AusFIC - Could THIS be the beginning of the demise of???

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Heard on 'the grapevine'......


Doncha just luv-it?? - 'Ere we go again.....


A 'review' - (LUV that word - NOT) - in AirServicesAus is set to cut jobs from the 100 or so AusFIC staff by Mid 2007 - apparently ??


Anyone want to bet 'London to a Brick' that this review will have the outcome of 'INTEGRATION' of the services of AusFIC to ATC, in part or whole???


All in the name of 'efficiency' - no doubt!


The provision of 'Service Delivery' to us, the clients of that service, would then be transferred to ATC, at the higher ATC salary rate, at a time when ATC themselves are 'under review'......


That is, MORE 'services' / workload for ATC to provide to us, the industry, with LESS ATC's, and at a higher cost....=....Less FIS at a Higher cost!


FIS was established external to ATC as the 'trade off' for the demise of Flight Service, when the then FS VHF Freqs were transferred to ATC functions. This would now put the FIS back onto ATC Centre Freqs - increased congestion and delays in service - That makes sense??


Other forums rumour the ATC staff cut to be in the order of 10% -
around 200 or so staff 'across the board'.


So, that, combined with this proposal, would indicate that the industry will get LESS, at MORE cost, and the ATC's will be expected to do MORE, with LESS staff. (more or less...couldn't help that - but, you get the idea...)


Interestingly, the FAA of the USA, has announced on
Aero-News (Fri. 25 Aug '06)
that THEIR plan is to HIRE MORE than 1,130 additional ATC's in fiscal year 2007 - based on updated traffic forecasts, retirements etc. The plan also allows for the hiring of more than 2,000 ATC's over the next 2 years to allow for retiring controllers and increase the size of its workforce by more than
200 ATC's.


Funny, thats the same number ASA are reducing by......but the percentages are vastly different of course.


The FAA plan "also adresses the broader need to hire more than 11,800 controllers over the next ten (10) years based on the latest attrition and traffic growth modelling..."


Its EASY to guess what ASA will do when the attrition rate vs traffic becomes a real issue - REDUCE SERVICES FURTHER!!!


What else will they then be capable of doing???


:ugh: :ugh:
I simply fail to comprehend the logic -
if there is any...... :confused: :confused:


Cheers Guys and Gals....:ok:

[Bendo]

Hey Griffo!

I get the drift mate but... what is AUSFIC?

I think I can cope with FIS and ATC... but give us pyluts some more info with the three letter acronyms (TLA's) that only you Control Freaks (CF's) understand.

Thanks moit! :ok:

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'day 'Bendo',


Yeah, I know the acronyms really used to give me the 'irits' too...
NAIPS TAAATS etc etc ad nauseum......


Don't really quote me, but Australian Flight Info Centre???

Situated at YBBN ATS Building -
Houses the Flight Info Service (FIS) - both Domestic and International,
HF Services,
Flightwatch - a couple of VHF sites and HF,
The NOTAM Office,
CENSAR,
Briefing - such as it is nowadays...
etc etc and currently has around 100 or so staff.


I think........:ok:

[Slugfest]

The way I understand it is this

AusFIC = Australian Flight Information Centre = the old "briefing office"

domestic HF
international HF
Flightwatch VHF - 29 freqs
CENSAR
Briefing
NOTAM office
Message switching

It is staffed by <100 and that is going to be cut by 19 by July 2007 (about a 20%cut)

There was a "review" done last year that essentially proposed moving AusFIC functions into the ATC centres and this is the basis for the staff cut.

This review seems to be getting legs and by the end of 2006, the Flightwatch VHF freqs (29 at various sites around the country) will be decommissioned and ATC will action flightwatch requests as part of their normal duties - as opposed to telling pilots to "Contact Flightwatch".

Point to note here is that ATC already can/should provide FIS (Flight Information Service) on their freqs but are often too busy to do so; hence the "contact Flightwatch" out.

One rumour also is that the Flightwatch freqs are not to be decommissioned but merely moved to ATC consoles and allow ATC to mute them when need be. BAD idea if someone calls with a problem/IFE don't you think??? Kinda tough to hear a MADay/PAN call with the freq rejected/muted: and from what I am told - there have been quite a few situations where IFE calls have been made on VHF flightwatch.

Nomination/cancellation of SARTIME is a huge component of VHF flightwatch ops and that too will have to be handled by the ATCer. They will have to coord the sartime details to their Flight Data person who will have to coord that to the CENSAR operator. Did I just hear someone mention "SARTIME Mismanagment" and ESIR???

Numbers of sartimes on VHF are about 3000 per month. Quite a few to have to triple handle.

Another good rumour doing the rounds is that SARTIMES are to change. I have not been able to find out much about that but I guess that it could have something to do with reducing access to SARTIMES or at least making it more difficult to nominate/cancel them. Maybe something like a hybrid SARTIME/US system of opening and closing a flight plan by phone????

All in all, I think it will mean a serious reduction of services available to the GA sector and to all users of Flightwatch - which includes most if not all aviators in the country.

[topdrop]

Heard on 'the grapevine'......

Interestingly, the FAA of the USA, has announced on
Aero-News (Fri. 25 Aug '06)
that THEIR plan is to HIRE MORE than 1,130 additional ATC's in fiscal year 2007 - based on updated traffic forecasts, retirements etc. The plan also allows for the hiring of more than 2,000 ATC's over the next 2 years to allow for retiring controllers and increase the size of its workforce by more than
200 ATC's.


The main reason the FAA needs a major increase in controllers is because all those recruited in 81 as a result of the PATCO strike are at or approaching retirement - Reagan sacked all those on strike :*

[Shitsu_Tonka]

This rumour has been doing the rounds for sometime.

The initial plan to try and remove Sartime removal seems to have fallen over.

The grand plan for ATC is to restructure the sectors in to basically low level (Below FL245) and join them up laterally a bit more, combine the Radar High Level sectors along the East Coast (new Mode S Radars), and completely revise the non-radar High Level airspace over the GAFA, Oceans etc. trying to create 'flexible' sectors tha change depending upon the UPR/AUSOTS structure of the particular day.

One thing this does require is more ATC's not less - and therefore the ability to add AUSFIC roles on top of the ATC role is simply not possible.

Even on the current structure, it is more likely that we are 100 Operational ATCs short - the amount of overtime being worked and the frequency of TIBA alone shows it.

To suggest a reduction in ATC numbers further, whilst at the same time impementing this new airspace structure, and also attempting to consolidate AUSFIC roles in to the ATC role suggests that not everyone is playing to the same tune. Or that some of these rumours are od rhetoric from a few of the accountant types who need to leave the organisation.

Apparently the ASA executive know that to save their customer base money they need to be able to provide a different service - and to do that they need to staff and resource it properly. So let us hope we see that logic coming to fruition rather than the long knives approach of late.

[peuce]

Or that some of these rumours are od rhetoric from a few of the accountant types who need to leave the organisation.


Unfortunately, not rumour ..

FACT: AUSFIC must remove 19 staff (20%)by financial year's end
FACT: AUSFIC told that services must be maintained
FACT: That's impossible to do
FACT: Briefing to ATC Flight Datas
FACT: VHF Flightwatch to ATC Sectors
FACT: Communications Centre to Techs
FACT: HF Flightwatch up in the air
FACT: Notam Office to AIS people
FACT: ATC numbers must be cut by 15%

[SM4 Pirate]

There are FACTS and then there are posts claiming FACTS that are nothing more than a load of sh!t. :=

Puece, up in the air "fact"; 15% "fact"; That's impossible to do "fact"...

Targets are not FACTS, they are targets, reality often amends targets...

The cold light of day will tell all, SDE is far from implemented; the reality of taking the high level sectors, with the Point to Point concept is probably good, but what you are left with may be totally unworkable; thus the SDE gets amended. "FACT" SDE is not determined; therefore no one could "FACTUALLY" guess at staff reductions. Sure they have a target, but from what I see the mantra is service first, then work on cutting...

SDE should reduce staff at the coal face; will it, not in my working lifetime; "FACT"...:E

[peuce]

SM4 Pirate,

You are correct. Nothing posted on these boards is FACT ... unless it has occurred in the past ... and thus, can be validated.

Anything of a future nature, like QANTAS buying x number of A380s or J* to start Honolulu services, or the RAAF to buy F22s is purely conjecture, a guess, a plan, an expectation, an intention ... the FACT is in the pudding.

Perhaps I should have said that it is a fact that it is PLANNED to ...... etc

[Jamitupyr]

The cold light of day will tell all, SDE is far from implemented; the reality of taking the high level sectors, with the Point to Point concept is probably good, but what you are left with may be totally unworkable; thus the SDE gets amended. "FACT" SDE is not determined; therefore no one could "FACTUALLY" guess at staff reductions. Sure they have a target, but from what I see the mantra is service first, then work on cutting...

Pirate old son, I must beg to differ with your assertion that Aircircuses is all about service. Sure all the corporate spin says it is about service. From where I sit it is all about return to the shareholder. From what I understand, the approach to be taken to ATC is to cut 200 controllers and then get them to fit the service thats left. Well, attempt to provide a service with what's left!
The poor loser will again be the pilot. If, as Griffo's rumour suggests actually goes ahead, it seems that the ability of pilots to get information in Flight about say a destination several ATC sectors/frequencies ahead will be very difficult. The external (to ATC) standalone Flightwatch service is the simplest way to get inflight info, or make a change to flight plan. I'm sure all the regionals and freight haulers will not be pleased if they can't get the latest WX for destination/ALTN, because the "non" service delivery environment of the overloaded ATC sector is too busy, unable to handle an information request.
From what Slug has said, it looks like the proposal is pretty poorly thought out from an operational perspective, e.g. relay of infomation through several hands. It does seem dumb to put more work on fewer ATCs, and then increase the workload by doing it with relays to yet other people.
It would seem to me that the Flightwatch setup is pretty efficient as it is. You get an almost instant response to the information and the operator is the one that is guarding my Sartime. And I understand that they get less pay than controllers. ****su says that to do what Aircircuses is proposing will actually need MORE controllers. This whole thing doesn't make sense.
Maybe there are some people trying to "fly a kite" with this rumour to see if it crashes! Can anyone verify this???
Jamit:confused:

[Slugfest]

Late mail

I just heard that a workshop is planned for this coming week to thrash out all the issues of VHF Flightwatch being turned off and FIS done by ATC.

Supposedly representatives from all atc groups will attend.

It sounds like a "how to do it" rather than a "can we do it" meeting???

Yes AusFIC staff get less $$ that ATCs and do run a very lean operation with a roster that has a high ratio of console time to rostered hours (If the numbers in other posts are to be believed).

I think puece is correct in that it is impossible for AusFIC to maintain services *and* cut 20% of staff.

I don't know about the rumours v facts of staff/service cuts: but look at the rest of the "right sizing" in Airservices and you could easily conclude that some form of change is coming to the operational service.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'day to all....


History: - Step 1 - "Let's 'downsize' F.S.".....12.12.'91 ....Done!
(How? By REDUCING / ELIMINATING SERVICES....)


Step 2 - "Let's 'Get rid of F.S."......15.12.2000....Done!
(How? By REDUCING / ELIMINATING SERVICES....)
(Only took 'them' nine (9) Years!!!)

Step 3 - "Let's 'Get rid of AusFIC"......We'll start by "Downsizing"
first - THEN, we'll get rid of them......
( How? By..............................)


You can fill in the blanks.............


You've got the drift.......


Enjoy...."Air No Services".......(But, YOU still pay......)


Cheers! :{

[Icarus2001]

Enjoy...."Air No Services".......(But, YOU still pay......)

So how much does a VFR pilot pay to access the weather, submit a flightplan and SARtime, access METAR information and traffic advisories in flight via ATC or Flightwatch, cancel their SARtime and have AusSAR waiting in the background if the worst happens...

Zero

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Return to Shareholder.

Well, we all know there is only one - and supposedly that shareholder is 'employed' by all of us.

Nice theory. A post from another forum about this structure:


You describe what is essentialy the problem with most (real) businesses in Australia and indeed around the world.

Overpromising and under-delivering with the exit strategy of the golden parachute is the disease that many CEO's are infecting previously sound organisations with.

Imagine if Airservices was a real business and we actually had a shareprice to measure market sentiment? I wonder where it would have moved over the past 2 years or so?

I don't think TFN* is a fool - he is just working within the parameter he has been given - given by those to whom you probably refer (i.e. who are the idiots?).

Is it that we are really stuck with this zero-net-gain scenario as long as we continue to be a pretend business? i.e. not private and not government. Telstra is another example where the executive are stuck in an impossible position, however they have taken on their (currently) majority masters in a very public attempt to rectify the problem. The executive of Airservices have no personal interest in such courage. But would we be better being simply a government department again? In my view that is a tricky question. I think we might actually be even more politicised, and possibly even more bloated with Canberra parasites.

*TFN = Greg Russell - CEO of ASA.

Will be interesting to see if ATC's are 'consulted' or told. There is one definite fact that you can take to the bank - current ATC numbers can not take a cut in numbers and continue even their current duties - they are unable to cover their current duties with existing numbers without significant overtime, and even cancelled recreation leave. This does not take in to account acquiting outstanding recreational leave and sufficient training time for new projects (such as SDE). To then suggest that AUSFIC functions will be 'integrated' (or whatever weasel word you wish to choose) in to the ATC roles leaves only one possible outcome - the AUSFIC functions will cease to be - either that or the ATC functions will cease to be.

Even ICAO think it is a nonsense.

[Enufsaid]

Next thing you know all Airservices centres will be migrated to Indian Call Centres...
Velcom do Brisbayne (Calcutta) Cender, my name is Sanjeev, vat area vould you like me do fax do you?

[Slugfest]

Icarus2001,

"Zero"
is understood.

I'm interested to know what is your take on the provision of services to this section on industry?

Are you putting forward that no services should be provided or that there should be a cost involved?

[SM4 Pirate]

Pirate old son, I must beg to differ with your assertion that Aircircuses is all about service. Mate, don't for a second think that I believe it's all about service; the message I'm getting from all the level three Managers out there working on this (I've spoken to at least 5 of them directly and 2 level two's) is that the service needs to improve to our core customers (Qustomers and the like) that must be a good thing; stop C152s stepping on B747 transmissions etc.

There of course is likely to be some undermining of the principles by those that sit above; the board when realising how much it's all going to cost in the cold light of day may change the Mantra quickly; but until more flesh is on the bones there won't be a change in the current principles.

Do I expect a change when it comes down to dollars and cents, absolutely, but until then I think that there is some real value in exploring further these ideas.

ECS is going to have about half the ATCs, RS about 40% and UAS about 5%. This makes UAS a real cash cow (50% of the revenue and 5% of costs...) Current charges for Oceanic and continental cruise is massive; if it's done with bugger all ATC then there is your first privatised ATC unit, but that's a whole other topic...

Enufsaid, I think the concept is bring all the other airspace here, not the otherway around... "global domination, mmmuuuhhhhaaawwwaaahhhh!"

TFNs hasn't impressed many, yet, and he does appear to be here on a short term basis and probably positioning himself to maximise his payout; rumours abounding elsewhere about new recruits for MAp (but I hear the Axe and TFN don't get along)...

The real joy of this adventure is when the CA expires only 14 months to go until negotiations start again (this is why the structure must be implace by mid next year). I'm wondering how many OMs will take the current AWAs on offer, I've never seen a more pissed-off bunch of managers... Worse than taking the car deal away...

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'day Icarus,
I don't know about you, but, have you faxed a Flight Plan in recently?
Lodged a SARTIME?
Then phoned to 'confirm receipt?
Paid with your 'PHONECARD' BOTH times?? Real money.......
And, yes, CURRENTLY you CAN call FlightWatch and receive the weather etc etc for ZERO.....
I think THAT is the point 'they' are trying to stop.....(My Opinion)
Currently, nobody is actually paying for FW 'RADIO' services directly.........
But, IFR do pay for ATC en-route, who will be the SOLE provider of these services, "When Time / Workload Permits" - i.e. you may ask, but you may not necessarily receive....
Hence my comment....
Cheers:ok:

[The Voice]

:} Griffo, forever a RaDO and diplomat!

[Jamitupyr]

Griffo,
I take your point that this whole exercise has an endpoint of effectively removing the service that Flightwatch currently provides.
The posts of Pirate and co certainly convince one that putting the task on to ATC is not going to get wings. If the management is hell bent on reducing the staff as rumoured above, then the only way they can go is to stop the provision of Flightwatch!!
So is there no interest from the IFR community who call up Flightwatch for the latest weather, Are they not interested in their own safety??
As I recall, the ICAO definition of "FIS" goes something like "the provision of such advice and information so as to ensure the safety of flight".
Do these Managers that pirate quotes really want the political odium of having to justify the removal of a safety service, albeit one that is relatively revenue neutral?? As Sir Humphrey would have said: "Courageous Minister!"

[peuce]

All Airservices has to do if it wants to stop/amend/dilute its Flight Information Services is file a difference with ICAO. Jobs done

[Icarus2001]

Slugfest to answer your question. I think that the service should be provided and that it should be FOC to VFR as it now is.
My point was that Griffo was talking about paying but receiving no service. Well VFR do not pay, simple.
Griffo you obviously have a computer so why fax a plan rather than use NAIPS (free). Or why not hold on to the plan yourself but lodge a SARtime via VHF of HF for free?
Peuce I cannot find the reference at present but basically provision of SAR is mandatory so the Flightwatch-AusSAR link is likely to remain. It would be a "courageous" minister to sign the paperwork removing a USO from existence.
Listening to what the ATCO's on here have to say it appears to be unlikely to happen, not that AsA wouldn't probably love to be able to remove it.

[Slugfest]

Ta Iccy,

Why FOC? I think users should pay for the true costs for delivery (not the token 50c charge on the phoneaway card), and only that cost ie AA not to make a profit on stuff mandated that the pilot must have to go flying but neither should AA incur a cost for providing that info. Fair's fair?

Provision of SAR is mandatory for certain categories of flight - SARTIMEs are not. Most countries don't have such a "device". Neither are they a USO / CSO.

Apparently TFN/Minister has decreed that SARTIMEs will not be removed for "other" reasons: read most affected is "the bush".

Slug

[cdnfssgal]

Sounds like the way Canada is headed. FIC's all over...one proposed one cancelled. How far away is more consolidation, then eventually doing away with them entirely and having internet briefings only and SAR delegated elsewhere? Come to think of it...wasn't it a Canadian (PP) who decimated your FSS many years agao?

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Well Icarus,

Thanks for THAT rather obvious query.......
I wonder if I would have thought of that - eventually...?

Being an 'ex' means that I do know how the 'system' works - or doesn't work -so I tend to use it accordingly.
e.g. I do BUY current maps and charts / amendments etc at the INFLATED PRICES the ASA monopoly sets and INSISTS we carry - but only what I actually use / need - For Safety of course.

Why not a 'COST-ONLY- PRICE'???

VFR Doesn't pay????
Remember when...a WAC cost less than $2...???
And VTC's, ERSA's etc were FREE...???
Because it is 'REQUIRED' information??

And, I do leave 'SARTIME" and FULL DETAILS / CONTACTS with 'MUM' - it works for me - she KNOWS who to ring & what to do etc etc...ITS FREE!!!:D

However, at the Aero club from which I mostly fly, I do see students being taught the 'vagaries' of 'the system' (and other pilots who do not have convenient computer access) and inserting their phone cards and spending their money...:(

And, this younger generation of pilots will never know the 'old' system of being able to attend a manned briefing office, and receive a personal 'over the counter' briefing on weather / NOTAMs / Flight Plan education / perusal / checking etc etc....did you NEVER receive a little green 'Smiley' on your Flight Plan???? := :}

ALL FOR FREE!!!!!:D

Yeah, I know those days are GORN - NEVER to return - and now we DO pay - and pay extravagantly for all of the above......:yuk:

So, Mate(?), when next you get into your acft and go for a little VFR cross country fly, remember the items you HAVE TO carry, where you got them, how much you paid for them, and then, tell me it is free!!!!!:=

Yes - You can call FW - ask for the Area QNH - thats now being 'discouraged' - oh, but, that's still free.....:}

[Pinky the pilot]

And, this younger generation of pilots will never know the 'old' system of being able to attend a manned briefing office, and receive a personal 'over the counter' briefing on weather / NOTAMs / Flight Plan education / perusal / checking etc etc....did you NEVER receive a little green 'Smiley' on your Flight Plan????


Not to mention the fact that the FSO manning the counter would cast an 'eagle eye' over your VFR flight plan and woe betide you if you actually had made a mistake!!:} :=

I really don't give a rats a**e what some people may think but it is my humble opinion that aviation was far better then and I consider myself lucky to have learned to fly back in those times. Yes indeed things have changed in Aviation; but not for the better!:{ :{
G'day Griffo.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'day Pink....
Hows dem oranges???:ok:
I take it, you got a 'smiley' or two?

[Led Zep]

Would someone care to let me in to what one of those green smilies were? :O

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'day 'Zep',

'Twas a personal touch.....nothing 'big', but when the pilots submitted their FPL's (students in particular) for entry into 'the system',
along with the 'Date/Time' stamp on receipt of the plan, a little 'green smiley face' was added with a rubber stamp & green ink from a kid's set....
Now you can all say, aaaaahhhhh.......:yuk: or :D
At least it made the students smile......and that, often 'made our day'....

'Twas a YPJT 'thing'........and, THEY were FREE too!!!

Cheers,

QFY..:ok:

[Led Zep]

G'day Griffo,
Awwwwww, how lovely! :};)

Check yer PMs. :cool:

[Icarus2001]

Griffo, I agree with you. I loved having a briefing office. I loved having a REAL met man to talk to, face to face. Fantastic. Apparently we cannot afford all that any more. It was a little odd to just ask for a new ERC when mine was getting tatty but the WAC came with a Commonwealth government receipt for $2.00!

What has happened is the cost and the provision of this service has been transplanted to said Aero Club, (as you well know) their staff now provide the briefing facility and safety net that the government used to provide.

So all these "savings" from the Bosch report, what have we actually done with the money, sold the bloody airports...

However, my original point remains. VFR is free. It is important to keep saying that because RHS uses costs as a platform for his NAS peccadillos and it is a furphy.

Yes Griffo, you have to spend, what $150-$200 a year on charts. What does an aeroplane cost you a year to own or rent? If a PPL holder flys say 100 hours a year, it adds $2 per hour to the cost. I would argue that if you cannot afford that then find a cheaper hobby. Sorry.

Have you tried buying nautical charts lately?

Finally I was not insulting your knowledge, simply expanding and simplifying it for the newbies who may be reading.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Hey 'Icarus',
Thanks for that - its all Ok - really - we are all 'in the same boat' so to speak??
But....doesn't this continual 'downsizing' and degradation of services rendered
give you the 'irits'??
I know it certainly does me!
And we all know the 'reasons' given are pure B.S.!
Smacks of (allegedly) a new CEO coming in and making a name for himself, as we have all seen so many times before in this and other industries, then takes the big 'golden handshake' and leaves the resultant mess for the 'troops' to deal with......:ugh:
Its just, so Ho Hum, these days....
And, I hear the proposal is to 'consolidate' senior management to CBR - now there's a novel idea....so close to the 'coalface....' :yuk:

And, AT WHAT COST to the industry...??

Cheers:ok:

[The Voice]

senior management and there would be so few of those blokes too!

I'm sure there's a bit of money there that could be better spent! :p

[Pinky the pilot]

I take it, you got a 'smiley' or two?

Unfortunately they did'nt give those out at YPAD,YPFL or YCDU when I lodged my plans back in my training days Griffo. But I still remember lodging a plan for a return flight to YWKI from Ceduna which was accepted ok, but about an hour after t/o Flight Service called me to say that they had rechecked my plan and found that I had made an error in calculating my track on one leg and gave me a correction!:ok:

It was'nt called Flight Service for nothing!:ok: :ok:

[Jamitupyr]

Getting back to Griffo's original post. Well the rumour was confirmed today. Thanks to an AusFIC staffer for all the acronmyms that follow!!
AusFIC management have formally sought expressions of interest (EOI) from staff for voluntary redundancy. (VR)
They say they will achieve "efficiencies" by transferring certain functions of AusFIC to other sections of ATC, namely
1. Transfer of the Flightwatch VHF function to ATC sectors (no longer a standalone FIS external to the traffic environment)
2. Transfer of management of Sartimes with CENSAR to the Flight Data Coordinators (FDC) of the two ATC Centres. (one might presume that the FDCs would have to take on this responsibility in addition to their existing work for it to be an efficiency gain - but you can bet that they fudge it and increase the staff numbers in FDC area, simply to cut them in AusFIC)
3. Tweak the rosters of Flightwatch (both domestic and International)
4. Transfer part of the Briefing Office function on to those same FDCs who are taking on the Sartimes (namely the queue that your Flight Notification comes in when you submit it on NAIPS and your flight notification has need for manual processing foor any reason)
5. Transfer of the switching of messages on the Aeronautical Fixed Telecommunication Network (AFTN) management from AusFIC staff to technical staff (I guess these staff will have to do this in addition to their current work without increases in numbers for it to be an efficiency!)
6. Transfer of some clerical/rostering/admin functions to other admin staff in Brisbane.
Well we've seen all this before. Make the cuts first (the VRs) then find that it does not work, then re-employ those same staff later to fix up the mess after the managers responsible for these debacles are long gone.
There is a view by some that many of the staff affected who leave are more than happy to go..... so they are not victims, but those who stay behind have to do more with less, suffer more stress and are involved in the provision of a permanently degraded service for which those customers who pay, just keep paying.
However, the real victim here is the aviation industry - the pilot flying the aircraft - the pilot is getting less of what is presently provided. In-flight FIS will now be a less responsive service by busy controllers. This is again the real tragedy - they never learn.
For those controllers who have said here that all this won't happen, well if you guys are going to stop this, now is the time.
Cheers, Jamit

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Jamit,

As I am sure you are aware, those planning these projects in Canberra have an altered sense of reality. Exactly where the shiny bum silk tie types get their information from on actual resources on the ground and what these people actually do... I really shake my head in wonder.

Airservices Management finally, and quietly, shelved another of their ill fated projects this year after about 6 years in the making / not-making. The concentration of Terminal Control Units from Perth, Sydney, Adelaide and Cairns to Brisbane and Melbourne Centres has been canned. How many $M were spent on coming to the same conclusion that Civil Air and it's members gave years back? We will never know. Commerical-in-confidence of course. More like Embarassment-in-confidence. Remember - these are YOUR dollars people.

So what will happen with this new toy project as well as the other myriad on the boil? Well the track record to date suggests some re-thinking. Probably in a few years from now the realisation that ther is no spare capacity to move these responsibilities to the already stretched ATC system is possible.

Every day in Australia it is only due to the goodwill (yes there is some left) and professionalism of the ATC's who work the system that stops it being closed - practically every day large sections of airspace come within hours of being shut down because there are not the people to cover the gaps.

Amongst this environment is one of the largest projects to restruture the airspace yet again, whilst introducing new technologies and a myriad of other projects. All of these require training - but to train people they have to have time away from the roster which can not be covered as it is.

On top of this comes a rumour that management wish to reduce controller numbers by another 10%.

So forgive many of us for being a bit cynical when we see yet another scheme to make more money for the government by reducing service to the industry. Let me tell you right now - Sectors do not have time to provide a Flightwatch function.

Always ask yourself the question when a proposal comes along like this - Who proposed it and why?

[AirSic]

Yeah, I remember this mantra when I was a teenager!:ugh: :(

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Hey 'AIRSIC'.....

'Twas none other than the 'so called 'MAN' at the top at the time - electronics ring a bell?? - who coined the phrase.......wait for the denials........

12.12.1991......"Your Safety Will Be Enhanced And It Will Cost You Less!"
Well, Industry People:-

- IS YOUR SAFETY ENHANCED??

- HAS IT COST YOU LESS???
:= := :yuk: :yuk:

The REPEAT of this phrase is the ONLY thing I have'nt heard ....YET!!!

p.s. You are showing your age........:ok:

[peuce]

So forgive many of us for being a bit cynical when we see yet another scheme to make more money for the government by reducing service to the industry. Let me tell you right now - Sectors do not have time to provide a Flightwatch function.
Always ask yourself the question when a proposal comes along like this - Who proposed it and why?

****su ... if you don't take your head out of the sand soon, I think you'll be in for a very rude shock. I also think the days of ATC being bullet proof are long gone. It's happening all around you, but you guys are oblivious to it. The fact is ... there's staff being sacked every day and you lot are going to be left doing all the work.

I remember one of your collegues on these boards some months ago was, let's say, somewhat less than sympathetic about non-ATC staff being shown the door. Well, the chickens are coming home to roost. If you don't like it, you better act fast!

As to where did the proposal come from ? try, ex-ATC Managers who believe that AUSFIC do nothing and that we would all be better off without them ... a bit like 1991/92!!

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Peuce,

I don't have a bloody clue what you are on about.

ATC are hardly bullet proof - we have all seen that recently, and are far from oblivious to it.

The managers you speak of who dream up these schemes to give the government more money are the ones who are oblivious to the operational realities. That is exactly why these myriad of projects blow out in cost or time, or get shelved all together.

An interesting trend resulting from this is the number of managment/supervisor types who are scrambling to get back in to working traffic. Perhaps they just cannot swallow any more of the bull****?

You puzzle me when you say my head is in the sand - does this mean that you agree that ATC in fact CAN take on the AUSFIC role and still provide the same service all round? If so I would like to know if you are smoking the same blend dealt about in Canberra.

[peuce]

I guess my post was directed at ATCs in general (you were the closest at hand), who :

Don't appear to have much sympathy for others loosing their jobs around them
Mistakingly believe that it will never happen to them
Provide the pool of Managers who make these crazy decisions
Mistakingly believe that, just because it's not rational, that it won't happen i.e. "we're already overloaded so they won't give us extra work"
Did nothing to help stem the slaughter (once again ... "it won't happen to me")


My personal position is that it is phlosophically wrong to add FIS-on-request/Sartime creation,amendment,cancellation to the ATC platform. I want the controllers looking to see who is going to hit me ... not "have I written down that blokes flight plan correctly?".

However, I have a sufficient grasp of reality to accept that just because it's wrong, doesn't mean they won't bring it in.

I envisage, that in the long term, they will relegate the service to seperate consoles, meaning more controllers required ... at twice the salary. But they did get a short term efficiency ... that's what counts.

[tobzalp]

I believe you refered to me on page 2 and above.

Don't appear to have much sympathy for others loosing their jobs around them

My lack stands. These people had a chance 2 EBAs ago to be all under the same umbrella as us but took their 4 percent and voted for themselves and left opeational staff hanging to fight solo. This 15% reduction that gets waved around all the time is not going to come from staff looking at a screen or out a tower window.

[JackoSchitt]

tobzalp,

You obviously have an interesting slant on history. No where near correct - just interesting.

Please, tell me your "slant" on the circumstances where, in one of those EBAs to justify a pay rise, the then existing controllers SOLD OUT future controllers for their own benefit by condemming the new chums to a future of LESS PAY for the same work.

As an aside, I hope that tickets are avbl to watch ATC cope with HF and FIS and Seperation coz its going to be a piss funny show!

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Aaahhh Yes!!!!!!!!!
I can see it now.............
ATC'er genuinely busy doing separation 'things'....
RFDS SP IFR genuinely busy flying 'out the back of nowhere in the middle of the night', Ts all over the place, being asked to divert to pick up another urgent patient - said pilot calls on HF for weather info / diversion details on 'new' destination.......and calls ...and calls.....
and calls.......:ugh:
Said pilot unable to proceed to new 'pick up' as fuel is now getting to decision point, and has to proceed to 'safe' destination...........
Who would want to be the patient?? Or the Pilot??? And WHY would this condition exist at all??????????
BAD MANAGEMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:mad:
ANY solution?????....ANYBODY???:ugh:

[Shitsu_Tonka]

FSO Griff,
Fair scenario you paint. But the ATC's, pilots and FSO's are not the ones pushing for this position. Worth remembering this when we start attacking each other over past fights with the company over EBA's etc.
Remember, this is being driven by the shiny bums to make more profit for our sole shareholder - the ones who get driven around in the white cars.(Have topically heard this referred to as another round of the 'Latham Shuffle'; i.e. Dance of the Conga Line of Suckholes)
In the context of everyone is overpromising to make their masters happy but underdelivering because they don't appreciate the operational realities, or more importantly responsibilites that exist.
Having seen sectors absolutely saturated at times of the day where they have to work at optimum to acquit their existing responsibilities (often on a skeleton roster because of the 'real' staffing levels) I can see that placing the important AUSFIC responsibilites on top of this means that it simply cannot be done. No matter how much one spins the 'work smarter' line, that is simply uninformed rhetoric.
Australian ATC already work beyond the worlds best practice recommended maximum times for safe operations. How much further is this suppose to stretch? Who is going to be responsible when the inevitable happens? Will the shiny bums cry mea culpa? I don't think so.
Copied below is a posting from another website showing the actual numbers that are referred to in one of the previous posts:

You will recall the campaign about Air Traffic Controller numbers and salaries during previous CA negotiations.
So what are the numbers?
The recent Staff Survey revealed some interesting numbers on total staffing [Document not shown due copyright - but shows 1026]
Annual Report 2005 stats:
http://www.civilair.asn.au/images/staffing_ar2005.jpg
According to this Airservices commissioned survey and annual report, there are [b]493 out of a total of 1026 Air Traffic Controllers (including 51 Trainees).
1026? Hmmm. What would the break up of those controllers be do you think?
Only 1026 Operational Controllers out of a staff of 3028 would in itself alone probably surprise those stakeholders we hear so much about. They would probably question what, technical support aside, those other 2/3rds of the total staffing are up to - but of course there are Firies, TFDC, TGO, FIO etc.
But.... I wonder about those 1026 to start with. *
How many are actually operational controllers?
Well, it got me thinking about doing a real survey. I know how many people actually hold an operational line down on my roster, and I am sure you all know the same about your group. *So I have compiled a list of all the groups I can think of below (I will have missed quite a few of course, so help me fill in the gaps).
So, reply to this thread below and tell me how many controllers actually hold an operational line from your group.
I guess this also calls in to question what an operational position is - and that is something you can debate here I guess. *My suggestion would be some that has to keep a traffic separation rating current to fulfill their roster over the course of the year. What do you think?
-------------------------------------------------------
Groups:
Brisbane Centre
MORETON (37)
BYRON (22)
FRASER (22)
TOPS (39)
OUTBACK (20)
REEF (19)
OCEAN (21)
HUNTER (25)
MACQUARIE (15)
CAIRNS TCU (22)
-------------------
Melbourne Centre (correct me on these please)
TULLA (32)
BASS (30)
CANBERRA (23)[Amended:]
WEST PROC & RADAR (43)
BAROSSA ( 16 )
BIGHT ( 16 )
DESERT (27)
CENTRAL (36) ?!
ADELAIDE TCU (19)[Amended:]
PERTH TCU (21)
------------------
SYDNEY APP/DEP (59)
------------------
Towers
CAIRNS ( 18 )
MACKAY (7)
HAMILTON ISLAND (3)
ROCKHAMPTON (8)[Amended:]
MAROOCHYDORE (6)
BRISBANE TWR (25)
ARCHERFELD (10)
GOLD COAST (11)
TAMWORTH (12)
COFFS HARBOUR (4)
SYDNEY TWR (40)
BANKSTOWN/CAMDEN (15)
CANBERRA (14)
ALBURY (5)
MELBOURNE TWR (27)
ESSENDON (10)
MOORABIN (11)
ADELAIDE (20)
PARAFIELD (12)
ALICE SPRINGS (5)
PERTH TWR (19)
JANDAKOT (12)
HOBART (8)
LAUNCESTON (5)
T O T A L *S O *F A R - (871) (Assuming I can add up)

[jumpuFOKKERjump]

I hope that tickets are avbl to watch ATC cope with HF and FIS and Seperation coz its going to be a piss funny show!Well contact the Public Relations Manager at your neighborhood ATCC (provided you neighborhood is Melbourne or Brisbane) and come along for a laff. Only two rings of the circus are available though, ATC do separation & FIS but not HF. ICAO (bless 'em) frown on ATC playing with HF.

Even if the HF does move into the centres I doubt ATC will be manning the consoles. The BN FIS consoles have large control panels in addition to the woeful standard voice switching panel ATS & FIS use which are not compatible with the visual displays ATC need. I have worked Flight Service with VHF only, HF only & consoles with both, and have worked ATC both procedural & radar. If somebody can make my ATC position more efficient by moving VFR crap/briefing/traffic out of my radio coverage so I can concentrate on where the jets are then they need to be there.

[tobzalp]

tobzalp,
You obviously have an interesting slant on history.

Jacko, I was not refering to Fisos but to the recent broom through the admin people.

[JackoSchitt]

****su,

Very good points and I concur with them all. This whole exercise of the AusFIC review is about some shiny bum pulling out a plum and saying “what a good boy am I” to TFN.

FOKKER,

ICAO can frown all they like but as stated in a previous post, ICAO are guidelines, simply register a difference and move on.

BN FIS are being made redundant - VRs are on the table as of last Friday afternoon. AusFIC services are being moved into/onto ATC and FIS will be fully provided by ATC on area frequencies if you don’t do anything to stop it.

HazIDs and SCARDS and stuff are already done that say it can be so!

Don’t get me wrong here. I’m on your side!

I think the whole review is a fraud of monumental proportions and “the FIS” should continue to be a separate entity with staff truly multi-endorsed across a range of functions (Flightwatch Domestic HF, Flightwatch International HF, Flightwatch VHF, Briefing, NOTAM office, Communications Centre).

Divide it up an spread it between centres, ATCs, FDCs and Techs and you have no economies of scale or flexible staffing options.

Given that BN FIS is gooooone…..you will not have the ability to get VFR crap/briefing/traffic off you frequencies coz there ain’t no where for them to go!

I don’t know what the answer is on this. If ATC don’t want the full FIS workload on their area frequencies, then I guess they had better start speaking out against the proposals proper….but will they???

Tobzalp,

A lot of those people do things for you like arrange your salary sacrifice benefits, pay your salary, maintain facilities that you need to control stuff, plan and fill your rosters, plan and conduct your training, support your ATC functions and ensure that your daily duties complies with legislation and regulation in all its forms etc, etc, etc. Comments like the one you have made are really un-warranted.

[peuce]

The good thing about all this is that there is now no chance of Dick saying that we have/should have a "US-Like" system ... they have ATC separating and FS advising. Once we amalgamate here, any resemblance to the US System is gooonnneee.....

All we need to do now is wait for the fat lady. As JACKO said ... the Safety Assessments are done (that justifies what the "shiny bums" have done .. so they are safe), the redundancies have been dispensed ... it's time to lie down and take it like a man!

P.S. Who participated in all the Safety Assessments and HAZIDs and gave it all the thumbs up? ..... the ATCs. So, I don't know what they have to complain about ....

[Sunfish]

I just keep thinking of those two guys who crashed in the Blue Mountains and lived for about five days before they died. No flight plan, no EPIRB, no Sartime.........No rescue.

When I first went for a ride in a Piper Tri Pacer circa 1970 the rule seemed to be "no sparrow shall fall"...OK, I'm a superannuated old fart.

And of course while the service deteriorates, the costs don't go down do they?

[DirtyPierre]

P.S. Who participated in all the Safety Assessments and HAZIDs and gave it all the thumbs up? ..... the ATCs. So, I don't know what they have to complain about ....
Not true. As one of the technical specialists who was to be involved (but couldn't make it, I was required on the console!), I know that there are no operational ATCs that want or think that ATC sectors performing AUSFIC functions is a good thing.

Also, a HazID will not stop this happening. They'll just put in mitigators to reduce the hazards and get it signed off. Very little the ATCs can do about this.

Stop shooting at ATCs, we don't want the demise of AUSFIC. As a former smelly, I have watched my mates loose their jobs for a number of years. There is nothing I can do to stop this.

[Jamitupyr]

The good thing about all this is that there is now no chance of Dick saying that we have/should have a "US-Like" system ... they have ATC separating and FS advising. Once we amalgamate here, any resemblance to the US System is gooonnneee.....
All we need to do now is wait for the fat lady. As JACKO said ... the Safety Assessments are done (that justifies what the "shiny bums" have done .. so they are safe), the redundancies have been dispensed ... it's time to lie down and take it like a man!
P.S. Who participated in all the Safety Assessments and HAZIDs and gave it all the thumbs up? ..... the ATCs. So, I don't know what they have to complain about ....


Peuce Maaaaatttteeee!

What I don't get here, is - have the Capn Bloggs & Co types woken up to what is about to befall the professional aviator?? Are you RAPAC types listening to this discussion? I think it is about to bite you??

It seems to me that these poor few AusFICers have little voice, nor forum to voice what they say - I suppose they just want to keep providing their service, but the "shiny bums" are doing their level best to stop them (as per Griffo's scenario),

The ATCers are saying "it won't happen" (just like the Class G trial of 1999 or the various NAS attacks)

The only group with real weight in the argument (sic) could be CASA, yet I suspect that they have not even been consulted by the accountant now running Aircircuses on this one.

RAPAC is a forum that is entitled to ask hard questions - about how it will affect their operations on a dark and stormy night.

Come on RAPACs, ask Aircircuses what it is up to here!!

Best - Jamit

[Shitsu_Tonka]

I don't think the ATC'ers are saying it won't happen.

They are saying that the service can not be provided.

You can only squeeze so much out the stone.

The term 'unable' will be transmitted regularly I should imagine.

[peuce]

There is nothing I can do to stop this.

Truer than you think.

I daresay that many in AusFIC, fed up with the continual "ethnic clensing" mentality of Airservices, relish this opportunity to leave with a truckload of extra cash ... especially as many would be approaching retirement age anyway.

Once they depart, there's no going back. They ain't gunna recruit and train for Ausfic.

If they have a sudden change of heart and decide not to close it (unlikely), there will be a revolt from those promised a package and who had started re-organising their lives.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

Hey 'Tonka'........
I do believe I called it as 'BAD MANAGEMENT'........did I not??
I fully realise it is NOT the 'Troops' who are pushing this so called 'efficiency'...
HENCE MY POST!!!!!!
:= :ok:


As I see it from the 'outside', the only efficiencies to be gained are to delete the 'jobs for the boys' middle management, to the actual number required to run the show - and for them to be located at the 'coalface', AND hold ratings so as to 'fill in' 'as required' from time to time - NOT to be located remotely somewhere half way between SY & ML - commensurate with the actual number of admin staff to handle the actual admin, and leave the separation / training to the boys and girls who actually do the job!

Further, I feel that the only way this situation could be achieved, is by the INDUSTRY supporting / lobbying for this EFFICIENCY - after all, it IS in THEIR BEST interests and they are the PAYing customers....the FED GOVT being the 'major stakeholder' couldn't care less - we see THAT - and, the 'shinies' are not really going to do the 'right thing'...are they??:= :yuk:

So, it all boils down to THE INDUSTRY who provides the FUNDING - do YOU want an efficient ATC / FIS 'system' or not??

Further thoughts???:ok:

[DOWNWARDS]

Those of us who want to stay, just want to get on with our jobs, without the axe hanging over our heads all the time! There is no way I want a package (to young). I enjoy my job and do it well! But its hard to keep going when the Boss tells us that no matter how hard we try to provide an efficient and cost effective service, they long term plan is to close down the shop. HF (both Domestic and International) will stay, but eventually will be at stand alone consoles in centre. VHF FIS will go the ATC next year. Briefing will slowly go to FDC over the next year or two and be provided with less staff requiring a longer wait on the phone for pilots. Ways and means will be found to make it less likely for a pilot to call in for a voice briefing or to put in a plan over the phone.

Yes, I will still have a job, but what it will be and where it will be, no one knows. Future career path progression unknown.

The stupid thing is that in the end they will get rid of the AUSFIC, but will have to put on more Flight Data staff and ATC to do the job, we do now already! There is no way that Roper sector will handle the number of VFR Sartimes that are submitted every day out of Gove on a good weather day let alone during bad weather when constant updates to Met reports are requested! More Techs will be required to take on the Communication Centre Role.

Just does not make sense to me at all! And who are “they” anyway?

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

No responses from anyone connected with The Industry / RAPAC I see.......hhhmmmm....

Ah well!

How many AusFIC VR's being 'taken up'?? Anybody??

ATC staffing still to be reduced?? VR's still on the table here??

So many questions....so few answers!

So few staff....so little services...:ugh:

Cheers:confused: