Beyond Destinations?

[Winnie The Pooh]

Anyone read Shaping Our Future on the NATS Intranet? Not surprised if the answer is no :eek: but this is ........interesting

(from the notes of Paul's speech)



We are coming to the end of the Destinations programme and the start of whatever we invent beyond itInvent?:\

[GT3]

So how many of the destinations have been met?

[London Mil]

Surely you don't 'meet' a destination, you 'arrive' at one? Good to see he is concerned about the French feeling marginalised. :8

[Gonzo]

GT3, perhaps you arrive at the wrong destination?

Like that bloke from Manchester who turned up in Sydney, Cape Breton Island in Canada instead of Sydney, Australia, wearing only shorts in January!

[Roger That]

I'm told about a dozen or so have been met already, a handful aren't sure yet and few won't be "arrived at" :cool:

[Standard Noise]

We've met (unlucky?) 13, 3 won't be met and the jury's still out on the others. Oh, and even though we've met one, it's being classed as not met in case we all get too complacent!

[Jerricho]

and few won't be "arrived at"

.....which will be blamed on ATC delays.

[anotherthing]

So if we do not arrive at the destinations, is this our failing, or Barrons for trying to implement stupid management speak type goals.

How many people do we employ in those offices at to come up with these 'destinations' (what do aaallll those office workers do all day? Genuine question - does our company require so many admin types?).... are their jobs safe if we fail to meet the destination?

Are our jobs safe because we failed to reach their destinations?

Is Barrons job safe because he does not understand (nor wants to) ATC?

"SSE1s will not be tolerated" springs to mind.... how to win friends and influence people Mr B! :ugh:

We'll have some more destination type thingys soon no doubt... though like last time, they will take longer to be devised than we will be given to try to implement them. They will be followed by many roadshows (which incurs expense), to explain them to us... then they will probably be swept under the carpet again in a couple of years time.

Why can't management get back to basics instead of all these fancy words and phrases... not just prevalant in NATS either. It's a lot of bull:mad: :mad: IMHO.

[letMfly]

I went on a course recently with thirteen other NATS employees. Only three of us were operational ATCOs. Of the other eleven office workers I could honestly only work out why four of them were employed by NATS. The others were doing jobs that were really more of a CAA concern, or ones which our contractors should already be taking care of.
"Destinations" was discussed as part of the course. Oddly enough, the operational ATCOs all thought it was a complete load of rehashed management bo!!ocks, wheareas the penpushers all thought that it "gelled the workforce and pushed NATS forward as one":yuk:
BTW is there any truth that the new management initiative will take all the best bits of "Destinations" and merge them with "New Horizons" and call it .....let me think........"New Destinations"?

[BDiONU]

I went on a course recently with thirteen other NATS employees. Only three of us were operational ATCOs. Of the other eleven office workers I could honestly only work out why four of them were employed by NATS. The others were doing jobs that were really more of a CAA concern, or ones which our contractors should already be taking care of.
"Destinations" was discussed as part of the course. Oddly enough, the operational ATCOs all thought it was a complete load of rehashed management bo!!ocks, wheareas the penpushers all thought that it "gelled the workforce and pushed NATS forward as one":yuk:
Darn! You've sussed us all out now. Obviously we've got no work to do, our only reason for being employed by NATS is to bolster der Red Barron's edicts and to push the company motto and management speak :}

BD

[Token Sane Person]

Quoth anotherthing:

"SSE1s will not be tolerated" springs to mind.... how to win friends and influence people Mr B! :ugh: Would you prefer to work for an organisation where SSE1s are routinely tolerated, as in "hey, the controller was only human, people make mistakes sometimes, and the tools/procedures/whatever to stop that kind of mistake in the future would cost too much"? :confused:

Personally I prefer to work for an organisation that is going to find out what led to the mistake, and seek to ensure that the root cause is eliminated, as opposed to the person in the hot seat at the time.

[Married a Canadian]

Sane person

I think it was the way that destination was phrased that annoyed most controllers.

Sounds a wee bit too "fierce":eek:

[BEXIL160]

Mr Sane,

The person who wrote the "will not tollerate" destination was asked several times to change the wording to something more appropriate.

If the aim was to improve safety the initiative failed at the first hurdle because the writer Failed to communicate his message effectively and did not listen to or act upon the resultant feedback"

But then, there is the Doctrine of Management Infallability to consider:rolleyes:

BEX

[anotherthing]

Mr Sane,

it was the phrasing that raised peoples hackles...

NATS has an extremely good safety record - and it's not as if ATCOs wake up one morning and think.. "I've not had an incident for a while, I think I will have one today", the phrase 'not be tolerated' infers that we do not care if we have an incident - it's complete tosh and is a prime example of how some management workers have absolutely no idea what air traffic control (NATS primary business), is about.

And thats what is worrying!!

[radarman]

anotherthing,
I'm not at all sure that air traffic control is NATS primary business any more. NATS is now a corporate entity, run by, and for, management clones for their own glorification. Running a successful business now seems to be the core aim, with everything aimed single-mindedly at the holy grail of cost cutting. Controllers, unfortunately, seem to be little more than expensive drones and soldier ants, slaving away to cram ever more aircraft into airports to make even more money for the operators. These 'Destinations' are just a symptom of the increasing hold of the managing class on NATS, and there are meetings being held right now to decide the future of the business. So you haven't heard the last of it. Time's up now, back to my headset. :ugh:

[Gonzo]

Radarman, I have to agree. I've submitted this to 'Pulse'. Wonder what response it will get.....
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Dear Editor,


I write to register my disappointment at the announcement of the 'NATS Awards'


Last summer I had a long conversation with a senior HR manager regarding the increasing divergence of the operational and non-operational sides of the organisation. I was describing what I would like to do, if I was in a position to do so, to reward, recognise and provide incentive to, my fantastic team of OJTIs during my stint as a Watch Training Officer. The scope of this discussion then widened to encompass the whole operational work force, and how we need to be engaged and approached in a completely different way to non-op staff. A fact that our top management have always struggled to overcome.


There is a growing feeling among the operational staff that NATS is increasingly seeing us as an irritant, something to be endured or tolerated: Electronic rostering that heaps workload on to operational staff during what should be responsibility-free breaks; Increasing use of email to disseminate vital information by non-op staff not realising that we may not be at work during the week; 21 Destinations that, to my colleagues and I at least, mean nothing at all; Visiting the CTC as I do more than once a month and seeing Plasma TVs all over the place, and returning to my unit where there are damp stains creeping across many ceilings and broken air conditioning units.


I was then made aware of the then 'hush hush' project to develop a NATS awards scheme. I remember my words at the end of that conversation: The last thing most operational staff would want to do is go to a posh venue in London for a black tie dinner with a token senior manager on each table, and to be presented with an engraved tankard or similar – having discussed the matter with many of my colleagues, they all agree with me. It remains to be seen how accurate that statement is, but it does sound strangely familiar.

I was contacted in September and asked to get involved in planning this project. I assume my ideas and thoughts discussed that day found their way to someone responsible. The email I received was addressed to five staff members. I was pleased that there were going to be two operational ATCOs (perhaps more, I didn't recognise all the names) contributing to this, perhaps lending it some credibility in the eyes of my colleagues. However, even at that stage it seemed as though many of the details had been finalised. However, one important task this 'working group' had to accomplish was to nominate the judging panel. I dutifully replied, explaining when I would be free to attend meetings on this matter. I was looking forward to ensuring there was a fair representation on the panel, and perhaps put forward some alternative 'prizes' or 'awards' that might hold some attraction to operational staff.

I never was invited to any meeting, and the other ATCO who's name I recognised is in the same position. I had to ask my GM to allow me to have up to four days off work in anticipation of these meetings. At least now I can go back and inform him I won't need those days.


And now the Awards scheme has been officially announced. The panel consists of a life peer, and HR consultant and an airline CEO and of course Mr. Barron. Yes. Very representative.


Many operational staff will consider the fact that the only award that seems to be relevant to us, the award for excellence in Air Traffic Management, is only open to 'a person or organisation, outside of NATS', is an indication of how much the organisation wants to engage and involve us in the future. How about my colleagues who perform miracles and deliver excellence in ATM every day, faced with ever growing difficulties? Which award are they eligible for? Please let me know and I'll start writing over one hundred nomination forms.



There are those of us who want to get involved in this type of venture, want to attempt to help in making the organisation more relevant to the operational staff. Operational staff (especially ATCOs) who are not completely cynical aren't too numerous; our offers of help should not be ignored so quickly.


Yours faithfully........
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

[GT3]

:D

Shame they (HE) wont take any notice Gonzo.

Since his aviation club speech Our Dear Leader has clearly laid down how he feels about operational ATCOs. In all honesty I think that he thinks he can get rid of troublesome ATCOs and find some new ones to replace us very quickly. Sadly the corportate world in which NATS now operates, for a profit I will add, does not consider ALL of its staff.