Air Traffic Control Assistants
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: at home
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so, in a systems outage situation, ATCOs attending to what were once ATSA tasks in addition to their own tasks is no less safe?
Having worked in an EFPS-equipped tower, I agree that the new technology can take the ATSA requirement away - I've seen it firsthand. However I've also seen one particular EFPS-equipped ATCO position go into one-armed paperhanger mode - even when the system is working OK - just down to sheer workload.
If the system went tilt (and there's never a guarantee that it won't) then for those left in the tower, the policy to remove the support staff may just get called into question.
Having worked in an EFPS-equipped tower, I agree that the new technology can take the ATSA requirement away - I've seen it firsthand. However I've also seen one particular EFPS-equipped ATCO position go into one-armed paperhanger mode - even when the system is working OK - just down to sheer workload.
If the system went tilt (and there's never a guarantee that it won't) then for those left in the tower, the policy to remove the support staff may just get called into question.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Near Stalyvegas
Age: 78
Posts: 2,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the system went tilt (and there's never a guarantee that it won't) then for those left in the tower, the policy to remove the support staff may just get called into question.
Lights blue touchpaper, and stands well back
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"cdtaylor_nats - It doesn't need to be safer, just no less safe"
True, but a knowledgable person on the team carrying out the risk assessment should be instantly able to argue that it will be less safe!
ALARP shouldn't concentrate on just the cost saving after many years!
I am sure the initial outlay for the technology will be more than the first years annual salaries for all ATCAs!
True, but a knowledgable person on the team carrying out the risk assessment should be instantly able to argue that it will be less safe!
ALARP shouldn't concentrate on just the cost saving after many years!
I am sure the initial outlay for the technology will be more than the first years annual salaries for all ATCAs!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Long White Cloud
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice one Chiglet, try adding centre to tower and it's closer to the unit in question. Does anyone work in a centre environment with EFPS where there are no assistants and no planners? That is what they are proposing.
As for the comments about evolving the position, the only way to do this (and most sensible option) is to close down the current waste-of-space-and-totally-unprofessional-get-paid-more-to-do-less operations department and give the tasks to the assistants (who are more capable and deserving).
As for the comments about evolving the position, the only way to do this (and most sensible option) is to close down the current waste-of-space-and-totally-unprofessional-get-paid-more-to-do-less operations department and give the tasks to the assistants (who are more capable and deserving).
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Isle of No Name
Age: 71
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said OA32
With one or two operations departments closing around the countyside it sounds a good idea to follow them.
I take it the operations department is new to where you are talking about??
Some operations departments can be worth they wait in gold when as they do the job as per the tin.
Some of the tasks done by the operations department is better done by the Air Traffic staff as they are in a better position to handle the traffic.
Some operations staff call them selves controllers, which is a joke, the only thing they get close to, is controlling stand alllocation which is not the same as an Air Traffic Controller.
With one or two operations departments closing around the countyside it sounds a good idea to follow them.
I take it the operations department is new to where you are talking about??
Some operations departments can be worth they wait in gold when as they do the job as per the tin.
Some of the tasks done by the operations department is better done by the Air Traffic staff as they are in a better position to handle the traffic.
Some operations staff call them selves controllers, which is a joke, the only thing they get close to, is controlling stand alllocation which is not the same as an Air Traffic Controller.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having worked in an EFPS-equipped tower, I agree that the new technology can take the ATSA requirement away - I've seen it firsthand. However I've also seen one particular EFPS-equipped ATCO position go into one-armed paperhanger mode - even when the system is working OK - just down to sheer workload.
The difference is that when all is working fine, EFPS doesnt need someone to put strips into holders, EFPS links to other systems, such as the movement log, FIDS displays, connects to various CDM tools, so apron planning, Flow, taxi checks etc all again become automatically done rather than needing the ATSA.
Which ever system you look at, if they fail, then **** hits the fan, workload will increase, the fact remains that while the system is working the EFPS route means no Manual input needed from an ATSA. So make EFPS and these systems robost reduces risk of any problems, improves risk score, then mitigate against it failing, so flow control, other ATCOS to help etc and then it suddenly becomes a viable option.
Regards cost of equipment agaisnt cost of ATSA. Well first off, NATS (or in case of this post, the place where TAX isnt a swear word) doesnt become such an issue, cant speak completely for the unit in question, but most NATS units are unlikely to have funded the total cost of EFPS, with it being shared or totally funded by the Aerdome operator. NATS reduces cost in staffing, which makes NATS richer, some of this can be passed back to the aerodrome operator so reduces cost of contract, its a one off cost, where the ATSA salary is a continuous and increasing cost, along with all the other issues people cause that technology doesnt. The airport may make other cost saving gains, by being able to reduce their ops dept becuase of other automation that can be used that links into the EFPS and CDM software, so they see the benefits of paying for it. They also likely to pay for it, becuase if they choose to bin NATS they dont want NATS running off with the equipment!
All Nails in the coffin for the ATSA....and one less Safety Accountability on the list in the SMS...one less reason to have them, hence why again to keep ATSA's for all the reasons that those of us who value the "UnDocumented" Work that they do. I say that ATSA's need to not let the Unions or their own attitudes make them not able to take on more roles. So training, Simulator work, do tasks that maybe Apron do(Stand Planning) other project work, etc are all tasks that the assistants should look to getting involved in, so that we can argue that just because some of their task have gone elsewhere they are needed to for the others.
So two choices, go with the one option that someone posted, run now and find another job.....or involve the role in the change and become part of the way forward. otherwise...however much we argue it, ATSA's are/will be a dying breed.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite protestations from some, 3miles makes a lot of sense in his/her posts.
ATSA duties are being pared down with the advent of new technology... however there are lots of opportunities for ATSAs to make themselves too valuable to lose (besides the day to day tasks they do at the moment). Adding strings to your bow now makes sense, because like it or not, change is coming and it will be survival of the fittest.
The question you have to ask yourself is do you want to continue to have a career in ATC, even if it means it won't necessarily be in the traditional roles of a tower/centre ATSA?
If you do, then you'll probably find that the new tasks/challenges are rewarding in a job satisfaction type of way and you should be adding to your portfolio now.
If you want to resist change and are not interested in taking on new challenges then maybe the ATC of tomorrow is not what you are cut out for.
ATSAs get a very good wage for what they do - and that is not taking anything away from the fact that a good ATSA can make or break a sector and help out in times of trouble - that wage, coupled with an interest in learning more about the job would have me taking on extra tasks in a jiffy if I was an ATSA.
We all know how weak our unions have been recently - if you sit on your hands and listen to them when they advise you not to take on extraneous tasks because they will fight your corner, you are asking for trouble.
The ATSA task is evolving, and will encompass more and more duties outside of the Ops room/VCR - this is only going to become more true as time goes on. If the individual ATSA does not evolve, then they will fall by the wayside... sticking your head in the sand and saying ATCOs don't support you etc will not stop that task evolution!
Yes, you should expect support from colleagues but even if you get that support, it alone will not necessarily stop the rot. Look after number one if you want continued employment - it's not selfish and still fits in with beng a team player, but it is what needs to be done to make yourself as attractive to your employer as you can.
ATSA duties are being pared down with the advent of new technology... however there are lots of opportunities for ATSAs to make themselves too valuable to lose (besides the day to day tasks they do at the moment). Adding strings to your bow now makes sense, because like it or not, change is coming and it will be survival of the fittest.
The question you have to ask yourself is do you want to continue to have a career in ATC, even if it means it won't necessarily be in the traditional roles of a tower/centre ATSA?
If you do, then you'll probably find that the new tasks/challenges are rewarding in a job satisfaction type of way and you should be adding to your portfolio now.
If you want to resist change and are not interested in taking on new challenges then maybe the ATC of tomorrow is not what you are cut out for.
ATSAs get a very good wage for what they do - and that is not taking anything away from the fact that a good ATSA can make or break a sector and help out in times of trouble - that wage, coupled with an interest in learning more about the job would have me taking on extra tasks in a jiffy if I was an ATSA.
We all know how weak our unions have been recently - if you sit on your hands and listen to them when they advise you not to take on extraneous tasks because they will fight your corner, you are asking for trouble.
The ATSA task is evolving, and will encompass more and more duties outside of the Ops room/VCR - this is only going to become more true as time goes on. If the individual ATSA does not evolve, then they will fall by the wayside... sticking your head in the sand and saying ATCOs don't support you etc will not stop that task evolution!
Yes, you should expect support from colleagues but even if you get that support, it alone will not necessarily stop the rot. Look after number one if you want continued employment - it's not selfish and still fits in with beng a team player, but it is what needs to be done to make yourself as attractive to your employer as you can.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Long White Cloud
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I agree that times are changing and assistants have less to do in the traditional air traffic sense, they have literally been shoved into the position of being unable to evolve at the unit. The main reason for this being the ineptitude of local management in rushing to set up an operations department at great expense with people who have no relevant experience in doing so. If they had waited then a substantial amount of money and vital experience could have been saved by evolving the assistant role, as has been the case at similar airfields.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: at home
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'dont we now have the same problem that would occur if EFPS goes wrong? The same increase in workload? The same issues in getting FlightData to the controller?'
The issue is not about how the data is secured/passed to ATCOs - its all about who actually does it whilst the system is down and the ATCOs have a significant increase in their personal workloads as a result. What would you rather have - an assistant to help you, or do it all yourself because the ATSAs have been removed? Furthermore, what is the safer option?
'So make EFPS and these systems robost reduces risk of any problems,'
This was not the case when EFPS was first introduced, and there were problems. I do not recall the EFPS technical situation changing to such a degree that the requirement for ATSAs as backup is now completely negated.
'So training, Simulator work, do tasks that maybe Apron do(Stand Planning) other project work, etc ..'
wonderful idea, and one which many ATSAs would wholeheartedly support - if it wasn't for the fact that Mgmt dont want the ATSAs to even look at any options which might enhance their position, other than help with a voluntary transfer to another Unit (goes totally against the NATS plan to reduce staff numbers, but at least it offloads a future problem onto somebody else whilst making own Unit look more efficient and working to NATS ATSA staffing policy). Therefore, options like 'making yourself indispensable' are not going to be actively promoted by Mgmt, nor are they likely to let you do it.
BTW, all VCAs should be shown the door immediately, so as to allow all full contract ATSAs the maximum number of options for VN/redeployment/voluntary relocation - and definitely before any full-contract ATSA is made compulsorily redundant. (wont happen though - 'variable' is no longer the same as 'temporary' - which is how it was sold to us by the Union in the first instance
)
The issue is not about how the data is secured/passed to ATCOs - its all about who actually does it whilst the system is down and the ATCOs have a significant increase in their personal workloads as a result. What would you rather have - an assistant to help you, or do it all yourself because the ATSAs have been removed? Furthermore, what is the safer option?
'So make EFPS and these systems robost reduces risk of any problems,'
This was not the case when EFPS was first introduced, and there were problems. I do not recall the EFPS technical situation changing to such a degree that the requirement for ATSAs as backup is now completely negated.
'So training, Simulator work, do tasks that maybe Apron do(Stand Planning) other project work, etc ..'
wonderful idea, and one which many ATSAs would wholeheartedly support - if it wasn't for the fact that Mgmt dont want the ATSAs to even look at any options which might enhance their position, other than help with a voluntary transfer to another Unit (goes totally against the NATS plan to reduce staff numbers, but at least it offloads a future problem onto somebody else whilst making own Unit look more efficient and working to NATS ATSA staffing policy). Therefore, options like 'making yourself indispensable' are not going to be actively promoted by Mgmt, nor are they likely to let you do it.
BTW, all VCAs should be shown the door immediately, so as to allow all full contract ATSAs the maximum number of options for VN/redeployment/voluntary relocation - and definitely before any full-contract ATSA is made compulsorily redundant. (wont happen though - 'variable' is no longer the same as 'temporary' - which is how it was sold to us by the Union in the first instance
)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Isle of No Name
Age: 71
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EFPS and MET conditions
The new way to operate electronic f;ight strips???, what happens when things go wrong??? where this change is going to happening they have a lot of wet damp foggy conditions, so a lot of diversions???
When the diversions start happening what happens with the EFPS?? the records need to be changed when diversions to another destination starts happening??
So the controllers have time to do this??
Looks like a bit of a mess when things starting going wrong.
The delights of moving into the modern world to keep pace with life???
Where is all the safety meassures when things start going down the you know where.
I take it all the QMS and SMS on eletronic flight data is more than one hundered percent safe???
When the diversions start happening what happens with the EFPS?? the records need to be changed when diversions to another destination starts happening??
So the controllers have time to do this??
Looks like a bit of a mess when things starting going wrong.
The delights of moving into the modern world to keep pace with life???
Where is all the safety meassures when things start going down the you know where.
I take it all the QMS and SMS on eletronic flight data is more than one hundered percent safe???
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATSAs have one major flaw in their argument about fallback - we all know that EFPS will never fail and will work as it is advertised - management have told us so, and they must be correct - I mean look at VCCS and AMAN...
Make no mistake, where there is a bonus to be had, ATC serviceability takes a back seat. A shame they don't give management bonuses for using comon sense, then maybe we wouldn't have half baked schemes implemented, or those schemes that actually might have some benefit may actually be given long enough to set up to work properly, instead of being rushed in on stupid deadines to make someone look good.
Make no mistake, where there is a bonus to be had, ATC serviceability takes a back seat. A shame they don't give management bonuses for using comon sense, then maybe we wouldn't have half baked schemes implemented, or those schemes that actually might have some benefit may actually be given long enough to set up to work properly, instead of being rushed in on stupid deadines to make someone look good.
Disappointed
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
White Hart, I agree with much of what you say on these forums, an awful lot of it - however I cannot support your disdain for the VCA ATSAs.
VCA ATSAs will most definitely be shown the door before full contract ATSAs should compulsory redundancies become an issue. So your point there isn't valid. Let's hope it never comes to that.
And, as someone who has in the past interviewed ATSA staff for promotions/redeployment etc let me tell you, some of the VCA ATSAs knocked spots off pretty much all of the "lifer" ATSAs I've dealt with - generally speaking anyway. Some have gone on to much bigger and "better" things, and thrived.
So, to differentiate between VCA and non-VCA ATSA staff when it comes to fighting the good cause just undermines the whole argument. Remember divide and rule?
How someone with views as strong as yours could ever condone showing people of the same speciality, who might sit next to you today, or tomorrow, or at some point, and do the same job the door immediately is, frankly, beyond me.
Agency staff have been taken on to fill temporarty posts as PC.
The VCA ATSAs were never, ever designed to be temporary. If you believed so you were grossly misled.
VCA ATSAs will most definitely be shown the door before full contract ATSAs should compulsory redundancies become an issue. So your point there isn't valid. Let's hope it never comes to that.
And, as someone who has in the past interviewed ATSA staff for promotions/redeployment etc let me tell you, some of the VCA ATSAs knocked spots off pretty much all of the "lifer" ATSAs I've dealt with - generally speaking anyway. Some have gone on to much bigger and "better" things, and thrived.
So, to differentiate between VCA and non-VCA ATSA staff when it comes to fighting the good cause just undermines the whole argument. Remember divide and rule?
How someone with views as strong as yours could ever condone showing people of the same speciality, who might sit next to you today, or tomorrow, or at some point, and do the same job the door immediately is, frankly, beyond me.
Agency staff have been taken on to fill temporarty posts as PC.
The VCA ATSAs were never, ever designed to be temporary. If you believed so you were grossly misled.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
White Hart
IMHO Ceannairceach has an extremely valid point... you yourself come across (reading from your posts) as having a huge chip on your shoulder when it comes to ATCOs and perceived lack of support from them for ATSAs... yet you yourself seem to value VCA ATSAs with utter disrespect when it comes to maintaining their jobs.
Treat people like you would like to be treated is a great mantra - cutting any post, be it filled by VCA staff or otherwise is the start of the rot. You want support from other grades? Then show the same level of support yourself to those you deem to be 'below you'.
It is maybe a totally incorrect perception, but it comes across as if you are only interested in number one, yourself... you are quick enough to berate others for not looking out for you, but then don't show the same level of support to others that you demand.
I might be reading you completely wrong, but having read a lot of your posts, that's how it looks.
IMHO Ceannairceach has an extremely valid point... you yourself come across (reading from your posts) as having a huge chip on your shoulder when it comes to ATCOs and perceived lack of support from them for ATSAs... yet you yourself seem to value VCA ATSAs with utter disrespect when it comes to maintaining their jobs.
Treat people like you would like to be treated is a great mantra - cutting any post, be it filled by VCA staff or otherwise is the start of the rot. You want support from other grades? Then show the same level of support yourself to those you deem to be 'below you'.
It is maybe a totally incorrect perception, but it comes across as if you are only interested in number one, yourself... you are quick enough to berate others for not looking out for you, but then don't show the same level of support to others that you demand.
I might be reading you completely wrong, but having read a lot of your posts, that's how it looks.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentlemen.
I am retired and I am not siding with one side or another but I was also on the PCS BEC at Swanwick and attended a number of union seminars and conferences and therefore know a little of the VCA situation and its history. White Hart is quite correct that the VCA staff were brought in as "temporary" staff for temporary staff shortfalls. The rationale was that there will be a reduction in ATSA numbers in the future and to fulfil the present staffing numbers personnel would be brought in to cover that shortfall, when the numbers were to be reduced they would be the first to be dismissed as they were recruited on that basis and the theory was that this would safeguard existing ATSA staff. Both PCS and the management argreed with the principle and that it was a "Good idea". I believe that a VCA member threatened to challenge this concept in the courts as unfair dismissal and subsequently the "temporary status" was dropped. I would confirm that White Hart is quite right when he says that the VCA concept was sold to the unions and staff as a method of protecting existing long-serving staff members and their job security. I can also understand his frustration at the existing situation, although the cynic in me wonders if the management used the VCA staff and their "status" to undermine both the exisiting long-term staff and their terms and conditions?
I am retired and I am not siding with one side or another but I was also on the PCS BEC at Swanwick and attended a number of union seminars and conferences and therefore know a little of the VCA situation and its history. White Hart is quite correct that the VCA staff were brought in as "temporary" staff for temporary staff shortfalls. The rationale was that there will be a reduction in ATSA numbers in the future and to fulfil the present staffing numbers personnel would be brought in to cover that shortfall, when the numbers were to be reduced they would be the first to be dismissed as they were recruited on that basis and the theory was that this would safeguard existing ATSA staff. Both PCS and the management argreed with the principle and that it was a "Good idea". I believe that a VCA member threatened to challenge this concept in the courts as unfair dismissal and subsequently the "temporary status" was dropped. I would confirm that White Hart is quite right when he says that the VCA concept was sold to the unions and staff as a method of protecting existing long-serving staff members and their job security. I can also understand his frustration at the existing situation, although the cynic in me wonders if the management used the VCA staff and their "status" to undermine both the exisiting long-term staff and their terms and conditions?
Last edited by DC10RealMan; 12th Aug 2009 at 12:41.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: at home
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DC10RM - thanks for helping to clarify what was really the situation at the time of VCA introduction. It seems to have been forgotten by many, ATCOs and ATSAs included, and the newest recruits probably know nothing of the history behind all this. It now has the potential to cause problems for a lot of unsuspecting people in the future. It certainly was a problem for me.
Ceannairceach - thanks for the PM. Hope its all a bit clearer now.
anotherthing - PM for you
Ceannairceach - thanks for the PM. Hope its all a bit clearer now.
anotherthing - PM for you
Disappointed
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sorry but whatever the background, to say all VCA staff should be shown the door immediately is devisive and harmful. And reamins wrong in my opinion.
I refuse to believe that any person with a genuine care for his colleagues would demonstrate such an attitude. So White Hart, even though now I know the background etc, I make no apology for still being a little shocked at your insistence in shoving them out of the door.
A redundancy is a redundancy.
I refuse to believe that any person with a genuine care for his colleagues would demonstrate such an attitude. So White Hart, even though now I know the background etc, I make no apology for still being a little shocked at your insistence in shoving them out of the door.
A redundancy is a redundancy.
Disappointed
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See there I agree. VCA ATSA staff should have been employed on full NATS contracts.
That's the injustice in this, not the fact that they were taken on in the first place.
However, they are on VCA contracts are we shouldn't discriminate against them in any other way than the terms of their contract stipulates. I know the same would be the case if a similar system was set up for us lot.
As I said, we have temporary contract ATSA staff at PC employed by an agency, and the system works very well for all concerned I think.
That's the injustice in this, not the fact that they were taken on in the first place.
However, they are on VCA contracts are we shouldn't discriminate against them in any other way than the terms of their contract stipulates. I know the same would be the case if a similar system was set up for us lot.
As I said, we have temporary contract ATSA staff at PC employed by an agency, and the system works very well for all concerned I think.
