Airservices Australia insiders warn air-traffic job cuts are 'huge risk to public"
Thread Starter
Airservices Australia insiders warn air-traffic job cuts are 'huge risk to public"
Seems the ABC agrees that something is not right with air safety. if you ask me, critical safety related activity and infrastructure do not belong in a corporate - for profit structure, they belong in a government bureaucratic structural model.
i warned that change will only occur after Two or more smoking holes - major loss of life, before this charade of a corporate model for a natural government monopoly is seen for the abomination it really is. Seems like someone in Airservices agrees.
"Airservices Australia insiders warn air-traffic job cuts are 'huge risk to public safety'
By the National Reporting Team's Benjamin Sveen and national technology reporter Jake Sturmer
Job cuts have left the government body responsible for air-traffic control in Australia in crisis, with senior Airservices officials providing damning accounts that the organisation is now "a huge risk to public safety".
Key points:
Airservices staff fear it could take 'blood on their hands' before changes are made
More than 700 jobs have been cut from the organisation to date as part of cost-cutting
Senator Nick Xenophon is demanding an immediate cease of the retrenchments
"It's only a matter of time before we have a major aviation incident," one Airservices executive has told the ABC.
As a result of a cost-cutting program known as Accelerate, Airservices Australia suffered a net loss of more than 700 staff.
But the organisation has insisted the cuts only affect backroom support staff and not frontline workers such as air-traffic controllers and airport firefighters.
The definition of "frontline" has been hotly disputed among staff, as the cuts include positions such as safety specialists, radiation hazard inspectors, flight simulator training operators and environmental noise managers.
Fears about Airservices' capacity to manage problems in the skies had been debated since executives learned of how extensive cuts would impact their operational areas last July.
But these simmering anxieties reached a new flashpoint when a thunderstorm erupted over Melbourne just after Christmas last year.".....
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-1...s-warn/8268360
i warned that change will only occur after Two or more smoking holes - major loss of life, before this charade of a corporate model for a natural government monopoly is seen for the abomination it really is. Seems like someone in Airservices agrees.
"Airservices Australia insiders warn air-traffic job cuts are 'huge risk to public safety'
By the National Reporting Team's Benjamin Sveen and national technology reporter Jake Sturmer
Job cuts have left the government body responsible for air-traffic control in Australia in crisis, with senior Airservices officials providing damning accounts that the organisation is now "a huge risk to public safety".
Key points:
Airservices staff fear it could take 'blood on their hands' before changes are made
More than 700 jobs have been cut from the organisation to date as part of cost-cutting
Senator Nick Xenophon is demanding an immediate cease of the retrenchments
"It's only a matter of time before we have a major aviation incident," one Airservices executive has told the ABC.
As a result of a cost-cutting program known as Accelerate, Airservices Australia suffered a net loss of more than 700 staff.
But the organisation has insisted the cuts only affect backroom support staff and not frontline workers such as air-traffic controllers and airport firefighters.
The definition of "frontline" has been hotly disputed among staff, as the cuts include positions such as safety specialists, radiation hazard inspectors, flight simulator training operators and environmental noise managers.
Fears about Airservices' capacity to manage problems in the skies had been debated since executives learned of how extensive cuts would impact their operational areas last July.
But these simmering anxieties reached a new flashpoint when a thunderstorm erupted over Melbourne just after Christmas last year.".....
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-1...s-warn/8268360
And it will only get worse. Since user pays was introduced the decline in activity in GA especially has seen aircraft sold off and/or relocated to non controlled airports around the major cities. Then revenue drops and staff cuts are made plus charges increased. This in turn makes more aircraft be sold off/relocate etc,and around we go again. If it wasn't for the college at Parafield the tower would be closed long ago. More staff cuts etc. Simular story around the country I bet.However ASA doesn't help themselves either. Years past GA was considered their bread and butter with airlines the cream. Today GA is encouraged to stay away from CTA and ordered to put a full plan in for a minor track through airspace not even landing inside it, with regular long delays expected. So what does GA do? They stay away so less revenue,staff cuts etc and around the parcel goes again.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over the 26 years that I observed at ASA empires were built in different areas with exponential growth of staff in those areas. Very little attention was paid to replacing retiring and resigning ATC's let alone the growth in air traffic. The NOC was known as a joke amongst working controllers, why was it ever created? Another empire.
I firmly believe that Russell increased employment in areas that would make the appalling staff engagement surveys look better. Empires were created and now they're falling. Some engineering jobs and other required classifications appear to be caught up in VR/IVR. One thing's for sure, there's a number of people rubbing their hands in glee at the payout they got/getting.
The controllers at the work face will make it work, whatever Harfield does.
The best shakeup any politician could perform is put a stop to an essential service making profits, returning dividends to incompetent governments etc, won't happen but.
I firmly believe that Russell increased employment in areas that would make the appalling staff engagement surveys look better. Empires were created and now they're falling. Some engineering jobs and other required classifications appear to be caught up in VR/IVR. One thing's for sure, there's a number of people rubbing their hands in glee at the payout they got/getting.
The controllers at the work face will make it work, whatever Harfield does.
The best shakeup any politician could perform is put a stop to an essential service making profits, returning dividends to incompetent governments etc, won't happen but.
The best shakeup any politician could perform is put a stop to an essential service making profits, returning dividends
Not sure your argument makes sense, Mostly.
You said user pays came in and scared everyone away so revenue dropped and hence staff cuts. Before user pays there WAS no revenue, so there should have been MORE staff cuts. Not sure how you get a revenue drop from there being no user pays.
You said user pays came in and scared everyone away so revenue dropped and hence staff cuts. Before user pays there WAS no revenue, so there should have been MORE staff cuts. Not sure how you get a revenue drop from there being no user pays.
Trevor,
Easy -the government turned the money tap off and they had to generate the revenue themselves - thus user pays.
Personally i think all this user pays stuff has knobs on it - we fund vital infrastructure such as road and rail so why should the airline/aviation industry be unfunded?
there is no credit for the benefit to the economy and it must pay for itself yet when it goes away (such as during the dispute or the ansett collapse) the economy suffers..
seems to be a bit of a both way bet to me
Easy -the government turned the money tap off and they had to generate the revenue themselves - thus user pays.
Personally i think all this user pays stuff has knobs on it - we fund vital infrastructure such as road and rail so why should the airline/aviation industry be unfunded?
there is no credit for the benefit to the economy and it must pay for itself yet when it goes away (such as during the dispute or the ansett collapse) the economy suffers..
seems to be a bit of a both way bet to me
we fund vital infrastructure such as road and rail so why should the airline/aviation industry be unfunded?
The best shakeup any politician could perform is put a stop to an essential service making profits
Very soon there will be no users in GA to pay.So "someone" will have to pay for the essential services such as RFDS and fire fighting and maintenance of country airports.That will be tax payers and rate payers.
Very soon there will be no users in GA to pay.So "someone" will have to pay for the essential services such as RFDS and fire fighting and maintenance of country airports.That will be tax payers and rate payers.
ARFFS - Airline pax, not GA
Country Airports - already mostly rate payers and tax payers and RPT pax if they have them.
GA pays for bugger all major infrastructure. It pays mostly for the bureaucracy to oversee itself.
The NOC is not a National Operations Centre, it's at best a airline liaison unit that runs a bit of software called harmony. The name is all wrong however Greg Russell probably intended it to have much bigger role "where are all the radios that can be used when the controllers are on strike" is one quote attributed to him. The role it does have, however, can easily be cut back and the work passed back to ATC, who used to do all the liaison before the NOC was established. Now there's the rub with the cut backs, either the work that the people were doing does not get done; or someone who is left has to do it.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rumour at the time it was established is that immediately following 9/11 he was impressed by the FAA's version with it's actions in that event, and wanted one here for the same purpose. That GR was told that's fine, but to function properly it will need to be located at one of the Centres, where operational staff are available, they can be brought in and consulted when required, rotate through the function etc. etc. (which I think is how the FAA's work).
No, he wanted it in CB. I guess he had his reasons, so that's where it went. For a while there it did seem it struggled to find itself a useful purpose.
No, he wanted it in CB. I guess he had his reasons, so that's where it went. For a while there it did seem it struggled to find itself a useful purpose.
You said user pays came in and scared everyone away so revenue dropped and hence staff cuts. Before user pays there WAS no revenue, so there should have been MORE staff cuts. Not sure how you get a revenue drop from there being no user pays
Ironically there is a fuel levy on petrol for cars which noone seems to protest.
This sounds like deja vu, from the time when the number of controllers at Jandakot was halved (about 16 years ago?) and the tower had to close at 6 when it is still really busy, sure enough someone landed on top of someone else just after the tower closed.
Is it true that controllers are coming in on 457 visas?
Yes there was revenue before user pays, buckshot, from the fuel levy. The excise duty we now have is about the same amount as the levy was and we have user pays as well.
Is it true that controllers are coming in on 457 visas?
Yes there was revenue before user pays, buckshot, from the fuel levy. The excise duty we now have is about the same amount as the levy was and we have user pays as well.
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I bet the house that this organisation, like many other Fed organisations, is paralysed within and has no internal capability left to adapt or change with the times and serve the current needs of its customers.
I personally blame the superior protection their own HR framework provides them from being meaningful and relevant to their purpose. It penalises those that go the extra mile and compensates those that are just boat anchors.
I personally blame the superior protection their own HR framework provides them from being meaningful and relevant to their purpose. It penalises those that go the extra mile and compensates those that are just boat anchors.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a massive purge (under Dick I think?) 7000 staff members down to 3800 I think. The sky didn't fall in then and won't now. Maybe the controllers can get a coffee on their first break of the morning without having to line up for half an hour now that the massive number of floor walkers are being moved on 