ACC Complexity scores.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ACC Complexity scores.
On the top desk yesterday at MACC there appeared a table entitled;
"ACC and Terminal Results Table Annex11. (Table 15).
It appeared to be a European document rating the complexity of the traffic at European ACC's. Caused a bit of controversy as the ratings went thus;
1st for complexity-London TC.
2nd-Skyguide
3rd-DFS Frankfurt
4th DFS Frankfurt
5th NATS MACC...and it went on but not until it reached number 28 was LACC AC mentioned, with NATS SCOACC coming in at number 53.
This seems to be a European Annex and maybe someone can help me with it's origin. If it is indeed genuine then the scribbled line on the bottom 'Band 4, we know the score' seems even more incontrovertable.
At a time when even our GM has admitted that we (MACC) are at crisis point with staffing, where we have been told that, even though we will be getting busier, our manning will not increase-and will even drop-before the move to SCOACC; this seems to put fuel to the fire of the whole banding issue (not again I hear you cry!).
At a time when TC is 30 controllers over staffed (from our GM) the fact that we are now regularly rostered for 2 hours on with half hour breaks and even then are sometimes unable to split busy sectors is anathema to our safety culture. ATCO's are becoming far more fatigued, all of our perks (which we all know exist) have long since gone, sickness is already on the increase and guys are not coming in for AAVA's (which we're still paid less for even though it's a valuation of the worth of your time off) because the shifts are leaving them too tired. This unit is now run on AAVA's, they WILL begin to dry up;then where do we go.We know our southern colleagues think we're wingers and our northern colleagues are a bit unsettled by the fact we dont want to join them; but for a unit ranked 5th in comlexity in Europe by an outside agency surely the very fact that our GM admitting that in our present condition we are in crisis demands urgent action. What action? Well...that's for far wiser people than me (our management?), but I would respectfully suggest that if our situation is not resolved somehow...then this unit will collapse long before the scottish move. A genuinely concerned worker in a genuinely (no really) busier ACC than we are given credit for.
ps Dont forget that when we DO get to scottish our scores will be incorporated making our average probably then lower than AC's even though the MACC sectors will, by then, probably be even busier than they are now.
"ACC and Terminal Results Table Annex11. (Table 15).
It appeared to be a European document rating the complexity of the traffic at European ACC's. Caused a bit of controversy as the ratings went thus;
1st for complexity-London TC.
2nd-Skyguide
3rd-DFS Frankfurt
4th DFS Frankfurt
5th NATS MACC...and it went on but not until it reached number 28 was LACC AC mentioned, with NATS SCOACC coming in at number 53.
This seems to be a European Annex and maybe someone can help me with it's origin. If it is indeed genuine then the scribbled line on the bottom 'Band 4, we know the score' seems even more incontrovertable.
At a time when even our GM has admitted that we (MACC) are at crisis point with staffing, where we have been told that, even though we will be getting busier, our manning will not increase-and will even drop-before the move to SCOACC; this seems to put fuel to the fire of the whole banding issue (not again I hear you cry!).
At a time when TC is 30 controllers over staffed (from our GM) the fact that we are now regularly rostered for 2 hours on with half hour breaks and even then are sometimes unable to split busy sectors is anathema to our safety culture. ATCO's are becoming far more fatigued, all of our perks (which we all know exist) have long since gone, sickness is already on the increase and guys are not coming in for AAVA's (which we're still paid less for even though it's a valuation of the worth of your time off) because the shifts are leaving them too tired. This unit is now run on AAVA's, they WILL begin to dry up;then where do we go.We know our southern colleagues think we're wingers and our northern colleagues are a bit unsettled by the fact we dont want to join them; but for a unit ranked 5th in comlexity in Europe by an outside agency surely the very fact that our GM admitting that in our present condition we are in crisis demands urgent action. What action? Well...that's for far wiser people than me (our management?), but I would respectfully suggest that if our situation is not resolved somehow...then this unit will collapse long before the scottish move. A genuinely concerned worker in a genuinely (no really) busier ACC than we are given credit for.
ps Dont forget that when we DO get to scottish our scores will be incorporated making our average probably then lower than AC's even though the MACC sectors will, by then, probably be even busier than they are now.
Last edited by Mahaba; 27th Jun 2007 at 14:13. Reason: sp!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southampton
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps this should be on the NATS forum?
Interesting that MACC scores so high on "complexity" but perhaps not so surprising considering the complete lack of Air Traffic reasons for giving MACC the extra responsibilities when NATS managment were trying to sort out the staffing at LACC.
Given that the situation is as you describe at MACC what do YOU suggest CAN be done? Could moving sectors back to LACC along with some staff help? Would that have the support of those moved and those staying behind? Would EGCC approach moving to TC help free up some more area bods? Can you train out of your staffing shortfall i.e. do you have the capacity to take double or triple your usual number of trainees while training at LACC winds down to deal with iFacts? Could Scottish take sectors early and help staff them? Do they have the extra staff? Do they have the positions available to work them?
No point waiting for our managment to come up with a solution, they got you into this mess in the first place!!!
Interesting that MACC scores so high on "complexity" but perhaps not so surprising considering the complete lack of Air Traffic reasons for giving MACC the extra responsibilities when NATS managment were trying to sort out the staffing at LACC.
Given that the situation is as you describe at MACC what do YOU suggest CAN be done? Could moving sectors back to LACC along with some staff help? Would that have the support of those moved and those staying behind? Would EGCC approach moving to TC help free up some more area bods? Can you train out of your staffing shortfall i.e. do you have the capacity to take double or triple your usual number of trainees while training at LACC winds down to deal with iFacts? Could Scottish take sectors early and help staff them? Do they have the extra staff? Do they have the positions available to work them?
No point waiting for our managment to come up with a solution, they got you into this mess in the first place!!!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southampton
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not many are being faced with a move that is so unpopular staff are prepared to move to Canada instead....
Seriously though, MACCs forced move does make them rather worse off than most other units.
Seriously though, MACCs forced move does make them rather worse off than most other units.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swanwick, England
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the complexity is determined by an outside agency then how can they achieve that without being sat plugged in on the sector?
Spys in our midst?
Plus, if TC is 30 over then how come they never have a co-ordinator when busy?
Plus, COMPLEXITY versus SUSTAINED traffic, argue this now please
Spys in our midst?
Plus, if TC is 30 over then how come they never have a co-ordinator when busy?
Plus, COMPLEXITY versus SUSTAINED traffic, argue this now please
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southampton
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Complexity in Air Traffic is difficult to quantify and even harder to compare across sectors let alone units. Nor is that really the issue this thread raises.
According to Mahaba the MACC GM believes the unit is in a "crisis position". So what do the MACC staff think can be done about it?
According to Mahaba the MACC GM believes the unit is in a "crisis position". So what do the MACC staff think can be done about it?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 30bods at TC? That came from our GM so however he arrived at that figure or the makeup of the numbers I really dont know. And again, until we can find the source of the report, how the complexity rating is achieved at, again Im unaware though I do know that the top desk Harry Potter prediction devices do factor in complexity so maybe theres a connection to dat there somewher. As for resolving the situation? Big question and in truth one for someone other than me, maybe if we'd been listened to earlier on some of these problems could have been stopped.
Manc boy. Why does this always develop into the same old arguments? Cant we put that to one side and just accept outside agency figures (if they are indeed correct and unbiased)? Maybe the sectors wouldnt have been moved to MACC if they'd listened to what we were saying and not what they thought they knew. Maybe that would have helped, I couldnt say. Moving sectors back to LACC? I doubt that would ever happen. More bods? We cant cross train or extension train many of the ones we have. Some of our staff have gone part time (they've had enough) we also have lots of part valids to compound the problem visa vie training folk up. So the answers? I honestly dont know and with all of the guys with extra responsiblities (LCE's OJTI's WTO's LCC's) having to do their admin in their 30 minute breaks, there's not a great deal of time for us lowly ATCO's to figure this out in depth. The **** might begin to hit the fan even more when those intending to leave before our forced (Arkady's word not mine) move begin to see their plans developing to where they are able to leave. Im not one but there are more than you would think willing to downsize and retrain than move their families north.
Thankyou Arkady, you seem to be a voice of reason with either no axe to grind or no need to defend your southern location, after all we are not criticizing any of our colleagues, just our managements total inadequacy at keeping an excellent workforce (all locations) in the right state of mind to carry out what I consider to be one of the best careers available anywhere.
Manc boy. Why does this always develop into the same old arguments? Cant we put that to one side and just accept outside agency figures (if they are indeed correct and unbiased)? Maybe the sectors wouldnt have been moved to MACC if they'd listened to what we were saying and not what they thought they knew. Maybe that would have helped, I couldnt say. Moving sectors back to LACC? I doubt that would ever happen. More bods? We cant cross train or extension train many of the ones we have. Some of our staff have gone part time (they've had enough) we also have lots of part valids to compound the problem visa vie training folk up. So the answers? I honestly dont know and with all of the guys with extra responsiblities (LCE's OJTI's WTO's LCC's) having to do their admin in their 30 minute breaks, there's not a great deal of time for us lowly ATCO's to figure this out in depth. The **** might begin to hit the fan even more when those intending to leave before our forced (Arkady's word not mine) move begin to see their plans developing to where they are able to leave. Im not one but there are more than you would think willing to downsize and retrain than move their families north.
Thankyou Arkady, you seem to be a voice of reason with either no axe to grind or no need to defend your southern location, after all we are not criticizing any of our colleagues, just our managements total inadequacy at keeping an excellent workforce (all locations) in the right state of mind to carry out what I consider to be one of the best careers available anywhere.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southampton
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do you doubt moving sectors back to LACC would never happen? Is that management or staff resistance? Given the state of flux down here at the moment (iFacts, training colleges, CTC, TC moving) I'm sure more sectors could be accommodated if 1) the decision were made soon enough and 2) there is a compelling reason to do it.
Or to put it another way, do we need to rethink where we are going to perform all the ACC tasks (including training) before we start building new sites or refurbishing old ones?
Or to put it another way, do we need to rethink where we are going to perform all the ACC tasks (including training) before we start building new sites or refurbishing old ones?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our GM has stated within the last week that there will definitely be NO MORE lateral (ATCO2-ATCO2) moves out of MACC for anyone. Kinda makes a travesty of their justification of moving us under the auspices of the 'mobile grade' when they can cancel that when they see fit. Honestly I fear collapse is on the way. Even when asked where our gym or sports facilities were at our new purpose built centre (NPC) we were told by Mr Barron that we will get what we're given and that's that. So it's not so much a two centre strategy but a one and three quarter strategy. Whilst MACC still sufferes the indignity of not even being mentioned in NATS media as existing now as the third centre. Need I go on?
As for your last point, I believe the building began long before the serious thinking did. To paraphrase an old Prime Minister...this NATS is not for turning!...and look what happened to her.
As for your last point, I believe the building began long before the serious thinking did. To paraphrase an old Prime Minister...this NATS is not for turning!...and look what happened to her.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southampton
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry I meant the building going on down here. If our TDU were moved to CTC (which was on the cards not that long ago) there would have been plenty of space for the MACC operation at Swanwick.
You are probably right, it would not happen now, NATS missed their chance when the resistance to your move North became obvious and an alternative may have helped retain some staff.
It does make you wonder whether losing people was the intention from the beginning.
You are probably right, it would not happen now, NATS missed their chance when the resistance to your move North became obvious and an alternative may have helped retain some staff.
It does make you wonder whether losing people was the intention from the beginning.
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ark, your comment regarding people taking the mosey elsewhere does certainly warrants recognition, but that happens elsewhere as well (methinks the Nav Can ship has sailed by the sounds of it).
I'm not trying to demean your situation at all, it's just another page in what's going on in units all over the world.
I'm not trying to demean your situation at all, it's just another page in what's going on in units all over the world.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Swanwick, England
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mahaba, I'm not starting the same old argument again, you did!
I merely want to know how an outside agency can come up with figures that only internal agencies would be able to get.
Were they sat counting traffic like they do when counting cars on the road?
Plus, TLPD is merely a guide and doesn't always tell the true story
I merely want to know how an outside agency can come up with figures that only internal agencies would be able to get.
Were they sat counting traffic like they do when counting cars on the road?
Plus, TLPD is merely a guide and doesn't always tell the true story
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Southampton
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Jer I think you've missed the point. I agree, MACCs problems plague most ATC units the world over - except for the move, which is not commonplace. I'm not saying they shouldn't be moving, there are good reasons why they should, but the whole situation has been handled very poorly by NATS (hence resignations and retirements) to the companies detriment.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mancboy-If I misunderstood your comment then I apologize unreservedly. As for how the figures were arrived at, like I said-I've honestly no idea. The document was available for all to see in the Ops room. Its origin and even its authenticity to me is still unknown. Im hoping someone out there may be able to verify its authenticity and content or not. As for our TLPD, in general I think our top desk guys do quite well with it but, as you say, it's not entirely accurate and we still get caught out. Problem is that when we do get caught out, sometimes we cant split and any urgent flow measures we try to apply are often implemented too late to take effect. I can remember a controller mentioning that his last hour or so had been too busy, to which he was told the traffic and the complexity were off the top of the scale for that period but as the split was not available, it wasn't mentioned to him in case he became 'scared'. I think you'll agree it's not the best picture to have in your head on your way into work.
Ohcirrej
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ark, all due respect to you mate, but I don't miss the point. Many on the move? No. But it's not the first. The other problems listed in the original thread.........I can certainly add to it, as probably others can. Why the hell has it evolved to this?