Please make a bit of noise if flying into CBR early
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
En-Rooter
Do I detect a subtle application of Parkinson’s Fifth Law here?
Shortly stated, Parkinson’s Fifth Law says that: “The quality of client service is directly proportional to the distance between revenue source and the customer”.
For most air traffickers (and indeed public servants generally), there’s some distance between the source of the spondulicks that pay the salaries, the workplace where the service is provided, and the end user of the service. There is thus a temptation to be reckless as to what the source of the spondulicks should reasonably be expected to fund.
It’s sometimes known as “Public Service Disease”.
May I be equally reckless and propose the following:
* Be late for work once for reasons within your control: KITA*.
* Be late for work again for reasons within your control: formal warning.
* Be late again for work for reasons within your control: the bullet.
And why not engage in a bit of lawyer baiting, just to deflect some criticism of a colleague. I’m sorry if you had a bad experience (if that’s what you’re saying) with a lawyer. But we lawyers are strictly regulated in every state and territory. You should always seek a second opinion if you're not happy with the advice you get/got. And if you weren’t/aren’t satisfied with the service you received, you should complain to the Law Society or Legal Services Commission in the state/territory where you live. Most of us prefer not to have to answer allegations of misconduct or negligence - unlike public servants, if allegations of misconduct are proved against us, we can be struck off and lose our livelihoods.
* Kick in the @rse
Do I detect a subtle application of Parkinson’s Fifth Law here?
Shortly stated, Parkinson’s Fifth Law says that: “The quality of client service is directly proportional to the distance between revenue source and the customer”.
For most air traffickers (and indeed public servants generally), there’s some distance between the source of the spondulicks that pay the salaries, the workplace where the service is provided, and the end user of the service. There is thus a temptation to be reckless as to what the source of the spondulicks should reasonably be expected to fund.
It’s sometimes known as “Public Service Disease”.
May I be equally reckless and propose the following:
* Be late for work once for reasons within your control: KITA*.
* Be late for work again for reasons within your control: formal warning.
* Be late again for work for reasons within your control: the bullet.
And why not engage in a bit of lawyer baiting, just to deflect some criticism of a colleague. I’m sorry if you had a bad experience (if that’s what you’re saying) with a lawyer. But we lawyers are strictly regulated in every state and territory. You should always seek a second opinion if you're not happy with the advice you get/got. And if you weren’t/aren’t satisfied with the service you received, you should complain to the Law Society or Legal Services Commission in the state/territory where you live. Most of us prefer not to have to answer allegations of misconduct or negligence - unlike public servants, if allegations of misconduct are proved against us, we can be struck off and lose our livelihoods.
* Kick in the @rse
Last edited by Argus; 8th Sep 2005 at 08:17.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Glass Gumtree
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Take the bait
Argus
Are you stating that ATC's are public servants? Or just a general statement?
By the way, ATC's by nature will bait whoever is available............especially lawyer's
Are you stating that ATC's are public servants? Or just a general statement?
By the way, ATC's by nature will bait whoever is available............especially lawyer's
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ferris
We must have crossed in cyber space.
That wasn't my intention. I accept that there are various ratings that controllers advance to over time, starting from SMC and progressing to (if memory serves me correctly, and in increasing order of complexity) tower, en-route, departures, arrivals and what used to be called in my day, "flow control".
These days, I'm told that Canberra has lost its departures/arrivals function to Melbourne. I stand to be corrected but it seems to me that all that's left in the CBR tower is aerodrome/local and surface movement control. In my (albeit dated) ATC days, the real pros worked on approach/departures/arrivals etc and not just in the "zone".
It's not clear to me why a non tower rated controller would be rostered for the early turn in CBR: unless it's to ensure that the tower is at least manned if the rated person doesn't show up; and to turn the airfield lighting on, and to hit the Selcall if a diversion seems likely!
But I digress. My beef is directed to people who don't show up to work for reasons within their control, and whose actions have the potential to cause disruption and loss (including financial loss) to third parties.
Freedom7
Depends on your definition of "public servant". I prefer a broad consideration that includes anyone who derives an income from the public purse.
And as a former air trafficker and now lawyer, I claim to have the more than the zero sum totals of belligerence and attitude that go with both professions!
We must have crossed in cyber space.
You seem to be taking the tack that an ATC is an ATC is an ATC
These days, I'm told that Canberra has lost its departures/arrivals function to Melbourne. I stand to be corrected but it seems to me that all that's left in the CBR tower is aerodrome/local and surface movement control. In my (albeit dated) ATC days, the real pros worked on approach/departures/arrivals etc and not just in the "zone".
It's not clear to me why a non tower rated controller would be rostered for the early turn in CBR: unless it's to ensure that the tower is at least manned if the rated person doesn't show up; and to turn the airfield lighting on, and to hit the Selcall if a diversion seems likely!
But I digress. My beef is directed to people who don't show up to work for reasons within their control, and whose actions have the potential to cause disruption and loss (including financial loss) to third parties.
Freedom7
Depends on your definition of "public servant". I prefer a broad consideration that includes anyone who derives an income from the public purse.
And as a former air trafficker and now lawyer, I claim to have the more than the zero sum totals of belligerence and attitude that go with both professions!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Licencing 101
It's not clear to me why a non tower rated controller would be rostered for the early turn in CBR
1. SMC/COORD/ACD - ie, rated as a Ground controller, as well as a few other things, but not tower rated. This is quite normal at many aerodromes. The first few hours would involve him/her doing these functions, whilst the other "Senior Tower" does the Aerodrome Control. Or;
2. Rated in all positions, except OCA - OCA (Operational Command Authority) is sort of like being the Captain of an aircraft. A good FO can take off, fly and land an aircraft all by himself. In fact the Captain can leave the flight deck and the FO can fly just fine, however, the Captain needs to be in the aircraft to make it all legal. Why not put 2 Captains on every aircraft? Because there is no need. A Captain and a FO do just fine. Same reason why there might not be 2 OCA's rostered on every ATC shift. There needs to be one to make it all "legal like", but the other guy can do all of the other jobs him/herself.
I can only assume that is what was meant by "Senior Controller". Hope I helped.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Starts with P
Thank you.
But if the "Captn" fails to show for the early morning arrival, is there any point in having the "FO" there if he/she can't make the call to issue a landing clearance for the one early arrival from Perth?
Thank you.
But if the "Captn" fails to show for the early morning arrival, is there any point in having the "FO" there if he/she can't make the call to issue a landing clearance for the one early arrival from Perth?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ferris
But if the FO can't take off without the Capt, who pays the pax for the losses sustained by the pax for the non attendance of the Capt, for reasons within his/her control?
But if the FO can't take off without the Capt, who pays the pax for the losses sustained by the pax for the non attendance of the Capt, for reasons within his/her control?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bleak City
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Argus,
You indeed detect en-rooter rule no.1 when it comes to sleeping in.
'When one has slept in, one gets his/her ar$e to the aerodrome ASAP' One does not spend the next 8 hours of ones shift thinking about this and apologising, one has more important things to think of.
Do you know what disciplinary actions are taken against controllers these days? Things have changed significantly since you were around obviously. I can point out a number of ATC's that have been stood down 'indefinitely' one on the advise of OLC, I wont publish the reasons here of course, en-rooter could get himself/herself in quite alot of trouble! Suffice to say the reason is horse$hit.
Everything an ATC does these days is recorded and monitored, I doubt you could name me a profession that is more scrutinised or checked than that of an ATC, I'd include pilots in this category. You are nowhere near as regulated as me and the 'panel' of people that discipline are not my mates.
I would also mention briefly fatigue, you would be well aware of the work being undertaken in his area, in the past scant regard has been paid to this by ASA. It is being worked on now and will take a fair bit more work. Do you know the circumstances of this occurrence or is it easier to wield the big stick?
I would say the pax in your scenario below would be compensated to the tune of mmmmmm, nothing as it would be passed off as a 'technical fault' or one of the myriad of other lies that are used to explain delays cancellations etc.
A bad experience with a lawyer? Name me a person who has had a pleasant experience with a lawyer or the law system you lot have constructed? Fairly broad statement I know.
Finally, how often has this late TWR opening occured? I would struggle to find a similar occurence in the last 5 years at least, not a bad record eh?
Yes the aircraft in question could have landed, they would have been provided with a DTI service and a radar advisory service, as somewho's there at that time, there's stuff all traffic there at that time.
You'll have to talk to QF about why they no longer allow their crews to land at an MBZ in CB.
p.s. That little 'Parkinsons fifth law' bizzo is precisely why people don't like lawyers too much. Speak English!
You indeed detect en-rooter rule no.1 when it comes to sleeping in.
'When one has slept in, one gets his/her ar$e to the aerodrome ASAP' One does not spend the next 8 hours of ones shift thinking about this and apologising, one has more important things to think of.
Do you know what disciplinary actions are taken against controllers these days? Things have changed significantly since you were around obviously. I can point out a number of ATC's that have been stood down 'indefinitely' one on the advise of OLC, I wont publish the reasons here of course, en-rooter could get himself/herself in quite alot of trouble! Suffice to say the reason is horse$hit.
Everything an ATC does these days is recorded and monitored, I doubt you could name me a profession that is more scrutinised or checked than that of an ATC, I'd include pilots in this category. You are nowhere near as regulated as me and the 'panel' of people that discipline are not my mates.
I would also mention briefly fatigue, you would be well aware of the work being undertaken in his area, in the past scant regard has been paid to this by ASA. It is being worked on now and will take a fair bit more work. Do you know the circumstances of this occurrence or is it easier to wield the big stick?
I would say the pax in your scenario below would be compensated to the tune of mmmmmm, nothing as it would be passed off as a 'technical fault' or one of the myriad of other lies that are used to explain delays cancellations etc.
A bad experience with a lawyer? Name me a person who has had a pleasant experience with a lawyer or the law system you lot have constructed? Fairly broad statement I know.
Finally, how often has this late TWR opening occured? I would struggle to find a similar occurence in the last 5 years at least, not a bad record eh?
Yes the aircraft in question could have landed, they would have been provided with a DTI service and a radar advisory service, as somewho's there at that time, there's stuff all traffic there at that time.
You'll have to talk to QF about why they no longer allow their crews to land at an MBZ in CB.
p.s. That little 'Parkinsons fifth law' bizzo is precisely why people don't like lawyers too much. Speak English!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
En-Rooter
Similar incident last year - on 24 July 2004.
So, if it's happened before, why isn't there a contingency plan for staff shortages? Or, if there is a contingency plan, was it used on this occasion? If not, why not?
As I said above, I agree that fatigue can cause or contribute to workplace accidents. But, with great respect, neither your collegues or yourself adduce any evidence of fatigue in this case. Rather than just making a blanket statement, perhaps you'd like to elaborate on, say, the rostering practices at CBR, any recent excessive overtime/extension of shifts, lack of sufficient rest time between shifts, frequency of movements etc; then state which, if not all are to be found in the current CBR tower working environment; and why you say all of these provide a causal link to the controller being late for work on the day concerned. If there's an OH&S (or worse) issue here, let's have it aired and dealt with, promptly.
How often has this late TWR opening occured?
So, if it's happened before, why isn't there a contingency plan for staff shortages? Or, if there is a contingency plan, was it used on this occasion? If not, why not?
As I said above, I agree that fatigue can cause or contribute to workplace accidents. But, with great respect, neither your collegues or yourself adduce any evidence of fatigue in this case. Rather than just making a blanket statement, perhaps you'd like to elaborate on, say, the rostering practices at CBR, any recent excessive overtime/extension of shifts, lack of sufficient rest time between shifts, frequency of movements etc; then state which, if not all are to be found in the current CBR tower working environment; and why you say all of these provide a causal link to the controller being late for work on the day concerned. If there's an OH&S (or worse) issue here, let's have it aired and dealt with, promptly.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Bleak City
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Argus,
There are other threads discussing the overstaffing/understaffing issue regarding ATC.
It is obvious to us working in the centre which groups are understaffed i.e. most of them. (can't speak for the TWR's, although I did work in one that was hopelessly understaffed and resourced).
It's been stated that 'managers' (and I use that term loosely) are receiving performance bonuses that preclude them hiring more ATC's. I can't state that this categorically true, there may be other reasons.
These 'managers' greed has to be seen to be believed, (they are not all like this I must state) there is no other reason for them to behave this way. They are an absolute pox on society. I would suggest that managers performance bonuses within Telstra has perhaps led to the state they are in at the moment.
Maybe this leads to fatigue, alot of us are working a fair wack of O/T and yes the extra money is nice, but there is a feeling amongst some of us that if you don't go in you are leaving your buddy in a bit of pickle perhaps.
I'm not blindly supporting the fellow in CB TWR, merely stating there may be a raft of reasons why this occured??
There are other threads discussing the overstaffing/understaffing issue regarding ATC.
It is obvious to us working in the centre which groups are understaffed i.e. most of them. (can't speak for the TWR's, although I did work in one that was hopelessly understaffed and resourced).
It's been stated that 'managers' (and I use that term loosely) are receiving performance bonuses that preclude them hiring more ATC's. I can't state that this categorically true, there may be other reasons.
These 'managers' greed has to be seen to be believed, (they are not all like this I must state) there is no other reason for them to behave this way. They are an absolute pox on society. I would suggest that managers performance bonuses within Telstra has perhaps led to the state they are in at the moment.
Maybe this leads to fatigue, alot of us are working a fair wack of O/T and yes the extra money is nice, but there is a feeling amongst some of us that if you don't go in you are leaving your buddy in a bit of pickle perhaps.
I'm not blindly supporting the fellow in CB TWR, merely stating there may be a raft of reasons why this occured??
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
En-Rooter
Thanks. Surprised your Union hasn't flexed its arm. Used to be quite vocal on these sorts of things, as I recall.
Ah Uncommon Sense, it's always a pleasure to read your considered contribution to the intellectual locus of the debate.
Thanks. Surprised your Union hasn't flexed its arm. Used to be quite vocal on these sorts of things, as I recall.
Ah Uncommon Sense, it's always a pleasure to read your considered contribution to the intellectual locus of the debate.
I'm in one of those moods
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SFC to A085
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Argus
- A Tower ATC that does not hold all ratings and/or endorsements and experience required of Operational Command Authority status (i.e. open the tower service and be able to work solo through any emergencies etc) is loosely termed a trainee.
- Many towers open with a Solo OCA ATC as a normal rostering arrangement
- In previous years these same towers may have had a minimum of two or three OCA capable ATC’s at opening.
- The commercial industry has required cost efficiencies of ATS since the days you were studying legalese stumped up at your FS console (which I might add is a function now undertaken by ATC as part of that industry/fed gov’t efficiency program).
- The resulting savings delivered to the firms that cut holes through the atmosphere each day delivering the likes of you to your appointments with the judiciary are the ones from whom you should seek reimbursement.
- It is as a result of those ‘absolutely necessary, otherwise we are all gunna’ die in the financial ditch if we don’t get em’…... efficiencies that provide nil contingencies for this type of occurrence.
Whilst I am at it……………Multiple alarms not withstanding.......(which of course we use)....there would not be a single ATC in this country who would ..in your vernacular………..for reasons within your control… intentionally be late to open a service. Actions such as ‘auto alarm off whilst still basically asleep’ or alarm failure due batteries, mains power supply or general failure etc etc are not within a persons control or they would not do them. Provide evidence/argument to the contrary!
The fact is many ATS services are solo operations particularly at opening. The number of happenings that could preclude that from occurring on time is many and varied although very rarely occurs.
It is therefore fair to say that you, the travelling public and the firms that convey your ‘big word’ personage by air are, on balance, streets in front thanks in no small part to the years of efficiencies and continued professionalism of the ATS line staff who work those solo shifts?
Cheery bye then…. or should that be……………….we will adjourn for the day……
…………no doubt to the SpatchcockandBigWigWearingWankers Inn ……..just aruuuund the corner ol’ cock ol’ chap eh what………
- A Tower ATC that does not hold all ratings and/or endorsements and experience required of Operational Command Authority status (i.e. open the tower service and be able to work solo through any emergencies etc) is loosely termed a trainee.
- Many towers open with a Solo OCA ATC as a normal rostering arrangement
- In previous years these same towers may have had a minimum of two or three OCA capable ATC’s at opening.
- The commercial industry has required cost efficiencies of ATS since the days you were studying legalese stumped up at your FS console (which I might add is a function now undertaken by ATC as part of that industry/fed gov’t efficiency program).
- The resulting savings delivered to the firms that cut holes through the atmosphere each day delivering the likes of you to your appointments with the judiciary are the ones from whom you should seek reimbursement.
- It is as a result of those ‘absolutely necessary, otherwise we are all gunna’ die in the financial ditch if we don’t get em’…... efficiencies that provide nil contingencies for this type of occurrence.
Whilst I am at it……………Multiple alarms not withstanding.......(which of course we use)....there would not be a single ATC in this country who would ..in your vernacular………..for reasons within your control… intentionally be late to open a service. Actions such as ‘auto alarm off whilst still basically asleep’ or alarm failure due batteries, mains power supply or general failure etc etc are not within a persons control or they would not do them. Provide evidence/argument to the contrary!
The fact is many ATS services are solo operations particularly at opening. The number of happenings that could preclude that from occurring on time is many and varied although very rarely occurs.
It is therefore fair to say that you, the travelling public and the firms that convey your ‘big word’ personage by air are, on balance, streets in front thanks in no small part to the years of efficiencies and continued professionalism of the ATS line staff who work those solo shifts?
Cheery bye then…. or should that be……………….we will adjourn for the day……
…………no doubt to the SpatchcockandBigWigWearingWankers Inn ……..just aruuuund the corner ol’ cock ol’ chap eh what………
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scurvy D.Dog
All Australian industrial jurisdictions have long accepted that punctuality is an important part of the employment relationship.
A lack of punctuality may be grounds for dismissal.
And as a long held general principle of employment law, it’s an employee’s responsibility to get him/herself to work on time – even to the point of using the Telstra wake up call service to raise the individual from Morpheus’ grasp!
These days, all employers, including public sector ones, need to be conscious of salary and related costs. That’s not to say safety and operating requirements should be ignored. Determining the staffing levels is a mix of all these, and more (leave, training, recruitment, staff turnover, airspace complexity, frequency of movements etc etc). What emerges from this process are staffing levels that reflect the operating requirements of the enterprise, a fair wage to the employees and a reasonable financial return to either the shareholders or the taxpayers, as the case may be.
For private sector employers, if expenses exceed income, then the future of the enterprise looks grim. But when it comes to shelling out fortnightly generous financial infusions, even the public purse isn’t bottomless. No less a luminary than the NSW Premier has been forced to concede recently that the sheltered workshop called the NSW Public Service can't continue to sustain inefficient work practices and security of tenure for public servants.
Why should a non government worker on the average (or indeed any) wage have his/her tax deductions used to support an inflated and inefficient bureaucracy, which is generally cushioned from the vicissitudes of commercial life.
But this isn’t the main point of the debate – and nor are inaccurate and hysterical claims about lawyers’ alleged lack of productivity, work practices and where they did or did not study law.
To return to the thread topic, perhaps you, or another reader could advise on the facts at issue: Is the Canberra TWR a solo operation on opening? If so, with at least one scheduled inbound RPT aircraft from WA due to arrive shortly after opening, is there a contingency plan to ensure the tower is always staffed by a rated operator from the scheduled opening time? If not, why not? If not, is this, in your professional opinion, a safe operating practice? And if not, what do you suggest should be done about it?
All Australian industrial jurisdictions have long accepted that punctuality is an important part of the employment relationship.
A lack of punctuality may be grounds for dismissal.
And as a long held general principle of employment law, it’s an employee’s responsibility to get him/herself to work on time – even to the point of using the Telstra wake up call service to raise the individual from Morpheus’ grasp!
These days, all employers, including public sector ones, need to be conscious of salary and related costs. That’s not to say safety and operating requirements should be ignored. Determining the staffing levels is a mix of all these, and more (leave, training, recruitment, staff turnover, airspace complexity, frequency of movements etc etc). What emerges from this process are staffing levels that reflect the operating requirements of the enterprise, a fair wage to the employees and a reasonable financial return to either the shareholders or the taxpayers, as the case may be.
For private sector employers, if expenses exceed income, then the future of the enterprise looks grim. But when it comes to shelling out fortnightly generous financial infusions, even the public purse isn’t bottomless. No less a luminary than the NSW Premier has been forced to concede recently that the sheltered workshop called the NSW Public Service can't continue to sustain inefficient work practices and security of tenure for public servants.
Why should a non government worker on the average (or indeed any) wage have his/her tax deductions used to support an inflated and inefficient bureaucracy, which is generally cushioned from the vicissitudes of commercial life.
But this isn’t the main point of the debate – and nor are inaccurate and hysterical claims about lawyers’ alleged lack of productivity, work practices and where they did or did not study law.
To return to the thread topic, perhaps you, or another reader could advise on the facts at issue: Is the Canberra TWR a solo operation on opening? If so, with at least one scheduled inbound RPT aircraft from WA due to arrive shortly after opening, is there a contingency plan to ensure the tower is always staffed by a rated operator from the scheduled opening time? If not, why not? If not, is this, in your professional opinion, a safe operating practice? And if not, what do you suggest should be done about it?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll ignore all the rubbish about sheltered workshops.
How would such a contingency plan work? If AsA rosters 2 people to open the tower, people such as yourself jump up and down about public servants and wasting money, because 99.9% of the time they will both arrive on time and one of them will read the paper while the other works. Then if AsA only rosters one, and he sleeps in once in a blue moon, it's some sort of disaster? Why can't the contingency plan be that the QF plane lands using MBZ procedures?
One of the big clashes in ATC between commercial sense and safety, is staffing. If the wx is nice, the VFR traffic goes up, so if part of your tasking is low-level servicing (flight service), your workload increases. If you only deal with CTA, your workload will tend to be lower. If the wx is bad, FS is quieter, but high level sector workload goes thru the roof. How does one roster and have staff levels based on the weather? So when bean counters wander around looking at all the staff in the rec room, they have a fit. They never seem to be around when the thunderstorms are causing big diversions and the guys are working their arses off. Wx is only one variable- emergencies (try blocking a runway at a major airport and see how much work there is), one-off traffic peaks (airshows, easter {and before someone starts, although it is a known event, if your staffing is normally x, where do you get x+3 for half-a-dozen days a year} etc) and other things make staffing a hot potato.
Nothing is ever simple. Being a lawyer, you knew that, didn't you?
If so, with at least one scheduled inbound RPT aircraft from WA due to arrive shortly after opening, is there a contingency plan to ensure the tower is always staffed by a rated operator from the scheduled opening time? If not, why not?
One of the big clashes in ATC between commercial sense and safety, is staffing. If the wx is nice, the VFR traffic goes up, so if part of your tasking is low-level servicing (flight service), your workload increases. If you only deal with CTA, your workload will tend to be lower. If the wx is bad, FS is quieter, but high level sector workload goes thru the roof. How does one roster and have staff levels based on the weather? So when bean counters wander around looking at all the staff in the rec room, they have a fit. They never seem to be around when the thunderstorms are causing big diversions and the guys are working their arses off. Wx is only one variable- emergencies (try blocking a runway at a major airport and see how much work there is), one-off traffic peaks (airshows, easter {and before someone starts, although it is a known event, if your staffing is normally x, where do you get x+3 for half-a-dozen days a year} etc) and other things make staffing a hot potato.
Nothing is ever simple. Being a lawyer, you knew that, didn't you?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ferris
Some good points, well made, especially on the ever present tension between commercial reality and safety.
I understand QF won't accept MBZ at Canberra. I'm not able to say why this is so. Perhaps some one who operates into Canberra with QF might care to comment.
I have no objection to two people being rostered in the CBR Tower, if that is the minimum staffing level necessary to ensure the safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic (is this still the definition of ATC), at sparrows.
But irrespective of how many people are rostered on, it's still an indivudual's responsibility to get to work on time.
And I agree that nothing is simple as it seems, including the law!
Some good points, well made, especially on the ever present tension between commercial reality and safety.
I understand QF won't accept MBZ at Canberra. I'm not able to say why this is so. Perhaps some one who operates into Canberra with QF might care to comment.
I have no objection to two people being rostered in the CBR Tower, if that is the minimum staffing level necessary to ensure the safe, orderly and expeditious flow of air traffic (is this still the definition of ATC), at sparrows.
But irrespective of how many people are rostered on, it's still an indivudual's responsibility to get to work on time.
And I agree that nothing is simple as it seems, including the law!