Approach controller described a loss of separation event noting his fellow controller's lack of prof...

Narrative:

My aircraft was on downwind and I waited until I had course divergence from the air carrier X departure prior to descent clearance. The person working the departure position was working at the scope directly next to me. The departure was obviously issued a climb clearance because the next thing I hear is the conflict alert and air carrier X was climbing through 5;300 ft and headed northeast bound. My downwind air carrier Y was descending through 5;600 ft and the aircraft were about a mile apart. I issued traffic; but air carrier Y did not see air carrier X until appropriate separation was achieved. I then said to the controller; 'he didn't get him in sight until he was at 6;000 ft.' the controller's reply; 'it doesn't matter anyway.' I do not agree or like this reporting system. I have witnessed more operational errors since it's inception than ever before. Many of the errors I have seen were similar in nature to the one described above; preventable. Let me be clear; this program is creating and breeding a group of controllers who have no conscience. When there is no accountability; the rules no longer apply. Recommendation; cancel this program immediately.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Approach Controller described a loss of separation event noting his fellow Controller's lack of professionalism and listing the current reporting program as problematic.

Narrative: My aircraft was on downwind and I waited until I had course divergence from the Air Carrier X departure prior to descent clearance. The person working the Departure position was working at the scope directly next to me. The departure was obviously issued a climb clearance because the next thing I hear is the conflict alert and Air Carrier X was climbing through 5;300 FT and headed northeast bound. My downwind Air Carrier Y was descending through 5;600 FT and the aircraft were about a mile apart. I issued traffic; but Air Carrier Y did not see Air Carrier X until appropriate separation was achieved. I then said to the Controller; 'He didn't get him in sight until he was at 6;000 FT.' The Controller's reply; 'It doesn't matter anyway.' I do not agree or like this reporting system. I have witnessed more operational errors since it's inception than ever before. Many of the errors I have seen were similar in nature to the one described above; preventable. Let me be clear; this program is creating and breeding a group of controllers who have no conscience. When there is no accountability; the rules no longer apply. Recommendation; cancel this program immediately.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

Attributes
ACN	953136
Time
Date	201106
Local Time Of Day	0001-0600
Place
Locale Reference	ZZZ.Airport
State Reference	US
Environment
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	EMB ERJ 145 ER&LR
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Descent
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Climb
Route In Use	Vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Approach
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types

Approach controller described a loss of separation event noting his fellow controller's lack of professionalism and listing the current reporting program as problematic.