PDA

View Full Version : Please make a bit of noise if flying into CBR early


RJM
2nd Sep 2005, 09:13
Sleep-in, so plane flies on

02sep05

An air traffic controller who slept in has been blamed for a passenger plane being forced to circle over Canberra waiting for the air traffic tower to open.

The controller's alarm apparently failed to work on Wednesday morning and the air traffic control tower at Canberra International Airport was not opened at the usual time of 5:30am.

It opened 20 minutes later at 5:50am, and the delay caused a Qantas Boeing 737-800 flight from Perth to circle over Canberra airport for 20 minutes.

The plane, carrying 68 passengers, finally landed at 6:12am, 12 minutes after its scheduled arrival time.

Airservices Australia, which operates air traffic control operations across the country, said an investigation had been launched into the incident.

A spokesman for the government-owned body said two senior controllers would now be rostered on to open the tower at Canberra airport as a result of those circumstances.

"There's always more than one person in the tower. It's just that we have to have a senior controller in to open the tower," the spokesman said.

"There are going to be two senior controllers in the tower."

The spokesman said Tuesday's incident did not pose a safety threat to passengers or the aircraft.

"The controller slept in. In other industries people sleep in. It's a fact of life," he said.

Qantas said it was not concerned for the safety of its passengers at any time.

Seloco
2nd Sep 2005, 12:36
Qantas said it was not concerned for the safety of its passengers at any time.

I have a feeling that didn't quite come out the way that they intended!

RJM
2nd Sep 2005, 13:13
Hmm. Just short of a winning slogan, isn't it?

S76Heavy
2nd Sep 2005, 15:29
So how many alarm clocks can 20 minutes holding fuel buy?:E

Colonel Klink
2nd Sep 2005, 19:57
Well, with only 69 passengers on an -800 Qantas probably won't be flying it too much longer anyway!! Might as well sleep in!

Foreign Worker
2nd Sep 2005, 22:04
Is this not the Qantas GPWS incident discussed here previously, several months prior, in which a QF aircraft had to hold, until Canberra Tower opened?

RJM
2nd Sep 2005, 23:22
I posted here what was published (undated) as a general news item in the News Ltd 'Adelaide Advertiser' on 2/9/05 p 33.

I think it's a different incident than the one you are referring to. The earlier GPWS incident (24/7/04) seems to have involved the same Perth-Canberra flight QF 720, but slightly different facts. See

http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/occurs/occurs_detail.cfm?ID=659


PPRuNE got a rap on Australian ABC radio in the earlier incident:

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2004/s1204732.htm

"ALISON CALDWELL: Details of the incident are contained on a professional pilots website.
It claims the crew and passengers were just seconds from disaster when the plane's warning system was activated.
Alan Stray is with the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, he says the website has grossly exaggerated the incident... ...CASA's Peter Gibson says the website doesn't tell the whole story.

PETER GIBSON: The website is known as the pilots rumour network, and some of the information there is spot on and some of the information is just that, rumours.
Now, some of the information on this particular incident I think is probably reasonably close to the mark. Some of the other information is suggesting that the aircraft was only metres away from the mountaintops at the Tinderry Ranges I think is a bit exaggerated.

fireflybob
3rd Sep 2005, 11:06
Whenever I am on an early start I have three separate devices to wake me up (I don't call it an "alarm" clock - I call it the "opportunity" clock!), one is mains powered, one battery powered and the third is my mobile phone.

If none of them function, well I dont cater for triple failures!

In the industry I am currently working in we have a system where if a unit fails to open on time (we have to signal an adjacent unit when we open) the adjacent unit will report this to a centralised control in order they can take steps to find out why the unit has not opened on time (like call the person who is supposed to be there on the phone) and/or call out the relief.

En-Rooter
3rd Sep 2005, 13:05
Whenever I have an early start I have one separate device to wake me up and if it fails.................I sleep in.

Argus
5th Sep 2005, 01:34
Outcomes?

* Sacked
* Demoted
* Fined
* Formally warned
* Counselled
* Transferred
* Commended
* Promoted
* Paid performance bonus
* Accelerated advancement to management
* None of the above

Non Normal
5th Sep 2005, 11:06
* Sacked
* Demoted
* Fined
* Formally warned
* Counselled
* Transferred
* Commended
* Promoted
* Paid performance bonus
* Accelerated advancement to management
* None of the above

None of the above.

The controller sued the employer for causing him enough tiredness to fail to wake up to his alarm and miss work.*



*This is a joke.

Freedom7
6th Sep 2005, 00:59
*This is a joke.

One day it will not be a joke.

Fatigue will kill you.:*

Argus
6th Sep 2005, 07:36
Freedom7

Are you saying?

* Air traffickers at CBR don't have sufficient rest time between shifts;

* Even with reasonable rest periods between shifts, air traffickers at CBR are exposed to excessive workplace stress;

* When rostered for an early start, air traffickers at CBR should go to bed earlier;

* The employer of air traffickers at Canberra should refund the cost of purchasing reliable alarm clocks for staff rostered on early starts;

* All of the above;

* Some of the above; or

* None of the above.

NAMPS
6th Sep 2005, 08:13
Winner of the "Employee of the Month" award.

:p :zzz:

Argus
6th Sep 2005, 08:31
Recommended for the Order of the Brass Razoo in the next Australia Day Honours list?

I had the misfortune to be in Canberra last week. While going about my lawful occasions, I noticed a report in the local journal of record to the effect that there are now to be two controllers (a senior and mid ranking person, whatever that means) rostered for the early start in the Canberra tower.

Why does it now require two people to do the work that one used to do in issuing an early morning landing clearance? Will the additional salary costs will be passed on to airlines via increases in landing charges? Will any such increase be passed on to the mug punter?

And all this because some one can’t get out of the scratcher to get to work on time!

Freedom7
6th Sep 2005, 12:16
Argus

"Some of the above".

Do not speculate. Fact - Fatigue is a killer, and one day you will be able to form litigation when it is found to be the cause of x accident.

You may find that the "Non Senior Controller" was not rated to "issue an early morning landing clearance". Someone please correct me if this is not the case.

Tell me you have never been late to Court............

:ok:

Argus
7th Sep 2005, 08:20
Freedom7

I've been late for Court once. For my lack of punctuality, I had a costs order made against me personally. Never been late again.

I agree that fatigue can cause or contribute to workplace accidents. But you adduce no evidence of fatigue in this case. Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on, say, the rostering practices at CBR, any recent excessive overtime/extension of shifts, lack of sufficient rest time between shifts, frequency of movements etc; then state which, if not all are to be found in the current CBR tower working environment; and why you say all of these provide a causal link to the controller being late for work on the day concerned. If there's an OH&S (or worse) issue here, let's have it aired and dealt with, promptly.

I'm not sure of the relevance of your comments about a non senior controller being unrated for aerodrome control. How many controllers are required for the early morning/late finishes? How many movements are there in the first/last hour of operation that justify the staffing numbers? Why is an unrated person rostered for early starts/late finishes if he/she can't issue landing (or take off) clearances? If the rated controller doesn't turn up, what does the unrated person then do? What's his/her value added contribution - turn the runway lighting on and be paid penalty rates?

And if an aircraft on which I'm travelling to Canberra for an early arrival has to be diverted elsewhere because there's no rated controller available during scheduled opening hours; and I'm late for Court in Canberra as a consequence and have another costs order made against me personally; will AirServices Australia pay it on my behalf or reimburse me because one of its staff couldn't resist the call of the cot on a cold Canberra morn?

Forgive me, there's a porcine formation in echelon port outside my window!

Freedom7
7th Sep 2005, 09:30
Argus


Merly making a general statment in relation to Fatigue.

We do not know, the exact reason as to why the controller slept in. YSCB Tower rostering principal's are not my forte, however not being H24, I would say they are better, fatigue wise, than other H24 Tower's. Maybe other's can shed light here.

FYI. Generally a Tower consists of several positions.

I noticed a report in the local journal of record to the effect that there are now to be two controllers (a senior and mid ranking person, whatever that means) rostered for the early start in the Canberra tower.

Generally speaking only, a person who singularly holds all ratings in all positions is the Senior Tower Controller.

It is possible that the controller on station at the time was not rated to provide an ADC service. What does he do? Yes ring the other rostered controller and then implement staff contingency plans, whatever that may be.

I think that you will find that it was the airline's SOP which restricted the acfts landing at that time without an ADC service.

If you believe that the ATS provider or the Airline have not provided you with the service that you have paid for - then I am in complete agreement with you - you should be provided with reimbursement.


:ok:

En-Rooter
7th Sep 2005, 14:41
Personally I think we should hang the bastard for sleeping in, I mean, really, I don't know how the bastard can live with himself. About the same as a lawyer guaranteeing you a 85% chance of winning in court, then walking away with his big fat fee after your 'unforseen circumstance' loss.

For chri$t sake, a bloke slept in???? Never happened to you before???? The pilot had probably landed at 3000 mbz's at night in his/her previous GA job and couldn't this time? Anyone who's a regular pruner knows the answer to this.

And you wonder why the staffing was 'increased' hello, hello, hello, we're talking about CANBERRA here. And relax fellas, it wont cost you too much more, the [email protected] management at airport services will put some poor bastard with all the FPC ratings in there that's being paid at journeyman rates

ferris
8th Sep 2005, 06:33
Argus
You seem to be taking the tack that an ATC is an ATC is an ATC.
The job is learned over time; you do not just 'get an ATC license' then trot off and do anything. You start at the bottom and work your way up, learning the different parts of the job along the way. So, whilst issuing a landing clearance to a single aircraft in the early morning may be very simple, the legal authority to do so stems from having a license that calls for being able to handle lots of traffic at a peak time. The licenses are issued for particular validations on positions, not for numbers of aircraft able to be worked.
It's a bit like a QC going into court with 3 consulting solicitors in trail. Isn't the QC able to go into court on his own? Moreover, if the QC is the best type of counsel, why have solicitors? Fair enough analogy?

Argus
8th Sep 2005, 06:38
En-Rooter

Do I detect a subtle application of Parkinson’s Fifth Law here?

Shortly stated, Parkinson’s Fifth Law says that: “The quality of client service is directly proportional to the distance between revenue source and the customer”.

For most air traffickers (and indeed public servants generally), there’s some distance between the source of the spondulicks that pay the salaries, the workplace where the service is provided, and the end user of the service. There is thus a temptation to be reckless as to what the source of the spondulicks should reasonably be expected to fund.

It’s sometimes known as “Public Service Disease”.

May I be equally reckless and propose the following:

* Be late for work once for reasons within your control: KITA*.

* Be late for work again for reasons within your control: formal warning.

* Be late again for work for reasons within your control: the bullet.

And why not engage in a bit of lawyer baiting, just to deflect some criticism of a colleague. I’m sorry if you had a bad experience (if that’s what you’re saying) with a lawyer. But we lawyers are strictly regulated in every state and territory. You should always seek a second opinion if you're not happy with the advice you get/got. And if you weren’t/aren’t satisfied with the service you received, you should complain to the Law Society or Legal Services Commission in the state/territory where you live. Most of us prefer not to have to answer allegations of misconduct or negligence - unlike public servants, if allegations of misconduct are proved against us, we can be struck off and lose our livelihoods.

* Kick in the @rse

Freedom7
8th Sep 2005, 07:01
Argus

Are you stating that ATC's are public servants? Or just a general statement?

By the way, ATC's by nature will bait whoever is available............especially lawyer's:ok:

Argus
8th Sep 2005, 07:32
ferris

We must have crossed in cyber space.

You seem to be taking the tack that an ATC is an ATC is an ATC

That wasn't my intention. I accept that there are various ratings that controllers advance to over time, starting from SMC and progressing to (if memory serves me correctly, and in increasing order of complexity) tower, en-route, departures, arrivals and what used to be called in my day, "flow control".

These days, I'm told that Canberra has lost its departures/arrivals function to Melbourne. I stand to be corrected but it seems to me that all that's left in the CBR tower is aerodrome/local and surface movement control. In my (albeit dated) ATC days, the real pros worked on approach/departures/arrivals etc and not just in the "zone".

It's not clear to me why a non tower rated controller would be rostered for the early turn in CBR: unless it's to ensure that the tower is at least manned if the rated person doesn't show up; and to turn the airfield lighting on, and to hit the Selcall if a diversion seems likely!

But I digress. My beef is directed to people who don't show up to work for reasons within their control, and whose actions have the potential to cause disruption and loss (including financial loss) to third parties.

Freedom7

Depends on your definition of "public servant". I prefer a broad consideration that includes anyone who derives an income from the public purse.

And as a former air trafficker and now lawyer, I claim to have the more than the zero sum totals of belligerence and attitude that go with both professions!

Starts with P
8th Sep 2005, 07:52
It's not clear to me why a non tower rated controller would be rostered for the early turn in CBRQuite simply, the other controller woud have most likely been rated one of two ways:

1. SMC/COORD/ACD - ie, rated as a Ground controller, as well as a few other things, but not tower rated. This is quite normal at many aerodromes. The first few hours would involve him/her doing these functions, whilst the other "Senior Tower" does the Aerodrome Control. Or;

2. Rated in all positions, except OCA - OCA (Operational Command Authority) is sort of like being the Captain of an aircraft. A good FO can take off, fly and land an aircraft all by himself. In fact the Captain can leave the flight deck and the FO can fly just fine, however, the Captain needs to be in the aircraft to make it all legal. Why not put 2 Captains on every aircraft? Because there is no need. A Captain and a FO do just fine. Same reason why there might not be 2 OCA's rostered on every ATC shift. There needs to be one to make it all "legal like", but the other guy can do all of the other jobs him/herself.

I can only assume that is what was meant by "Senior Controller". Hope I helped.

Argus
8th Sep 2005, 08:01
Starts with P

Thank you.

But if the "Captn" fails to show for the early morning arrival, is there any point in having the "FO" there if he/she can't make the call to issue a landing clearance for the one early arrival from Perth?

ferris
8th Sep 2005, 08:04
If the Capt. doesn't show up on time for the flight, should the FO take off without him?

Argus
8th Sep 2005, 08:22
ferris

But if the FO can't take off without the Capt, who pays the pax for the losses sustained by the pax for the non attendance of the Capt, for reasons within his/her control?

Starts with P
8th Sep 2005, 09:45
Argus and Feris

You are both right, the FO won't take off without the Captain, which is why the Tower didn't open.

Airlines run late all the time, does anyone get paid for that?

En-Rooter
9th Sep 2005, 02:24
Argus,

You indeed detect en-rooter rule no.1 when it comes to sleeping in.

'When one has slept in, one gets his/her ar$e to the aerodrome ASAP' One does not spend the next 8 hours of ones shift thinking about this and apologising, one has more important things to think of.

Do you know what disciplinary actions are taken against controllers these days? Things have changed significantly since you were around obviously. I can point out a number of ATC's that have been stood down 'indefinitely' one on the advise of OLC, I wont publish the reasons here of course, en-rooter could get himself/herself in quite alot of trouble! Suffice to say the reason is horse$hit.

Everything an ATC does these days is recorded and monitored, I doubt you could name me a profession that is more scrutinised or checked than that of an ATC, I'd include pilots in this category. You are nowhere near as regulated as me and the 'panel' of people that discipline are not my mates.

I would also mention briefly fatigue, you would be well aware of the work being undertaken in his area, in the past scant regard has been paid to this by ASA. It is being worked on now and will take a fair bit more work. Do you know the circumstances of this occurrence or is it easier to wield the big stick?

I would say the pax in your scenario below would be compensated to the tune of mmmmmm, nothing as it would be passed off as a 'technical fault' or one of the myriad of other lies that are used to explain delays cancellations etc.

A bad experience with a lawyer? Name me a person who has had a pleasant experience with a lawyer or the law system you lot have constructed? Fairly broad statement I know.

Finally, how often has this late TWR opening occured? I would struggle to find a similar occurence in the last 5 years at least, not a bad record eh?

Yes the aircraft in question could have landed, they would have been provided with a DTI service and a radar advisory service, as somewho's there at that time, there's stuff all traffic there at that time.

You'll have to talk to QF about why they no longer allow their crews to land at an MBZ in CB.

p.s. That little 'Parkinsons fifth law' bizzo is precisely why people don't like lawyers too much. Speak English!

Argus
9th Sep 2005, 05:33
En-Rooter

How often has this late TWR opening occured?

Similar incident last year - on 24 July 2004.

So, if it's happened before, why isn't there a contingency plan for staff shortages? Or, if there is a contingency plan, was it used on this occasion? If not, why not?

As I said above, I agree that fatigue can cause or contribute to workplace accidents. But, with great respect, neither your collegues or yourself adduce any evidence of fatigue in this case. Rather than just making a blanket statement, perhaps you'd like to elaborate on, say, the rostering practices at CBR, any recent excessive overtime/extension of shifts, lack of sufficient rest time between shifts, frequency of movements etc; then state which, if not all are to be found in the current CBR tower working environment; and why you say all of these provide a causal link to the controller being late for work on the day concerned. If there's an OH&S (or worse) issue here, let's have it aired and dealt with, promptly.

En-Rooter
9th Sep 2005, 07:12
Argus,

There are other threads discussing the overstaffing/understaffing issue regarding ATC.

It is obvious to us working in the centre which groups are understaffed i.e. most of them. (can't speak for the TWR's, although I did work in one that was hopelessly understaffed and resourced).

It's been stated that 'managers' (and I use that term loosely) are receiving performance bonuses that preclude them hiring more ATC's. I can't state that this categorically true, there may be other reasons.

These 'managers' greed has to be seen to be believed, (they are not all like this I must state) there is no other reason for them to behave this way. They are an absolute pox on society. I would suggest that managers performance bonuses within Telstra has perhaps led to the state they are in at the moment.

Maybe this leads to fatigue, alot of us are working a fair wack of O/T and yes the extra money is nice, but there is a feeling amongst some of us that if you don't go in you are leaving your buddy in a bit of pickle perhaps.

I'm not blindly supporting the fellow in CB TWR, merely stating there may be a raft of reasons why this occured??

Uncommon Sense
9th Sep 2005, 07:33
Christ Argus - you would be a barrel of laughs to share the cockpit with on a long sector.

Argus
9th Sep 2005, 08:51
En-Rooter

Thanks. Surprised your Union hasn't flexed its arm. Used to be quite vocal on these sorts of things, as I recall.

Ah Uncommon Sense, it's always a pleasure to read your considered contribution to the intellectual locus of the debate.

piniped
9th Sep 2005, 19:24
Hey Argus, you didn't used to be a FSO in a former life did you???

I know 2 of the old days FSO's that went on to become lawyers...

speak:E

Argus
10th Sep 2005, 02:26
piniped

Check your PMs.

fartsock
10th Sep 2005, 11:02
Hey argus did you used to teach 'aviation law' at Sydney Tech ?

My son was one of your students, said you were a real good teacher

Scurvy.D.Dog
10th Sep 2005, 16:32
Argus

- A Tower ATC that does not hold all ratings and/or endorsements and experience required of Operational Command Authority status (i.e. open the tower service and be able to work solo through any emergencies etc) is loosely termed a trainee.
- Many towers open with a Solo OCA ATC as a normal rostering arrangement
- In previous years these same towers may have had a minimum of two or three OCA capable ATC’s at opening.
- The commercial industry has required cost efficiencies of ATS since the days you were studying legalese stumped up at your FS console (which I might add is a function now undertaken by ATC as part of that industry/fed gov’t efficiency program).
- The resulting savings delivered to the firms that cut holes through the atmosphere each day delivering the likes of you to your appointments with the judiciary are the ones from whom you should seek reimbursement.
- It is as a result of those ‘absolutely necessary, otherwise we are all gunna’ die in the financial ditch if we don’t get em’…... efficiencies that provide nil contingencies for this type of occurrence.

Whilst I am at it……………Multiple alarms not withstanding.......(which of course we use)....there would not be a single ATC in this country who would ..in your vernacular………..for reasons within your control… intentionally be late to open a service. Actions such as ‘auto alarm off whilst still basically asleep’ or alarm failure due batteries, mains power supply or general failure etc etc are not within a persons control or they would not do them. Provide evidence/argument to the contrary!

The fact is many ATS services are solo operations particularly at opening. The number of happenings that could preclude that from occurring on time is many and varied although very rarely occurs.

It is therefore fair to say that you, the travelling public and the firms that convey your ‘big word’ personage by air are, on balance, streets in front thanks in no small part to the years of efficiencies and continued professionalism of the ATS line staff who work those solo shifts?

Cheery bye then…. or should that be……………….we will adjourn for the day……
…………no doubt to the SpatchcockandBigWigWearingWankers Inn ……..just aruuuund the corner ol’ cock ol’ chap eh what………:hmm:

Argus
11th Sep 2005, 05:58
Scurvy D.Dog

All Australian industrial jurisdictions have long accepted that punctuality is an important part of the employment relationship.

A lack of punctuality may be grounds for dismissal.

And as a long held general principle of employment law, it’s an employee’s responsibility to get him/herself to work on time – even to the point of using the Telstra wake up call service to raise the individual from Morpheus’ grasp!

These days, all employers, including public sector ones, need to be conscious of salary and related costs. That’s not to say safety and operating requirements should be ignored. Determining the staffing levels is a mix of all these, and more (leave, training, recruitment, staff turnover, airspace complexity, frequency of movements etc etc). What emerges from this process are staffing levels that reflect the operating requirements of the enterprise, a fair wage to the employees and a reasonable financial return to either the shareholders or the taxpayers, as the case may be.

For private sector employers, if expenses exceed income, then the future of the enterprise looks grim. But when it comes to shelling out fortnightly generous financial infusions, even the public purse isn’t bottomless. No less a luminary than the NSW Premier has been forced to concede recently that the sheltered workshop called the NSW Public Service can't continue to sustain inefficient work practices and security of tenure for public servants.

Why should a non government worker on the average (or indeed any) wage have his/her tax deductions used to support an inflated and inefficient bureaucracy, which is generally cushioned from the vicissitudes of commercial life.

But this isn’t the main point of the debate – and nor are inaccurate and hysterical claims about lawyers’ alleged lack of productivity, work practices and where they did or did not study law.

To return to the thread topic, perhaps you, or another reader could advise on the facts at issue: Is the Canberra TWR a solo operation on opening? If so, with at least one scheduled inbound RPT aircraft from WA due to arrive shortly after opening, is there a contingency plan to ensure the tower is always staffed by a rated operator from the scheduled opening time? If not, why not? If not, is this, in your professional opinion, a safe operating practice? And if not, what do you suggest should be done about it?

ferris
11th Sep 2005, 07:39
I'll ignore all the rubbish about sheltered workshops.
If so, with at least one scheduled inbound RPT aircraft from WA due to arrive shortly after opening, is there a contingency plan to ensure the tower is always staffed by a rated operator from the scheduled opening time? If not, why not? How would such a contingency plan work? If AsA rosters 2 people to open the tower, people such as yourself jump up and down about public servants and wasting money, because 99.9% of the time they will both arrive on time and one of them will read the paper while the other works. Then if AsA only rosters one, and he sleeps in once in a blue moon, it's some sort of disaster? Why can't the contingency plan be that the QF plane lands using MBZ procedures?
One of the big clashes in ATC between commercial sense and safety, is staffing. If the wx is nice, the VFR traffic goes up, so if part of your tasking is low-level servicing (flight service), your workload increases. If you only deal with CTA, your workload will tend to be lower. If the wx is bad, FS is quieter, but high level sector workload goes thru the roof. How does one roster and have staff levels based on the weather? So when bean counters wander around looking at all the staff in the rec room, they have a fit. They never seem to be around when the thunderstorms are causing big diversions and the guys are working their arses off. Wx is only one variable- emergencies (try blocking a runway at a major airport and see how much work there is), one-off traffic peaks (airshows, easter {and before someone starts, although it is a known event, if your staffing is normally x, where do you get x+3 for half-a-dozen days a year} etc) and other things make staffing a hot potato.
Nothing is ever simple. Being a lawyer, you knew that, didn't you?

Argus
11th Sep 2005, 10:18
Ferris

Some good points, well made, especially on the ever present tension between commercial reality and safety.

I understand QF won't accept MBZ at Canberra. I'm not able to say why this is so. Perhaps some one who operates into Canberra with QF might care to comment.

I have no objection to two people being rostered in the CBR Tower, if that is the minimum staffing level necessary to ensure the safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic (is this still the definition of ATC), at sparrows.

But irrespective of how many people are rostered on, it's still an indivudual's responsibility to get to work on time.

And I agree that nothing is simple as it seems, including the law!

Scurvy.D.Dog
11th Sep 2005, 15:41
Argus me ol’ But this isn’t the main point of the debate – and nor are inaccurate and hysterical claims about lawyers’ alleged lack of productivity, work practices and where they did or did not study law.……my dear fellow, no need to be so easily bruised…:eek: …..I would not seriously suggest that the ‘black pot is calling the kettle tarnished’….. :E And I agree that nothing is simple as it seems, including the law!…..to be sure :D

Ferris old chap, on the money comment as usual…… how be life in the land of the dunes ….. :ok:

Freedom7
11th Sep 2005, 23:49
With 400 odd managers mowing lawns around the place, the majority in CB, maybe a button on the console attached to said lawn mower/et/s electric blanket, of course armed at 50,000 amps to jolt them in to action with a current rating. As manager is rocketed into ceiling this in turn activates leased bmw ready for travel to workstation. Problem solved.

Goat's do a great job at managing the grass......as well:uhoh:

lestump
12th Sep 2005, 06:26
Argus:
"And all this because some one can’t get out of the scratcher to get to work on time!"


What was the old line..... "Let he who is without sin..........."

It appears that the employers/management NEVER sleep in.

Argus
12th Sep 2005, 07:01
Scurvy. D. Dog

Ah, me 'ansome, no wokking furries!

lestump

It appears managers and employers NEVER sleep in
Can't speak for managers. But if you're self employed and depend on clients' fees for a living, you can't afford to miss the flight that gets you to where the business is; so as to do the work that generates the income that pays the taxes to keep the House that John (and Maurice) built.

No show, no dough!

lestump
12th Sep 2005, 07:17
So now, Scurvy, I take it from that you would be prepared to say you have never, I mean, never, slept in?

After all, we ATCs are human too. No, really.

Scurvy.D.Dog
12th Sep 2005, 21:05
lestumpSo now, Scurvy, I take it from that you would be prepared to say you have never, I mean, never, slept in?Nup, guilty of same in my younger days..:8 .... thankfully there were contingencies back then..:\
.........not in recent years though.......otherwise to many newspapers find out .......:zzz: ........:ooh: ........:O After all, we ATCs are human too. No, really.Wash thy mouth out..... blasphemer......:ouch: .....

....now bugga off all o' ya.......I have a ocean to stroll across....:E