Spanish ATC [Archive] - Page 5

flameproof

10th Dec 2010, 18:20

@AngeleToR:

First, thanks for a polite reply, and as a foreword, I am well aware that the government is using all this to divert public attention away from their incompetent handling of the huge crisis we are in, but that's as far as it goes - they present the facts in a way that suits their needs, but in the end, facts are facts.

To comment on your points:

We made some simple sums this summer and saw that the maximum hours will be reached by the end of the year, and government said we were menacing with undeclared strikes. They let the problem rot until it wildly exploded, I say again, we are EXHAUSTED and thousands of lives depend on us and our good job (thanks god for the TCAS)... We are AFRAID of doing our job in our current conditions (physically and psychologically tired, many are menaced with jail and losing EVERY property they have, people HATES US thanks to our incompetent government).

From what I know, the government took the average hours you worked previous years, being 1670, and took this as the new base instead of the 1200 that were set in the 1999 agreement ('convenio'). They added an extra 80 voluntary hours on top just in case. Now, can you please answer, in order to clarify things:

- Did the government set 1670 + 80 = 1750 hours as the MAXIMUM you could work this year, meaning, they PROHIBITED you from doing any extra hours than this amount?

- Did you really do an average of 1670 hours the last few years, as has been said, where everything above 1200 hours was paid as overtime? If so, how can previous years have been covered with 1670 hours, but this year we fall two months short due to a much higher "rate of consumption" of hours?

OK, we deserve it because of what we have done, screwing everybody up and all that stuff... But honestly, do you believe that what we did is a rational reaction for a group of equilibrated people just forcing the government to earn 350.000€ instead of 200.000€??? It seems more a desperate measure of desperate people trying desperately to be heard, to stop all the madness we are living in from ten months now until it's too late and we all get really sorry about it. And please, forget about money once and for all, 5.000€ gross per month sums 60.000€, google a little and you will find scanned monthly wages proving it.

Honestly, I think the issue is not just pay - there may be legitimate claims such as shift schedules etc., but with your actions you lost all right to those claims. However, we have not heard one single ATCO say "we would gladly give up our salaries based on overtime and hire 1000 controllers to make up the difference". As for the monthly wages, yes, I have seen one that totals 5.000€ for one month clean, gross was 10.000€. I have also seen this one:

http://www.cadenaser.com/csermedia/cadenaser/media/201012/09/economia/20101209csrcsreco_2_Pes_PDF.pdf

which comes at 30.000€ gross, 16.500€ CLEAN. In 12 months, that is 360.000€ gross, or 198.000€ clean. And we're talking november 2010, so these are wages after the cuts made last February. This brings another question:

- Is it true that AENA is paying you the difference between the old salary and the new salary after the cuts, until you reach a new agreement with them? This is what Mr. Lema, AENA's director, said before the Senate.

We are playing with human lives, nobody sees??? When finally the accident happens, as we are warning since months ago, let's guess who will end up in jail... Right, the ATCO!!! Because we have warned (menaced according gov.) about colliding two airplanes...

These days, with modern radar and TCAS, it is quite unlikely. Also, the fact that you are now using strict adherence to SIDs and STARs makes it even less likely that something bad could happen. VFR flights are not allowed in TMAs or CTRs at big airports, so the problem of stray light planes is reduced in comparison with, say, London TMA. This brings another question:

- Do you still get your 33% time rest periods? Have they been reduced to 25%? What is the maximum straight time you are actually working before a radar console or at the tower?

I sincerely hope you resolve the problems, meaning that the government stops using the issue as a political pawn/smokescreen, and you admit that you have lived extremely privileged lives for many years, and that you're now willing to be sensible and come to reasonable terms. Admit your mistakes, show that you care and are "sorry" (can't find a good word to get the point across) and you will find the people will be willing to forgive you and go back to hating politicians.

@paidworker:

You resort to bickering attacks, which shows you have no good arguments:

Flameproof, you wanted to be an air traffic controller but failed to get in.

I said I wanted to, but I didn't even try, so how could I fail? I was told both by a military controller with many years on the job, and by the son of an Iberia fleet commander, that you plugged people in at will, and controlled the admission process. If you got lucky and all friends & family had been "placed" and there were spots left, you could get in, but that it was rather unlikely. So, why even try? Question:

- Do you deny that USCA had control, at least a veto, over the admissions process, and thus could control how many controllers were hired?

- Do you deny that USCA, as part of the tribunal that judged applicants, had the power to admit friends & family, and deny entry to others?

Regardless of the maths etc. etc. the point is now that the government is using the military in an illegal manner to force people to do their work

It may be illegal - the legal system and laws of Spain are so screwed up, almost anything is possible. What is a fact is that your irresponsible act was illegal, and could land you anywhere between three and eleven years in jail.

Questions for you:

- Can you suggest how the situation may have been resolved, instead of threatening you with jail time?

- All the public knows is that that Friday evening, your USCA delegates presented a proposal to AENA which returned everything to 2009-like conditions, i.e. 1200 hours max, the rest hugely expensive overtime, etc. is this true?

- How could work have been done with 1670 hours in the past, and not this year? What has been different?

Instead of attacking back, answer the questions.

paidworker

10th Dec 2010, 18:44

Flameproof, if an ATCO is on 10 or 20K a month so what. So what I say , it is because the union is good and there have been good tactical negotiations. Many unions should look to the one of the controllers for what they do right and what they do wrong. Without going into the nitty gritty i see it this way.. the Government stopped trying to negotiate and started to issue dictates but could not even manage to dictate correctly due to the hours shortfall. AENA did not want more controllers but instead wanted existing controllers to increase their hours and take pay cuts but in typical fashion felt that while they arranged lucrative contracts for each other that the workers would just sit about and take it. Laws were passed meaning the unions had no recourse of strike for the last year , civilians started trying to manage centers when they had no experience or idea what they were doing and the environment for many became a very difficult one to work in , money aside. AENA moved further away from a viable negotiating position when our politicians started to appear on television mocking the controllers creating an environment where the mob would be against them ( but keeping their mouth shut about their involment in private companies recieving state contracts ) . I do not agree for a moment with the wildcat strike but I do understand how it happened , it wasnt the extreme militant manouver that some people would have it portrayed , rather i think people just "snapped" pure and simple..the lid came of the pressure cooker...as torres as said the hungry mouse ate the cheese. I do not work as an ATCO but in aviation south of Madrid and earn about 10K a month , however that does not mean I am happy to take it in the ass be dictated to or roughly treated by my employer who " needs " me. Unlike the ATCOs I can be replaced , the ATCOs cant and that brings us to present day. Now the ATCOs have had time to calm down but the military rule is not lifted..why.. because the government " needs " the ATCOS , they were so short sighted and ill organised that they have no viable replacements for the people who will surely leave..there are head hunters all over Torejon gates from Asia with contracts for 300K for qualified senior controllers but it would be treason for the ATCO to take it now.. so AENA wants Blanco to extend the rule to " keep " them.. You see the government is the one in the weak position because while the supply of what they need is limited they have to pay the price demanded for it and if they want to break that pattern they have to create more supply... letting the military ATCOs civilian ratings expire 6 weeks ago was not a good start and gives you an idea of where they are at. When a working man has no right to strike in the state, there is something wrong with the state. Our taxes did not go down when times were good , they went up. Answer me this , why is it you think that military rule cant be lifted now and you have your answer ( It appears that despite the governments wishes it will be because more and more legal sources say its illegal ). Jealous people can moan and whine all they like but i think there are few of us who would not like to have enjoyed such a strong union and pay and benefits. In fact i would suggest to anybody moaning and groaning about them on the thread to state " I would refuse on moral grounds to work in a high paid job with a strong union. "

Daermon ATC

10th Dec 2010, 19:00

What is a fact is that your irresponsible act was illegal, and could land you anywhere between three and eleven years in jail.

Questions for you:

- Can you suggest how the situation may have been resolved, instead of threatening you with jail time?

- All the public knows is that that Friday evening, your USCA delegates presented a proposal to AENA which returned everything to 2009-like conditions, i.e. 1200 hours max, the rest hugely expensive overtime, etc. is this true?

- How could work have been done with 1670 hours in the past, and not this year? What has been different?

Instead of attacking back, answer the questions.

First of all, apologies if any of my answers seems unpolite, or inaproppriate. Contrary to widespread belief ATCOs are selected for high resilience to stress but not complete immunity which I believe is a type of mental disorder. Humans do have a breaking point.

What is a fact is that your irresponsible act was illegal, and could land you anywhere between three and eleven years in jail.
You are 100% correct here but I would like to point out the small issue of timing. Whatever the Atcos did (regardless of whether it was a collective industrial action or a genuine chain reaction) was legal untill friday 3rd at 21:30 local time, when the royal decree making it illegal was published. How can most of the Atco's actions not be illegal when we get a specific law?

Can you suggest how the situation may have been resolved, instead of threatening you with jail time?"Principiis obsta." At the time of the events there were no longer good options neither for the government nor for the controllers. Could be compared to a disease and the differenceof applying medicine at the first simptoms or waiting till there is need for a life-or-death surgery. This issue could (and should) have been solved in negotiation long time ago. Unfortunately Atco's stalled negotiations prior to 5th of february and Aena ever since. Since one only negotiates when you feel you have something to gain by doing so and something to loose if you don't, could be that both sides will now get back to the bargaining table, this time for real.

All the public knows is that that Friday evening, your USCA delegates presented a proposal to AENA which returned everything to 2009-like conditions, i.e. 1200 hours max, the rest hugely expensive overtime, etc. is this true?As I wasn't there I wouldn't know. And neither does the public or the media since their only source of information (the minister) is hardly impartial in this issue... and neither would be USCA's president. However, since USCA presented earlier this week an agreement proposal which was considered by the arbiter (former Aena director, proposed by Aena and accepted by Usca) "ballanced and in good faith", I would suppose they presented that. I have not seen that proposal but I don't believe a return to previous conditions would count as "ballanced".

How could work have been done with 1670 hours in the past, and not this year? What has been different?The royal decree in february used the 1750 hours figure probably calculated by Aena as the hours they would need. However, whe the final law was made, someone got overzealous and barred all atcos aged 57+ to work. This caused that all other controllers had to make huge amounts of hours during the summer. When later this year another law reversed that error, more than 6 months had passed so you had to retrain them... this affects more in those units with higher average age.

Del Prado

10th Dec 2010, 19:01

These days, with modern radar and TCAS, it is quite unlikely

You've got a short memory.

flameproof

10th Dec 2010, 23:42

@Del Prado:

You've got a short memory.

Meaning what? I'm not talking about airproxes, but actual collisions between commercial aircraft under ATC control. You can get airproxes even while fully rested and earning a million euros an hour.

@Daermon ATC:

Thanks for your replies - they are not offensive at all, and in fact, provide useful information.

You are 100% correct here but I would like to point out the small issue of timing. Whatever the Atcos did (regardless of whether it was a collective industrial action or a genuine chain reaction) was legal untill friday 3rd at 21:30 local time, when the royal decree making it illegal was published. How can most of the Atco's actions not be illegal when we get a specific law?

Leaving the ATC post is, at best, a "very grave fault" according to the 1999 agreement, and it can carry penalties up to being fired. Past this, a court can decide that the ATCO acted irresponsibly and/or negligently in leaving airspace unattended, in which case the act would be deemed illegal. What the 21:30 decree did was to put in the hands of the military the ATC mission normally carried out by AENA, and mentioned nothing about making the ATCOs actions illegal.

This was not the 'state of alarm' decree, which was declared hours later, and which is what prompted controllers to return, as they now faced military laws.

Coincidentally, at 21:12 the first NOTAM closing the airspace was published, until then it was not officially closed. Thus, a space between around 18:00 (when Eurocontrol first learned of the strike) and 21:00 exists where controllers were leaving, but airspace was left open with planes departing towards Spain, and this is what could constitute an illegal act.

Since one only negotiates when you feel you have something to gain by doing so and something to loose if you don't, could be that both sides will now get back to the bargaining table, this time for real.

Indeed - we all hope so! :)

I have not seen that proposal but I don't believe a return to previous conditions would count as "ballanced"

If it was considered as balanced by an arbiter then why is it not up on every forum and blog where controllers are trying to make their case? There are a lot of documents ATCOs could publish to make their points tangible, yet we just hear words, which right now, in the eyes of the public, count the same - if not less - than the government's.

However, whe the final law was made, someone got overzealous and barred all atcos aged 57+ to work.

That's a critical piece of information that I didn't know, and would explain controllers running out of hours sooner than in past years - is that in the decree itself, or just something planners did on their own?

Always Moving

11th Dec 2010, 00:18

What nobody explains is; HOW come there are no more ATC? (is it true ATC has Veto over everything? if it is, THAT is what you should had taken away government and not allow to come to this mess)

Is it incompetence from the government (I believe it, they ARE incompetent in everything else)

Do the Spanish ATC have anything to do with the shortage? (I believe it, in Spain there is a long history of corruption)

More ATC, less money that they have to pay per hour, more people employ, more rest, I just do not see the downfall, FOR THE PEOPLE, I see it for some greedy buster counting his money in a closet.

LH2

11th Dec 2010, 00:18

1. People don't complain about ATCOs making a lot of money per se, even if the salaries are huge and benefits wide and generous, but about the fact that every few months, ATCOs complain about their working conditions, amount of hours they work, and so on.

Negative. By and large the pilot community (myself included) complain about their gross incompetence.

As I have said plenty of times, I couldn't care less how much a French, British, Italian, Czech, Croatian, Slovenian, etc., etc. controller gets paid. The more the better as far as I'm concerned: they deserve it.

On the other hand, when it comes to the bulk of Spanish controllers, it is appalling that they should be in the business at all, regardless of any monies made.

As usual, obligatory apologies to the few Spanish controllers who are worth their salt.

Whatever the Atcos did (regardless of whether it was a collective industrial action or a genuine chain reaction) was legal untill friday 3rd at 21:30 local time

I understand that not to be the case, given that provision of an essential public service was effectively discontinued (which is the basis under the Spanish penal code for the charges of sedition being mentioned days ago).

The royal decree in february used the 1750 hours figure probably calculated by Aena as the hours they would need. However, whe the final law was made, someone got overzealous and barred all atcos aged 57+ to work. This caused that all other controllers had to make huge amounts of hours during the summer.

This brings up an interesting point. Over the years I have heard persistent rumours (and I emphasise) of a curious practice by AENA controllers consisting of showing up to work on rest days and opening extra sectors not for any justifiable operational reason, but in order to make overtime.

This may of course be nothing else but a malicious, long running rumour--I recall having a conversation about it in 2007. I wonder if there is a place where one can get some stats on how many flights/hr controllers handle in different parts of Europe/World.

Daermon ATC

11th Dec 2010, 11:54

Apologies to non spanish speakers. The links I provide are to the Official State Bulletin where all spanish laws are published.

Quote:
However, whe the final law was made, someone got overzealous and barred all atcos aged 57+ to work.
That's a critical piece of information that I didn't know, and would explain controllers running out of hours sooner than in past years - is that in the decree itself, or just something planners did on their own?

It was not in the original decree but on the law made later to ratify it. Here is the link, read the "Disposición adicional cuarta", second paragraph (or just use the search function to look up "57")

http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/04/15/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-5983.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daermon ATC http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/416995-spanish-atc-post6114774.html#post6114774)
Whatever the Atcos did (regardless of whether it was a collective industrial action or a genuine chain reaction) was legal untill friday 3rd at 21:30 local time

I understand that not to be the case, given that provision of an essential public service was effectively discontinued (which is the basis under the Spanish penal code for the charges of sedition being mentioned days ago).

This is the link to the Aerial Safety Law published 2003.
http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2003/07/08/pdfs/A26368-26387.pdf
Article 34.4 states that it is the duty of aeronautical personell to refrain to perform said duties (as laid out in the previous points of that article) in case of a reduction of the physical and psychological abilities needed to perform them.

I am told that atcos did not simply "walk away" but rather informed their superiors that they were not in a psychological state to work. Considering the situation since february, I wouldn't necessarilly consider this a fake. My personal opinion is that several did genuinely feel sick and that several others "jumped in" thinking that the previous ones were performing some industrial action but I do not have any information to back up this impression.

In any case the government tacitly acknowledged that their action was legal as the legal decree published the 3rd at 21:30 changes the letter of the aforementioned law. Read the "Disposición adicional segunda", second point.
http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/12/03-2/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-18651.pdf

This brings up an interesting point. Over the years I have heard persistent rumours (and I emphasise) of a curious practice by AENA controllers consisting of showing up to work on rest days and opening extra sectors not for any justifiable operational reason, but in order to make overtime.

I can't personally validate or refute this rumor but based on what others have told me I would consider at least the second part of your claim ("opening extra sectors not for any justifiable operational reason, but in order to make overtime") to be true.

However this is only true till 5th of february 2010 as the royal decree 1/2010 (article 2.2) puts staffing, sectoring and any other related activity firmly in the hands of Aena. It also prohibits them explicitly to delegate these functions (article 2.3).
http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/02/05-2/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-1916.pdf

flameproof

11th Dec 2010, 14:22

@Del Prado:

First, it's 'Flameproof'. Second, I know about Überlingen, the Tupolev was bound for Barcelona, and the case had a big media impact here. My point was that the picture of doom & gloom painted by controllers in Spain, where it would seem that a mid-air can occur any minute now, is FAR from the truth. First, because ATCOs work, more or less hours, but they have their rest periods, so it's not like they spend 12 hours straight glued to the station. Second, because we have MANY safety features that can prevent a mid-air.

On the particular accident you mention, the ATCO was probably the LEAST at fault, as there was maintenance work keeping radar on fallback mode (12 second updates), the visual proximity alert was not operational but aural was, and the phone lines were also down for maintenance, leaving one single fallback line which was malfunctioning, and prevented other ATC centers warning the controller on duty. The controller was also working two stations, something prohibited by regulations.

The accident would have been prevented had both pilots complied with the TCAS RA, which instructed the Tupolev to climb and the 757 to descend. The controller only managed to give a descend instruction to the Tupolev, and its crew ignored the RA (contrary to the Tupolev FOM which clearly stated TCAS RA to be strictly followed and ATC ignored) and descended as instructed. The 757 crew followed the descend RA and thus the collision took place. The reasoning behind the rule to follow TCAS RAs is precisely that they are automated and at best can result in an evasive maneuver for a collision that wasn't going to take place anyhow, whereas the instructions given by a controller could be misguided by his judgement or technical issues.

Thus, at fault were the Tupolev crew, and the operator of the ATC center, Skyguide. The ATCO was sadly murdered two years later by a man who lost his family in the crash.

As for your questioning of my background, I have an Aeronautical Engineering degree, and a private pilot's license. As part of a work experience program, I sat beside ATCOs for many hours, both in radar and tower duties. I frequently listen in on local control frequencies, so I am familiar with the local airspace and operations. During the close to eight years I lived in the UK, I flew back and forth to Spain some 10 times a year, and almost always riding the jumpseat (sadly 9/11 has changed this forever) - this apart from my own experiences flying light aircraft.

As I have already written, being a new member in a forum does not preclude one from posting on topics, does it? Imagine Albert Einstein joining a physics forum for the first time, and on his first post, dismantling someone's theory on subatomic particles. "Hey, you're new here, you have only just joined and this is your first post, leave this topic to professionals!".

May I ask what is your background and specific expertise in ATC?

@Daermon ATC:

Thanks for the extra info and links to the BOE PDFs. Just a comment:

I am told that atcos did not simply "walk away" but rather informed their superiors that they were not in a psychological state to work. Considering the situation since february, I wouldn't necessarilly consider this a fake.

I can understand if a -few- controllers walked away after reporting medical or psychological reasons that prevented them from doing their job (they would be completely right in doing this). This is one of the reasons why some ATCOs are placed on call while off-premises and off-duty, eg. at home etc. (this counts as having worked 20% of the on-call time). The normal course of action would have been to activate these reserves who would fill in the missing posts, but in fact 440 controllers walked off. About 100 of them assembled in a hotel near Madrid airport, which is something you don't do if you feel sick - you go to a hospital or you go home.

Del Prado

11th Dec 2010, 18:32

hi flameproof,
apologies for getting your name wrong and thanks for the compehensive run down on Uberlingen.
I'm surprised it wasn't at the forefront of your mind when you posted,These days, with modern radar and TCAS, (a mid air collision) is quite unlikely

Thinking back to that incident and the tragic events that followed, I don't think it's at all helpful to have the frenzy that has been whipped up against the Spanish ATCOs in the media.

You can get airproxes even while fully rested and earning a million euros an hour. you can also get airproxes while fatigued and earning 50 euros an hour. When do you think airproxes are more likely to happen?

There's surely more chance of an airprox when ATCOs are forced to work longer hours, under worse terms and conditions and 'militarised' under threat of jail? IFATCA clearly think so.
Given the duress under which our Spanish colleagues are forced to work, IFATCA declares that the safety of Spanish airspace and airports is severely
compromised while this military rule is in force.

Imagine Albert Einstein joining a physics forum for the first time, and on his first post, dismantling someone's theory on subatomic particles. "Hey, you're new here, you have only just joined and this is your first post, leave this topic to professionals!".

Not sure your comparison is valid.
Aeronautical engineering degree and general aviation interest is very impressive but not quite up there with Einstein. I've had many people listen in to me on work experience and I'm in doubt as to how much information they would have gleaned to contribute to a similar debate.
Your posts seem to be well researched rehashings of articles already published in the media and online. I was hoping someone that was taking such a lead in this debate would be able to provide new facts and inside information.

May I ask what is your background and specific expertise in ATC?

ATCO in London. Never worked (as an ATCO) in Spain.

flameproof

11th Dec 2010, 21:42

I'm surprised it wasn't at the forefront of your mind when you posted,
Quote:
These days, with modern radar and TCAS, (a mid air collision) is quite unlikely

So, in the Überlingen accident,

- Did the controller have at his disposal a modern radar? No, he had a fallback system, 12-second updates, and no integrated flight plan data into his display [pages 36-39 of the accident report]
- Did the pilots follow TCAS advisories? No, the Tupolev's pilot chose to obey the controller over what his TCAS was telling him, which was a major factor in the outcome, and contrary to procedure.
- Was the controller working under a lot of stress, particularly once he realized he was facing a possible mid-air? Indeed, as he was alone, had no working phone lines, and had no working visual SCTA [pages 39-41].
- Did other facilities, with adequate radar systems, enough staff, and working phone lines, try repeatedly to contact Zurich in order to warn the controller of the impending collision? Yes, they did. Karlsruhe had an SCTA alarm, and called eleven times via the direct phone connection (which was not working at Zurich due to maintenance). [page 44].

None of what I said was met at Überlingen, so I fail to see how you can compare that situation with what is going on in Spain right now, where staffing levels are at record highs, sick leaves at record lows, and traffic delays minimal. This comes from "insider information" that you seem to care so much about (I do have contacts, you know...), but if you want media coverage, here it is too:

Los controladores, una semana después del paro masivo: "Somos civiles, no etarras" - 20minutos.es - El medio social (http://www.20minutos.es/noticia/899447)

Let me translate a money quote for you:

"El portavoz del sindicato USCA, César Cabo, opina que trabajan "bastante mejor" bajo las órdenes del Ejército que de la gestora aeroportuaria."

"The USCA union's spokesman, César Cabo, believes that they [the controllers] are working "much better" under the military's orders than under the company management."

Another:

´Trabajamos mejor con los militares´ - La Provincia - Diario de Las Palmas (http://www.laprovincia.es/economia/2010/12/10/mejor-militares/339928.html)

One controller is quoted as saying he was coerced by others into turning an aircraft ready for departure around and back to the terminal. This ties in with my direct observation, by listening to ATC all night until 01:00Z, that controllers were deliberately making things difficult. I have posted about this before, so I won't plaster it here again.

Thinking back to that incident and the tragic events that followed, I don't think it's at all helpful to have the frenzy that has been whipped up against the Spanish ATCOs in the media.

It was their choice. They make an average of 300.000€ a year, and they continuously complain about working conditions, and hold undeclared strikes almost every vacation period. The public was really tired of this. The government of course took advantage of this to its own favor, but who could blame them? The ATCOs made it really easy for them. Instead of shutting up and admitting they had extremely good working conditions and salary, and admitting that this had to end, they played chicken with the government and the population of Spain. It appears they lost. From the above articles, and from direct information I have, it appears that while the initial hours were quite stressful, things are more or less back to normal, and even better in some cases as absenteeism is at record lows.

There's surely more chance of an airprox when ATCOs are forced to work longer hours, under worse terms and conditions and 'militarised' under threat of jail? IFATCA clearly think so.
Quote:
Given the duress under which our Spanish colleagues are forced to work, IFATCA declares that the safety of Spanish airspace and airports is severely
compromised while this military rule is in force.

This is, plain and simple, false. The controllers have been forced to go back to the NORMAL shifts they were already doing. Worse terms and conditions? Meaning what? They took the individual bedrooms with individual bathrooms away? They are not allowed their legally-bound rest periods? They have to be on duty 24 hours round the clock? They are not being paid? Not at all. They still have their individual bedrooms with individual bathrooms for the 33% rest time that they still have (during night shifts, 25% for daytime), and they have to be on duty the same as before.

They were simply told go back to work or face military laws. It's that simple. They don't have a gun to their head, nor they ever did, they just have a few military in each center making sure people are on time, schedules are kept, etc. You accuse me of simply regurgitating press coverage, and you go and believe a note written by a union?

The IFATCA note seems to have been redacted by a USCA representative, and it's even more poignant than the usual USCA-speak. Cross-union support is to be expected, you have exactly opposite statements by associations of airport service providers, etc.

Not sure your comparison is valid.
Aeronautical engineering degree and general aviation interest is very impressive but not quite up there with Einstein.

Did you really not get the point? :ugh: The point being that you have NO idea who I am, what experience I have, what connections I have, and so on, yet you are quick to dismiss my posts based on the fact that I just joined and started posting. I did not intend to compare myself with Einstein, but merely make the point that not all bright heads and experts are on this forum from day one and have 1000s of posts. I'm sure there are people out there so much more knowledgeable and intelligent that you and I who are not posting here. My point was don't judge someone by being a new forum member, but by his posts and content.

I've had many people listen in to me on work experience and I'm in doubt as to how much information they would have gleaned to contribute to a similar debate.

How long were these people listening in for - days, weeks? Tell me, and then I will tell you how long and how often I would "listen in" for. Besides, are ATCOs not initially trained by "listening in" and "observation"? Or are they thrown into the post and told "there ya go, start moving 'planes around". I'd like to know, as you seem to indicate that by "listening in" you cannot learn much, thus, it would be interesting to know how exactly are ATCOs initially trained.

Your posts seem to be well researched rehashings of articles already published in the media and online. I was hoping someone that was taking such a lead in this debate would be able to provide new facts and inside information.

And so do yours. They seem to be rehashed from union activities and statements. They seem to be based on giving blanket coverage to colleagues, no matter what their actions. I have asked many questions, based on "inside information", which by the way, nobody (not even the spanish ATCOs that are reading this thread) has bothered to answer, instead, attacked me on the basis of "being new" here - this is the second time already.

As an ATCO in London, you are bound to have less information than I do, not more. For starters, you don't have a plug on LECB's frequencies, and I happen to live a few miles away from the control center - so I'm hearing first hand what is going on.

towerboy

12th Dec 2010, 12:14

Pitotheat and others,

What you are describing is a dynamc environment.

The ATC system works around a basic plan.

Yes it does take differing times to dipatch an aircraft.

A plan based on normal assumptions!

We rely on your ESTIMATES. If your estimates suddenly change then that is your problem...slot of 2000...we have late pasengers, unserviceability, blah, blah...

Pilots are extremely good at (trying to) bring other people down...and that is your bane. Your conditions are going the same way as your attitude!

There are too many people wanting to "track direct".

Your ego is your detriment!

"How dare he say that"..."More fool you".

flameproof

12th Dec 2010, 19:29

@megustalavida:

You need to get serious. I'm not a frustrated office guy, if you read my previous posts you'd know that by now. What I can tell from yours is that you have a very short sight.

If 440 ATCOs leave their posts en-masse, falsely claiming to be ill (they were all seen assembling in nearby hotels, and not looking particularly ill by eyewitness accounts), after having already walked out of one control center a few days earlier, given several warnings that they were going to strike, and shoving an agreement in the government's face that returned controllers to previous outrageous conditions, then handing over the service to the military was the least of the problems.

Tell me - what should the government have done? Tell me! All of you whiners keep crying and complaining, but you don't give A SOLUTION. How do you make controllers return to their posts after they walk out en-masse? If the excuse was that they ran out of ours, what do you do, pull more hours out of your a**? Noooo, you say "hey, I'll pay you 1000€ an hour overtime, and buy you a new Ferrari, is that OK? Can you go back to work now?". Then, I guess ATCOs would all get much better thank you very much, and all go back to doing 1800 hours a year like THEY HAVE BEEN DOING SINCE 1999.

Because, if the problem was that ATCOs had ran out of hours, and were over-stressed, there is NO WAY to fix it!!! Unless you can magically invent ATCOs, how do you solve the problem? Can you answer the question?

terrain safe

12th Dec 2010, 20:22

Because, if the problem was that ATCOs had ran out of hours, and were over-stressed, there is NO WAY to fix it!!! Unless you can magically invent ATCOs, how do you solve the problem? Can you answer the question?

The answer was posted above. Change the number of hours and get the military involved. I would suggest the military weren't there to count the pencils, there are there to ensure that the new military regulations were complied with, however that may be done.

Flameproof, ATCO training varies from unit to unit. At my unit they don't listen in, that wastes money, they do some sim time and then plug in and get on with it. Having an airband radio does not make you an expert and you have so amply proved. Thank you and good night.

flameproof

12th Dec 2010, 20:49

@terrain safe:

The answer was posted above. Change the number of hours and get the military involved. I would suggest the military weren't there to count the pencils, there are there to ensure that the new military regulations were complied with, however that may be done.

Er... are you agreeing with me, or being ironic? Because I have been saying that the only way to get ATCOs to get back to their posts, after they had walked away en-masse, was to threaten them with a stick so big they would have second thoughts. In fact, the first stick which was to turn ATC to military's oversight wasn't big enough (this was Friday at 21:30h), and they had to get the bigger one of "state of alarm" which made all ATCOs military personnel (this was during Saturday morning), and thus placed them under military law; only then did they go back to work. It appears things are running much better now (no pun, I'm being serious).

If anyone has a better answer...

Flameproof, ATCO training varies from unit to unit. At my unit they don't listen in, that wastes money, they do some sim time and then plug in and get on with it. Having an airband radio does not make you an expert and you have so amply proved. Thank you and good night.

OK, so at your unit you take someone that comes from the street, and stick them in front of a sim, hand them a headset, and say "here you go lad, get going". When his maggots all wonder off the scope (to use Bill Gunston's words), you point him to a manual page, and let him sort things out all by himself. Let me get this right - your new recruits don't ever observe how things are done, but are thrown right into the action on a simulator?

Ahem *cough*. Teaching is done first by explanation and example, with the pupil paying attention, writing notes, observing. Then, it is completed by supervised practice. What you describe is probably what you do with an ATCO that changes position, am I right? Otherwise, please tell me what unit you work at, because there's no way I'm flying near it.

Your condescending tone is the same used by everyone bashing those who are critic with spanish ATCOs, rather than give sensible answers, try to discredit and tarnish the critic. Does the 'ATCO' tag on your profile make you an "expert"? Really? I don't just have an airband radio, I'm an aeronautical engineer, I have a pilot's license, several years flying in UK and Spanish airspace, and three years sitting next to radar and tower controllers an average of two days a week for 4-5 hours at a time. I guess I've seen some 1.500 hours of controller time, that of course doesn't make me an expert, but it makes me someone who can talk about the subject while knowing what I'm talking about. But maybe I'm wrong, oh master of all ATC knowledge.

This is the third time someone on the forum attacks my background and labels it as 'worthless' to be discussing the subject at hand. I must be hitting some sore points...

flameproof

12th Dec 2010, 21:28

So there we go again - this from, reading your tags and prior posts, someone who is an ATCO in Seville, and last April expressed an interest in applying for a job at DFS. I guess conditions in Seville are not what they used to be...

Read this loud and clear:

I DON'T WANT ATCOs TO GO TO JAIL AND DIE. I DON'T WANT THEM TO HAVE TO PAY HUGE FINES. I DON'T WANT THEM RIDICULED, INSULTED OR THREATENED BY THE PUBLIC.

What I DO want:

1. ATCOs and USCA, their union, to admit they lived in very privileged conditions thanks to the 1999 agreement. Then, provide a credible path to a normal arrangement, in accordance with what is the norm and average in the rest of Europe.

2. ATCOs and USCA to admit that they were doing 1800 hours a year, with 600 of those hours paid at huge premiums. Then, to explain why this year they cannot get the same job done with 70 more controllers (read AENA's 2009 consolidated report, where over 70 controllers were added to the roster).

3. ATCOs and USCA to stop setting up hidden strikes, and actually announce they will go on strike, when and how, like everyone else does. People are tired of booking flights while having a Damocles' sword over their heads. ATCOs are holding the sword, by the way.

These are just basic issues - if ATCOs and USCA had done things right, the public wrath would be directed to the government, who so badly miss-managed the whole thing (I have also said this again and again). If I had a say in this, I would make USCA's heads, and minister Blanco resign, along with a few directors at AENA, and let new blood take over and make things work. It seems you are all so hard-headed in your positions, I understand it is hard to give up such good conditions, but you cannot live in an ivory tower forever.

belk78

12th Dec 2010, 21:53

You are right, working conditions are not what they used to be. Not everything is about money mate. Should i have here what my colleagues out there have i wouldn´t express any interest don´t you think?
Atcos were not doing 1800 hours, just some of them. Hours over 1200 were paid very well, the company wanted it that way so they didn´t have to hire more people. I know you know you are lying, i only wonder why.

tolgab

12th Dec 2010, 21:59

Flameproof,

Do this to ATCOs and USCA, do that to ATCOs and USCA, and what shall we do to the management?

AFAIK the 1999 "agreement" benefited both ATCOs and management. Well paid extras to ATCOs and cheap cover up of lacking controllers to management. You do know that it was cheaper to pay those extras than recruiting new controllers, don't you?

Jimmy Hoffa Rocks

12th Dec 2010, 23:17

Today the controllers were saying no Directs due to Military Command on the radio.

It is time for Blanco, AENA and the Controllers to agree to mutually binding arbitration and a respected Arbitrator. Blanco´s hard style will not work as this does not appear to be over at all

Why didn´t AENA train more controllers a year ago ?

In my opnion both sides need to grow up admit their mistakes and really sit down to negotiate fresh. A win-win agreement is the only way.

It is time for both sides to wake up and face the music!

Either side should perhaps read Stephen Covey and really force themselves to see the other sides point of view.

With Christmas approaching the clock is ticking.

flameproof

12th Dec 2010, 23:26

@belk78:

Thanks for a sensible answer, even though you accuse me of lying - maybe I don't know the whole truth, which is different, but what I say I know from first-hand accounts, and actually reading BOEs, session diaries of parliament and congress, direct observation, and conversations with ATCOs.

You are right, working conditions are not what they used to be. Not everything is about money mate. Should i have here what my colleagues out there have i wouldn´t express any interest don´t you think?

Indeed - it's one thing to work 1800 for a huge payout, and another to do so for a 40% pay cut. Really, I can understand that, no irony here. But if that is the problem, ATCOs and USCA should say so, and not say that they are stressed out working the same hours they have been working in the past - the difference being money. However, it doesn't win over the public's opinion to say that your motivating factor for leaving your post en-masse is money.

If you do decide to move, best of luck, I sincerely hope you find better conditions. Personally, I gave up a startup job that paid nearly 85k€ a year (brute), for a part-time teaching job combined with consultancy work that brings in a fraction of what I earned, but allows me to take my kids to school, pick them up, and be with them a few hours a day. Before, I was working over 2500 hours a year. Trust me when I say that I agree that money isn't everything.

Atcos were not doing 1800 hours, just some of them. Hours over 1200 were paid very well, the company wanted it that way so they didn´t have to hire more people.

So, can you categorically deny that USCA had veto powers over hiring new ATCOs? From a purely business perspective, even in the mid term, what does make more sense (I'm putting rounded up figures to illustrate the point):

- One ATCO at 1200h x 150€/hour + 600h overtime x 450€/hour = 450.000€

or

- Two ATCOs at 1200 x 150€/hour = 360.000€

I bet any manager would kill to show his boss how he reduced costs by this much (again, using figures to prove my point, don't take them literally, I know not everyone makes the same money or works the same hours):

- 2400 controllers at 450.000€/year/controller = 1080 Million € / year.
- 4800 controllers at 180.000€/year/controller = 864 Million € / year.

Or, savings of 216 Million Euros per year. Tell me of a single manager, director, or politician who could not benefit from such savings. Even if they used them to build useless airports in the middle of nowhere like Lleida.

Turn things to the other side, from your point of view, would you rather work 1200 hours for 180k€, or 1800 for 450k€. I think the answer is obvious (in your particular case, you said money isn't everything, so I agree that some ATCOs may prefer less hours).

I know you know you are lying, i only wonder why.

Please tell me the above are lies. At least, admit the math is right, and the conclusions logical. Again, I have said in many of my posts that the government is also at fault for miss-managing the whole affair, from when they signed the agreement in 1999, up until this year's series of messed-up decrees.

@tolgab:

Do this to ATCOs and USCA, do that to ATCOs and USCA, and what shall we do to the management?

May I quote myself from a post a few lines up?

If I had a say in this, I would make USCA's heads, and minister Blanco resign, along with a few directors at AENA, and let new blood take over and make things work.

(My emphasis via underline)

AFAIK the 1999 "agreement" benefited both ATCOs and management. Well paid extras to ATCOs and cheap cover up of lacking controllers to management. You do know that it was cheaper to pay those extras than recruiting new controllers, don't you?

Have you read the 1999 agreement? I have, all 53 pages of it, cover to cover. Its 19th Agreement, states that a "mixed commission" was created on 10 June 1998, with the aim to propose instruments, means and actions needed to recruit and train 741 new ATCOs, that were to join between 1 January 1998 and 31 December 2003.

On 27 March 1998, the government approved the hiring of 190 ATCOs. In 1999, 96 new ATCOs were hired. In 2000 it was 98. In 2001, it was 94. So, in total, 478 new ATCO places were offered, and I have not been able to find any further offers until today. Again, it would be nice if someone from USCA could confirm if they did or did not have veto powers over new hiring. Everyone I have asked, even ATCOs, have told me that they did.

I have also read the 2010 decrees, which basically cut down on pay through the limitation to 80 overtime hours, and the ability ATCOs had to regulate their own working schedules. The 1001/2010 decree from August 5, established very specifically how work assignments were to be performed, defined what constituted work, rest, etc. and applied rules to rest periods to clarify the maximums an ATCO could work.

I have also read the session diaries from parliament and congress, in which you can read, among other things, that until a new collective agreement (like the one signed in 1999) is reached, ATCOs will receive an extra payment to compensate the loss generated by the new decrees and working hours. This is very often conveniently forgotten, only mentioning the pay cuts. Obviously, the key here is "when a new agreement is signed", which means it has to have the approval of USCA, and they're not going to sign a major reduction in pay and 'rights'.

LH2

13th Dec 2010, 00:42

Hours over 1200 were paid very well, the company wanted it that way so they didn´t have to hire more people.

If by the company you mean AENA, that might have well been the case. I do not know for certain, but from my encounters with AENA management I can only describe them as a bunch of useless pricks, so it wouldn't surprise me that they wouldn't do a few numbers... or perhaps they just didn't want to confront the unions with the issue.

I suppose I have to give you that. If AENA (and the successive governments) hadn't been so amazingly incompetent they wouldn't have let their unions, both ATCOs and others, become so powerful and they wouldn't be in the situation today they find themselves in.

whats is your point here???

What is yours?

The lad is researching the issue and contributing useful local knowledge. You are doing neither: you are just wasting space with childish (and frankly quite stupid) comments.

Pot calling Kettle over.

Not to be a pedant, but in the well-known saying the pot is not addressing the kettle; it is ascribing a quality to it.

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 06:36

Flameproof,

It appears obvious you don't pay Spanish ATC service with your taxes, like I do.

I didn't know that Spanish ATC service was paid by your taxes, interesting. No route charges in Spain? or are they subsidized by the government? Normally ATC is quite lucrative, even if not for the airports the areas' income should cover up for that and more. Quite frankly I find it hard to believe that AENA went into problems due to high ATCO salaries. There has been a lot of major improvements in the airports all over spain which don't come cheap.

In other words, if any tax money is used in AENA I cannot believe it is due to high controller salaries if not incompetent management. Maybe you also can get access to AENA balance sheets, those should make some interesting reading and shed some light.

On 27 March 1998, the government approved the hiring of 190 ATCOs. In 1999, 96 new ATCOs were hired. In 2000 it was 98. In 2001, it was 94. So, in total, 478 new ATCO places were offered, and I have not been able to find any further offers until today. Again, it would be nice if someone from USCA could confirm if they did or did not have veto powers over new hiring. Everyone I have asked, even ATCOs, have told me that they did.

Why would they give such powers to the controllers, why would you let your workforce veto hiring of more controllers?? If they were blackmailed by strike, how would the controllers have justified such a strike? They should have just hired the people and if controllers resisted in giving training, make it official and use that as a weapon against them when they complain about lack of workforce.

See, I believe you are going for the easy target. I think you and the main Spanish public is being "toreada". Gotta say the controllers, among other government tools, are an effective "capote" and the government is proving to be a very effective bullfighter. I wonder when and how the sword will land.

iamhere

13th Dec 2010, 06:48

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 07:08

Over paid = Over paid.

stop your bitching boys and girls and get on with the job of stopping planes smacking into eachother.

I am an ATCO, I don't earn as much as the spanish guys.

Same job, most likely more hours, but I don't consider mayself underpaid.

You have all had your cream and eaten it, now you'll just have to drink the milk.

spanish ATC is over paid. No buts. It just is.

Over paid = Over paid.

So Iamhere, honestly, imagine none of this Spanish affair has happened yet, if one day the management comes up to you and says "look we seem to or going to have some staff shortage, would you mind working few more days a month and we give you a very handsome compensation for that. Works for us, works for you." Then your union negotiates roughly 25% salary per extra duty, you are going to say that is too much and not take it? Are you going to claim it is not fair for the rest of the controllers in the world? Seriously?!? In the worst scenario you would be worried, rightly as it seems, that it would come back and bite you. Probably take it as a temporary agreement until new controllers are trained ready. Which AFAIK was the idea.

But then AENA decided they could continue doing the extras without the pay. How would you react to that? Suddenly you have to do the extras without the pay. Would you not have like to be consulted again? Explained the problems in the company that for whatever reason you still need the extras but cannot afford the pay. Would that not be your legal right, the right to a new negotiation before the old agreement is amended?

Yes, they had good conditions, yes, they had good compensation for their extras. Yes, maybe they were overpaid. You don't/are not, they were better negotiators, their management has been weaker. Do you not know anyone else that seems to have an easier life and earns much more than you do? Should their conditions be lowered to yours without negotiation as well?

Del Prado

13th Dec 2010, 07:22

- 2400 controllers at 450.000€/year/controller = 1080 Million € / year.
- 4800 controllers at 180.000€/year/controller = 864 Million € / year.

Or, savings of 216 Million Euros per year.

Please tell me the above are lies. At least, admit the math is right, and the conclusions logical

The above are lies. Sorry to have another pop flameproof but you're wrong.

Salary is not the only cost to consider. Quite apart from tax, pension and healthcare what about training?
It takes about 2 years to become an ATCO (surprised you didn't validate during your 3 years of listening in), even after 2 years many candidates simply don't make it, I think it costs close to a million euros to train an ATCO (check previous posts by Lon More for details).

To double ATCO numbers would cost 2.4 billion in training costs. Then you'd start to save 216 million a year (based on your assumptions).

Can you understand now why some posters take exception at your extremely forthright views when such gaps appear in your knowledge? (unless you aim to deliberately mislead?)

PeltonLevel

13th Dec 2010, 08:09

No route charges in Spain?
Only the highest in Europe!
Unfortunately, it is possible for there to be hidden subsidies from taxation even within the Eurocontrol charging regime. Unless all services and infrastructure employed are paid for at full rates and unless all assets used are on the company's books at full current value and weren't transferred from the government at some nominal value, there is an implicit subsidy.

'I' in the sky

13th Dec 2010, 08:57

Del Prado,
If those figures are lies, can you tell us what the true figures are ?

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 09:22

Unfortunately, it is possible for there to be hidden subsidies from taxation even within the Eurocontrol charging regime. Unless all services and infrastructure employed are paid for at full rates and unless all assets used are on the company's books at full current value and weren't transferred from the government at some nominal value, there is an implicit subsidy.

That is a whole new can of worms that would need to be opened. When they claim that Barcelona and Madrid are the only two airports actually making profit, Mallorca apparently cuts it even and all the others are at a loss. Would that be including the original cost of acquisition/building or only the running costs?

In the end subsidies are paid off to many industries to keep them running or get them to start. Are the subsidies paid off to AENA any different to those in other industries? If so in what way?

Either case AENA is losing money but where are they really bleeding the money? So do we charge at the "capote" or wisen up and handle the "torero"?

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 10:02

If those figures are lies, can you tell us what the true figures are ?

All those that consider salaries as the only costs of personnel need to study some business. Gross salaries are only part of the costs of personnel, especially where specialist training is needed.

I am not a business man, but I was trained into shipping business by my father since as far back as I can remember as a child and went to the university about it. Both taught how to calculate worthiness of a business venture by feasibility and profitability calculations. In case of controllers you would need to figure out how much a controller costs you to recruit, make ready for ops and how long would it take you to cover that cost and start making profit out of it.

Recruiting controllers go beyond those of pilots for the fact that controllers hold licences for the area and type of control they provide, unlike pilots who only need the type ratings. So even if you were to recruit already licensed controllers you still need extensive training. Correct me if I am mistaken but I'm guessing (based on my experience from Maastricht UAC) a conversion controller can take anything from 8 months to a year and up to be validated in a sector, during which time full if not almost full salary is paid.

Training is not always successful, many times trainees, even those with licences, cannot adopt to the new airspace and have to be terminated. Which is also a cost you need to add to successful recruitments. So if 10 trainees are recruited and only 5 make it (and that is a very optimistic value), if each training costs x, the cost of recruiting each of these 5 successful controllers would be 2x. They would have to yield enough years working for you to pay for that and then start making profit. Obviously this is not calculated as per individual training group but as an average from overall experience of the business. If the failure rate rises the training and recruitment criteria are looked into to balance out the costs.

So those numbers by flameproof are indeed misleading. It is not as simple a calculation. Very good for herding angry mob though.

In the end it is about the opportunity cost. If you get the real numbers and do calculations in the short term, be it 10 years, it could indeed seem smarter to pay immense extras to avoid the cost of recruitment. Could still only work if you continue to recruit at least for pending retirements and fallouts, as long as you can reasonably guarantee that keeping the current workforce numbers can supply the demand. Either case you would have to make up for the missing gap by negotiating the new hours or increasing the workforce before the cost of extra duties build up to be greater than the cost of recruitment.

I am pretty sure AENA did this calculation, but went further and instead of negotiating they imposed the new rules. They knew very well that those immense extras could be used against the controllers, very smart. Two birds with a single stone.

Another point I would like to stress is the fact that; as controllers age their options to look for work somewhere else reduce immensely. Conversions are still accepted in many centers around the world, but the older you get the thicker your skull gets and harder to train new air spaces, hence harder to find a job elsewhere. One of the many reasons why controllers tend to try and protect their conditions in any ways possible. It is not as easy for controllers to go look for a work anywhere else as it is for pilots, if the demand for pilots was as high as it is for controllers at the moment.

Del Prado

13th Dec 2010, 10:30

Excellent post Tolgab.

'I' in the sky, it's also been discussed here, post #27 onwards (http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/435789-controllers-can-earn-350-000-euros-470-000-297-000-a-2.html#post6105679)

I hope that gives you some idea of training costs.

Neptune262

13th Dec 2010, 10:54

Correct me if I am mistaken but I'm guessing a conversion controller can take anything from 8 months to a year and up to be validated in a sector, during which time full if not almost full salary is paid.

Correction: From as little as 3 weeks, depending on unit complexity - taken from a country which relies on mostly external hire.

So if 10 trainees are recruited and only 5 make it (and that is a very optimistic value)

Correction: Not at all optimistic - I think way too low. I would think the figure to be above 80% - maybe somebody from SERCO, for example, could give their figures for external hire?

For initial training, most training agencies post figures between 65-95% pass rate at the training facility, obviously there is still local training to be taken into account.

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 11:26

Correction: From as little as 3 weeks, depending on unit complexity - taken from a country which relies on mostly external hire.

3 weeks, not even conversions from one sector group to another here within the Maastricht UAC takes as little as 3 weeks, let alone from another center. Which center are you talking about? Also conversion from within a center/company?

Correction: Not at all optimistic - I think way too low. I would think the figure to be above 80% - maybe somebody from SERCO, for example, could give their figures for external hire?

80% success rate with 3 weeks training only, seriously where are you getting these numbers from? Cause they seem way too good.

What are you basing your thinking on? I am basing mine to my 10yr experience at Eurocontrol Maastricht UAC which is supposed to be one of the most efficient centers in Europe. Maybe someone from SERCO should clarify, including the type of training given, systems used, strip/stripless, radar/procedural.

I wonder what the success rate at NATS, DFS or any other large successful European ATS provider is from recruitment to full establishment.

Please also refrain from "corrections" based on your thinking alone, some facts could help.

Neptune262

13th Dec 2010, 12:13

3 weeks, not even conversions from one sector group to another here within the Maastricht UAC takes as little as 3 weeks, let alone from another center. Which center are you talking about? Also conversion from within a center/company?

Fact:
Civil Aviation Regulations (CARs) (http://www.gcaa.gov.ae/en/epublication/pages/cars.aspx?CertID=CARs)

See CAR Part VIII Subpart 4, ATS Appendix 2, 2.9.9

Minimum experience requirement is 15 training days for ADI/APP or APS

If you read my post it states "from as little as three weeks" - does not exclude your example of 8 months, but just reduces the minimum ammount. Note: ACC training minimum is 40 training days.

Please also refrain from "corrections" based on your thinking alone, some facts could help.

Sorry, but all mine is based on experience, as is yours no doubt. Just trying to say that the world is a big place and that different counties have different rules.

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 12:34

Fact:
Civil Aviation Regulations (CARs)

See CAR Part VIII Subpart 4, ATS Appendix 2, 2.9.9

Minimum experience requirement is 15 training days for ADI/APP or APS

If you read my post it states "from as little as three weeks" - does not exclude your example of 8 months, but just reduces the minimum ammount. Note: ACC training minimum is 40 training days.

It would have helped a lot if you started off saying that in UAE rule book you can be validated in 3 weeks. Do you also need a check out in UAE before the validation or the coaches decide?

Yes the world is big indeed and there are many discrepancies between the aviation rules as per controllers. Either case you are basing your cost calculations depending on UAE rule book for a European country tied with European rules. That sounds fair to you?

We are talking about the problems of AENA's cost management, and I'm trying to prove a point by explaining why paying extras to the controllers could have been the cheaper option for the management even if those amounts were astronomical. Then you come up and say you can get validated in 3 weeks, yes but in UAE! Not really the same criteria for obtaining a valid license in Europe now is it? I bet you in N.Korea the controllers cost even less...

Neptune262

13th Dec 2010, 13:01

It would have helped a lot if you started off saying that in UAE rule book you can be validated in 3 weeks. Do you also need a check out in UAE before the validation or the coaches decide?

Yes the world is big indeed and there are many discrepancies between the aviation rules as per controllers. Either case you are basing your cost calculations depending on UAE rule book for a European country tied with European rules. That sounds fair to you?

We are talking about the problems of AENA's cost management, and I'm trying to prove a point by explaining why paying extras to the controllers could have been the cheaper option for the management even if those amounts were astronomical. Then you come up and say you can get validated in 3 weeks, yes but in UAE! Not really the same criteria for obtaining a valid license in Europe now is it? I bet you in N.Korea the controllers cost even less... 13th Dec 2010 15:13

1. Yes an examination is required - as stated in the regulations
2. You did the cost calculations, not me. I was just commenting on your original post Correct me if I am mistaken but I'm guessing
3. They may do, as may do many controllers from other parts of the world, including Europe.

Look, this is distracting from the original thread.

I posted because your comment made assumptions that do not portray the total global ATM environment. Your post was based on your experience at Maastricht UAC, which you did not state. I read your post as talking about ATM as a whole. Your post was requesting comment, so comment was duely made. I apologise if I upset you by talking about the global situation, but I feel that all the world is looking at the Spanish situation now, so any facts quoted should be global, unless specified as otherwise.

If you feel justified on backing the AENA's cost management model, then you carry on.

But for now, hugs all round and let this thread get back to talking about Spanish ATC.

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 13:18

I posted because your comment made assumptions that do not portray the total global ATM environment. Your post was based on your experience at Maastricht UAC, which you did not state. I read your post as talking about ATM as a whole. Your post was requesting comment, so comment was duely made. I apologise if I upset you by talking about the global situation, but I feel that all the world is looking at the Spanish situation now, so any facts quoted should be global, unless specified as otherwise.

Fair enough, I shall make the necessary editions to the post to highlight those so others will not have the same misunderstanding as you did.

added after edition;
If you feel justified on backing the AENA's cost management model, then you carry on.

I am not backing the AENA's cost management model, I am trying to show certain people that the cost of a controller is not simply the salary, that recruitment and training are quite substantial parts of it, at least in Europe (see, I'm learning). Trying to discuss that not recruiting new controllers and paying high sums of extras was also profitable to AENA, at least in the short run.

I'd hug you back but got the flu :}. Thanks for that anyways.

andrijander

13th Dec 2010, 13:30

For the cases I know of (about a dozen), it does take around a year to validate in a new centre. The cases I talk about are of people coming from or going to MUAC. Some cases it takes significantly longer than that - up to 2 years. It does have to do with airspace complexity and the learning curve of the individual. Also, since so much time is involved, personal situation of the individual may play a part, amongst others.

I do not know how it would be with smaller towers regarding training time but I believe big airports like MAD, BCN may take way longer when compared. When taking into account all the theory courses, SIM and OJT it does seem that 3 weeks is cutting it a bit short. even for a small tower.

Perhaps in some of the ventures SERCO may be involved such a short time is more than enough, but as Tolgab already mentions, that is not the case over here due regulations.

flameproof

13th Dec 2010, 14:33

Replying to various posts here,

I didn't know that Spanish ATC service was paid by your taxes, interesting.

AENA is a public company, and thus, it is either financed by its own income, or by taxes, or a combination of both. Until now, ATCOs sustained that they didn't cost the public anything, as their salaries came out of route fees, and AENA was in the black.

However, you could by the same logic say, if AENA has money left at the end of the year, money which came from fees, then it could buy gold-plated toilets for all the ATC centers. Or buy everyone a new car as a bonus.

Things don't work that way - the duty of the public company is to rationalize spending, and if it does bring in a profit, to spend it to the benefit of the public. Just because you bring in rakes of cash doesn't mean you can spend it all on huge salaries and bonuses. Thus, if AENA is wasting money it could put into improving a service, into something else, such as inflated salaries, that money is effectively coming out of the public's pocket.

No route charges in Spain?

The second most expensive in Europe, behind Switzerland. For December 2010, the unit rate is set at 84.11€, as an example. You could say these are high to pay for ATC services, or that due to the high cost of ATC services, the fees have to be set so high.

Why would they give such powers to the controllers, why would you let your workforce veto hiring of more controllers?? If they were blackmailed by strike, how would the controllers have justified such a strike? They should have just hired the people and if controllers resisted in giving training, make it official and use that as a weapon against them when they complain about lack of workforce.

Because the issue is not comparing the cost of hiring a new controller versus paying the existing one a huge premium. The issue is comparing paying the existing controllers a huge premium, versus the cost of a strike, be it hidden or open. The estimate of the losses due to the walk-out stands at some 1.500 million Euros, and yet the government decided to stand its ground. It would have been WAY cheaper to pay the controllers 4x or 5x the hourly rate, than to suffer the consequences of the walk-out.

See, I believe you are going for the easy target.

Nope, the controllers landed themselves in hot water by continuously complaining about their conditions, complaints which were always fixed with more money and better conditions, and curiously, the issue now is not salaries. For the first time, we face a problem that cannot be fixed with money. It is at least, curious.

The proof is in the groundless barking you are receiving - continua y muchas gracias, parece que la verdad hace ladrar a algunos.

Thank you! Muchas gracias! :)

The above are lies. Sorry to have another pop flameproof but you're wrong.

Ahem. I have not called anyone a liar, yet I have been called a liar several times. It's a rather strong accusation. You can say that my calculations are not correct, that I'm missing some info that you do have, and provide more accurate calculations. You cannot say that I'm lying and then not provide any figures or data to back up your claim. Other than "because I say so" of course.

Salary is not the only cost to consider. Quite apart from tax, pension and healthcare what about training?
It takes about 2 years to become an ATCO (surprised you didn't validate during your 3 years of listening in), even after 2 years many candidates simply don't make it, I think it costs close to a million euros to train an ATCO (check previous posts by Lon More for details).

Training is a cost, of course, but maybe the high costs of training are due to the fact that ATCOs are in charge of the training process, and we know how much an ATCO costs in Spain. In any case, USCA keeps repeating that in their training there is something like a 95% pass rate, so there doesn't seem to be so much waste in the system.

To double ATCO numbers would cost 2.4 billion in training costs. Then you'd start to save 216 million a year (based on your assumptions).

I didn't say you had to double the number of ATCOs to solve the problems, maybe a few hundred are enough. Maybe there is enough staff already as it is. What I was pointing out is the fallacy that paying huge premiums is cheaper than hiring new staff, in this particular case.

Either case AENA is losing money but where are they really bleeding the money?

OK so we cut down on building airports, and we leave the ATCOs alone with their huge salaries and associated costs? Or we do an across-the-board rationalization of spending. Let me remind you that many public services are loss-leaders, are you thus saying we should just leave open BCN, MAD and Palma, and close all other airports in Spain? Because they generate losses? We ferry all the passengers in Spain via bus or train to/from these three airports?

There are train stations that see three passengers a week, yet they have to be there as a public service. Same goes with many other public services. Including airports. Having said this, I don't agree with some of the recent spending in new airports, considering the crisis we are in, but this doesn't mean I can automatically ignore the ATCO problem.

As far as training goes, word now is that you can pay 45.000€ to a private learning center, and get an ATCO license, which makes you eligible to be hired by AENA or other ATC providers. You will of course need additional on-site training, but can anyone comment on how much this extra training entails, compared to when SENASA was handling all the training? Is it three weeks? Three months? I would be interesting to know.

calypso

13th Dec 2010, 14:44

The cost of conversion will be: time of trainee x salary + time of trainer x salary - time of controller needed in that position regardless x salary + cost of extra training equipment used.

I will asume that the cost of the equipment is not into the hundreds of thousands so if it costs up to a million it must be because those receiving the training are still on mega salaries even thought they are not yet productive.

The solution is then quite easy: don´t pay 300k to a trainee. Don't pay 600k to the trainer

paidworker

13th Dec 2010, 15:05

" The controllers landed themselves in hot water "... Nah ,.. I would imagine it was not comfortable for a day or two but now the false indignation of the politicians is gone , the press have to worry about what Prince Harrys wife will wear to her wedding and a tidy solution for another 12 months is being hammered out behind closed doors. Nobody will be charged with anything for the most part for sedition etc etc. because it would be too messy given the government is acting illegally anyway. The bottom line is the government doesnt really have options and will negotiate properly now..I would imagine the controllers want to negotiate too ..but the laws of supply and demand have not changed.

Flameproof no matter how many books I read about being a pilot , I still had no idea what it was like to fly a plane..you are mixing fact with opinion quite freely such that opinion may appear to be fact when of course it is not..

LH2

13th Dec 2010, 15:40

Tolgab,

I do on the whole agree with your post, and commend you for your clear exposition. I will make a few remarks though.

Recruiting controllers go beyond those of pilots for the fact that controllers hold licences for the area and type of control they provide, unlike pilots who only need the type ratings.

While this doesn't change in any way the validity of what you're saying as regards this discussion, I think it should be pointed out that your assertion that pilots "only need the type ratings" is not quite correct. There are also many additional certifications required on the flight deck of practically any aeroplane for any kind of commercial ops, from the lowest end of GA to the airlines. By way of example, think about Cat III ops, hazmat, ETOPS, restricted airports, etc., etc. Most if not all of them carry their own currency and recency requirements.

So even if you were to recruit already licensed controllers you still need extensive training.

Yes, understood. That is hardly unique to this sector, and one understands that you are making a point in relation to there being other costs on top of what a previous poster mentioned, but doesn't a controller already on the job also require training, in the form of refreshers, re-training as circumstances change (e.g., airfield or airspace reconfiguration), or simply moving up/around? If that is the case, to an extent training costs are (should be) incurred both in the hiring of new recruits and in keeping existing personnel up to speed.

Training is not always successful, many times trainees, even those with licences, cannot adopt to the new airspace and have to be terminated. Which is also a cost you need to add to successful recruitments. So if 10 trainees are recruited and only 5 make it (and that is a very optimistic value), if each training costs x, the cost of recruiting each of these 5 successful controllers would be 2x.

That is as true in ATS as in any other business needing qualified personnel. But would not hiring new people on the basis of this be a sustainable long-term business plan, in terms of cost savings or otherwise? Not that Spaniards are known for their planning capacity beyond the next half-hour, mind you. :)

In the end it is about the opportunity cost. If you get the real numbers and do calculations in the short term, be it 10 years, it could indeed seem smarter to pay immense extras to avoid the cost of recruitment. Could still only work if you continue to recruit at least for pending retirements and fallouts, as long as you can reasonably guarantee that keeping the current workforce numbers can supply the demand.

Entirely agreed. As you mention demand, one might stress that the volume of air traffic seems to have increased significantly over the last ten years.

Either case you would have to make up for the missing gap by negotiating the new hours or increasing the workforce before the cost of extra duties build up to be greater than the cost of recruitment.

I am pretty sure AENA did this calculation, but went further and instead of negotiating they imposed the new rules.

This is where accounts differ. As has been mentioned here before, and is a matter of public record, there have been numerous rounds of negotiations over the years, and in particular in the last 18 months or so. Whether those negotiations were in good faith on AENA's side that is subject to discussion. OTOH the persistent bad faith and zero negotiating and PR skills by the controller's union and many individual controllers has been clearly and repeatedly evidenced (the public claims by certain union leaders of being threatened with firearms being particularly outlandish. I certainly hope they get prosecuted for that.)

It takes two to tango, and clearly those who now choose to portray themselves as "victims" didn't bother to come to the dance floor when it was time for them to do so. Kind of narrows the available options, doesn't it? Not saying that any of the other actors were free of fault, but the way the controller's union played it could hardly have been worse--if I were an ATCO I would certainly be demanding explanations from my union leaders.

Another point I would like to stress is the fact that; as controllers age their options to look for work somewhere else reduce immensely.

How is that different from any other activity? Contrary to your assertion, I do not believe that it is easy for a person of certain age to find new work, regardless of their field of activity and regardless of demand. Personally, I am also unconvinced by the cognitive deterioration argument, although I understand that as a common perception, it will play against an aged person even if the claim has no objective basis.

I am also unclear as to how this relates to the main thrust of your argument. Is my understanding correct that you claim that in the short term paying a higher salary to your existing workforce works out cheaper than hiring more people? If so I am inclined to agree.

How about in the mid and long terms? Do you agree that this strategy is not sustainable over a longer time scale?

If you do, the one remaining question is how come we're not there? If you claim that there were no negotiations, that is incorrect: there were, albeit not very fruitful by the looks of it and, whatever the other parties faults and shortcomings, it seems rather plain to see that the controller's negotiating representatives (presumably the union) bear the bulk of the responsibility in letting things deteriorate to this point through sheer incompetence as negotiators (let alone as controllers :ugh:).

In any case, I wish to congratulate you for a very clear exposition of your argument. :ok:

Del Prado

13th Dec 2010, 15:52

AENA is a public company, and thus, it is either financed by its own income, or by taxes, or a combination of both. Until now, ATCOs sustained that they didn't cost the public anything, as their salaries came out of route fees, and AENA was in the black.

However, you could by the same logic say, if AENA has money left at the end of the year, money which came from fees, then it could buy gold-plated toilets for all the ATC centers. Or buy everyone a new car as a bonus.

Things don't work that way - the duty of the public company is to rationalize spending, and if it does bring in a profit, to spend it to the benefit of the public. Just because you bring in rakes of cash doesn't mean you can spend it all on huge salaries and bonuses. Thus, if AENA is wasting money it could put into improving a service, into something else, such as inflated salaries, that money is effectively coming out of the public's pocket.

I'd put it to you that ATC is self funding through route charges. Your line of attack so far is ATCOs are being paid by your taxes. Now you say the ATCOs aren't making a big enough profit for you?

Flameproof said
Ahem. I have not called anyone a liar, yet I have been called a liar several times. It's a rather strong accusation.
and also said
Please tell me the above are lies. At least, admit the math is right, and the conclusions logical.
Once again the maths is wrong, the conclusions are not logical, the only way to describe your calculations was as you requested, lies. I'm therefore surprised at your indignation.
My argument is not subjective but based in fact. Training of ATCOs is a huge expense. I know that from my experience in UK, Tolgab confirms it with his experience in Maastricht and if you read the link I provided, Lon More confirms it with his experience in Maastricht.
You can say that my calculations are not correct, that I'm missing some info that you do have, and provide more accurate calculations. You cannot say that I'm lying and then not provide any figures or data to back up your claim.
I've simply used your figures and then added the cost of training which you conveniently omitted.
I cannot provide the exact figures of the cost of training an ATCO (ab-initio) in Spain, I can't do it for the UK either because the figures could be calculated any number of ways. But the figure for the UK, Maastricht and most european ANSPs will be in the region of 750,000 to 1 million euros per valid ATCO recruited with no experience. If you want a more detailed breakdown of the costs have a look at the excellent posts by Tolgab and Lon More.

Training is a cost, of course, but maybe the high costs of training are due to the fact that ATCOs are in charge of the training process, and we know how much an ATCO costs in Spain
I've used the cost of training an ATCO in UK and Maastricht, I think it's safe to say training in Spain will be broadly similar.

I didn't say you had to double the number of ATCOs to solve the problems
It was you who doubled the number of ATCOs in your example, I was following you for clarity.

the fallacy that paying huge premiums is cheaper than hiring new staff, in this particular case.
No fallacy. All ANSPs are under pressure from airlines to cut staff numbers and use overtime to cover. Ireland went through a dispute last year where overtime was used as a stick to beat the ATCOs with, NATS uses overtime to cover significant staff shortages on certain sectors, it's just the Spanish model has gone further than the others.

As far as training goes, word now is that you can pay 45.000€ to a private learning center, and get an ATCO license, which makes you eligible to be hired by AENA or other ATC providers. You will of course need additional on-site training, but can anyone comment on how much this extra training entails, compared to when SENASA was handling all the training? Is it three weeks? Three months? I would be interesting to know.

The UK college course has been reduced from about 15 months to around 4. The time spent at unit training towards sector validation has gone from 4 months to 18. Guess which part of the training is the most expensive?

flameproof

13th Dec 2010, 15:54

The bottom line is the government doesnt really have options and will negotiate properly now..I would imagine the controllers want to negotiate too ..but the laws of supply and demand have not changed.

So you admit that ATCOs used, and will continue using, the lack of supply as a negotiation tactic? That is called 'extorsion', not negotiation. Things will go lime this then:

1. Charges will be dropped agains ATCOs, who will not set a foot in jail, nor pay any fine.
2. Controllers will sit with AENA, and say "as you failed to have us prosecuted, and you still need us as there are no replacements, we want our huge overtime pay back, and a new Ferrari".
3. AENA will roll over like a trained puppy and give in.

I guess the arrogance of some (I could say many or all, but I don't like to generalize) of Spain's ATCOs knows no bounds.

I was going to ignore this, but I see you approve of it as well. So now we are barking dogs for trying to make you understand our point of view, nice, really nice...

Er... I didn't generalize, but ever since I started posting, I've had nothing but crap thrown my way, called a liar, had my experience and knowledge questioned, so I think when someone shows appreciation and encouragement, I should be allowed to thank him. There has been a lot of barking, but in your case, it has been stiff opposition, not barking. You have argued your points, without going into the personal bickering - if you feel offended, I apologize.

I sincerely hope that your and rest of the Spanish people's approval of the current actions of the Spanish government will make a better Spain. But somehow I cannot get myself to believe that.

What is the solution then? I keep asking the same question over and over again, and nobody answers. Should we just keep having a vital service sequestered by just over 2000 people who will, as paidworker has said, keep extorting the government for more money and better conditions.

LH2

13th Dec 2010, 16:09

Training of ATCOs is a huge expense.

But a necessary one. Your business cannot operate without incurring that expense.

the figure for the UK, Maastricht and most european ANSPs will be in the region of 750,000 to 1 million euros per valid ATCO recruited with no experience.

Keep in mind that different figures are used for different purposes. In principle they're all legitimate, but only useful in the context they were intended to be used.

Incidentally (and my previous remark notwithstanding) that looks fairly cheap when you think of the training costs incurred by, e.g., many elements in the military (from pilots to specialised infantry), engineering, and naval industries.

The UK college course has been reduced from about 15 months to around 4. The time spent at unit training towards sector validation has gone from 4 months to 18. Guess which part of the training is the most expensive?

You appear to be a Spaniard working in the UK as an ATCO. May I ask what led you to make the decision to work in the UK rather than in Spain? Not trying to make a point of any kind, just pure curiosity.

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 16:47

LH2,

I agree that both parties played this wrong, especially the controllers played it real bad. They have no public support for lack of proper communication by their representatives.

I think it should be pointed out that your assertion that pilots "only need the type ratings" is not quite correct.

To this I stand corrected.

I am also unclear as to how this relates to the main thrust of your argument. Is my understanding correct that you claim that in the short term paying a higher salary to your existing workforce works out cheaper than hiring more people? If so I am inclined to agree.

Yes, what I meant exactly in the short term, with dangerous consequences in the long term if you do not make up for whatever is the cause of such need.

But on the ground of aging controllers looking for job, I meant in the ATC business. If I look for a job as an ATCO in some other center, my age will play against me quite substantially. Just trying to say that it will be harder for a 45 year old ATCO to find a job in at least W.Europe than it would be for a 45 year old captain for example, if we consider the demand for pilots be the same as controllers today.

Let me try and explain you what a conversion would have to go through if he was to come to my sector group today.

After all the interviews and stuff, he would join with the ab-initios on the Letters of Agreement(LoAs) phase, where they are to learn the restrictions, rules for silent transfer of control between us and the neighboring sectors. In case of my sector group it is; London, Scottish, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Rhein and Bremen.

Then it would be two weeks of simulator to put into practice those rules with low traffic. Later you go into ops room, as a training co-ordinator controller. A small exam to see whether you learned anything. A month or two and back to simulator for more serious training to get used to different military activations, weather, traffic loads.

Then practical exams in the simulator. If you make them, into the ops room for on the job training in one of the sectors. You get 5 levels in training, 5 being ready for a check out. Can take 5 months to a certain maximum which I cannot remember what. Oral boards about the systems, back up systems, LoAs. Then the practical exam.

Copy paste the on the job training for the other sectors in the sector group, which could be 2-4.

This again is for my center, could be different but don't expect it to be too different. We all want the trainees to get checked out as soon as possible but there are rules and regulations we have to follow before we can let someone take over the frequency. I am sure at least the pilots would appreciate that.

I really would not like to go through all that past 40s. Also even the shorter term re-training of the controllers cost money, so the recruiter has to keep in mind whether the money spend on this controller will pay-back before he retires, also chances of him making it. In case of a 40 year old, you'd have 15 years to work if all goes well. As an ab-initio you are under a contract of at least 10 years before you can leave without damages to the company if I remember correctly. Don't know what the minimum is for conversion controllers or whether there is any.

I don't know how complicated it is to switch companies for pilots, or how complicated it is to get a new type rating. But for every new center the only thing we take from the previous is the 5nm and 1000ft on radar unless you move to a neighboring center. But even how you achieve that 5nm or 1000ft will be questioned.

Hopefully this sheds some lights on why I believe that as we age our chances of switching centers get highly unlikely. We could look for jobs as trainers or maybe consultants somewhere else, but as an ATCO not so easy.

By the way, thanks for the mature discussion, but if you need more clarification please PM me as I am done with this tread.

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 17:08

Flameproof,

Er... I didn't generalize, but ever since I started posting, I've had nothing but crap thrown my way, called a liar, had my experience and knowledge questioned, so I think when someone shows appreciation and encouragement, I should be allowed to thank him. There has been a lot of barking, but in your case, it has been stiff opposition, not barking. You have argued your points, without going into the personal bickering - if you feel offended, I apologize.

Thanks for the apology, either case I will agree to disagree with you and end my part of the discussion. For me both parties screwed up big time, but only the controllers seem to be getting the bad end of the stick. Which I find highly unfair that the government is getting applauded by the public.

A solution? That would depend from which point onwards. They should never have allowed things to get this bad. And now, who knows? We will have to wait and see where they get from here.

Thanks for making the peace, till another tread puts us for or against.

flameproof

13th Dec 2010, 17:12

@Del Prado:

I'd put it to you that ATC is self funding through route charges. Your line of attack so far is ATCOs are being paid by your taxes. Now you say the ATCOs aren't making a big enough profit for you?

Let's do some math. Assume we have

2400 ATCOs x 450.000€/year = 1.080M€ in ATC personnel costs.
Route charges = 1.200M€/year.

We have a 'profit' of 120 million Euros. Now, let's place the same controllers into the lower salary levels:

2400 ATCOs x 150.000€/year = 360M€ in ATC personnel costs.
Route charges = 1.200M€/year.

We now have a 'profit' of 840 million Euros. Do you know how many schools can be built with the difference? Or how many improvements can be made to airports, or even ATC services, like better facilities, better technology, etc.? What is being overpaid to controllers is not being spent on other things. Are these lies too?

Once again the maths is wrong, the conclusions are not logical, the only way to describe your calculations was as you requested, lies. I'm therefore surprised at your indignation.
My argument is not subjective but based in fact. Training of ATCOs is a huge expense. I know that from my experience in UK, Tolgab confirms it with his experience in Maastricht and if you read the link I provided, Lon More confirms it with his experience in Maastricht.

OK let's include training expenses of 1M€ per new ATCO.

2400 ATCOs x 450.000€/year = 1.080M€/year.

or,

2400 ATCOs x 150.000€/year = 360M€/year.
500 New recruits, training expense = 500M€ (let's say they are all recruited and trained at the same time).
500 New recruits earning the same as ATCOs, for argument's sake = 75M€ (they would logically earn much less).

So, for this first year, we have a total cost of 935M€, still a whole 145M€ savings over having 2400 controllers earning the huge salary. If we were to take 300.000€ as the average salary quoted in various media, instead of 450.000€, we'd be looking at 720M€, so the first year you'd lose 215M€, but the next year, you're paying 2900 ATCOs 150.000€ which comes to 435M€, thus, you'd be saving 285M€, or recovering 70M€ already.

The lifespan of a government is 4 years unless re-elected, so this cost/savings structure fits very well within their timeframe.

Now, please, do your own math, with your own facts as you say, and post them here. Don't just say I'm lying because you say so.

I've used the cost of training an ATCO in UK and Maastricht, I think it's safe to say training in Spain will be broadly similar.

So it is also safe to say that ATCO salaries in Spain will be broadly similar to those in UK and Maastricht. But they are not, they are at least triple. Please provide accurate training costs for Spain, or else don't speculate.

It was you who doubled the number of ATCOs in your example, I was following you for clarity.

Granted, and point taken. Please see my above calcs with an increase of 500 controllers.

ATC Watcher

13th Dec 2010, 17:14

Excellent debate between people that have fixed opinions beforehand and won't change.
Figures thrown in the debate are not verified , nor correct but of course you can , just like with statistics take those that suit you to support your already made opinion. 3 weeks to train a controller ?. why not. In a small TWR with 10 IFR mvts a day, sure. but in Madrid ACC ?

I give you just a few FACTS based on 35 years experience :
You can take my word for it or not, your choice , I have nothing to sell.

1) in a modern en route ACC centre with an advanced flight processing system ( e.g , London, Geneva, LATCC, Maatricht , Rhein , etc ): , ab initio recruitment from selection to fully validated ( i.e bringing money in ) is 3 to 4 years.
Absolute failure rate : ( i.e from selection to fully validated FOR THE POST YOU WERE RECRUITED ) is between 40 and 60% .
Simulator training costs double, the trainee controller you pay, plus the costs, of a fully validated controller that you take off the ops room to do this for weeks on: double costs, no revenue. So training a controller today is hugely expensive. Plus a controller when fully validated, will get sick, might get kids and ask for part time, might leave you to go somewhere else in 10 years, needs insurance and a pension.
Overtime is flexible, does not get sick, does not need pension and no training.

So for Any ATC service Provider : Overtime is cheaper than recruiting, plus if your traffic goes down you cut overtime . You cannot (in Europe at least ) dismiss controllers without pay when traffic goes down.( like it does currently in Spain )

So forget your theories and claculations to the euro. Overtime is cheaper.

Now conversion training versus ab-initio : again based on exeperience in a large centre, depends on the age you get them , contrary to Pilots, the older and more experienced the longer it will take : a young guy ( say 25ish, takes 9 months minimum, 25 to 30 , a year, above 30 anything from one up to 2 years, not worth it m in fact same or longer OJT in ops room that an ab-initio.

Is Palma, Barcelona, Madrid and Canarias ACCs exactly same as those above ? No. In Spain, just like in France for instance failure rate is lower because you can swich the slower trainees to locations (APP or TWRS )where complexity is less. The traffic complexity in Rhein, LATCC , Maastricht is far superior , so training takes longer.

Now back to the original problem: Who will control Spanish airspace in the next years ? AENA? New controllers or the same ones as today ?

LH2

13th Dec 2010, 17:35

I agree that both parties played this wrong, especially the controllers played it real bad. They have no public support for lack of proper communication by their representatives.

Indeed.

But on the ground of aging controllers looking for job, I meant in the ATC business. If I look for a job as an ATCO in some other center, my age will play against me quite substantially.

I am afraid that will probably be the case. There seem to be two factors (or two views of one factor if you wish): on one hand, the recruiter's perception that an old man is less "sharp" than a youth--although lots of progress have been made on this front, it will still play a part. The other thing is one's own view of one's capacity, and our tendency to look for accommodation as we grow older: this is not any easier to fight against than the first point, unless one is put in a tight corner with no options :)

Thank you for the insight into how controllers are trained and released on the job, that is quite fascinating.

Personally, I would be inclined to think that although there is quite an effort involved and if I understood correctly most of the procedures will have to be relearned, there must still be those basic elements of the job that only experience can give you (the sort of sixth sense where you look at a screen and say "this don't look right"), and that would certainly add quite some value to a mature, experienced person. What I'm trying to say is that I hope that recruiters do look at the risk/benefit balance when they hire new people and don't always go for the 20 year old.

Hopefully this sheds some lights on why I believe that as we age our chances of switching centers get highly unlikely. We could look for jobs as trainers or maybe consultants somewhere else, but as an ATCO not so easy.

Since you have mentioned the shipping business in a previous post, it looks like the kind of situation (marine) pilots eventually find themselves in.

One last thing if I may: Out of interest, what sort of training, refreshers, or exam/revalidations are involved for people to stay on their current position?

By the way, thanks for the mature discussion

Likewise, it's been a pleasure to read your contributions.

tolgab

13th Dec 2010, 17:58

it looks like the kind of situation (marine) pilots eventually find themselves in.

Actually now that you mention it, given their situation and need for specialized knowledge of the port, would be a very good comparison.

One last thing if I may: Out of interest, what sort of training, refreshers, or exam/revalidations are involved for people to stay on their current position?

Yearly refresher training, which is a bunch of random computerized multiple choice tests, and simulator training for back up system and unusual occurrences.

We need to have worked so many hours within so much time to keep validations. If we lose them we sit with competency assessors for revalidation. In case of long absence you will need a training before such in house test. Longer periods, over 180 days I believe, you will need to do the oral board, LoA tests and a new full scale check out on the individual sectors, all this after simulation runs to get you up to date. Again this is for my center and things might change but shouldn't by too much within European ATS centers.

edited to add: The competency assessors will also monitor the controllers during normal course of the day. They will take notes and put those controllers in need to retraining.

paidworker

13th Dec 2010, 18:50

ATC Watcher , thanks for weighing in with your experience.

dirtymagic

13th Dec 2010, 19:31

It looks like this will be just the start for all European controllers read the comment of a senior EU minister in the New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/09/world/europe/09controllers.html?pagewanted=2&ref=raphael_minder

"The dispute also comes as European nations are striving to integrate the region’s air traffic control systems into the Single European Sky, with the first phase of the project to begin in 2012. A senior E.U. official, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said the Spanish strike “is very clearly linked to European air-traffic management reform,” adding that “next year people will start to see a lot of privileges end.”

Spain might be the first but I don´t think anyone is safe. :uhoh:

Spitoon

13th Dec 2010, 19:48

The points about costs of recruitment and training versus overtime are an interesting turn in the debate (finally!). The problem is that one cannot rely on overtime alone - it is not sustainable in the mid to long-term. As people leave, retrire or die the remaining workforce eventually becomes insufficient to cover the overtime required.

The answers might be somewhere in the thread but I would be interested to know how many new staff have been checked out in Spain over, say, the last five years....and where.

BrATCO

13th Dec 2010, 21:09

Spitoon,
Originally posted by Flameproof, 2 or 3 pages ago :
On 27 March 1998, the government approved the hiring of 190 ATCOs. In 1999, 96 new ATCOs were hired. In 2000 it was 98. In 2001, it was 94. So, in total, 478 new ATCO places were offered, and I have not been able to find any further offers until today.

It seems not too much in the last 9 years...

10W

13th Dec 2010, 22:48

Or in other words: when a Spanish controller works the same amount of hours as his colleague without overtime in e.g. U.K., the Spanish thief will have collected 1/3 in overtime, at a 4-fold rate.

It was what the contract said they should get. How can that make them thieves ?

Whether the contract was acceptable to you or I is irrelevant. AENA agreed to it and presumably budgeted for it. And the Spanish union obviously didn't want to give it up. I don't think they will win the argument in the long run, but you can't blame any union for trying to protect what it has gained for its members, regardless of what society thinks about any deal (and are intensely jealous of it seems).

AENA management agreed to it in the first place, so they should take most of the blame for the mess that Spanish ATC is now in. Their lack of foresight and poor judgment are there for all to see, regardless of the political spin from the Government.

The union, for their part, are not squeaky clean either. They have mishandled their customers, the press, and the public and refused to come to a reasonable agreement on terminating the over inflated overtime rates. Whilst they have a duty to protect what they have won in the past, they also need to recognise the position of their country and their public in these hard financial times. That might mean some compromise is needed, a word which I don't believe exists in their dictionary.

Mister Geezer

13th Dec 2010, 22:51

For a lighthearted look at Spanish ATC then listen to this (slightly amended) Barcelona broadcast.

Spoof Barcelona ATIS (soundcloud.com/borat-sagdieyv/spoof-barcelona-atis)

Some individual has obviously spent some time in order to replicate that awfully posh accent too that greets you when you listen to the ATIS at most Spanish airports! I did laugh when I heard the caveat at the end about the 'controller on the job training monitored' which gets blasted out at Madrid all to frequently nowadays too. However, I am sure many people can come up with a witty remark for controllers being 'on the job'! :}

ATC Watcher

14th Dec 2010, 06:59

Studi :
To enhance safety, you also get wide competences in determining whether you are fit for duty and how much traffic you can handle in a certain moment, without a lot of accountability. This is as it should be, no pressure on the people who actually perform the job and produce safety day in and day out.

Now, if you start to use this freedom into industrial pressure, over years, to gain the conditions they were finally in, for me this is theft.

Interesting remarks coming from a commercial pilot . From your profile, let me guess : Germanwings ? does not matter but would be nice it it was, as I happen to follow closely the VC Cockpit campain about deterioration of working conditions for Flight crews and the move of your parent company (DLH) towards a cheaper and more flexible workforce ( i.e working far more hours for far less salary ) a la moda Italiana .
VC cockpit organised a few work stoppages ( strikes) to that end this year.

Different tactics, legal ones , OK, but the reasonning is the same as yours : so far pilots used their own defined rules to defend very good working conditions and benefits. You also want to maintain rules fit for post WWII operations into today's environment. In 1960 it was far more complicated (and dangerous) and tiring to cross the atlantic on a Constellation than flying a DC3 overland . Hence the large salaries and the (huge) pay difference between long and short haul. Today flying a A320 between Frankfurt and London required far more work that crossing the Atlantic on a A340 ,( let alone in a A380 , as with 3 return flights per month you'll have reached your max hours ). But the salaries difference is still there.

My point is we are all in the same boat. Spain is ( for the controllers ) the first shot of a long battle to come that will see our salaries and working conditions re-adjusted. Luthansa-Italia is your own starter in Germany..( or Vueling , Wizz air, whatever..if you're not from Germany.)

So let's stop fighting each other and perhaps realise that if the Spanish gov wins, this will spread. And low cost operations with low salaries and large hours , wether in the air or in the ground is not really what we are after, aren't we ? .

.

supraspinatus

14th Dec 2010, 07:42

did anyone read IFATCA's (http://www.ifatca.org/) bulletin published 9th December?

It states that it was not a walk off or industrial action. Most of AENA's controllers had spent their available yearly work hours (1750hrs).

I have the bulletin, but I will not publish it here. It is available at IFATCA's forum (http://www.ifatca.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=842&start=15#p1353) if you register.

It is definitively worth a read.

LH2

14th Dec 2010, 14:00

It was what the contract said they should get. How can that make them thieves ?

Presumably because of how they managed to get it in the first place, by creating a strong and closed "monopoly" and abusing their position and AENA management's ignorance/incompetence/couldntbearsediness. It is basically what you say yourself in the last paragraph of your post. It may work in the short term, and good if you can get it, but you need to recognise when it's over.

you can't blame any union for trying to protect what it has gained for its members,

Yes you can if they end up doing such a terrible job.

regardless of what society thinks about any deal (and are intensely jealous of it seems).

I am in Spain at the moment, and talking to local friends and acquaintances they do not seem jealous, neither were they in the past. What pisses them off is that they come across as selfish gits (see previous para). Have you read the local press at all?

My point is we are all in the same boat. Spain is ( for the controllers ) the first shot of a long battle to come that will see our salaries and working conditions re-adjusted.

Not at all ATCW. Spanish controllers are not on the same boat as everyone else.

Assuming that you have enough elements to judge, are you not of the opinion that their situation is an aberration that needs to be adjusted?

Nobody's talking of putting Spain's ATC on minimum salary. From what has been said so far, I understand they'll still be getting a pretty good deal, even in comparison with European controllers.

The most important point seems to be lost on everyone though (AENA included), which is the desperate need to get them to provide a half-competent service.

flameproof

14th Dec 2010, 16:40

Replying to a few comments,

So for Any ATC service Provider : Overtime is cheaper than recruiting, plus if your traffic goes down you cut overtime . You cannot (in Europe at least ) dismiss controllers without pay when traffic goes down.( like it does currently in Spain )

That makes sense, so I can agree that AENA would take that route for a short while, however, the controllers themselves have complained about lack of staff. In fact, they claim that traffic increases mean they have to do more hours, and this is why the current situation has been reached - that they have ran out of hours as established in this year's decrees. If traffic had gone down this year, how can controllers run out of hours, doing less hours they have been doing since 1999? Remember that ATCOs could reach 1800 hours a year or more.

So forget your theories and claculations to the euro. Overtime is cheaper.

It depends on how much you pay the overtime. If it costs you 3x the normal hourly rate, maybe it isn't, and it is actually cheaper to have staff doing less hours during periods of low traffic rates. Again, I apply Occam's Razor to this, when you have ATCOs setting their own schedules, deciding when to open or close sectors, book overtime, etc. and you pay overtime at huge premiums, the natural course of action is for ATCOs to not want extra staff.

If every public sector in the country went by the same rules, the economy would suffer considerably.

Thanks for your post, it provides a new, useful angle to look at things!

The answers might be somewhere in the thread but I would be interested to know how many new staff have been checked out in Spain over, say, the last five years....and where.

It seems not too much in the last 9 years...

I have checked the 2009 consolidated report by AENA:

http://www.aena.es/csee/ccurl/412/550/infoLegal_cuentas%202009_EN.pdf

and on page 351 we can see, for 2008, AENA employed 2331 controllers, whereas in 2009, this number rose to 2404, an increase of 73 controllers. I don't know on what basis does USCA claim to have 1700 controllers, page 3 of IFATCA statement:

http://spain.atczone.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Bulletin_2-ATC_Spain_final_091210.pdf

Eurocontrol's PRR mentions 2005 controllers in Operations at AENA in 2008, and 1966 controllers in 2007:

http://www.eurocontrol.int/prc/gallery/content/public/Docs/PRR_2009.pdf

So by all accounts, it would appear that staff has been increasing over the years.

Or in other words: when a Spanish controller works the same amount of hours as his colleague without overtime in e.g. U.K., the Spanish thief will have collected 1/3 in overtime, at a 4-fold rate.

I wouldn't go as far as calling them thiefs, they have not stolen anything, just that they have enjoyed exceedingly good conditions and salary thanks to successive weak governments. The situation has snowballed until reaching what we have today - on one hand, a government decided to solve in a few months what has taken years to rot, and a group of people who have grown too accustomed to have the government roll over and flip backwards when threatened. It would be best for all to reach compromise, however I'm not sure this can happen, judging by what ATCOs are still declaring before the media.

you can't blame any union for trying to protect what it has gained for its members, regardless of what society thinks about any deal (and are intensely jealous of it seems)

No, but you can blame them for paralyzing a country and leaving 600.000 people without their holiday, and causing an economic impact which is counted in multiples of their collective yearly salary. Also, you cannot defend what is so obviously out of control, if you read the 1999 agreement you will see that what was signed there could only have been done under duress, and indeed, during the months preceding the signature, there were threats of, and actual actions ('hidden' strikes of course).

I'm all for the union defending a position, but not the position they have enjoyed for so long. The salary levels and benefits are completely out of proportion for Spain as a country, and when compared to other EU ATC services. On the night of the 3rd, they gave AENA a draft agreement that in effect returned things to the 1999 agreement - is that a compromise, or trying to be rational, while you are paralyzing air traffic in the country?

AENA management agreed to it in the first place, so they should take most of the blame for the mess that Spanish ATC is now in. Their lack of foresight and poor judgment are there for all to see, regardless of the political spin from the Government.

I fully agree, but only with the caveat that AENA faced a collective where 98% of members belong to one single union, and have a position of great power. It's not easy to take a stand in that situation, particularly if you're a politician who cares more about public image than making things work.

My point is we are all in the same boat. Spain is ( for the controllers ) the first shot of a long battle to come that will see our salaries and working conditions re-adjusted. Luthansa-Italia is your own starter in Germany..( or Vueling , Wizz air, whatever..if you're not from Germany.)

Are you sure about this? Not saying it could not be, but the case in Spain is very atypical, in terms of benefits, conditions and salary which are unheard of in the rest of the EU.

So let's stop fighting each other and perhaps realise that if the Spanish gov wins, this will spread. And low cost operations with low salaries and large hours , wether in the air or in the ground is not really what we are after, aren't we ?

If ATCO or an airline pilot gets to work long hours for low salaries - that would be unfair, and worth fighting for. But you cannot justify the situation of ATCOs in Spain and defend it on the basis that you will be next. Right is right, and the public (usually) sides with the weak side. If your rights are genuinely hurt, you go on strike, but you do so in an orderly fashion, you don't covertly disrupt operations, induce delays, or walk off the job without warning.

did anyone read IFATCA's bulletin published 9th December?

Yes. Cleared to take a large pinch of salt, proceed direct to bulletin.

It states that it was not a walk off or industrial action. Most of AENA's controllers had spent their available yearly work hours (1750hrs).

The 440 controllers that walked off on Friday 3rd had not consumed their hours. They claimed to be so upset so as to be unfit for duty - this proved false as they assembled in nearby hotels, insulting the press and the public in the process (the public insulted them back, so I guess that was a draw).

Here is a commentary on IFATCA's release, which can also be found here:

http://spain.atczone.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Bulletin_2-ATC_Spain_final_091210.pdf

"A 5‐year collective agreement made in 1999 ended on the 31 December 2004. Ever since, AENA and controller union USCA were in negotiations to create a new one."

It forgets to mention that the agreement automatically renews unless a new one is signed, thus, as long as ATCOs didn't sign a new agreement, they would continue to enjoy the excellent conditions they got in the original. Note that the rest of AENA's staff is already on their fifth collective agreement, while the controllers are still under the first one.

"Oddly, AENA and the government concluded that the controllers’ wages, inflated due to the overtime payments, were the source of all problems."

It is one problem of many. However, it is obvious that no private company will take up operations of say, Barajas or Barcelona, both profitable airports, when their entire operation can be disrupted by a few dozen people. It's not so much an issue of salary, but of control.

This is what IFATCA claims was written in the first decree,

"Make overtime compulsory, limiting it to a maximum of 80 hours per year."

but in fact, decree RD 1/2010 states:

"2. El número de horas extraordinarias no será superior a ochenta al año, de conformidad con lo establecido en el Estatuto de los Trabajadores."

Which translates to "The number of overtime hours will not exceed eighty a year, according to what is laid out in the Worker's Statute".

The "Estatuto de los Trabajadores" doesn't make overtime mandatory, as it states in Art. 35:

"4. La prestación de trabajo en horas extraordinarias será voluntaria..."

So what IFATCA says is misleading, not wanting to use stronger words.

"On average, a controllers’ net income dropped overnight by 30 to 50% depending on the amount of overtime he or she performed before."

They also conveniently forget to mention what AENA's director declared before the Senate of Spain,

http://www.senado.es/legis9/publicaciones/html/textos/CS0357.html#10

"Además, con el fin de amortiguar el descenso retributivo, se ha abonado un complemento provisional resultante de la diferencia entre las retribuciones básicas que percibían los controladores antes de la publicación del real decreto ley y las nuevas. "

Translated, it means that ATCOs are paid a supplement to cover the loss of earnings caused by the new decree that came into effect early this year. What is true is that the average decrease of salary was 35%.

"At the same time, Royal Decree 1001/2010 was published. It refined the first one, defining maximum working time for controllers independent of the provider they work for.
Major points in this new decree included:
- 1670 hours working time per year plus 80 hours mandatory overtime at the complete
discretion of AENA."

Again, insisting on the "mandatory overtime". In fact, the 1001/2010 decree says nothing about whether overtime is mandatory or not, only maintaining that the maximum is 80 hours and in accordance with the 'Estatuto de los Trabajadores'. The decree is here:

http://boe.es/boe/dias/2010/08/06/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-12620.pdf

Now for the real contradiction. At the beginning of the statement, IFATCA says:

"After air traffic controllers pointed out to AENA management that they had reached the maximum number of working hours according to the Royal Decree, AENA management systematically shut down the airspace in Spain even against the advice of air traffic control supervisors."

and a few pages later,

"The air traffic controllers on duty on December 3rd received an advance copy of a new royal decree, which radically altered conditions again. Many of them were so upset, that continuing to work would have been irresponsible. As required by AENA procedure, they handed in a declaration of unfitness to the supervisors. In Madrid ACC, the local AENA Management, against the advice of the operational supervisors, took the decision to close the airspace, after having tried to manage the traffic themselves. The ATCOs remained in the facilities until the end of their shifts."

So, what did really happen? That the controllers were not at all sick, but they informed supervisors they had run out of hours, and thus AENA shut down the airspace? Or that they controllers all got sick after reading the new decree passed in the afternoon?

IFATCA is, at best, misleading. Eurocontrol was informed at 18:00Z that controllers were walking out of their posts in Spain. Media filmed controllers as they gathered in nearby hotels. Maybe some remained in the facilities, but 'facilities' could mean their private bedrooms, or the cafeteria. In any event, they were not at their stations. Airspace was closed via NOTAM at 20:12Z, and it was done as controllers had abandoned their posts. The unions (including IFATCA) are now trying to sell the story that AENA shut down the airspace, and thus, the ATCOs left their posts, when the reverse happened. The NOTAM reads:

(B9283/10 NOTAMN Q)LEXX/QXXXX/IV/NBO/E /GEN/000/999/4220N00345W433 A)LECM LECB B)1012032012 C)1012040700 EST E)TRAFFIC IS NOT ACCEPTED IN FIRES LECM, LECB AND GCCC DUE TO LACK ATC SERVICE.)

At this time, I had been listening to Barcelona FIR, APP, GMC and TWR for a while, and there were two controllers active with the frequencies bandboxed, basically telling everyone to read the NOTAM. Maybe the rest of ATCOs were downstairs having a coffee, and so "in the facilities", but they were hardly doing their job.

Finally,

"USCA has made a proposal, which could resolve the current deadlock, which includes a freeze of the remuneration budget for the next 3 years."

It doesn't say at which level it is frozen, 1999, or post-cuts? Let's just hope it is something sensible, and this mess can be sorted out.

IMHO, it appears that IFATCA is at the service of USCA, repeating verbatim their story, without reading the decrees, laws and agreements themselves.

Footnote: for the record, ATCOs did, on average, 1.744 hours in 2006, 1.799 hours in 2007, 1.802 hours in 2008 and 1.750 hours in 2009.

Del Prado

14th Dec 2010, 19:14

today, flameproof said
If traffic had gone down this year, how can controllers run out of hours, doing less hours they have been doing since 1999?
and again
How could work have been done with 1670 hours in the past, and not this year? What has been different?

yet 2 days ago, in response to this,
"whe the final law was made, someone got overzealous and barred all atcos aged 57+ to work"

flameproof said
That's a critical piece of information that I didn't know, and would explain controllers running out of hours sooner than in past years - is that in the decree itself, or just something planners did on their own?

did he forget this 'critical piece of information?

When Spitoon said "... I would be interested to know how many new staff have been checked out in Spain over, say, the last five years....and where."

Flameproof's answer was...
On 27 March 1998, the government approved the hiring of 190 ATCOs. In 1999, 96 new ATCOs were hired. In 2000 it was 98. In 2001, it was 94. So, in total, 478 new ATCO places were offered, and I have not been able to find any further offers until today

Still that was yesterday. Today he says...
"I have checked the 2009 consolidated report by AENA: etc, etc."

Flameproof, you're spending a long time researching, why don't you take a bit of time off and spend it with your family? There are people contributing here with experience, listen to them and please don't dictate the debate with the stuff you're regurgitating from the internet.

I had hope to leave this thread alone as more mature posters were making a much better job of presenting the issues on both sides but you consistently quote half truths and made up statistics.
While your contributions are welcome you have little more to add than a layman's view and it's only fair to bring that to the attention to this forum.

Blockla

14th Dec 2010, 19:22

If traffic had gone down this year, how can controllers run out of hours, doing less hours they have been doing since 1999? Remember that ATCOs could reach 1800 hours a year or more.Because they aren't more efficient by being rostered for more hours.

I'd suggest that they are running out of the 'decree' hours when they are not really needed; ie they publish a roster in advance, whether the traffic is there or not, before sickness or other anomalies that strike 'manpower' businesses like ATC. Rostering for all the gaps that come along is very inefficient and doesn't always work. Overtime is flexible, it's "usually" agreed between the employer and employee with little notice and great flexibility, unlike a rostered shift, which isn't flexible and that is done with more than a little notice.

It's hard to keep up, but there used to be no limits to overtime (excluding breaks and fatigue issues, and it was by agreement), for a while, before decree 3 there were limits imposed.... So they weren't/aren't getting the bodies in the right places at the right times.

This also is where the earlier 'stats' about raw costs go out the window; doubling the staff and increasing the hours isn't directly proportional to covering the roster for anomalies.

flameproof

14th Dec 2010, 19:52

yet 2 days ago, in response to this,
"whe the final law was made, someone got overzealous and barred all atcos aged 57+ to work"

flameproof said
Quote:
That's a critical piece of information that I didn't know, and would explain controllers running out of hours sooner than in past years - is that in the decree itself, or just something planners did on their own?
did he forget this 'critical piece of information?

No, I did not, because what the IFATCA bulletin says, and I quote:

"...this Royal Decree 1/2010 created a framework for AENA to force the controllers to:
...
- Fixed retirement age at 57 years."

is inaccurate. There is nothing in the 1/2010 decree even mentioning the word "57" or "cincuenta y siete". What it does say is that it cancels the paid leave clause that allowed ATCOs to "retire" at 52 years old, and keep full pay until reaching the official age of retirement. The 57 years of age limit was imposed on April 14, via law 9/2010.

In fact, the original 1999 agreement states:

"Artículo 163.

Límite de edad operativa.
Se establece el límite de edad operativa en los cincuenta y cinco años. No obstante, todo CCA que quiera seguir desempeñando puestos operativos, podrá hacerlo a petición propia y previa superación de la oportuna revisión psicofísica."

Translated, it states that the maximum operational age is 55 years old, not even 57. If an ATCO wants, he can request to keep working past 55, after passing a series of tests. So, if the unions and bulletins were right, the decree would have raised the maximum age to 57 years old. Again, I find nothing in the 1/2010 decree that says that 57 is the maximum operational age of an ATCO in Spain, it's done on Law 9/2010 on April 14th.

Still that was yesterday. Today he says...
"I have checked the 2009 consolidated report by AENA: etc, etc."

You keep twisting my words. I would appreciate it if you stopped doing that. The offers I found up to 2001 were in the official BOE, which is where offers for public workers are made. The AENA report merely states the number of employees, for 2008 and 2009, but I have not found the corresponding offers in the BOE that would make the increases in ATCOs match. The BOE offers end in 2001 - again, if you can find where the others went, or where they were posted, please provide a link.

Flameproof, you're spending a long time researching, why don't you take a bit of time off and spend it with your family?

This is getting a bit ridiculous. In your next post, don't forget to add "We know where you live" to that phrase, it will make it sound more mafia-like.

There are people contributing here with experience, listen to them and please don't dictate the debate with the stuff you're regurgitating from the internet.

Oh, so I'm regurgitating stuff from the internet? You call the official diary of the Spanish Government "the internet"? Or the IFATCA bulletin? Or the 1999 agreement signed between AENA and USCA? Or the Eurocontrol PRR report? Give me a break...

Some contributions by experience have been great. I contribute factual information, with my own opinion on it, but I don't tell you to "go with your family". You have so far not refuted any of my arguments or information extracted from official documents.

I had hope to leave this thread alone as more mature posters were making a much better job of presenting the issues on both sides but you consistently quote half truths and made up statistics.

Please provide non-made up statistics, or whole truths. Or even the other half of the truths. Or, feel free to ignore this thread.

While your contributions are welcome

...you just told me to go with my family...

you have little more to add than a layman's view and it's only fair to bring that to the attention to this forum.

You have little more to add than a bitter old man with no arguments other than "I don't like what you write so go home with your family". Your "experience" or "maturity" have not come into play into any of your posts yet.

'I' in the sky

14th Dec 2010, 20:17

del prado,
I folloWed your link and couldn't find any "true figures" of spanish ATC salaries. I didn't ask about training costs, I don't see why they should be that much more in Spain than anywhere else.

You said the salaries quoted were lies.I'm just asking if you can give a more honest stetement about how many spanish ATCs earned how much last year and perhaps provide us with a reference ?

ATC Watcher

14th Dec 2010, 20:46

Studi , LH 2 :
when I said we are all on the same boat I meant the "workers" of the system, (that include Pilots and Controllers but not limited to them ) If you think this is only a purely ATC domestic issue and is going to affect Spain and stop there ,you're gonna wake up with a big hang over. This is whisful thinking.
For me it is all about cost reduction and imposing a new economical model .
.
You can believe otherwise, and maybe you will be right. I am no crystal ball reader, But I've be around , and when I smell a dead rat there is generally one not too far away. Let's come back and discuss this again in 2 -3 years and we see who pays a beer ( or a red wine for me ) to the other.

Now Flamefroof :
A few comments on your last posts :
IFATCA Press release and bulettins :NO, they were not written by USCA but mostly based on Spanish controllers information passed to IFATCA, by people Known to IFATCA. No only USCA /Union leaders, but normal , generally senior people working the system.
But USCA is a member of IFATCA, defending them is normal, that is what IFATCA is for, even if USCA is not free of all blame in this situation.
Same as in a familly. if your brother screws up, it is still your brother and you'll help, regardless.

But USCA is mainly a Union. IFATCA is a professional body. ATCEUC should be taking care of the Union part. IFATCA is more concerned about Professional and Safety issues, and about picking up the pieces when this is over and if ( as I believe ) it spreads out .
Interestingly enough, the Spanish Government, AENA and CANSO never mention safety erosion. But Spain is an odd Country in the EU since Ministry, Service provider (AENA) and Regulator are all the same and Safety management is at the orders .So any erosion of Safety margins will be kept indoors .

Overtime ,57, hours, Royal decree(s) :
The Royal decrees mention one thing, AENA rules interpreted the decrees to fit their needs. Just an example among many : Since August Overtime and extra duties became mandatory for AENA ( asked any Spanish controller the meaning of " turno express " which is one of the root of the "explosion" .) failure to comply with an imposed extra duty was reason for dismissal.

A last example :The age 57 : AENA "removed from operational duties " every controller above 57 from one day to another without warning. In MAD Apprach this was 15% of the staff . Not in the decrees but a fact.Consequences adding pressure to remaining staff and distress to the "dismissed" ones. Benefit for AENA ? More upset Controllers.

Now the big question : was it ,as AENA states an illegal "walk out " organised by USCA or a "fed up action " of a few frustrated guys that spread out to become 400. ?
AENA affirms it was an organised illegal walkout and they had to react. . USCA says it was not them ( plenty of lawyers in Usca, expensive ones too, so they would have most probably known the consequences ) but wildcat individuals. In Madrid ACC , Controllers say AENA shut down the airspace,against the advice of the Supervisors as there was still enough controllers to run the airpace with reduced capacities ( say 50 or 60% of the traffic ) But AENA managers came to the OPS room and shut down the airspace, indications are they knew what they were doing , so it appeared to be the execution of a well rehersed "B' plan.

That is the information IFATCA got. Based on my experience with such things, when In doubt I always asks who benefit the actions : Certainly not the controllers. Union Busting ? probably. Getting rid of a few individuals leading the revolt to send a message to the 1500 others : most certainly .

Preparing AENA for privatisation with a docile reduced de-unionized workforce, at half the costs as before ? you bet.
Using teh Statee of Alarm to introduce single man operations (the so called " monosectores" ) and test it in live traffic : Probably.
If this works in Spain the next ones will be the French, then Belgium and Ireland. (I do not guarantee the order but you get the idea )

Finally , Contrary to what many beleive, the French and the Portugues for instance (still) have far better working conditions that the Spanish had before 2009. The Spanish salaries were the highest in the EU due to Overtime, takes the overtime off and you get them in the top average. (with Maastricht , for instance much higher). So abnormal was the overtime payments , not the basic salaries.
Cutting Overtime and mass recruitment would have solved the problem.
Having a small group affecting the entire economy of a country when having a strike ? A law imposing a minimum service ( like in other EU countries ) would have solved the problem. But confrontation was looked for. because for the goal for me was not reducing salaries or preventing strikes. USCA fell into the trap .

My analysis, not neccessarily the correct one, but for me the most likely one. So read this post again in a few years and we'll see . Bottle of Ribera del Duero ?

PeltonLevel

14th Dec 2010, 21:29

As I have intimated earlier, you don't get into a mess like this without seriously CR:eek:P management!
Controllers who were motivated by some very generous T's and C's are likely to be much more capable of making flexible use of the working hours available than an arbitrary management. Even with a very good understanding of the needs and constraints of a working air traffic control centre, it is very difficult to put together a roster. I can see that it is quite possible that AENA's management (a job title, not necessarily a skill) have had to use up all of the available mandated controller hours before the year is up in order to get the necessary sector staff coverage.
By the way, I would be interested to know what the average time spent actually controlling is across the various ANSPs. I may have made some incorrect assumptions, but, allowing for SRATCOH breaks, I suspect for staff in NATS' centres it is not too different from the '1200 hours' that was the AENA baseline (and I know that I am not comparing like with like here).

megustalavida

14th Dec 2010, 22:21

HI ATC Watcher,

thanks for your sensible writeup; it sheds up some some light with valuable insight information from an actual ATC Controller :ok:; unlike some other contributors, somebody mentioned "lawyers", and that it exactly what there are doing.

Well, even on court everybody deserve a lawyers, whatever he did/does :p And it seems AENA management messed the situation up and can deal with it anymore.

I hope that the ATC controllers find a sensible solution for them soon and they can return to work in a safe working environment, where they can be actually able to concentrate back on their work.

flameproof

14th Dec 2010, 22:30

First, I have to say that I finally found the law, 9/2010 (not a Royal Decree) that limits operational status to 57 years of age on April 14th:

http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/04/15/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-5983.pdf

It states that controllers above this age are to be given other, non-operational roles, until they retire. This requirement was later revoked in law 36/2010 on October 22nd:

http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2010/10/23/pdfs/BOE-A-2010-16131.pdf

whereby controllers over 57 years of age can continue operational duties, while they must undergo examinations every six months. I'll edit my previous post to lighten up the wording on IFATCA's bulletin, their info was not false on this particular point, but the timeline was wrong, and references not provided correctly.

IFATCA Press release and bulettins :NO, they were not written by USCA but mostly based on Spanish controllers information passed to IFATCA, by people Known to IFATCA. No only USCA /Union leaders, but normal , generally senior people working the system.
But USCA is a member of IFATCA, defending them is normal, that is what IFATCA is for, even if USCA is not free of all blame in this situation.
Same as in a familly. if your brother screws up, it is still your brother and you'll help, regardless.

Agreed, it would be abnormal for unions or trade bodies to not defend each other, they just need to make sure what it is they are defending. If your brother kills someone, maybe you won't be so forthcoming in his defense (figuratively speaking, I'm sensing Del Prado starting to type "you say controllers kill people, liar!").

But USCA is mainly a Union. IFATCA is a professional body. ATCEUC should be taking care of the Union part. IFATCA is more concerned about Professional and Safety issues, and about picking up the pieces when this is over and if ( as I believe ) it spreads out .
Interestingly enough, the Spanish Government, AENA and CANSO never mention safety erosion. But Spain is an odd Country in the EU since Ministry, Service provider (AENA) and Regulator are all the same and Safety management is at the orders .So any erosion of Safety margins will be kept indoors .

Thanks so much for those clarifications on unions. As for safety erosion, it has been a problem for ages. Absenteeism in some control centers has reached 50%, which is very high compared to any other professional sector. In any case, recent events cannot contribute towards improved safety, I agree.

The Royal decrees mention one thing, AENA rules interpreted the decrees to fit their needs. Just an example among many : Since August Overtime and extra duties became mandatory for AENA ( asked any Spanish controller the meaning of " turno express " which is one of the root of the "explosion" .) failure to comply with an imposed extra duty was reason for dismissal.

The "turno express" is a secondary measure in case the controller on call also fails. It was implemented, according to Lema, after on many occasions, a supervisor would call a controller who was on call (in case the on-duty controller became sick etc.) and nobody would answer the phone. Thus, a second safety was added with the "turno express". If controllers don't have a high absenteeism, the "turno express" is never triggered, and they still get to credit a % of the time on call as having worked (part of those 1670 hours) even if they don't get called in.

Again, the average absenteeism in the whole of AENA's workforce is around 4,2%, whereas in Madrid TWR it reaches 30%, as an example. I doubt Mr. Lema would lie in front of the Senate when providing these figures, but you can understand why they came up with the "turno express".

Do you have any references to laws or decrees that made overtime compulsory? I have not found any, if it was an internal company rule, it had to be agreed with the workers/union, per the "Worker's Statute" provisions. If a controller were to be dismissed because he refused to do overtime, he could prosecute and be re-instated with a compensation.

A last example :The age 57 : AENA "removed from operational duties " every controller above 57 from one day to another without warning. In MAD Apprach this was 15% of the staff . Not in the decrees but a fact.Consequences adding pressure to remaining staff and distress to the "dismissed" ones. Benefit for AENA ? More upset Controllers.

Agreed, this was ruled so on April 14th, and revoked on October 22nd. In today's deposition, Minister Blanco has explained that they tried to re-instate two controllers over 57 years of age to fix the lack of ATC service in Santiago, which had forced temporary closures of the airport and airspace. One of the controllers didn't join the service, under pressures by the controllers at Santiago and the local USCA branch. It appears that AENA even offered overtime hours, but the controllers didn't accept (all this happened between 27-29 of November).

Now the big question : was it ,as AENA states an illegal "walk out " organised by USCA or a "fed up action " of a few frustrated guys that spread out to become 400. ?
AENA affirms it was an organised illegal walkout and they had to react. . USCA says it was not them ( plenty of lawyers in Usca, expensive ones too, so they would have most probably known the consequences ) but wildcat individuals. In Madrid ACC , Controllers say AENA shut down the airspace,against the advice of the Supervisors as there was still enough controllers to run the airpace with reduced capacities ( say 50 or 60% of the traffic ) But AENA managers came to the OPS room and shut down the airspace, indications are they knew what they were doing , so it appeared to be the execution of a well rehersed "B' plan.

I go back to the contradiction in IFATCA's bulletin. In any case, it seems that on the afternoon shift, which begins at 15:00, out of 270 ATCOs scheduled to work, 154 failed to turn up. In the evening shift, which begins at 22:00, out of 162 scheduled ATCOs, 108 refused to work - in this case it wasn't a walk-out, but a failure to walk-in.

Going back to your questions about safety, would you say the Spanish airspace could be operated safely with so much staff missing? Did AENA have any guarantee that the remaining ATCOs would not walk out too, in which case having left the airspace open would have been reckless? IMHO the safest bet was to shut down the airspace, and wait for a resolution to re-open it.

That is the information IFATCA got. Based on my experience with such things, when In doubt I always asks who benefit the actions : Certainly not the controllers. Union Busting ? probably. Getting rid of a few individuals leading the revolt to send a message to the 1500 others : most certainly .

IMHO the issue was that ATCOs thought they wielded too much power, much more power than they thought. They miss-calculated the reaction. Did the government take advantage to display a show of force, and appear to be defending the common good of the public? Indeed. But it was the ATCOs who chose to act, nobody forced them to.

Preparing AENA for privatisation with a docile reduced de-unionized workforce, at half the costs as before ? you bet.

I agree, I have already said that no company in their right mind would purchase a stake in any business where a minority holds the power to effectively stop the company from operating. I have been reading about the Canadian model of privatization of ATC, and it makes a lot of sense - anyone with more info care to comment?

Using teh Statee of Alarm to introduce single man operations (the so called " monosectores" ) and test it in live traffic : Probably.

Negative. When the state of alarm came into effect, the airspace had been closed for hours, and the only thing flying were flocks of birds. The mono-sector could not be tested on live traffic, as there was no live traffic.

Finally , Contrary to what many beleive, the French and the Portugues for instance (still) have far better working conditions that the Spanish had before 2009. The Spanish salaries were the highest in the EU due to Overtime, takes the overtime off and you get them in the top average. (with Maastricht , for instance much higher). So abnormal was the overtime payments , not the basic salaries.

Agreed - the issue here is overtime. USCA has repeatedly tried to go back to the 1200 hours + overtime model, as this is where they got the huge salaries from. They put such a proposal in front of AENA at around 19:00 on December 3rd, saying "sign this and it's all over".

Cutting Overtime and mass recruitment would have solved the problem.

That's exactly what I have been saying all this time, with the caveat that USCA could force AENA into not recruiting, to keep the excellent overtime payments flowing. Just like unions defending other unions, does this not make sense? Prevent anything that will make your own salary go down considerably, if you have the power to do so?

Having a small group affecting the entire economy of a country when having a strike ? A law imposing a minimum service ( like in other EU countries ) would have solved the problem. But confrontation was looked for. because for the goal for me was not reducing salaries or preventing strikes. USCA fell into the trap .

I agree they fell into a trap - but mostly due to a miss-calculation of power, or willingness of the government to make a case. In Spain minimum services are imposed when a strike is formally called for. USCA claims they wanted to strike in early August, but that the government imposed minimum services above 100%. It seems odd but I wouldn't put it past this government.

My analysis, not neccessarily the correct one, but for me the most likely one. So read this post again in a few years and we'll see . Bottle of Ribera del Duero ?

My analysis too could be not correct, or even totally flawed, but I want someone to prove so with positive arguments, facts, and discussion, as you have done in this post - not by telling me to shut up and go with my family as others have done.

Ribera del Duero it is! :)

LH2

15th Dec 2010, 01:46

ATCW,

when I said we are all on the same boat I meant the "workers" of the system, (that include Pilots and Controllers but not limited to them ) If you think this is only a purely ATC domestic issue and is going to affect Spain and stop there ,you're gonna wake up with a big hang over. This is whisful thinking.
For me it is all about cost reduction and imposing a new economical model .

I believe the issue you point out does exist indeed, and there would be a degree of overlap with the current fracas in Spain, so from that point of view it is understandable that other parties should take an interest. However, on top of that, there exists a separate issue in Spain where years of mismanagement and lack of interest led to an unsustainable situation--and I do not mean just in financial terms.

But USCA is mainly a Union. IFATCA is a professional body. ATCEUC should be taking care of the Union part. IFATCA is more concerned about Professional and Safety issues,

Since you mention... so what if anything is being done from IFATCA (or elsewhere) as regards the levels of training, safety, and efficiency in Spanish airspace? Are the international actors satisfied with those aspects of Spain's air traffic services? If so, on the basis of which metrics? (but see below regarding this).

Interestingly enough, the Spanish Government, AENA and CANSO never mention safety erosion. But Spain is an odd Country in the EU since Ministry, Service provider (AENA) and Regulator are all the same and Safety management is at the orders .So any erosion of Safety margins will be kept indoors .

This is so true. I have been talked out twice, by sensible old fellows who knew the system, from filing incident reports following gross negligence by the tower. I was basically told not to waste my time since nothing would ever happen. The unfortunate thing about this is, with reports not being filed (or being ignored), the only problems that ever come to light are the ones involving smoking holes in the ground.

AENA affirms it was an organised illegal walkout and they had to react. . USCA says it was not them ( plenty of lawyers in Usca, expensive ones too, so they would have most probably known the consequences ) but wildcat individuals.

Are the union really saying that? I don't know, but I think I would expect my union to back me up rather than look the other way while I'm being dragged through the ****--especially since they did nothing to prevent their members from taking (allegedly) individual action not even after it was all over the news.

Preparing AENA for privatisation with a docile reduced de-unionized workforce, at half the costs as before ? you bet.

Given that the current union are failing to protect anyone's interests, that seems like a win-win situation. :)

Using teh Statee of Alarm to introduce single man operations

Could you please give a brief description of that single-man operation stuff for non-ATC types like me? Perhaps on a separate thread to avoid cluttering this one up even more.

Finally , Contrary to what many beleive, the French and the Portugues for instance (still) have far better working conditions that the Spanish had before 2009. The Spanish salaries were the highest in the EU due to Overtime, takes the overtime off and you get them in the top average.

But we keep hearing that this is not about money, and clearly it is not about training or safety since that point hasn't been raised once if not as a rather pathetic straw man (the "we're doing so many hours" hypocritical sniff)... so what is is about then? And why isn't it about money anyway? Aren't they worth it? :E :E

SINGAPURCANAC

15th Dec 2010, 06:56

Let's do alittle math and essential economics to this topic.
Someone wrote:
- 2400 controllers at 450.000€/year/controller = 1080 Million € / year.
But we know that it is more likely:
2100 ATCOs x 300 000 Eurs= 630 M EUR

simplicity is neccessary for further example ,otherwise we will need a lot of space.

If we accept that ATCOs represents some 50% of total work force in the most effective ATC providers in the World, we find that there at least 2000 more workers in that particular ANSP. There is the first problem,AENA is not only ATC provider,if I undesrstand correctly there is more function of this comapny,such as airports duties and so on. AENA also is not among those the most effective ATC providers, but it is another story.

If those 2000 additional workers(tehnicians, met officers,aro officers, trainning units, managers all the levels, drivers and so....) have only "standard aviation" salary ,which is by the way is less likely, and that standard aviation salary is around 3 times average,we may just for the purpose of example take 4000 eurs average month salary for rest of employees.
It is 2000 x 4000x 12= 96 M Eurs

Than we have
ATCOs salary plus others salries = 630 + 96= 726 M EURs

If we accept that in any aviation organization, workforce costs reprent only 30 to 35% , and if we take the best case of 35%,than we have
ALL COSTS= WORKFORCE COSTS x 3
ALL COSTS= 726 MEurs x 3

ALL COSTS= 2178 M EURs

So i will have now e few questions:
- what is the average salary ,for ATC managers,technicians, administrative workers, met officers,others
- what is the total number of workers in ANSP part of AENA
-what is source of your incomes? i suppose airliners,i.e passengers
- how big are your incomes?

Since i believe that your answer will just push costs above those stated and incomes will be less than my prediction, i will have final question:

WHO IS GOING TO PAY YOUR SALARIES?

Nothing than just pure logic.
If I want to travel somewhere in Europe by plane, at first glimpse anything between 200 and 250 eur per european destination is acceptable for me.
if we took that 250 eurs is average ticket sold in Europe ,and ATC costs represent only 2-3% of all costs acceptable for any airliner,than you may count that ATC will take something 6 eurs per passengers, for return flight. Lets say, Timisora- Barcelona - Timisora :E

If we ,for example simplicity, represents all incomes as incomes of paasengers ticket from BCN-MAD tha we need ,
2178 M Eur : 6 EUR= 363 000 000 passengers

and if we take that all those passengers, fly on B737 ,RYR type ,187 available seats per a/c ,with some 85% that is very high load factor, we may expect at each flight will have 159 passengers.
363 000 000 passengers : 159= 2 283 019 flights x 2 thus,
4 566 037 flights per year,or

4566 037: 365= 12 509 flights dayli

so the question is:
Do you have12 509 flights,dayli?

as you could see it is impossible to have such level of salaries. Especially when bed times comes.

P.S. I took all numbers quite conservativly and in some cases ideal numbers, accept any correction but I think it may even be worse numbers,from atcos salary point of view.
unfortunatelly,:{

ATC Watcher

15th Dec 2010, 07:34

Flameproof, LH2, Thanks for yourtime and your interesting replies . We're not going to convince each other overnight, but if we were life would be boring.

No real time this morning to go into each point , but to reply tho the question of LH 2 :
Could you please give a brief description of that single-man operation stuff for non-ATC types like me? Perhaps on a separate thread to avoid cluttering this one up even more.

Good subject item . And a crucial one for the future in fact. and one that will affect all of us. Another thread indeed .

PeltonLevel

15th Dec 2010, 08:13

Sorry about my earlier statement that LE was the most expensive airspace in Europe - I hadn't allowed for the recent appreciation of the CHF against the EUR.
From the CRCO website:
2009:
LE CSUs 8,358,173; LE Unit Charge €84.14
GC CSUs 1,492,498; LE Unit Charge €68.30
2010 projected:
LE CSUs 8,358,173; LE Unit Charge €84.11
GC CSUs 1,538,423; LE Unit Charge €68.27
According to my calculations, that comes well short of €1bn.
(But it should be noted that, for Spain, CRCO only collects money for en-route air navigation services, not for airfield or terminal services, so AENA will have other income related to air traffic control)

SINGAPURCANAC

15th Dec 2010, 08:42

that comes well short of €1bn.

Than salary budget could anything between 300 and 350 M EURs.
Maximum 60%,that I am very doubtfull, for ATCOs,
180 -200 M EURs : 2100 ATCOs= 85 700 EURs average brut salary for qualified ATCOs.
reduce taxes,and you will find exact your month salary,including all payments .
And that bring us into conclusion that 6/7 k eurs for ATCO in Europe is quite OK,regardless traffic complexity ,location and other factors. and you will find such payment at best and most complex units,plus/minus a few percents.

and it is very logic ,because Middle east offers starts at that amount.
And there is no better offers in the whole World,in terms of money .
;)

Jimmy Hoffa Rocks

15th Dec 2010, 18:07

What about the salaries of all the AENA Fat Cat directors who dont do much.

Dont see their salaries being cut ?

kontrolor

15th Dec 2010, 18:35

I just wonder, how many pilots would accept something like this:

IFATCA BULLETIN (http://avijacija.net/slike/atc/Bulletin_2%20ATC_Spain_final_091210.pdf)

Sunnyjohn

15th Dec 2010, 21:23

What about the salaries of all the AENA Fat Cat directors who dont do much.

Dont see their salaries being cut ?

This will shortly be academic since there was an announcement in Las Provincias today to say that the government are bringing forward the privatisation of Spanish airports, including the controllers. This is an interesting ploy that was used widely in the UK to break up the union monopoly of the railways, dockers and miners among others. However, in those cases it was a right wing government that did this, whereas here we have a left-wing government using the ploy. I cannot see the controllers taking this lying down since, behind their recent actions was also the fact that they did not want privatisation. I fear a winter of discontent is ahead for travellers using Spanish airspace.

SINGAPURCANAC

16th Dec 2010, 05:18

IFATCA BULLETIN (http://redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&xs=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Favijacija.net%2Fslike%2Fatc%2FBulletin_2%25 20ATC_Spain_final_091210.pdf&sref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fatc-issues%2F416995-spanish-atc-56.html)I think that local water and sawage company will have more impact on Royal decree than Ifatca.
:E

Spanish ATCOs have problems with numbers, :mad:

ATC Watcher

16th Dec 2010, 07:37

Singapurcanac : IFATCA bulletins aim is not really to change the Decrees or reverse the Governement decisions ,they are more about giving "the other side" views and correcting some "spinned" facts .
. In any dispute there are 2 points of view.
The view of the governement , including desinformation and news spinning, is well known, now you have the other side view, You make your own opinion.
IFATCA also say Safety today is eroded by the current State of alarm , and nobody so far questionned that point.

The Spanish parlement today willd debate if the State of alarm is prolonged for another 2 weeks period . The final decision is not that assured, as now the question is moves to a political level.

As to the mumbers, as I said here a few posts before, the final aim of all this is not about salaries or number of hours or right to strike , it is about changing an economical model to prepare the privatisation (selling) of a Air navigation service Provider.

SINGAPURCANAC

16th Dec 2010, 08:24

I just pointed out that IFATCA is really nothing.Especially when hard times come.
They have never changed anything,especially sovereign goverment decesion.

it is about changing an economical model to prepare the privatisation (selling) of a Air navigation service Provider.
so the real question is WHY?
Because,current system is inefficient ,slow and non progressive.
And rich people loose too much. :ok:
that's is the first reason.
the second one is : possible profit for rich people. :}
The third one: refer to previous two :{:mad:

so workers' rights on one side and some Texas boy on the other.
Guess who is looser at the end of the day....:E

ATC Watcher

16th Dec 2010, 09:20

Singapurcanac : The perfect world according to Singapore , hey ? No Unions , and power to the rich and to the efficient ? Nice concept but not new. China is trying it at the moment with success.Not sure the rest of their society will accept this forever though.

Quoting you :
I just pointed out that IFATCA is really nothing.Especially when hard times come.
They have never changed anything,especially sovereign goverment decesion.

Not true, but who cares ? The issue in life is to always try, not to succeed immediately .IFATCA aims are long term . You'll be surprised what organisations like IFATCA or IFALPA do achieve behind the scenes.

SINGAPURCANAC

16th Dec 2010, 09:57

wrong snake at wrong head,my mate.

I am also for workers' right at first place. I even don't know where is China,and never bored to lean where it is ,just because I do not accept such system. :ugh:

if we are talking in that directions we have situation that greed workers ,or their union representatives,made in past deal that was good but they didn't chage it when it was neccessary. It was their duty to anticipate ,to avoid such situation.
but greed was greater.
They ALL*know the numbers ,mentioned above.
they also believe that someone else will solve their problems.
and now they want solidarity.

ALL* - Spanish ATC association, ATC Union, ATC managers, Minister(s),and King as well.

You'll be surprised what organisations like IFATCA or IFALPA do achieve behind the scenes.
their biggest achievment was organization of annual conference at exotic places. I have to confirm that choices are very good and done behind scenes as ussual,
:E

kontrolor

16th Dec 2010, 10:33

singapurcanac is sometimes producing BS, but I easily agree with his latest observation - IFATCA has lost its compass in a big way...

flameproof

16th Dec 2010, 12:17

Let's do alittle math and essential economics to this topic.

OMG you have done "math" and "calculations"! You must be lying, go home with your family! Of course I'm just kidding :)

I used 450,000 like I could have used 300,000, the idea was to prove a point. If we take your calculation, and the numbers from AENA's 2009 consolidated report,

http://www.aena.es/csee/ccurl/412/550/infoLegal_cuentas%202009_EN.pdf

we can see that

Staff costs = 1,310 Million €
Total AENA staff = 15,256
Of which ATCOs = 2,404

Thus, ATCOs which represent 15.7% of staff, are eating 48% of staff costs at AENA. IMHO this is hugely out of proportion. The average salary of other AENA employees is 53,000€ a year, or 17.6% of an ATCO's average salary.

If IFATCA or USCA or anyone else can still defend this, they must be crazy. It's simply not economically viable, even if AENA were not to be privatized, or even if AENA wasted millions in building loss-leading airports etc.

I just wonder, how many pilots would accept something like this:

IFATCA BULLETIN

You are completely right, I doubt any pilot would accept such one-sided, riddled with factual errors bulletin, which even falls into a gross contradiction as to how the walk-out was triggered and how it took place. See my previous post on the subject where I analyze all this.

What about the salaries of all the AENA Fat Cat directors who dont do much.

Well, at least they are quiet Fat Cat directors. They don't complain about how much they work or how much they are stressed out, and they don't keep organizing hidden strikes every two months.

Just so you know, absenteeism in the ATCO group is between 15% to 30%, whereas the rest of AENA suffers 4.2%. That includes the directors etc. If ATCOs are so prone to illness maybe the recruitment processes are wrong, or they should think of changing jobs.

It would be interesting to know what is the level of absenteeism in other ATC services such as UK or Maastricht.

IFATCA also say Safety today is eroded by the current State of alarm , and nobody so far questionned that point.

I can understand nobody wants to work with an armed guard standing next to him, but ATCOs have even said they are working under less stress now than when they had AENA supervisors over them.

I've been reading through safety reports for Spain, and in 2008 we had 78 A+B incidents, how does that compare with other countries? In the near future we will also see if the number of incidents increased during these troubled weeks.

chevvron

16th Dec 2010, 13:43

Maybe those same 'fat cat' directors are also directors of Barcelona and Real Madrid football clubs; the money to run them must come from somewhere!

Isaid180

16th Dec 2010, 16:55

I heard Mr Blanco mention this morning in an interview that earlier on this year, as a good gesture towards negotiation with the controllers, he had been kind enough to 'postpone' the requirement for all Spanish controllers to have their English Language skills tested so that they could have time to prepare for the tests! Here in the UK, we had to get our licences re-issued to comply with European Licence requirements by August this year. I wonder:
1. Shouldn't they already have the required language proficiency to 'do their job'?
2. Is Mr Blanco so concerned that a significant number of Spanish ATCOs do not meet the required ICAO level 4 that he, pressumably having had to request permission in Europe first, was fored to delay by law the implementation of the European Licence to guarantee Air Traffic Service provision?

European Directives state that "Member States shall ensure that air traffic controllers can demonstrate the ability to speak and understand English to a satisfactory standard"

....there is much more to the whole situation than people realise.

I have also heard Mr Blanco and other members of the government talk about the future and how they would bring controllers from abroad (WHO???) and provide fast track validation for Military controllers to cover for unexpected situations like the events of last week.
:eek:

Phalconphixer

16th Dec 2010, 17:29

Isaid180...

Have you not realised by now that the purpose of anything that Snr. Blanco says is said purely to keep the pot boiling, to keep the press and media on the government and AENA's side and to continue the smokescreen diverting peoples attention away from all of the other unpleasant things that are being foisted onto the Spanish people?

He is using exactly the same tactics as Thatcher and Blair did whenever they wanted to underhandedly catch the Brit public on the hop...it's all diversionary propaganda;

"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion."...Josef Goebbels (circa1930) and...

"The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over."

On a lighter note...

"Politicians are like seagulls. They arrive from out of nowhere in a fluster, squawking, sticking their beaks in.... crapping all over everything and then flying off leaving a mess."

"Politicians are like nappies / diapers...They should be changed frequently, and for the same reason."

Billy Connolly: 'Anyone who wants to be a politician should be automatically barred from being one.'

This is a propaganda battle with both sides using the same textbooks; unfortunately the government / AENA as the holders of the purse strings have the upper hand.

As a Brit living in Spain in retirement I have come to realise that when it comes to political issues both here and in the UK (and anywhere else for that matter), you don't listen to what they are saying, you listen out for what they are not saying...and that applies equally to both sides in this matter.

pp

DjerbaDevil

16th Dec 2010, 17:29

Language Proficiency:
European Directives state that "Member States shall ensure that air traffic controllers can demonstrate the ability to speak and understand English to a satisfactory standard"

A report in a newspaper article recently said that, since AENA took over the management of ATCOs from USCA in Februay 2010, they had been providing English exams for ATCOs to comply with the above European Directive. However AENA reported that they had had very limited success, since only about 5% of the active ATCOs had volunteered to take the exam.

The Spanish Parliament have voted favourably to continue the military supervision of ATCOs until the 15th of January 2011, to make sure that the Christmas holiday period will be free of any possible industrial action.

Isaid180

16th Dec 2010, 17:52

However AENA reported that they had had very limited success, since only about 5% of the active ATCOs had volunteered to take the exam That is more shocking than I thought. Could it have been simply rebellion against the government or a genuine concern that they would not get the required level? :confused:

@ PP
I am aware of the demonisation campaign against controllers of the current government and they are suceeding as the majority of population are channelling all the anger and frustration towards the controllers who haven't made themselves any favours with the events of last week. I know politicians 'often' manipulate information and they have done it especially with regards to the conflict with the controllers. Sadly, most people believe every single word and have little knowledge of the specific complications about training and working terms and conditions of ATC It seems like the controllers are now responsible for the economic crisis and the government are saving Spain from the evil ones.... what a load of rubbish!

Phalconphixer

16th Dec 2010, 20:02

A report in a newspaper article recently said that, since AENA took over the management of ATCOs from USCA in Februay 2010, they had been providing English exams for ATCOs to comply with the above European Directive. However AENA reported that they had had very limited success, since only about 5% of the active ATCOs had volunteered to take the exam.

A report in a newspaper...remember...

"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion."

That is more shocking than I thought. Could it have been simply rebellion against the government or a genuine concern that they would not get the required level?

Or could it be they already have the qualification and see no need to repeat the process?

I certainly wouldn't volunteer to retake any exams I passed years ago...got enough stress on my plate already... I wouldn't want to have to take my driving test again for that matter...

Those of us born and raised in the UK have a distinct advantage over most other countries; we don't have to learn a second language; imagine if all Brit ATCO positions were based on a requirement to speak French or German ...or Spanish!

The Spanish Parliament have voted favourably to continue the military supervision of ATCOs until the 15th of January 2011, to make sure that the Christmas holiday period will be free of any possible industrial action.

Of course they have....I seriously doubt that the government ever had any other intention... to the best of my knowledge, under the Spanish Constitution they can continue to do so ad infinitum...and irrespective of the legality of the use of the State of Alarm...got to keep Johnny Rebel under the thumb... and post a warning to any other rebellious group like train drivers, metro drivers, bus drivers...or any other group that can remotely be classified as 'essential services'...

It seems like the controllers are now responsible for the economic crisis and the government are saving Spain from the evil ones.... what a load of rubbish!

Precisely what Ive been saying all along...scapegoats and smokescreens...

pp

flameproof

17th Dec 2010, 02:24

I really have no idea how anyone can defend this:

"Among the largest ANSPs, however, Aena has by far both the lowest productivity (see left-hand side of Figure 0.17) and the highest employment costs per ATCO-hour (see right-hand side of Figure 0.17). This raises a serious performance issue."

Taken from:

http://www.eurocontrol.int/prc/gallery/content/public/Docs/ace2008/ACE_2008_Benchmarking_Report.pdf

So this is not a "newspaper" or "media", but an Eurocontrol report. It states that Spain's ATCOs cost 191€/hour, while their productivity is 0.54 flight-hours per ATCO hour. NATS in comparison is at 96€/hour, and 1.14 flight-hours per ATCO hour.

So, an ATCO in Spain costs almost twice as one in the UK, and is half as productive. Please explain how this, which has dragged on for years, didn't require an adjustment. Please explain how with these numbers, the ATCOs can still walk away from the job for "working too many hours" or "being stressed out", when they are handling half the workload of their NATS counterparts.

"Achieving productivity improvements in a context of declining traffic is going to be a challenge. It will require a critical review of managing overtime and more effective use of the ATCO-hours on duty."

This is what took place early this year, albeit with a botched and badly handled process on the government's part.

There is also an interesting table on page 125, with figures such as number of ATCOs, number of sectors per ACC, etc. The conclusions for all of 2008:

- ATCOs in Spain were on duty for 1786 hours, handled 2500 IFR flights each, and there are an average of 17 ATCOs on roster per sector. Each ATCO handled 1150 flight-hours each, and 1.4 flights per hour.

- ATCOs in NATS-UK were on duty for 1268 hours, handled 5000 IFR flights each, and there are an average of 12 ATCOs on roster per sector. Each ATCO handled 1450 flight-hours each, and 3.9 flights per hour.

So, how on Earth can anyone, no matter how deep his head is up a union's :mad: defend this performance? Whatever the government did wrong to handle the situation, seems almost warranted by these figures.

Slo Moe

17th Dec 2010, 06:38

This sort of flaming is quite much counter productive.

It is apparent, that just by listening to the frequencies nobody can grasp the complexities of a particular ATS system. It does not make anybody an expert even if you visit a couple a times in an ATS unit. You simply can not know all of the facts. Not even an ATCO working in a different country can compare the systems. At least it is like comparing oranges with apples.

Different rules and airspaces/procedures CAN NOT be compared. It is interesting to see the statistical figures.

It just happens to be so that air traffic controllers are NOT the ones responsible for planning the procedures OR the airspace structure OR organizing the shift allocation. These are the MAIN factors that lead to the statistics. NOT unions. NOT ATC:s. NOT the salary.

It is even useless to rant or judge the people responsible for the structure of a particular ATS system. If you truly want to be productive, this is not the way to improve things.

ATC Watcher

17th Dec 2010, 07:09

Absolutely Slo Moe :
Let me try a simple comparison :

Let's compare 2 employees of say, Banks :

One is given a BMW as a company car and, due to insurance reasons is not allowed to take anyone else in the car when coming to work.
The Bank branch opening times are 0930 to 1530 and is located in a small town of 10.000, no real automation in the branch .

The other is given a Toyota , company has a car pooling policy, bank is located in a city of 300.000 with opening times of 07:30 to 17:30 and the company has full automation devices to serve clients.

The employees of the second bank will be 3 or 4 times more productive and at a lower cost than the first one . But is the employee responsible for this ?

So trashing the employees ( the Spanish controllers ) instead of the Bank (AENA) is definitively not the way to make the Bank more productive.

le Pingouin

17th Dec 2010, 08:08

flameproof, how are the controllers responsible for the manning levels of the sectors and the sector structure? Those things are the domain of management and regulatory bodies so they bear the responsibility for this cluster :mad:.

Averages are a terribly blunt tool and say nothing about peaks and complexity. Staffing needs to be at levels to safely handle peaks not just the bean counting averages. Why do airlines bother with two pilots? On average they sit on their arses doing nothing much.......

SINGAPURCANAC

17th Dec 2010, 08:26

So trashing the employees ( the Spanish controllers ) instead of the Bank (AENA) is definitively not the way to make the Bank more productive.

from my point of view it is not question about productivity at it basic meaning.
It is consequence.

i just pointed out that Spanish ATCOs didn't react correctly,long time ago.
they enjoyed privileged during good period of bussines.
but as we all know there is always bad period behind good so employee and his representatives (unions and proffesional associations) MUST react in advance.

They know that revenues are reduced.

They know the basic maths and economics.

They know that their tourism(the main "enginee" for their bussiness ) is under big threat and every single Euro is big

They know for lack of staff,all airspace constraints, market requirements and so on...

they know political situation in Spain,as overall statement,not dayli politics. State of Alarm is miracle in Sweden,not in Southern Europe. :(

what do they belive,that they go the the bad in Spain,and find themselves in Norway? :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Having in mind what current situation might develop yet,i said that AENA and therefore Spanish ATCOs must increase productivity.

Otherwise, impact will enormous especially on tourism industry.
with one more toursim downturn, Spanis economy will be out of consideration. :E

Unlike some other eurpean touristic destination Spanish toruism havily depnds on aviation.
Ineffective ATC as consequence will have ineefective flying.

It will reflect on ticket price, thus will effect overall price for holiday thus will put some other destination at better postition.

I just wanted to help Spanish colleagues, by pointing their mind in right direction.
sometimes it is easier to see if you aren't direct involved.

Final consequence will be:
-if problem continiues, privatization will save rich people. they will buy ANSP for small amount of money, they will significantly reduce costs by openning position to foreigner competitions ,that will push down even more domestic workfoce,and finally put ATC and consequently aviation within "competitive margins" .

and it will happen very fast. because rich people loosing too much for every ineeficient day.
and as we all know those rich have very effective system of ruling.

Does someone said corruption? :mad::mad:

Painfull but simple and easy.

flameproof

17th Dec 2010, 10:04

This sort of flaming is quite much counter productive.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaming_(Internet)

"Flaming, also known as bashing, is hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users."

I don't see my post as being hostile and insulting. It may be harsh, but I wouldn't consider it flaming. Anyway,

It is apparent, that just by listening to the frequencies nobody can grasp the complexities of a particular ATS system. It does not make anybody an expert even if you visit a couple a times in an ATS unit. You simply can not know all of the facts. Not even an ATCO working in a different country can compare the systems. At least it is like comparing oranges with apples.

If you are again referring to my listening to ATC or "a couple of visits" to an ATS unit (it was three years, but hey...), then you are flaming, not me. I'm starting to get used to the abuse on this forum, so whatever floats your boat.

If you are inferring that Eurocontrol does a 100+ page report by listening to frequencies and a couple of visits to ATS units, then you're probably quite misguided.

If you actually read the Eurocontrol report, you will see that there are many weighing factors to compensate precisely for all the things that make airspace different, it would be stupid of course to do otherwise.

It just happens to be so that air traffic controllers are NOT the ones responsible for planning the procedures OR the airspace structure OR organizing the shift allocation. These are the MAIN factors that lead to the statistics. NOT unions. NOT ATC:s. NOT the salary.

You are obviously completely unfamiliar with the situation, its history, and how it developed. In Spain, the ATCOs were the ones opening and closing sectors, organizing shift allocation, and were directly involved in planning of procedures and airspace structure. In fact, until 2009, ATCOs were not required to use any form of shift control (punch-card, etc.) to verify hours worked. It is all written in the 1999 agreement, which you haven't bothered to read.

One of the main complaints from ATCOs this year, since February, is that planning of airspace, capacity, shifts etc. is now done by AENA supervisor staff, and not by them, which leads to endless problems (this could be somewhat true, but it's a different issue and it only started this year).

So trashing the employees ( the Spanish controllers ) instead of the Bank (AENA) is definitively not the way to make the Bank more productive.

It is when the employees have been effectively running the bank, under pressure and coercion as they could at any time open the vaults and pour the cash out on the street. We have direct losses of over 300 MILLION € due to the walk-out, and indirect losses are still being figured out. This threat has been ALWAYS present, and has been ALWAYS used by USCA. At least someone agrees:

A report in a newspaper article recently said that, since AENA took over the management of ATCOs from USCA in Februay 2010...

The union, USCA, was running the show. It was in the process awarding itself huge payouts thanks to overtime.

Averages are a terribly blunt tool and say nothing about peaks and complexity. Staffing needs to be at levels to safely handle peaks not just the bean counting averages. Why do airlines bother with two pilots? On average they sit on their arses doing nothing much.......

Yes, but with the numbers we have, there is simply NO WAY that peak traffic can justify the staffing levels and cost. UK airspace has a complexity level of 4/5 as defined by Eurocontrol, whereas Spain barely passes 1/5. Complexity takes of course into account peak traffic.

This is a chart showing the number of aircraft movements and flights under ATC control per controller, between 2001 and 2009:

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/7585/acmatco.png (http://img823.imageshack.us/i/acmatco.png/)

While ATCOs have grown every year between 2001 and 2009, from 1753 to 2404, traffic peaked in 2007, and has been falling since. In any case, the extra controllers with a reduced load would mean a decrease in staffing costs, as there would be less of the hugely expensive overtime being done (remember, anything above 1200 hours was paid at almost 3x normal rate!). But in fact, staffing costs have risen every year, from around 140€ in 2000, to 191€ in 2009 (€ per ATCO hour). In 2008, ATCOs in Spain worked an average of 1786 hours, which seems a lot when you consider the decrease in traffic and movements.

If you want to refute my arguments, make your own calculations, don't just say they can't be done, as it appears Eurocontrol doesn't agree with you (they release yearly PRR reports etc.). Otherwise, are you telling me the following:

ATC costs will be whatever they happen to be, as there is no way to measure if the costs correspond with reality.

Statistics and metrics exist for many reasons, one of them is to identify gross divergence from the norm, as is the case in Spain.

Slo Moe

17th Dec 2010, 12:47

This is what it very much looks like.

Scapegoating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapegoating)

From a totally outsider point of view.

Blaming has never been an effective way of leadership. If you consider what really can be achieved when someone (ATCO:s in this case) are blamed about systemic "wholes" in the cheese. Scapegoating has been in use for a long long time. There are better ways.

It defies any logic that blaming would make ANY system better.

W. Edwards Deming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._Edwards_Deming#Key_principles)

Especially point 8.
8. Drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company.

What impression I have is that the Spanish government has actually done effectively the very things they fear the most: Eroding the trust in a once highly reliable ATS system. Costly, maybe yes. But very reliable.

What measures or actions draw in more tourists to Spain? Facts about Spanish situation are widely known already.

It really is not to blame ANY group of individuals about a "national deficit". It just does not help.

What helps?

le Pingouin

17th Dec 2010, 14:04

ATC costs will be whatever they happen to be, as there is no way to measure if the costs correspond with reality.Reality? Oh, you're meaning a rather peculiar definition of reality - the world as you think it should be as opposed to what it actually is.

Of course the costs can be whatever they happen to be. How is it so hard to grasp that it's whatever management agrees to pay the workers plus other fixed costs. If they chose to buy a new $500million system or spend on money on other things then that gets thrown in as well.

Why do different airlines not all charge the same for tickets and have the same operating costs? I'm sure you can answer that one.

flameproof

17th Dec 2010, 15:11

Blaming has never been an effective way of leadership. If you consider what really can be achieved when someone (ATCO:s in this case) are blamed about systemic "wholes" in the cheese. Scapegoating has been in use for a long long time. There are better ways.

Nobody is scapegoating the ATCOs. The government hasn't said they are the cause of AENA's 13,000M€ "whole", but that they are a group that acts almost like a mafia, holding the whole country at ransom while they demand whatever they want. If you find this agreeable, you have a problem. No group of people should be allowed to sequester a whole country, we're talking 600.000 passengers stranded due to 2.000 having certain demands about their comfort level and salary. It's absolutely intolerable.

It is true that the ATCOs have made it really easy for the government to use their case as a diversion from leadership problems, rampant crisis, unemployment, tax increases, poverty, social security cuts, etc. etc. but that is all it is - a diversion. The problem is real, and it exists. The problem cost all of us 300 MILLION EUROS, and it was less than 24 hours without ATC service. Can you get that into your head? Please? If it came out of your pocket you may be thinking differently.

There is a lot of blame to spread around, on the ATCOs for holding the system hostage, and on the government and AENA for having allowed this in the first place, and then to continue paying and not taking a stand.

The only way to fix this is if both sides step down from their soapboxes and agreed on something, but sadly, it's not looking like it will happen any time soon. Controllers signed a letter whereby they would go back to work, but the USCA spokesman said in an interview that they would retain the right to strike. That's not inspiring much confidence on the other side when you have to sit down to negotiate.

What impression I have is that the Spanish government has actually done effectively the very things they fear the most: Eroding the trust in a once highly reliable ATS system. Costly, maybe yes. But very reliable.

Very reliable? Where do you get that information? Please read the PRR reports and get back to me about the reliability of the Spanish ATC system. Particularly around holiday seasons. Particularly when absenteeism between ATCOs has been 15% to 30% for years. The rest of AENA sees only 4.2% in comparison. Please quote a source/reference, I have provided plenty of references, and not newspaper cuttings precisely.

It really is not to blame ANY group of individuals about a "national deficit". It just does not help.

Nobody is blaming ATCOs for the national deficit or the crisis, even the government (which is probably the most hated by the people since we got democracy) isn't saying they are the cause of the deficit of the nation or AENA. They are blaming them for having kept outrageous conditions, completely out of proportion salaries, by continuous threats and arm-twisting, and then, when one government, for better or worse, decides to take a stand and fix the issue, they leave 600.000 people stranded without their 5-day holiday. Get real, and stop believing the BS being spun that they're being blamed for every problem the country has. Unless you're in a union and have the duty to defend your peers at all costs, no matter how wrong their position may be, in that case, please say so and we'll all know where you stand. It would be nice if you researched a bit and came up with factual replies, rather than sentimental conspiracy theories.

Of course the costs can be whatever they happen to be. How is it so hard to grasp that it's whatever management agrees to pay the workers plus other fixed costs. If they chose to buy a new $500million system or spend on money on other things then that gets thrown in as well.

Precisely - this is OK as long as the workers are not threatening management with constant hidden strikes that cost millions and result in the second highest route fees in Europe. I have given figures where you can see that ATCOs represent 48% of AENA's staff costs, and only represent 17% of staff. Is that, not saying fair, but simply economically viable? Is it something that sane managers would have done? Or is it the result of being repeatedly threatened with "you either give us xyz, or we bring the country to a halt, or we slow it down so it's costing you 100M€ a week".

Of course, it is cheaper for management to pay the extra than to face millions of Euros in losses.

Why do different airlines not all charge the same for tickets and have the same operating costs? I'm sure you can answer that one.

Because they have different cost structures, but with ATC, it's not that different. You cannot claim to handle half the number of aircraft, in an airspace three notches less complex, with about twice the number of controllers, who make three times as much as their peers. Don't you see that it makes no sense? There are variations across Europe, read the benchmark report by Eurocontrol. And I mean it, before you hit "reply" and spill more non-researched sentimentalism, read the report. I pasted the link earlier, here it is again for your comfort:

http://www.eurocontrol.int/prc/gallery/content/public/Docs/ace2008/ACE_2008_Benchmarking_Report.pdf

Note that it singles out AENA and its problem with ATCOs. This is Eurocontrol, not me.

LH2

17th Dec 2010, 16:39

How is it so hard to grasp that it's whatever management agrees to pay the workers

How hard is it to grasp that it's not always like that? Case in point under discussion.

I understand there are over 1100 posts in this thread which does not make it an easy read, but the peculiar organisation (not really the best word for it!) of Spanish ATS has been discussed already.

paidworker

17th Dec 2010, 16:57

This thread wanders on. Ok Flameproof the ATCOS enjoy great working conditions and high pay. Therefore I congratulate their union on a job well done.:ok: I take it you dont actually have a job or terms and conditions to protect though given the amount of time ( which borders imho on unhealthy ) you spend on this? AENA are recruiting in HR at the moment ..that might suit you ..however be sure to offer to work for lower than negotiated rates since certain positions have attractive salaries. FWIW 20% of UK police officers are on short or long term sick leave this week. Lets get the kai bosh on them too, I mean they cant be all that sick. As for USCA saying they retain the right to strike , too bloody right , what else does a working man have to bring to the table to negotiate.. (http://www.ryanaircabincrewjobs.com/) lets all be friends or some crap. Nobody sitting across the table from them has taken a single penny in cuts for years.

LH2 that should "always" be the case , where there is no union it is only because the workers have been bullied out of them, in aviation threads every second thread these days is devoted to diminishing terms and conditions,, how long before P2F for TP captains ? The middle ground some seem to seek is utopian.. either the union is strong or it is not. That is an absolute. One can argue, (without having both sides of the coin) that the union went to far , but that was initially the fault of impotent management ( poor victims of the union lets all shed a tear :{ ) .. cant blame the union for doing its job well.. I certainly wont. I appreciate its complex and difficult to solve but Spain finds itself in an odd position, a supposed deeply socialist government behaving in a deeply communist manner.

While not deeply familiar with the privatization plans ( just read the elmundo editorials ) , i reckon its not the states problem for long. Blanco has used emergency powers to force people to work while the sale is worked out, I wonder if the illegal measures assumed by the government will stay in force to assist a private enterprise. Metro drivers on their much more modest salaries next. :ugh:

LH2

17th Dec 2010, 17:40

http://www.eurocontrol.int/prc/gallery/content/public/Docs/ace2008/ACE_2008_Benchmarking_Report.pdf

Just having a very quick look.

Figure 3.10 shows that over 55% of AENA's service provision costs fall in the "ATCOs in OPS employment" category. The second highest is Sweden at around 38%. NATS scores under 25%. Total employment costs are higher than AENA's 72% in Greece, Portugal, and Austria.

Looks like costwise the rest of Europe could benefit from hiring some Albanian controllers :E

The report euphemistically notes that "[e]mployment costs are influenced by the (local) cost of living and the bargaining power between staff and management".

Page 48 deals with the cost-effectiveness of the different services and announces that "[t]he +50% unit costs difference for services
rendered by Aena compared with the average of the four largest ANSPs is rather puzzling and deserves specific attention.", which kind of ties in with the argument in an early discussion that, effectively, AENA are not on the same boat as everyone else. This is supported by pretty much the rest of the report as far as I have read, with AENA either at the bottom (performance) or way over the top (costs).

Figure 5.6 are the infamous ATCO productivity figures (which I had been wondering about) and shows AENA crawling along the bottom, as expected from the other data (costs + traffic complexity).

It is quite an interesting bit of trivia to know from around page 54 that an AENA ATCO costs 2.5 times as much per hour than a Norwegian ATCO (and twice as much as a NATS fellow), all this not adjusted for purchasing power parity, which then widens the gap. :)

What the report has to say about this:
"The unit costs in Aena are high both before and after adjustment for PPP. For Aena, more than 1/3 of the total hours on duty are accomplished as overtime, which is one of the reasons behind the high ATCO employment costs. Clearly, the negotiating power of Aena’s ATCOs enables them to have very favourable contractual arrangements. This has a significant impact on ATCO employment costs and on Aena’s overall cost-effectiveness performance"

So, while I have quoted simple bits of information, not always in full context, etc., the figures in this report tell quite a damning story about AENA's performance, and there is plenty of data pointing to where a big part of that inefficiency comes from. An interesting read indeed.

On an incidental note, the other provider which does not seem to come out too well on quite a few of the indicators is Belgocontrol. What gives? Is that to do with a combination of small country, high traffic density, politics? (just guessing).

calcagafo

17th Dec 2010, 18:30

flameproof:

I really have no idea how anyone can defend this:

"Among the largest ANSPs, however, Aena has by far both the lowest productivity (see left-hand side of Figure 0.17) and the highest employment costs per ATCO-hour (see right-hand side of Figure 0.17). This raises a serious performance issue."

I may be mistaken, but it appears most countries only include (for productivity reports)those airports with 50.000 movements per year or more, and only the operative ATCO´s, whereas Spain included (intentionally???) all airports and all ATCO´s.

My guess is: if you count airports such as El Hierro, La Gomera, Almeria, and so on, (there´s more than 30 airports like those in Spain) and also include 450 non operative ATCO´s, the productivity is bound to be lower....

regards

BDiONU

18th Dec 2010, 06:35

Luckily, the governement has finally decided to take a stand.
The question is why the government and management of AENA have failed at every level to take command of the situation YEARS ago? It is their job to manage and they have spectacularly failed to do so. It is entirely their fault that Spain is in the position it currently is, not the ATCOs.

BD

PeltonLevel

18th Dec 2010, 08:34

I may be mistaken, but it appears most countries only include (for productivity reports)those airports with 50.000 movements per year or more, and only the operative ATCO´s, whereas Spain included (intentionally???) all airports and all ATCO´s. You may indeed be mistaken!
Note that this includes only data on ACCs, and is therefore not comparable with the ANSP gate-to-gate productivity data given in Section 5.4.1 (see page 100)

le Pingouin

18th Dec 2010, 12:48

Precisely - this is OK as long as the workers are not threatening management with constant hidden strikes that cost millions and result in the second highest route fees in Europe. I have given figures where you can see that ATCOs represent 48% of AENA's staff costs, and only represent 17% of staff. Is that, not saying fair, but simply economically viable? Is it something that sane managers would have done? Or is it the result of being repeatedly threatened with "you either give us xyz, or we bring the country to a halt, or we slow it down so it's costing you 100M€ a week".

Of course, it is cheaper for management to pay the extra than to face millions of Euros in losses.
Constant hidden strikes? Yeah right.

Why do you resort to conspiracy theories when all it takes is incompetent management to dig themselves a mighty big hole?

You just have to look to Australia for another example. Our system has been propped up by huge amounts of overtime for years because management has been chasing exciting projects instead of paying attention to their core business.

Because they have different cost structures, but with ATC, it's not that different. You cannot claim to handle half the number of aircraft, in an airspace three notches less complex, with about twice the number of controllers, who make three times as much as their peers. Don't you see that it makes no sense? There are variations across Europe, read the benchmark report by Eurocontrol.How is it not that different? If you choose to pay your workers in whatever line of business so much more than another provider of course your cost structure is different.

AENA chose to pay what it did, regardless of the sanity, economic viability or otherwise. That is the reality you seem unable or unwilling to grasp.

le Pingouin

18th Dec 2010, 14:08

Spare us the histrionic conspiracies studi. How is a "go slow" hidden or otherwise holding anyone to ransom?!?

Claiming hidden this and hidden that is not evidence of anything. Please tell me you don't believe every time you're denied direct tracking you think it's industrial action.

Clearly AENA couldn't negotiate their way out of a wet paper bag.

BDiONU

18th Dec 2010, 14:39

AENA had no choice, it was either give in to the demands or have the countries aviation put to a standstill
Sounds like a choice to me. Negotiate on the demands and reach a settlement or the workers threaten strikes etc. which will eventually cripple them as being on strike = no pay.

Do you really believe that the Spanish controllers just took what AENA gave out to them easily?
That is very obviously PRECISELY what happened. Being a manager doesn't mean giving in for an easy life it means sometimes having to make tough decisions because thats what you're paid to do, it's not just a job title.

BD

BDiONU

18th Dec 2010, 14:42

Clearly AENA couldn't negotiate their way out of a wet paper bag.
Very well put but don't forget that AENA is government run, so there is a further layer of management which needed to go look up in a dictionary the definition of 'managing'. It's not about having a big office and a big car.

BD

paidworker

18th Dec 2010, 19:51

Studi, I could be wrong in this , however my understanding was that an agreement made years ago was deemed to be in effect so long as no new agreement was reached.. No new agreement was reached so AENA decided to call the controllers bluff and started issuing decrees ( one cutting wages by 30% and increasing hours ) .. eventually the controllers were provoked into calling AENAs bluff which is where they stand now.. People decry the demands of the controllers but really I suspect all the union wanted was to keep the status quo in force ( logical instead of bending over for reduced t+cs ). AENA realised the position so begun a public hate campaign against the controllers months and months before the walkout ever happened. As for the go slow , like i said many times it effected our operation in south madrid periodically ( especially in south configuration ) but because of who and where we are we felt a degree of solidarity..something many hourly paid "cadets" seem to have had a problem with , even if the effect was that they got to fly more hours due to lack of directs. :ugh: Given however the decree which made it illegal for them to strike , im not sure what other measure the controllers were supposed to take to represent themselves with conviction at a negotiating table.

paidworker

19th Dec 2010, 03:54

I can see the other side of the coin Studi, just as a non management type it doesnt do it for me.. AENA / SENASA have deep problems which mostly run from mismanagment and fantasy. There was huge mismanagement/ missapropriation of funds..just as an example Ocana (my airfield )is a gliding club south of Madrid but has a runway that can take a 737:ugh:.

AENA may have gone too far and the unions were glad to accept the deal they got, if you pay a union sub you would be wondering why they didnt. Some of the terms and conditions appear strange to non spanish people also but Spain is Spain and time off is an important part of terms and condtions in private industry too. Micko would not like to be Spanish..All that being said I think the manner in which AENA sought to redress the percieved imbalance is not justified by the figures given they are a drop in an otherwise undrained ocean ( smoke and mirrors dont allow that come out right now ) . As a paidworker in Spain, If half the tactics were turned on me by management ( starting years ago ) I am sure I would be none to happy so i see it beyond the amount of money they are paid and the principle of how a company / state is doing its business. It is a matter of dispute but I believe the Unions version in examining the hours problem, having talked to controllers they in person seems straight up in saying AENA got their sums wrong ( tragically stupid accounting error ) but its not a problem.. Just issue another decree. It is not appropriate regardless when an employer consistantly begins to shift the ground ,issuing decrees then issuing a new one etc. etc. Thatcher did not need it seems coal miners , but the state needs ATCOS. Say for example the controllers had not walked out and brought it to a head .. what would be next , another 30% cut , another 30% rise in hours ..another accounting error ..all the while helicopter hat with his apple and briefcase is trying to tell you how to do a job he knows nothing about and mocking you in public. There are many ways of redressing imbalance , one is though retirements , there are new controllers coming in now on lower terms and conditions which was agreed by the union way back when. They are not quiet as inflexible as you would be led to believe by people baying for blood. To anybody in a unionised job where state money is coming into play , im sure you are watching this close because the powers that be surely are. Its a tangent but I dont buy the state coffers crap either , all thats happening is the banks are being given bailouts with the " cost savings " but that is an entirely different matter. On balance , a working man has to look at this as a trial case for the coming attempted deflation in Europe and understand that unity is the better option instead of enjoying hangings in public. And think of it this way , if the state can do it , soo too will private enterprise be given more powers to do as it pleases too.

As for the cost of living in Madrid , its not all that low especially if you have children. Housing prices have not collapsed here like the UK ( shadow inventory ) , core inflation in the likes of food is on the rise as are utilities and you must remember that very few people are declaring anything more than 60% of their income so the national figures are fantasy too.

Incidentally its generally accepted that a decree at the beginning of the year brought the average wage from 300K to 200K , overnight.

Lon More

19th Dec 2010, 04:41

Thread drift: Had Prospect and its predecessors been as aggressive as some wanted this thread could have been about UK salaries.

ATC Watcher

19th Dec 2010, 06:18

Studi :
If one choose to work max hours, I guess reaching 1800h, he would earn in the region of close to 1Mio €!
Noone has ever disputed these figures,
:hmm:::hmm:
Either you cannot read , or your emotions/hatred are cluttering your judgement.

Stop taking your information from Spanish media and start thinking a bit.

paidworker

19th Dec 2010, 16:01

According to the press the negotiations are moving along between AENA and the controllers today. It has also emerged that the Spanish Central intelligence agency have wire tapped the mobile phones of all the controllers along with the union representatives. I am pretty sure that spanish military personell in the broader sense dont have their phones tapped without a court order.

Lon More

20th Dec 2010, 12:34

I hear there was a meeting of the Controllers to discuss the situation further.

AENA has released a photo of the carpark

http://www.toyrally.com/2007%20Pictures/Ferrari%20Line%20Mara%20Lago.JPG

BrATCO

20th Dec 2010, 13:22

Well done, Lone More !
We even can see the military truck in the background. :)

calcagafo

21st Dec 2010, 18:54

AENA has released a photo of the carpark

There must be some mistake, that is not a carpark.....
It´s my backyard, and those are all mine....;)

megustalavida

22nd Dec 2010, 15:45

jealousy.... its not everything about money :p

paidworker

23rd Dec 2010, 00:23

Lon More said

"AENA has released a photo of the carpark"

Thats kind of the problem really .. it is an AENA released photograph..everything AENA say must be true and repeated by the sheople in order to stop their own part in the play from being discussed.

Nightstop

23rd Dec 2010, 17:15

That's a picture of Trump's Mar-a-lago Club, Palm Beach FL....rather a long drive from MAD in your Ferrari , don't you think ?

'I' in the sky

23rd Dec 2010, 19:13

Studi said "In Spain, it was on average >300k € a year, ...."

ATC watcher said "Stop taking your information from Spanish media and start thinking a bit. "

I haven't seen anyone provide us with their alternative figures to these "lies". They rant on about training costs, one posted me a link to an earlier posting which also didn't appear to contain any more "honest" information about the real salaries so until they do I think the figure of an "average" 300k euros per year has to be seen as a fair one to use.

ATC Watcher

23rd Dec 2010, 22:07

ATC watcher said "Stop taking your information from Spanish media and start thinking a bit. "

If you want to quote an answer from me, do not alter the question.

The Statement Studi made was :If one choose to work max hours, I guess reaching 1800h, he would earn in the region of close to 1Mio €!
Noone has ever disputed these figures

I did and I stand to my reply.

As to the 300K Gross, yes some did made it in a few ACCs with a lot of overtime, but average salary ? Think a bit : 2000 controllers in Spain how many controllers in ACC and in Airports, how many small airports , etc.. . Not everybody works in the large ACCs and not everybody did maximum overtime in there . But the figure stuck. The media loves it.

paidworker

24th Dec 2010, 01:40

Open Letter to AENA/ Jose Blanco (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=es&tl=en&u=http://www.abc.es/20101206/economia/carta-controlador-201012061117.html) from a controller published on the 13/12/2010 in ABC a leading broadsheet style newspaper along the lines of the times. I dont have time to translate it all now so you can make some allowances for google gettting the words wrong ( e.g what is translated as track can in fact be " runway " in the case of talking about operating out of limits with snow contamination ). " Driver " is actually controller.

Edited to add: I posted it as soon as I found it , it is quite a long document , not suited to people who are more accustomed to cartoons and parrot fashion repeating a syndicated news story with catchy headlines. I would even say its heavy going at times but there are some very interesting assertions in it:

Such as management( non qualified controllers ) wages are actually higher but are being lumped into the pot when calculating atcos wages.

Serious breaches of eurocontrol / ICAO accepted guidelines for things like runway contamination where non qualified people are " managing the controllers " as a result of the decree. Controllers not being allowed close airports in the north even though the airport operator cant clear snow of the runway ( 15cm ).

Dramatic increase in what are described as category " A " near misses since new operating regime in the royal decree of Feb of this year.

Been delayed going into Barajas this year ? Perhaps its because some helicopter hat is trying to cut costs by running radar maintenance during the day even if the controllers are pointing out its peak time..generally speaking operational and safety decisions were being taken by people who are not ATCOS in a lot of routine and non routine matter.

AENA pump billions into regional airports that nobody will buy of AENA and insist on manning them even if the average is 18 pax a day. ( we have a super long concrete runway in our "gliding" club ). There are tons of these airports in the middle of nowhere ( even Ryanair wont fly there with no airport charge ) and AENA insist on keeping them open with a team of controllers. Yet AENA gets to " pump " the mass media and say look at these lazy fools.. I landed in Cordoba recently and thought to myself seems a bit much to have full service here..AENA has in the last years racked up debt with these projects alone of 13,142 million euros. Then of course theres the cost of the military post too.. So you have to ask yourself if thats " management " are they really " victims "?

AENAs HR department has cut recruitment for the last 6 years despite part of the original agreement saying they would hire. The notion that controllers controlled the intake is made a mockery off. (AENA needed the money instead to reward Jose Blancos ( Government minister ) wifes company contracts to build airports and buildings nobody needed. And if that was a control tower its cost of course is being hung around the kneck of the controller of course.

If there is serious interest in a "section" after the holiday I will try and translate it in detail. I can read / write / speak spanish and source documents for all arguments are there. Otherwise Google does a good job if you copy and paste individual sections in for translation. Good luck with it as I said its well referenced for people who want third party source documents but it means not being lazy:hmm:

misterblue

24th Dec 2010, 13:39

Flying through Spanish airspace yesterday received the following reply to introductory calls-

'You are identified under military control'

What was that all about?

MB

calcagafo

25th Dec 2010, 09:21

misterblue

What was that all about?

Spain´s airspace is under military "supervision" since the fourth of December.
The ATCO´s are the same, but the military are there to make sure they do as they are told :eek:

Merry Christmas??

TrafficTraffic

26th Dec 2010, 08:59

le Pingoiun

"It is better not to post and let people think you dont know what you are talking about rather than to post and remove all doubt." -
-- Mark Twain (well I changed it a bit)

Lon Moore,

I thought that was your back yard at Hawkinge...;)

TT

liftman

5th Jan 2011, 06:11

Hi Guys,

Aena apparently is looking for controller abroad, rumours about a coming agreement with italy for "training and international programs" with controller detached to some spanish center, rumours of coming agreement with further nations soon.

Who knows something more? Any spanish controller could verify this?

belk78

5th Jan 2011, 11:54

Aena has been looking for atco´s across Europe and South America but nobody accepted so far. Our situation and working conditions right now are crap.
Where did you hear that?

Famas

7th Jan 2011, 15:35

Hi guys,
I'm an italian Atco and i want to confirm that my provider start a research of personnel for those destinations:Madrid ,Barcellona,Siviglia,Palma di Maiorca e Gran canarie.
I want to know any useful information to report to all my collegues that decide to apply for.
Do spanish controllers know anything about that?
Are you looking for someone to help you for your holiday,shift,days off....or it's only an attempt of Aena to definitely fire some spanish controllers?
Does spanish union know something about the agreement between the two providers?
Happy to receive any information.....
TY.

spanishatco45

7th Jan 2011, 16:47

Hi guys, I'm a Spanish atco and I'm going to tell you what's going on here. AENA, the Ministry of Fomento, the Ministry of the Interior, the Government and the political opposition (partido popular), have been trying to anihilate us for more than one year now. They've issued 5 decrees and 2 laws to change our working conditions because they don't want to negotiate a new agreement with us. They have an open war against us and they're desperately looking for atcos whereever. If any Italians want to come to Spain they should know this it is hell here, and it is an attempt to destroy the collective of spanish atcos. You'd better get in touch with any of our union representatives to get information. You don't know what you`re getting into. This is serious and you wouldn't be doing us any favours by accepting to come to Spain. This is union busting from Aena and the Government of Spain. Please get information from your trade union, they know about the hell that is going on here. I'll be pleased to provide you with any information you wish. [email protected]

jlms

7th Jan 2011, 16:59

No surprise Famas. They are going to have to replace many of us who are starting to look for jobs abroad :)

They do not intend stopping until history repeats itself and they copy the current Spanish pilot situation that started in the late '80's and has some Vueling pilots desperate for that right hand seat currently earning less than 1000€ a month...

Kind regards to everyone, including those that have been so harsh to us in the last year and still love to bash us.

calcagafo

7th Jan 2011, 17:06

Do spanish controllers know anything about that?Nope.
Are you looking for someone to help you for your holiday,shift,days off..Nope, although that would be nice :O
Does spanish union know something about the agreement between the two providers?Not that I know
I want to know any useful informationI can only tell you about Barcelona
1670 hours per year, up to 200 hours a month, 5/3 days work/off ( 6/2 in the summer), 45 days vacation (maximum 15 days between June and September ), around 5000 euro net per month, and, oh yeah, everybody hates you.....

Any doubt, don't hesitate to ask ;)

Regards

spanishatco45

7th Jan 2011, 17:06

This attempt from aena to recruit atcos abroad is a union busting practice. They’ve been trying to annihilate the collective of Spanish atcos for more than one year now. Get info before taking any initiatives from our trade union USCA or from your own union, they know what’s going on in Spain about atc. You must know this is not paradise and they’re trying to have replacements in order to fire quite a few of us. The deadline of January 31 coincides with the one given by the Government for a “solution” they curiously “don’t want to find” about the agreement they “don’t want to sign” with the Spanish atcos. We didn’t know anything about them trying to find atcos abroad and this means they’re lying once more. If you want to come to Spain, think it more than twice. We’re at war. Greetings

Plumaveloz

7th Jan 2011, 17:30

Hello:
Some days ago, a new Royal Decree stated 13th no-aproach-control towers to be privatized.
This are the towers:
LEVX: Vigo
LECO: La Coruña
LECU: Madrid - Cuatro Vientos
LEAL: Alicante
LEVC: Valencia
LEIB: Ibiza
LEAM: Almería
LEZL: Sevilla
LELL: Sabadell
LEJR: Jerez
GCFV: Fuertenventura (Canary Islands)
GCRR: Lanzarote (Canary Islands)
GEML: Melilla

Regards,
A.

SINGAPURCANAC

7th Jan 2011, 17:36

it means that "expat newcomers" may expect those postings for twr ratings?

LH2

7th Jan 2011, 21:39

This attempt from aena to recruit atcos abroad is a union busting practice.

May they be successful.

The controller's union has done bugger all in all these years to improve airspace safety and training of controllers, or any other positive contribution to aviation whatso*******ever so the sooner one gets rid of them, the sooner everyone can start reaping the benefits.

Btw, you do not say, but I assume you are a union rep/leader--there's been a few of you here over the last few months so your pitch is nothing new really

LH2

7th Jan 2011, 21:46

it means that "expat newcomers" may expect those postings for twr ratings?

The provision of tower services will be open to competition and any qualifying EU company will be able to bid.

There might be issues with applying if they insist on level 4 Spanish or some such (which they will, given the political implications in such a Jacobin country). I'll try to keep an eye out for any developments and post here if anyone's interested.

jlms

7th Jan 2011, 21:55

The controller's union has done bugger all in all these years to improve the safety and training of controllers, or any other positive contribution to aviation whatso*******ever so the sooner one gets rid of them, the sooner everyone can start reaping the benefits.

You're right LH2. That's APROCTA (http://www.aprocta.es/)'s job.

BTW and just for the record, I would say most of us writing here have no responsibility in the union.

Have a nice weekend.

aldegar

8th Jan 2011, 07:25

First news about the italian agreement. Have no information about it, but it would be really nice if it involved some kind of exchange... italian ATCOs come to Spain and we are allowed to go and replace them in Italy! ;)

LH2

8th Jan 2011, 08:46

pdcta

8th Jan 2011, 09:00

it would be really nice if it involved some kind of exchange... italian ATCOs come to Spain and we are allowed to go and replace them in Italy
It would be really great! I mean... short period of exchange (2 to 3 years) would be really formative for everybody: for you and for the hosting unit/controllers.
And initially... to be employed in the Upper Airspace's sectors won't be a problem as the national language can be easily avoided, there. (At the moment not in the terminal due to the VFR traffic).

BrATCO

8th Jan 2011, 12:57

There might be issues with applying if they insist on level 4 Spanish or some such (which they will, given the political implications in such a Jacobin country).

I hope they will !
Not for political or Jacobin reasons : for safety reasons.

Or you would have to include in the martial law that Spanish pilots who fly only in Spain and don't speak technical English will be grounded.

Haven't you read any of the threads about multiple languages on the frenquency ? Would you fly in a single manned airspace where the CONTROLLER wouldn't understand the situation ?

Not talking about normal situation. Sometimes, VFRs get lost...

SINGAPURCANAC

8th Jan 2011, 13:00

sorry for stupid question,but what is the point if it happen according to union idea?
You have 100 atcos-and it is not enough
Than you will send 5 people to other country,and they will send 5 people to your centers.
and at the end of the day you will have again 100 atcos.

Actually you will not have 100 atcos.
There will be 95 qualified plus 5 on ojt.
So if you are understuffed with 100 atcos, what is the name for situation when you have 95 plus 5.
Understuffed with increased costs,because transfers aren't for free.Someone has to pay tickets,and other costs relating to "exchange programs"(hotel,transportation, familiarization period,plus increased need for free days....)

It won't happen like this.
they will "exchange" a few people just to "break ice" than they will introduce bunch of other atcos.

Because you need more people for less money.

Insted of paying one atco average 20 000 eurs per month,they will deploy six average atcos for 3000 eur per month.
guess who will take the difference. :mad:

aldegar

8th Jan 2011, 18:04

I was just giving some thoughts to this new and unknown italian agreement and I was wondering:

- How many italian ATCOs are they recruiting? Could it be 175? (any italian that can answer this?). Not long ago Mr. Lema said in the media they didn't need more ATCOs. However, now that 175 spanish ATCOs are being judged and are facing 8 to 10 years of prison, all of the sudden we find out that they are recruiting italian ATCOs... Will the spanish government speed up the trials and start sending spanish ATCOs to prison as soon as they start getting fresh foreign replacements?

- Considering we are now all militarized, and somehow feeling it's not going to be the last time, can foreign ATCOs working in Spain be also militarized in the future? The decree militarized ALL air traffic controllers working in Spain, but didn't say anything about nationalities... interesting issue.

Shadowrun

8th Jan 2011, 22:28

have been trying to anihilate us for more than one year now. They've issued 5 decrees and 2 laws to change our working conditions because they don't want to negotiate a new agreement with us.

Minister of Public Works (Pepe Blanco) said ATCO's union pulled government's leg as they didn't accept any new terms&conditions. So, ther should have been at least one negotiation.

deci

9th Jan 2011, 08:30

How many italian ATCOs are they recruiting? Could it be 175? (any italian that can answer this?)175? Impossible.
If I remember correctly 15/20 was the maximum number of ACC controllers ENAV granted to DFS last year so I guess it could be not more than 15/20 people as well (in the official document I read is requested ATC people from ACC only).
... by the way I hope we'll be ZERO italian ATC'os answering to this "strange request"..
suerte:ok:

spanishatco45

9th Jan 2011, 09:15

Hi LH2, thanks for the compliments. Just to satisfy your curiosity, I’m not a union representative, just an atco. By the way, what sources of knowledge are you drinking from to state all that **** about the Union? Do you know what the Union was one year ago and what it is nowadays? If you tell us what you exactly know and what your sources are, I can talk to you, otherwise I’ll assume you’re just intoxicating the forum. Do you work for SERCO or any of those companies supposedly taking care of our towers in the near future? I told you who I am, you tell us who you are. The problem is Aena owes a hell of a lot of money (13.000.000.000 €) yes, you read well: thirteen thousand million euros, mainly to your British banks, as you know well. They built dozens of loss-making airports only to make the construction companies, like Construcciones San José, a little richer (Oh, what a surprising coincidence, Juan Ignacio Lema, AENA’s current president was the President of Construcciones San José until 2 days before taking over in AENA!!!!!!!), and now they want to get out of this hell at the expense of all AENA’s workers, not only of the controllers. Lema said the other day they don’t need any more controllers and he is looking for them behind our backs… He knows how many applications DFS has received from Spanish ATCOS in the past few months (nearly all of them rejected). If he wants to get rid of us, why doesn’t he let us go? We’d be pleased to. He doesn’t know what he wants himself, I see him a little desperate. He should go and rest a little bit, the same as you LH2 the troll.

Lon More

9th Jan 2011, 11:24

When are the next elections scheduled in Spain?

pdcta

9th Jan 2011, 11:31

...by the way I hope we'll be ZERO italian ATC'os answering to this "strange request"...
They have an agreement. I think that it means that if 0 ATCOs will apply they will brush up someone licence to send there support. They cannot promise help and after that told them "sorry cannot help you anymore". International public relations cannot admit this, I think. Am I wrong?!
Different was if the company denied since the beginning the help request. "Sorry understaffed too..." was a nice option (and it's the real truth).

aldegar

9th Jan 2011, 13:02

When are the next elections scheduled in Spain?

March 2012.

... by the way I hope we'll be ZERO italian ATC'os answering to this "strange request"..
suertehttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

Thanks ;)

BrATCO

9th Jan 2011, 16:21

aldegar,can foreign ATCOs working in Spain be also militarized in the future? No way, unless they've got Spanish nationality too. Or Italian Minister of Economical War decides they are forced to work for Spain under Spanish military rules...

pdcta,
It would be really great! I mean... short period of exchange (2 to 3 years)
Would have been great in the 70's-80's, when everything in European aviation wasn't all about "reaping the benefits", as says LH2.
2 or 3 years would be absolutely cost ineffective.
Months to get a qualification one way, months to get again the previous qualification, back to home-country... If the place is still vacated...
Months paying a useless controller ?
Plus the cost of hiring new controllers to replace the ones who leave. (hence the possibility that the place is not available anymore when the controller wants to get back home)

I think there would be a line in the contract to force controllers stay at least 10 years. If ever they want to leave before, let them give the whole money back (except a part which represents the minimum salary in the country for the period). This is the kind of contract we sign here before starting training.

As said here and there, training is very expensive. Could be wise (at last) to consider it as an investment instead of this "strike breaking" method.

LH2

9th Jan 2011, 18:10

I hope they will !
Not for political or Jacobin reasons : for safety reasons.

There is that too, of course, but even without that consideration the Spaniards would never go for an English-only service.

Look at what happened in CDG after that runway incursion incident (one of the recommendations coming out of the BEA was to make CDG English-only, which was agreed by AF and the DSNA--or its predecessor, don't know if it existed back then--and most others. One of the minority ATCO unions, the kind that are always throwing sticks into the spokes for no good reason, kicked up a stink along with some ultraconservative deputies at the AN, the rightist press got into it... rest is history until the next accident happens)

Or you would have to include in the martial law that Spanish pilots who fly only in Spain and don't speak technical English will be grounded.

Just a correction: there is no martial law in force in Spain at the moment. Nor has ever been since the restoration of democracy, whatever the childish propaganda from the local unions may try to imply. :rolleyes:

Haven't you read any of the threads about multiple languages on the frenquency ? Would you fly in a single manned airspace where the CONTROLLER wouldn't understand the situation ?

No, of course not, but at least in theory you could make certain airfields/frequencies EN only, just like we have FR-only airfields in France, or better yet, sort of like the situation in Germany; make upper airspace EN-only, no VFR there and I think (but might very well be wrong) that English level 4 is required for an IR rating. Confirmation in one sense or another would be welcome, btw.

I emphasise, you are right to say that safety would be an important consideration... but that's beyond the politicians concern and understanding.

Not talking about normal situation. Sometimes, VFRs get lost...

Agreed.

deci

9th Jan 2011, 18:44

They have an agreement. I think that it means that if 0 ATCOs will apply they will brush up someone licence to send there support. They cannot promise help and after that told them "sorry cannot help you anymore". International public relations cannot admit this, I think. Am I wrong?!
Nobody of us can be forced to go in spain and make some "training activity for 2 years".. am I wrong?

(edited to avoid speculations)

Nock

9th Jan 2011, 19:46

Sorry to disturb you in this discussion but, we were discussing at work about AENA wanting to hire some italian controllers and some points remained a little hazy (and this discussion holds so many deviations that I am unable to find out the answers!):

1) why this hiring? would foreign ATCO be used only to replace spanish ATCOs (and his this case, which ones) or would they be used as OJTI and train spanish atcos (military, civilian???)
2) is there an official paper (I have made a quick research on the aena website but with no luck) where I could find this decision to employ foreign atcos? If someone had this kind of document, could he send it to me via PM?

Last thing, I've read the really interesting issue of The Controller of october, it's well written and it really explains how things happened in Spain. I sincerely hope that no controller will accept such a deal to work for aena, just to show that we are solidary with of spanish colleagues and that you can't attack our profession in this way with the approval of the ATCO community.

good luck dear southern neighbours and thanks for your help in my search for information!

Nock

BrATCO

9th Jan 2011, 21:10

LH2,
edit : removed

Deci,

Nobody of us can be forced to go in spain and train military personnel who's going to replace fired civilian controllers (I'm afraid we're talking about this).. am I wrong?

I'm afraid this will depend on the contract you signed with your ANSP.

Anyway, you won't be able to train anyone as long as you're not qualified on the sectors (basic rule of OJTI). This after having been trained by Spanish controllers : only they can "OJT" you... or will this rule be broken too ?

Nock,
Any link about "The Controller" ?

LH2

9th Jan 2011, 23:38

:confused: I think you need to re-read the post you are replying to.

Aren't Spaniards the ones who have been treated unable to cope with English, page after page, in this very thread ?
Was this propaganda too ?
And now, you want them to work English only ?

??? Are you sure you're not mixing up responses from various people here?

You suggest foreign controllers could come in Spain and work along with Spanish controlers...

I did not suggest that. I do not particularly give a stronzetto one way or another.

Interestingly, vBulleting censors the non-diminutive form. :cool:

As you don't seem to know much about control, let me tell you that even though level 4 in English can be considered enough to spit in a mike, a good level 5 in Spanish should be preconised for coming controllers to work together with Spanish controllers on a sector.

Yes, fantastic, but isn't level 4 the minimum legally required (whether that's sufficient or not, and I think we all know in practise it's probably not)? If that's not the case, I'm happy to stand corrected. Note that my mention of level 4 was in the context of pilots flying in class A airspace anyway so it's not entirely clear to me by which association of ideas you might have arrived at your response above.

Re CDG, I (really !) don't know why French came back on the freq. I just wonder why controllers who work English 90% of the time would mind adding 10%...

Well, in the post that you are putatively replying to I have explained that: political considerations completely unrelated to the aviation industry. Very sad.

Call the Royal Decrees/Government Decisions as you like.

??? Please explain?

Spanish controllers are not treated the same as the rest of Spanish population.

In one way or another every sector, community, and individual is treated in a particular way which you can argue "is not the same" as the rest. So what?

If you have any particular interest on any of this, I think you should come to Spain for a visit and see how it is all really like (a degree in anthropology would probably help :})

Read : The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/) (I know : off-thread)

:rolleyes:

Aviation rules forbid controllers to work if ever they feel unfit for any reason, same for pilots. Why shouldn't they have a right to go on sick-leave or even quit ?

I really don't know how this relates to any recent discussion. In any event, the situation is still as per regulations, the only difference being the way it's managed, which had to change due to controllers being irresponsible and abusing the system, as has been talked about previously.

Just the contrary in fact. The reason for FR-only fields in France is precisely that they are not controlled.

I know how it works, thank you.

Being a controller, not a politician nor any union-ist, safety is my first concern.

Well, that's good to hear (especially the bit about being non-union). That's about the only sense you've talked in your whole reply I'm afraid. Not wishing to offend, but I see you are emotional and can't help to think you might be a little tired as well. :uhoh:

Tarq57

10th Jan 2011, 06:40

@ Nock, post 1187 (http://www.pprune.org/6169040-post1187.html)

Nicely said; my sentiment also.

BrATCO
I believe The Controller is only available to subscribers/members of IFATCA. Don't you get it at work?

The article was good reading. Fairly scary. Make no mistake, this will be part of an orchestrated campaign to reduce T's & C's everywhere. I don't for a moment believe that CANSO is only about technical cooperation.

aldegar

10th Jan 2011, 07:58

2) is there an official paper (I have made a quick research on the aena website but with no luck) where I could find this decision to employ foreign atcos? If someone had this kind of document, could he send it to me via PM?

I'd also be interested, should someone have the information send it also to me if possible (PM), thanks. It's all been so obscurely managed... we just found out about this, but there must be so many things going on we don't know about.

Make no mistake, this will be part of an orchestrated campaign to reduce T's & C's everywhere.

Absolutely true, in fact T's & C's are already being reduced in other countries.

Also, even though ours look as a local conflict, there are too many international issues involved: this italian agreement, DFS answering to all spanish ATCOs applying that they won't hire spanish ATCOs until our conflict is solved, foreign providers interested in taking part in the privatization of AENA, the single sky, functional blocks, the global crisis...

I don't for a moment believe that CANSO is only about technical cooperation.

Shortly after the first decree (february) Mr. Lema (AENAs president) became a member of CANSOs executive comittee.

BrATCO

10th Jan 2011, 08:10

Tarq57,
Not member of IFATCA, nor any union.
I'll try to find it tomorrow at work.

Thank you anyway.

Tarq57

10th Jan 2011, 08:14

[deleted due misunderstanding]

GAU-8

10th Jan 2011, 11:25

I agree with the idea of no italian ATCOs or any other country joining AENA at this time with the purpose of putting pressure on the current spanish controllers, we have to support each other.
However, knowing the situation in the past years, I hope our spanish friends have learnt the lesson, and be more open minded to the idea of controllers working outside of Spain joining them in the future once this crisis is over, we know that their union was reluctant to that idea, putting obstacles to ATCOs from abroad (even to spanish ones working outside of Spain for other providers as I know some cases); having a 3-year degree of any kind not related to aviation was a requirement, fair enough, although doesn't make much sense; but making those already validated controllers going through the whole selection process with the rest of ab-initio applicants without any recognition of their experience was harsh enough. The worst part is that even if you would have been accepted through the whole selection process, you had to start the school since the beginning, learning the aeronautical alphabet again and how to vector 2 aircraft away from each other, and with a marginal pay during 18 months in the school before starting OJT.

That was like saying to the rest of ATC world, you can try if you want, but YOU ARE NOT WELCOME HERE, they knew it was an impossible situation for a current ATCO to accept. It shouldn't be like that, ATCOs should facilitate the mobility of other colleagues when it doesn't affect their position, the job itself restrains your posibility of changing your place to work enough.

All my support for the spanish ATCOs during this hard time, we know their government is not playing fair.

Phalconphixer

10th Jan 2011, 17:30

BrATCO:

You have probably already found this but just in case...

IFATCA - The Controller (http://www.the-controller.net/)

pp

kontrolor

11th Jan 2011, 10:02

I don't think that anyone here ranting about the quality or justification of the actions by spanish ATCOS would approve or is enjoying him/herself over the latest developments. Because this might be the sign of the times:

Quote from wsws.org:

Spanish air traffic controllers’ union facilitates government persecution of its members
By Robert Stevens and Paul Stuart
7 January 2011
The Spanish Socialist Workers Party (PSOE) government has stepped up its offensive against 2,200 air traffic controllers.

The controllers are currently under a State of Alert, imposed by the government by Royal Decree (1673/2010) on December 4. Under the order, the controllers have been forced to work under “military discipline” under the command of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force until the State of Alert ends. The order was imposed following a mass walkout by the controllers on December 3 to protest intolerable working conditions and attacks on their legal rights.

On December 29, Eduardo Esteban, the chief prosecutor of the Madrid Court, issued a letter demanding the prosecution of air traffic controllers on charges of sedition for stopping work on health and safety grounds over December 3-4. The government has now escalated the threat of prosecution to involve controllers “in general”, according to an insider at the Public Prosecutions office reported in El Pais.

Attorney General Cándido Conde-Pumpido is demanding sentences of up to eight years under article 20 of the 1964 Air Navigation Laws. This is the second law carried over from the dictatorship of General Franco deployed against air traffic controllers. The government’s declaration of a State of Alert was the first since the end of the Franco regime in 1975.

Conde-Pumpido, who has consistently demanded maximum sentences on charges of sedition, said, “We are not dealing with a labour problem because [the controllers] have not used legal avenues at any time, but staged a premeditated abandonment of airports causing grave damage to the citizens of Spain.”

He added that he was considering instructing local courts to apply for the seizure of air traffic controllers’ assets, in the event of payments to those individuals, companies and organisations demanding compensation for loss of profits incurred during the shutdown.

The attorney general’s move is in preparation for the expected private compensation claims against the controllers that are being encouraged by the government’s unrelenting campaign against the workers. According to Time magazine, a group of some 5,500 passengers, affected by the controllers’ walkout in December, are planning to file a civil suit before the end of the year demanding €10,000 per passenger in “moral damages.” The estimated total cost of such an action to the controllers would be around €55 million.

The persecution of the controllers is taking place with the aid of the trade union bureaucracy. Having collaborated with the government at every stage of the dispute, the air traffic controllers’ union, the Unión Sindical de Controladores Aéreos (USCA), is now facilitating the prosecution and possible jailing of its own members.

At every stage in the air traffic controllers’ struggle against the government attacks on working conditions, the USCA has sought to demobilise and derail a united offensive.

In February, the PSOE issued a Royal Decree (1/2010) cutting controllers’ wages by 40 percent, increasing hours, cutting overtime and reducing rest periods. According to the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Associations (IFATCA), “a controllers’ net income dropped overnight by 30 to 50 percent depending on the amount of overtime he or she performed before.”

In August, the USCA abandoned a 92 percent vote in favour of strike action against the controllers’ employers, the state-run Aeropuertos Españoles y Navegación Aérea (AENA), and instead called for the government to mediate. Calling off strike action scheduled for the end of August, USCA head of communications Cesar Cap said, “The executive committee has decided not to exercise the right to strike during the month of August in order to demonstrate responsibility.”

This allowed the PSOE to intensify its attacks, with the issuing of a Royal Decree (1001/2010). This included the stipulation that controllers work 1,670 hours per year, plus 80 hours mandatory overtime, to be decided by the AENA.

Many controllers were angry at the outcome of the union’s collaboration with the government. Commenting on the August 19, 2010, “pre-agreement” reached between the USCA and AENA, the IFATCA noted it was accepted by the union’s membership “though not with great enthusiasm.”

Prior to the December walkout by the controllers, the union submitted a proposal to the AENA in which it accepted all the basic demands being made by the government. The USCA did not request any more money and fully accepted the terms presented by the Transport Ministry in February and signed as part of a draft agreement in August. Commenting on the USCA’s capitulation, the IFATCA stated that the USCA had “made a proposal, which could resolve the current deadlock, which includes a freeze of the remuneration budget for the next three years.” USCA spokesperson Daniel Zamit stated that on the basis of the unions’ proposals, an agreement could be reached in “less than ten days” in order to end the dispute “as soon as possible”.

On December 3, controllers refused to go to work, after making it clear they had worked more than their scheduled annual hours outlined in the previous Royal Decree. Controllers had also received an advance copy of a new Royal Decree, passed earlier that day by the Council of Ministers, drastically worsening their working conditions and expanding their hours of work. The USCA immediately disowned the action and set the stage for the government to mobilise the military against its members. The USCA demanded that the workers return to the air control towers and denounced the action as “spontaneous” and an “extreme” decision.

USCA officials then attended a secret emergency cabinet at the Ministry of Public Works, at the request of Prime Minister Jose Zapatero. Their next action was to go to a Madrid hotel, where controllers were meeting, and insist that their members had no option but to return to work on terms determined by the Ministry of Defence and accept being placed under military law.

In the face of the threat of dictatorial rule, the sole function of the USCA has been to suppress the growing discontent and opposition of air traffic controllers to the PSOE government. The union called on its members to sign a “letter of intent” dated December 15, which promised that they would not take any industrial action and would “ensure the continuity of the service”. The letter said that its signatories would comply with the “terms established under the current legislation” and “with the previous agreements reached between the parties.”

Despite the best efforts of the USCA, 15 percent of the controllers refused to sign the document.

The USCA presented this to the government as a pledge that they could be fully trusted to discipline and police their own members and, on this basis, requested the lifting of the State of Alert, up for congressional renewal on December 16. But the promise of a pact in which the union committed itself to preventing any future action by controllers was not enough for the government. Once again, the PSOE pressed ahead with its attacks on the controllers. As the government extended the State of Alert to January 15, Development Minister José Blanco stated, “To suggest that some signatures should determine the action of a government is to return to sabotage and blackmail.”

Since the extension of the State of Alert, the USCA has continued to renounce any association with the December 3 action by the controllers and has deepened its collaboration with the government. Quoted in Time, the USCA’s César Cabo said of the walkout, “It was a mistake…. They counted on us overreacting to cover up the problems with their own mismanagement. And we fell into it.”

This is a lie. The workers did not “overreact” but sought to defend themselves under conditions whereby the USCA was working hand-in-glove with the government and the AENA, and was prepared to accept anything in terms of the destruction of its members’ terms and conditions.

The PSOE is seeking to fast-track the tender process plans to sell off 49 percent of the AENA on behalf of international finance capital. The defeat of the air traffic controllers was a critical factor in its bid to privatise Spain’s airports, the largest remaining state-run system in Europe. The proposed sale of the AENA was announced as the initial State of Alert was imposed.

Last month, Blanco said that the process to recruit a new air traffic control workforce had actually begun in July. Some 3,200 applications were being sifted, and “the training of new controllers will be designed to encourage the incorporation of new companies, rather than incorporation into a state-owned monopoly model,” said Blanco.

This year, the government plans to sell off control towers, including those at Alicante, Valencia, Ibiza, La Palma de Mallorca, Lanzarote, Fuerteventura and Sevilla, The remainder will be privatised in 2012. The USCA has signalled no opposition to this, with one newspaper, The Leader, reporting on January 1, “Officials from AENA met with the air traffic controllers union USCA this week to inform them of their plans.”

The report added, “Controllers will be offered new contracts with the new privatised companies, or will be offered a place at a non-privatised airport should they decline the first option. In the event of the controllers refusing both, then their contracts will be terminated and a severance package offered instead.”

The isolation and demobilisation of the controllers by the USCA has been backed to the hilt by Spain’s two main trade union federations, the General Workers Union (UGT), and the Workers Commissions (CC.OO). Also responsible is the IFATCA, which represents more than 50,000 air traffic control workers in its 134 members’ associations. Despite declaring in response to the attacks on the Spanish workers that the “possibility of solidarity actions by air traffic controllers across Europe is a very real one” and that a “solidarity pact exists among several European Unions, which requires them to support each other in social conflicts,” the federation has not lifted a finger.

The USCA is also affiliated to the Air Traffic Controllers European Union’s Coordination (ATCEUC), representing 13,000 workers in 28 European countries. Apart from issuing a perfunctory press release on December 4, the ATCEUC has done nothing to assist the workers in Spain. Just one further statement on the Spanish controllers was issued by the ATCEUC on December 10. Noting that it is “shocked by the violence of the decisions taken by the Spanish Government against its air traffic controllers,” it concluded, “We will therefore have no other choice than to refrain from participating in any European meeting involving the Spanish State or provider.”

That the trade union bureaucracy has paved the way for the onset of mass state repression against workers, up to and including the use of the military to smash up strikes and protests, must serve as a warning to the working class in Europe and internationally. The unions have confirmed their role as the chief obstacle to a counteroffensive by workers against the destruction of their livelihoods and democratic rights. Working people must wage a political rebellion against the rotten bureaucratic apparatus of the trade unions and build new organisations of struggle, under the democratic control of the rank and file.

LH2

11th Jan 2011, 12:16

I don't think that anyone here ranting about the quality or justification of the actions by spanish ATCOS would approve or is enjoying him/herself over the latest developments. Because this might be the sign of the times

I do believe it is a sign of the times. What remains to be seen is whether it is a negative or a positive one.

Quote from wsws.org:

I should note that http://wsws.org/ is the website of the International Committee of the Fourth International. I have absolutely nothing for or against Trotskyists, only pointing out (for the benefit of the politically challenged) that the above was written by the followers of someone who was expelled from the Soviet Union for being too communist, just so you know where it's coming from. :E

In any event, and ignoring the fact that the article is propaganda to serve the Fourth International's own goals, it agrees with my impression that the union's only goal all this time has been to serve their own leaders' interests, and sod the rank and file--let alone the general public.

The whole article is summarised by its closing statement:

Working people must wage a political rebellion against the rotten bureaucratic apparatus of the trade unions and build new organisations of struggle, under the democratic control of the rank and file.

which I support in principle, even if I doubt it could ever be made a functioning and practical reality in the long term, being more of a Ghoethist in my appreciation of liberal democracy.

So there you go :)

p_perez

11th Jan 2011, 14:23

Hello!

You can read here the alleged message of USCA´s president, Mr Camilo Cela, to our Italian colleagues after AENA´s offer:

http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/438688-dolce-vita.html#post6172849

Saludos!

belk78

12th Jan 2011, 10:55

Ok LH2, we know who they are and where the article is coming from and. Now we only need to know who the **** you are.

By the way, Aena is trying to recruit italians to train spanish atco´s in spanish ACC´s. Very wise...

McNulty

12th Jan 2011, 11:54

Whilst looking to import controllers to spain is certainly a step in the right direction, I hope they dont just plan to bring them in from the country in Europe with the second worst standard of controlling - Italy!!

Please please please bring in some UK/German/Dutch/Scandinavian controllers!!!

BrATCO

12th Jan 2011, 12:49

Now, isn't there a compatibility problem ?
Italians work stripless, Spanish work with strips, don't they ? :confused:

aldegar

12th Jan 2011, 15:35

Now, isn't there a compatibility problem ?
Italians work stripless, Spanish work with strips, don't they ?

Correct. Even more surprising, they don't have the ratings they are supposed to teach and they are not even required to have OJT experience.:ooh:

deci

12th Jan 2011, 16:45

Hello!

You can read here the alleged message of USCA´s president, Mr Camilo Cela, to our Italian colleagues after AENA´s offer:hi p_perez.. why do you say alleged? It's just a curiosity cause as you can see HERE (http://www.atmpp.it/upload/ATMPP-Sito-Nazionale/Consiglio-Direttivo-Nazionale/2956/il-presidente-di-usca-sindacato-dei-cta-spagnoli-scrive-ai-colleghi-italiani.pdf) the message is available in the website of main italian ATC union..

Atmpp Air traffic Management Professional Project (http://www.atmpp.it/)

p_perez

12th Jan 2011, 19:28

Hello deci!

When I received the message, I didn't have any confirmation that it was authentic. Now I do confirm it's from Camilo Cela.

Thank you for your help and interest!

BrATCO

12th Jan 2011, 20:01

BrATCO:

You have probably already found this but just in case...

IFATCA - The Controller (http://www.the-controller.net/)

pp

Thank you, Phalconphixer.

The article says (p. 26, interview with APROTCA) that training courses have been suspended since 1999... :eek:

Is that true ???

Ciao ci

13th Jan 2011, 13:45

Sorry guys...just to inform you....
i work in Milan Acc...
i can tell you for sure some collegues of us already asked to move to Spain...
and they r sure to earn at least 200thousand euros x year...
i don't know about your contract
but Spain
it's like a dream for italians controllers...
i'd like too...but i can't.....

Ciao ci

13th Jan 2011, 13:48

sorry...i forgot...
we have been working stripless since 2002....

qwerty2

13th Jan 2011, 14:13

Ferrovial / Press Room / Press Releases (http://www.ferrovial.com/en/index.asp?MP=18&MS=338&MN=2&id=1673)
Interesting snippet ; looks like NATS are trying to get hold of the Spanish airfields.

BrATCO

13th Jan 2011, 16:00

Ciao ci,

and they r sure to earn at least 200thousand euros x year...

So, to save money, AENA is going to hire Italian controllers 200K€ a year in order to replace Spanish who are paid 12 x 7500€ = 90 k€ (plus overtime ?)...
They would have to train them first (environment, SOPs, Spanish,...), for a 2 years contract... :=
Were I an AENA manager, I would try another solution...

My opinion is either "200 K€ : not even in their dreams".
Or AENA/Spain will lose yet a bit more. Italian controllers will keep as much as they can and get back home with the Spanish gold... :rolleyes:
Were I in the Spanish government, I would try another solution...

No need to mention : I'm not in AENA/government. And I wouldn't like to be nowadays.

qwerty2,

Interesting snippet ; looks like NATS are trying to get hold of the Spanish airfields.
So, Ferrovial is homesick...
At, least, they wouldn't have to invest too much in snowploughs !
Do they hope this will avoid them paying the fines about last month snow-mess in UK ? :}

jlms

13th Jan 2011, 19:47

and they r sure to earn at least 200thousand euros x year...

Boy, are they in for a big surprise.

Oh, and a warm welcome!

atcsstudent

13th Jan 2011, 20:16

Ciao ci, I,ll tell you right now I'm sure they woun't stay longer than a year in Spain, and forget 200K.
And thank you for helping us, we really apreciate that, expect a really warm wellcome and huges.
The thing is that I and we don't mind controllers moving around Europe, but we think is not the time to come to Spain and doing something that is against your colleagues, and by the way they are saying everyday that there are enough controllers in Spain, and why looking for other controllers to come here? AENA = lies lies and lies, you will find out.
Cheers and thank you!!

ATC Watcher

13th Jan 2011, 21:26

Ciao Ci : Use you head a bit : if you are really a controller in Milano ACC you know that you cannot work this job (ATC in an ACC) alone, it is Team work. If a Team does not like you , you cannot make it further,you know that if you've been trough OJT. Now imagine a whole OPS room against you. How long do you think you'll last ? Then thinking of coming back if it does not work ? I don't know about your union in Italy , but it it was in my unit they'd say : you wanted out ?, you'll stay out.

Also ATC in Europe is a very small world full of elephants. An Elephants have good memories.

aldegar

14th Jan 2011, 07:20

This is not a beautiful and wonderful world of fairy tales. If two sign an agreement, that's because BOTH of them expect to get a benefit. What does ENAV gets by loosing some ATCOs for a couple of years? Don't you think, maybe, there is a second (unknown) part of this agreement? Maybe once they are finished with us it's your turn. Who knows if in a couple of years AENA will be asking us to volunteer to go to Italy as instructors. We'll be more than delighted to pay back your visit...

If a Team does not like you

Why shouldn't we like our italian guests? After being harassed for a year by our company, our government, our media, our society... it's just so nice to be stabbed in the back by fellow ATCOs :*

AENA = lies lies and lies, you will find out

You are coming to hell and will be working directly for Satan.

and a warm welcome!

Absolutely, you'll be most welcome. Please, feel free to contact us if you need a place to stay, raping our wives or whatever.

deci

14th Jan 2011, 07:44

it's like a dream for italians controllerscorrect version: it was like a dream for italians controllers (and all europeans too)

Now fell free to speak for you only.

In Milano someone of you should stop dreaming..
As you surely know the only official news given by ENAV are that is a "training activity" done in a "european project" between ENAV and AENA and it will be for 2 years. Nothing said about money.

According to your nickname there's a possibility you are from Roma, if you (or someone of milano guys "ready to go") want to know something true (no dreams) about spain situation: on january the 18th there will be a meeting between some spanish collegues and roma acc personnel..
p.s. if in the future (i hope no) there will be people coming from abroad to replace ATCers in Italy (or to help ENAV in this) I'd be curious to know personal feelings of the "coalition of willings" you're referring to..
:ugh:

aldegar

14th Jan 2011, 08:06

Just read a press release from ATCEUC on this issue ("Controllers seats to hire in Spain: higher salary and military weapons in the back" - 13th january)[/URL]
[URL="http://www.atceuc.org"]www.atceuc.org (http://www.atceuc.org/upload/ATC-EUC/ATCEUC-Documents/337/controllers-seats-to-hire-in-spain-higher-salary-and-military-weapons-in-the-back.pdf)

They mention other providers participating besides ENAV. Any idea?

Deci, thanks. I hope most of your colleagues think like you do.

Nock

14th Jan 2011, 08:31

Just one question for those who are tempted / advice people to go to Spain: WHY?

Because of their salary or working conditions?
Well if you thing your working conditions are lower than those of Spain, it means that you should fight in your country to increase your salary/reduce your working hours or whatever! Going their for money makes you a profiteer and a coward that only wants to get the same priviledges of people who have fought for them.

Because it would be an interesting job?
Nobody knows what is the very definition of the job, so this answer can't be used.

Because you want to "punish" spanish ATCO for devaluating the image of ATCO?
First this is quite childish, then they have done nothing appart from playing with the system and the rules that were given to then. But the game was crooked since everything was orchestrated to lead to the point where spanish ATCO could be sacrificed on the public place. So don't worry the punishment has already exceeded the crime.

I really don't get why people would like to go to work in Spain and stab in the back of our colleagues.
Once upon a time, we had this feeling of belonging to the same community, of having to protect each other. It seems it has completely led place to individualism and selfishness.

Nock

dirtymagic

14th Jan 2011, 09:12

Well said Nock!

belk78

14th Jan 2011, 11:23

I am sure you are all interested in their last press release..

atceuc.org - Air Traffic Controllers European Unions Coordination (http://www.atceuc.org/)

Simon Spain

14th Jan 2011, 18:31

A basic problem when making decisions is a lack of information. It's all OK to say yes to great pay and an opportunity for change in your working life. Why not, especially if your original post is kept for you. Will it? Are you sure?
I have personally published a brief -by no means comprehensive- overview of the Spanish ATCO situation on uncontrolledairspain.********.com. Please take your time to read it, pose questions or ask for any clarifications. Thank you very much.
PS If in doubt, consider I would never go to your country if you were in the midst of a crisis including being militarised

DjerbaDevil

14th Jan 2011, 23:23

<H1>NATS targets Spanish expansion

14 Jan 2011
BAA’s Spanish owner Ferrovial and the UK’s air traffic control body NATS have joined forces to bid for air traffic control services in Spain.

Spain's Infrastructure Ministry has announced plans to privatise ATC at Alicante, Valencia, Ibiza, La Palma, Lanzarote, Fuerteventura, Seville, Jerez, Sabadell, Cuatro Vientos, Vigo, La Coruña and Melilla airports this year.

Santiago Olivares, chief executive of Ferrovial Services, said: ‘Our alliance with NATS combines our knowledge of the aviation industry and the specific features of the Spanish market with NATS' track record in air traffic control and its unique experience in the privatisation of such a sensitive sector.’

Paul Reid, managing director NATS Services, added: ‘We are very much looking forward to developing further our relationship with Ferrovial, building on the strong links we have already established in the UK.

‘Since privatisation, NATS has demonstrated an excellent track record in safety and quality of service, leading the industry in reducing ATC-related delays.’

NATS, which became a public private partnership in 2001 with the UK Government owning a 49% stake and the rest of the shares privately held, recently reported its sixth successive year of profit.

It currently manages around 2.2m flights a year in the UK and eastern North Atlantic, through some 2,000 controllers based at 15 airports and two operations centres.

NATS Services is its commercial business, which works with airports, air navigation service providers and other customers worldwide.

Ferrovial, meanwhile, founded in 1952, is one of the world's biggest infrastructure groups, operating airports, toll roads, construction and services divisions, with a presence in over 45 countries.

It acquired BAA in 2006.

</H1>

saintex2002

15th Jan 2011, 10:10

Again 'n again...
If we really want to save our bones...it's time to create our own...etc...etc...
No other exit...

aldegar

15th Jan 2011, 13:13

I was watching the news in TV and they just said that 100 military controllers will be trained to take over civilian control if necessary. That could be one of the reasons they are hiring italian instructors.

kontrolor

15th Jan 2011, 19:20

I don't know what the hell is with the some people still ranting about Spanish ATCOS...don't you see we are well beyond ranting and fingerpointing? Do you realy wish that ATM systems are privatised? Do you realy wish that any infrastructure is privatised? Do you realy think that competition in ATM will bring any good?
I think that the privatisation of British rail system showed us everything we need to know about that.

and think where this world is heading to - where operational staff is held hostage and delt with as if they are terrorists or criminals...where is your bloody sense of solidarity with brothers in arms? If crews would start an uprising/strike due to unbearable working conditions, we would all support you. The question of quality of the service is now in second or even in third plan...what is going on in Spain is fascism. And if you would like to see it working, go to Hungary...they have just introuced new kind of totalitarism...

SINGAPURCANAC

15th Jan 2011, 20:01

Do you realy wish that ATM systems are privatised? Do you realy wish that any infrastructure is privatised? Do you realy think that competition in ATM will bring any good?
I think that the privatisation of British rail system showed us everything we need to know about that.
asking me or someone else......:E:confused::}

ATM System is SERVICE not RULER,for further references check Mesa Selimovic book " CASTLE" :ok:

there is no reason to believe that infrastructure is purely state business. there are hundreds of good privat examples.
British ATM system is good reference. in that direction. If you need more good examples I will provide it.
Also there are good State ATM companies ,absolutely safe,expeditious.....
So there is no one answer.

Competition is always good. It is so nature. Of course if you believe in evolution.

Spain will be perfect example of "nature processes" in ATM world.
If they do not solve problem with ATM, before the March/April they will have huge problems with touristic season. that will effect tourist industry and ATCOs will loose any public suport. In such situation any deterioration of T&C is so easy. Rulers dream.:ugh::{:=

Do you really bellieve that tourist will flow to Ibiza or to gran Canaria if problem with ATM persist during the main Toursitic fairs,all around Europe?

No Chance.
Do you remember Greece last year?. They had some uncertainty,during the first three/four months of 2010. Nothing special for Balkan state, but uncertainty as such. Figures for last year , 20 to 30 % less tourist ,in areas with the Dutch and German tourists up to 80% less tourists. if you need pictures of empty towns and beaches ,just ask. After that everyone agrees that "measures" should be taken.
Too late, too little.
I am afraid that it could happen to our Spanish colleagues.
Unfortunately.

LH2

15th Jan 2011, 22:56

I don't know what the hell is with the some people still ranting about Spanish ATCOS...don't you see we are well beyond ranting and fingerpointing?

Speak for yourself :E

Do you realy wish that ATM systems are privatised?

Do you realy wish that any infrastructure is privatised? Do you realy think that competition in ATM will bring any good?

In Spain? Big yes to all three :ok: The current service is rubbish, so well worth a shot at trying something else.

and think where this world is heading to - where operational staff is held hostage and delt with as if they are terrorists or criminals...

Yeah, yeah... You know what they say: at least you can negotiate with a terrorist, so please do not drag their good name through the mud. :) As for being criminals... I do believe there are a number of judicial proceedings ongoing, some of which under criminal law. Glad you asked.

where is your bloody sense of solidarity with brothers in arms? If crews would start an uprising/strike due to unbearable working conditions, we would all support you.

How about supporting us pilots by offering a professional and efficient service? Ask yourself this: if controllers in say the UK, Germany, or Norway had a serious labour conflict, do you doubt they would have the support of every pilot who's ever flown in their airspace? Why do you think this doesn't apply to Spain?

The question of quality of the service is now in second or even in third plan...

That's an excellent improvement! For you lot that had never been in any plans before, so I welcome the news.

what is going on in Spain is fascism. And if you would like to see it working, go to Hungary...they have just introuced new kind of totalitarism...

Oh the horror! :}

Problem with Spaniards is that they never admit to being wrong :cool:

DjerbaDevil

15th Jan 2011, 23:39

To clarify what would appear to be an effort on the part of some posters here to avoid telling all the truth, the press article and the reasons why AENA are asking for Italian controllers to work in Spain temporarily, is copied below:

Very brief translation and summary of the Spanish press article copied below with apologies for errors and omissions and additions:

AENA recruits controllers in Italy for recycling redundant personnel

Madrid. 12/1/11.- AENA has decided to ask their Italian equivalent ENAV to resolve the lack of controller instructors for a period of approximately 16 months or two years.

Two circulars have been distributed at the principal ENAV air navigation centres offering an undisclosed number of Italian controllers the possibility of joining the principal control centres at Madrid, Seville, Palma and Gran Canaria.

In the first circular, controllers are invited to apply, who may be interested in a "temporary position" at the above mentioned AENA centres of control, as instructors. The candidates must apply before the 21st of January. They must be in possession of all the appropriate licences and a high level of knowledge of English.

In the second circular they are advised of the selection process and the requirement of guarantees that those chosen will remain in Spain for the period contracted.

AENA sources said that the recruitment is the result of an agreement signed with ENAV and the objective is that the Italian controllers will be acting in the Spanish control centres as instructors of the Spanish professionals who become redundant at the air traffic control towers due to the privatisation process, which has been launched by the Ministry of Public Works at 13 airports, namely at Alicante, Valencia, Ibiza, La Palma, Lanzarote, Fuerteventura, Seville, Jerez, Sabadell, Cuatro Vientos, Vigo, La Coruña and Melilla airports. (The last part is an addition from a posting in this thread #1220)

AENA recluta en Italia controladores para reciclar al personal excedente

Madrid. 12/1/11.- El proveedor de servicios de navegación aérea español, AENA, ha decidido echar mano de sus buenas relaciones con su homólogo italiano, ENAV, para resolver un problema de falta de personal de instrucción durante un periodo que oscilará entre 16 meses y dos años.

El acuerdo para que un número indeterminado de controladores aéreos italianos pueda incorporarse en un plazo breve de tiempo a los principales centros de control de ruta de AENA ubicados en Madrid, Barcelona, Sevilla, Palma y Gran Canaria, se ha articulado mediante dos circulares que se han distribuido en las principales instalaciones de navegación de ENAV.

En la primera, se solicitan controladores interesados en ocupar un "empleo temporal" en los centros de AENA anteriormente citados, en calidad de instructores. Los candidatos deben cumplimentar su petición antes del próximo 21 de enero. Se exige, entre otros requisitos, poseer la licencia comunitaria de controlador de tráfico aéreo, habilitaciones en el máximo nivel de especialización de control de tráfico en ruta y un alto nivel de conocimiento de inglés.

En la segunda circular se detallan los extremos sobre los que se hará la selección entre todos los candidatos y se solicitan garantías para que los elegidos cumplan en su totalidad el plazo que permanecerán desplazados en España.

Fuentes de AENA dijeron que esta convocatoria responde a un acuerdo firmado con ENAV que tiene como objetivo que los controladores italianos puedan actuar en los centros de control españoles como instructores de los profesionales españoles que resulten excedentes en el proceso de privatización del servicio de las torres de control que ha sido lanzado por el Ministerio de Fomento el pasado mes de diciembre.

BrATCO

16th Jan 2011, 07:13

Kontrolor,
I think that the privatisation of British rail system showed us everything we need to know about that.

As shows privatisation of French rail, mail, electricity, water, health, pensions, motorways,...

Prices never decrease, investments stop, services fade away then prices increase.
Never mind as long as shareholders get their incomes, but it costs the community a lot more than before for a result that could be questionned.

The question of quality of the service is now in second or even in third plan...what is going on in Spain is fascism. And if you would like to see it working, go to Hungary...they have just introuced new kind of totalitarism...

Would you please share your knowledge about Hungary ?
Another thread, maybe ?

SINGAPURCANAC,

Competition is always good. It is so nature. Of course if you believe in evolution.

Can one believe in evolution and still wonder about humans flying ? :suspect:

Competition is always good when it's about being as good as one can.
I don't agree with you when competition is all about earning more than the neighbour.
At least not in aviation.
In ATC, the service is safety, everything else is litterature.
Safety in aviation needs investment. Shareholders need as little investment as possible...
You might be right : Darwin will sort the situation out. Just hope the only loss will be money.

I found an interresting link in another thread about Human Factors, thus safety when talking aviation.
This is the thread :
http://www.pprune.org/safety-crm-qa-emergency-response-planning/437767-human-factors-incidents.html
This is the link :
Serious about improving morale? (http://redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&xs=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.humanresourcesmagazine.com.au%2Farticle s%2Ff2%2F0c050ef2.asp&sref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fsafety-crm-qa-emergency-response-planning%2F437767-human-factors-incidents.html)

This shows everything AENA's managers should have done in order to avoid Darwin's strike.

LH2,

Problem with Spaniards is that they never admit to being wrong http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/cool.gif

Sure, you always do !

Djerbadevil,

AENA has decided to ask their Italian equivalent ENAV to resolve the lack of controller instructors

I remember this :

Italians work stripless, Spanish work with strips, don't they ? http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/confused.gif

And this :

Correct. Even more surprising, they don't have the ratings they are supposed to teach

And this :

we have been working stripless since 2002....

Makes me think that this time, the trainees might surpass the trainers... before the training begins.
Another loss of money, another Darwin's strike...