Changes to working practices at LACC

[zygote]

PROSPECT are in discussion with LACC management about changing some of the working practices for the summer. I think in the main we should agree with the proposals and pull together to get through a difficult summer. But I fear I may be in the minority. Anyone care to comment ?

[Numpo-Nigit]

zygote

I fear that this summer will be difficult enough with or without accepting the revised working practices, so why make things more difficult for ourselves to try to get management out of a hole of their own making?

It may be that you see things from a different perspective. Perhaps you could explain your thinking a little more?

NN

[250 kts]

This is what I was trying to get at in my recent thread about summer 2003.

There is no doubt that they need us to help them out but it is important that the staff let their negotiators know what is and isn't acceptable and what recompense,financial or otherwise,is required for the bail out.

[BEXIL160]

I can see the managements need for "changes" this summer but I also have to agree with Numpo and 250 kts.

Questions that need to be answered:

What's in it for us, the operational workforce?
What changes are we going to see in the attitude of the management towards us?

Let's not forget that the current mess at LACC is entirely due to the incompetance of NATS management and has nothing to do with the operational staff.

Just why should we bail them out AGAIN? You see, I'm fairly happy with WPP as it stands, and it's not me or my colleagues that need a change, it's the management.

What would I like to see, personally? Simple. An Admission from NATS management that they have completely messed up (despite warnings from their own staff). An Admission that the ONLY way out of the mess is with the help of the operational staff. Only then would I consider any changes. (and only then after some LARGE financial reward for doing so).

You might contend that such admissions of incompetance will do nothing to help. You'd be wrong. Morale (and willingness to help) would improve dramatically.

There is an argument that draws a parallel with an alcoholics attending an AA meeting. You cannot be helped until you admit you have a problem. NATS management have yet to admit THEY have a problem. Just bailing them out all the time is akin to giving the alcoholic another drink. Nobody gets any better.

Rgds
BEX

[250 kts]

Bex, you're absolutely right. But I think we have to assume that there is no great financial reward available. So we have to think of other things which MAY be acceptable as a short term sweetener prior to,hopefully,gains from the forthcoming re-structuring.

There is no doubt they are in the s**t and let's be honest if there is little improvement this year there is a real chance NATS will go under. That is no good for anyone-most of all the operational staff as the managers will be gone with a nice pay-off.

So for those of us with 30 years to go-do we bite the bullet and help them out with the potential of something next year or possibly let them go under??

We need to think a bit differently in terms of recompense eg. we are owned by 7 airlines that happen to have lots of seats-mainly at the front of the plane!!- available most of the time. Would this type of recompense be acceptable as a one-off?

I don't know the answer to this summer but don't fancy taking the chance that we are owned by the mob from Basingstoke if it goes wrong because we were reluctant to see the longer/bigger picture.

[Loki]

Perhaps I`m being naive, but I always thought that a union existed in order to support its members. I hope Prospect are not the managements poodles and that they won`t sell us down the river. I would have thought we were in a very strong position, and that we could get all manner of concessions from management.

[BDiONU]

At a recent meeting I attended we were told that there are measures being considered to incentivize the workforce and recognise those who are making a greater contribution than others. Whether they'll happen or ..........

BTW Its no longer Working Practices but "Lifestyle Choices"

[250 kts]

Loki,

What sort of concessions would you be happy with assuming financial is not possible at this time. There must be a serious debate over this to see just what the mood really is. Also what do you consider being sold down the river?

[TrafficTraffic]

As seen somewhere else in PPRUNE

Would the POMS please send us posters who can read the Forum titles and then put their posts in the right one ??

It's spelt ..... N A T S

...you guys wanted it so use it...

[250 kts]

Traffic.

This is NOT just a NATS issue as it involves the busiest and biggest ACC in Europe possibly making major changes for the coming summer. It will therefore impact on just about other unit in western Europe.

However now you know what the thread is about you won't need to go near it again will you

[Fallows]

I would agree wholeheartly with the comments equating "The Management" with AA. We have just had our first year at LACC, also we have just had a major change in the form of a new roster, I would like to suggest that we operational staff reject the managements proposal for at least a year to allow for some stability in our personal lives. I believe the major shareholder is still the government who is spending billions of pounds on armaments for the proposed war against Iraq!.

[BDiONU]

Concur with Bex's comments. It does seem curious that on the one hand the management have steadfastly maintained that there has never been any problem or mismanagement with the opening of NERC and the staffing difficulties. On the other they're saying there were problems with delays last year and the main focus must be to improve this summer, please help us out.
I do believe that acknowledgement that senior management erred would be a HUGE step forward and a good sign to the workforce. However, with Cheese & Ham and those of his ilk at that level, it has to be the first one to blink that would apologise or acknowledge (or accept) blame. They've all been at this game far too long to blink and they know they'd be the sacrificial lamb if they did. So I'm afraid to say that unless the hole in my backside heals up we'll never see any change in attitude in NATS senior management. They are too set in their ways, too entrenched to change. Debate in this forum is, I'm sorry to say, knocking on the door of closed minds.

Fallows:
Sorry but I don't see the relevance of the possible war on Iraq to NATS.

[Lon More]

TT has a point. It looks like degenerating into a Whingeing Pom thread, more like terms & endearments than working practices.

However with the summer schedules only about eight weeks away it looks like someone is going to have to pull a bloody large rabbit out of the hat.

Maybe giving everything N of DTY to ScATCC would solve a lot of the problems or is it soon going to be, "Radar service terminated, contact London on W. T." ?

Lon More; Still more than an ATCO

[PPRuNe Radar]

TT would have a point ... except the Forum is called ATC issues ... and this presents an issue for both ATC in Europe and also to our airline brethren who read this Forum. An issue related to ATC.

If we'd wanted TT to be a Moderator we would have asked him. As usual he attempts to be the smart arse and wind people up .... well, we have rules to deal with people like him.

And the despotic Admin sections decision on that is final and comes right from the top.

I get very few complaints about posts in this Forum, but one poster always guarantees to make a few appear in my mailbag. It's hassle I can do without and there is a simple solution which I might one day exercise. Mainly because I and all other PPRuNe Admins have far more important things to spend our time dealing with and much bigger fish to fry.

If anyone wants to take issue or discuss this aspect then email me .... I won't be entering into any debate or further discussion here.

Now, play the ball .......

[ATCO Two]

BDiONU

You said, "Sorry but I don't see the relevance of the possible war on Iraq to NATS". Probably Fallows was alluding to the fact that the government seems toi have around £1 billion plus to spend on waging war on Iraq, but nothing to invest in the ATC infrastructure.
If I am wrong then I am sure that Fallows will elucidate. You must have a very narrow mind if you can't see the relevance of such a war to NATS. Did you work during the Gulf War? Traffic figures were dramatically lower, meaning a huge drop in revenue for NATS. It didn't "matter" quite as much then as we were a government quango and didn't have to pay our way. We are now firmly in the commercial world where NATS is required to make money to survive. The loss of revenue caused by a war would be crippling, and many airlines would go to the wall. A secondary factor would a huge hike in fuel prices which again would cause airlines to drastically cut back on their schedules, with a further consequent reduction in revenue. I hope you can see now that war with Iraq would have a very real impact on our livelihoods. Just pray that commonsense will prevail and a war can be averted.

[Checco]

Thanks for this thread.

NATS performances are worrying European readers, because they impact on European traffic.

Would it be possible to make a brief description of working practices, that would relieve the situation? What changes the management things about?


What role the regulator (UK-SRG) plays when changing working practices ? When the UK-SRG is consulted? Before or after reaching the agreement between Prospect and NATS?


By the way, it seems to me that it was not simply a management failure, but also the government choosed the wrong moment for privatisation. Additionally no one in Europe would have afforded to go into privatisation without the consensus of trade unions. Changes in governance (from public sector to corporate agency) was agreed in Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland. So they went smoothly.

[BEXIL160]

There is a continuing assumption when discussing NATS future that it will "fold" if things don't look up. Indeed NATS management actively encourage this line of thinking probably in order to un-nerve the staff.

Well, it occurs to me that with HMG as the MAJOR shareholder (49%) this cannot happen. Bail out money will always be available. Therefore the only people who are really un-nerved by NATS possible financial failure and renationalisation (like RailTrack)are the existing management.

It's their jobs that are looking less than secure, not the operational staff.

rgds BEX

[A I]

Of course, if, God forbid, there is conflict in Iraq and the expected downturn in traffic occurs, then NATS attributable delays are likely to go down significantly this summer. Does this then trigger huge bonuses for Cheese 'n Ham etc?

[055166k]

Availability of Controllers

I suggest that all ATCOs in non operational positions, irrespective of grade, are redeployed to the Ops room for the summer. From my own perspective and since moving to NERC I have had no fam flights, no liaison visits, no courses, just continuous and unrelenting work. The last thing I want right now is a change to working practices. After discussion with colleagues it seems that controller burnout is a very real possibility. Anyway...my suggestion to close the offices for the summer months is surely worth consideration!

[Loki]

There are precious few valid ATCOs in offices these days matey.