Merged: ASA Staff Shortage
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Here
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi TrafficTraffic : )
Thanks for your comments a couple of pages back (and the link), however I think you missed the point of my posts. I was pointing out the absurdity of the seven endorsements. This is what ASA are trumpeting publicly and privately to the minister/industry as the panacea to our current problems. This kind of over simplification (particularly over such an important issue as the current staff shortage) is irresponsible, dangerous, and wrong. You know, as well as I do, that if we went down this path, now, with no staff, no preparation, no supporting technology, then it will fail. Call me a troglodyte, but if the caveats in WELLCONCERNED's post aren't met, I cannot see a way forward in this area.
If you read the reform paper you will see that many qualifications are being made to the 7 endorsements, such as the Approach endorsement may not be practical with the differing requirements of each unit. It recognises the FDRG boundary between ML and BN. That's all fine, but don't go telling the press that 144 endorsements can be compressed into 7.
I was not having a go at generic endorsements in general and I am curious why you implied I was opposed to progress. If you knew me you would know that that isn't the case. You are not alone in wanting to see us use technology and being more efficient in the way ATC is done.
Cheers
Thanks for your comments a couple of pages back (and the link), however I think you missed the point of my posts. I was pointing out the absurdity of the seven endorsements. This is what ASA are trumpeting publicly and privately to the minister/industry as the panacea to our current problems. This kind of over simplification (particularly over such an important issue as the current staff shortage) is irresponsible, dangerous, and wrong. You know, as well as I do, that if we went down this path, now, with no staff, no preparation, no supporting technology, then it will fail. Call me a troglodyte, but if the caveats in WELLCONCERNED's post aren't met, I cannot see a way forward in this area.
If you read the reform paper you will see that many qualifications are being made to the 7 endorsements, such as the Approach endorsement may not be practical with the differing requirements of each unit. It recognises the FDRG boundary between ML and BN. That's all fine, but don't go telling the press that 144 endorsements can be compressed into 7.
I was not having a go at generic endorsements in general and I am curious why you implied I was opposed to progress. If you knew me you would know that that isn't the case. You are not alone in wanting to see us use technology and being more efficient in the way ATC is done.
Cheers
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quokka,
The devil is in the detail. Anyone involved should make themselves aware of just what the proposal is. Do you agree?
In my initial reading of TTs post (We have since discussed this) he came across to me as someone who had heard the broadbrush concept and thought it was good ( and there are some very doable parts) but hadn't actually read the Endorsement paper.He has admitted that he has in fact not read the paper.
There are many concepts floated that at first seem plausible, that on further reading of the detail are shown to be flawed, or not what they originally purported to be.
I would have thought given his experience and that the area he works in will be particularly affected by the concept, that he would be completely up with the proposal and giving input. This lead to my now erroneous supposition that he was not a controller.
Your statement
"I don't think that Traffic needs to have read the Airservices proposal to be entitled to contribute to a discussion about the merits or otherwise of generic endorsements covering multiple sectors. In that particular post he made no reference to/judgement of specifics of the Airservices proposal. His support for the concept of generic endorsements was just that... support for the concept"
I would think that anyone who is involved in a Front Line position (controller or Manager), who will be required to train and/or implement this proposal should be very intimate with the facts and providing input NOW, not waiting for the waste of resources and money to continue until the upper echelons realise that they have been trying to put a square peg in a round whole. He is not the only one, it is endemic across the organization. People have disengaged and are basically no longer interested in what is going on. Not a healthy way to run a safety based organization.
Also Quokka please don't put words into my mouth
"As to the suggestion that he is not a Controller or perhaps, in your personal opinion, not fit to be a Controller and therefore not fit to contribute... not appropriate." I did not say 'not fit to be a controller'. You did.
And further 'Traffic and anyone else for that matter will stand or fall on the merits of the logic and substance of his/her contributions... not their date of Recency, Endorsement or Rating.'
Fair enough, Joe Bloggs is also welcome to throw in their two-bobs worth, but he better be arguing with the facts of ASAs proposal and not some general statement that doesn't pertain to the specific proposal that ASA have made.
I am not against some simplification of endorsements, but lets make it achievable and safe. Please have a read of some of my previous posts about what ASA are proposing and some of the inherent dangers of expecting controllers to remain current and proficient on airspace that would cover a huge area, involve dozens of STARs, many controlled Aerodromes, myriad restricted areas and maybe a hundred different frequencies. The Level 3 Author of the Endorsement paper told me that technology and standardisation will fix this. He has no idea when the technology will come in, and admits that no work has been done on Standardisation. Then why the hell did we start down this path, when as an organization we were sadly lacking in the ability to achieve it and who the hell signed off in it.
It is increasingly frustrating in ASA that ex-controllers who are now managers are not voicing their concerns in a meaningful way about some of the more fanciful ideas that are coming down from on high.
In discussions with many of the ALMs the prevailing attitude seems to be that we know that areas of what the SDE proponent is trying to do will not work in their current guise, but I am (well) paid and will just continue to carry out orders until those misguided individuals wake-up. Many of the ALMs, and some Level 3s, are just us dispirited as the controllers, but whilst they are on very lucrative AWAs they are not willing to be seen to rock the boat.
My major issue with SDE is the lack of proving that it is achievable with the resources, staff and technology we currently have. Having kept up with it since it was first touted, I have been astounded with the lack of any real management or accountability of the project. This has been going on for nearly three years, and there is no end in sight. A very simple question for the Board to ask the CEO " When will SDE as first proposed be fully implemented?" TFN has been there for three and a half years now, it is time he stopped blaming the previous incumbent. The Federal government gets a four year term, I don't think the voters would be that happy if in that time frame they were still trying to pin the blame on the previous administration.
The devil is in the detail. Anyone involved should make themselves aware of just what the proposal is. Do you agree?
In my initial reading of TTs post (We have since discussed this) he came across to me as someone who had heard the broadbrush concept and thought it was good ( and there are some very doable parts) but hadn't actually read the Endorsement paper.He has admitted that he has in fact not read the paper.
There are many concepts floated that at first seem plausible, that on further reading of the detail are shown to be flawed, or not what they originally purported to be.
I would have thought given his experience and that the area he works in will be particularly affected by the concept, that he would be completely up with the proposal and giving input. This lead to my now erroneous supposition that he was not a controller.
Your statement
"I don't think that Traffic needs to have read the Airservices proposal to be entitled to contribute to a discussion about the merits or otherwise of generic endorsements covering multiple sectors. In that particular post he made no reference to/judgement of specifics of the Airservices proposal. His support for the concept of generic endorsements was just that... support for the concept"
I would think that anyone who is involved in a Front Line position (controller or Manager), who will be required to train and/or implement this proposal should be very intimate with the facts and providing input NOW, not waiting for the waste of resources and money to continue until the upper echelons realise that they have been trying to put a square peg in a round whole. He is not the only one, it is endemic across the organization. People have disengaged and are basically no longer interested in what is going on. Not a healthy way to run a safety based organization.
Also Quokka please don't put words into my mouth
"As to the suggestion that he is not a Controller or perhaps, in your personal opinion, not fit to be a Controller and therefore not fit to contribute... not appropriate." I did not say 'not fit to be a controller'. You did.
And further 'Traffic and anyone else for that matter will stand or fall on the merits of the logic and substance of his/her contributions... not their date of Recency, Endorsement or Rating.'
Fair enough, Joe Bloggs is also welcome to throw in their two-bobs worth, but he better be arguing with the facts of ASAs proposal and not some general statement that doesn't pertain to the specific proposal that ASA have made.
I am not against some simplification of endorsements, but lets make it achievable and safe. Please have a read of some of my previous posts about what ASA are proposing and some of the inherent dangers of expecting controllers to remain current and proficient on airspace that would cover a huge area, involve dozens of STARs, many controlled Aerodromes, myriad restricted areas and maybe a hundred different frequencies. The Level 3 Author of the Endorsement paper told me that technology and standardisation will fix this. He has no idea when the technology will come in, and admits that no work has been done on Standardisation. Then why the hell did we start down this path, when as an organization we were sadly lacking in the ability to achieve it and who the hell signed off in it.
It is increasingly frustrating in ASA that ex-controllers who are now managers are not voicing their concerns in a meaningful way about some of the more fanciful ideas that are coming down from on high.
In discussions with many of the ALMs the prevailing attitude seems to be that we know that areas of what the SDE proponent is trying to do will not work in their current guise, but I am (well) paid and will just continue to carry out orders until those misguided individuals wake-up. Many of the ALMs, and some Level 3s, are just us dispirited as the controllers, but whilst they are on very lucrative AWAs they are not willing to be seen to rock the boat.
My major issue with SDE is the lack of proving that it is achievable with the resources, staff and technology we currently have. Having kept up with it since it was first touted, I have been astounded with the lack of any real management or accountability of the project. This has been going on for nearly three years, and there is no end in sight. A very simple question for the Board to ask the CEO " When will SDE as first proposed be fully implemented?" TFN has been there for three and a half years now, it is time he stopped blaming the previous incumbent. The Federal government gets a four year term, I don't think the voters would be that happy if in that time frame they were still trying to pin the blame on the previous administration.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Here
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the.....?!
read through to the bottom of the page.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had to laugh when this thread popped up in the 'similar threads' suggestions: http://www.pprune.org/d-g-reporting-...-set-bite.html
First Post 23rd August 2005, 23:06
Funny how things don't change as the years roll on
First Post 23rd August 2005, 23:06
A little birdy tells me that ATC staff are going to stop working on their days off from next week.
Some impact expected at the major cities.
Apparently constant overtime is all that has been keeping the airspace open for quite some time.
Funny - I thought I read about Airservices getting an International Award for being the best ANSP.
Maybe they meant the best for their profits!
Some impact expected at the major cities.
Apparently constant overtime is all that has been keeping the airspace open for quite some time.
Funny - I thought I read about Airservices getting an International Award for being the best ANSP.
Maybe they meant the best for their profits!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: where the sun shines
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old Matey,
I believe that is what you call Airservices trying to low-ball us through the media.
Civil Airs' position is still that of the Vision document.
They will try anything to divide and conquer, that is their M.O. remember.
I think if you have a look at the Civil Air website tomorrow, you may find an interesting exchange of letters posted there, if I am not too mistaken.
Sorry couldn't help myself with the smilies, I am in a mood.
I believe that is what you call Airservices trying to low-ball us through the media.
Civil Airs' position is still that of the Vision document.
They will try anything to divide and conquer, that is their M.O. remember.
I think if you have a look at the Civil Air website tomorrow, you may find an interesting exchange of letters posted there, if I am not too mistaken.
Sorry couldn't help myself with the smilies, I am in a mood.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bris Vegas
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
got the emails too.
But I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting for AsA to put the alleged informal offer in writing.
Just another 'baiting' tactic which I assume was intended to make our negotiating team angry and lose the plot (patience of a saint, every one of 'em) . But our guys are better than that.
But I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting for AsA to put the alleged informal offer in writing.
Just another 'baiting' tactic which I assume was intended to make our negotiating team angry and lose the plot (patience of a saint, every one of 'em) . But our guys are better than that.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ex FSO GRIFFO
Pilot inserts card into an ACM - Airways Clearance Machine - press 'PIN' for the flight route, and VOILA!!
Your very own printed copy of your Airways Clearance - and aaawwaaaayy you go......no 'Tellers' required.
(In the event of 'systems' failure....ring Calcutta for 'Manual Cnce delivery......)
Sort of a 'Domestic CPDLC' - and those 'bankers' thought that they had actually invented something??
Your very own printed copy of your Airways Clearance - and aaawwaaaayy you go......no 'Tellers' required.
(In the event of 'systems' failure....ring Calcutta for 'Manual Cnce delivery......)
Sort of a 'Domestic CPDLC' - and those 'bankers' thought that they had actually invented something??
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nearby
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spread the Word People - especially to your Internet/Email not-so-literate colleagues:
Whilst there will no doubt be far in excess of the 50%+1 voting in favour of Industrial Action, FIRST OF ALL there MUST be a TOTAL return of ALL Ballots in excess of 50%.
No excuses - No Apathy - This is Important.
Tell Someone you work with who looks like they don't know!
Whilst there will no doubt be far in excess of the 50%+1 voting in favour of Industrial Action, FIRST OF ALL there MUST be a TOTAL return of ALL Ballots in excess of 50%.
No excuses - No Apathy - This is Important.
Tell Someone you work with who looks like they don't know!
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Brisbane
Age: 57
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I admire the restraint of Civil Air's response.
For Mueller to request a response to media reports is hypocrisy at the highest level.
What about all the slander and inuendo put about by the media re the ATC workforce.
For Mueller to request a response to media reports is hypocrisy at the highest level.
What about all the slander and inuendo put about by the media re the ATC workforce.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a little summary for those who are voting:
from www.civilair.asn.au/joomla
As at 30th January, 2009:
As at 30th January, 2009:
40 days since ATC Certified Agreement Expired
151 days since CEO was supposed to have fixed ATC staff shortages
151 days since CEO was supposed to have fixed ATC staff shortages
284 days since 'Good Faith' Negotiations Commenced
395 days since Air Traffic Controllers received a payrise
1291 days since Greg Russell Appointed as CEO
How much bigger do you want these numbers to get?
How much bigger do you want these numbers to get?
Last edited by undervaluedATC; 30th Jan 2009 at 06:12. Reason: web address typed wrong
Hey 'Hempy',
That photoshop is absolutely bewdifulll........
LOVE the script at top of ACM.......and the tel no...........
Refunds...For TIBA ??? ....HA HA HA !!!
Cheers and TKS!!!
That photoshop is absolutely bewdifulll........
LOVE the script at top of ACM.......and the tel no...........
Refunds...For TIBA ??? ....HA HA HA !!!
Cheers and TKS!!!
Last edited by Ex FSO GRIFFO; 30th Jan 2009 at 06:41.
Hey Capcom...
'HOT OFF THE PRESS'.....
"Attention: ALL ASA EMPLOYEES.....
Dear ASA Employees,
Due to the current financial situation caused by the slowdown of the economy, Management has decided to implement a scheme to put workers of 50 years of age and above on Early Retirement.
This scheme will be known as RAPE (Retire Aged People Early).
Persons selected to be RAPED can apply to management to be eligible for the SHAFT scheme (Special Help After Forced Termination).
Persons who have been RAPED and SHAFTED will be reviewed under the SCREW program (Scheme Covering Retired Early Workers).
A person may be RAPED once, SHAFTED twice and SCREWED as many times as Management deems appropriate.......
Persons who have been RAPED can only get AIDS (Additional Income for Dependants & Spouse) or HERPES (Half Earnings for Retired Personnel Early Severance).
Obviously persons who have AIDS or HERPES will not be SHAFTED or SCREWED any further by Management.
Persons who are not RAPED and are staying on will receive as much **** (Special High Intensity Training) as possible. Management has always prided itself on the amount of **** it gives employees.
Should you feel that you do not receive enough ****, please bring to the attention of your Supervisor. (ALM)
They have been trained to give you all the **** you can handle.!
Sincerely,
TFN.
(We do need a little humour guys and gals......)...
"Attention: ALL ASA EMPLOYEES.....
Dear ASA Employees,
Due to the current financial situation caused by the slowdown of the economy, Management has decided to implement a scheme to put workers of 50 years of age and above on Early Retirement.
This scheme will be known as RAPE (Retire Aged People Early).
Persons selected to be RAPED can apply to management to be eligible for the SHAFT scheme (Special Help After Forced Termination).
Persons who have been RAPED and SHAFTED will be reviewed under the SCREW program (Scheme Covering Retired Early Workers).
A person may be RAPED once, SHAFTED twice and SCREWED as many times as Management deems appropriate.......
Persons who have been RAPED can only get AIDS (Additional Income for Dependants & Spouse) or HERPES (Half Earnings for Retired Personnel Early Severance).
Obviously persons who have AIDS or HERPES will not be SHAFTED or SCREWED any further by Management.
Persons who are not RAPED and are staying on will receive as much **** (Special High Intensity Training) as possible. Management has always prided itself on the amount of **** it gives employees.
Should you feel that you do not receive enough ****, please bring to the attention of your Supervisor. (ALM)
They have been trained to give you all the **** you can handle.!
Sincerely,
TFN.
(We do need a little humour guys and gals......)
...
...... 
...... 
.. 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Here
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Civil Air Australia - Response to Australian Financial Review 30 Jan 2009
Re: "Traffic Controllers Test Rudd Stance" 30/01/09, pg 3
Dear Sir/Madam,
In response to Louise Dodson’s article “Traffic Controllers Test Rudd’s Stance” in the Australian Financial Review, Friday January 30, I would like to put a differing view. There is no doubt that the economic situation is grave and warrants great attention on all fronts. The calls from Government by both the Prime Minister and his deputy, Julia Gillard, have been couched in terms that plead the case for retaining jobs. I and all of my members support this position.
The simple fact of the matter is that we are in the midst of a critical shortage of Air Traffic Controllers worldwide. In Australia, we are currently operating, unsustainably, at about 90% of actual functional requirement. We are competing in an aggressive market in which the rest of the world seems to be winning...
The situation has been exacerbated by an employer whose sole negotiating position has been that no salary increases can be made unless the employee pays for it in full. After 9 months of negotiations and a year without any pay rise, the offer from the employer stands at 4.1% per annum with removal of conditions of service to pay for it. Essentially we have been told that there is a fixed bucket of money that will not be increased this time around (from the baseline of the previous agreement). I would also point out that middle management pay scales have not been similarly restricted and a 4.3% pay rise was granted with no conditions trade off required. Senior Executive salaries across the same period have grown significantly above this rate.
Controllers currently enjoy a provision of sick leave as required. Far from being “unlimited” controllers must provide a certificate for every absence above 1 day duration. Above 1 month requires a full medical for return to duty (mandated by government legislation). We are bound by the same standards that commercial pilots must apply and provide roster coverage 24 hours a day 365 days a year. Even with these stringent requirements Airservices quotes internally that sick leave runs at about 9 days per controller per annum. In a roster style that yields an average reduction in life expectancy of 5 years and the most stringent medical standards applied in any industry Australia wide this is a remarkable measure of the professionalism and dedication of our members. Sick leave is not the problem. Airservices has failed in its legislated duty to carry enough staff for real operations.
Examination of Airservices’ annual report will show dramatic increases in profit over several years and similar increase in the amount of traffic handled. Meanwhile real operational staff numbers have decreased and yet there is apparently no productivity element to any of this.
Civil Air has not recommended strike action. In fact we specifically excluded it in discussions with Minister Albanese before Christmas. As you are aware, the remaining elements of Workchoices provide stringent procedural limitations upon how industrial action might be taken and amongst these is a secret ballot listing every possible type of action. Civil Air seeks to progress its claims to an agreed and negotiated outcome with Airservices. Any action taken will be framed to limit impact upon the economy and travelling public.
When the mining industry was booming wages prices rose accordingly. In Air Traffic Control the market is very aggressive and I’m afraid Australia simply cannot compete. We have vacancies that are not being filled at a rate that offsets losses overseas much less addresses the current shortages. We are not seeking to make a bad situation worse. To the contrary we are working to achieve a long term solution to a problem not of our making.
Robert Mason
President, Civil Air
Dear Sir/Madam,
In response to Louise Dodson’s article “Traffic Controllers Test Rudd’s Stance” in the Australian Financial Review, Friday January 30, I would like to put a differing view. There is no doubt that the economic situation is grave and warrants great attention on all fronts. The calls from Government by both the Prime Minister and his deputy, Julia Gillard, have been couched in terms that plead the case for retaining jobs. I and all of my members support this position.
The simple fact of the matter is that we are in the midst of a critical shortage of Air Traffic Controllers worldwide. In Australia, we are currently operating, unsustainably, at about 90% of actual functional requirement. We are competing in an aggressive market in which the rest of the world seems to be winning...
The situation has been exacerbated by an employer whose sole negotiating position has been that no salary increases can be made unless the employee pays for it in full. After 9 months of negotiations and a year without any pay rise, the offer from the employer stands at 4.1% per annum with removal of conditions of service to pay for it. Essentially we have been told that there is a fixed bucket of money that will not be increased this time around (from the baseline of the previous agreement). I would also point out that middle management pay scales have not been similarly restricted and a 4.3% pay rise was granted with no conditions trade off required. Senior Executive salaries across the same period have grown significantly above this rate.
Controllers currently enjoy a provision of sick leave as required. Far from being “unlimited” controllers must provide a certificate for every absence above 1 day duration. Above 1 month requires a full medical for return to duty (mandated by government legislation). We are bound by the same standards that commercial pilots must apply and provide roster coverage 24 hours a day 365 days a year. Even with these stringent requirements Airservices quotes internally that sick leave runs at about 9 days per controller per annum. In a roster style that yields an average reduction in life expectancy of 5 years and the most stringent medical standards applied in any industry Australia wide this is a remarkable measure of the professionalism and dedication of our members. Sick leave is not the problem. Airservices has failed in its legislated duty to carry enough staff for real operations.
Examination of Airservices’ annual report will show dramatic increases in profit over several years and similar increase in the amount of traffic handled. Meanwhile real operational staff numbers have decreased and yet there is apparently no productivity element to any of this.
Civil Air has not recommended strike action. In fact we specifically excluded it in discussions with Minister Albanese before Christmas. As you are aware, the remaining elements of Workchoices provide stringent procedural limitations upon how industrial action might be taken and amongst these is a secret ballot listing every possible type of action. Civil Air seeks to progress its claims to an agreed and negotiated outcome with Airservices. Any action taken will be framed to limit impact upon the economy and travelling public.
When the mining industry was booming wages prices rose accordingly. In Air Traffic Control the market is very aggressive and I’m afraid Australia simply cannot compete. We have vacancies that are not being filled at a rate that offsets losses overseas much less addresses the current shortages. We are not seeking to make a bad situation worse. To the contrary we are working to achieve a long term solution to a problem not of our making.
Robert Mason
President, Civil Air