But what is the real cost?
Training for new airspace, mapping, man hours, hazard assessments, procedures rewrites, man hours on the project etc. is what has been tracked as costs of implementation.
But what about the real costs?
These include the costs of 'surrendering' ratings which previously had a significant cost basis as per the above costs. The costs of additional overtime needed due to rosters now being cut at some places below 'new' minimum staffing levels.
Some groups that have been combined with other groups within the SDE the cost of subsequent training for the new 'same group' ratings is not captured in the costs of implementation but have been pushed into group budgets.
What of training?
Group training programs have required full re-writes, has this been included in implementation or simply within group costs? This is more than documentation and procedures rewrites. Sources tell us that some groups ran in excess of 60 simulator exercises across all their sectors; that's right effectively 60 full days training wasted on every group, just updating exercises, if you are lucky.
Has any of the changes at the 'Acadamy' been captured?
Airspace redesign, rewriting exercises, theory amendments etc.
Are new trainees getting 'streamed' within a stream? If you are going to be placed with UAS; why learn all that low level traffic, SARWATCH, LSALT type stuff?
Cost, cost, cost. Not captured we'd bet.
Let's not mention the cost, not otherwise financially based. These include the cost on staff in terms of morale (particularly those who now consider their role not as valuable as it used to be), the cost in reputation with industry in terms of TIBA and otherwise employed traffic management strategies, the cost of the employer/employee relationship.
But we are now better positioned to provide a better service to our customers, sure?
No comments:
Post a Comment