I am not blaming the controllers. I find there are many controllers – especially the younger ones – who want to embrace the idea of giving a better service in radar covered airspace where we have airline traffic.
Yes you are. You're confusing opposition to the half @rsed way it's been done without adequate resources, planning or comprehension with opposition to the ideal.
I can see why the bosses are happy to exploit controllers. You may remember with NAS 2b, the airspace above Class D was Class E. It was a number of controllers who vocally led the movement to have this reversed and made Class C – without any extra manning or without even an approach radar facility.
Airprox near LT anyone? Yet again you seem to think ATCs can demand as many staff as we want.
Can you imagine this? There was no hope of any more pay for the extra responsibility, but these controllers were saying to their bosses, “Give us the extra responsibility compared to controllers in other countries. We don’t want radar, we don’t want extra staffing and we know we will be paid no more as there is no more income, but we will do it anyway.”
What extra responsibility? It was the way we'd been doing it previously with the same number of controllers.
Once the bosses see that controllers are happy to take extra responsibility when there is no potential for any more income – and therefore no potential for any higher pay – the bosses will exploit.
And what possible recourse did we have? Go on strike? CASA is just a lapdog.
I spoke to a US controller and union member, and asked if the FAA insisted on changing the Class E above their Class D to Class C, without any extra staffing or radar, would they accept it? He said, “There’s no way we would take on that responsibility as we would not know where all the VFR traffic is, as about 50% of our towers with Class D airspace have no radar coverage to the Class E above. In the USA we will only operate Class C airspace with an approach radar facility and adequate Class C manning.”
It's called requiring a clearance in C. So how do they know where all the VFR are off radar now? They don't & are perfectly happy to launch their high capacity IFR jet straight through it all. Airprox near LT anyone?
There you have it. Australian controllers insisting that they have this extra responsibility, and even reversing NAS 2b, whilst US controllers are simply saying they would never take that extra responsibility unless it was properly manned and with proper radar.
There you have it. Australian controllers objecting to a half @rsed implementation of a system.
Again I ask why are you still bleating on in here &
not bashing the ears of those doing a well less than half @rsed job of introducing a system.
They are the problem.