Staff Shortages at LHR and elsewhere

[Fokjok]

Anyone on the inside care to comment on the numbers short per watch at LHR and other units?

Is it true that validating new controllers on GMC is the problem?

[Wedding Tackle]

For an Aussie ATCO - what's GMC?

------------------
"flow! like thine inspirer, beer"
-Alexander Pope, 1742 (History's first Approach Controller?)

[captlcc]

GMC = Ground Movement Control

[Wedding Tackle]

GMC Called SMC in Oz (S for surface). I would have thought it wouldn't be easy with the labyrinth of taxiways. A friend at Kingsford-Smith (Sydney) in the aerodrome stream told me he felt 'ground' was more difficult than 'tower' in some respects for similar reasons i.e when they they called Tower at the holding points 'ready' they either launched them or not whereas ground has a heap of cr@p to contend with (Xing RWY's and optimising departure tracks via optimum order at the holding point etc). I would have thought at somewhere so demanding you would work upstairs or downstairs but not both, is this so? If so,how quickly are the Approach, Departures, and Traffic Director trainees validating?

------------------
"flow! like thine inspirer, beer"
-Alexander Pope, 1742 (History's first Approach Controller?)

[identnospeed]

Tackle - London H'row, Gatwick, Stansted and soon to be Luton approach functions are carried out at London Area and Terminal Control Centre at West Drayton (2miles North of LHR). Terminal Control (which includes departure radar positions) is also based there.

I can't speak for any of the approach validation rates, but the success rate on Terminal Control sectors is about 70% of those starting live training.

INS

[halo]

Yeah, numbers are a problem unfortunately.

GMC is the hardest position to work at LHR, although with some perserverance it can be quite reasonable.
Some people struggle with departures, others with ground. We do validate people though on a regular basis which is cool.
Its just a case of tackling it head on!!

[Wedding Tackle]

How short are you at LHR Tower and LATCC? What impact is this having on operations?

From what you say there appears to be a shortage of ATCO's almost everywhere.

From the following site the Canucks are having a hard (unhappy?) time as well:
http://www.catca.ca/English/Branches_and_Facilities/Spring2000RD.html

------------------
"flow! like thine inspirer, beer"
-Alexander Pope, 1742 (History's first Approach Controller?)

[identnospeed]

Allegedly, if the present validation rate continues for the forseeable future, in 10 yrs time (presumably the New En-Route Centre will be open by then!?!!) there will be a shortfall of about 150 ATCOs nationwide (about 10%).

Also the management figures apparently indicate that those employees participating in the CAA flexible retirement scheme will be retiring on ave at about 58. Of those ATCOs over 50 and still operational, I have met only one ATCO who intends to stay that long.

Understaffing has obvious repurcussions. ie. with staff getting hammered harder by traffic for longer periods of time, (ref : incessant increases in tfc of 8% pa) the sickness rate rises.

Medical experts say that prolonged exposure to stress leads to stomach, heart and sleep pattern problems. Hence the sickness levels !

The more ATCOs absent thru illness the harder those at work.........er......work !

I reckon that ranks as a self-fulfilling downward spiral.

Short-term this can and has been dealt with by the application flow restrictions, but long-term the only answer is more controllers.

But with impending privatisation, the wage bill is a sensitive issue. Shareholders want profits and the only way to increase profits is to increase revenue or cut costs. Higher wage bills don't fit into either category !

remember the motto......life sucks, so get a f***ing helmet !!

end of diatribe !!

INS

[Wedding Tackle]

Surely management realises that if that if they cut wages they won't attract the 'right' people to the profession, both, bright young people in the UK and trained ATCO's from o'seas that qualify to live and work in Britain. "you pay peanuts to attract monkeys".

The beancounters of aviation refer to 'risk management' and 'affordable safety' (QF16 in Rome is raising a storm in Oz about profits vs safety in what WAS the worlds safest airline).

In a Uni unit I did covering safety management I remember an NTSB investigator (USA) referring to safety regulators (in his case the FAA) as 'Tombstone Agencies' - they act after somebody dies.

What sort of power does the ATC union/association (UK) have to rectify the situation?

Is the recruiting/training machine (sausage factory? :) ) turning out enough of the right people?

How much does it cost to recruit, train and validate a person off the street?



------------------
"flow! like thine inspirer, beer"
-Alexander Pope, 1742 (History's first Approach Controller?)

[identnospeed]

Tackle - My understanding is that the salaries of controllers won't be cut, but that NATS will keep an eye on the overall company-wide wage bill. Privatised NATS will see that restraining salary-costs will assist it in achieving greater profits and soothing the shareholders.

Privatised NATS will be no different to any other company.....profit oriented.

Elementary micro-economics shows that NO business maintains a long-term break-even or loss-making position. And one of the axioms of accountancy is that a company operates on a going-concern basis (ie. aims to operate above break-even point).

The British Govt and NATS senior managers have said that this profit motive will not impinge on safety, because the Safety Regulation Group (SRG) will regulate ATC as it does now, just as a different business entity. (at present SRG and NATS exist under the umbrella of CAA). Presently NATS operates well above the minimum standard required by SRG. In a few years under private management, NATS may only meet the bare minimum of safety standards, because any extra expense in achieving more than that minimum is potential profit wasted !!

The British rail system was sold off to private interests a few years ago. 2 rail accidents (in the last 3 years) in West London highlighted that profit and safety are uneasy bedfellows.

The Chief Executive of Railtrack (the company maintaining track and signals) said recently that he would not be focusing as much on profit and would be more safety minded. This was obviously just a PR excercise, because a City business analyst commented that the Railtrack CEO would be MAD to try and operate a private company on anything but a profit-maximisation basis.

As you say, it is likely that Safety Regulation will be operating on a reactive rather than a proactive basis !

The ATCOs union has been fighting against privatisation.

I'm not sure of the cost of training an ATCO from start to validation. The decision on whether to continue training a trainee who has reached a learning plateau will no doubt be taken with reference to the amount of money already spent on the training process to that point. So if the total cost is, say £300,000 per valid controller, then a trainee who has already started live training will have probably cost £200,000. I am sure the bean-counters will be keeping tabs on this come privatisation !
I think that with a success rate of 70%+ in LATCC Terminal control we are getting the right kind of recruits. The only problem is the busy-ness and complexity of the traffic and airspace !!

Cheers

INS