60 minutes, sometimes 45, help me understand.

[Ducatist4]

If you qualify as an air traffic controller I think I’m right in saying that they could post you to any of their centres/airfields in the UK. You don’t get a choice, it’s like being in the Army!

Aptitude scores, they just use them to rate you against others applying at the same time. There is no pass or fail and the actual score doesn’t matter, they just take the top twenty or however many they need.

 

[The Puddock]

If you qualify as an air traffic controller I think I’m right in saying that they could post you to any of their centres/airfields in the UK. You don’t get a choice, it’s like being in the Army!

Yes, that’s right. NATS reserves the right to send you to any unit and position in the business once you’ve finished training, so when you finish the college you’re likely to be moving house whether you really want to or not.

 

[rob788]

Well let’s compare it to university then.

So yes a 1st is better than a 2.1.
However that is the final qualification, not the entry requirements.

Someone could take the same university course as another and let’s for arguments sake say the entry requirement for that course was all B’s.

Now one person may have all B’s and be accepted on the course and another may have all A’s and be accepted on the course.

Does that mean the person with all A’s will finish with a higher score? Nope.

It may well be that the person with the B’s is the one that leaves with a 1st and the person with A’s finishes with a 2.1.

So even if they did open up the recruitment for train drivers to the whole of the country choosing the highest pass rate on the psychometrics wouldn’t mean you have some type of bionic man train driver.

It’s a bit of a pointless discussion at this point though because as we know how it’s done now works perfectly fine for the recruiting tocs.

I was honestly happy after my last reply. At the end of the day no one will accept or consider what is good for every single other industry is good for drivers of trains. That is the long and short of it. A degree by the way is often an entry requirement for many jobs though. No degree no job in many cases.

 

[rob788]

The railway has been burned by "promises" like this before. As I said, it's not like they are desperate for trainees; each position gets plenty of applicants, people are kept in talent pools for years in some cases and recruitment teams are small. It's very much an 'employer's market'.

Harsh to say burned by promises, comes across as yeah let's tar every applicant going forward forever with the same brush.

Recruitment teams are small is an excuse, not a reason.

I am happy with this thread being done, it has gone beyond its need. Hopefully, it is closed or whatever happens.

 

[ComUtoR]

I am happy with this thread being done, it has gone beyond its need. Hopefully, it is closed or whatever happens.

On each thread there is a report button. Report the original post and enter your reasoning. The Moderators will then decide to take action or not.

 

[Glover2013]

Harsh to say burned by promises, comes across as yeah let's tar every applicant going forward forever with the same brush.

Recruitment teams are small is an excuse, not a reason.

I am happy with this thread being done, it has gone beyond its need. Hopefully, it is closed or whatever happens.

How many times can you be burned by the same broken promise in life before the party in control (I.e. the employer) put an end to it. It’s both harsh for the applicant and the reality of trying to control what is a huge financial investment for the employer.

‘Recruitment teams are small’ is both an excuse and a reason. Why try and make lots of the facets of this debate a binary argument?

As they say, it’s one of the toughest jobs to get and easiest to lose.

 

[43066]

At the end of the day no one will accept or consider what is good for every single other industry is good for drivers of trains. That is the long and short of it.

The long and the short of it is that the reason for the policy has been explained, as has the fact that there are plenty of excellent applicants who do meet the criteria. So the initial question you posed has been answered.

If the industry struggles to attract applicants in future the policy will probably change, but it’s hard to see why it would otherwise. You’re entitled to disagree with the current approach, of course, but I’m not sure what you’re expecting to achieve by litigating the point on here.

How many times can you be burned by the same broken promise in life before the party in control (I.e. the employer) put an end to it. It’s both harsh for the applicant and the reality of trying to control what is a huge financial investment for the employer.

‘Recruitment teams are small’ is both an excuse and a reason. Why try and make lots of the facets of this debate a binary argument?

As they say, it’s one of the toughest jobs to get and easiest to lose.

100%.

 

[Leeds Driver]

Anyone who would want to live more than 45 minutes away hasn’t done the job. The last thing you want when you’re starting at 4am is to have to get up even earlier to drive in from miles away.

 

[spellbound330]

Relocating for the trainee driver job is not possible as the OPC have said that moving house is considered a significant life event. This also includes other things such as having an operation, illness etc. You will therefore have to repeat the psychometric again after six months once you’ve moved house as your results will be void.

 

[skyhigh]

You will therefore have to repeat the psychometric again after six months once you’ve moved house as your results will be void.

As far as I'm aware, that is nonsense.

Edited to add - having read the appropriate RSSB standard (RIS-3751-TOM) I can confirm most of that post is either misguided or incorrect.

 

[muz379]

As others have said , plenty of TOC's & FOC's will have been caught out in the past . Relocating whilst also completing your training be it at school or practical handling is likely to have an impact on your progress . And there is always the risk that even if you have the best will in the world you could have property sale/purchase fall through meaning you are not relocated within time .

I know plenty of other jobs will allow relocation , but I don't know of many safety critical ones that would , on the railway I know the same applies for signallers for example . Ive seen vacancies for pilot training schemes that give geographic restrictions . And once in post as a pilot or cabin crew there are requirements that apply to be able to be on location within a set time when on standby so if you do not relocate it is likely to quickly have implications for your continuing employment .

Take Air Traffic Control if not, Apply for N.A.T.S, they don't care where you come from as long as you are in position for day 1 of the role

Anyone applying for NATS though would be aware that they will be trained in either area or approach control , and once trained can be posted anywhere accross the country depending on the needs of the business . Slightly different from applying for a given vacancy at a set location . The whole premise with NATS is that it is more likely than not that you will be relocating once trained .