HIAL ATCO’s vote for strike action
 

They might not be happy with the punctuation, either !

Bad news...

And while on strike, some of their (few) controllers with APS ratings will find better pay scales elsewhere, there still being a countrywide shortage of experienced ATCOs with that rating.

HIAL ATCOs vote for strike action
 

Good luck to them for standing up for their rights.

Apart from Dundee, all the airports involved used to be owned and operated by NATS and of those, with the exception of Inverness, NATS used to operate them with one controller providing combined ADC/APP service who was also airport manager, plus the ATC Tels Officer who was supposedly trained to operate as a FISO. Sometimes an ATCO Cadet (often 2 at a time in the case of Sumburgh) would also be attached for 4 week periods to help out although they weren't supposed to work without the ATCO Manager being present.;)
Leave reliefs would be done by controllers from other Scottish airfields where NATS provided ATC such as Aberdeen and Glasgow.

Not seen much news lately. Any progress towards a resolution?

Unbelievable but allegedly true!
 

HIAL ATCOs are on a work to rule as part of their industrial action. The Kirkwall to Edinburgh Loganair flight on Friday evening was informed by ATC that due to controller hours the airport was closed and the flight would not be able to depart. ATC closes and goes home. Airport has reached the end of it's published operating hours for the day so is officially closed. End of story? No. Loganair flight 63KB departs to Edinburgh 46 minutes later from a closed airport with passengers on board. How is this possible? Management sent someone to the Tower to switch on the lights. Management said it was ok. Airport not NOTAMed as open so not licenced. No air traffic service of any sort provided to departing plane. How was any of this safe or legal? Surely there are laws against this?

On the legal side - although I don't know the extant legislation, the aviation law is easy enough to check. Other rules are less easy to pin down and verify - such as insurance requirements for both airport and aircraft operator, normal operating procedures and authority to deviate from them. As for whether it is safe - well, it appears that the aircraft got away without incident or issue. (With one or two possible exceptions) we can only guess at what the plan was should the aircraft have had a problem shortly after departure but given clement weather I suspect that entirely suitable and safe options might have been available. It is sometimes useful, or even important, to remember that ATC is one part of a system - in the UK, historically there have been requirements for ATC service in situations where elsewhere no similar obligations have existed. This can lead us to imagine that things are not safe without some form of ATS whereas elsewhere people and carry on flying quite happily whilst wondering what all the fuss in the UK is. I'm not advocating that we can do away with ATC, simply trying to point out that in the sort of situation described safety is not likely to have been compromised to any great extent.

The UK traditionally has also rather over-engineered some aspects of ATS provision (although the rest of Europe is catching up fast) making it a very expensive service to provide - this might encourage alternatives to ATC to be investigated or used. Where such alternatives are legal and adequately safe why shouldn't they be used? I must stress that I don't know enough about the current dispute between HIAL and some of its employees to understand the rights or wrongs of this particular alleged event, simply trying to provide a fairly balanced view to an earlier post.

As to SARG, I'm not sure if I understand highwideandugly's comment correctly, but my personal recollection of the Scottish Regional Office (albeit from some time ago) was that it was run akin to a little fiefdom, having declared UDI with respect to the Gatwick people, where all sorts of odd things were allowed for some regardless of the rules. Times may change.....

Now that I have recovered from my disbelief at what HIAL and Loganair seem to have done I will elaborate a bit on my concerns about what my expectations are as a paying passenger on a UK regulated flight.

When I go to a UK airport to catch a UK operated flight I expect safety and professionalism from the moment I enter the departure terminal until the moment I leave arrivals at my destination. I expect CAA, UK, European and ICAO laws and regulations to be adhered to. Many of these regulations and laws have originated from the lessons learned from past incidents and accidents. They are born in the main of wisdom not bureaucracy. What I don't expect are spur of the moment decisions that bypass these laws and regulations. I am sure that the passengers that flew from Kirkwall to Edinburgh last Friday evening expected the same application of regulations and laws regarding their flight. I know no more about what happened now then I did when I made my previous post. What was done may well turn out to be acceptable to the authorities within some interpretation of the previously mentioned rules and regulations but right now it looks wrong and I am worried. HIAL operate the airports in the Highlands and Islands and Loganair operate almost all the flights. If I want to fly I have to use them or travel by land and sea to central Scotland and fly from there. I want to know that they can be trusted.

LookingForAJob, I thank you for joining in the discussion. I posted on PPrune to seek views and enter debate. If I may, I would like to comment on your post. You said:
[QUOTE]As for whether it is safe - well, it appears that the aircraft got away without incident or issue. /QUOTE]
True as far as it goes. I am sure that the pilot who flew Emiliano Sala on his last flight thought that what he was doing was safe. I am sure that the crew of LaMia Flight 2933 who flew the Chapecoense football team on their last flight thought that what they were doing was safe. The holes in the cheese lined up and tragedy followed. There are lengthy threads on PPrune proving that their thought processes were flawed. Their passengers trusted them to operate safely within the rules and they were fatally let down.
[QUOTE]The UK traditionally has also rather over-engineered some aspects of ATS provision (although the rest of Europe is catching up fast) making it a very expensive service to provide - this might encourage alternatives to ATC to be investigated or used./QUOTE]
An Airport Fire Service is a very expensive service to provide. I have seen a Transport Scotland study document that seems to think that some Scottish airports could do without an Airport Fire Service as "no passenger had been killed in an accident at any Scottish airport or airfield since the Second World War". I am sure that legal and alternative measures could be found by some accountant to do without them.

Airport Security is a very expensive service to provide. Using the above logic, as no passenger has been killed by terrorism at a Scottish airport should we get rid of or downgrade security too?

ATC, Security and Airport Fire Services have developed into what they are today because of lessons learned in the past that have now been forgotten. They are expensive but they are necessary.

All of the above is off topic in regard to the original thread topic which is about the HIAL industrial dispute. Did the fact that Kirkwall ATC would not extend it's normal operating hours due to the industrial dispute lead to some sort mania that ended with a passenger aircraft departing from a closed airfield?

Who knows?

If the Kirkwall departure is found to be acceptable, does this not set a precedent for any future flights ? If it's ok at 2015, why would it not be ok under the same conditions at 0815 ? Just adjust the Airport opening hours to suit & don't bother with ATC any longer ! The expression "you can't have your cake & eat it" comes to mind - but it seems someone would like to do just that ….

Anthonius Gunawan Mutiara
 

Sadly the news, if true, that Loganair departed without ATC cover brings to mind the sad death last September of the above ATCO in Sulawesi who stayed at his post and paid with his life, to ensure a departure got away safely during an earthquake. I guess he stayed to provide alerting service should something have happened to the departing aircraft.
Modern managers and their crass decisions make me cringe.

AyrTC - a brief look at the second attachment re opening hours. Chap 4.1 states that flights for public transport are prohibited by the ANO.

When I was at PO we never had any difficulty - if a flight was late, probably Loganair returning from Benbecula would be the only one, I or the other ATCO told AFS, then we all stayed until he'd shut down, and claimed overtime.
When ATCOs were being used in the '81 Civil Service strike ( we were still linked to the CS for pay rises ) H&I had been exempted from the ballot and any subsequent action as we were deemed an essential service for the communities.
Mind you the penny-pinching hadn't started then and any out of hours call-out paid a minimum of 3 hours overtime plus mileage at duty rate - hence very popular!