I just had a quick read through the arbitration agreement, published this morning. It’s called the II Collective Bargaining Agreement. But it’s neither collective, nor has much bargaining been included. And it certainly is not an agreement: it’s an imposition.
All the media are reporting that it means a reduction in the hours to work, now 1500. There is a provision for only 1500 to be scheduled, but different articles within the ruling also admit a maximum of 1670 hours of aeronautical activity, plus a further 40 for training, plus up to 80 for overtime. I’m pleased at finally seeing a provision for training hours. But why just 40? And furthermore, why are they further reduced, to 25 in 2012 and 20 in 2013? Is that the importance conceded to training? And the hours are even more than before.
Regarding English and it’s own training, the provision is for Aena to hand out and finance the training, which is to be carried out in one’s spare time. I haven’t yet seen if a decision has been made over controllers’ fate if their exams are failed, but I still think that all essential training for the workplace should be carried out and supervised within the workplace and considered working hours
I’ve also calculatedt how close I am to the 200.000 euros “average” yearly pay promised. From my position I should be comfortably on top of that, but according to my situation in the salary tables, I’m just about on 60 per cent of that, considering before tax numbers. Of course amidst the present crisis it’s hard to complain, but it does prove that the media campaign to demonise controllers is still going strong. And far too many lies are still being told.
It seems like there may be a large quantity of money spared by the company to use discretionally.
This was just a very speedy report. After a couple of days I’ll let you know if things are looking any less gloomy. So far it looks like it's going to be even worse than it was last year. I hope someone can prove me wrong.
Popular Posts
-
I have been away for a long time, but I think it's time to return. I recently posted a text on one of our forums, the copy of a letter I...
-
So you're thinking about coming to Spain to become an Air Traffic Controller? Maybe you're thinking about imparting some lessons at ...
-
I have recently strayed somewhat from my centrel objective of portraying life as a Spanish air traffic controller. Tomorrow there's a ge...
-
I have flown with EasyJet dozens of times and the overall experience has been quite satisfactory. It's a no-nonsense company: you ar...
-
When you accrue a debt of 13500 million €, you've obviously got to do something. Aena has decided to jeopardise safety. The cost reducti... -
...INCLUDING SOME TRUTHS. First of all, it's fair to state that most of the numbers reported belong to a time which now seems very lon...
-
I just read an article so good that I have to share it with you, It speaks about the moral decay at the top of society in comparison with th...
-
On the fifth of February four years will have passed since José Blanco, the ousted Minister for Transport, dictatorially removed almost a...
-
Finally, years after the requirement had been enshrined in European regulations, Aena has introduced briefing in the workplace. We are expec...
-
I know this post is long overdue. Have you heard about the phone hacking scandal in UK? It's made a one hundred and sixty eight year old...
Monday, 28 February 2011
Saturday, 26 February 2011
The arbitrator's job
His name is Manuel Pimentel, and he’s a former Work Minister from the conservative Government of José María Aznar. He faces a tough decision. Aena (our employer) and Usca (our union) have been unable to reach an agreement after over a year of negotiation. It’s easy to say why. Basically there was some discrepancy between the different positions. The company wanted us to be slaves working h24 with resting rights cropped, and everything else subject to “the provider’s obligation to guarantee continuity of service”. This was interpreted as 100% capacity service, when everyone should know, by now, that there is a shortage of air traffic controllers in Spain.
What about the Union’s requests. If you consider that the agreements between British, French, Portuguese or German controllers were laid upon the table and Usca would accept signing any of them, it doesn’t seem like our position was too radical.
So, what’s going to happen? Will Mr Pimentel refer to before February 5th last, when the agreement between Usca and Aena was legitimate, or will he allow all the illegal Royal Decrees imposed since then to influence his final ruling?
I’m afraid the end result, whether the whole system is going to work, depends not only on this, but also upon whether Aena has enough capacity to implement the changes and comply with it’s part of the Mr Pimentel’s arbtrarion award. Personally, I feel they haven’t and things are going to be rough regardless of the arbitration outcome.
What about the Union’s requests. If you consider that the agreements between British, French, Portuguese or German controllers were laid upon the table and Usca would accept signing any of them, it doesn’t seem like our position was too radical.
So, what’s going to happen? Will Mr Pimentel refer to before February 5th last, when the agreement between Usca and Aena was legitimate, or will he allow all the illegal Royal Decrees imposed since then to influence his final ruling?
I’m afraid the end result, whether the whole system is going to work, depends not only on this, but also upon whether Aena has enough capacity to implement the changes and comply with it’s part of the Mr Pimentel’s arbtrarion award. Personally, I feel they haven’t and things are going to be rough regardless of the arbitration outcome.
Tuesday, 22 February 2011
Thank Mr Blanco for the new ATM efficiency!
I’ve been working as a controller for about thirteen years. Until a couple of years ago, in Madrid (my closest example) we used to try to get as many aircraft as possible onto the left runway (shortest taxi). Until a couple of years ago all of us endeavoured to shorten routes as much as possible. Indeed, each traffic –as we say- arriving at Madrid Barajas International Airport probably saved more than ten minutes on average if we take flying and taxi time into account. I have no reason to suppose events didn’t happen likewise in the rest os Spain.
This meant a huge effort by controllers. But we are well aware that each flying minute might mean 50 kilos (or around 25 pounds sterling) of fuel. It was a time of happy crews and passengers. And we, the controllers, ended our workday with a grimace of satisfaction after a very beneficial day of work.
Since then we’ve had to read circulars about noise reduction compelling us to even out traffic between the runways, reprimands from Flow Control trying to ensure that routes are not shortened lest overcrowding occur further along the line, letters by operations managers, or even by Eurocontrol, underlining the need to attentively follow the flight plan in all of its terms.
But above everything else, we have lately had to withstand the impositions of the Minister of Development. With the intention of “optimising” the system, and failing completely to take a grasp of the basic evidence that there’s a shortage of air traffic controllers, he has imposed an increase in working hours together with a reduction in the resting periods.. He has also handed operational management to irresponsible and incompetent engineers who are incapable of changing configurations, or regulating traffic sector capacities at the right time, or giving priority to the necessary flights. On top of this, no consideration at all to human factors. Consequently, we have had overloads, delays and, worst of all, far many more near misses than before.
The ATCOs employer, Aena, enjoying the company of it’s ‘new’ bully cousin, has exerted all kinds of abuse, amongst them, disposing of workers’ days off with no previous advice. What we called the “express shifts”.
Endured we have the draconian impositions, which probably haven’t been equalled in any other civilised country in the world. But it hasn’t been without consequences. Depression and resort to tranquillisers or sleeping pills has been the norm. And the medical leaves, hundreds of them. Some for heart attacks or angina pectoris or even controllers having been stretchered out of their workplace, consciousless. Fortunately, there have been no suicides committed, as did happen in France Télécom, who had used the same consultancy company, McKinsey, as the Spanish Government.
To solve the medical leave problem (absenteeism, they called it), instead of reducing the exerted pressure, the State machinery decided to impose fines of up to 4.500.000 € for faking illness. No typing error. As you might have guessed, the workplace doctor is who’s in charge of deciding whether you’re fit or you’re pretending to be ill. He/she is paid by the same employer, Aena. The doctor has his own pressure in order to keep people at work. And you can’t even get a straightforward report immediately, you need to go through a lengthy process that involves complaining to the Head of the operations room and collecting the final report, many hours later, from the Human Resources department
Sometimes the medical service commits the atrocity of sending controllers with extremely high blood pressure back to their sectors. This isn’t the place to dispute the professionalism of doctors, but it’s a basic fact that they are unable to determine whether one is able to work; they have never seen a cotroller at work (I asked them). Their job depending on it, they would rather exert pressure upon us than the Company. Why don’t they share the responsibility if serious illness or even an airprox results from their decisions? They state that they are not under pressure to give us the thumbs up to go home, but they also express the fact that the report needs “objective parameters” and it is also complicated and five pages long!
Controllers in Spain have been struggling to cope with the pressure for over a year now. Under these circumstances, the only way to try to guarantee safety to both traffic and ourselves is to shield ourselves behind procedures and increase traffic separation, thereby hugely reducing efficiency in favour of safety.
In this environment I casually encounter an envelope in my letterbox. It contains a Eurocontrol project, called AIRE (air, in Spanish). It proposes lots of analyses of aircraft trajectories under “continuous descent”. The same idea of “free flight” created decades ago. The project’s aim is fantastic: considering that aviation contaminates, both atmospheric and acoustically, let’s enforce measures through which all pollution is reduced. Thereafter, hordes of Eurocontrol bureaucrats and technocrats involve dozens of civil servants who devote loads of hours filling in stacks of paperwork, so as to lead to multiple conferences that will show air traffic controllers the best way to do what we already did, very much more profficiently, a couple of years ago.
Controllers are well aware of what needs to be done in order to save fuel, time, noise and money. In fact, it wouldn’t be hard to prove that what has now been saved in controllers’ wages has been squandered many times over in broken shedules, crew hotels, controllers’ medical treatments, illness and leave paid for by the Social Security system and compensation to airlines for excessive fuel waste. Almost all these costs, as opposed to controllers’ pay, come from the taxpayer’s pocket. Probably, billions of euro. There is one person at the end of the responsibility chain for all this: the Development Minister José Blanco López.
And that is where I wonder: what has Mr Blanco, apart from destroying the efficiency of the Spanish Air Traffic Control System and and using the whole issue as a smoke curtain to hide all sorts of antisocial measures, achieved with all this? Ah, yes, he managed to increase the vote expectancy of the Socialist Party for a few moments.
Returning to my ecology argument, how are controllers going to be motivated and retrained now in order to get back to what we previously did quite well? When are we going to be left alone to work efficiently once again? When are these useless politicians going to admit that all this nonsense of flight fee control was absurd and inconsistent demagoguery (as well as admitting that if Airport fees are considered, they really have not been reduced at all). Honestly, will anyone change their business or holiday destination for the fifference of 20 or 30 cents in the price of their ticket?
These excesses of shortsighted and incompetent politicians have probably had the worst ever effect on one of the Spain’s most effective and reliable means of income: Tourism. I’m afraid we will all be paying the price for years to come.
Why didn’t they just state the end to be achieved and leave the pros (pilots and sontrollers) to do it?
If, on the other hand, their real intention was just to destroy the system, to make it less valuable in order to facilitate the sale to private groups, thereby diluting colossal investment errors or budget noncompliances, or just to show a pleasant face to the equally incompetent european bureaucrats, then forget all I’ve said, because from that viewpoint the job has been excellent. I just don’t understand it.
Nevertheless, I feel that citizens have the right to know that they have had their pockeys emptied for the squandering in absurd infrastructures, in budget excesses, and they’re still bearing the burden. And flights are delayed and probably not as safe. In exchange, they can feel happy because the average family is going to make a huge saving on next Summer’s holidays to Spain : exactly one euro!.
This meant a huge effort by controllers. But we are well aware that each flying minute might mean 50 kilos (or around 25 pounds sterling) of fuel. It was a time of happy crews and passengers. And we, the controllers, ended our workday with a grimace of satisfaction after a very beneficial day of work.
Since then we’ve had to read circulars about noise reduction compelling us to even out traffic between the runways, reprimands from Flow Control trying to ensure that routes are not shortened lest overcrowding occur further along the line, letters by operations managers, or even by Eurocontrol, underlining the need to attentively follow the flight plan in all of its terms.
But above everything else, we have lately had to withstand the impositions of the Minister of Development. With the intention of “optimising” the system, and failing completely to take a grasp of the basic evidence that there’s a shortage of air traffic controllers, he has imposed an increase in working hours together with a reduction in the resting periods.. He has also handed operational management to irresponsible and incompetent engineers who are incapable of changing configurations, or regulating traffic sector capacities at the right time, or giving priority to the necessary flights. On top of this, no consideration at all to human factors. Consequently, we have had overloads, delays and, worst of all, far many more near misses than before.
The ATCOs employer, Aena, enjoying the company of it’s ‘new’ bully cousin, has exerted all kinds of abuse, amongst them, disposing of workers’ days off with no previous advice. What we called the “express shifts”.
Endured we have the draconian impositions, which probably haven’t been equalled in any other civilised country in the world. But it hasn’t been without consequences. Depression and resort to tranquillisers or sleeping pills has been the norm. And the medical leaves, hundreds of them. Some for heart attacks or angina pectoris or even controllers having been stretchered out of their workplace, consciousless. Fortunately, there have been no suicides committed, as did happen in France Télécom, who had used the same consultancy company, McKinsey, as the Spanish Government.
To solve the medical leave problem (absenteeism, they called it), instead of reducing the exerted pressure, the State machinery decided to impose fines of up to 4.500.000 € for faking illness. No typing error. As you might have guessed, the workplace doctor is who’s in charge of deciding whether you’re fit or you’re pretending to be ill. He/she is paid by the same employer, Aena. The doctor has his own pressure in order to keep people at work. And you can’t even get a straightforward report immediately, you need to go through a lengthy process that involves complaining to the Head of the operations room and collecting the final report, many hours later, from the Human Resources department
Sometimes the medical service commits the atrocity of sending controllers with extremely high blood pressure back to their sectors. This isn’t the place to dispute the professionalism of doctors, but it’s a basic fact that they are unable to determine whether one is able to work; they have never seen a cotroller at work (I asked them). Their job depending on it, they would rather exert pressure upon us than the Company. Why don’t they share the responsibility if serious illness or even an airprox results from their decisions? They state that they are not under pressure to give us the thumbs up to go home, but they also express the fact that the report needs “objective parameters” and it is also complicated and five pages long!
Controllers in Spain have been struggling to cope with the pressure for over a year now. Under these circumstances, the only way to try to guarantee safety to both traffic and ourselves is to shield ourselves behind procedures and increase traffic separation, thereby hugely reducing efficiency in favour of safety.
In this environment I casually encounter an envelope in my letterbox. It contains a Eurocontrol project, called AIRE (air, in Spanish). It proposes lots of analyses of aircraft trajectories under “continuous descent”. The same idea of “free flight” created decades ago. The project’s aim is fantastic: considering that aviation contaminates, both atmospheric and acoustically, let’s enforce measures through which all pollution is reduced. Thereafter, hordes of Eurocontrol bureaucrats and technocrats involve dozens of civil servants who devote loads of hours filling in stacks of paperwork, so as to lead to multiple conferences that will show air traffic controllers the best way to do what we already did, very much more profficiently, a couple of years ago.
Controllers are well aware of what needs to be done in order to save fuel, time, noise and money. In fact, it wouldn’t be hard to prove that what has now been saved in controllers’ wages has been squandered many times over in broken shedules, crew hotels, controllers’ medical treatments, illness and leave paid for by the Social Security system and compensation to airlines for excessive fuel waste. Almost all these costs, as opposed to controllers’ pay, come from the taxpayer’s pocket. Probably, billions of euro. There is one person at the end of the responsibility chain for all this: the Development Minister José Blanco López.
And that is where I wonder: what has Mr Blanco, apart from destroying the efficiency of the Spanish Air Traffic Control System and and using the whole issue as a smoke curtain to hide all sorts of antisocial measures, achieved with all this? Ah, yes, he managed to increase the vote expectancy of the Socialist Party for a few moments.
Returning to my ecology argument, how are controllers going to be motivated and retrained now in order to get back to what we previously did quite well? When are we going to be left alone to work efficiently once again? When are these useless politicians going to admit that all this nonsense of flight fee control was absurd and inconsistent demagoguery (as well as admitting that if Airport fees are considered, they really have not been reduced at all). Honestly, will anyone change their business or holiday destination for the fifference of 20 or 30 cents in the price of their ticket?
These excesses of shortsighted and incompetent politicians have probably had the worst ever effect on one of the Spain’s most effective and reliable means of income: Tourism. I’m afraid we will all be paying the price for years to come.
Why didn’t they just state the end to be achieved and leave the pros (pilots and sontrollers) to do it?
If, on the other hand, their real intention was just to destroy the system, to make it less valuable in order to facilitate the sale to private groups, thereby diluting colossal investment errors or budget noncompliances, or just to show a pleasant face to the equally incompetent european bureaucrats, then forget all I’ve said, because from that viewpoint the job has been excellent. I just don’t understand it.
Nevertheless, I feel that citizens have the right to know that they have had their pockeys emptied for the squandering in absurd infrastructures, in budget excesses, and they’re still bearing the burden. And flights are delayed and probably not as safe. In exchange, they can feel happy because the average family is going to make a huge saving on next Summer’s holidays to Spain : exactly one euro!.
Friday, 18 February 2011
Feeling ill and the doctor's responsibility
Everyone has a bad day from time to time. I wasn’t feeling very well when I went to work today, afternoon shift. I went nevertheless, but was a bit blocked and stuffy. I usually have about one or two days like this per year, and frequently it’s on my day off.
Normally I would have an aspirin (in fact I did before leaving home) and just work through it. But during this last year I’ve seen too many incidents to be working without being 100% fit. And you must consider that in my current situation I’m not even the last person responsible for my sector, because I’me undergoing instruction in order to recover my validation after a long leave.
So, I decided to go to the workplace doctor. She’s upstairs from the operations room, less than a minute. I explained that I wasn’t feeling tiptop and she answered that she needed objective parameters. Temperature wasn’t too high, 37,2; and a visible sore throat wasn’t enough. So I had a chat and I tried to convey that the only real way to guarantee maximum safety is to make sure people who are not feeling fit on the day don’t get to work at their sector. It’s a very complicated issue, and once again the debate is upon the limits. The doctor admitted to not being able to know objectively if I had a headache or not. I didn’t, and I really just thought I should be relieved based upon not feeling very well, nothing else.
It turns out that the doctor doesn’t know what an airprox is. (You’ll excuse me for not knowing English jargon for that: literal translations from Spanish are crushing, sanding, or shoving). She has never been in the operations room. She doesn’t have a clue what our job is about. I assumed the doctors are pressurised upon to give as few leaves as possible. She denied it. Finally I stated my opinion that not everything could or should be objective: if a controller isn’t feeling fit, he/she should refrain. There are rules and fines for faking illness, but what about a headache, your dog died last night, or you exceeded yourself in the jogging and you’re sugar’s running low?. These can’t be judged objectively by simple visual examination by a doctor. But they are limiting conditions. So how should it work, because, on the other hand, I admit we can’t have workers pulling out ill whenever they want a day off (although this is a lesser evil).
In the end, the only way to organise this is to base the employer/employee relationship on confidence and good will. And throw in a couple more controllers than are needed in the shift, just in case.
By the way, I finally had high blood pressure, so I did leave for home. The doctor had to fill in five sheets of paperwork (isn’t that pressure against the leave?) and if I want my report –which I will- I have to go through a rigmarole involving the operations room Head and the Human Resources department. And I’ll get my report in a couple of days!
If you’re a controller from abroad, let me know how you do it. In comments below or to simon.a.rance@gmail.com. Thanks
Normally I would have an aspirin (in fact I did before leaving home) and just work through it. But during this last year I’ve seen too many incidents to be working without being 100% fit. And you must consider that in my current situation I’m not even the last person responsible for my sector, because I’me undergoing instruction in order to recover my validation after a long leave.
So, I decided to go to the workplace doctor. She’s upstairs from the operations room, less than a minute. I explained that I wasn’t feeling tiptop and she answered that she needed objective parameters. Temperature wasn’t too high, 37,2; and a visible sore throat wasn’t enough. So I had a chat and I tried to convey that the only real way to guarantee maximum safety is to make sure people who are not feeling fit on the day don’t get to work at their sector. It’s a very complicated issue, and once again the debate is upon the limits. The doctor admitted to not being able to know objectively if I had a headache or not. I didn’t, and I really just thought I should be relieved based upon not feeling very well, nothing else.
It turns out that the doctor doesn’t know what an airprox is. (You’ll excuse me for not knowing English jargon for that: literal translations from Spanish are crushing, sanding, or shoving). She has never been in the operations room. She doesn’t have a clue what our job is about. I assumed the doctors are pressurised upon to give as few leaves as possible. She denied it. Finally I stated my opinion that not everything could or should be objective: if a controller isn’t feeling fit, he/she should refrain. There are rules and fines for faking illness, but what about a headache, your dog died last night, or you exceeded yourself in the jogging and you’re sugar’s running low?. These can’t be judged objectively by simple visual examination by a doctor. But they are limiting conditions. So how should it work, because, on the other hand, I admit we can’t have workers pulling out ill whenever they want a day off (although this is a lesser evil).
In the end, the only way to organise this is to base the employer/employee relationship on confidence and good will. And throw in a couple more controllers than are needed in the shift, just in case.
By the way, I finally had high blood pressure, so I did leave for home. The doctor had to fill in five sheets of paperwork (isn’t that pressure against the leave?) and if I want my report –which I will- I have to go through a rigmarole involving the operations room Head and the Human Resources department. And I’ll get my report in a couple of days!
If you’re a controller from abroad, let me know how you do it. In comments below or to simon.a.rance@gmail.com. Thanks
Tuesday, 25 January 2011
English: a controversial topic
You would be excused for thinking this is as straightforward as it can get. You enter a selection process. You prove your level of English. You get selected. You study and do your training and then you have a job with great wages and you forget about your English altogether because you’re never going to be tested again.
That was so until a few years ago. Or a few months, from our point of view. ICAO (International Civil Aviation Authority) has proved that miscommunication is a key factor in many air traffic incidents and therefore has published a document (doc 9835) and a circular (318) to do it’s best to establish minimum standards for all Air Traffic Controllers and Pilots, in order to curb this serious problem. It poses the need for all personnel to pass an exam and obtain level 4 or higher out of six. It also established a deadline which nobody took any notice of. So it has now been extended, for the last time, until 5th March 2011.
This means nothing to you native English speakers out there but it causes havoc here in Spain. We currently have ATCO’s with 30 plus years’ experience who haven’t done an English refresher in the whole of their working life. Some others have. Some practise a lot, regardless of their job. About two thousand different cases. All are now required to prove their proficiency during the next month. And beware: you lose your license if you fail!
How much English is really used on the average day at work? Not much more than numbers and descriptors to indicate runway names, speeds, headings, altitudes, rates of climb or descent, departure or landing procedure names, and company or unit names. Possibly a little more may be needed to warn of bad weather or radio interference. It seldom goes any further than that.
These are the grounds for many controllers to argue that, if they have been working for a number of years and have never been involved in an incident report regarding the use of English, why shouldn’t they be validated to continue working? Precisely the opposite reasoning goes into ICAO’s effort: many people hadn’t suffered a mishap because non-routine circumstances hadn’t cropped up. The whole English debate intends to ensure that we all are ready to affront most non-routine situations
These are also the reasons that were used by National Safety Agencies to curb the previous deadline by giving all workers a provisional level 4. That’s now until March 5th next. By then, you have to hold your certificate. All you have to do is get yourself a four, then forget the whole issue for three years. Or a five and forget it for six years. A level six will allow you to bury the bastard for ever, although you have to be practically bilingual to get one. For 2000 controllers, anything could happen. But, despite claims from the Spanish ATCO Guild that our English is excellent, it doesn’t seem that absolutely everyone will keep their license. And many are scared stiff to take the exam.
All this has caught both Aena and Spanish controllers off guard. More than a year ago some of us were offered a test exam over the phone. Just a few of us actually tried it. As far as I know, nobody got any marks. Nobody knew what it was all about. Nothing else was known for months, until suddenly we received a letter from the Human Resources Director pointing out the new deadline, and it’s consequences.
So what will Aena do to the controllers who fail their test? Basically, a six months leave with progressively diminishing pay has been offered, in order to give people time to revive their languishing English and retry the test. All studying has to be done in one’s own time, although Aena has offered an online study package. If, after this you fail, you’re fired.
Bear in mind the following situation: Controller has been at the job for 35 years, had qualified for early retirement, was deprived of that by the (probably illegal and certainly immoral) Royal Decree, but could still retire in the short future, maintaining substantial wages until full retirement and State pension. He/she fails the exam a few weeks before retirement and loses it all, without ever having been offered an English refresher. Obviously unacceptable. Our reaction has been to leave the exam until the last possible moment, just in case Aena realises that it has some duty towards it’s workers.
Even the Sinister Minister has had to speak. Facing the prospect of suddenly losing all Air Traffic Services in Spain, he has filtered a project extending the validity of our English level 4 for 18 months. As a result, we will be an ICAO exception (as in many other areas). And if all our managers and politicians continue to try to enforce unacceptable measures upon us with no negotiation we are slowly but steadily going to turn into one of the most dangerous places to fly to in the world. If we’re not there already.
That was so until a few years ago. Or a few months, from our point of view. ICAO (International Civil Aviation Authority) has proved that miscommunication is a key factor in many air traffic incidents and therefore has published a document (doc 9835) and a circular (318) to do it’s best to establish minimum standards for all Air Traffic Controllers and Pilots, in order to curb this serious problem. It poses the need for all personnel to pass an exam and obtain level 4 or higher out of six. It also established a deadline which nobody took any notice of. So it has now been extended, for the last time, until 5th March 2011.
This means nothing to you native English speakers out there but it causes havoc here in Spain. We currently have ATCO’s with 30 plus years’ experience who haven’t done an English refresher in the whole of their working life. Some others have. Some practise a lot, regardless of their job. About two thousand different cases. All are now required to prove their proficiency during the next month. And beware: you lose your license if you fail!
How much English is really used on the average day at work? Not much more than numbers and descriptors to indicate runway names, speeds, headings, altitudes, rates of climb or descent, departure or landing procedure names, and company or unit names. Possibly a little more may be needed to warn of bad weather or radio interference. It seldom goes any further than that.
These are the grounds for many controllers to argue that, if they have been working for a number of years and have never been involved in an incident report regarding the use of English, why shouldn’t they be validated to continue working? Precisely the opposite reasoning goes into ICAO’s effort: many people hadn’t suffered a mishap because non-routine circumstances hadn’t cropped up. The whole English debate intends to ensure that we all are ready to affront most non-routine situations
These are also the reasons that were used by National Safety Agencies to curb the previous deadline by giving all workers a provisional level 4. That’s now until March 5th next. By then, you have to hold your certificate. All you have to do is get yourself a four, then forget the whole issue for three years. Or a five and forget it for six years. A level six will allow you to bury the bastard for ever, although you have to be practically bilingual to get one. For 2000 controllers, anything could happen. But, despite claims from the Spanish ATCO Guild that our English is excellent, it doesn’t seem that absolutely everyone will keep their license. And many are scared stiff to take the exam.
All this has caught both Aena and Spanish controllers off guard. More than a year ago some of us were offered a test exam over the phone. Just a few of us actually tried it. As far as I know, nobody got any marks. Nobody knew what it was all about. Nothing else was known for months, until suddenly we received a letter from the Human Resources Director pointing out the new deadline, and it’s consequences.
So what will Aena do to the controllers who fail their test? Basically, a six months leave with progressively diminishing pay has been offered, in order to give people time to revive their languishing English and retry the test. All studying has to be done in one’s own time, although Aena has offered an online study package. If, after this you fail, you’re fired.
Bear in mind the following situation: Controller has been at the job for 35 years, had qualified for early retirement, was deprived of that by the (probably illegal and certainly immoral) Royal Decree, but could still retire in the short future, maintaining substantial wages until full retirement and State pension. He/she fails the exam a few weeks before retirement and loses it all, without ever having been offered an English refresher. Obviously unacceptable. Our reaction has been to leave the exam until the last possible moment, just in case Aena realises that it has some duty towards it’s workers.
Even the Sinister Minister has had to speak. Facing the prospect of suddenly losing all Air Traffic Services in Spain, he has filtered a project extending the validity of our English level 4 for 18 months. As a result, we will be an ICAO exception (as in many other areas). And if all our managers and politicians continue to try to enforce unacceptable measures upon us with no negotiation we are slowly but steadily going to turn into one of the most dangerous places to fly to in the world. If we’re not there already.
Saturday, 22 January 2011
Fatigue and the million dollar question.
In earlier posts I showed how we are now forced to do 40% more than other countries’ controllers, and I suppose nobody can embrace the idea of knackered controllers. After quite a while experiencing how Aena has tried to squeeze the last drop of blood out of us, after seeing how dozens of colleagues have fallen to illness (including myself), and many others work under the effect of tranquillisers or need pills to sleep at night, one wonders: Where is the limit? Surely there must be a point where it’s unfair to ask an air traffic control specialist to do any more. I feel that most readers will think that they already spend too much time and effort at their own workplace, and I cannot dispute that, but the specific responsibility of an ATCO may require specific working condition guarantees.
Each of us obviously has different capacities. Some of us can withstand less pressure than others. Politically incorrect as it may be, I need to expose what really is an obvious truth: although all controllers have passed their respective tests and have the required skills to do the job, some are better than others. Sometimes very much so. The same applies to resilience, some are tougher than others.
Our’s is a very specialised job. I don’t believe that it’s in any way more important than others in this or other fields. We’re just the end of a large chain. We could do nothing if engineeers, maintenance or cleaning weren’t running properly. Each link of the chain is as important as each other.
On the other hand, it is true that our task is delicate. We "play" directly with thousands of lives every day and therefore have to be serene, rested and show a reasonably positive attitude. We are even compelled by law to refrain from work if we’re not feeling up to it on the given day. An article of the Air Safety Law specifically addresses this (art 34.4 LSA).
The Goverment used a rationale to justify increasing our hours to 1670 (plus 80 of overtime). They said that is what we effectively did a couple of years ago, when so much overtime had been done. That would respond to a certain logic if the conditions had also been maintained. But there are many major changes. Rest within the shift has been reduced from 33 to 25%. Rostering is done only ten days in advance, instead of 90. The over 57’s were unjustifiably axed. So much so, that they were recovered six months later. Pay was reduced between 25 and over 75%, depending on the previous overtime. These and many more were measures that just added to the already extreme pressure upon ATCOs’ shoulders. Admitting a degree of subjectivity, where’s the reasonable limit? It’s very hard to establish an objective yearly limit, but I can focus on daily ones.
My own experience and subjective feeling makes me think that, under a high traffic load, the maximum continuous working limit is about an hour, probably a bit more if you mix tasks (i.e. planning/organising as well as actually controlling).
The Spanish Government has helped me to establish an objective limit, because it has published a Royal Decree on “limits to activity and rests” (RD 1001/2010 5th Aug.) last August. Instead of performing its own studies about fatigue on the workplace it decides to use comparable international legislation, and it chooses FAA (USA) and NATS (UK), as an example, because they are the amongst the most demanding and flexible, in order to allow the ANSPs to satisfy the necessary demand. Obviously, for the rest of my working career I would have preferred less demanding hours, but this has been imposed by Royal Decree, no negotiation. The law imposes a maximum limit of two consecutive hours, literally copied from SRATCOH, the UK regulation. Not only do I personally think that is too much, I’ve also observed that the Spanish ruling has “forgotten” to translate parts relating to enhanced relief, which establishes increased rest, with a maximum of 1h30min continuous activity, for high complexity workplaces, as many in Aena are. Our irresponsible legislators have also added a clause allowing Aena to delay implementation 18 months. In the meantime, we are working daily timetables of no less than three consecutive hours almost every day.
If the Spanish law states that its conditions are those necessary in order to guarantee a fatigue free environment, is it reasonable to assume that if it is not abided by, that guarantee vanishes?
To be honest with you all, I must say that I know nothing about other countries’ regulations on this topic, but I wonder why they have chosen UK and USA. Could it be because those two countries naturally have a lower fatigue load than Spain because they only use one language? Spanish is an official ICAO language and has to be used together with English every day on the radio, meaning constant register changes, and therefore a higher workload.
More about English in a future post. Thanks for reading.
Each of us obviously has different capacities. Some of us can withstand less pressure than others. Politically incorrect as it may be, I need to expose what really is an obvious truth: although all controllers have passed their respective tests and have the required skills to do the job, some are better than others. Sometimes very much so. The same applies to resilience, some are tougher than others.
Our’s is a very specialised job. I don’t believe that it’s in any way more important than others in this or other fields. We’re just the end of a large chain. We could do nothing if engineeers, maintenance or cleaning weren’t running properly. Each link of the chain is as important as each other.
On the other hand, it is true that our task is delicate. We "play" directly with thousands of lives every day and therefore have to be serene, rested and show a reasonably positive attitude. We are even compelled by law to refrain from work if we’re not feeling up to it on the given day. An article of the Air Safety Law specifically addresses this (art 34.4 LSA).
The Goverment used a rationale to justify increasing our hours to 1670 (plus 80 of overtime). They said that is what we effectively did a couple of years ago, when so much overtime had been done. That would respond to a certain logic if the conditions had also been maintained. But there are many major changes. Rest within the shift has been reduced from 33 to 25%. Rostering is done only ten days in advance, instead of 90. The over 57’s were unjustifiably axed. So much so, that they were recovered six months later. Pay was reduced between 25 and over 75%, depending on the previous overtime. These and many more were measures that just added to the already extreme pressure upon ATCOs’ shoulders. Admitting a degree of subjectivity, where’s the reasonable limit? It’s very hard to establish an objective yearly limit, but I can focus on daily ones.
My own experience and subjective feeling makes me think that, under a high traffic load, the maximum continuous working limit is about an hour, probably a bit more if you mix tasks (i.e. planning/organising as well as actually controlling).
The Spanish Government has helped me to establish an objective limit, because it has published a Royal Decree on “limits to activity and rests” (RD 1001/2010 5th Aug.) last August. Instead of performing its own studies about fatigue on the workplace it decides to use comparable international legislation, and it chooses FAA (USA) and NATS (UK), as an example, because they are the amongst the most demanding and flexible, in order to allow the ANSPs to satisfy the necessary demand. Obviously, for the rest of my working career I would have preferred less demanding hours, but this has been imposed by Royal Decree, no negotiation. The law imposes a maximum limit of two consecutive hours, literally copied from SRATCOH, the UK regulation. Not only do I personally think that is too much, I’ve also observed that the Spanish ruling has “forgotten” to translate parts relating to enhanced relief, which establishes increased rest, with a maximum of 1h30min continuous activity, for high complexity workplaces, as many in Aena are. Our irresponsible legislators have also added a clause allowing Aena to delay implementation 18 months. In the meantime, we are working daily timetables of no less than three consecutive hours almost every day.
If the Spanish law states that its conditions are those necessary in order to guarantee a fatigue free environment, is it reasonable to assume that if it is not abided by, that guarantee vanishes?
To be honest with you all, I must say that I know nothing about other countries’ regulations on this topic, but I wonder why they have chosen UK and USA. Could it be because those two countries naturally have a lower fatigue load than Spain because they only use one language? Spanish is an official ICAO language and has to be used together with English every day on the radio, meaning constant register changes, and therefore a higher workload.
More about English in a future post. Thanks for reading.
Thursday, 20 January 2011
Why and how so much overtime?
In my last post I published Eurocontrols numbers for yearly working hours at different Air Navigation Service Providers. Spanish ATCOs were required to work about 40% more hours than other providers. I believe that this was one of the first steps taken in order to destroy our profession and bust our Union.
Just to prove the point let me tell you how rostering works (at least in Spain). You are not allowed to adjoin two shifts operating with real air traffic, but you may do a simulator session, as a trainee or an instructor, just before or after a real traffic shift. Thus it was perfectly possible to do a morning shift, afternoon simulator, night shift, morning simulator and afternoon shift in direct succession. This is obviously unreasonable and no-one really wanted to do it. That's why overtime hours' pay rose to a very high amount.
What almost nobody knows is that Aena imposed a double condition in order to earn that overtime: you could only work in the simulator if you had previously worked in the operations room, and you could only do overtime in the operations room if you has previously worked in the simulator. This is so extreme that there is no written evidence to prove it but I personally assure you it's true. I got to hear it when I was learning and practising the new airspace for the Madrid TMA (Terminal Manoeuvring Area). Aena was very intent on it getting through quickly. We then thought we were doing everyone: Aena, Government, Citizens, a huge favour. Now I believe that we were innocent victims of the first step of a huge image campaign which has ended in the demonisation of a group of workers to achieve a goal.
What's the goal, I hear you ask! My guess might be slightly better than yours, but I feel it's just trying to offer the best possible situation for a private buyer to invest heavily in the company and it's airports. In fact, privatisation is on it's way. The ruling (a decree again) that puts 13 airports on the marketplace, was published in December.
Hurry! they're cheap now, and Spain may have a reasonable future in the mid term run.Right now a few airports that have been completed in the last couple of years (case of Castellón and Ciudad Real) are bankrupt.
Mismanagement?
More about Ciudad Real and/or what happened on the 3rd December in my next post. Thanks for reading!
Just to prove the point let me tell you how rostering works (at least in Spain). You are not allowed to adjoin two shifts operating with real air traffic, but you may do a simulator session, as a trainee or an instructor, just before or after a real traffic shift. Thus it was perfectly possible to do a morning shift, afternoon simulator, night shift, morning simulator and afternoon shift in direct succession. This is obviously unreasonable and no-one really wanted to do it. That's why overtime hours' pay rose to a very high amount.
What almost nobody knows is that Aena imposed a double condition in order to earn that overtime: you could only work in the simulator if you had previously worked in the operations room, and you could only do overtime in the operations room if you has previously worked in the simulator. This is so extreme that there is no written evidence to prove it but I personally assure you it's true. I got to hear it when I was learning and practising the new airspace for the Madrid TMA (Terminal Manoeuvring Area). Aena was very intent on it getting through quickly. We then thought we were doing everyone: Aena, Government, Citizens, a huge favour. Now I believe that we were innocent victims of the first step of a huge image campaign which has ended in the demonisation of a group of workers to achieve a goal.
What's the goal, I hear you ask! My guess might be slightly better than yours, but I feel it's just trying to offer the best possible situation for a private buyer to invest heavily in the company and it's airports. In fact, privatisation is on it's way. The ruling (a decree again) that puts 13 airports on the marketplace, was published in December.
Hurry! they're cheap now, and Spain may have a reasonable future in the mid term run.Right now a few airports that have been completed in the last couple of years (case of Castellón and Ciudad Real) are bankrupt.
Mismanagement?
More about Ciudad Real and/or what happened on the 3rd December in my next post. Thanks for reading!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)