In a situation such as this, the C3 rating would just serve as another badge someone can pin on themselves, which is something I believe the Division wants to avoid happening.

In summary, you got your C1 rating, you've been on this network for 9 years (longer than I have) and you have made countless contributions to your ARTCC. Congratulations!  Now, continue in your efforts to make VATSIM a better place.  Like Tom said, perhaps you should apply for a position on the VATUSA staff when one opens, or apply for a staff position at your local ARTCC.  You can do all of these things (as many already have and continue to do so) without the C3 rating.

[Jonathan Cox]

Personally I think the C3 should just disappear. It's nothing more than a "badge" rating (as everyone else has said) and serves no extra purpose, and if it's going to sit, confuse people, and bring up issues of people "wanting" it, it's better to just remove it or make a firm decision that nobody will get it.

Although John, I politely disagree with what you said about the forums/emails signatures. In my view, that has nothing to do with any sort of "score" or recognition, when people see me post and they ask "who is this guy?" they can see who I am and what I do in terms of Vatsim. And I would hope it would be the same with others.

[Salvatore Barcia]

I was very curious in the past about bringing back the C3 rating, but I realized that it would cause many headaches within Vatusa that aren't needed. I was told that each ARTCC would be responsible for distributing the rating according to the qualifications of each facility, and this is where the problems will start. There are going to facilities that give the certification away faster/easier than others. Then you'll start hearing stuff like this " It's not fair!! The XXX ARTCC allows controllers to get their C3 rating much faster than here! Why do I have to work harder than other people to get this rating? I'm transferring! "....  This is one of the many ways of politics and headaches starting and the meaning of the rating will be non-existing over time

That's my 2 cents... 

[Kevin Kelm]

You guys are making valid points, but I guess where I'm caught up, is why does the fact that 6/7 ratings are based on a set criteria, mean that this one has to be? It doesn't have to cause headaches; let VATUSA decide who gets it, we're all gentleman (and gentlewomen :$) here, don't cry about it. There needs to be means of incentifying experience John, otherwise the network is going to keep losing experienced controllers. The overhead to training new students up to C1 so a ARTCC can stay frequently staffed costs a huge amount of time for the ARTCC. Maybe you don't want this to be seen as a "game" where you rack up points, but to be honest, for many people, adding to their total time is the only reason they control; sad yes, but it is what it is. And furthermore, we need those controllers, even if that's why they control. There are only two controllers left at Seattle controlling that were there when I started back in 2004, and they control a minimum amount of hours. Why not issue in a new means of rewarding controllers; other divisions use it just fine, even some who don't use it for center controlling; why waste the infrastructure?