Airservices restructure
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: inner suburbia
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airservices restructure
http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/....asp?id=pr3_06
How much truth is there in
?
Airservices Australia restructure - 03/06
Airservices Australia, the national air traffic control service provider, today announced another stage of an ongoing restructure program.
The announcement details the final management structure for the organisation, which has been progressively introduced since 1 December 2005, and sees a flattening of management structure with improved accountability and communication.
The announcement to staff today also advised of a reduction of approximately 300 positions across the organisation, largely as a result of removing duplicated functions and a realignment of other areas of activity.
Chief Executive Officer Greg Russell said the restructure was transparent to airline and airport customers with no impact on the provision of air traffic control, aviation rescue and fire fighting or technical and engineering services.
"Today's announcement follows a review of the organisation in late 2005 which showed improvements could be made that would improve the efficiency of the organisation without impacting on safety, while better aligning our services to the needs of the aviation community and the country as a whole.
"This restructure process is subjected to rigorous safety analysis and is being scrutinised by the Safety Regulator.
"The restructure is understandably causing some uncertainty, but these changes are necessary to ensure our organisation is best prepared to safely and efficiently face the challenges and requirements of an ever-changing aviation industry," he said.
The reductions will be through voluntary and involuntary redundancies, in accordance with provisions in the applicable Certified Agreements and be completed over a 15 month timeframe.
Airservices Australia, the national air traffic control service provider, today announced another stage of an ongoing restructure program.
The announcement details the final management structure for the organisation, which has been progressively introduced since 1 December 2005, and sees a flattening of management structure with improved accountability and communication.
The announcement to staff today also advised of a reduction of approximately 300 positions across the organisation, largely as a result of removing duplicated functions and a realignment of other areas of activity.
Chief Executive Officer Greg Russell said the restructure was transparent to airline and airport customers with no impact on the provision of air traffic control, aviation rescue and fire fighting or technical and engineering services.
"Today's announcement follows a review of the organisation in late 2005 which showed improvements could be made that would improve the efficiency of the organisation without impacting on safety, while better aligning our services to the needs of the aviation community and the country as a whole.
"This restructure process is subjected to rigorous safety analysis and is being scrutinised by the Safety Regulator.
"The restructure is understandably causing some uncertainty, but these changes are necessary to ensure our organisation is best prepared to safely and efficiently face the challenges and requirements of an ever-changing aviation industry," he said.
The reductions will be through voluntary and involuntary redundancies, in accordance with provisions in the applicable Certified Agreements and be completed over a 15 month timeframe.
... no impact on the provision of air traffic control, aviation rescue and fire fighting or technical and engineering services.
Re The "Restructure".....
Ref quote;...'No impact on the provision of...services...etc etc'
Sounds almost like 'THAT' mantra of 12/12/91 ...will it show up again here....
"Your Safety Will Be Enhanced And It Will Cost You Less"!!!!
Well, Has it???
Costs (in total) have gone ballistic....And where is the safety now??
Air Traffic (Lack of ) SERVICES!!!
e.g. Lack of VHF "Flightwatch" freqs.
Reduced HF facilities.
NDB's not being replaced...etc etc...
And, notwithstanding ALL of the 'other' restructures since 12/12/91, and the deletion of that COSTLY Flight Service FIS / Traffic 'Thing', (purported to cost $100M, $80M, $40M, $24M....) how long do you think it might be before the 'bean counters' try looking at the cost of providing your present 'Traffic Information Service' advice by ATC, at their higher salary rate?
Restructure??
Just cynical is all
Sounds almost like 'THAT' mantra of 12/12/91 ...will it show up again here....
"Your Safety Will Be Enhanced And It Will Cost You Less"!!!!
Well, Has it???
Costs (in total) have gone ballistic....And where is the safety now??
Air Traffic (Lack of ) SERVICES!!!
e.g. Lack of VHF "Flightwatch" freqs.
Reduced HF facilities.
NDB's not being replaced...etc etc...
And, notwithstanding ALL of the 'other' restructures since 12/12/91, and the deletion of that COSTLY Flight Service FIS / Traffic 'Thing', (purported to cost $100M, $80M, $40M, $24M....) how long do you think it might be before the 'bean counters' try looking at the cost of providing your present 'Traffic Information Service' advice by ATC, at their higher salary rate?
Restructure??
Just cynical is all
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The jist of it is that the Airport Services Group (Control Towers) was separated some time ago from the Enroute and Terminal Control Units (basically the two big centres plus the approach cells) with a view to opening up the towers to competitive tendering (selling them off to a different monopoly).
To facilitate this there was a fair bit of duplication of roles in the two structures.
It now turns out this wasnt such a great idea ( hmm
)
So now that the Towers are welcomed back in to the fold ( good idea - not before time IMHO), it turns out we dont need a separate set of managers, beancounters and administrators to look after them.
I think that is the crux of it.
No doubt a certain someone will see a conspiracy in it and we will all hear about it. Again.
If you are rolling your eyes, you should know that the coal face people who just get on and do the job at the other end of the microphone are rolling with you.
To facilitate this there was a fair bit of duplication of roles in the two structures.
It now turns out this wasnt such a great idea ( hmm
)So now that the Towers are welcomed back in to the fold ( good idea - not before time IMHO), it turns out we dont need a separate set of managers, beancounters and administrators to look after them.
I think that is the crux of it.
No doubt a certain someone will see a conspiracy in it and we will all hear about it. Again.
If you are rolling your eyes, you should know that the coal face people who just get on and do the job at the other end of the microphone are rolling with you.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Planet Plazbot
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, what ST said.
Seeing as those 300 positions are at least ASO3 level at around $50000 (at least!!!) a year, that is some 15million PER YEAR(probably more like 20/25million times 2 for on cost rec leave, admin etc) that AsA has saved. I assume they will use it for complete ADSB and GPWS fit out over a few years for the entire VH regoed fleet in Oz. Yeah right.
Seeing as those 300 positions are at least ASO3 level at around $50000 (at least!!!) a year, that is some 15million PER YEAR(probably more like 20/25million times 2 for on cost rec leave, admin etc) that AsA has saved. I assume they will use it for complete ADSB and GPWS fit out over a few years for the entire VH regoed fleet in Oz. Yeah right.
While some rationalisation was needed, unfortunately the same CEO told all ASA managers last week that he wants a 10% reduction in costs across the organisation. I'm told many areas are understaffed, projects are under-resourced and other areas operate efficiently within budget, yet the edict applies to all.
For quite some time it appears the bean counters running ASA have been hell-bent on reducing the organisation's costs for every $ they can squeeze, and not having the foresight to realise that real savings to industry can be gained if $$$$ and resources are committed to those projects that would yield savings to the industry. I'm told that the CEO's edict means that these projects are going to be shelved or delayed.
For quite some time it appears the bean counters running ASA have been hell-bent on reducing the organisation's costs for every $ they can squeeze, and not having the foresight to realise that real savings to industry can be gained if $$$$ and resources are committed to those projects that would yield savings to the industry. I'm told that the CEO's edict means that these projects are going to be shelved or delayed.
And I forgot to say I've heard a rumour that the staff reduction figure of 300 stated by the CEO is wrong, and many in ASA know it.
The story I got is that the restructure people used a piece of ASA management software to come up with a list of all staff within ASA, and the cost centres they belong to. They then used these figures for number crunching, publishing internally on their website, and the magic number for the CEO to use. Unfortunately they didn't realise that the list also included the names of all external contractors i.e. people who work for outside organisations who have contracts with ASA to do various work, everything from security guards, cleaners, PC maintainers, up to software engineers etc. The names of these people are "on the system" for a variety of reasons eg. they hold security cards, need access to the ASA computer network and so on. They are all assigned to various cost centres, so the figures for these are artificially high because these people have been lumped in with ASA staff numbers.
Perhaps someone in ASA can verify this rumour
The story I got is that the restructure people used a piece of ASA management software to come up with a list of all staff within ASA, and the cost centres they belong to. They then used these figures for number crunching, publishing internally on their website, and the magic number for the CEO to use. Unfortunately they didn't realise that the list also included the names of all external contractors i.e. people who work for outside organisations who have contracts with ASA to do various work, everything from security guards, cleaners, PC maintainers, up to software engineers etc. The names of these people are "on the system" for a variety of reasons eg. they hold security cards, need access to the ASA computer network and so on. They are all assigned to various cost centres, so the figures for these are artificially high because these people have been lumped in with ASA staff numbers.
Perhaps someone in ASA can verify this rumour
Mostly Harmless
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Oz (cold & wet bit)
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...the figures for these are artificially high because these people have been lumped in with ASA staff numbers...
"Yes, Minister."
"Even though every cent would save if we REALLY cut 300 jobs we spend on Geoff's bonus and the 30 new management positions?"
"Yes, Minister."
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: where the sun shines
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poor Managers
Boo Bloody hoo!!
All those poor oxygen thieves are finally going to get the boot they so readily deserve!!!
By the time they have finished culling those complete wastes of space, we might be able to get a carpark at last.
I for one will be absolutetly devestated to see the back of them.
At last the "screwers" become the "screwees"! I am loving seeing the tables turned.
Bye Bye
All those poor oxygen thieves are finally going to get the boot they so readily deserve!!!
By the time they have finished culling those complete wastes of space, we might be able to get a carpark at last.
I for one will be absolutetly devestated to see the back of them.
At last the "screwers" become the "screwees"! I am loving seeing the tables turned.
Bye Bye
Blind Fredy,
It's touching to see how much compassion you have for the poor sods who have to go home to their wife and kids and tell them that they no longer have a job!
A Senior ASA ATC Manager was once quoted as saying ... " you know why we have such a high support staff to Controller ratio? ... the Controllers are such high maintenance"
Will you be so gleeful when you want someone to organise a removalist for you, fix up a pay error, organise your salary sacrifice laptop/car, move you around on the roster, case manage you when you get stressed, remind you that your medical is due, complete a project that updates your equipment, change the documents to reflect a new rule, re-write that new rule, update your superannuation payments, show you how to make an application work, re-jig an application, fix the broken intercom, fix the gate to your car park etc etc etc ... and there is nobody there!
I hope, for your sake, that the rumored culling of Controllers over the next 12 months doesn't come to fuition.
It's touching to see how much compassion you have for the poor sods who have to go home to their wife and kids and tell them that they no longer have a job!
A Senior ASA ATC Manager was once quoted as saying ... " you know why we have such a high support staff to Controller ratio? ... the Controllers are such high maintenance"
Will you be so gleeful when you want someone to organise a removalist for you, fix up a pay error, organise your salary sacrifice laptop/car, move you around on the roster, case manage you when you get stressed, remind you that your medical is due, complete a project that updates your equipment, change the documents to reflect a new rule, re-write that new rule, update your superannuation payments, show you how to make an application work, re-jig an application, fix the broken intercom, fix the gate to your car park etc etc etc ... and there is nobody there!
I hope, for your sake, that the rumored culling of Controllers over the next 12 months doesn't come to fuition.
Cuts also required in the training section, so the first thing to happen is that the instructors will no longer be seconded to the training section, but will remain assigned to their groups and only come across to the training section to deliver courses! I do not know how courses will be developed, or how this will impact on the paper work associated with training, as required by CASA or to meet our RTO status. So there a are some jobs gone, the next cut is suposed to be to the low level training staff after they install new simulator software. This may happen in 18 months, (but we all know what their record on installing software on time and to spec is!)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it just me or is this new structure extremely reflective of the Civil Air proposal put to help offset a better payrise in late 2001 early 2002?
New software, aka voice recognition; awsure! Just ring Telstra directory service for an example of fine cut out the "human element" software... High fidelity simulation, OMG!
New software, aka voice recognition; awsure! Just ring Telstra directory service for an example of fine cut out the "human element" software... High fidelity simulation, OMG!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope, for your sake, that the rumored culling of Controllers over the next 12 months doesn't come to fuition.
Now there is a rumour from someone who doesn't have a handle on reality. Perhaps they should stop the recruiting drive now? And stop looking overseas to get controllers because we cant find enough here? Maybe they could stop cancelling leave for controllers too?
Originally Posted by peuce
I hope, for your sake, that the rumored culling of Controllers over the next 12 months doesn't come to fuition.
agree with everything else you said - some good people will get/have had the shove, but that last bit is pretty funny.
The line up of people queuing for a VR would go around the block several times.
I know it sounds silly ... but we are talking Airservices here ... it's not a beat up ...promises have been made to reduce ATC numbers. How they do it is another question. It might be by technology, new procedures, airspace changes,re-sectorisation, natural attrition ... who knows. The point is ... when the bean counters are let loose, no one's safe.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
when the bean counters are let loose, no one's safe.
CM, heard the same story about the contractors in the 300... Seems like about 120 people in ML and BN and what was AS have been offered an opportunity to apply for the remaining CB based jobs; but there will be no local options left, all centralised in CB.
Puece, the age profile is such that redundancy opportunities in ATC would be accepted with open arms. Count those over 50, nearly half... In some locations it is rare to find a permanent body under 50... We have been finding ways to reduce ATC numbers for the last 10 years; we have gone from 1100 to 950 in that time; taking on FS functionality too; so the numbers currently say pretty tight.
Technology might save some bodies; but from where I am, 2 days off every 10 shifts or so, 5+ phones calls on my days off every single time to come to work; if I say no (and chose life) they often close airspace or the others left at the consoles are doing so understaffed... Bring on technolgoy please; it's been the "great white hope" for 15 years already, yet we haven't seen very many changes (huh!) that actually saved one body...
G'day 'SM4',
Re; ".....taking on FS functionality too; so the numbers stay pretty tight."
Yep! SOMEONE has to do it!!
But, then we all really knew that, did we not?? And it was stated many many times 'that FS do it cheaper'.....
To have an INTEGRATED service, do we not require FIS/DTI as well as Separation? Surely it is all part of the whole package?
I am still awaiting re-use of that phrase 'getting back to our core business' - we all know what THAT really means...
T'ain't new!
Yep! SOMEONE has to do it!!
But, then we all really knew that, did we not?? And it was stated many many times 'that FS do it cheaper'.....
To have an INTEGRATED service, do we not require FIS/DTI as well as Separation? Surely it is all part of the whole package?
I am still awaiting re-use of that phrase 'getting back to our core business' - we all know what THAT really means...
T'ain't new!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Griffo,
Purely to play devils advocate...
I think the jury would still be well and truly out on FS did it cheaper. Yes on a dollar per man hour that is true. But there are only 8 truly low level sectors left in OZ; and some of those have up to FL245 or FL180 with E airspace above A180 or A085 respectively. These console see stand alone time for about 4 hours per day, and are hardly catered for in the staffing coverage numbers. So nearly, not quite, but nearly no ATC is dedicated for duty to cover the FS role... So perhaps it is cheaper integrated.
A good idea, a better service, well we probably fully agree there. Mind you it easier to change airspace when it's just the one system; try and do that with private ANSPs.
Will be interesting to watch this all unfold, I doubt there will be any real change anywhere near a console; but hey I've been wrong before.
Purely to play devils advocate...
I think the jury would still be well and truly out on FS did it cheaper. Yes on a dollar per man hour that is true. But there are only 8 truly low level sectors left in OZ; and some of those have up to FL245 or FL180 with E airspace above A180 or A085 respectively. These console see stand alone time for about 4 hours per day, and are hardly catered for in the staffing coverage numbers. So nearly, not quite, but nearly no ATC is dedicated for duty to cover the FS role... So perhaps it is cheaper integrated.
A good idea, a better service, well we probably fully agree there. Mind you it easier to change airspace when it's just the one system; try and do that with private ANSPs.
Will be interesting to watch this all unfold, I doubt there will be any real change anywhere near a console; but hey I've been wrong before.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dont forget to include the cost of running AUSFIC in any comparison. It is still there, and likely to stay.
If the base of E were to be pushed down the number of controllers would have to escalate dramatically. The question of course - who pays for it?
If the base of E were to be pushed down the number of controllers would have to escalate dramatically. The question of course - who pays for it?
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that the well known entrepreneur has left the building (so to speak), I see no reason why AsA can't reduce staff by 300. What with the fact finding trips, the staff consultants, project managers, industry liaisons and general hangers-on, minute secretaries, lunch organisers, brochure printers and reprinters, trip planners, meeting planners, luggage carriers, image consultants, PR staff, political consultants and general would-be's if they could-be's running around and handling 15 flawed projects at once, surely there should be some fat left for trimming. Now that air traffic controllers can do what they are paid to do - air traffic control - we might start seeing some cost savings.
Lodown,
You hit the nail on the head. IF Airservices got back to its "core business", then maybe you could "trim some fat" . But Airservices, no matter what it says, can't help itself ... it's always looking for outside work, trying to take over someone elses airspace or inventing new gizmos. That's why there are over 150 current projects.
Then add in the Controllers, who are always wanting their equipment/tools/software/documents to do this or not to do this (often for good reason) ... which starts everyone running around again. Then they get impatient because they don't understand, and often don't want to understand, what scope and size of work is involved for the support Staff to deliver on their requirements.
Add this all together and you NEED "fact finding trips, staff consultants, project managers, industry liaisons, and general hangers-on, minute secretaries, lunch organisers, brochure printers and reprinters, trip planners, meeting planners, luggage carriers, image consultants, PR staff, political consultants"
Now just watch it all bog down as support is trimmed and centralised in Canberra.
You hit the nail on the head. IF Airservices got back to its "core business", then maybe you could "trim some fat" . But Airservices, no matter what it says, can't help itself ... it's always looking for outside work, trying to take over someone elses airspace or inventing new gizmos. That's why there are over 150 current projects.
Then add in the Controllers, who are always wanting their equipment/tools/software/documents to do this or not to do this (often for good reason) ... which starts everyone running around again. Then they get impatient because they don't understand, and often don't want to understand, what scope and size of work is involved for the support Staff to deliver on their requirements.
Add this all together and you NEED "fact finding trips, staff consultants, project managers, industry liaisons, and general hangers-on, minute secretaries, lunch organisers, brochure printers and reprinters, trip planners, meeting planners, luggage carriers, image consultants, PR staff, political consultants"
Now just watch it all bog down as support is trimmed and centralised in Canberra.
