Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Company Policy; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: This has now become a consistent problem and I am worried someone is going to get hurt. Several times a day [company] flights depart DEN flying to ZZZ; they always file for FL 220. The last few weeks they have filed for FL 220 as normal but when I take the handoff and they are switched they have broken that altitude by 1;000 ft. with no coordination from Denver Approach. It has happened to me personally 3 [times] this week alone and many other times to others. I asked Aircraft X why he climbed to FL230 when his requested is FL220 and I had not been told he would be deviating from his requested altitude. The pilot said he was given a climb via clearance by approach without being given an 'except maintain'; so that is why they are continuously breaking their altitudes. They are going to the SIDs top altitude of FL 230.This is a continuous problem with west departure. They are not being clear with pilots who don't want higher than top altitude and so we are getting them expecting FL 220 only for them to go through their altitude to FL 230. A lot of times they do not ship these guys until already in our airspace; while to my knowledge it hasn't caused a deal yet; I would be shocked to hear that it does not soon. It is a dangerous situation.


Second narrative: [The] departure plate read FL 230 at top of climb. After making the at or below 10;000 ft. restriction; we set 23;000 ft. as our next climb to altitude off the departure plate under what I seem to recall as a climb via the SID from ATC. After several minutes at 23;000 ft.; ATC queried us what altitude we were at. That's when we realized our filed altitude was 22;000 ft. and ATC was probably asking because we were level at 23;000 ft. We asked what altitude ATC would like us at and they said 23;000 ft. was fine. ATC remarked that this has been happening recently. They didn't appear to be upset at our deviation and were focused on suggestions to improve compliance. The CA (Captain) suggested a 'climb via except maintain FLxxx' might help. We reviewed the departure after landing; during our debrief; and noticed the instruction to maintain the lower filed altitude; if it was lower than 23;000 ft. [The] aircrew incorrectly set top of SID altitude instead of flight planned cleared lower altitude when given a climb via SID instruction.Aircrew should have ensured all notes were read on the SID plate and lower than 'top of SID' altitudes filed are briefed as threats with mitigation strategies. When confirming assigned altitudes between crew members; ensure the altitude is cross-checked. ATC may mitigate likelihood of similar events by adding 'except maintain FLxxx' when having aircraft climb via SID. Additionally; if fuel and time permit; one might consider filing aircraft for final altitudes above the top of SID altitude.


Synopsis: A Center Controller and flight crew reported the flight crew climbed above their filed final altitude.