Another slap in the face for ATC?
Thread Starter
Hypocrisy??
Rudd's top advisers ignore appeal for wage restraint
A secret memo obtained by The Sun-Herald reveals Special Minister of State John Faulkner wants a 5.6 per cent pay rise for all senior staff employed by MPs.
The memo, written three days before Christmas, also reveals Senator Faulkner has been working on a longer-term strategy to boost the pay and conditions for senior staff amid concern about burnout and soaring turnover rates.
Senator Faulkner says a ruling by Mr Rudd shortly after he was elected in 2007 had in effect frozen pay rates for senior staff, with "no mechanism" for salary increases.
"I am considering approving a 5.6 per cent salary increase for senior staff who have not had an annual increase since 9 December 2007," the memo says.
"I also wish to commence the process of developing a longer- term employment framework for senior staff which will incorporate remuneration and other terms and conditions of employment."
Senator Faulkner also promises to contact senior staff early this year to begin consulting on a "longer-term employment framework".
With growing gloom about the economic outlook for Australia and the world, Mr Rudd last week warned workers to "restrain wage claims" to help deal with the crisis.
US President Barack Obama has also frozen pay rises for his senior advisers.
A spokesman for Senator Faulkner said senior staff employed under the Members of Parliament Staff Act had not been given a universal pay rise since May 2006, unlike other less senior staff who had been given annual increases of 4.5 per cent three years' running.
"This is a consultation process and no decision has yet been made," the spokesman said.
The most senior staffers are paid up to $192,400 in basic wages and an extra $17,719 as a special payment to cover long working hours. A 5.6 per cent increase would mean an extra $11,766.
Chiefs of staff for cabinet ministers and the Leader of the Opposition, who are paid up to $136,100, plus the $17,719 payment, would be in line for an extra $8614.
The recommended increase follows news that two or Mr Rudd's senior staffers - including his chief of staff, Alister Jordan - had received special top-up payments to boost their $200,000-plus annual incomes.
Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union national secretary Dave Oliver said Mr Rudd's plea for wage restraint highlighted a "classic case of privatise the profits and socialise the losses".
Community and Public Sector Union deputy national secretary Nadine Flood said senior staff had not had a pay rise for some time, "so an interim increase is a step in the right direction".
The Sydney Morning Herald
- Josh Gordon
- January 24, 2009
A secret memo obtained by The Sun-Herald reveals Special Minister of State John Faulkner wants a 5.6 per cent pay rise for all senior staff employed by MPs.
The memo, written three days before Christmas, also reveals Senator Faulkner has been working on a longer-term strategy to boost the pay and conditions for senior staff amid concern about burnout and soaring turnover rates.
Senator Faulkner says a ruling by Mr Rudd shortly after he was elected in 2007 had in effect frozen pay rates for senior staff, with "no mechanism" for salary increases.
"I am considering approving a 5.6 per cent salary increase for senior staff who have not had an annual increase since 9 December 2007," the memo says.
"I also wish to commence the process of developing a longer- term employment framework for senior staff which will incorporate remuneration and other terms and conditions of employment."
Senator Faulkner also promises to contact senior staff early this year to begin consulting on a "longer-term employment framework".
With growing gloom about the economic outlook for Australia and the world, Mr Rudd last week warned workers to "restrain wage claims" to help deal with the crisis.
US President Barack Obama has also frozen pay rises for his senior advisers.
A spokesman for Senator Faulkner said senior staff employed under the Members of Parliament Staff Act had not been given a universal pay rise since May 2006, unlike other less senior staff who had been given annual increases of 4.5 per cent three years' running.
"This is a consultation process and no decision has yet been made," the spokesman said.
The most senior staffers are paid up to $192,400 in basic wages and an extra $17,719 as a special payment to cover long working hours. A 5.6 per cent increase would mean an extra $11,766.
Chiefs of staff for cabinet ministers and the Leader of the Opposition, who are paid up to $136,100, plus the $17,719 payment, would be in line for an extra $8614.
The recommended increase follows news that two or Mr Rudd's senior staffers - including his chief of staff, Alister Jordan - had received special top-up payments to boost their $200,000-plus annual incomes.
Australian Manufacturing Workers' Union national secretary Dave Oliver said Mr Rudd's plea for wage restraint highlighted a "classic case of privatise the profits and socialise the losses".
Community and Public Sector Union deputy national secretary Nadine Flood said senior staff had not had a pay rise for some time, "so an interim increase is a step in the right direction".
The Sydney Morning Herald
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere that looks a lot better when I close my eyes
Age: 37
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this ASA stuff confuses me. Why can't we just give controllers the standard four, or if we're generous, six weeks off per year, the usual sick-leave and other entitlements applied to other similar professions and meet them in the middle on pay conditions?
The flipside of the coin is, why do ATC get paid quite a bit more than many of the pilots they are controlling? Why can't everyone just be paid what they're worth?
All the controllers I've ever met are hardworking, honest, professional, safety-conscious people, as they should be. I greatly appreciate the (sadly more and more limited) service provided. If I sound at any point like I'm ATC-bashing or pandering it's because I don't fully understand the issue and would like to know more.
Call me communist, but I think profiteering, corporate greed, screwing the little guy for a buck and indeed money in general is a crock of ****.
The flipside of the coin is, why do ATC get paid quite a bit more than many of the pilots they are controlling? Why can't everyone just be paid what they're worth?
All the controllers I've ever met are hardworking, honest, professional, safety-conscious people, as they should be. I greatly appreciate the (sadly more and more limited) service provided. If I sound at any point like I'm ATC-bashing or pandering it's because I don't fully understand the issue and would like to know more.
Call me communist, but I think profiteering, corporate greed, screwing the little guy for a buck and indeed money in general is a crock of ****.
"It seems Mr Rudd can call for restraint and declare "we're all in this together" until he is blue in the face. In this dispute, it might appear some are in it for themselves"
Mr Wright ... show me one EBA/Industrial negotiation where BOTH parties weren't "in it for themselves" ... and I'll show you an FSO who never missed traffic ! (Griffo excepted)
Mr Wright ... show me one EBA/Industrial negotiation where BOTH parties weren't "in it for themselves" ... and I'll show you an FSO who never missed traffic ! (Griffo excepted)
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: YLIL on my days off
Age: 50
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unlimited sick leave amazes me.
It it unlimited, or unlimited up to your accrued entitlement (like, 1 year = 10 days, after 10 years with no sick leave I've got 100 days and I can take it all at once if I need to? - or is it full on 356 days, go for your life?)?
If it's the full on 356 go for it kind, there's no way it'll stay in. The management that let that through should be shot.
Having said that, I've known a controller or two in my time and you guys need the leave when and where required. No questions asked.
What do the ground Ambo's / Copper's get as far as sick / stress / annual leave entitlements?
It it unlimited, or unlimited up to your accrued entitlement (like, 1 year = 10 days, after 10 years with no sick leave I've got 100 days and I can take it all at once if I need to? - or is it full on 356 days, go for your life?)?
If it's the full on 356 go for it kind, there's no way it'll stay in. The management that let that through should be shot.
Having said that, I've known a controller or two in my time and you guys need the leave when and where required. No questions asked.
What do the ground Ambo's / Copper's get as far as sick / stress / annual leave entitlements?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: melbourne
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, it was Buck who offered up the unlimited sick leave, and Ferris is spot on is saying:
It was 'offered' for the purpose of getting a large unfunded liability off the books (same as they have been trying for years to get us old farts out of the CSS super!!).
There is NO sick leave problem. This is nothing more than a smoke screen from the AWB. They know it won't be given up without a fight. Which is what they want! It gives the spin kings an opportunity to call the service interruptions "industrial action by those greedy controllers" to mask the real issue, especially from the minister/government - that is, the complete mismanagement of the organisation.
I repeat there is NO sick leave problem - as evidenced by ASA management not 'performance managing' or disciplining anyone about sick leave. As has quoted elsewhere, single day absences have been declining.
This is more a moral battle - the controllers won't give up this professional 'insurance' for nothing, thus ASA get the chance for their PR spin. Should the controllers trade it away, ASA gain NO financial advantage, but they'd feel they'd had a crushing victory, making those nasty controllers back down on a key issue. So, a win-win for the spin kings. The longer the stale mate goes on, the more they can keep the focus off the real problems, and the longer the effective 'pay freeze', the better for ASA.
But do not be fooled. This is only a diversion. Long after the agreement is eventually settled, the closures and interruptions will continue unabated. There still won't be enough controllers (less actually), and there still won't be any substantial training happening. It will takes years for the mess to be cleaned up from this regime.
So, forget about the sick leave issue - it is really a non-event. (In fact if ASA got their way, it would make the balance sheet worse, because they have to fund the 'potential' leave, rather than the lesser 'actual' leave).
We have genuine crisis - we are at, probably beyond, the critical point. The solution, in the long term, will probably involve very substantial long term traffic restrictions whilst the company is rebuilt. The industry pain is only beginning; and it has NOTHING to do with the certified agreement, sick leave or any possible "protected industrial action".
Why else would ASA be holding the line of 'there is no shortage' whilst simultaneously offering dodgy visas to 'non-australian' experienced controllers to track direct to SY TWR/TCU? I thought the law was that these things could only be offered if you couldn't get local talent. But if we're fully staffed, as the spin kings would have you believe, why haven't these SY positions even been advertised internally to aussie controllers? Wouldn't be because there is ZERO chance of any controller being released from ANY ATC group because we have a critical shortage, would it Minister?
If only the Minister would ask the right questions.
The truth is out there.
It was introduced years ago to remove a large overhang of unused sickleave from the accounts- to make the books look better
There is NO sick leave problem. This is nothing more than a smoke screen from the AWB. They know it won't be given up without a fight. Which is what they want! It gives the spin kings an opportunity to call the service interruptions "industrial action by those greedy controllers" to mask the real issue, especially from the minister/government - that is, the complete mismanagement of the organisation.
I repeat there is NO sick leave problem - as evidenced by ASA management not 'performance managing' or disciplining anyone about sick leave. As has quoted elsewhere, single day absences have been declining.
This is more a moral battle - the controllers won't give up this professional 'insurance' for nothing, thus ASA get the chance for their PR spin. Should the controllers trade it away, ASA gain NO financial advantage, but they'd feel they'd had a crushing victory, making those nasty controllers back down on a key issue. So, a win-win for the spin kings. The longer the stale mate goes on, the more they can keep the focus off the real problems, and the longer the effective 'pay freeze', the better for ASA.
But do not be fooled. This is only a diversion. Long after the agreement is eventually settled, the closures and interruptions will continue unabated. There still won't be enough controllers (less actually), and there still won't be any substantial training happening. It will takes years for the mess to be cleaned up from this regime.
So, forget about the sick leave issue - it is really a non-event. (In fact if ASA got their way, it would make the balance sheet worse, because they have to fund the 'potential' leave, rather than the lesser 'actual' leave).
We have genuine crisis - we are at, probably beyond, the critical point. The solution, in the long term, will probably involve very substantial long term traffic restrictions whilst the company is rebuilt. The industry pain is only beginning; and it has NOTHING to do with the certified agreement, sick leave or any possible "protected industrial action".
Why else would ASA be holding the line of 'there is no shortage' whilst simultaneously offering dodgy visas to 'non-australian' experienced controllers to track direct to SY TWR/TCU? I thought the law was that these things could only be offered if you couldn't get local talent. But if we're fully staffed, as the spin kings would have you believe, why haven't these SY positions even been advertised internally to aussie controllers? Wouldn't be because there is ZERO chance of any controller being released from ANY ATC group because we have a critical shortage, would it Minister?
If only the Minister would ask the right questions.
The truth is out there.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not "unlimited" sick leave, that is a misnomer. It is sick leave "as required" (by the ailment not by the controller).
ATC's are able to take one day off without a certificate. More than one day and a doctor has to be visited and a certificate produced.
Airservices can require employees to visit a DAME if they want a second opinion and in any case after more than 30 days a DAME is the only one who can authorise a return to work. (And I have known same cases where that permission was refused and the controller given more time off).
The clause was introduced into the award when Buck Brooksbank and George Grunbaum were running the place and was to offload the books and make management of controller unavailability easier. (Try have half a dozen staff on leave without pay, they will probably look for a less demanding job)
Pre this agreement after the standard public service entitlement controllers were on leave without pay. The obvious consequence of this was that if you were sick you came to work, you needed to save the sick leave for when you were really sick!
Hazard identifications (HAZids) are very popular these days; the AWB should try doing one on a control centre or worse still a Tower assuming five days sick leave. You will find that colds and flu run rampant; controllers are often working in an unfit state; under the weather, emotionally upset, not concentrating on what they are doing. The employer is vicariously responsible for the controllers actions. I assure you Greg it is better to wear a overtime bill that wear a hull loss attributed to a sick or emotionally disturbed ATC being at work because the employer is only clever enough to manage KPIs, not the business.
Controllers have long term sick leave for many reasons. Debilitating illnesses such a dengue fever, broken legs that make control tower access impossible. stress that can be overcome but needs time; family crises that cause depression or loss of concentration, the list is endless.
A caring employer does not want to lose skilled staff and many will fund such arrangements; the only difference with controllers is that it was written into their work contract in a time when the management of Airservices did care.
ATC's are able to take one day off without a certificate. More than one day and a doctor has to be visited and a certificate produced.
Airservices can require employees to visit a DAME if they want a second opinion and in any case after more than 30 days a DAME is the only one who can authorise a return to work. (And I have known same cases where that permission was refused and the controller given more time off).
The clause was introduced into the award when Buck Brooksbank and George Grunbaum were running the place and was to offload the books and make management of controller unavailability easier. (Try have half a dozen staff on leave without pay, they will probably look for a less demanding job)
Pre this agreement after the standard public service entitlement controllers were on leave without pay. The obvious consequence of this was that if you were sick you came to work, you needed to save the sick leave for when you were really sick!
Hazard identifications (HAZids) are very popular these days; the AWB should try doing one on a control centre or worse still a Tower assuming five days sick leave. You will find that colds and flu run rampant; controllers are often working in an unfit state; under the weather, emotionally upset, not concentrating on what they are doing. The employer is vicariously responsible for the controllers actions. I assure you Greg it is better to wear a overtime bill that wear a hull loss attributed to a sick or emotionally disturbed ATC being at work because the employer is only clever enough to manage KPIs, not the business.
Controllers have long term sick leave for many reasons. Debilitating illnesses such a dengue fever, broken legs that make control tower access impossible. stress that can be overcome but needs time; family crises that cause depression or loss of concentration, the list is endless.
A caring employer does not want to lose skilled staff and many will fund such arrangements; the only difference with controllers is that it was written into their work contract in a time when the management of Airservices did care.
Queensland Police get 'standard' sick leave and then put a few days of their leave a year into a 'sick leave accumulation account'.
Once you use your 'standard' sick leave you can then move into using the accumulation if you have certificates. In a large workforce this accumulation account has years of 'hours' available in it and is of course mainly there for major illness (cancer, breaking limbs etc). It obviously has limits but certainly a fantastic idea.
Generally not abused because the 'bank' is not seen to be managements tool but rather than your peers as each officer makes a 'deposit' into it.
Once you use your 'standard' sick leave you can then move into using the accumulation if you have certificates. In a large workforce this accumulation account has years of 'hours' available in it and is of course mainly there for major illness (cancer, breaking limbs etc). It obviously has limits but certainly a fantastic idea.
Generally not abused because the 'bank' is not seen to be managements tool but rather than your peers as each officer makes a 'deposit' into it.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Melbourne, Vic
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interestingly, AsA is happy for the clerks and pen-pushers in AWB to take up to two consecutive days off sick without a certificate, but wants to restrict Controllers to only one, even though Controllers have the same, much tougher, legal requirement as pilots to be fully fit for duty at all times.
I think I smell a political rat...
I think I smell a political rat...
