Sinister development/witchhunt??

[Ahh-40612]

Don't know what to make of the request by AC management for the names of all those that unanimously turned down the golden opportunity to spend even more time at Latcc after an afternoon duty at the weekend.

Perhaps we need more people rostered for nights!!!!!

I understand that 'normal' overtime rates would have applied which I think means about 15 quid after tax for all the fun.

Does this mean that their card is marked as a "non-company" man/woman?
If this is the case they probably won't be able to buy enough cards with the new stationery budget!!!!

If anyone knows what they plan to do with these names, please let us know.

[vertigo]

It does come back to the same old question doesn't it.
Should we as controllers bend over backwards to help out the company in the short term by doing overtime, cancelling leave to cover shortages and making 'unworkable' manning work.
Or should we say no, illustrate the system doesn't work in the hope of long term improvements ?
One thing is certain, we should have strong leadership from our union to stop work place friction and intimidation.

[Flick the switch]

All names on said list are not to expect a xmas card this year :D

[ZIP250]

I heard today that every ATCO on watch yesterday morning who wasn't on Mr Lewis' list signed a letter to him asking to be included and saying that they wouldn't have said yes if asked.

Well Done A Watch

Z

[expediter]

Speaking from a commercial background in a career focussed on leadership development - the insights I have into public sector management are atrocious. My feeling would be to get some people in leadership postions who know how to motivate people on a daily basis, treat them as adults who can make thier own decisions, and can reward them accordingly.

Until ATCO's and colleagues are treated with the respect they deserve, they will not treat management with the respect they don't seem to deserve at the moment...

NATS need a serious shake up or you will always be working in an environment where your only outlet that won't do any detriment to your career is PPRUNE! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[overload]

But what of the watch management that agreed to the request, are they mice or men? They should have killed this one stone dead before it became a PR disaster.

Even as one of the more moderate posters to pprune, I find it difficult to understand the stupidly of management to go down this path. I would hope that the union have requested a written response as to the reason for “requesting names”, what has been done with the list of the “guilty”, are they somewhere to have “black marks” recorded against their records.

This must not be allowed to pass without a proper response from senior management. The person responsible has committed an obvious error of judgement, and an apology should be forthcoming not only to assuage the feelings of the personal involved but also to ensure that in future any volunteers in the same situation are exactly that, “volunteers”.

Please tell me I got the wrong end of the stick and it didn’t really happen as reported.

[Biggin Koksy]

So we now have a 'black list', and undue pressure on certain people, maybe someone could actually find out if 'The LATCC Charter' has any bite , or is just another management front?

[Bright-Ling]

Sorry - didn't you read the Charter small print....

Page 3, chap 2, para 8.

"...thus allowing us to disrespect all who work hard for the company."

Seriously, the worrying thing that I HOPE TAG adderss is what this is doing to the company.

We are now in a situation where anyone who joined from the last 3 years or so HATE management! Even studes I speak to at the college are aware of all this and are fed up with it all. They all speak of their distrust and lack of respect. Senior management are breading a culture of hatred towards themselves.

We wonder why there is a recruitment problem. Dont forget that many many people read this, esp wannabes. This site doesn't paint the rosiest picture of a caring employer - but it is sadly the fact.

TAG MANAGEMENT:

Give us something nice to write about! Sadly, people are merely reporting the facts and bad feeling. Nothing is even made up!
ONLY YOU CAN TURN THIS AROUND!

[250 kts]

But what was the reason to make the request in the first place. Could it possibly have been that once again the ORO rostered below the minimum of covering each validation 3 times on a night duty??

There is a certain watch which is regularly in the position of having positions covered by 2 on nights, and they're surprised when they get in trouble. In fact I understand they recently had to close DVR/SFD to allow for fatigue breaks but the desk forgot to include HRN in the Notam!! You can guess the rest of what happened.

The Watches really do have to get a grip of what the ORO are getting up to,and instead of a witch hunt the management should be
looking at ensuring that the staffing schedules are adhered to.

[bjcc]

Who Decides who does nights/spins....The watch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]

[BEXIL160]

Who screwed up the TOTAL numbers of ATCOs required? Management. Who has to sit at the sharp end and deal with the traffic? ATCOs Who is more "customer facing" The Operational staff (ATCOs/ATEs and ATSAs) or the Office staff? Go figure. I've given up.

Rgds BEX

[Big Nose1]

bjcc[B]...who decides who does nights/spins....tho ORO[B]. :mad: :mad:
Watches produce a draft roster 15 days before the real one is published, the final version bares very little resemblence to the draft.

[250 kts]

The ORO insist that the spins are correctly manned and that if anywhere suffers then it's the nights. Not sure how this equates to the PSS which stipulates the numbers required for each. We recently had no less than 7 northbank spinners and the nights left short again. The spinners were either being sent on very long breaks or were doing 1/2 on 1 hour off-some may even have got away early!. The sooner all the rostering is given back to the watches then the better the whole organisation will be.
At least if it then goes wrong we then know who to blame rather than "just the ORO".
:mad: :mad: :mad:

[crowman]

Maybe NATS Management were just "getting off on the situation" and the people asked did not give one of the six recognised responses to the demand!!! Just say NO!

[Great Unmanaged]

Simple. ATCO's do not good managers make! Sorry and all thet but its a fact. ATCO's are paid to be always right.

This is not a requirement of senior managers. Just look around you and tell me one, just one former ATCO, civil (or even ex military - ) that has become a good, well respected manager?

ATCO's should talk to aircraft until they cannot do that anymore and then retire, early, on a full pension or go into ops/development/consultation posts.

Managers should prove that they have the ability to manage BEFORE they are promoted to their own level of incompetence. NOT when the 'next chief in line' is ready to become a watch supervisor or 'manager'. :D :mad: