Air Traffic Control Assistants

[GBALU53]

We were told today that a number of Air traffic units around the country were cutting back on assistants is this information correct??
We were also informaed today all the assistants when our air traffic move to there new centre there will be no requirment for any assistants at all.
Is this good for the controllers??:ugh:
The reason for cutting back on the assistants is due to the new automated equipments going in including electronic flight progress strips is all this asking for trouble??
So what next?? No controllers and all the aircraft do there own air traffic.
After all a good assistant can be worth they wait in gold when things are busy and a less than half there salary.
So could we have been sold down the air waves?? :sad:

[ZOOKER]

Unfortunately, new automated equipment does not answer the telephone, or look out of the window, or know when it's all going 'pear-shaped'.
Don't worry though, with the money saved, ANSPs will have the finances to employ lots of HR/HF bods and a plethora of environmental 'managers'. :ok:

[eastern wiseguy]

GBALU53...Who are "we"?

It is no secret that the assistant grade is becoming less relevant or viable. (Cue injured sensibilities about how they saved various backsides.) Unfortunately the world we live in now requires EVERYONE to contribute to the collective profit. ATSA's earning top of the scale for a diminishing amount of work just aren't part of the master plan.


p.s your spelling is dreadful.

[ZOOKER]

"a diminishing amount of work"
Would that include making the official half-hourly aerodrome METAR observation perchance?

[eastern wiseguy]

Yes....and thats only a little bit of work making up for a plethora of tasks no longer carried out.(Aerodrome ATSA's only)

[ZOOKER]

Hmm...
I think UK Met Office Assistant Scientific Officers might disagree with you on that.
Er, sorry, I forgot. 'MULTI-TASKING'!
Doing several jobs badly at the expense of doing one job properly. :}

[eastern wiseguy]

I was married to one of those and SHE worked hard ...for a lot less money. Whats your experience?....None is my guess.

[GBALU53]

Now Now girls you are getting off the topic

[chiglet]

We were also informaed today all the assistants when our air traffic move to there new centre there will be no requirment for any assistants at all.


IF you mean MACC moving to NPC, then the "information" that you? were given is incorrect.
ATSAs are moving "up North" [not all, admittedly]...OOI, where are you stationed?

[OA32]

The centre concerned is down south and I believe it will be the first Area/Approach centre in Britain to have electronic strips.

[cdtaylor_nats]

No it won't - Oceanic Control at Prestwick dispensed with paper strips for routine ATC in 1987.

[Slider57]

Interesting comments about the lack of work coming from the ATSA's. At my unit they are happy to take on the jobs that the ATCO's don't want to do.

If the company gets rid of them, who will take on all the work they currently do. Very few ATCO's are prepared to do it unless they are paid more, well thats what they keep saying.

[Hootin an a roarin]

NSL's goal is to rid themselves of the ATSA grade.

They fully expect the ATCO's to bend over and carry out old ATSA duties, Met being one, as certain aerodromes doon sooth do this anyway. They are trying to bring this in slowly by using the old 'contingency' ploy. We all know if we do this then it will become normal OPS and we will be sold down the river by the Union. The only reason I believe that we are not doing these duties as a matter of course now is that we (the union) have not been offered enough money to carry out these duties. However you can bet that when proposed it will be put to the vote and seeing as it only affects NSL then the majority of the union (NERL) will take the extra % on offer as it doesn't affect them.

From my point of view money isn't the issue, I would sooner have an assistant and for instance object to having to undertake 1/2 hourly met obs on a night shift whilst on a break.

[DC10RealMan]

I am sure that I am being old fashioned here in this brave new world of nats,but isnt there another view that atcos should refuse that extra few pounds to save the jobs of colleagues who have families, mortgages, school fees etc to pay. I consider it reprehensible that the unions are negotiating colleagues livelihoods away in such a cavalier manner

[autothrottle]

DC10 ,

You are SOOOO old fashioned!;)

[GBALU53]

What are controllers views, can a unit like this one as being down can a unit operate without and assistance be it an ATCA or ATSA??
A quote from a NATS colleague ( A good assistant can be worth there wait in gold when things get very busy)
A number of units handle differant types of movements most NATS or nearly all handle very limited light and VFR aircraft. Now a days with restrictions executive jets have been known to go VFR, working London Information yesterday a Executive Jet was crossing the Channel Low level, all be it these types of flights are at a reduced speed burning lots of fuel but they happen for a number of reason possible due over weight for landing so you burn fuel and need to fly low level.
The unit concerned is it an ATSU??? if so are they not required to proved some flight planning facility??, if so should they not assist with flight plans as and when required??
Last question is automation one hundered percent?? as I understand that is why the ATCAs are being fassed out.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<What are controllers views, can a unit like this one as being down can a unit operate without and assistance be it an ATCA or ATSA??>>

Very sorry but I cannot understand this. "Can a unit like this one as being down can a unit...." What does that mean, please?

<<A quote from a NATS colleague (A good assistant can be worth there wait in gold when things get very busy)>>

I think you mean "worth their weight in gold"? The ATCAs I worked with in NATS were worth their weight in gold ALL the time, not just when it was busy and I held them all in very high regard.

Problem is that technology is taking over many tasks so humans are not needed in such numbers. When I started at Heathrow the Approach Room had 8 operational positions for ATCOs. I believe at Swanwick they now get away with 3 or 4 and shift almost twice the amount of traffic.

[White Hart]

'technology' will not help you when 'technology' falls flat on its 'fk me, they told us that would never happen' face.

and one day, it will.

[Me Me Me Me]

Wow it's like the Luddites all over again! :\

It is the job of TUs to try to protect jobs... but they can only do so if they have valid grounds. Wanting to ignore progress and do things "the old way" in order to keep people in jobs is not valid grounds.

Change should always be challenged to make sure it actually is better - generally it is!

(he replied via a touch-screen, multi-media handset whilst waiting in line at the sandwich shop........ bring back typing pools!! :ok: )

[ZOOKER]

So, Me Me,
You're in a queue. Why, is the sandwich shop understaffed? Why is that?
Why are you in a sandwich shop anyway? Is it because you don't have time to make your own sandwiches due to pressure of work? Love that "Meal Deal"! :E
Why not go to a restaurant for lunch? Ah, not enough time, or, TU's have negotiated away your workplace staff restaurant.- A Shame.
Anyway why bother going? It will only be full of loud-mouthed, networking nutters using the 'latest technology' to say "Hi, I'm in the restaurant at the moment, if you can't pickup, just drop me an email and I'll get back to you ASAP"
Check out the dumbed-down dross on the TV channels, check out the music scene and then, if it's safe to do so, go for a stroll around the litter and vomit-strewn boulevards of your local 'clone town'.
I'm sure you'll agree, change is generally for the better! :ok:

[DC10RealMan]

Me Me Me

I do not disagree with progress and/or change. I would suggest that a lot of these "improvements" are money/bonuses/management career driven with safety coming a poor second or third. I just do not see that the respective unions should encourage their members to cooperate with it.

[middles]

With the current technology EFD will not work on TMA/N andTMA/S. It will probably work on some of the 'feed' sectors and the approach positions but with the absense of some kind of E&S (ATSA to do the input perhaps?) the workload in busy sessions is to great.

[chiglet]

GBALU53
I say again......what unit do you work at?
Or are you a Troll? Or a Walt? With your spelling and grammar, I suspect the latter.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Hi Chiglet.. Good number of them on PPRuNe I'm afraid.

[Eggs Petition]

Couple of abbreviations that are passing me by here. Am I showing my age?

Middles: can you help me with E&S please.

Chiglet: what on earth is a Walt???!

[anotherthing]

Eggs

Walt - abbreviation for 'Walter Mitty' - a character masquerading as something he was not. Most often 'Walt' is used in military circles, but has found its way more and more into civvy street.

Based on the lead character in James Thurbers' short story 'The Secret Life of Walter Mitty' in which Walter fantasises about situations he is in

Each of the fantasies is inspired by some detail of Mitty's mundane surroundings:

The powering up of the "Navy hydroplane” in the opening scene is followed by Mrs. Mitty's complaint that Mitty is "driving too fast", which suggests that his driving was what led to the daydream.
Mitty's turn as a brilliant surgeon immediately follows his taking off and putting on his gloves (as a surgeon dons surgical gloves) and driving past a hospital.
The courtroom dram cliché "Perhaps this will refresh your memory", which begins the third fantasy, follows Mitty's attempt to remember what (besides overshoes) his wife told him to buy; and also a newspaper vendor using news of a trial to sell his papers. (Thurber once used the same line to caption a cartoon in which a prosecutor shows the defendant akangaroo.)
Mitty's romanticized version of British pilots in the early days of WW1 is inspired from his looking at "an old copy of Liberty’, which contains images of a war in which the United States was not yet involved at the time of the story's publication. The closing firing-squad scene comes when Mitty is standing against a wall, smoking.

[White Hart]

me me,

Luddites we are not. Part of the NATS operational staff trying to be logical about the workload impact/safety aspect of new technology on service provision, yes. Trying to save some of our jobs is something which anybody in our position would do - even you. Unions? dont even go there. The only thing which would ever have a real impact on this part of the dilemma is for those who readily speak of ATSAs being 'worth their weight in gold' and having 'utmost admiration' for us to actually get up of their ar*es, state this to the Mgmt who are trying their best to remove us and the service we can provide, and genuinely offer more than just moral support. If you think that ATSAs genuinely can be/are of benefit to the operation, then tell Mgmt so! :mad:

The alternative is for the tasks being relinquished by many of us to be foisted onto ATCO shoulders. Automation is not always what it seems. Many of the tasks are not going away - just being redeployed. If you're happy with sitting there doing your own job and somebody else's on top (especially during a systems outage), then no amount of reasoning is going to change your mind.

[middles]

Eggs, E&S=Executive and support

[GBALU53]

Chiglet

My spelling was not on the top list at school, being of mature years I am unable to find the computer spell check.

A number of people on this forum know where I am talking about, I am not going to shoot myself down the airwaves and tell the world which unit we are talking about.

I might even be one of the ATCA,s or ATSA,s that is already down the airwaves awiting a P45 to go to the labour exchange with.

[Eggs Petition]

Anotherthing: thankyou, I've learned something. Might even have to watch the film too now.

Middles: do you mean a Planner? Has there been a re-naming exercise? Excuse my ignorance as an APR controller.

[3miles]

The point is that the role is changing like it or not. Technology is replacing many of the tasks that ATSA's had to do, especially in Twr/App units of recent time, (a side not here NSL assistants generally for many years have worked harder, more hours with more tasks than NERL ones, yet get paid far less!) Assistants are worth their weight in gold, in more ways than just when it gets busy or something unusual, but it is a fact that when this isnt the case, their tasks are more limited now than before. EFPS, Full automated Met, CDM tools which perform autologging, FIDS updates etc. Even in some cases the way ATCO postions are now manned such as planners, co-ordinators, or use of Radar1 Radar2 are all reducing the continuous need for ATSA's. They are a great asset, when you consider them being another pair of eyes, to handle that strange time consuming telephone call from some nutter, sorting out some flightplan cockup etc. But very hard to quantify that all the time.

What frustrates though, is that all this arguing about ATSA's isnt going to save them their jobs. What becomes totally mad, is that when you see opportunites for ATSA's to become involved in other tasks to re-generate their wort, the response you can often be faced with is that isnt "in the WP" or " The union wont allow that" or "What will I get paid for that?" So their jobs are at risk because what they do is being replaced by technology, yet sometimes when given the chance to replace their lost tasks with new ones to help secure their future and make them that much needed part of the team again, the Union! Again actually just help them out of the door that much quicker.

Change is happening....ATSA's need to be apart of it, not become a victim of it, in order that they keep their at the end of the day very well paid jobs. If you are asked to help out on the simulator, be involved in a project, take on another task do it....becasue then you will have a reason to argue why the company shouldnt get rid of you, other than our cries of you being worth your weight in gold.

[GBALU53]

The two BUZZ words at the moment,

Safety Management and Risk assesment.:suspect:

I take it both of these have been fully looked into in this case??::suspect:

With no assistant in two years time and new equipment not fully tested in an area like the one the subject is on, what happens when all goes pear shape with the new equipment failsing???

The airport which I understand is on an Island along with a number of other Islands all comes to a grinding halt and closes for a number of days???

Good for trade????:(:(:(:ugh::ugh:

[3miles]

GBALU53

I get the feeling that you are somewhat new to the "NATS" experience?

Safety Management and Risk assesment are in no way new Buzz Words. It will be within the realms of these that assistants can be phased out, a Unit Safety Case, which all units are legally bound to have under both european and CAA law as its part of the Safety Manual. Have a read of CAP670 to see that it isnt specific to NATS. But basically an ATSA and also any new systems so example EFPS will all be risk assessed and the assistants have published safety accountabilities....hence my view that if they make sure they do more then there is less option to have them replaced! Then the value that we put in ATSA's that cant be documented in a Safety Case, wont be lost.

As I say Change is happening....they need to be part of it i order to secure their future. Its a fact some are going....we/they need to make sure it isnt all of them!

[RVR600]

3miles:

<<What becomes totally mad, is that when you see opportunites for ATSA's to become involved in other tasks to re-generate their wort, the response you can often be faced with is that isnt "in the WP" or " The union wont allow that" or "What will I get paid for that?" So their jobs are at risk because what they do is being replaced by technology, yet sometimes when given the chance to replace their lost tasks with new ones to help secure their future and make them that much needed part of the team again, the Union! Again actually just help them out of the door that much quicker.

Change is happening....ATSA's need to be apart of it, not become a victim of it, in order that they keep their at the end of the day very well paid jobs. If you are asked to help out on the simulator, be involved in a project, take on another task do it....becasue then you will have a reason to argue why the company shouldnt get rid of you, other than our cries of you being worth your weight in gold.>>

If you are happy to take on the work, project or tasks that were originally done by either several people or somebody of a higher grade until they became victims of the cost savings, then more power to you and I respect your reasons why.

However, if it is in the mistaken belief that it will make your position more secure then you could not be more wrong. When it comes to judgement day for you, management will show you exactly how they value your worth by asking you to bend over the desk and whilst having a good old rumage will pass the P45 around with the other hand, in the same way they have/will do with others.

I think I would rather jump before being pushed and leave with my dignity in tact before I fell into the smeagol way of thinking, which seems to be getting championed by management and union alike.

[BALLOO53]

3miles
From what I understand those buzz words are new to the centre which the topic relates to??

[3miles]

3miles
From what I understand those buzz words are new to the centre which the topic relates to??

Well if the centre that the poster is reffering to is within the UK, or even in fact europe, then they are most certainaly not new, whether it be a TWR/APP unit or a Centre...they all require to have a Safety Management System in place by law, its not a NATS idea, its Aviation Law. and has been for some time. How that SMS gets put together has strict guidance, and is required to be audited and approved by SRG/CAA and European legislation.

Along with Job accountabilites and Safety Accountabilites for each role....which is what links to the ATSA's. Read there Safety Accountabilites, and when you read, provide Met observations, input flight data, etc...and see that they dont exist anymore because they have been replaced by technology, then it becomes a difficult fight for the ATSA's not to lose their job, Their Weight in Gold is difficult to put on a Saftey Accountability, along with fielding Phone calls, sorting out bad flightplans, running to get you a support controller, being another valuable pair of eyes. But some of the other tasks that could be taken up by assistants, to replace the tasks that they dont do anymore, would ensure when you read their safety Accountabilities, make them a lot harder to get rid of then. As the other cynical poster points out, management and the Unions are not here to be nice and think of peoples mortgages, they deal in how much money they can safe, and yes they will look to loading other peoples jobs together, but then lets face it there an awfull lot of dross in NATS, doing jobs with massive teams that could be done by fewer individuals. But perhaps the reason VN's keep coming up for these positions, is because the staff we have wont do it! at the end of the day its far cheaper for NATS to keep the ATSA, not employ a load of others if the ATSA's took on some of these roles, and quite honestly I'd have thought especially some of the younger ATSA's they would relish the task of getting an opportunity to develop a career and not see their job become mundane because of the amount of technology thats taken away a lot of their work.

[Flaps ten please]

RVR600 makes perfect sense to me :ok:

[OA32]

Oddly enough, the unit isn't part of the UK and in fact not part of Europe although some would try to disagree. So SMS and QMS are relatively new terms.

[Neptune262]

It would be interesting to read the risk assessment that says it is safer to run without ATCAs!!:ugh:

[cdtaylor_nats]

It doesn't need to be safer, just no less safe

[White Hart]

so, in a systems outage situation, ATCOs attending to what were once ATSA tasks in addition to their own tasks is no less safe?

Having worked in an EFPS-equipped tower, I agree that the new technology can take the ATSA requirement away - I've seen it firsthand. However I've also seen one particular EFPS-equipped ATCO position go into one-armed paperhanger mode - even when the system is working OK - just down to sheer workload.

If the system went tilt (and there's never a guarantee that it won't) then for those left in the tower, the policy to remove the support staff may just get called into question.

[chiglet]

If the system went tilt (and there's never a guarantee that it won't) then for those left in the tower, the policy to remove the support staff may just get called into question.

Change the word "Tower" to "Centre".........
Lights blue touchpaper, and stands well back

[Neptune262]

"cdtaylor_nats - It doesn't need to be safer, just no less safe"

True, but a knowledgable person on the team carrying out the risk assessment should be instantly able to argue that it will be less safe!

ALARP shouldn't concentrate on just the cost saving after many years!

I am sure the initial outlay for the technology will be more than the first years annual salaries for all ATCAs!

[OA32]

Nice one Chiglet, try adding centre to tower and it's closer to the unit in question. Does anyone work in a centre environment with EFPS where there are no assistants and no planners? That is what they are proposing.

As for the comments about evolving the position, the only way to do this (and most sensible option) is to close down the current waste-of-space-and-totally-unprofessional-get-paid-more-to-do-less operations department and give the tasks to the assistants (who are more capable and deserving).

[BALLOO53]

Well said OA32
With one or two operations departments closing around the countyside it sounds a good idea to follow them.
I take it the operations department is new to where you are talking about??
Some operations departments can be worth they wait in gold when as they do the job as per the tin.

Some of the tasks done by the operations department is better done by the Air Traffic staff as they are in a better position to handle the traffic.

Some operations staff call them selves controllers, which is a joke, the only thing they get close to, is controlling stand alllocation which is not the same as an Air Traffic Controller.

[3miles]

Having worked in an EFPS-equipped tower, I agree that the new technology can take the ATSA requirement away - I've seen it firsthand. However I've also seen one particular EFPS-equipped ATCO position go into one-armed paperhanger mode - even when the system is working OK - just down to sheer workload.

To play devils advocate here, lets say no EFPS, but strip based system, outputted from strip printers connected to either NAS, or some other system, copperchase say for example is in use at a unit....already that is a electronic partly automated system in place(good old days ATSA's would write out everystrip or manualy print them) only manual part of it is the assistant putting the paper into plastic holders and throwing them at the controller. Now NAS goes down, printer blows up, or copperchase computer gets fried. Hmmm dont we now have the same problem that would occur if EFPS goes wrong? The same increase in workload? The same issues in getting FlightData to the controller?

The difference is that when all is working fine, EFPS doesnt need someone to put strips into holders, EFPS links to other systems, such as the movement log, FIDS displays, connects to various CDM tools, so apron planning, Flow, taxi checks etc all again become automatically done rather than needing the ATSA.

Which ever system you look at, if they fail, then **** hits the fan, workload will increase, the fact remains that while the system is working the EFPS route means no Manual input needed from an ATSA. So make EFPS and these systems robost reduces risk of any problems, improves risk score, then mitigate against it failing, so flow control, other ATCOS to help etc and then it suddenly becomes a viable option.

Regards cost of equipment agaisnt cost of ATSA. Well first off, NATS (or in case of this post, the place where TAX isnt a swear word) doesnt become such an issue, cant speak completely for the unit in question, but most NATS units are unlikely to have funded the total cost of EFPS, with it being shared or totally funded by the Aerdome operator. NATS reduces cost in staffing, which makes NATS richer, some of this can be passed back to the aerodrome operator so reduces cost of contract, its a one off cost, where the ATSA salary is a continuous and increasing cost, along with all the other issues people cause that technology doesnt. The airport may make other cost saving gains, by being able to reduce their ops dept becuase of other automation that can be used that links into the EFPS and CDM software, so they see the benefits of paying for it. They also likely to pay for it, becuase if they choose to bin NATS they dont want NATS running off with the equipment!

All Nails in the coffin for the ATSA....and one less Safety Accountability on the list in the SMS...one less reason to have them, hence why again to keep ATSA's for all the reasons that those of us who value the "UnDocumented" Work that they do. I say that ATSA's need to not let the Unions or their own attitudes make them not able to take on more roles. So training, Simulator work, do tasks that maybe Apron do(Stand Planning) other project work, etc are all tasks that the assistants should look to getting involved in, so that we can argue that just because some of their task have gone elsewhere they are needed to for the others.

So two choices, go with the one option that someone posted, run now and find another job.....or involve the role in the change and become part of the way forward. otherwise...however much we argue it, ATSA's are/will be a dying breed.

[anotherthing]

Despite protestations from some, 3miles makes a lot of sense in his/her posts.

ATSA duties are being pared down with the advent of new technology... however there are lots of opportunities for ATSAs to make themselves too valuable to lose (besides the day to day tasks they do at the moment). Adding strings to your bow now makes sense, because like it or not, change is coming and it will be survival of the fittest.

The question you have to ask yourself is do you want to continue to have a career in ATC, even if it means it won't necessarily be in the traditional roles of a tower/centre ATSA?

If you do, then you'll probably find that the new tasks/challenges are rewarding in a job satisfaction type of way and you should be adding to your portfolio now.

If you want to resist change and are not interested in taking on new challenges then maybe the ATC of tomorrow is not what you are cut out for.

ATSAs get a very good wage for what they do - and that is not taking anything away from the fact that a good ATSA can make or break a sector and help out in times of trouble - that wage, coupled with an interest in learning more about the job would have me taking on extra tasks in a jiffy if I was an ATSA.

We all know how weak our unions have been recently - if you sit on your hands and listen to them when they advise you not to take on extraneous tasks because they will fight your corner, you are asking for trouble.

The ATSA task is evolving, and will encompass more and more duties outside of the Ops room/VCR - this is only going to become more true as time goes on. If the individual ATSA does not evolve, then they will fall by the wayside... sticking your head in the sand and saying ATCOs don't support you etc will not stop that task evolution!

Yes, you should expect support from colleagues but even if you get that support, it alone will not necessarily stop the rot. Look after number one if you want continued employment - it's not selfish and still fits in with beng a team player, but it is what needs to be done to make yourself as attractive to your employer as you can.

[OA32]

While I agree that times are changing and assistants have less to do in the traditional air traffic sense, they have literally been shoved into the position of being unable to evolve at the unit. The main reason for this being the ineptitude of local management in rushing to set up an operations department at great expense with people who have no relevant experience in doing so. If they had waited then a substantial amount of money and vital experience could have been saved by evolving the assistant role, as has been the case at similar airfields.

[White Hart]

'dont we now have the same problem that would occur if EFPS goes wrong? The same increase in workload? The same issues in getting FlightData to the controller?'

The issue is not about how the data is secured/passed to ATCOs - its all about who actually does it whilst the system is down and the ATCOs have a significant increase in their personal workloads as a result. What would you rather have - an assistant to help you, or do it all yourself because the ATSAs have been removed? Furthermore, what is the safer option?

'So make EFPS and these systems robost reduces risk of any problems,'

This was not the case when EFPS was first introduced, and there were problems. I do not recall the EFPS technical situation changing to such a degree that the requirement for ATSAs as backup is now completely negated.

'So training, Simulator work, do tasks that maybe Apron do(Stand Planning) other project work, etc ..'

wonderful idea, and one which many ATSAs would wholeheartedly support - if it wasn't for the fact that Mgmt dont want the ATSAs to even look at any options which might enhance their position, other than help with a voluntary transfer to another Unit (goes totally against the NATS plan to reduce staff numbers, but at least it offloads a future problem onto somebody else whilst making own Unit look more efficient and working to NATS ATSA staffing policy). Therefore, options like 'making yourself indispensable' are not going to be actively promoted by Mgmt, nor are they likely to let you do it.

BTW, all VCAs should be shown the door immediately, so as to allow all full contract ATSAs the maximum number of options for VN/redeployment/voluntary relocation - and definitely before any full-contract ATSA is made compulsorily redundant. (wont happen though - 'variable' is no longer the same as 'temporary' - which is how it was sold to us by the Union in the first instance :mad:)

[BALLOO53]

The new way to operate electronic f;ight strips???, what happens when things go wrong??? where this change is going to happening they have a lot of wet damp foggy conditions, so a lot of diversions???
When the diversions start happening what happens with the EFPS?? the records need to be changed when diversions to another destination starts happening??
So the controllers have time to do this??
Looks like a bit of a mess when things starting going wrong.
The delights of moving into the modern world to keep pace with life???
Where is all the safety meassures when things start going down the you know where.:ugh:
I take it all the QMS and SMS on eletronic flight data is more than one hundered percent safe???:ugh:

[anotherthing]

ATSAs have one major flaw in their argument about fallback - we all know that EFPS will never fail and will work as it is advertised - management have told us so, and they must be correct - I mean look at VCCS and AMAN...

Make no mistake, where there is a bonus to be had, ATC serviceability takes a back seat. A shame they don't give management bonuses for using comon sense, then maybe we wouldn't have half baked schemes implemented, or those schemes that actually might have some benefit may actually be given long enough to set up to work properly, instead of being rushed in on stupid deadines to make someone look good.

[Ceannairceach]

White Hart, I agree with much of what you say on these forums, an awful lot of it - however I cannot support your disdain for the VCA ATSAs.

VCA ATSAs will most definitely be shown the door before full contract ATSAs should compulsory redundancies become an issue. So your point there isn't valid. Let's hope it never comes to that.

And, as someone who has in the past interviewed ATSA staff for promotions/redeployment etc let me tell you, some of the VCA ATSAs knocked spots off pretty much all of the "lifer" ATSAs I've dealt with - generally speaking anyway. Some have gone on to much bigger and "better" things, and thrived.

So, to differentiate between VCA and non-VCA ATSA staff when it comes to fighting the good cause just undermines the whole argument. Remember divide and rule?

How someone with views as strong as yours could ever condone showing people of the same speciality, who might sit next to you today, or tomorrow, or at some point, and do the same job the door immediately is, frankly, beyond me.

Agency staff have been taken on to fill temporarty posts as PC.

The VCA ATSAs were never, ever designed to be temporary. If you believed so you were grossly misled.

[White Hart]

Ceannairceach

'If you believed so you were grossly misled.'

yes I was, and I stand by my statement.

PM for you BTW.

[Ceannairceach]

It doesn't surprise me that the union has misled people, I'll say that much.

[anotherthing]

White Hart

IMHO Ceannairceach has an extremely valid point... you yourself come across (reading from your posts) as having a huge chip on your shoulder when it comes to ATCOs and perceived lack of support from them for ATSAs... yet you yourself seem to value VCA ATSAs with utter disrespect when it comes to maintaining their jobs.

Treat people like you would like to be treated is a great mantra - cutting any post, be it filled by VCA staff or otherwise is the start of the rot. You want support from other grades? Then show the same level of support yourself to those you deem to be 'below you'.

It is maybe a totally incorrect perception, but it comes across as if you are only interested in number one, yourself... you are quick enough to berate others for not looking out for you, but then don't show the same level of support to others that you demand.

I might be reading you completely wrong, but having read a lot of your posts, that's how it looks.

[DC10RealMan]

Gentlemen.

I am retired and I am not siding with one side or another but I was also on the PCS BEC at Swanwick and attended a number of union seminars and conferences and therefore know a little of the VCA situation and its history. White Hart is quite correct that the VCA staff were brought in as "temporary" staff for temporary staff shortfalls. The rationale was that there will be a reduction in ATSA numbers in the future and to fulfil the present staffing numbers personnel would be brought in to cover that shortfall, when the numbers were to be reduced they would be the first to be dismissed as they were recruited on that basis and the theory was that this would safeguard existing ATSA staff. Both PCS and the management argreed with the principle and that it was a "Good idea". I believe that a VCA member threatened to challenge this concept in the courts as unfair dismissal and subsequently the "temporary status" was dropped. I would confirm that White Hart is quite right when he says that the VCA concept was sold to the unions and staff as a method of protecting existing long-serving staff members and their job security. I can also understand his frustration at the existing situation, although the cynic in me wonders if the management used the VCA staff and their "status" to undermine both the exisiting long-term staff and their terms and conditions?

[White Hart]

DC10RM - thanks for helping to clarify what was really the situation at the time of VCA introduction. It seems to have been forgotten by many, ATCOs and ATSAs included, and the newest recruits probably know nothing of the history behind all this. It now has the potential to cause problems for a lot of unsuspecting people in the future. It certainly was a problem for me.

Ceannairceach - thanks for the PM. Hope its all a bit clearer now.

anotherthing - PM for you

[Ceannairceach]

I'm sorry but whatever the background, to say all VCA staff should be shown the door immediately is devisive and harmful. And reamins wrong in my opinion.

I refuse to believe that any person with a genuine care for his colleagues would demonstrate such an attitude. So White Hart, even though now I know the background etc, I make no apology for still being a little shocked at your insistence in shoving them out of the door.

A redundancy is a redundancy.

[White Hart]

sorry - no apologies and no retraction. They shouldn't have been taken on in the first place. It was a problem waiting to happen.

[Ceannairceach]

See there I agree. VCA ATSA staff should have been employed on full NATS contracts.

That's the injustice in this, not the fact that they were taken on in the first place.

However, they are on VCA contracts are we shouldn't discriminate against them in any other way than the terms of their contract stipulates. I know the same would be the case if a similar system was set up for us lot.

As I said, we have temporary contract ATSA staff at PC employed by an agency, and the system works very well for all concerned I think.