NATS Destinations - YOU DECIDE
Time merchant
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sounds like a variation on the theme of management consultants using your wristwatch to tell you the time.
So you guys give them the answer and they take the money and the plaudits. Yeah, sure.
So you guys give them the answer and they take the money and the plaudits. Yeah, sure.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One point has been raised. One of the targets, sorry, destinations is; 'No safety Significant Events (ie. airproxes, etc) will be tolerated'. I wonder what will happen to the ATCO that has an airprox (perhaps through no fault of his or her own) in April 2007? Off to Room 101, never to be heard from again!
And if to improve safety is one of our new targets, sorry, destinations....I'm so confused as to what we've been trying to do up until now!
And then of course there's the great one where 'Managers will be empowered and rewarded.......' Nothing about other, non-managerial staff being empowered and rewarded!
And if to improve safety is one of our new targets, sorry, destinations....I'm so confused as to what we've been trying to do up until now!
And then of course there's the great one where 'Managers will be empowered and rewarded.......' Nothing about other, non-managerial staff being empowered and rewarded!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Costa del Hampshire
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gonzo, couldn't agree more. Why was the word TOLERATED used? I'm not sure that I want to work for an organisation that has a fear of reprisal if you make human errors.
Kudos to the first person that does dare to "defy" the Red Baron and drop a clanger... Will the Union be strong enough to stand by said controller and protect him/her?
Kudos to the first person that does dare to "defy" the Red Baron and drop a clanger... Will the Union be strong enough to stand by said controller and protect him/her?
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally, I think it show how out of touch whoever came up with this brilliant scheme is with the worker bees on the shop floor. Maybe another destination of "Ineffective or incompetent management will not be tolerated" should be added.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats all very well Jer but think of the layers and layers of management that will need to be heaved out of the door. I've said it b4 and I'll say it again. The "we will not tolerate airproxes" destination, whilst noble in intent, is extremely inept in it's wording and totally unachievable. Who goes to work with the intent to have a whoopsie ? If we had enough staff to man the required positions when it does blow then there would be less chance of these things happening. The whole thing stinks of a cheap sideshow and when this lot have been given the heave ho we will be faced with another load of waffle from our next saviour. perhaps I'm being over cynical, would love to be proved wrong...........still waiting.....just like TC 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ISZ - not the end of the world, but you can see it from here.
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rant on
I haven't put anything on the intranet yet, but I''m sure I will.
"SSE s will not be tolerated"
So now we've got a blame culture, and an ar5e covering cultutre instead of a safety culture.
Some ATCOs will now, instead of holding their hands up and admitting to minor indiscretions, (where electronic spying equipment permits) will cover them up, and important lessons of what went wrong, and what could be done better will be left unlearnt. Anyone on a SMWG, will find less and less to do, I can guarantee it.
What's the point of a safety management culture when incidents / occurences will be hidden? Ah yes, it looks good to SRG. It won't soon.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying SSEs should be encouraged.
I look at the older guys at my unit, and I can't help thinking they've had the best years of ATC.
Rant off
I haven't put anything on the intranet yet, but I''m sure I will.
"SSE s will not be tolerated"
So now we've got a blame culture, and an ar5e covering cultutre instead of a safety culture.
Some ATCOs will now, instead of holding their hands up and admitting to minor indiscretions, (where electronic spying equipment permits) will cover them up, and important lessons of what went wrong, and what could be done better will be left unlearnt. Anyone on a SMWG, will find less and less to do, I can guarantee it.
What's the point of a safety management culture when incidents / occurences will be hidden? Ah yes, it looks good to SRG. It won't soon.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying SSEs should be encouraged.
I look at the older guys at my unit, and I can't help thinking they've had the best years of ATC.
Rant off
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ref the "Will not tollerate" phraseology....
If you look at the "destinations" intranet site (yep, it's got it's own pages!), you will find an ideas page with links to each destination.
I notice that the "Will not tollerate" SSEs destination has already drawn a lot of comments from ATCOs mostly pointing out the blindingly obvious, that this is at best poorly worded and at worst a yet another indication of how far out of touch with reality the top table are. It's also not achievable.
The only comment from a manager seems to be: "stop moaning". Not very constructive, when the people that know about these things are pointing out an error.
Have a look yourself (if you can) . You might like to add your own comments.
Rgds BEX
If you look at the "destinations" intranet site (yep, it's got it's own pages!), you will find an ideas page with links to each destination.
I notice that the "Will not tollerate" SSEs destination has already drawn a lot of comments from ATCOs mostly pointing out the blindingly obvious, that this is at best poorly worded and at worst a yet another indication of how far out of touch with reality the top table are. It's also not achievable.
The only comment from a manager seems to be: "stop moaning". Not very constructive, when the people that know about these things are pointing out an error.
Have a look yourself (if you can) . You might like to add your own comments.
Rgds BEX
<<Ignorant question here, but who grades SSEs is it SRG or the unit (ie ATC OPS/Training)?>>
Perfectly legit question GT3. SSEs are graded on unit, normally by DWMs or above, who have attended a SSE grading course.
And to pre-empt a follow-up question; no there is no pressure to err on the low side!
Regards
letMfly
Perfectly legit question GT3. SSEs are graded on unit, normally by DWMs or above, who have attended a SSE grading course.
And to pre-empt a follow-up question; no there is no pressure to err on the low side!
Regards
letMfly
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: solent-on-sea
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems, as I read it now, a TCAS RA is a SSE2. Now they occur every now and again usually due to high rate climb/descent. No error on anyone's behalf, no loss of seperation, just life. How are they going to be stopped?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that the key phrase in there somewhere is "NATS attributable" so screw ups ARE allowed as long as we didn't cause them !!!!!
write out 200 times
I will correctly separate all aircraft.
on my desk by monday morning or it's after school detention.
write out 200 times
I will correctly separate all aircraft.
on my desk by monday morning or it's after school detention.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignorant question here, but who grades SSEs is it SRG or the unit (ie ATC OPS/Training)?
Of course, marks may go up as well as down as a result of any moderation
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 531
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was an interesting rating of an incident at LHR in the last few months. Sorry no it wasnt actually an incident, simply an unhappy pilot. However it was graded in the non-tolerable zone.