Controllers being paid to go to EGLL [Archive]

SonicTPA

15th Oct 2003, 19:05

Heathrow tower controllers already get paid 15000 quid more than most other airport towers - and the cost of living is the same as for other Nats units in the southeast. In fact, a lot of the controllers live nearer to other Nats units, than to Heathrow.

So surely the lure of extra money isn't enough - there'll have to be something else...

But as has been said, there's the "I'm outside CAS and take more risks" and "I have more movements" and "Mine is more complex" arguments to get round. If one persons pay goes up, others will want more too.

And remember, airport movements are not necessarily a good pointer as to how busy a unit is - Cardiff have more area movements, and then Farnborough has the busiest Lars in the country...

It's a difficult situation to resolve. At the moment, I just want to make sure that we get a decent pay rise next year...

Sonic

GT3

15th Oct 2003, 19:45

Heathrow tower controllers already get paid 15000 quid more than most other airport towers

All of them?

250 kts

16th Oct 2003, 05:23

Maybe it's a management issue then. Get decent managers in and it may just encourage more people to stay. It can't just be financial or we'd be seeing the same issues 3 miles up the road.

Let's all just see what the long waited for restructuring may bring and then decide what to do rather than another knee-jerk reaction. And anyway any payment for retention would mean just that-your chances of ever getting out would be greatly reduced.

take5

17th Oct 2003, 18:12

For want of sticking my oar in - if EGLL has a retention problem, then a monetary retention scheme may be the answer - this will be totally removed from the "I'm busier/more complex than you" argument.

Why this company does not have a retention clause in the contract anyways is beyond me - they spend so much money and OJTIs spend so much valuable time training people, some sort of clause to say "you will work for x years on completion of training" should be included.

I know that EGLL still send someone to have lunch with college students prior to completion of each Approach course (elitist?) so surely if any student had a violent objection to working at LL then they should voice it then or otherwise put up with the known conditions.

To put the cat amongst the pigeons tho' - EGLL is wholly in CAS, has two runways, 1 for take off, 1 for landing, no circuits, extremely rare helo flights..... how hard is it to say "cleared to land" or "cleared for take off, sfc wind..." for an hour?!! (simplifying things slightly, I know). Yes it is busy - I reckon Ground could be a killer, but it is a TOWER ONLY validation, so how do the aircraft that land and take off get to the localiser/destination??

I would hope that as younger controllers enter EGLL this 'white gloved' controller attitude would change, but unfortunately, I know of people who have gone there in recent years who are being tainted by older controllers and are now expressing a superior "I should get paid more" attitude.

Maybe if there was a little more acknowledgement of other units then this would be eradicated. Come out of the Ivory tower and see what others do!!

AlanM

17th Oct 2003, 19:13

know that EGLL still send someone to have lunch with college students prior to completion of each Approach course

Not just someone my friend..... he is Heathrow's finest!

(elitist?)

........so he tells everyone!!

teee heee :)

Topofthestack

17th Oct 2003, 19:13

Here comes the old argument again, about how easy LL/LTCC have it and how everyone else is so hard done by/busy. I hope that those who are posting on this thread from outside the capital have put their names down for both stations, but I don't hear of a long list of names wanting postings to the London area, especially the units above!

NATS HAS a retention problems in the South-east and should be doing something about it! It takes hours for us to train/validate someone, and then with three month's notice, they're gone! We can't go on expanding airspace to deal with increasing traffic in the south-east if we don't have the staff resources and know that we're not going to be suddenly sunk as they all move off. I don't blame them for going, I would have gone myself, but we HAVE to stop the drain of our most valuable resource. If the other parts of the country don't like the solution, or are prepared to get posted down here, then tough!!

GT3

17th Oct 2003, 20:10

Best put those white gloves away

Jerricho

17th Oct 2003, 22:46

Tower only Validation??? Wrong!!!!!! Thames Radar and Special VFR do exist.......which the tower guys now have to run between TC and the Airport due to staffing problems.

And how do they get to the llz/destination......team game dude. Arrivals isn't just a case of "cleared to land"......especially when the Final Director is doing his best to stuff as many jets down the approach as possible, with a stupid wind gradient causing a major catch up on final. And a good Deps man can make or break the TMA and the airfield as well. And 2 runways......you ever seen the result of having 6 jets on final approach and having the arrival runway blocked (with the departure runway unavailable for landing due to a crane being up)???? And Ground is white-man's magic!!

I know there are people who are sitting there reading this thinking "hey, this goes on at my airfield" and I appreciate this. I get p*ssed off with this "white glove" statement. Fact is, Heathrow IS the busiest airpost in the U.K. and is very limited by airspace. And the people there are proud of this and what they do (I know I am!). Yet, there is always that element who wants to urinate on the parade!

Come on Take5, this has all ben thrashed to death before. The States and Canada recognise different units are busier than others, and pay different "facility premiums" for this. Can this be seen as pandering to inflated ego's or recognition? You try and implement this here and there would be a riot! Also (this will annoy some people, and for this make an apology now), it can a bit frustrating when you've been slogging away in EAT's for hours, then as you walk out the room you see other guys plugged in reading the paper at the console. And they're on the same or more pay than you.

Come out of the Ivory tower and see what others do!!

Come to the Ivory Tower and Heathrow Approach, and see what we do!

(The whole pay thing stinks a little.....when there are ATSA's in the room being paid more that the TMA guy or girl pointing jets at each other...ain't that right R.D.!?)

Connex

18th Oct 2003, 07:26

Jerricho -

Quote: (The whole pay thing stinks a little.....when there are ATSA's in the room being paid more that the TMA guy or girl pointing jets at each other...ain't that right R.D.!?)

And just exactly why should an ATSA not be paid more than you? Sounds like you have a bad case of the "us and them" syndrome. There might be a very valid reason why they get paid more - they may be ATSA4s, and have more years under their belt than you, for instance. The pay structure being as it is, (ladder point system etc) this might very well mean they are getting more than you at present - but we all know it won't stay that way, don't we? I also expect that if/when the issue of ATSA staff being offered financial incentives to stay at certain workplaces is raised, you will be jumping on your high horse again to tell all and sundry how unfair it all is, as ATSAs aren't "pointing jets at each other". Its pathetic and selfish statements like yours that cause more friction between ATSAs and ATCOs than anything else. Remember the words you posted earlier –“ team game, DUDE!” - that means that everybody in the team should share in the potential benefits, whatever they may be. “Come to the Ivory Tower” you say – if they have an attitude remotely like yours, then don’t bother.
:mad:

PS - I expect that you're another of the "I don't think ATSAs should hold licences like us ATCOs" brigade as well, eh? Not quite up to YOUR standard, are we?:p

StillDark&Hungry

18th Oct 2003, 11:42

But who decides who is busier than who?

At airfields that may be quite easy, but then you must bring us area guys into the equation as well. (What's good for the goose. . . . . . etc.);)

So do you then go down to validations held? Would the suggestion be to pay a Clacton controller more than a BerryHead one because he worked more planes that day? Or maybe we ought to pay the BerryHead controller more because he worked only a third as many but each one for 4 times as long?:hmm: :hmm: :hmm: :hmm:

Can see logic in the idea but can't believe implementation would be viable unless it's basic.

Jerricho

18th Oct 2003, 15:48

Connex, you are SO wrong!

I worked for many years as an ATSA (or ADSO as it was known, and while not licensed, it required a yearly competency check, and and endorsed 'certificate') in Australia, so don't go pulling the us and them sh!te. I don't detract from the vital roles of all facets of an ATC system

The pay scale was such that the top of the assistant scale was the starting point of a newly rated ATCO. And, I seem to remember something about a certain pay deal in the not to distant past where a group (not ATCO's) started an us and them. Potential benefits my a$$. The comment was in brackets at the end of my statement........as well as a reference to somebody.....or did you miss that as well. It came from a discussion between Controllers and Assistants at work the other day, obviously that didn't involve you. Read and understand the full thing before attempting to inflame a thread!

As I have made no effort to hide my identity, most people from TC (and the Tower) who read this know me! And they know my attitude toward my work and co-workers. There is only one person around here with a chip on their shoulder.......and it ain't me!

And P.S. The only thing not up to my standard is your poor attempt to hijack a thread for your own whining.

(Edited for spelling.....I should probably check these things before posting!)

250 kts

18th Oct 2003, 16:36

As I said earlier why don't we wait for the outcome of the re-structuring discussions which hopefully will substantially increase the differentials between the SE and the rest of the country. This then gives people the opportunity to earn significantly more than they will by staying put. I know this will not please everyone but a £8K difference is not going to entice anyone from the regional airports/centres into the likes of LL/TC/AC.

On the subject of ATSA/ATCO pay. It is a disgrace that any FULLY valid ATCO is paid less than an ATSA, no matter what length of service. I see junior ATCOs getting hammered every day whilst the ATSA spends 90% of the time reading a magazine. Now I know this is a function of the system at LACC but with only one overall pot of money we surely can't continue to pay these people around £40K for doing this level of work and if we do is it realistic for them to get the same pay rise as the ATCOs?

I see that there is a "common" pay claim in at present. Well what the hell does that mean? Didn't our conference vote for individual bargaining last year-after the disgraceful antics of PCS? I know this is a thorny subject but at some stage management has to be prepared to resolve the anomalies within the relative pay bands and the sooner the better if we are to solve the recruitment/retention issues.

OK-heads down for the incoming barrage.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

1261

18th Oct 2003, 18:05

250kts; however un-PC your views may be, I fully agree with you.

And before it kicks off, that's not to say that I hate ATSAs. They are a crucial part of our team, but for me the reality is no licence (and an internal check is not a licence, sorry) = no responsibility. If we put two together (god forbid) then I don't think it'll be the ATSA (however senior) who ends up in prison.

Eira

18th Oct 2003, 18:35

This argument seems to raise its ugly head every three months or so.
I tried and failed to validate Heathrow Approach, I pulled myself from training as I had no capacity left if anything went wrong.
I subsequently moved onto another ATC unit and validated with no problems. Is my job any easier , no far from it it is infact more complex but less pressured if you can understand that.
There are those who are able to deal with the sheer intensity of Heathrow and do it well and there are those of us who deal with intensely complex situations in a totally different environment and do it equally well. One ATCO is not better than the other simply we all possess different skills which are best suited at different ATC environments.

Would a substantial pay rise induce me back to Heathrow no not on your life it wouldn't. I do ATC because I really enjoy the job and Heathrow is not my cup of tea.

The problems at Heathrow are deep seated , although I am told the attitude towards trainees has improved since I was there 10 years ago it has a long way to go before it matches other units positive response towards people training.

Yes the Southeast is expensive to live in but the people working still at West Drayton and Gatwick and Farnborough to then should be recognized , and I suppose it is also pretty expensive at Stansted and Luton to live as well.
Where do we stop .

We all recognize the retention problems at Heathrow , but do we truly want people going there who are only going for the increased money .

055166k

18th Oct 2003, 23:56

1261.... ATCO1 Local Area Supervisors at Swanwick do not have a validated licence or a realistic competency checking scheme, and I am not aware of any case where the LAS has been held to account for even one of the 273 overload reports or controllers exceeding permitted hours. They get more money than I do , so let's not get anti-assistant. I'd have a good assistant in lieu of an LAS any day of the week......and save a few quid to boot!

250 kts

19th Oct 2003, 01:00

The issue is that there is only one pool of money to pay the salaries from. And if we want to improve the salaries of the staff at the sharp end then that will inevitably lead to difficult decisions being made by staff and management.

The LAS role at LACC is still being developed using previously employed ATCO1's. Despite the initial problems , training/competency of them is being improved and whatever we may think about some of them they are still in overall charge of their local areas. Maybe if the ATCO2s involved them more then they would become more pro-active. There is however a small number who are just not suited to the task and at least 2 have reverted to being ATCO2s again. Once again maybe the re-structure will help to resolve some of these issues.

I also am not anti ATSA-just realistic as to what the job is now worth. Is nearly £40k realistic-i think not! There is no doubt that there is still a need for a small number of highly skilled and therefore highly paid ATSAs but nowhere near the number that we have at present. ATCOs are being required to constantly change their Working Practices for the good of the company but I see little demand in a similar manner from PCS. Indeed there is evidence that they are actively campaigning to do some of the traditional ATCO tasks. As more sophisticated flight data processing is introduced there is no doubt that the ATSA task will whither even further so best we start to have the open debate about what the future holds now rather than it take everyone by surprise over the coming years.

Gonzo

19th Oct 2003, 01:08

We all recognize the retention problems at Heathrow , but do we truly want people going there who are only going for the increased money .

Surely wanting to go to Heathrow 'for the money' is a better state of affairs than being sent to Heathrow entirely against your wishes and thus unable/can't be bothered to motivate yourself to train?

1261

19th Oct 2003, 01:12

055166k: As I said, I'm not anti-assistant! But your point is a perfectly fair one; I'd rather have one good ATSA than our entire unit management, any day.

Connex

19th Oct 2003, 02:56

Jerricho –

I have no interest in you as an individual, nor in ATCOs in general – I do, however, feel deep regret for how ATCOs and ATSAs fail miserably to integrate within ATC, and particularly in the field of working relations. Since joining, I have never failed to be amazed by the open hostility between these two grades when it comes to matters of a financial or beneficial nature. If there’s even a remote possibility of something being evenly or fairly distributed, the ATCOs don’t want the ATSAs to have the same. And as to hijacking the thread to have a “whine” – who, apart from ATCOs, gives a to$$ about this particular thread? It’s not even of real interest to most of us – just another example of the ATCO fraternity looking to flex their financial muscle. The real ATCO interest here is not about returning/relocating ATCOs receiving incentive payments – it’s all about how the rest of you can get on the bandwagon (under the guise of “loyalty” payments – what tosh!) I don’t care one way or the other about your payments – whatever the outcome, you lot will never be satisfied.

As for your remark about ATSA/ATCO pay - I just happened to be browsing, and after reading your post, I responded to something written by yourself with which I disagree. No apologies – and I will continue to respond when I see such things in the future.

As with the ATCO issue, I am told that there is a serious problem with ATSA staffing at EGLL. Are any you, or any other ATCOs concerned about this? No, I guess not, and especially when the issue of money comes to the fore. As with everything – pay agreements, terms and conditions, alleged (£15k) incentive payments(!) - and particularly when hard cash is involved - the ATCOs, as always, are only concerned about one thing - themselves.

Arkady

19th Oct 2003, 03:04

Although the ATSA - ATCO debate is a bit off topic some of the above needs addressing.

ATCOs and ATSAs do different jobs, have different responsibilities and are represented to management by different Unions. There is no reason to link ATCO and ATSA pay.

Jerricho’s example from Australia is illuminating if a little misleading. ADSOs (or FDOs as they were originally called) were recruited to take over an ATCO task. Controllers used to do all of the Flight Data at the AACCs and when the late 80's retirement bulge went through, the CAA was left with plenty of staff to promote to en-route positions but not enough staff to replace them as Flight Datas. The answer was to recruit assistants locally, their pay scale being incorporated below that of an ATCO. The restructuring of the early Nineties aside, ADSOs were encouraged to apply to the college in Melbourne to train as ATCOs, it was seen as a natural step. Their pay scale was the first rung on the ladder if they wanted to pursue a career as a controller. If they were happy to remain an assistant they remained below ATCOs on the pay scale.

In the UK this relationship has never existed. ATCOs and ATSAs have separate career structures and pay scales to match. NATS has chosen, in effect, to encourage the career assistant rather than progression from the wings to the college.

IMHO, all ATCOs should be recruited from the ranks of ATSAs, but the benefit of the NATS approach is the quality of the majority of assistants. Making a career of being an assistant has meant a wealth of experience always available to the ATCO. In addition, the quality has remained high because of the financial rewards. Just look at the number of ex-cadets and failed ATCOs who have remained in ATC as a result.

While some junior ATCOs may see inequality of pay they ignore the inequality of opportunity between the two jobs. Why should we criticise our colleagues’ pay when we do little or nothing to support their grievances over job security, career progression and demarcation? Why should we have any say in their pay affairs at all? They do a different job and are entitled to what ever remuneration they can get for themselves.

DC10RealMan

19th Oct 2003, 03:47

Oh No, here we go again!!!. Periodically the subject of ATCO/ATSA pay comes up and the respective worth. I would like to point out that on certain positions particularly in the early hours I see ATCOs reading magazines and books whilst ATSAs are working their butts off!!. So what does that prove?. A fair proportion of our salaries are made up of monies payable for working at Christmas and the middle of the night should ATCOs get paid more for that because they are ATCOs?. I know pilots and licensed engineers who work more unsocial hours and longer hours that most ATCOs and for less money, I consider that to be unfair!!! and not to mention NHS staff. I think that it is about time we as a GROUP OF EMPLOYEES thank our lucky stars that we all get well paid for a job that we enjoy, we have travel concessions, good pension, and other benefits not available to most people and stop this bickering about what benefits our colleagues get. Guys, Why dont you all get a life and get upset about important matters!!. Sorry to sound like a hippy but it is from the heart.

Gonzo

19th Oct 2003, 05:43

Ooops, thread drift!

If ATCO pay goes up substantially, locally at Heathrow, and ATSA pay doesn't, does that not give PCS a great starting position for the next pay round?

250 kts

19th Oct 2003, 16:47

DC10-it proves that there is room for a small number of very highly skilled and therefore highly paid ATSAs within the organisation. I won't go into the argument about how our salaries compare with other industries but we need to be realistic and ask is it still reasonable for an ATSA at LACC to continue to get the same pay rises as other groups within the organisation?

The actions of PCS regarding pay 18 months ago were nothing short of disgraceful. They sat on the ATCO coat-tails and got the same rise despite the membership voting to accept a lower figure. Yes-i know management were weak and sent out the wrong signals. This is just the reason that the ATCOs voted to be represented separately at this years' pay round.

Gonzo-no why should it? They are a different group of staff represented by a different union. They showed last year that they are not prepared to fight for what they want and this is why the relations between the unions has deteriorated.

We have to remeber that there is only one pot of gold and if we are to target it where it is needed most then there has to be a realisation that some groups are being vastly over paid for the tasks which they now perform.

I see and hear everyday that ATCOs need to change their Working practices in order to improve the customer service-I don't see any major changes being asked or offered of the ATSAs. They have had it really good for the last 20 years or so but now maybe the gravy train is coming to the end of the line.

Jerricho

19th Oct 2003, 17:06

who, apart from ATCOs, gives a to$$ about this particular thread?

Then, isn't it below you to even grace us with your thoughts? Thought not.......just an emotional response then (strange for not giving a toss). Sorry, I'm just being petty now.

And Arkaday, thanks for the better explanation! If I had tried, no body would have understood what the hell I was on about!

(Don't you just love when this topic comes up? It's like throwing a chook into a pool of crocs!)

Arkady

19th Oct 2003, 18:10

250

“The actions of PCS regarding pay 18 months ago were nothing short of disgraceful. They sat on the ATCO coat-tails and got the same rise despite the membership voting to accept a lower figure.”

No they did not. PCS do not have as strong a bargaining position as Prospect and the deal offered to the ATSAs was a fair one. PCS recommended the deal on the table because it was a good deal and management said that there was no more money. The ATCOs voted no and more money appeared. Management LIED. Again. It would have been disgraceful if PCS had allowed management to lie to them and go unpunished. PCS got more than they could have hoped for because of management ineptitude and no other reason.

“We have to remeber (sic) that there is only one pot of gold and if we are to target it where it is needed most then there has to be a realisation that some groups are being vastly over paid for the tasks which they now perform.”

There is only one “pot of gold” but wouldn’t it be more productive to increase the size of the pot rather than fight to grab the biggest share? That worked 18 months ago.

“…we need to be realistic and ask is it still reasonable for an ATSA at LACC to continue to get the same pay rises as other groups within the organisation?”

Or we could be constructive, increase the role and responsibilities of the sector ATSAs to match your perception of their financial worth and in the process make our jobs easier and theirs more secure.

“They have had it really good for the last 20 years or so but now maybe the gravy train is coming to the end of the line.”

Maybe, but it is not our place to derail it.

Jerricho

19th Oct 2003, 19:28

WARNING: Over-simplified narrow minded comment coming!

Along the lines of 1261's little gem, ATSA forgets to put strip out vs ATCO forgets to turn a jet.

Arkady

19th Oct 2003, 20:26

ATCO climbs jet into another because ATSA forgets to put the strip out.

We could go on like this all day, but lets not.

Eira

19th Oct 2003, 20:59

As this now seems to have delved into a slanging match between ATCOs and ATSAs I will add my tupenneth worth.

It is about time the standardisation of ATSA training was brought in.

I work with two distinct groups of ATSAs and there are no shades of grey with them, there are those who are truly excellent at their job and are a pleasure to work with and are worth every penny they are paid. Then there are those who quite frankly are diabolically bad and working alongside then means that I end up doing both their job and mine and despite numerous complaints little or nothing can be done about them. PCS should be looking to raise ATSAs profile by bringing in standards of training to ensure that the minority do not ruin it for the vast majority who do a superb job and do not get the recognition that they should. With the poor minority removed maybe then the profile and the good work of our ATSA staff may be properly recognised.

tigtog

19th Oct 2003, 23:43

In relation to the whole ATSA / ATCO debate I fully agree with the issue that NO Atsa anywhere within NATS should be paid more than ANY validated controller at their respective units.

ATSA's go on and on about about Controllers having a "them and us culture" when really it is the Assistants who all have the chipped shoulders!!!

Go and spend 18 months of hell at the college and then you can all talk about being on an equal par! ( Applications are welcome from everyone by the way !!)

At the end of the day , in my experience, there is nothing that an ATSA can do that a controller couldn't do anyway.

Sorry if this causes a barrage of complaints !!

DC10RealMan

20th Oct 2003, 02:21

This thread has not just gone off at a tangent but completely changed character to a different subject, and a very pathetic and banal one at that. I find that all this posturing and perceived one upmanship about who is more important than whom embarrassing from a supposedly "professional" group of people.
I would also like to make this observation though, there are a group of predominately younger controllers who are on a major ego trip and perceive themselves to be "skygods" and who belittle anyone who is not "one of them". I am always amazed that some of them have wives/partners and even children as I have always found them to be so much in love with themselves that they even find time for other people. The management and NATS culture encourages them in this belief, however in the not too distant future when technology makes them redundant they will find themselves dismissed without a moments hesitation by NATS managemment as they find out that they are just employees like the rest of us.

Arkady

20th Oct 2003, 04:22

tigtog

“In relation to the whole ATSA / ATCO debate I fully agree with the issue that NO Atsa anywhere within NATS should be paid more than ANY validated controller at their respective units.”

For the love of Mike, why? A newly valid controller has cost NATS hundreds of thousands of pounds to train and has years to go before they’ve worked off that debt. An ATSA of similar length with the company will have long paid back the cost of his or hers training and have actually been earning their salary.

”ATSA's go on and on about about Controllers having a "them and us culture" when really it is the Assistants who all have the chipped shoulders!!!”

Read the above posts. There has been no suggestion by the ATSAs that ATCOs
(a) should have their pay dramatically reduced
(b) have no responsibility
(c) should lose their jobs
I think the ATSAs have been pretty restrained in this debate; even Connex has been civil if not always logical.

”Go and spend 18 months of hell at the college and then you can all talk about being on an equal par!”

A lot of ATSAs did. Is somebody your inferior because they failed at the college, failed to validate, removed themselves from training or lost their license? Be careful young man, there but for the grace of god….

“( Applications are welcome from everyone by the way !!)”

No they are not. NATS has made promotion from ATSA to ATCO diabolically difficult in the past and still refuses to take applications from temporary staff.

”At the end of the day , in my experience, there is nothing that an ATSA can do that a controller couldn't do anyway.”

At the end of the day, your experience must be at the worlds smallest unit, or you have no idea of what the people around you are doing.

”Sorry if this causes a barrage of complaints !!”

I doubt it.

Jerricho

20th Oct 2003, 16:27

I'm goning to make a formal apology for starting the fanning of the flames on the ATCO vs ATSA pay. As Ark correctly points out, we could argue all day and start getting very personal.

And, I still stand by the point that as controllers (and I guess this is true of human nature) we don't like to see others getting something we're not (and believe we should be getting). However, IMHO, if you were to breakdown areas of responsibility a controller has while driving a sector and equate it to the salary they recieve, if the same analysis is applied to assistant salaries, this is where the beef lies. It's not a personal attack, or (for most of us I think) a "you're second rate employees to us sky-gods".

I can see from Tig's post the chances are he/she has never actually worked as an assistant. It is bloody hard work, and particularly on a night shift during a shut-down, they work their @sses off.

But, as usual, people are just going to p!ss and moan about the whole pay system and how much it annoys them.

(Of course, some people are just here to get a rise out of people!)

Arkady

20th Oct 2003, 17:21

Jerricho

I suspect that your sentiments reflect most ATCO opinions.

“However, IMHO, if you were to breakdown areas of responsibility a controller has while driving a sector and equate it to the salary they recieve, if the same analysis is applied to assistant salaries, this is where the beef lies.”

This is a perfectly reasonable statement and I cannot imagine any assistant, even Connex, would disagree, but the key word is the third one – IF.

IF you analyse pay in this way then it is reasonable, but lets be constructive in our solution. IF ATSAs don’t have enough responsibilities then lets give them more responsibilities, rather than less pay. IF we compare all salaries in terms of responsibility alone then there are far greater inequalities out there and we ATCOs come out of it pretty poorly.

What IF we don’t compare salaries that way? What IF we compared the salaries in terms of retaining quality staff in regions with a high cost of living? The ATSA pay scale is appropriate in this respect. Airport security staff are very poorly paid, the turn over in the industry reflects this and the quality of their work is often called into question. Would we want a similar turn over in our support staff? You know better than anyone, IF ATCO salaries were structured to encourage retention of staff at key units then a lot of us would be in for big pay rises (which is my first contribution to this debate that is “on thread”!!).

We complain about ATSA pay because it comes out of our pay pool, the less we give them the more there is for us (in theory). Don’t forget, that is exactly the argument that created the T&D scale, which has shafted a whole generation of NATS controllers. What IF we had viewed payscales differently then?

Jerricho

20th Oct 2003, 17:51

I guess you're right Ark. Although, I don't think I ever implied a reduction in assistant pay (tee-hee.....pay rise you say?). Back to the original issue, this is has turned into a circular argument regarding increased pay as incentive for our "Heathrow's" or retaining of staff who are treking across the pond, and exactly who should get what (as it always does).

And I guess I was being a little narrow minded reference the roles and responsibilities of one's job: you can apply this to any job. Airport security screeners are an excellent example. As I'm sure other examples can be provided. As for widening the responsibilities of assistants......hell yeah! I'm an advocate of the progression form assistant (or as a Blippy) to controller (if that is one's desire). As well as an knowledge base to start controller training from, people like Tig (sorry dude....you asked for it!) wouldn't see the need for little "I've paid my dues in the college, what about you?" attitude.

As an aside, I am somewhat amazed the flag at the other end of the spectrum hasn't been lit yet: the topic of 'overpaid' managers hasn't reared it's ugly head........let's stop that there.

Arkady

20th Oct 2003, 18:20

No fun bagging over paid managers as no one is going to come on here to defend them.

Connex

21st Oct 2003, 03:25

Eira –

May I suggest you read (re-read?) the thread on ATSA Licensing – might be relevant to your thoughts on ATSA standardisation. I also agree with your thoughts on this issue, and see the PCS proposal of licensing/COC as being the method by which to achieve this.

DC10RM –

Apologies for bringing the ATSA/ATCO debate into this thread. It was not my intention to resurrect this topic, or to join in this thread at this juncture. However, the original topic under discussion here is, at this time, indirectly relevant to ATSAs too. There is difficulty at some Units in retaining ATSAs, and I also understand that there are difficulties in getting experienced ATSAs to apply to go to certain Units (EGLL, for instance). If this is the case, then why cannot the (alleged) incentive payment scheme be applied here as well? If it is going to actually happen, (even though I disagree with it) then this should not be the sole prerogative of the ATCO grades. As for “extending” the scheme (ie – everybody else getting in on the action), I expect the “loyalty payment” line of thinking to be the ATCOs next proposal – don’t call it ‘incentive’ – call it ‘loyalty’ – and then (obviously) they are all entitled to it! So, again, if that’s turns out to be the ATCO way of securing more money, then it too can be applied to ATSAs.

Tigtog –

“them and us culture” – it exists, believe me!! When you have spent as long on the receiving end of it as I, and many of my colleagues have, then you will understand why this issue is so contentious. As for your remark about ATCOs doing everything ATSAs can – Bu****it! Just as we cannot fully understand your tasks unless trained to do them, you cannot understand ours (at least not to an acceptable standard). Only somebody who is truly ignorant on ATSA issues/functions would suggest such a thing.

Arkady –

Its actually quite encouraging to read a post that supports the ATSA position (for once!) My apologies for not being more “logical” – please PM me if you want clarification on anything I have posted. Your points about the Prospect/PCS pay deal debacle are, as I remember, an accurate and fair resume of what took place. I would possibly take issue with one statement, assuming I have interpreted it in the way you meant:

Quote: “Just look at the number of ex-cadets and failed ATCOs who have remained in ATC as a result”

If your implication is that ex-cadets and failed ATCOs make good ATSAs, then, in general, I would disagree. As an ATSA training mentor, I have found these persons extremely indifferent to ATSAs and their role within ATC. They often view redeployment to ATSA duties as ‘demotion’, and no sooner than another job becomes available – they’re off. Can’t blame them – they want to be Controllers, - but they don’t make good ATSAs!

250kts –

Your comments about the PCS position were way off track. Also, your comments about changes to ATSA working practices are also inaccurate. ATCOs are not currently faced with the potential of redundancy – this is not the case for ATSAs. At certain Units, modernisation will result in big changes for ATSAs (and eventual redundancy for some), - those that remain will certainly not be riding the same “gravy train” you refer to. I would expect the next WP negotiations/agreement to reflect the beginning of these changes.

To everyone else –

My personal view is as follows – although we are all happy to accept additions to our salary from whatever source, the concept of ‘incentive payments’ is devisive and discriminatory, whether it applies to ATCOs, ATSAs or whoever. It should not be implemented, and furthermore, it should not be amended to apply to any concept of ‘loyalty payment’. All that will result is the continual argument between who received it, who didn’t, and how much we all did/didn’t receive. We are all salaried well enough as it is, especially compared to the majority of the aviation community. When the annual pay talks begin again, our Unions should endeavour to jointly negotiate a favourable and acceptable across-the-board percentage pay rise for all staff, irrespective of grade/title/job. That way, nobody can argue that they lost out, or that, as with the last agreement (!), the ATCO ‘bargaining’ position was stronger.

Jerricho

21st Oct 2003, 03:45

Not a bad response for somebody who didn't give a toss.........

As for your remark about ATCOs doing everything ATSAs can – Bu****it! Just as we cannot fully understand your tasks unless trained to do them, you cannot understand ours (at least not to an acceptable standard).

Are we forgetting the wings training (particularly) on initial posting pre TVC? I was rostered for a couple of cycles before mine so others could go on leave, so leave that cr@p out of it!

Gonzo

21st Oct 2003, 04:40

There is difficulty at some Units in retaining ATSAs, and I also understand that there are difficulties in getting experienced ATSAs to apply to go to certain Units (EGLL, for instance). If this is the case, then why cannot the (alleged) incentive payment scheme be applied here as well? If it is going to actually happen, (even though I disagree with it) then this should not be the sole prerogative of the ATCO grades.

My personal view is as follows – although we are all happy to accept additions to our salary from whatever source, the concept of ‘incentive payments’ is devisive and discriminatory, whether it applies to ATCOs, ATSAs or whoever. It should not be implemented

Playing devil's advocate here, how would you propose attracting high quality, experienced ATCOs and ATSAs to Heathrow Tower? (As an aside, and perhaps indicitive of Heathrow's problem, I've been valid for just just over three years, and I guess I'm just about half way up the 'seniority list'.....I'd be above that if a handful of newly valid controllers hadn't left in the last few years....I'm shortly going to start training as a tower supervisor, and am Deputy Watch Training Officer. The more people we get in from the college, the more 'bottom heavy' the unit becomes. That's why we need to attract previously valid, experienced ATCOs) Increasing Heathrow local pay would provide a 'Pull factor' that would bring results quickly. Yes, it would be discriminatory, but how else could we make Heathrow attractive to those who have been valid at other airports for 5-10 years where the difference in salary is not enough at present to compensate for the decrease in quality of life and increase of cost of living?

Razors Edge

21st Oct 2003, 06:08

:suspect: I don't understand what your problem with this is? Serco have been paying controllers different wages at different units, indeed at the the same units even, for years - it's called divide and rule:mad:

On a more serious note though, isn't this just market forces at work - ie the market pays what it can get away with, and if it can't then it has to pay more?:{

Connex

21st Oct 2003, 07:16

Gonzo –

Quote: “Yes, it would be discriminatory, but how else could we make Heathrow attractive to those who have been valid at other airports for 5-10 years where the difference in salary is not enough at present to compensate for the decrease in quality of life and increase of cost of living?”

The reason staff are refusing to come/stay at EGLL is because the NATS grapevine portrays EGLL as a legendary sh**hole for ATCOs and ATSAs alike. I cannot remember the last time I heard a truly favourable report on the place from a serving staff member. Usual complaints which filter down -virtually no promotional prospects for the ATSAs; ATCOs who constantly gripe about what they have or haven’t got; how hard they have to work compared to the rest of the world; never a day going by without somebody announcing that they wished they were working ‘somewhere else’, and all backed up by a Management regime and policy trusted by nobody. EGLL must put its own house in order before you stand any chance of attracting “experienced” personnel. Once that is achieved, (and its going to be extremely difficult) and EGLL has restored its “reputation”, such staff may be keener to move there anyway, possibly on EGLL’s own merits, and not solely because of financial incentives of the type being discussed here. You will not resolve this level of apathy with a pay rise – it will only appease in the short term, and then its back to square one. Throwing money at people has always been the quick/easy way to resolve issues – won’t work here unless the money is thrown at everybody – and there’s probably not enough to go around.

You also mentioned ATSAs in the context of attracting staff/payments. The reasons you give for ATCOs to receive payments refer just as equally to ATSAs – at present I understand that ATSAs are not in the frame for any such payments – that is discriminatory! And one question for you – just exactly what is the “decrease in quality of life” experienced by EGLL ATC staff? Compared to others, given your pay (plus your AAVAs!!) I would have thought most ordinary EGLL airport staff would be quite content with their quality of life!

Gonzo

21st Oct 2003, 15:40

You also mentioned ATSAs in the context of attracting staff/payments. The reasons you give for ATCOs to receive payments refer just as equally to ATSAs – at present I understand that ATSAs are not in the frame for any such payments – that is discriminatory!

Is that what PCS say? Has anyone put any pressure on them?

I think we'd all agree that Heathrow needs to improve as a unit, I think it has done in the last few years, immeasureably. However, that's going to take time, and that's something we don't have. We need something done both short and long term. Looking at ATCO manpower specifically, it's been said that if the next five years see the same number of validations, resignations, retirements, postings out etc as the last five years, then in summer 2008 we'll be 17 ATCOs short, against a complement of 60.

Wonder what the airlines would say to that, considering all the delays earlier this summer down to us were because we were 4 or 5 short on the unit?

And one question for you – just exactly what is the “decrease in quality of life” experienced by EGLL ATC staff? Compared to others, given your pay (plus your AAVAs!!) I would have thought most ordinary EGLL airport staff would be quite content with their quality of life!

Ok, maybe I should have said 'perceived' decrease in quality of life, especially when you're used to living in quieter, rural areas of Northern England, Scotland Wales etc. It most certainly is a very different quality of life.

Don't get me started on AAVAs. Overtime is perhaps one reason why we're short of ATSAs at the moment. I think the only beneficial thing to come out of AAVAs is the cost. Bear with me, but it costs 500 a shift, that's 1000 a day. that's 360,000 a year. Now, five ATCOs aren't going to cost that much, so maybe it will encourage the beancounters to get Heathrow to do something.

Throwing money at people has always been the quick/easy way to resolve issues – won’t work here unless the money is thrown at everybody – and there’s probably not enough to go around.

So, for argument's sake, how would both Heathrow and Manchester (say) getting the same pay rise encourage Manchester ATCOs to come to Heathrow?

Findo

21st Oct 2003, 17:15

There are rumours flying around NATS about the company devising a scheme at the moment where controllers are going to be offered lump sums to go and work at Heathrow Tower ?

It's also rumoured that some controllers already there are going to be offered some sort of retention bonus to stay ?

Does anyone know, FOR FACT(please!!), if this is true ?

Did anyone answer the question with a fact ? :confused:

DC10RealMan

21st Oct 2003, 19:30

I worked on D Watch at LHR from 1983 until about 1994 (ish) and I lived in London from 1981 until 2001, I am now based at Swanwick and living in rural Hampshire. NATS could give me a 100% increase in salary and I still would not return to Heathrow. The reason is not financial, but quality of life. Working at LHR and living in London is just awful compared to the rest of the country.

1261

21st Oct 2003, 21:44

Why would Manchester controllers ever want to move to Heathrow??

GT3

21st Oct 2003, 22:05

LHR and living in London is just awful compared to the rest of the country.

Why would Manchester controllers ever want to move to Heathrow??

Jerricho

21st Oct 2003, 23:24

On a more serious note though, isn't this just market forces at work - ie the market pays what it can get away with, and if it can't then it has to pay more?

In a round about way, RE leads us back towards out argument that at the moment there NATS controllers (from all units!) who are looking to places elsewhere. I did hear a rumour on the street that NATS were a little peeved about "training people for other ATS providers". With current market forces, if people pecieve their skills will attain them a better salary/standard of living else where, of course they're going to grab the opportunity with both hands! And NATS is doing nothing to try and stem the flow.

Cuddles

22nd Oct 2003, 00:46

I thought controllers were paid to go to EGLL. If they're doing it for nothing, then they want their heads looked at.

Findo

22nd Oct 2003, 05:23

DC10 ATCO

Can I quote you as a Swanwick ATCO when we get round to talking about the latest station grading ideas ?;);)

I worked on D Watch at LHR from 1983 until about 1994 (ish) and I lived in London from 1981 until 2001, I am now based at Swanwick and living in rural Hampshire. NATS could give me a 100% increase in salary and I still would not return to Heathrow. The reason is not financial, but quality of life. Working at LHR and living in London is just awful compared to the rest of the country

Connex

22nd Oct 2003, 05:25

Gonzo –

The NATS grapevine has supplied me with a little information today. I am informed that EGLL has one, possibly two, ATCOs who may have received incentive payments to return to EGLL after an extended absence. The figure quoted to me was £15000; breakdown - £10000 as payment towards housing costs, plus £5000 as an interest-free loan (?!) towards the purchase of transportation. This information is supposedly the subject of much speculation amongst your colleagues, but the ATCOs concerned are staying tight-lipped about it. (I wonder why?!!) There has been no official announcement of this payment by either the Unions (including PCS) or the local Management. The speculation is leaning towards the conclusion that this was a personal deal between the ATCOs concerned and the Unit Management, and not the first implementations of a new policy. I cannot believe that you, an EGLL ATCO, would not have heard all of this; therefore, if the above information is incorrect, perhaps you could put the record straight for us all?

Also, I am informed that many of your colleagues do not actually live in the vicinity of EGLL, nor in London, but much further afield. Therefore, I would argue that these long-distance travellers are not deserving of any future ‘compensation’ payments for working at EGLL, as they are receiving your so-called better “quality of living” already! All they will be doing is jumping on the cash bandwagon, as I have already stated. If you are one of these out-of-townies, be thankful that you have a job and a salary which allows you the luxury of such a choice. The salary you all receive at present, including your AAVA’s (!), is far better than most airport workers can ever expect to earn, and I certainly wouldn’t expect your non-ATCO co-workers to offer their support in your claim for any additional money – especially if it was an ATCO-only arrangement. ATCOs run the risk of ending up being as popular as a turd in a swimming pool with their colleagues if this incessant demand for ATCO-only everything and anything continues – there really are equally, and possibly more deserving cases out there than just yourselves.

Manchester ATCOs to EGLL? After seeing 1261’s comment, and coupled with the “EGLL grapevine report” in my previous post – I don’t think you’re likely to see a rush of EGCC applications just yet (nor from anywhere else, for that matter). EGLL must put its in-house affairs in order first.

I did like your maths regarding the AAVA/5 new ATCOs comparison – very logical, but sensible forward planning by your Management a few years back may have brought your staff numbers up to strength without the need for AAVAs, or incentive payments. Also, if the ATCOs do turn up at the expense of the AAVAs – I wouldn’t publicise the fact too loudly that it may have been your idea - some of your colleagues will not thank you for the resultant pay cut!
:ok:

1261

22nd Oct 2003, 16:09

Can't anyone in NATS apply for an interest-free car loan as part of the relocation deal?

Jerricho

22nd Oct 2003, 20:03

The salary you all receive at present, including your AAVA’s (!), is far better than most airport workers can ever expect to earn,

Hang on Connex. Most airport workers aren't clearing jets to take off or land. I think we've been here already.......I'm sure ATSA's at airports get paid more than most as well. Once again, excrement!

Gonzo

22nd Oct 2003, 20:58

The NATS grapevine has supplied me with a little information today.........

It's one, AFAIK, and why shouldn't he/she stay tight lipped about it? Someone joining the company from outside is free to negotiate his/her own pay, and any incentives on top he'she can get. Fair play, if that was what was agreed, then I can't believe any of us would begrudge it. I've heard those figures quoted, they were passed on to me by a local union rep who said that Local Union had been made aware of this by unit management.
All I know is that I was in the office the next day, along with four of my colleagues, asking when I was getting paid my 15k, and because I'd stayed, I'd be wanting more. Heathrow Prospect locally don't want to do anything because Central Union wouldn't agree to it, and Management don't want to do anything at the moment because of the National Pay and WP negotiations going on now.

We made it clear to management that giving such sums to those who left a few years ago and then came back does not do anything for loyalty, and that if something isn't done to redress that soon then a lot more of us will be thinking about leaving. We got our point across.

be thankful that you have a job and a salary which allows you the luxury of such a choice. The salary you all receive at present, including your AAVA’s (!), is far better than most airport workers can ever expect to earn,

Ah yes, I was expecting this to come out at some stage. Tell you what, why don't we all agree as ATCOs, ATSAs, ATCEs etc to a pay freeze until the customer assistant in Terminal 2 WH Smiths earns the same, and then we can all feel really happy with our alturistic ideals! :rolleyes:
So are you really saying that the fact that we are well-paid when compared to other airport workers is a reason not to increase pay to aid recruitment and retention.

and I certainly wouldn’t expect your non-ATCO co-workers to offer their support in your claim for any additional money – especially if it was an ATCO-only arrangement. ATCOs run the risk of ending up being as popular as a turd in a swimming pool with their colleagues if this incessant demand for ATCO-only everything and anything continues – there really are equally, and possibly more deserving cases out there than just yourselves.

I wouldn't expect any non-ATCOs to give us support. It would be nice, but I certainly wouldn't expect it. There you go generalising again. If there was another group, ATSAs, ATCEs, whoever, who could point out that something needed to be done urgently to increase recuitment or retention, and that entailed a pay increase, why the hell wouldn't I support that? After all an overworked, tired ATSA or ATCE can be just as much a liability as an overworked, tired ATCO. And the more tired and overworked we all are, the less we're able to spot each other's mistakes.

Manchester ATCOs to EGLL? After seeing 1261’s comment, and coupled with the “EGLL grapevine report” in my previous post – I don’t think you’re likely to see a rush of EGCC applications just yet (nor from anywhere else, for that matter).

Which is exactly the point I'm trying to make!

Also, if the ATCOs do turn up at the expense of the AAVAs – I wouldn’t publicise the fact too loudly that it may have been your idea - some of your colleagues will not thank you for the resultant pay cut!

Well, if anyone does feel hard done by if we ever get enough staff for AAVA to go, then I'm sorry, but they're imbeciles.

Razor's Edge is correct. There are market forces at work, our skills can be taken elsewhere, and it takes time to give us those skills. Supply and demand. There is a going rate for a 'Heathrow ATCO', and most of us feel as if we aren't getting near that. That is not going to induce people to stay, or to move in from elsewhere.

Jerricho

22nd Oct 2003, 21:06

Gonze.....by far and away the most sense I have ever heard from you! I take back some of the things I have said about you.

Altruistic, great word.

Gonzo

22nd Oct 2003, 21:18

Oh, fiddlesticks. A compliment from him. :{

There goes my credibility.

GT3

22nd Oct 2003, 23:51

Heathrow Prospect locally don't want to do anything

Sorry not true, apart from that the rest was ok

Gonzo

23rd Oct 2003, 00:17

GT3, check your PMs.

Connex

23rd Oct 2003, 06:52

Gonzo –

Quote:

“Fair play, if that was what was agreed, then I can't believe any of us would begrudge it.”

Followed by –

“We made it clear to management that giving such sums to those who left a few years ago and then came back does not do anything for loyalty, and that if something isn't done to redress that soon then a lot more of us will be thinking about leaving. We got our point across.”

Ah yes, of course, silly me - you don’t begrudge it! Yes you bl**dy well do!! You have seen somebody else get something, and you have decided that not only do you want it, but you want more than them as well. Greed – plain and simple. In ATCO-speak, ‘loyalty’ means loyalty to the monthly pay packet, not to the Unit/Company or anything/anybody else. If its possible, (as with employees in all professions) you will go to wherever the best pay packet is to be found. Therefore, your argument for extra renumeration for working at EGLL based on ‘loyalty’ is groundless. What you intend doing here is exploiting the Company weakness. They have not done a good job of managing the EGLL ATCO infrastructure over the last 10 years, and now find themselves in a difficult situation. Problem is, when the ATCOs decide to do something, they do not think (or care) about the knock-on effects their actions have on the rest of the workforce, as long as they get what they want.

Quote:
“So are you really saying that the fact that we are well-paid when compared to other airport workers is a reason not to increase pay to aid recruitment and retention.”

No I am not – what I am saying is your argument for additional payment is not based on “aid to recruitment and retention” – it’s based on greed.

Quote:
“There are market forces at work, our skills can be taken elsewhere, and it takes time to give us those skills. Supply and demand. There is a going rate for a 'Heathrow ATCO', and most of us feel as if we aren't getting near that. That is not going to induce people to stay, or to move in from elsewhere.”

As for a “going rate” for an EGLL ATCO – that was/is the agreed salary, plus annual pay rises/increments – at least it was until the issue of this ‘payment’ came to the fore – now you see this as an opportunity to screw a bit more for yourselves from the coffers. If you didn’t begrudge your fellow returning ATCO his £15k, then why are you all banging on about it now at EGLL, and demanding the £15k and more besides? Loyalty, decrease in quality of life etc etc – all horsesh*t. These reasons have nothing to do with it, and never have done. This is simply an opportunity for you to make a quick buck by intimidation – you know full well that the Company cannot/will not show you the door, because of the mess they have got themselves in – and you intend as a group to take full advantage of it. Also, if the Company was brave enough to say ‘no’ to your demands, I certainly would not expect to see a mass exodus of ATCOs from EGLL – not even a token few.

Quote:
“If there was another group, ATSAs, ATCEs, whoever, who could point out that something needed to be done urgently to increase recruitment or retention, and that entailed a pay increase, why the hell wouldn't I support that?”

Answer: You may very well support it as an individual – as a group, ATCOs would never officially support an ATSA/ATCE claim for anything – never have done – never will.

Gonzo

23rd Oct 2003, 17:16

You know Connex, I was going to keep going with this discussion, but on reading your post a second time. I've just decided that frankly it's not worth it.

Jerricho

23rd Oct 2003, 17:30

Well, this will probably be the end of this, until in a couple of weeks time the topic will be introduced in another way, and we will all come oozing out of the wood work and start heaping cr@p on another.

I look forward to it!

(Did the original question get an answer?)

take5

23rd Oct 2003, 17:54

Jerricho

I appreciate that Heathrow is busy, but complex??

Yes Ground is probably white mans magic - I certainly would not like to have to do it, though the challenge would be interesting.

As for my qoute about tower only validations, you replied that tower controllers now have to commute to West Drayton to carry out the duties of Thames Radar.

Can you tell me how many people hold both validations?? Not that high a percentage I would assume, as being an area controller at TC, most of the people I meet who sit in the far corner are Thames Radar /SVFR only qualified.

I am not disputing that LL is the busiest airport in the UK and indeed the busiest passenger airport in the world, but other airports make up for lack of traffic with complexity. The same as other Radar units do compared to TC no doubt.

Pay for number of movements is very easy to figure out - and LL would come out near the top, along with Clacton sector in AC and a few other south/south-east sectors, but complexity is a very subjective and difficult commodity to value.

I stand by my earlier statment that students who go to LL know what they are letting themselves in for; I would happily take more money to do my job but at the same time realise that despite the extortionate cost of housing etc down here, pay supplements above what we already receive may be difficult to justify.

Thinking back to my dim and distant days at CATC, the majority of people wanted to go to airports but, due to numbers required, most ended up in area units - I believe the same criteria still applies - so those who get airports are lucky in the first place and those who choose/get chosen to work at the premier UK airport (no pun) are even luckier, despite the traffic volume.

Heathrow is known to be busy and at times and in certain positions, very complex, so students who spend 18 months at the college cannot use the excuse that they do not know what to expect and therefore deserve more money.

I fully respect the skills of my fellow controllers both in the tower a LL and at Thames/SVFR (despite the cushy hours!) but also respect what other controllers have to do. I understand that Teeside is or has been looking for controllers recently - that to my mind would be a very different, but equally imposing challenge, due to the airspace and types of aircraft encountered.

Anyone completing a training course at CATC should be able to validate at any NATS unit applicable to thier specialisation (airports/area) on leaving the college - though in reality that is not always the case. As such we should respect all controllers abilities for what they achieve in increasingly busier times.;)

Gonzo

23rd Oct 2003, 17:55

and start heaping cr@p on another.

Don't we do that anyway, Jer?

Hey, word is you're over tomorrow?

Connex

24th Oct 2003, 06:39

Gonzo -

Same thought here when I read yours - we are never going to agree on this, so, until the next time.....

Jerricho

24th Oct 2003, 16:13

Take5,

I appreciate that Heathrow is busy, but complex??

Heathrow is known to be busy and at times and in certain positions, very complex

Which is it then? When the sausage factory is running 5-10 mins holding, nice gentle wind from the south-west, things aren't complex. However, with the restrictions on airspace and the proximity of KK, GW, SS, WU etc, with the pure number of jets in that tiny bit of airspace, when it goes wrong, it goes very wrong! You mention you're a TC controller: you must have seen this yourself. We get it around the ears, go into EAT's, and you poor TMA guys start holding out, working your collectives off! Standing agreements get suspended, deps don't get climb......

And reference you "assumption" about Thames/Special, while the percentage isn't high, it's more than just 1 or 2. Coupled with the fact there have been days when guys have turned up at TC for a couple of hourse, then have had to jump in their car and drive over to the tower! At 1800, I'm sure that would be great fun!

I don't think at any stage here there had been a question of lack of respect for other units and their difficulties/complexity. You yourself have used the term "premier" for Heathrow, perhaps (like US/Canada) recognition for this isn't such a bad thing! (And yes, CLN as well on the area side of things). But, then we get back to the "somebody getting something we're not!" argument.

Anyone completing a training course at CATC should be able to validate at any NATS unit applicable to thier specialisation (airports/area) on leaving the college - though in reality that is not always the case.

You've kinda screwed your own argument here. Conversely, there are people who bomb the college who may have made excellent controllers, but couldn't recite the Part 1 word for word!

P.S. Gonzo - you heard right!