PDA

View Full Version : individual rosters


bwatchbabe
12th Dec 2002, 14:55
What do people think of the idea of individual rosters?
I have no preference and can see arguments for both sides eg breaking up the watch structure (good or bad?)
Those that work them; does it give you control over your life or do you find it very restrictive?
Lets assume(for the sake of not treading well worn ground) that 'THE MANAGEMENT' won't make us work more hours and take the discussion from there.

eastern wiseguy
12th Dec 2002, 15:20
I think that I personally am opposed to the idea. I am quite sure that in a small unit like mine the team atmosphere and trust is a big point.I know we all sing from the same hymn sheet as far as procedures are concerned BUT as I find out when spinning there is a certain "difference" with other watches.I would be loath to have that as the norm.On a purely selfish view I can with a degree of certainty work out what I will be doing for months in advance and as such that permits me to plan my life.

flower
12th Dec 2002, 15:51
Individual Rosters generally only suit bean counters as there is an ability to reduce staffing numbers.
Apart from a couple of duties ie:night or day duties we can currently plan as has already been stated months in advance. With individual rosters we will be unable to plan more than a month in advance and then only from the 20th of the month.
Although I personally enjoy shift work , I do also need to have some stability in my life so I can actually have a life!!
And for those people with children they have to consider childcare arrangements and most Nannies and childminders will want more notice than would be available.

Again I agree with the points about working as a team,you very quickly learn the strengths and weaknesses of your colleagues which is a definite advantage.

The Watch system does have drawbacks but the alternative has far more in my opinion.

BDiONU
12th Dec 2002, 15:54
Why do you think they've just spent a fortune on setting up the ORO?

Direct HALIFAX
12th Dec 2002, 16:19
bwatchbabe - why have you started this thread now? Do you have some insider knowledge about a new NATS Mgt initative to transfer the guys at LACC onto such rosters.

If it means getting rid of 5 Watch Managers then it can't be competely bad.

BDiONU
12th Dec 2002, 16:56
Well there's certainly a case for going down to 3 Watch Managers who cover the period 0700-2200. Not needed on nights.

fish food
12th Dec 2002, 18:39
BAD NEWS ALL ROUND! - Fewer ATCOs, shorter leave 'blocks', loss of 'team spirit' in the working environment, fewer breaks therefore longer periods of time on sector between breaks, the list goes on...

Nav Canada operate on this basis and from what we at ScOACC hear it ain't up to much where the individual ATCO is concerned. Ideal for 'bean counters' however, especially when combined with 'voluntary' overtime!

Of major concern to the Oceanic bods is that this new co-operation between Nav Canada and NATS may see individual rosters introduced in Prestwick Oceanic on the basis of a system adapted from Gander's. You can bet if it happens then other NATS units won't be far behind.

:eek:

bwatchbabe
12th Dec 2002, 19:06
Direct halifax- I've no insider knowledge or hidden agenda I'm afraid. Just interested in peoples views.
As far as the ORO is concerned I do believe that shift logic was designed to work with individual rosters as opposed to a watch system. That would certainly account for some of the problems that we encounter.
As for working in teams. I think airlines faced a similar problem rostering crews together who have never even met each other.
You need very good team resource training and equally good SOP's.
How about bidding for work as in BA, fancy that anyone?

Warped Factor
12th Dec 2002, 19:52
How would the concept of "continuous assesment" with regards to the LCC/LCE scheme work under individual rosters?

WF.

ContactLondon
13th Dec 2002, 09:53
What makes you think that we haven't already got individual rosters? (OK its an extreme view!), but, since the shift pattern we work at the Management retirement home on the South Coast has become a case of waiting to see what shift you are on when the rosters come out, and the choice of shifts seems to be getting ever larger, surely these are already individual rosters?

For the Ops staff to have morning shift starts of 0600, 0630 or 0700, the afternoons to be 1000, 1100, 1300 or 1400 ( I think) and spins to start at any random time that ends in o'clock, as far as I'm concerned my roster is already individual.

Then take into account extra days, leave etc..........

niknak
13th Dec 2002, 11:25
For the benefit of the unwise and unwashed, what is an "individual roster" ?

Ta.

Fallows
13th Dec 2002, 12:24
I have a lot of friends who work individual rosters as airline flight deck crew. I would suggest that if this roster were implemented for ATC staff we should fight it tooth and nail. My reasons are purely practical, to have any social life, never mind important issues such as child care, is impossible if your roster only extends six weeks. Nothing can be guaranteed beyond six weeks, and that excludes standby duties for sickness which I am sure would be implemented. You would have to be within two hours travelling time if called out, there goes your travelling on the days off.
I am sure that the beancounters would love it, particularly as the watch "morale" cannot be quantified, and does not show on a balance sheet.
I am also sure that if individual rosters were implemented, it would be the final straw for the more senior members of staff who would opt for early retirement instead! .

Biggin Koksy
13th Dec 2002, 20:32
Fallows, I think you mean important issues like 'Football' dont you. ;) ;) ;) ;)

terrain safe
13th Dec 2002, 21:58
No Way!!!!!

Been there, got the T shirt and hated every minute.

Worked for 5 months on the individual roster, worked an average of 45 hour weeks, 198 hours in a 30 day rolling period (check SCRATCOH), 8 consectutive weekends while others refused to workk at weekends due to childcare. You have to check your roster as well as everybody elses to see who getting the free ride and working a 25 hour week. You have to complain that you are getting shafted and are made to feel that you are just a whinger. I seemed to continually feel tired all the time and I couldn't concentrate as well at work as I usually did or indeed needed to. You have to work with lots of different people, which does have its good points, but you lose the cameraderie you get with a watch system.

Just say NO. Never again.:mad: :mad:

atco-matic
15th Dec 2002, 15:59
The main thing about individual rostering is that it seems to be an easy way of saying ''OK so you know the people you've been working with for the last (insert figure)applicable years and built up a working rapport with, not to mention those of whom are your best friends, well we don't want you to have a social life with them any more, so we're going to make them work when your off and vice versa''.

I am also concerned that those people with kids will have the earth moved to give them the roster they want to work, and the rest of us will be left to pick up the dregs.

Thats not to say that things are perfect now! I think that the present system of forcing people to change watch against their will, just to accommodate those with childcare issues, is grossly unfair. As far as I am concerned if YOU want to change watch cos YOU have kids then it should be up to YOU to find somebody to swap watches with!! I hate to say it, but you knew what this job entailed with regards shift work before you applied/ had kids!

I am not against people changing watches etc. because they have kids, but I don't see why the rest of us should get shafted because of it.

mainecoon
15th Dec 2002, 18:16
agree with all post's

will end up knackering lifstlye for all but worst for parents

as is the start of overtime another issue i know

but tony in his new job will do his best to carry this through

Exel
15th Dec 2002, 21:39
Well said atco-matic.....

Are there not a minority (soon to be majority if things go on as they are) already working individual rosters ?

How many have heard....."i can't do nights coz my cat gets lonely"
"i can't do early spins coz my dog is pregnant"
"i can't do late spins coz i turn into a pumpkin after 6pm.

Ok, maybe not those particular scenarios but what it leads to is the rest of us getting continually SHAFTED because all we want to do is get on with the job in hand without expecting NATS to work around our private lifes.

Waiting to get blasted.........:D :D

bwatchbabe
16th Dec 2002, 09:47
ATCO-MATIC
what an unbelievable attitude! I have no childcare issues but I would like to think that in 2002 we live and work in a society where these problems can be accommodated by an intellectually mature workforce. If NATS ,through disastrous short term management has left us short of numbers then by turning inwards and attacking each other we can only harm our long term well being as employees. The days of old/not so old masogonist dinosaurs running ATC have passed my friends so lets move on.
Some people work part-time/flexible shifts to care for disabled or terminally ill relatives. Do you begrudge them this time? None of us know what our future needs will be in terms of working shifts when we enter the job. If you or I have to work a few extra night shifts so that some of your colleagues can care for their children or others then lets continue to pressurise NATS into employing adequate staff to cover this rather than berating people whose personal circumstances you are not really aware of.
As for 'all my friends are on my watch'. Well, judging by your views perhaps it would be good for you to get out and meet some people from the real world. Maybe even some females ?

250 kts
16th Dec 2002, 10:40
I think we should listen to people who have already worked this type of system. You will get little notice of what you will be working and the way leave works at present will certainly come to an end. There will be the end of the watches as we know them and little scope to ensure that management are playing by the rules. It raises LCE issues also but these could be resolved relativle easily. Also the system for doing the rostering has to be able to cope and that is certainly not the case at present.

I'm all for empowering the staff to make choices in life BUT what is going on at LACC at present is nothing short of a disgrace. Yes bwatchbabe I DO OBJECT to having to work additional night duties so people can look after their kids. Especially as in the main it is double ATCO families who are putting the demands on the system. The present roster allows a degree of certainty months in advance and consequently makes it easier for staff with kids to plan ahead and arrange care as required. The only staff who should be exempt from nights are those in single-parent families.

Why should people have to do extra duties and in some cases move watches just to accommodate people with kids? They were fully aware of the demands of the job and should make adequate provision for childcare and if they are unable to do so then one of the partners should consider their future. After all they will have around Ł100K coming in between them so should be able to arrange an alternative without it impinging on other staff.

The management should be strong now and they should have the say which shifts part-timers do-just as they would for the rest of us if individual rostering were ever introduced. An over-staffed system can cope with part-time working in whatever form people want it to be-the present under-staffing situation certainly doesn't allow people to pick and choose what they want to do.

eyeinthesky
16th Dec 2002, 11:42
NO to individual rosters!

Batchbabe: It's 'misogynist'!

I have to agree with many of the comments so far with regard to 'no night shifts because of childcare' or 'I want to work every Monday morning, Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday evening because I can't afford childcare' or whatever. Yes there indeed hard luck cases, ans these deserve sensitive treatment, but there are also many couples, BOTH OF WHOM work in ATC and drive in in new cars, who demand special treatment because they want to have their cake and eat it.
Sorry, but in this life you have to make choices. If you decide to have children, then that is the biggest investment of time and money you will make in your life. They should be a priority, and providing for their needs should be top of the list. If that requires you sacrificing some of the 3 holidays a year and maybe one of you giving up work to care for them, then that's what it's all about. Alternatively, the Ł100k+ between you should be enough to pay for a full time nanny if you think that's better.

Whatever, why should the rest of us, many of whom also have families, take the extra burden of your selfishness? I like to be with my kids too, but I have to spend a large part of two days asleep, and they have to keep relatively quiet, so I can go in to do the night duties that you decide is too much to ask. So I and my family are affected by your unwillingness to make sacrifices in your own life. Thanks.:mad:

I can't really seem how objecting to that can be termed 'turning inwards and attacking each other '. Seems only fair to me to expect everyone to pull their weight.

As for the wider issue of individual rosters, like many I fear that the more vocal will get what they want (B watch LACC being a good example!!) whilst the rest of us will have to fill in the gaps. Bad idea, and a right bastard for planning childcare!!

bwatchbabe
16th Dec 2002, 12:05
eyeinthesky- its and not ans! But point taken.
Also I did state that I have no childcare issues so some of the vitriole perhaps would have been better aimed elsewhere!
As for 100k families being able to employ nannies,I agree in theory but I believe it is not very easy to get them to work night shifts anyway so these people would still have to work spins.
BUT you have missed the point NATS has an obligation to employ adequate staff to allow people to make lifestyle choices so let's get working on that rather than forcing people who have taken just as long to train as yourself out of the industry.
When people join NATS at 20-21 years of age they DON'T know wether they want kids or not. So people must opt wether to marry someone who is happy to give up their career to look after children or not have children, this would appear to be the logical conclusion of your argument.
I for one know which I'd prefer.
Look beyond the next five years and decide what sort of atmosphere we all want to work in. A contented one where all of your workmates are happy(well most maybe) or a discontented ,resentful one which is the way we seem to be now.

250 kts
16th Dec 2002, 12:52
Yep you're right. But what about the contentment of the majority??

Let's go for one that is fair to ALL and doesn't involve many people working additional nights to allow 2 ATCO families to arrive at work in their Porches from their houses with the swimming pools. These people are big enough and rich enough to have a lifestyle that doesn't impinge on the lifestyle of others.

I really hope this situation gets resolved quickly or there will be a flood of staff going part-time and it will have nothing to do with childcare-and then what sort of a mess will we be in?

Yes, circumstances do change but staff have to be aware that decisions they make will have some impact on their lives and not rely on NATS to persecute others to make it all work.

bwatchbabe
16th Dec 2002, 13:39
can we move away from berating two atco families(my other half is not an ATCO but earns far more than I) and back to the issue of individual or flexible rosters. As a fairly new member of pprune I am dismayed at what a narrow minded bunch we come across as(especially nerc bods). Other units seem much more capable of seeing the bigger picture and other peoples/units problems.
Also the only two ATCO family that I know with a swimming pool and had a porsche(sorry jon) both work nights, he permanent and she more than half the time so perhaps one of you single types could take over his permanent nights. Lets not judge other people too readily

ATCO Two
16th Dec 2002, 19:48
bwatchbabe,

As you're pulling up people for their spelling let's get THIS one right once and for all.

IT'S with an apostrophe, means IT IS. The apostrophe denotes a missing letter, in this case "I".

ITS with NO apostrophe, is the possessive pronoun meaning "belonging to it." Same group as HIS, HERS, THEIRS etc.
Do you see any apostrophes in those words? No.

(The confusion between "its" and "it's" arises from when there is a proper noun involved and then we get John's book, Peter's car etc.)

A similar case is my (non) favourite - YOU'RE and YOUR, where YOU'RE = YOU ARE, and YOUR means belonging to YOU. Same principle. YOUR is cropping up more and more to mean "YOU ARE" and is extremely sloppy English!

Got that everybody??

GOOD!
THANK'S (JOKE!!)

ATCO TWO
Fully paid up member of AAAA
Association for the Abolition of the Aberrant Apostrophe

Lon More
16th Dec 2002, 21:54
Against this at Maastricht as well. Shift Logic has been binned here and it is up to the supervisors to "adjust" duties to ensure the minmum staffing levels are met. There are fortunately a number of restraints e.g no change from morning to afternoon, or vice versa without the consent of the controller involved.

From what i remember the guys at Amsterdam work an individual roster, there are acouple in Bournemouth next week on the CLN Sim. Talk to them about it.


Lon More - more than just an ATCO

Scott Voigt
17th Dec 2002, 02:28
I think that the only place that has tried shift logic and stayed with it were the Canadians, and it appears that a lot of them are ready to revolt...

regards

eyeinthesky
17th Dec 2002, 08:24
ATCO Two: Hooray! A fellow campaigner. Where can I join AAAA?!

By the way, whilst we're on the subject, the plural of ATCO is not ATCO's. Strictly, as it is an acronym, it is ATCO as the O could be Officer or Officers. But for clarity ATCOs will do.

Why does virtually everybody these days seem to think that plurals have to have apostrophes? :rolleyes: How's this for an example:

Quote

Dear Santa..............

I have been really really nice to the boys and girls in ATC and the CFMU this year,helping them out with re-routes to help free up there sector's when they need it for the big boy's to come through.
So this christmas i would like :-

1) a day of NO atc slot's due to lack of staff.

2) NO closure of sector's due to the above and capacity..

3) a day of NO level capping scenarios.

4) a day of NO zero flow rates through the sector's.

well santa i dont know if you will be able to grant this request - i expect my dream will only come true on one day and that's Christmas day - which is a real ****** as we arnt operating christmas day !!!!! oh well here's to dreaming..........

Happy christmas and all the best to you guy's in ATC - have a good one.

Unquote

:eek: ;)

P.S. BWB: The 'you' in my previous post was generic rather than specific. It was not targeted at you, so should more correctly have been 'one' (as the Royals are famous for saying).

NBanker
17th Dec 2002, 09:54
ATCO TWO
Well said! How good it is to meet a fellow AAAA member in NATS. I was beginning to think that my watch manager and I - both committed activists - were the only two in the company. That's two of my bętes noires dealt with in one go - thank you.

eyeinthesky
Welcome to the club. I now see you in an entirely new light - I'll even forgive you for your crack about LASs and gorillas! :) You just beat me to it with your post about the misuse of apostrophes in simple plurals but have you noticed how the same people who put them in when they’re not needed, frequently omit them when they are required?

To take an example from this thread: “…other peoples/units problems.” Surely that should be, "other people’s/units’ problems."? Unless, of course the writer was using "peoples" in the sense of the members of particular nations in which case it should be "other peoples'/units' problems". ;)

NB
AAAA Activist

bwatchbabe
17th Dec 2002, 11:10
goodbye to you all. This is my last post on pprune as I realise I live in a different universe from you all. I hope you are all at least fifty otherwise you are a very,very sad bunch of people.
No point in posting any witty replies to this post as I won't be reading them:( :(

Dances with Boffins
17th Dec 2002, 11:40
Any attempt at individual rosters that I have made in the past has always resulted in someone feeling that they are being put at a disadvantage due to someone else's [I'm getting paranoid about punctuation now] lifestyle/childcare/retail circumstances. The resultant fallout is however not usually directed at the roster maker, but rather at the poor unfortunate who is seen as the "cause" of the inequality, real or percieved. So any gain that person recieves through the individual roster is negated by the inability of all concerned to see the whole picture. Petty sniping and outright bully tactics ensue, and then harmony and peace become a thing of the past. I support any attempt by anyone to adapt the working day of people who find themselves with commitments that conflict with their working day [or night]. Alas human nature usually acts to protect its own interests if it feels threatened, and thus any percieved inequality will start to erode work-force relations to the extent that seemingly small issues escalate into outright conflict. My response now to requests for flexibility is far less accomodating now than it was prior to attempting individual rosters, which is a loss to all concerned. Usual story of everyone losing a useful or helpful initiative due to the obstinacy or inflexibility of a small minority.

Was that the sound of BWB's toys hitting the shag-pile again? Shame really as we all enjoyed her humourous postings about CATC. As I said about feeling threatened....

Edited for punctuation.

roger
18th Dec 2002, 18:07
bwatchbabe's gone for good.

roger

C U JIMMY
19th Dec 2002, 13:56
While we're on the subject of p*ss poor grammar (by and large originating from the fourth floor), does anyone wish to join me in my crusade against exorbitant use of the word 'literally'?
Whilst speaking to a fourth floor bod the other day, I counted 27 individual uses of this word in a 5 minute conversation. He was 'literally' doing everything; and here was me thinking he was merely talking in metaphors.
Dig deep, and with your help we can stamp out this dreadful affliction.
(See also: compulsive use of 'actually')

C U Jimmy

Fallows
24th Dec 2002, 21:05
On the aircrew page there is an article from the Economist newspaper which would have a bearing on staff who have individual rosters, more so than those of us who have a stable roster. The article refers to problems arising from sleep deprevation, sleep disturbance and lack of "quality" sleep, all of which I am sure would be exacerbated if we were subject to an individual roster.
Sorry I dont have the computer "knowhow" to transfer it to the ATC web!