Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: GRB.TRACON, WI
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was training a developmental on combined Radar positions at the R2 position. A situation arose where we had cleared an aircraft for a visual approach at ZZZ (a satellite airport where we provided radar arrival/departure services). ZZZ requested IFR releases from us for multiple departures while the inbound IFR aircraft we had cleared and transferred to ZZZ was on approximately a 3-4 mile final. I instructed the developmental to authorize the first departure released subject to visual separation being applied by ZZZ with the arrival IFR aircraft. The developmental then proceeded to issue the visual separation language required per directives to effect arrival/departure separation. After a slight pause by the ZZZ controller before replying; the ZZZ controller then began to snidely criticize our issuance of said visual separation requirements on the shout line; as the arrival aircraft; at that point; was now on a one to two mile final. The ZZZ controller then stated that they would wait to depart the first IFR departure until after the arrival was on the ground just so they wouldn't have to deal with our 'nonsense'.Upon hearing this; I immediately instructed the ZZZ controller on the shout line to cease this line of talk; reiterated the regulatory reasons why the visual separation verbiage is required by us; the potentiality of his manager being contacted regarding this instance; and to continue the conversation via landline and not the shout line if they so wished. No other disparaging remarks were encountered by us from ZZZ for the remainder of the training session. I contacted the GRB FLM on duty immediately after the situation occurred; and recordings of the above mentioned instance were completed. No loss of separation ever occurred due to; nor during; the incident. The above instance is only one of many similar instances I have encountered in my dealings with ZZZ controllers during my career at GRB. Various ZZZ controllers are frequently critical of the control instructions they are issued by GRB regarding arrival and departure separation; headings; etc. They often take an antagonistic tone; mutter disparaging remarks; or will abruptly hang up from the shout line if they do not like what we issue them. They often will initiate shout line communications with entire sentences; and hum; tap and communicate with their own traffic while waiting for a response from GRB on the shout line.The lack of professionalism by ZZZ is COMPLETELY unwarranted for the following reasons:1. GRB is responsible for IFR separation between ZZZ IFR traffic. Any attempt by ZZZ to disrupt regulatory requirements required by GRB for said separation is subversion on the part of ZZZ and in certain instances could be charged as negligence and criminal. 2. The aforementioned subversion ultimately creates distractions for GRB; as GRB controllers now have to deal with ZZZ controllers' inappropriate responses and try to resolve this while still working the rest of their traffic in the NAS.3. Distraction ultimately introduces greater risk to the NAS. ZZZ's continual negative emotional responses to assigned arrival/departure control instructions leads to overall reactive delay on the part of GRB controllers; thus creating safety concerns in keeping the big traffic picture.4. GRB controllers should NOT be subject to having their dignity attacked as individuals. ZZZ's aforementioned reactions to control instructions have only resulted in displaying their facility's ignorance of IFR separation regulatory requirements beyond what is required in their immediate ZZZ Class D surface area. Verbal abuse based on ignorance is unacceptable.I propose that the ZZZ manager be briefed not only on this instance but on other instances that have been documented in the past; and that; at a MINIMUM; the ZZZ Manager and ZZZ controllers be thoroughly briefed on what separation standards are required by an approach control providing IFR/RADAR services toa VFR tower. Please note that the above issues have NOT been displayed by all ZZZ controllers; but a few are definitely displaying damaging behavior that will not be tolerated. If similar behavior on the part of ZZZ staff continues; I will demand further inspection into the matter. I will also demand that disciplinary action be taken against any ZZZ staff who intentionally attempt to subvert control instructions/harass other controllers because they do not like/understand the control instructions issued to them. In many instances; the behavior displayed by ZZZ could ultimately be categorized as criminal; especially if it potentially leads to safety loss or death.




Synopsis: GRB TRACON Controller reported that a local Tower ridiculed the Developmental for correct phraseology required to release an IFR departure.