Another Day, this time the press is good

15 . ATC emerges as a threat to air safety. Something should be done

Ben Sandilands writes:

It is time for a management clean-out at AirServices Australia as well as Qantas.

AirServices Australia is now emerging as a serious threat not just to public safety, but to Australia’s international reputation.

At last someone is displaying that they get it, well done Ben and Crikey!

It is unprecedented for the managements of Qantas and Virgin Blue, and CASA more recently, and ICAO -- the International Civil Aviation Organisation -- to raise concerns about lack of air traffic control over high density areas of our airspace because of staff shortages.

Airservices runs at the behest of their AOC, this includes a requirement to have enough staff to provide the required services according to the relevant PART under the CASRs; is it time for CASA to really examine if Airservices is capable of running according to the rules that it is required to comply with?

The last time ICAO broke its usually diplomatic reserve in such cases was almost 50 years ago, when the department of civil aviation and the airlines of those days and some senior pilots resisted the installation of black box flight recorders and the costs of weather radar.

Australian aviation has been very, very change resistant for a very long time.

The chief executive officer of AirServices Australia, Gregg Russell, is blaming everything from "renegade" controllers to head-hunting by overseas countries and union demands for his inability to keep the radar consoles manned.

Don't forget he started out blaming previous management for poor planning; yet under his stewardship we cut training and recruitment even further; introduced a business model which required about 10% more controllers and moved 11% of operational staff into management roles, to increase communication.

Yet before Russell took it over, AirServices Australia it had a functioning air traffic control system, albeit one that was imperfect, but one that delivered developed world standards of aircraft separation.

Amen, we blame the FPT, otherwise known as TFN too.

The aviation sector is bewildered by the Minister for Infrastructure, Anthony Albanese, saying nothing about this so far except to repeat Mr Russell’s excuses about unionists wanting more money.

Yes, what is the agenda, is this a union that can be taken on to prove Labor can be tuff on unions too.  After all this is the union that puts those noisy aircraft over your house.

Well, of course they want more money. But CEOs earn their money by improving an enterprise, not leaving gaping gaps in the service and dropping the owners, in this case the government, in boiling water.

This CEO has made massive bonuses for himself and inner sanctum but cutting operational budgets beyond all recognition; removing waste, previously known as the core business.  One of Labor's election promises was to remove public service 'bonuses'; he's not a public servant he's a CEO...  hmmmm!

Russell should review whatever advice he is being given, ask himself who has been misleading the Minister, and insist that the radar consoles be manned, 24/7. If he can't deliver that, he should resign.

Resign, nope, don't give him the honour of resigning, BIG TONY Sack him before he gets you into more trouble.  Talk to the controllers before you swallow the spin that this corporation has become a master at.

More Bad Press

This is one of the crappiest ‘hack pieces’ any of us have ever seen; speechless!

http://www.theage.com.au/national/renegade-controllers-leave-pilots-flying-blind-air-chief-20080725-3l2x.html?page=-1

'Renegade' controllers leave pilots flying blind: air chief

Tony Wright

July 26, 2008

A GROUP of "renegade" air traffic controllers in Melbourne and Brisbane are deliberately closing air space, leaving pilots to fend for themselves on some of the nation's busiest air routes, according to the head of the agency that manages Australia's skies.

Bullshit Tony, it’s bullshit.  It is a completely insufficient that a single controller calling in sick can result in the closure of airspace.

The chief executive of Airservices Australia, Greg Russell, said it appeared a massive increase in incidents in which air space sectors had suddenly been left with no air traffic control was linked to an industrial campaign for big wage rises.

Greg Russell says a lot of things, he’s obviously starting to believe his own spin.  Controllers don’t need to close airspace to get a big payrise; we are a unique profession, and on the open market have proven our worth, all that closing airspace does is highlight that you can’t organise a beer in a brewery. 

Mr Russell said he did not believe the campaign was authorised by the air traffic controllers' union, Civil Air, and he did not believe most controllers were part of it.

Thank goodness, because if you did, you’d be in the AIRC before we could say “Minister sack this incompetent CEO”.

"I do think there are a small number of renegades who are involved in this activity," he said.

If you really did think it was ‘renegades’ it’s not in your nature to not pursue them or punish them; so why haven’t you, this organisation has form, none of it good.

There were only seven incidents in which control of air space sectors had been interrupted in the 22 months between January 2006 and October 2007, rising to a whopping 135 in the eight months since, he said.

It’s amazing how the stats line up. Are the numbers real?  Or just stolen from the union website which was only just starting to track things then?

The New Management Structure started in earnest September 2007, and the ALMs dropped their ratings about 21 days after that.  Most of these people did lots of overtime, now they can’t do any.

The New SDE airspace/sector structure September 2007?  The numbers were just about right then, your dividing of groups has cause massive inefficiencies, and you know it.

Did your stupid ideas come back to bite you?  We told you SDE was stupid; then and now; it’s still stupid.  Where was/is the business case to justify it? The last person to ask that question, Brian, was sacked for doing so.

AWA ideology was more important than the message. Greg, you and you alone (well not including your sycophant managers) have stuffed our company, go away please.

The union's executive secretary, Peter McGuane, emphatically denied any campaign, accusing Airservices of "desperate spin-doctoring".

"There is an acknowledged shortage of air traffic controllers, there is no campaign and our people are sick of being harassed to work on their days off," Mr McGuane said.

McGuane is right, we are all sick of getting called at home to come to work, sometimes 5 times a day, sometimes if you let it go to the answering machine you get, “you must call us back messages”; it’s harrassment; it does effect our health and crushes our morale.

In many of the incidents, air traffic controllers in Melbourne and Brisbane have suddenly declared themselves sick and when their colleagues have been contacted in an effort to find replacements, no one has been available.

Your missing the point, it’s shift work; you don’t call in sick with 24 hours notice if your last shift was only 10 hours ago?  If you start work at 0600 when do you call in sick, when you wake up feeling like shit, or when you magically wake up to give 6 hours notice?  What business runs without ‘contingency’, one person calling in sick should not cripple the service, it's poor management, fact.

Air traffic controllers won the right to unlimited sick leave in the 1990s and are required to give only two hours' notice of their unavailability to work. The rate of absenteeism among air traffic controllers is an average of more than 15 days a year - about three times the national average.

There is no requirement to give 2 hours notice.  And it would very rarely happen that less notice is given, often much much more; but it can happen.  When did 9 x 3 equal 15?  This is deliberate propoganda, what is the national average for sick leave?  What is the national average sick leave in work places that work rotational, non bidding 24/7/365 shift work?

The federal Minister for Transport, Anthony Albanese, also made plain this week he was convinced the rate of uncontrolled air space was linked to the air traffic controllers' industrial campaign.

"It is a fact that Civil Air, the air traffic control union, is engaged in industrial negotiation at the moment over a wages agreement," Mr Albanese told Brisbane radio 4BC. "At the same time, there appears to be a situation whereby you've had a number of people not turning up for work in order to create a situation which causes some difficulty."

BIG TONY it would appear you have swallowed the SPIN, hook, line and sinker.  Has sick leave gone up? Are there more ‘holes in rosters’ than ever before?  Has the over reliance on ‘overtime’ finally impacting and people have just simply reassessed their ability to keep working 10 on 1 off? We need 'oxygen' we want off the ride.

Many industry figures point to an anonymous blog circulated on the internet last November - just as the incidence of uncontrolled air space shot from one to 21 occurrences in a month - that exhorted air traffic controllers to refuse to relieve colleagues who had reported sick.

The blog said the Government would only react to public pressure and media interest, which would only be gained when airline schedules were disrupted or air space was closed.

We often blog, but we haven’t been here that long?  Are you talking about PPRUNE?

"Turn off your phone; don't answer unknown phone numbers; if you are contacted advise you have a 'family commitment', 'have had a drink', are 'too tired' or simply 'unavailable'," the blog advised.

One individuals response to being constantly harrassed to come to work, clearly a conspiracy.

Mr Russell has refused until now to criticise air traffic controllers or to link their industrial campaign to the spike in uncontrolled sectors.

So why is he doing it now? If it were a handful of people it is not in this organisations nature to not call people on doing wrong?  Is Greg about to sack some?  No that would make it worse. Is Greg trying to shame them?  Is Greg trying to poke the bear with a stick and hope you get a nasty reaction?

However, the controllers' certified industrial agreement expires on December 21 and while their union has not yet made a formal log of claims, it has issued a "vision statement" that calls for pay rises ranging from about 30% to 64%.

Mr Russell said such figures were clearly not realistic when Qantas long-haul pilots had received a 3% rise, private sector wage outcomes were about 3.8% and the public sector was receiving rises of about 4.2%.

There is a balance due, the airline employees have received various bonuses on top of base wages whilst times have been good.  We have lost wages growth compared to AWOTE consistently since 1996; we are due for an above average correction. 

It’s not about what others are getting.  It’s about your value in the ‘global market’.  If a CEO gets $1.5M and an annual increase of 14%, it’s market forces, if controllers claim 32% over 3 years it’s ‘not realistic’.  Well why not?  If we can get that pay and much more by going OS, why should we stay? What makes you Greg, so confident we have no choices?

He also pointed to the cost to airlines, which pay Airservices Australia to manage the skies on behalf of the Federal Government.

Did he point to the Airservices profit from last year (FY06/07), and the BIGGER PROFIT that will be delivered for FY07/08? Did he mention that if the claim were to be paid in full it would represent a significantly less amount than the profit for FY07/08 and translate into less than $1.00 per passenger seat; like it would be paid in full.

Most Australian domestic airlines refuse to fly through uncontrolled air space, meaning that at a time when fuel costs are cutting deeply into profits, the requirement to fly around black areas causes immense financial pain.

No, one airline avoids TIBA, sort of.

A regular passenger jet such as a Boeing 737 flying from Melbourne to Sydney requires an extra two tonnes of aviation fuel to fly around what is known as the Canberra sector if it is closed - a broad area between Canberra and Sydney's southern suburbs. With aviation fuel at $1.90 a litre, this equates to an extra $3800 for the journey.

And what would the daily cost of having one extra FPC controller available per shift?  Are these “facts” real? How many minutes does it take to avoid Canberra Group if it is closed?  5? 10? what is the burn rate for a Boeing 737 86 kg per minute?  430 kg, 860kg of fuel?  Not cheap but not two tonnes either. SPIN!

Many international airlines flying in to Australia from Asia have had no choice but to fly through uncontrolled space because they were already in the air when control closed down.

In one incident last month, the entire northern approach to Australia from Queensland to Darwin was uncontrolled after three air traffic controllers in Brisbane called in sick. Fourteen of their colleagues were called in an effort to find replacements, but all were unavailable or uncontactable. The result was that dozens of airliners carrying thousands of passengers had to rely on pilots advising each other of their positions with no assistance from the ground.

Hazards of teams rostering, communal diseases; flu’s and colds are ‘contageous’; or are you/they suggesting it was an orchestrated event?  Have they been counselled, sacked or even hinted at that they ‘did wrong’, have now we guess, shamed in the paper.

What shift was on offer?  A Night shift?  To cover 3 peoples jobs by yourself, attractive no?

How dare people have a life, no it’s a conspiracy that they all said no to working in the middle of the night “ON THEIR DAY OFF”. Most of them were still expected to work their ‘rostered’ shift the next day too, we’re sure.

Despite claims by the union that the problem was caused by a big shortage of controllers, the figures provided by Airservices Australia show the average number of controllers has not changed significantly over the past three years.

The figures Airservices presented say lots of things, they are just wrong, lies, they are using ‘end state’ numbers, we are a long way from end state; at least two years away.  They are figures calculated with ‘rostering efficiencies’ that they don’t yet have; ‘out of our cold dead hands’.

The union claims the system is 100 controllers short. Mr Russell concedes a shortage of 17, but believes the problem will be overcome within a month.

Where are they coming from?  The mythical magic ATC Fairy bus?  Nobody else leaving this month?  Nobody retiring? Nobody getting the shits working for this pack of lying arseholes?  So what happens if TIBA happens in August and September?  With the right numbers there won't be any right, no, that will be wild cat, renegade, industrial action.

Tony Wright, how much of this article did you write? Did you seek any evidence about ‘facts’?  Did you get them checked by a researcher?  What a disgraceful way of getting your biline on a front page. “F” back to journo school for you. Airservices has a habit of SPINNING, they shop around for gullible journo's, whoops.

Andrew Jaspan, We expect better from you, our favourite broadsheet; what a quality biased hack-job, we are not happy.

On a wing and a Prayer

We replicate the following commentary from the Courier Mail.

Why do Queenslanders get it, but Canberra people don't?

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/comments/0,,24048495-27197,00.html

Fly on a wing and a prayer   

By Mike O'Connor

July 21, 2008 12:00am

"GOOD MORNING. This is your captain speaking. Today we will be flying through uncontrolled airspace. To avoid a mid-air collision, the first officer and I will be monitoring a special radio frequency and as long as any pilot heading towards us does the same thing, we should be OK."

You won't hear announcements like this being made as you sit on the tarmac at Brisbane airport because, if you did, there'd be a stampede for the exits. If, however, you are a nervous flyer, read no further for, because of a chronic shortage of air traffic controllers, domestic and international airliners in Australia are now regularly flying through unsupervised airspace.

When this happens, pilots have to rely on TIBA – Traffic Information Broadcast by Aircraft or, more accurately DIYATC – Do It Yourself Air Traffic Control. We presume, you and I, as we buckle our seat belts, adjust our seat backs upright and half-listen to the familiar safety demonstration, that after we take off our progress is monitored by the ever-present and watchful eye of the guardian angel known as air traffic control. We've seen it in the movies, men in open-necked shirts perched in their control tower eyries, staring into radar screens and speaking in staccato bursts to pilots as they guide 300 trusting souls from A to B.

They're still there but there are not enough of them, creating a situation former chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority Dick Smith has described as "incredibly unsafe".

According to the controllers' union, Civil Air, the incidence of unsupervised airspace – pilots telling each other where they are and hoping to God everyone knows the TIBA rules – rose by 63 per cent in June.

CASA's head Bruce Byron disputes this figure but has been forced to concede that "what we may have is some circumstances where TIBA might be declared for maybe a 45 minute or two-hour period".

A check of the Civil Air website shows that on July 15, airspace in southeast Queensland from 30 nautical miles north of Brisbane to 70 nautical miles north of Rockhampton on the main Brisbane-Cairns air route was unsupervised for eight hours.

On July 16, a northern New South Wales sector on the heavily trafficked Brisbane-Sydney route suffered the same fate for five hours. The same site shows that in June, there were 98 closures and service reductions declared in Australian airspace. As of last Monday, there had been 56 this month.

In August last year there were none, in September four, and October two.

Do the simple mathematics and the conclusion is obvious – the air traffic control system is breaking down, devolving to a situation which in some reports controllers have described as "a disaster waiting to happen".

This situation is exacerbated by the fact that Australia is one of the few developed countries in the world to have unsupervised airspace.

This means that no matter how professional and well trained they may be, overseas pilots commanding international flights entering and leaving Australia are flying in an unfamiliar environment when air traffic control is suddenly suspended and they have to switch to TIBA.

Mr Smith has said pilots are not air traffic controllers and are not trained to work out their position in relation to other aircraft. "In other countries, they would not allow aircraft to fly in that airspace," he said.

The body that manages air traffic controllers is Airservices Australia, owned by the Government but funded by the airline industry, and it is this body which has so catastrophically failed to see a looming, global shortage of controllers. Put simply, in a scandalous abandonment of its responsibility to ensure the adequacy of the air traffic control network, it did nothing.

Equally, no one in the then Howard government appeared to know or particularly care. Civil Air says there is presently a shortfall of 80 controllers around Australia and many of the 900 controllers are nearing retirement.

Airservices now is desperately playing catch-up and doubling its recruitment program but this will not put extra controllers in towers for several years.

Behind this frightening scenario is the controllers' demand for significant pay increases but the wage dispute is not the issue.

The issue is that Australian airline passengers are boarding domestic and international aircraft sublimely unaware that their lives may be dependent on a Third World system of air traffic control.

Australia has an enviable safety record in civil aviation but the Government – and ultimately the responsibility lies with the Government – is playing Russian roulette with the lives of Australian air travellers.

One miscalculation, one misunderstood radio message, one garbled transmission and it will all end in flames and tears. Watch then, as politicians from both sides of the political spectrum run for cover.

Every day, they spin the chamber in the gun that passes for our air traffic control system.

It's only a matter of time before the hammer falls on a live round.

Oz Article - Cameron Stewart

Our comments imbedded in Red:

LAST week, as a dwindling number of air traffic controllers struggled to keep pace with the number of aeroplanes in the sky, one controller lost his cool.

"Who's off to jail then?" he fumed in an online forum for air traffic controllers and pilots. "Imagine our worst nightmare," he wrote. "TIBA (uncontrolled) airspace somewhere in Australia. Two aircraft collide, multiple fatalities. World headlines. The pilots had insufficient briefing on service levels and procedures. In the ensuring investigation, who would the authorities recommend be indicted on formal charges (for) reckless abandonment of responsibilities?"

It was a good question in the present climate, for there are few precedents in this country for what is going on in Australian skies. A shortage of air traffic controllers is forcing large chunks of the skies to be unmanned for hours on end, meaning there is no air traffic controller to monitor the passage of fully-laden jumbo jets criss-crossing this airspace.

Yes it’s a very good question, who would go to jail?

The federal Government's figures show that large sectors of Australian airspace were closed on 24 occasions in June, a record level and a one-third increase on May. What's more, passengers are told nothing. They do not know when they board a plane whether they are flying through uncontrolled airspace or what risks they face.

TIBA on 24 Occasions is scandalous; is this each sector or ‘groups of sectors’ being counted?  Is this including the multiple events to allow controller breaks, or simple 1 NOTAM = equals one count? Basically once a day Airshambles is uanble to provide any service whatsoever.  How many times a day is it providing a less than minimum ATC establishment service?

How dangerous this practice is depends on who you speak to. Air traffic controllers are unhappy, warning that this is a disaster waiting to happen.

Air safety regulator the Civil Aviation Safety Authority disagrees, maintaining that uncontrolled airspace - while not desirable - does not pose an unacceptable risk to aircraft and passengers.

CASA has suddenly shifted ground on TIBA, now they are ‘auditing pilots’ and reviewing ATC procedures relating to TIBA.  On the first visit the CASA dude was very unimpressed by what he saw; look out for more news on TIBA from CASA, of course for political expedience the news may never get out.

Qantas has signalled its view by instructing its pilots to avoid flying through uncontrolled airspace wherever possible. It has cancelled, delayed and diverted flights as a result of the increasing number of airspace closures in recent months.

Qantas appears to avoid TIBA where it can, but on multiple occasions Qantas has flown through TIBA and in some cases only minor diversions would have been required to avoid the Area effected.

So how did such a disturbing situation arise in a country with a well-resourced and advanced aviation industry?

The origins of the problem can be traced to the early 2000s when air traffic control manager Airservices Australia - a government-owned but airline industry-funded body - failed to plan for future air traffic control needs. This inexplicable management oversight was not noticed or felt for many years, but it has grave implications.

Don’t be fooled here Cameron, Airservices reduced ATC recruiting as early ago as 2006.  They ‘restructured’ the training college, now called the Learning Academy.  They moved on multiple contract instructors as they wouldn’t need them “going forward”.  

Airservices restructured ATC into Service delivery environments (SDEs) and the executive apparently were promised massive staff reductions as a result of the efficiencies of that project.  Unfortunately the SDE and concurrent management restructure has absorbed more resources than it saved; much more.

Airservices did not read the global trends of growing air traffic coupled with an international shortage of controllers. It did not lift recruitment when it should have and now - because of the long lead-time needed for training - it cannot solve the shortage.

The shortages in the short term could be significantly reduced by releasing managers back to consoles; but ideology is god in this organisation, you can’t be the boss and work side by side with someone; it’s just crap!  The management restructure also threw up multiple redundancies; so we lost controllers to replace those managers who got VR; there are more awaiting the AIRC decision on whether they get VR too.

Airservices chief executive Greg Russell admitted his organisation's liability in a private letter written to an airline in February and obtained by The Australian.

"When I arrived in 2005 one of the first requests was to see the Airservices workforce plan to see how the organisation intended to address future resource requirements," he wrote. "There was no such plan available."

This is a common lie. and Greg should be made to prove it.  There was significant ATC planning done in 2000, 2002 and again 2004.  Greg Russell’s first mission was to reduce staffing, he did so in non operational positions by giving out multiple redundancy packages; he did it in Air Traffic Control by reducing recruitment.

Russell said little planning had been done to address recruitment and the fact that many of Australia's 900 controllers were nearing retirement.

Wrong, this was done to death, the Certified Agreement process in 2001/2002 called for 60 trainees per year infinitum to address the pending ‘staffing crisis’. That plan was rejected on a cost basis and the reliance of overtime increased. It was a calculated and deliberate decision; new technology was supposed to save bodies by now.

"All of these issues were uncovered against a backdrop of a worldwide shortage of air traffic controllers and increasing customer demands and growth," he wrote.

He’s lying.  Greg Russell is often loose with the truth.  If he truly believe this then his advisors are lying to him., fact.

Airservices is belatedly trying to redress the shortage by more than doubling the number of recruits to between 80 and 100 a year. This will solve the problem in several years, but offers no immediate solution. The result, say air traffic controllers, is that the existing workforce is being overworked and saddled with unrealistic demands.

"Staff shortages abound," says Robert Mason, head of the air traffic control union Civil Air, which claims there is a 10 per cent shortfall of about 80 controllers in Australia.

He says controllers are often asked to come in on days off and and while on leave to cover shortages and avoid airspace closures.

"Simple things like breaks to go to the toilet or give tired eyes a break from staring at consoles or airborne traffic are willingly forgone to minimise disruptions to service," Mason says.

But the Government does not believe that controllers are as being as pure and selfless as Civil Air would like people to believe. Government sources believe Civil Air is exploiting staff shortages and exaggerating safety risks in order to win steep rises in pay and conditions. They maintain that there is a shortfall of only 17 controllers, not 80.

They are being loose with the truth again. this magic low number is about bodies on consoles, but the other 63 jobs are needed and required to get us back to full staffing.  The other jobs are in training, licencing and project work; all ‘required’ tasks; yet not included in the headline Airshambles figures, why?

Civil Air is pushing for pay rises of between 32 and 63 per cent over three years when its collective agreement with Airservices expires at the end of the year. The move would have senior air traffic controllers earning $175,000 a year from January.

Civil Air says this will bring Australia more into line with the conditions enjoyed by controllers overseas.

It’s true, in Europe and the Middle East the conditions of employment and monetary incenties are significantly higher than $175,000.  People have traditionally stayed here, because Australia is great, but now, they have reached the crest on the pile of shit and don’t want to work for Russell and his cronies any longer.

While Airservices will not comment on the wages push, the timing could not be worse for airlines that face record fuel prices and for a Government seeking to contain inflation.

What would the cost to the airlines be if you gave us everything we wanted?  We have read figures of 35 cents to 75 cents per ticket; not exactly a massive breakout in inflation.  One of us paid 50 cents more for a roll earlier today compared to yesterday; a 25% rise.

Civil Air is unrepentant about its claim, saying it is the only way to attract and retain air traffic controllers in the future.

But the pay claim means that Airservices and the Government are viewing controllers' safety complaints through the prism of industrial politics. In this volatile climate there is a risk that authorities will downplay the warnings of air traffic controllers regardless of how credible these warnings are.

It is clear that they are circling the wagons, CASA and Airshambles are relying on the lack of accidents to justify safety; is it acceptable, hell no.

Former CASA chairman Dick Smith says air traffic controllers are right to warn about the danger of passenger jets flying through uncontrolled airspace, describing the practice as "incredibly unsafe".

"I find it amazing it could ever be allowed to happen," Smith says. "In other countries, they would not allow aircraft to fly in that airspace."

Last week The Australian revealed warnings from controllers that many foreign pilots do not understand the correct collision avoidance procedures in uncontrolled airspace.

Not just foreign pilots, all of them; but at least Australian pilots will have more familiarity to it as they are likely to see it more often.

When flying through uncontrolled airspace, pilots must rely on themselves and other pilots to avoid collisions by keeping track of developments on a common frequency.

Without a controller watching over them, the potential for human error is magnified, especially because pilots are not trained to separate aircraft. Some controllers say they have seen examples of aircraft in uncontrolled airspace failing to broadcast their presence and their movements on the correct frequencies.

One controller, writing on an online industry forum said: "It quickly became apparent that none of the international crews - Malaysian Airlines, Thai Airways, Singapore Airlines - understood the procedures."

Could he be right?  Perhaps they’ve never heard of TIBA, perhaps they have never received any training in it, perhaps their operations departments haven’t got full knowledge and didn’t draw pilots attention to the relevant NOTAMs.

Peter McGuane, executive director of Civil Air, says controllers often have to teach foreign pilots the safety procedures for uncontrolled airspace in mid-flight.

CASA initially dismissed the concerns revealed in The Australian, saying that the procedures for uncontrolled airspace are internationally mandated rules that all pilots are taught and are explained in flight manuals.

But really do we believe that?  In Manuals yes, but taught it?  When? Are they current in these procedures? Not on your nelly.

But what CASA did not say was that many foreign pilots have never before used these procedures because they do not have uncontrolled airspace in their countries.

Singapore Airlines hit back at the controller's claims about foreign pilots, implying that it bordered on racism.

"Our pilots are trained to the highest internationally recognised standards and suggestions that they would compromise safety in controlled or uncontrolled airspace, whereas pilots for Australian carriers would not, are both false and professionally offensive," the airline said.

Again there was never intent to differentiate, all pilots are equally inept at flying in TIBA.  They are neither worse or better than Aussie pilots, all pilots are crap at flying in TIBA, and if CASA doesn’t know that then heads need to roll.

The airline said the controller's claims were part of an Australian industrial dispute and that it did not want to become involved.

TIBA is nothing to do with an industrial claim, perhaps they have their wires crossed too?

Yet several days after The Australian's story appeared, CASA said it would start quizzing foreign pilots about their knowledge of the procedures for flying through uncontrolled airspace.

CASA also said it would write to foreign airlines pointing out that there was uncontrolled airspace in Australia and ask them to refresh their knowledge of the procedures.

These actions by CASA contradicted its initial claims that there was nothing to worry about. It made the regulator appear to be reactive on a safety issue that affects all Australians who fly.

CASA has been caught out, they don’t know whether there is compliance with the procedures or not, they haven’t checked before, again, no accidents = safe, well maybe not.

Civil Air has now called for a sweeping review of the safety of passenger jets flying through uncontrolled airspace.

But CASA says that to ban jets from uncontrolled airspace would raise other potential risks, such as overcrowding in other airspace sectors, or forcing planes to take long detours. If planes were forced to take long detours this would add significantly to airline fuel and maintenance costs and would push air fares higher.

The costs and inconvenience would be substantial. Yet they would be nothing compared to the horrendous cost of a midair collision.

Amen!

For now, CASA maintains that the risks of such a collision are too small to support the dramatic step of closing all uncontrolled airspace.

"CASA has already done careful risk analysis and we believe this is the best way to proceed while acknowledging it would be far more preferable to have (controllers) all the time," CASA spokesman Peter Gibson says.

Controllers say this is not good enough and that not all pilots are knowledgable enough to send their jets hurtling safely through uncontrolled airspace.

To gain situational awareness is extremely difficult, pilots are keenly listening for reports of traffic at their level; but when pilots are choosing to change level either for a better ride or because they are getting near their destination the risks are significantly raised.

"There is a serious deficiency in what advice-briefing these crews are receiving," writes one controller in an online forum. "Personally I don't think the NOTAMS (the instructions given to pilots about flying through uncontrolled airspace) spell out exactly what they are getting themselves and the 300 trusting souls down the back of each of these flights into.

"This is in no way a reflection or comment on my fellow controllers: it is an indictment on our management for letting things get this bad, and on CASA for not ensuring that international crews operating in to this airspace are adequately operationally prepared."

Despite the warnings from air traffic controllers, CASA says there have so far been no confirmed close calls between aircraft in uncontrolled airspace.

How would anyone know? The only event that would be reported is a TCAS Resolution advisory; so a pair of aircraft could miss by 5NM on crossing tracks and there are no reports to be filled yet in reality they are less than 20 seconds from a midair. This is BIG SKY THEORY at it’s best.

Smith says this is no defence for what he believes is an inherently unsafe practice. "As people fly across Australia they think there is an air traffic controller instructing their pilot, telling them how to keep clear of other planes, but often there is not," he says.

"Pilots are not air traffic controllers; they don't have the training to work out where they are. It is impossible to believe this is really happening in this country."

Amen!

In the news

In recent weeks it appears that the mainstream media have given us a run.  Some of them, despite the false starts of 63% wages claim, are even starting to question the inevitable 'TIBA is safe" and "Safety has never been compromised" and 'pilots are trained in the procedures" and "International practice" defences trumped out by the PR Spinners of CASA and Airshambles, when they are providing no ATC service whatsoever.  Heck TIBA is worse than OCTA, cause at least in the OCTA environment you get a traffic statement about other IFRs.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24019978-23349,00.html?from=public_rss

We will be back soon with our analysis of this article, but the main questions you can garnish from this article are:

1) are the controllers causing TIBA running an industrial campaign, or 

2) are the numbers really low and will be that way for some time, and/or

3) is TIBA not safe as claimed by the controllers and those responsible will really be in the shit if something goes wrong.

Airshambles 1st position – part 2

The primary focus of managing the business is in the area of attendance.  

The inference therefore must be there is a significant problem with attendance.  But what are the facts?  Excluding long term sick-leave (3 months +) the average sick leave in the centres is 11 days per annum, slightly higher in Sydney and much lower in regional towers and the outer TCUs/TWRs. 

This compares to other public service roles and those other roles do not work 24/7/365 shift work.  HARDLY 4 times the national average, Julian, you've been sold a pup!

Is our sick leave too high? Well yes, in some cases there is leave taking which could be inferred as "abuse of leave"; but the problem we have is the way that all ATCs are targeted with the same managerial plan.  Rather than address the individuals that abuse leave entitlements; they sweep everyone into the ‘problem bucket’ and punish us all.  So because we don’t have managers that can sort out staffing issues, we need broad brush policies and practices.  Leaders leading, ha, not likely, fools reacting, yes that’s closer.

Sick Leave cap.

Well you can’t buy what we have now, so can we sell it?  What value would you really place on introducing a cap.  Ask anyone struck down with an immediate issue, such as cancer or a heart attack, how much value they place on sick leave as required.

We have heard some managers say that they could still approve sick leave payments for legitimate issues, inference, current sick leave is not legitimate.

Can you get ‘income protection' as an Air Traffic Controller?  No, is the simple answer, so if you can’t insure yourself against a long term illness and the employer won’t pay you if you get sick, what exactly will we do to protect ourselves, yes the fog is clearing, KEEP SICK LEAVE AS REQUIRED; don't touch it!

What if we conceded to a maximum of 7 days without certificate, with no restriction on leave with certificate?  Yes we'll give you that for $15K each on base pay, seems fair given that we currently run at 30+ days each (well according the J.McGauran) of illegitimate leave, and it would comply the governments Enterprise Bargaining Framework, productivity initiatives for more pay.

Non Operational Duty.

We have higher standards than the general community relating to health and fitness when performing the task of ATC.  We cannot take many readily available over the counter drugs and ‘soldier on’, etc. So what should we do?  

Airshambles seems to believe that ATCs don’t do enough non operational shifts, when they have a head cold, have a migraine, etc, when they have taken codeine, pseudoephedrine or similar drugs.  

Well there are a number of reasons why we avoid non operational work, most come back to management.  What does a non-operational controller do?  Plenty, if you have an admin portfolio or the like, not much if you are simply a ‘tools man’, filing paperwork is not legitimate work for non operational ATCs.  Most ATCs are paid to do operational work only, pity that's not always possible.

Then what shift are you working during your non-operational day at work, as rostered or something else.  Most controllers organise their lives around their shift work, to change your shift at short notice to ‘work non-operational duty’ it may have a significant effect on your outside of work life; the work life balance.  This isn’t always the case, but try telling a manager that you’ll be in for non-operational duty from 10-17 vice your 06-13 shift and you’ll be meet with a WTF response; why?

What if you are fatigued for your 0600 shift.  You could work later in the day after you get sleep, damn that work life balance, already organised things with the accountant/doctor/kids/wife/husband/boyfriend/girlfriend/principal etc. so can’t do that; is it fraudulent leave?  No it’s legitimate as long as you did all you could to reduce your fatigue prior to ‘taking the knock’. If you can do for example an afternoon vice a morning, to manage your illness, in this case, fatigue, will they let you?

So we are sure that more people would attend non-operational duty if there was true flexibility, and a method of assigning something worthy to do on said shifts.  Management is 100% responsible for not developing any value adding non-operational tasks and then they further exacerbate the issue by not allowing some shift flexibility if you can't front for the shift as rostered.  

Of course their concern is that if you can change shifts on a whim, without penalty, why would you ever work a doggo?

Did anyone else notice the line that ‘there is an obligation to work reasonable additional hours’?  Why slip this into the ‘sick leave’ section?

The current rule states:

4.3.1 We expect that you will work a reasonable amount of additional hours if the requirement becomes necessary. You may choose not to work additional hours in circumstances where the working of such hours would result in you working hours which are unreasonable after consideration of:

(a) Any risk to your health and safety;

(b) Your personal circumstances including any family responsibilities;

(c) The needs of the workplace;

(d) The notice given by us and by you of your intention to choose not to work the additional

hours; and

(e) Any other relevant matter.

Consultation:

We think this means Airshambles wants the right to do whatever they want, the consultation clauses make it very inconvenient for us when staff point out that consultation is required as per the agreement.  How many times have they been caught out not consulting; more than they have done it right in the first place.

Part 7:

They want to reduce (clarify/simplify) your entitlements relating to ‘Discipline, Redeployment and Termination of Employment’.  We assume this means that they want to impose more restructures and not be caught out by possible redundancy provisions; like during the ALM debacle; there are still some ATCs waiting AIRC advice about their entitlements.  We also suspect that they want to be able more readily able to sack employees that have disciplinary issues, these existing processes are very restrictive on their ability to be complete arse-holes.

Grievances:

Airshambles obviously doesn’t understand what the current grievance system is.  The paragraph they have written is exactly what the current process is, idiots.

Sustaining Capability (you’re joking right?)

Air Traffic Control is a great place to work and is able to maintain capability within the global marketplace. Oh please!  We have the lowest morale ever, you need to fix it, you need to relax terms and conditions and be less focused on 'fraud' and more focused on the individual.

How about starting with paying global rates and recognising that working 24/7/365 is difficult.  How about not standing people down for every little irrelevant event, how about recognising that our safety culture is primarily a box ticking exercise. How about giving something back? How about tapping someone on the shoulder and saying go home, you've done a good days work?

Airshambles now wants ‘flexibility’ in recleave; but wait they wanted the 18 month rolling plans so they could be better informed about operational training requirements and sustaining capability.  This was a pillar of the Airshambles position in 2002. Well which is it?  Locking in things so you can plan, or needing flexibility cause you can’t organise a beer in a brew house?

Methods of retaining ATCs, SHOW ME THE MONEY JERRY!  Do we smell individual contracts?

Career development, blah blah, how about sticking to something? Management training, how many processes in the last 5 years, leaders leading, cert IVs in frontline management etc.

Less CBT, real training courses, real refresher training, movement between ATC roles, now that’s development, reduce change, INFORMATION OVERLOAD LEADS TO MANAGEMENT ARSE COVERING AND INCREASED RISK!

Career Break scheme options - is that a carrot?  You can’t be trusted, we know that in 5 years time we will still be short and you know it, you can give us all you want when we have full staffing, not in the three years of the next agreement.  Next move on, no wait that’s it.

Airshambles, we here at the shafters are very unimpressed by your first effort, F, go back to your desk do better next time.