Why no AVA's for EGLL Tower?

[Jerricho]

Given the sizeable delays that occured on Friday and Saturday afternoons/evenings just gone, I am more than a little curious as to why no AVA's were brought for the tower? Perhaps I am stirring trouble just a little bit, but I'm sure while we don't mind 5 mile spacing for a couple of hours, I'm sure our merry band of travellers don't really enjoy the 30 mins holding.

Any thoughts/abuse etc. welcome (apart form you P7, if I want your opinion, I'll send it to you! ;) )

[Roger Dodge]

I'll add my twopennyworth if I may.

Surely the 'small' cost of an AVA is nothing compared to the tens of thousands of pounds worth of fuel that were burnt holding over the last 2 evenings. :E :E :ouch:

[halo]

Surely the cost of paying controllers at Heathrow/TC/NERC more money, so that they don't keep leaving for other units, wouldn't amount to anywhere near as much as the cost of the delays!!


You would think that maybe somebody would have figured it out

[Jerricho]

I totally agree with you guys...................

But also, I seem to remember hearing something about the government's plans to "fine" NATS for any delays attributable to them (can't remember the exact details, something about if greater than an average of 1.5 mins per a/c). I wonder if when this is implemented there would be a change of heart.

Also, I am looking forward to seeing exactly how many minutes delay were caused on that great little notice-board in the East Foyer. Or when this month's propaganda Newsletter comes out, will there be any mention of the staffing situation and the effects it is having.............AGAIN!!! (This should be a big RED Topic in the "How are we doing?" section.)

Let's get Mr Everitt's views............what's that number again?

[Scott Voigt]

Actually, I bet NATS can get out of the fines by attributing the delays to the airports for not providing enough runways <G>...

regards

Scott

PS, what is an AVA?

[Gonzo]

Scott,

Additional Voluntary Attendance - Overtime

Gonzo.

[Dan Dare]

I'm not sure I understand the apparent desire for AVAs. Surely it is a small step from regular AVAs to being told that you have no option and will attend an extra X days a year for a small increase in salary. I don't think that is in any of our interests.

I do believe that an appropriate level of pay (and respect) would help to keep staff, perhaps then AVAs would be an irrelevance.

[Jerricho]

Dan, my original wasn't expressing a desire for the all encompassing AVA. It stemmed from my almost embarressment at having to tell Pilots that we are 5 mile spacing due staff shortages in the tower, and your EAT is 35 mins from now. I'm sure anybody listening out on the freq could have heard the displeasure in both my voice and the poor sods in the stacks.

AVA's are a "Band-aid" solution to as you so correctly point out that they are not the solution to salary and respect issues. And I agree when you say that perhaps they are just a small step from "expected attendances" for all of us. I just don't like having to explain myself for somebody else's lack of assistance.

And let's throw caution to the wind. Special coming over to TC. Hmmm...........

PS - Scott: Nice one! Pitty they won't have the staff to run a 3rd runway anyway!

[Point Seven]

Jerricho

As always mate you're completely right. it's about time the airlines started to complain about delayas caused by the useless staffing levels in the tower. Thames Radio going to TC will only make matters worse, the dual valids all wanting to leave the tower (cos it's a/. rubbish to work at and b/.chroinically understaffed and getting worse) thus meaning we in the tower are shorter still. Long may Thames stay, I say ( another hand greande of controversy floats into the air....).

Have to say Jerricho. you'll be sorely missed in these parts. Hope we'll still get your inquisitive tones on here and that you won't spend all of your free time moose hunting.

P7

Ps Jerricho, pm me with your days off so we can do beers. x

[mr.777]

Hi guys,
Been reading this thread with much interest.....I'm starting on the ATCO course down at Bournemouth CATC next March.Without wanting to be presumptious,if I get through the course okay I'd really like to be posted at EGLL tower.Should I let your views dissuade me???It doesn't sound like much "fun" there,and I just wondered what your advice to a wet-behind-the-ears trainee would be with regards to getting posted there.I worked at LHR for 6 yrs as a dispatcher and loved every minute.I totally realise that being an ATCO is poles apart from this but is it really that bad there?
Cheers,
777.

[Scott Voigt]

777;

I wouldn't let anything disuade you <G>... Working traffic anywhere with some traffic is always FUN! It's just dealing with some of the office politics as well as some of the suits rules and other such things that gets to be a royal pain in the butt at times. From all of my travels, it appears to be the same no matter where you go...

regards

Scott

[fadec_primary_channel]

I believe the airport authority in JNB fines the airlines when they "block" stands due to missing pax etc.

Not sure what my lot will say to BAA, but I hope big airways said something.

Can only sympathise with all of you at LHR, I asked a question about staffing problems, a while ago and was surprised to find it had not been sorted.

We find it hard enough to convince people to travel at the moment, last thing we need is short sighted managers making it even harder by not keeping the correct staff levels.

Best of luck.:)

FPC

[moony]

AVA
A concept not understood by military controllers:confused: Just do the job :)

[Jerricho]

Hmmmmm.....just do the job. I'm sure Johnny Self-Load appreciates this ethos when positions combined and sectors closed causing him to be late for his connection or cause Mrs. Johnny to have to wait in the Terminal cause Mr. Johnny has been holding nearly 40 mins due staffing problems.

Hands up all those Tower Guys and EGLL Approach guys that got on with the job on this day (and other days like it!) And let's include every other NATS ATCO that turns up and has situations like this thrust upon them AND just does the job.

I think somebody missed the point on this one.........

[Point Seven]

Jerricho

Amen to that. Boo hoo to all those military controllers with their inordinately large pensions. They can all get off their high horses because, unles I'm very much mistaken, national service ain't compulsory you have to VOLUNTEER.

P7

[Jerricho]

And just as a continuance from you P7 (gotta stop agreeing with each other, people will talk), before anybody starts waving the "you "voluenteered" in chosing to become an ATCO" flag.

Support from powers that be, in situations where their front liners are required to provide excuses is non existant. As I mentioned, if a pilot ask me "What's the reson for the delay?" I'm going to tell them EXACTLY why. And then, as has been addressed many time before (as being thrashed in the Bondage thread), management happily take their salaries that are far and above the Sector Driver, as well as bonuses for whatever the excuse for it is this week. All the while, their excellent management decisions leave the controller open to criticism and derision.

Remember those mugs they had at LTCC when New Horizions was the buzzword of the week. Seem to remember comments like "service must be the best", "people are the kay to success" and my 2 favorites "leadership" and "right climate to contribute". Crap................................. :mad:

(Ok, I'll admit it, I've got one on the desk here in front of me. Makes a great ash-tray!)

[DC10RealMan]

Why should NATS be any different to any other large organisation in the UK. Indifferent and/or incompentant management paying themselves bonuses for "targets reached", while paying lip service to employee participation whilst the "workers" take all the flak, and/or have their terms and conditions changed and pensions stolen.

One more thing!. NATS are apparently "World leaders in Air Traffic Management" how do you quantify that?, bearing in mind six years delay to Swanwick, extensive delays, lack of trained staff, the debacle to McNERC, transfer of Manchester ACC (maybe?).
If NATS does have an excellent reputation it is due to the professionalism, commitment, and dedication of its staff, not to its management. I wonder if its a case of if you say it often and loud enough eventually you will be believed.

[moony]

Point Seven and Jerricho

Jerricho mentions early in the thread that AVAs are not desirable and this is echoed by other contributors.
Dan Dare says that it may only be a short time before Civil ATCOs are expected to attend extra days at work for a small increase in salary.
My point is that AVAs are not available to us so we have to just get on with it. Dan Dare - for the last few years, controllers where I work have been required to cover shifts on their days off without overtime pay or time off in lieu.
We try not to get overloaded by anticipating the problem and solving it in advance. Jerricho, I understand that the odd delay in leaving work may occure.
Point Seven - shame on you. Although I am approaching the end of my service and I should be checking up on the details of my pension, I have always been under the impression that the pension is somewhat based on salary levels- please feel free to correct me if I am wrong. It is no secret that a Civil ATCO's pay is far in excess of that of a Military ATCO's pay.
And yes, you are quite right, we are volunteers, and I am proud to have served my Queen and your country for the past 32 years.

[Jerricho]

Hang on a tick Mooney, can you explain something about your comment "the odd delay leaving work may occur". If you're implying that I feel the reason we need a FULL staff complement is simply to get out the door early, then you're here, and the point is WAY over there. As many will tell you at TC, I am normally one of the first in and very often the last out the door. While getting the early go is a nice thing, it is a bonus, not a right. If I'm rostered 2-10pm that's my shift.

You mention AVA's are not "available" for yourselves. As I don't know this one, do you guys have the correct number of staff, or close to? And saying "just get on with it"............shame on you. WE DO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Point Seven]

moony

Yes, we do get paid more. So why not bypass the mil and just do Civil? Because you wanted to do military controlling for all of the benefits that you get for being in the military and because you like the lifestyle. Fair do's. But don't go on about how you "get on with it", it means nowt to us. There are laws and rules put in place so that civil ATCOs are protected from "having to get on with it". As far as I'm concerned it's a stupid outdated ideal that has no place in the busy, safety conscious environment of civil ATC. We are entrusted with the safety of the lives of countless air travellers per year who, I don't think, would be too happy if they thought that we were cutting corners just to keep a stiff upper lip.

We have to fight to get our correct staff numbers, so that we don't shafted by our management into doing exactly what you're promoting. Well done to you for getting on with it, but we don't have to and as such, we aren't impressed by your martyrdom.

P7

[moony]

Jerricho
You are obviously committed to your work and I am not suggesting that you would want to run out of the door early - indeed I do not know any controller mil or civ that would want to legit and leave their mates in a difficult situation. Apart from that, it was just a statement that leaving work, may be delayed, for one reason or another, which could be staffing problems as you mentioned previously.
Manning - we are established for 24 controllers for 24/7 ops. This is fine until you take into consideration the fact that we have 1 controller in Basra, 1 in Cyprus(very nice) and untill recently 2 in the Falkand Isles(now just 1). Not our fault, but the way it is. I guess we are no different from other units in this respect.
And it's Moony!
Point Seven
I suppose that you will be posting a retraction and apology for stating the ' military receive an inordinately large pension'.
I am sure that your comments will be much considered by a huge amount of dedicated people.

[Jerricho]

"Dear Travelling Public,

Once again, the situation that began this thread occured last evening. And, unfortunately, it looks like this evening will be the same. Hope the frustration that you feel while holding for 35 mins isn't as great as the frustration of those on the ground trying to provide you with the best service they can in the circumstances.

Signed ............................

P.S. Oh, and sorry about the extra noise generated for all the jets after 2200 for those folks trying to get a good nights sleep"

P.P.S Sorry Moony, no disrespect with the "e", just my lack of typing skills.

[ATCO Two]

AVA Agreement signed at Heathrow Tower today! First AVA being worked this very afternoon! £500 per shift before tax.

[Jerricho]

What......now I've got nothing to bitch and moan about tonight when I get to work! ;)

[moony]

Jerricho
You may lack typing skills(your words) but debating skills are obviously in abundance!

[DC10RealMan]

Is the agreement about AVAs a measure to allevite a temporary staff shortage or is it a permenant thing?. If it is the latter then I would suggest that in the long term it is doing a disservice to all the ATC staff in NATS by not addressing the fundimental issue of staffing. I am not having a "go" at staff at LHR because Swanwick and I am sure other units do overtime as well.

[Point Seven]

DC10RealMan

This is the question. Are management just going to use AVAs to cover holes in staffing or are they actually going to try and get back up to OR?

In the (increasingly unlikely) event of Thames going, the tower will be chronically understaffed and with less kids going through the college where are the trainees coming from? At the moment, they're being rushed through just to get numbers up and the prognosis for the tower ain't good.

The whole thing is another display of unit management using AVAs to get out of the s*it they put themselves in.

P7

[250 kts]

.7,

You're absolutely right and I reckon the union should withdraw the deal at the end of the year when the present deal runs out. Management have taken the p**s out of this deal all along especially in the the airports. We should have the balls to say it hasn't worked as it should and lay it to rest for the foreseeable future.

[DC10RealMan]

Call me a cynic if you wish but by accepting overtime and the principle of overtime working are you not just guaranting that the management get their bonuses for "acheiving their targets", whatever that might be. I do not wish to state the obvious but also by accepting overtime as a principle are you not giving management a stick to beat you with when they try and introduce additional duties as a matter of course as your main defence of fatigue cannot be defended if you are doing overtime. I agree that it should be for a finate time and not indefinately, or we will all be truly sorry!.

[Findo]

Am I right in believing this is the first NATS airport to pay AVAs ? Presumably the rest will stop working overtime and await the introduction of AVAs at their unit..... or was there an agreement that we shaft the ATCO 3s again ?

[Warped Factor]

DC10RealMan,

You've just given some of the reasons why I chose not to sign up to the AVA scheme.

We've gone from keeping our powder dry all these years to now shooting ourselves in the foot as far as I can see.

WF.

[250 kts]

Findo,

Not a case of the ATCO3s being shafted-they are their own worse enemies if they go in at handbook overtime rates when there is a NATIONAL overtime deal agreed linked directly to the acceptance of the pay deal last year. When the manager asks for people to do the overtime the staff must just say NO unless it is at the AAVA agreed rate.

Similar to my last post people must have the balls to say "no" just as the union should cease the deal at the end of this year.

[flower]

250kts

Yes that is what some of us have been doing out at the ATCO3 units, this is a national agreement we have been advised by the union that it is an National agreement and told that we should not be doing overtime by the Union until it is sorted out. Unfortunately you will find at every unit there will be some people who see that in the short term they will get the extra money and goahead and take the Overtime.

As others are saying though if this is a sop about sorting out Correct staffing levels I would rather do without thanks.

[250 kts]

Which just goes to show that the union is only as strong as it's members!

[Swift]

"... we have been advised by the union that it is an National agreement and told that we should not be doing overtime by the Union until it is sorted out..."

Why then did our senior union rep ask me the other day to do overtime at the standard overtime rate? What kind of message is that from the union?