Avman –
Thanks for the info – how is the proposal being received by the staff at Eurocontrol? Any dissenters?
055166K –
Like you, I would like to see the end of the “ex-military/old Civil Service” terms of reference – they tend to aggravate the (openly unacknowledged) “us and them” attitude that prevails between ATCOs and just about everybody else.
DC10RealMan –
Good post – this issue is not just about who should or should not be licensed. The benefit it could bring to the ATC service as a whole should be kept foremost in mind. I myself am in favour of a licensing system for all ATC ATSAs, if only to ensure that efficient standards of service are maintained (by annual LCEs, as per the ATCO requirements). Personally, I do not think that holding a licence will in any way protect us with regard to job security – once you’re surplus - you’re surplus – licence or no licence!
Niknak –
With regard to senior ATCOs being “delegated” – yes, I agree, somebody has to be responsible overall for a group of staff working together to provide a service. If I am expected to be “directed” by an ATCO, or whoever, I personally would feel much better about it if I thought that the person so “delegated” had some genuine understanding of my job and the tasks I undertake. This is often not the case, at least, not at the Aerodrome I work at!
Therefore, I cannot agree with your statement that ATSAs have “no technical responsibility”. In the same way that I cannot do your ATCO tasks, if you can’t do the job I am doing within the ATC environment, then I am responsible for it – technically, physically, professionally – any way you care to call it. We don’t have to be talking into a microphone in order to be classed as “technical” – we just do different tasks within the same overall function – providing an ATC service.
As we are providing part of that same service as yourself, and some of us, (at least), can see the benefit of maintaining the standard of service, then what is the case for ATSAs not being licensed ? Licensing, as practised by NATS/CAA, would involve the regular re-assessment of those individuals so licensed, thus maintaining (and possibly improving) the overall standard. What’s the problem with that? After all, isn't that why ATCOs do it?
I would really like to see some support for the ATSA licensing issue from ATCOs in particular. I do not see any problem with it – I feel it can only benefit the service we provide, although I do agree with you that NATS will probably reject it on financial grounds alone. Does it really boil down to the fact that ATCOs want to keep themselves separate and aloof from us mere ATSAs, and do not want anybody invading their turf ? (a bit like the Fam Flight Schemes, eh?!!).
I sincerely hope not .
PS – any LATCC Flt Plan Supervisors out there care to comment on their failure to provide an efficient service to our ATCO colleagues??