Merged: ASA Staff Shortage

[oziatc]

They did meet!
I understood it was productive.
Nothing conclusive.
Next meeting Tuesday and Wednesday.
Lets see what happens at the next meeting!

[Lodown]

Bit of a quandry on how to stop the bleeding. The restructures just aren't working as a diversionary measure anymore. From a political viewpoint, the guvmint can't afford the message of paying more in recessionary times; and AsA can't afford to lose any more ATC's or console hours. A rock and a hard place comes to mind. How badly does CivilAir want to be seen as a friend of the Labor Party? How badly does the Labor Party want to be seen as a friend of the working class? Perhaps the most political expedient option might be to cut the CEO loose and find a new one. Might delay the inevitable for a while. Maybe if some incumbent boardmembers get their marching orders as well, it might buy a little more time.

Just wild speculation...

[peuce]

Government Objectives:

• Minimise any pay rises ... if any
• Attract sufficient Controllers to keep airways open
• Make current Controllers happy

Possible actions:

• Agree to pay rise ... effective 2011???
• As an interim carrot, sweeten current conditions ... eg overtime requirement, leave entitlements etc
• Appoint new CEO and agree to a Controller(Civil Air)-involved restructure

I don't think Controllers are totally money focused, so a trade off between instant improved conditions (lifestyle) and a future pay rise may be palatable.

A "proper" restucture will also placate many Controllers and would, conceivably, include the returning of many Controllers to the coal face.

The combination of these improvements should also attract a number of Controllers back to the country.

Am I dreaming ?

[Howabout]

Having read this thread from the outside, I'd offer the following:

I'd like a Sunfish comment, but I think that the only way to get out of this mess is to fire the current CEO, plus minions, redeploy previously rated people - and if they can't hack it, fire them as well - and get in a CEO who's actually done the job.

OK, it might not be the best "business practice" when times are good, but I think that the only way to restore some faith and get some credibility is to have someone who's "been there, done that". Another suit won't cut it.

If the mood on this thread is reflective of the general feeling, and I don't know that it is (but suspect that it's close), then the only person who is going to attract loyaly and get the organisation out of the hole is someone that can acknowledge the stuff ups, apologise for the mismanagement and ask the controllers to keep doing it tough until the organisation is rebuilt. Including going to the Minister and telling him he's getting zip in respect of dividends while profit is reinvested in training and infrastructure.

I'd say that the only person who could do that, and attract the necessary loyaly, is an e x-ATC.

[max1]

TFN reminds me of the trainees who are found out of their depth.

They tend to focus on the areas they are comfortable with and spend their time 'dealing' with something that they already know how to do and don't do the actions that require immediate attention. The trainee hopes that by showing competence in one area that this will somehow cancel out their inability to deal with a confliction in another. They spend what seems like an eternity trying to co-ord with someone who isn't answering their line, whilst the clock is ticking on moving some aircraft that will be in conflict in 5 minutes time.
Russell spouted on about what a shemozzle Finance and some other areas were and how he had to spend his time getting that sorted, whilst spending no time in trying to understand what the core business is, and how the staffing issues were going to impact on this.
He hoped that Ken and PC would sort it out for him, and this is the mess he has ended up with. He has been busy disparaging his workforce and sacking managers but he has still not made the effort to understand why we have ATC . He still doesn't realise that we are there for the Aviation industry and not the other way around.
He really should work out that 95% of ASAs income is from Airways Activity and our customers demand uninterrupted service, and it is part of our charter from the toothless CASA that we have enough controllers.
With trainees you have to let them know, and help them to, prioritise and also tell them that the problems won't just go away if they ignore them.
It may initially be hard to do, and take them out of their comfort zone, but they won't pass if they continue to ignore things that need fixing and they will be found out.
The buck stops with the controller/CEO. It is called accountability.

I don't think we need an ex-ATC as much as someone who is interested in what generates the income, how it is derived, and is interested in the long term health of the organization especially in the area of safety. What we don't need is someone who is going to come in and decide that another management restructure is the panacea for all ills.

[Tiberius]

Peuce,

Am I dreaming ?

I know a controller in ML who listens to a lot of Supertramp, but even he is leaving by the end of the month.

[oziatc]

Rumours are just that rumours!
An isolated case is not a change of policy. The voicing of dissent when it becomes personal, vicious and public should not be tolerated by us or management!
Lets not make this out to be bigger than it actually is!
Tackle the ball and not the man!

[sunnySA]

oziatc said

Rumours are just that rumours!
An isolated case is not a change of policy. The voicing of dissent when it becomes personal, vicious and public should not be tolerated by us or management!
Lets not make this out to be bigger than it actually is!
Tackle the ball and not the man!

Agreed about "tackling the ball and not the man!" but that works both ways. For the first few years of the current CEO's reign there was a culture of fear, a fear of speaking out lest you be shown the door.

I am not sure that the voicing of dissent on this occurrence has become public. I certainly haven't seen public comments that I can attribute to an individual. I think it demonstrates how poorly ASA have handled negotiations, perhaps highlights that ASA have not been negotiating in good faith, brings to the for the passions people have about their profession and the mismanagement of Aus ATC.

[oziatc]

Sunny SA,
The context of my comment is that we should not get caught up in this.
It is a distraction!
We need to keep focused on the negotiations and the staff shortage.

There is nothing wrong with dissenting, provided that we know there are some limits. This is the case in any employment! It should not be personal, vicious or public.

The difference between us and management is that by definition management will always have the power to limit criticism and always will.

[Sunfish]

My guess is that the meeting with the Minister was what's called a "come to Jesus" meeting - a polite request by the Minister not to embarrass the Government, or else.

The "or else" in TFN's case is dismissal of the Board, and the new board will dismiss him. In the union's case the "or else" is declaration of ATC as an essential service.

There is no question now that TFN will go, it's just going to be a matter of the timing, because a "come to Jesus" meeting is the last tool you have, and if the Minister is using it, he is mightily pissed off.

I don't know what the outcome will be, if TFN is stupid, he will try and weasel out of making you a decent offer if he can, but I think he has run out of weasel space.

[everyonefedup]

I think that sacking TFN and his lap dogs would go a long way to restore a bit of faith back in the ranks.

What they should do is sack TFN, do a short term agreement for 12 - 18 months with a good faith pay rise of 6% or so; offer incentives for people to do overtime over the life of the short term agreement to let a new board and executive come up with a workable solution going forward.

At the end of the day - even if TFN manages to pull an agreement out of his hat the staff shortages will still be there. What is he going to blame next? "eerr... I have only been here for FOUR years... I'm errr still new at this... all of the problems still aren't my fault"

What a joke.

To think he started this negotiation with a letter to all staff saying that he thought the LAST negotiations weren't run properly and he was going to do it better. Well guess what buddy boy - the last agreement at least got voted in on time. We may not have liked it all but it was on the road to incremental change... then TFN came in and stuffed it up so the reforms never happened.

The problem with ASA management is that they think they are above everything... above the employees, above the unions. The can't quite get it that the employees and unions have more corporate history than all of them put together. I mean who on the management team was even involved with the last agreement? They even got rid of KOB right in the middle of the negotiation!!! You have to ask why they thought they needed to get rid of him... the last person with any memory of why decision were made.

Something smelly methinks?

[max1]

Anyone coming into this debacle would want to be paid a lot to try and fix it.

I would guess they would do what TFN did and start with a 'restructure', paying a premium to get the 'right people' and 'structures' to 'deliver us the future'.
Follow this up with 'exhaustive work' on a 5 year plan, and 'succesion planning' for management. Throw in a national whistlestop tour of 'No BS' meetings with staff, so he/she could learn 'firsthand' the issues facing the business i.e. a still ageing demographic and no staffing plan. Then 'streamline' areas such as training.

They could then put out glossy brochures and call them ' Our Committment-Our People' showing that they are 'committed' to making ASA 'A Great Place To Work'. Follow this up with more glossy brochures which could be called 'Atmospherix' and 'Azimuth'. They could also spent a lot of time O/S attending conferences so we are seen as a 'World Leader' as we 'grow the global brand'.

New CEO could then host a conference in Canberra, lets call it Waypoint, where he could get managers to give speeches outlining a 'vision' and telling of our 'focus', and also apologise for 'over promising and under delivering'.And so on, and so on.

How am I doing so far? Do I get the position?

[everyonefedup]

Could the next person be as bad as TFN?

I guess it is wishful thinking that someone will come in, talk to the ATCs, talk to the union and develop a solution in a collaborative way that gets the most out of what ATCs know is right and move forward....

I don't know if there is someone inside or outside that is up for the job... but I think that half of TFNs problem is that he thinks that HE is the only one with the solution.

I think we need almost a facilitator of ideas rather than a dictator with solutions. Instead of allowing one person to hand pick brown nosers that talk the talk why can't we get a person that can sit down, invite suggestions and then through collaboration find a solution that everyone can live with...

TFN and the exec are out of their depth... whenever people get that way they refuse to listen to ideas because they feel threatened. Lets get someone that is competent enough to listen instead of bark.

[Nautilus Blue]

Could the next person be as bad as TFN?

When TFN first arrived I can remember thinking 'who cares, he can't be any worse than the last one'. Well, he showed me!

NB

[boree3]

MAX1,

Eleven out of ten i`d say! Sounds like you`re the man....

[everyonefedup]

Hey Max1... TFN paid a lot of money to a lot of consultants to come up with his strategy... you seem to have come up with an equally good one by yourself!! With you as CEO we could save millions!!!!

At this point anyone would be better - Bernie looks like a bloody genius next to this twit.

[max1]

Consultants - those who borrow my watch to tell me what time it is.

I find it strange that in paying high packages to get the right managers, that these managers then go out and hire consultants to effectively do their job for them.

Third Horizon, Mercer, Ernst and Young, PWC, etc. We use them all.
What next a feng-shui master?

I also remember walking out of his self proclaimed 'No BS' guardedly optimistic that here was someone at least prepared to listen, and who was giving guarantees about getting new controllers, allowing staff movement, access to leave,etc. The consensus was he sounded okay but he needed to walk the walk not just talk the talk.
Yes he does need to go.
Profits for the government are up. I look at the annual reports, staff costs in 2005 were $402.8 million, and in 2008 $402.3 million ( thats right $500k less). Airways Revenue was $614.4m in 2005 and $707.3 million in 2008
($92.9m more). Profit was $58.2 million in 2005 and $92m in 2008 ($33.8m more). We are told that there is no money for the promised 'bloody good payrise' as infrastructure spending has been neglected and there is a need to spend $100's millions of dollars. Its no good having new radars if there are not enough bodies to look at them.
It is a bit like the Yes Minister episode with the fantastic new hospital that is a beacon of efficiency but has no patients.

[Duff Man]

On the subject of a Toothless CASA, here's an extract from Ben Sandiland's latest entry on the Plane Talking blog...

Other examples of questionable conduct at CASA include its insistence that it is perfectly safe for jet airliners to self separate on the major trunk routes when AirServices Australia can’t find enough air traffic controllers to provide a service which is a legislated obligation in this country and throughout the first, second and much of the third world as well. (Short of imprisoning the diminished ranks of controllers inside the control centres the supremely well managed AirServices Australia enterprise won’t have enough qualified staff to provide full services for years to come.)

It is dangerously foolish for CASA to promote self separation between airlines as safe when it doesn’t provide complete certainty as to where all of the aircraft close to each other actually are. It is ridiculous for the government to tolerate such a situation. Don’t believe the media on this. Believe the chief pilots and chief executive officers of the main Australian and foreign airlines trying to efficiently use Australian air space and save their a*ses in advance of any sudden requirement for truck loads of body bags.

Way forward? Symbolic removal of the festering rot from the top is most certainly the first step, but don't be deluded into thinking a fresh selection of ex-ATCs will garner instant loyalty. The change to be made now is cultural. Airservices must no longer maintain structure as a profit-focussed corporation. For too long strategic planning has been taken with this as the number 1 priority, given the cost cutting bonus driven management culture. Bonuses must go. Executive salary must be fixed as a multiple of non-executive salaries. That is, a public service-style graded system from the bottom to the top.

The concept of a Canberra head office is anachronistic and too physically removed from the "customers". The AWB must move to a business park in a major capital city: lock, stock and barrel.

These fundamental, highly symbolic, but very functional changes can then be presented under a new agency name, as the tarnished Airservices Australia gets thrown into the shredder.

[max1]

"These fundamental, highly symbolic, but very functional changes can then be presented under a new agency name, as the tarnished Airservices Australia gets thrown into the shredder."

We were wondering when we would get another key ring.

For those wondering, everytime we get a name change they tend to give the staff a key ring to celebrate the brave new era a name change is supposed to bring.

[oziatc]

How about they relocate to existing buildings/leases in close proximity to airports, their air traffic controllers, technicians and customer bases. Somewhere like Tullamarine or Brisbane. Such a motion would increase interaction with the workforce and hopefully increase accessibility to management.
The isolation of Canberra AWB has done nothing but promoted an elitist aloof management style which is unworkable for our industry. I do believe our current ATC Mangager is doing what he can to overcome this but is being defeated by being located in Canberra. After all the real value and assets to the business are its people.
If we had to we could work from any building (centre) or dog box (tower) and still achieve a reasonable service.
We prove this when we utilise our contingency procedures, like portable control towers for extended periods of time. I seem to recall Adelaide Tower using a portable tower for about 2 weeks a couple of years ago . We also do it every two years at Avalon East Tower for the Airshow.

We need far more communication and genuine interaction from console level all the way to the CEO. How that can be achieved in the current environment I do not know. The rot has set in and any communication in either direction is viewed with distrust.

It could probably start by acknowledging the valuable role ATC's fulfill in the industry! Secondly acknowledge a real staffing shortage and a failed history of current management to appropriately plan for adequate staffing.
Certainly little can change until a reasonable offer is made to ATC's in the current CA negotiations. As we go through this 3 yearly gut wrench the sentiment towards management gets progressively worse. We need to have at least 2-3 negotiations which are quick, reasonably generous and address the long term financial losses made by ATC's for the sake of the industry over the last number of agreements.

The critical thing is a real need to redevelop some trust in both directions. That means both management and us, the controllers, taking some risks (like any relationship) and hopefully over a period of time experiential outcomes where genuine good faith is displayed on both sides trust is developed. That being the case someone will need to hold tightly to the management leashes and er on the side of restraint and likewise we need to give them time to respond to significant issues.
Maybe we need to move from the guise of a Statuary Authority to a Government Department once more. This may hold the promise of a higher degree of accountability, greater access through the FOI act, elimination of a bonus structure for management, greater accountability to the minister and taxpayer.
Alternatively we potentially need to look at dividing the company into multiple entities (Preferably 3 or more)and privitise. (Geographically speaking that is, not by division of roles. If divided into Enroute/Approach/Tower there would still be no competition and as a result little that could be done to force compliance by CASA). At least then CASA's hands will be untied and there will be a greater degree of competition for the skills of ATC's, Tech's and Firies.
This would also give regional centres an opportunity to request tenders for ATC services and gain a competitive quote and likewise the consumer would pay the real cost of the service. That being the case there is nothing stopping the Fedral government supplying a subsidy to these regional centres in order to provide a cost neutral service if CASA deems ATC is required on a safety basis.

I suppose time will tell!