The poor air traffic controllers

Tim Robbins

Spare a thought for the poor air traffic controllers. There poor victims of the recession are on 115K a year and a pension and should be getting more money because they are doing something new in their job and are due a 6% rise.

They must be the highest paid technicians in the world. The poor things.

Alcatel

Whilst I appreciate (particularly as a frequent flyer) the hard and skilled job that it is to be an ATC, they're having a laugh if they think they deserve a 6% increase during the recession and just because they have to do something new in their job.

Tim Robbins

Alcatel wrote: »

Whilst I appreciate (particularly as a frequent flyer) the hard and skilled job that it is to be an ATC, they're having a laugh if they think they deserve a 6% increase during the recession and just because they have to do something new in their job.

What's hard and skilled about it? Compared to other technical jobs?

They don't research anything, they don't design anything, they don't take risks. Granted they have some responsibility but really? The complicated stuff is done for them by the software they are using. It's a technical role.

I wonder what they get in other countries.

herya

Tim Robbins wrote: »

They don't research anything, they don't design anything, they don't take risks. Granted they have some responsibility but really? The complicated stuff is done for them by the software they are using. It's a technical role.

It's not when there's an emergency. My cousin is training for an ATC, it's not an easy job and there's a lot of responsibility, many burn out very early. They shouldn't be getting this raise but don't belittle them so easily.

The_Honeybadger

herya wrote: »

It's not when there's an emergency. My cousin is training for an ATC, it's not an easy job and there's a lot of responsibility, many burn out very early. They shouldn't be getting this raise but don't belittle them so easily.

Actually know an ATC personally and he has always said that it is an immensely stressful job and nobody would do it if it wasnt for the good salary. He has told me he will retire early due to the stress that the job entails and he is only 30, I have no doubt it is a stressful job and you have thousands of lives in your hands in an emergency, if I and my family are flying I would like to know the ATC bringing in the plane is happy and on top of his game. Still, will 6% really effect their standard of living enough to justify a strike when they are on that salary? I think not, its a terribly selfish action and just another example of the unions determination to make everybody suffer so that their members can remain untouched by the situation that is causing hardship to so many.

Tim Robbins

herya wrote: »

It's not when there's an emergency. My cousin is training for an ATC, it's not an easy job and there's a lot of responsibility, many burn out very early. They shouldn't be getting this raise but don't belittle them so easily.

Really? I don't know that much about it. But I'd be happy to change my opinions if someone can make a good argument for it.

The stress one isn't a good argument. It's the teacher's card. All jobs are stressful.

Anyone know what they get in other countries?
Info on UK salaries here:

http://www.prospects.ac.uk/p/types_of_job/air_traffic_controller_salary.jsp

Starting salary is £10,100.
The salary rises to £15,000 - £18,000 on appointment.
Salaries typically rise after validation (two years into the first appointment) to £46,000 - £50,000, depending on posted unit (salary data collected).
The typical salary for airport controllers with 10-15 years' experience is £60,000.
The typical salary for area centre controllers with substantial experience is around £88,000 (salary data collected March 2008).
More senior management grades run from £81,000 to £94,000.

So it seems that 60K is the salary there unless you are in senior management. And it's 115 Euro here.

Explain...

mickoneill30

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Anyone know what they get in other countries?

A quick Google brings up
UK
http://www.prospects.ac.uk/p/types_of_job/air_traffic_controller_salary.jsp
That seems to be from March 2008 so that was before the recession.

Australia (if you're looking for a job)
http://careers.airservicesaustralia.com/jobDetails.asp?sJobIDs=491494

Edit: Beaten by yourself. My Google searching must be too slow.

Sleepy

To be fair, I think the stress of having so many lives in your hands on a day to day basis would be fairly intense (and certainly more stressful than normal 'technical' roles where the worst you can do is wreck an information system). The burn out rate is quite widely known to be high (though I've not seen any figures on it).

That said, the idiocy of striking for salary increases in an environment where the government have just received wide support for cutting PS workers' salaries and where there'd be a mile-long queue of people lining up for training to replace you is staggering. Never mind the holding of union meetings during working hours, how is that legal? I understand that it's a 24/7 position but could a separate meeting not be held for each shift?

Staggering.

smellslikeshoes

There is definitely more to this than them just being greedy.

Link here posted Aviation & Aircraft which gives the other side.
If anyone really thinks being an ATC is an easy job and doesn't deserve to be as well payed as it does have a listen in to it here. You have the lives 100s of people on your shoulders at times and it takes a rare type of person to deal with the pressure.

Sleepy

You initiated unilateral changes without negotiation, why would you not expect a fight?

Seems to be the crux of their complaint, to which I'd respond that in the real world one does not get to negotiate on every aspect of your job.

Salary increments are a farce which should never be introduced in any profession. If your performance merits a raise, you should get one, you should not have an automatic "right" to one.

Do they think they're the only one's who have had salary increases agreed to under social partnership revoked due to the recession?

Could the government hire some American Military ATC's to replace these guys until their replacements can be trained up? I'd certainly apply for the job at current salary levels.

Tim Robbins

Sleepy wrote: »

To be fair, I think the stress of having so many lives in your hands on a day to day basis would be fairly intense (and certainly more stressful than normal 'technical' roles where the worst you can do is wreck an information system). The burn out rate is quite widely known to be high (though I've not seen any figures on it).

On that basis Firemen should get 1,000,000 a year.

A fireman actually saves life.
The ATC actually makes sure things work as they should.

A fireman ( I would suspect) would see death regularly.
An ATC could go their entire career and never see it.

A fireman could actually die doing their job.
An ATC could never die.

So because the ATC has some technical know how - know how that involves no R&D - they get the doe. Doesn't seem fair.

The_Honeybadger

Tim Robbins wrote: »

On that basis Firemen should get 1,000,000 a year.

A fireman actually saves life.
The ATC actually makes sure things work as they should.

A fireman ( I would suspect) would see death regularly.
An ATC could go their entire career and never see it.

A fireman could actually die doing their job.
An ATC could never die.

So because the ATC has some technical know how - know how that involves no R&D - they get the doe. Doesn't seem fair.

Interesting point of view, I would still like to be assured that the very best people possible are placed in these ATC roles. Best way to ensure that it is a highly sought after position is to make it a highly paid position, teachers also use this argument to justify their salary in my experience. This does not excuse what the ATCs are doing today of course, shameful behaviour.

PS If they do go through their entire careers withouts overseeing a tragedy surely this is an endorsement of their ability in a way?

rudedog

Tim Robbins wrote: »

What's hard and skilled about it? Compared to other technical jobs?

They don't research anything, they don't design anything, they don't take risks. Granted they have some responsibility but really? The complicated stuff is done for them by the software they are using. It's a technical role.

I wonder what they get in other countries.

Well said!

Alcatel

I think Tim makes a good point regarding the UK salary - why is an ATC controller in Ireland worth more than one in the UK, considering the UK is more crowded airspace?

115,000 is too much for the role, and I do believe it is more stressful than most. But we all have a choice in life as to what to do.

herya

Tim Robbins wrote: »

So because the ATC has some technical know how - know how that involves no R&D - they get the doe. Doesn't seem fair.

You have no clue what you're talking about. Yes they have software but all important decisions need to be signed off by a human and in case of emergency they have seconds to decide about hundreds of lives.

There are ATC responsible for the airport area - relatively easy although a bad ATC could still send an aircraft to take off from the same runway another flight is coming to land onto, plus crash them with ground traffic. It's something like a 3D puzzle in real time. I heard a story from the training when one candidate managed to crash an aircraft with a luggage train and another incoming aircraft into them; and he was not a bad candidate, he just had to juggle it along with many other items.

Then you have ATCs responsible for all the aircrafts in the controlled airspace which is several miles around the airport, taking off, preparing to land, waiting in line for the landing, then the ones just passing by including private flights and cargos on top of it. They are in radio contact all the time and need to manage them all, direct them and keep them separated. Imagine doing this in heavy traffic due to bad weather or emergency on board or on the ground. It's like a beehive.

Probably the least stressful is the flight control outside the airports - less complicated but again in case of emergency it's a nightmare. I knew an ATC who assisted the pilot of a small private flight - they crashed due to engine malfunction but he tried to assist them beforehand and he heard them die knowing that despite his best efforts he's helpless.

The candidates are hand picked for their personality and resilience and they face more life or death decisions than an average air pilot.

Yes they shouldn't strike for a salary raise but still it's a hugely responsible job. I'd rather have them earn 100k than some penpusher in FAS or a deputy school principal with a drinking problem.

Rujib1

herya wrote: »

You have no clue what you're talking about. Yes they have software but all important decisions need to be signed off by a human and in case of emergency they have seconds to decide about hundreds of lives.

There are ATC responsible for the airport area - relatively easy although a bad ATC could still send an aircraft to take off from the same runway another flight is coming to land onto, plus crash them with ground traffic. It's something like a 3D puzzle in real time. I heard a story from the training when one candidate managed to crash an aircraft with a luggage train and another incoming aircraft into them; and he was not a bad candidate, he just had to juggle it along with many other items.

Then you have ATCs responsible for all the aircrafts in the controlled airspace which is several miles around the airport, taking off, preparing to land, waiting in line for the landing, then the ones just passing by including private flights and cargos on top of it. They are in radio contact all the time and need to manage them all, direct them and keep them separated. Imagine doing this in heavy traffic due to bad weather or emergency on board or on the ground. It's like a beehive.

Probably the least stressful is the flight control outside the airports - less complicated but again in case of emergency it's a nightmare. I knew an ATC who assisted the pilot of a small private flight - they crashed due to engine malfunction but he tried to assist them beforehand and he heard them die knowing that despite his best efforts he's helpless.

The candidates are hand picked for their personality and resilience and they face more life or death decisions than an average air pilot.

Yes they shouldn't strike for a salary raise but still it's a hugely responsible job. I'd rather have them earn 100k than some penpusher in FAS or a deputy school principal with a drinking problem.

Yearra, get over it. bring all that logic to it's final conclusion, and you can justify assembly operators on the plane manufacturing plants, QA inspectors, mechanics who service the planes in service, all getting €120k or what ever.

Your average bus driver, has a lot of lives in his hands on a daily basis, without any real back up system, or guidence system like air traffic control.
He relies on 100% concentration 100% of the time, and does not have the security of some guy calling him up to tell him change course or speed or whatever to avoid a collision.

I hope these greedy clowns are taught a hard lesson in this fight. They cannot be allowed to win when average Joe on the street both public and private sector is taking pain.

Tim Robbins

herya wrote: »

You have no clue what you're talking about. Yes they have software but all important decisions need to be signed off by a human and in case of emergency they have seconds to decide about hundreds of lives.
...

How much do you think a fireman should get paid then?

Tim Robbins

Rujib1 wrote: »

Yearra, get over it. bring all that logic to it's final conclusion, and you can justify assembly operators on the plane manufacturing plants, QA inspectors, mechanics who service the planes in service, all getting €120k or what ever.

Your average bus driver, has a lot of lives in his hands on a daily basis, without any real back up system, or guidence system like air traffic control.
He relies on 100% concentration 100% of the time, and does not have the security of some guy calling him up to tell him change course or speed or whatever to avoid a collision.

I hope these greedy clowns are taught a hard lesson in this fight. They cannot be allowed to win when average Joe on the street both public and private sector is taking pain.

That's a great point about bus drivers especially considering the way cyclists weave in and out of them. You have to be a superb driver to be a bus driver.

Paddy James

look i for one couldn't care less about their stress

Every job is stressful and its all down to how you handle it

Time for them to get real and cop on to the fact that we are in a recession

What a load of g*obs*hites

Tim Robbins

Tim Robbins wrote: »

That's a great point about bus drivers especially considering the way cyclists weave in and out of them. You have to be a superb driver to be a bus driver.

Just thought of another one. A lifeguard - yeah they should be on about 300K based on some of the logic I am hearing here...

narwog81

Sleepy wrote: »

Could the government hire some American Military ATC's to replace these guys until their replacements can be trained up?

im sure we could look inward to our own military for solutions before asking for US aid, after all we wouldn't want the US to be accused of taking over another small country thats incapable of looking after itself:rolleyes:

herya

If you don't see a difference between learning to manage the airspace and learning to drive safely I rest my case.

Go get yourselves an ATC job if it's so easy. Surely if you can drive it should be just a formality.

narwog81

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Spare a thought for the poor air traffic controllers. There poor victims of the recession are on 115K a year and a pension and should be getting more money because they are doing something new in their job and are due a 6% rise.

They must be the highest paid technicians in the world. The poor things.

ehh try Spain:

"Of 2,300 controllers, ten were paid between €810,000 (£725,000) and €900,000 last year. A further 226 were paid between €450,000 and €540,000 and 701 were paid between €270,000 and €360,000.
The average basic salary is €200,000 but most double or triple this amount by working overtime"

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6991798.ece

Galwegian44

This reminds me of the ATC strike in the USA in 1981 when Ronnie Reagan fired anyone who went on strike and replaced them....seems like a good precedent to me. I would also like to echo the points here that it is an extremely stressful job, totally different from other technicians (and even bus drivers!!).

I don't support such high salaries but bear in mind that if you applied, on average, the percentage differences in salaries (Teachers, Police etc get far less in the UK) between the UK and Ireland then there might not be such a difference.

The ATC do need to cop on however and see that their claims are not worth supporting in this climate.

Edit: the sentence in bold below was done by myself to highlight, it was not bolded in the original

The President. This morning at 7 a.m. the union representing those who man America's air traffic control facilities called a strike. This was the culmination of 7 months of negotiations between the Federal Aviation Administration and the union. At one point in these negotiations agreement was reached and signed by both sides, granting a $40 million increase in salaries and benefits. This is twice what other government employees can expect. It was granted in recognition of the difficulties inherent in the work these people perform. Now, however, the union demands are 17 times what had been agreed to — $681 million. This would impose a tax burden on their fellow citizens which is unacceptable.

It is for this reason that I must tell those who fail to report for duty this morning they are in violation of the law, and if they do not report for work within 48 hours, they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated.

Q. Mr. President, are you going to order any union members who violate the law to go to jail?
The President. Well, I have some people around here, and maybe I should refer that question to the Attorney General.
Q. Do you think that they should go to jail, Mr. President, anybody who violates this law?
The President. I told you what I think should be done. They're terminated.

Idbatterim

In the event of an extreme emerygency, couldnt they consult with other colleagues?! when I take my car out on the road, I may be forced to make an instantaneous decision that could lead to life or death for myself or others! How many of us lose sleep over that when hopping in a car?!!!

Galwegian44

The difference is that you could, and probably do make mistakes when driving a car (as we all do from time to time) but in 99.99% of the cases it doesn't cost a life. With an ATC, any mistakes are unacceptable as the likelihood of it causing large numbers of deaths is very high and that is where the pressure resides.

Idbatterim wrote: »

In the event of an extreme emerygency, couldnt they consult with other colleagues?! when I take my car out on the road, I may be forced to make an instantaneous decision that could lead to life or death for myself or others! How many of us lose sleep over that when hopping in a car?!!!

Tim Robbins

Statistically you have a much higher chance of dieing in a car than on a plane. Statisically about 500 people die ever year on the roads. When was the last time there was plane crash in Ireland?

So, if it's all about risk, taxi drivers and bus drivers should get more than pilots?

Idbatterim

Pay increases for anyone in the PS shouldnt even come into the equation! If they arent happy, they should leave! ATC should not be allowed to strike...

Tim Robbins

Galwegian44 wrote: »

The difference is that you could, and probably do make mistakes when driving a car (as we all do from time to time) but in 99.99% of the cases it doesn't cost a life. With an ATC, any mistakes are unacceptable as the likelihood of it causing large numbers of deaths is very high and that is where the pressure resides.

I don't buy that. There have all sorts of systems, processes and safety margins. People are talking as if it's a war - real life or death stuff. There would be a lot more deaths if that was the case...

The ATCs get a huge amount of time off. Surely that's enough compenstation for the "stress".

Galwegian44

Not taxi drivers and bus drivers but the Road Traffic Controllers......now who exactly are these people?

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Statistically you have a much higher chance of dieing in a car than on a plane. Statisically about 500 people die ever year on the roads. When was the last time there was plane crash in Ireland?

So, if it's all about risk, taxi drivers and bus drivers should get more than pilots?

narwog81

Tim Robbins wrote: »

. Statisically about 500 people die ever year on the roads.

A total of 241 people lost their lives on the country's roads in 2009

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-215616445.html

not quite 500....

narwog81

Tim Robbins wrote: »

When was the last time there was plane crash in Ireland?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/four-killed-in-plane-crash-in-ireland-974786.html

from 2008 but i can think of several crashes in 2009 also, not least the air corps crash in connemara in november

Galwegian44

Tim - It is likely that in the future, technology will make the controller more of systems technician co-ordinating decisions made by automated systems.

However there are problems with technology that takes the controller out of the decision loop but requires the controller to step back in to control exceptional situations. Computer systems are not that sophisticated to make the important decisions and are not reliable enough (remember Dublin Airport last year). Air traffic control is a skill that has to be kept current by regular practice and training.

It may not be war but it's not like driving a bus either (no disrespect meant to bus drivers who are also skilled).

Tim Robbins wrote: »

I don't buy that. There have all sorts of systems, processes and safety margins. People are talking as if it's a war - real life or death stuff. There would be a lot more deaths if that was the case...

The ATCs get a huge amount of time off. Surely that's enough compenstation for the "stress".

herya

Idbatterim wrote: »

when I take my car out on the road, I may be forced to make an instantaneous decision that could lead to life or death for myself or others!

Yes but it won't be 100+ others at one go.

Your decision affects you, your passengers and a very limited number of other people, plus in most cases you have a very good chance of survival even if you have to crawl out of a burning car. There's no crawling out in air collisions.

ixoy

Galwegian44 wrote: »

Tim - It is likely that in the future, technology will make the controller more of systems technician co-ordinating decisions made by automated systems.

So if technology is going to make it easier for them - and growing in sophistication - why the hell are they whinging about having to adapt to these new systems?

jmayo

Tim Robbins wrote: »

What's hard and skilled about it? Compared to other technical jobs?

They don't research anything, they don't design anything, they don't take risks. Granted they have some responsibility but really? The complicated stuff is done for them by the software they are using. It's a technical role.

I wonder what they get in other countries.

As someone who does know a couple of ATCs and has some flying experience, I would suggest you do some research.

ATCS mostly have a limited career time, burn out can be high and reitrement usually can be earleir than most jobs.
Breakdowns can be high in some countries.
The job can be really stressful at busy airports, Dublin I would say is one.
Fine if you are stuck in Knock, Shannon or Cork where there a lot less flights and less traffic.

You say they take "some responsibility".

FFS do you know anything about aviation and how ATC works ?
They have to make sure that some numpty who thinks he is Tom Cruise doesn't do something stupid, all the while making sure the guy who doesn't understand English actually follows your instructions to the letter.

Have you ever been in the hold pattern at Heathrow ?
Next time look out the bloody window and see how many aircraft can be there.
Do you think all the pilots just fly around and keep an eye out.
Yes technology plays a part, but it is ultimately up to some controller to oversee separation both vertical and horizontal.
Some one has to coordinate that flying parking lot.
There is huge responsibility because if you fu** up a few hundred people could be dead.
BTW they may never see those dead people since it is unlikely the aircraft falls directly outside the tower or control centre.

Yes technology plays a big part, but it still fu**s up, and there is the human element which sometimes causes technology to be ignored.
There is a human condition where pilots become fixated and no matter what technology is telling them they make up their minds.
It has been found to have caused numerous accidents.

Tim Robbins wrote: »

On that basis Firemen should get 1,000,000 a year.

A fireman actually saves life.
The ATC actually makes sure things work as they should.

A fireman ( I would suspect) would see death regularly.
An ATC could go their entire career and never see it.

A fireman could actually die doing their job.
An ATC could never die.

So because the ATC has some technical know how - know how that involves no R&D - they get the doe. Doesn't seem fair.

FFS.
So should peoples' salaries be paid based on how many deaths they see or deal with.
A mortican or undertaker must be on millions then :rolleyes:

BTW even though I respect the job ATCs perform and understand the pressures they sometimes have to work under, I do not condone them looking for a raise at this time since we cannot afford it and by all accounts their workload is decreasing.

EDIT: I just spotted your stupid remark about air crash in Ireland.
What the fu** has statistic got to do with how much ATCs are paid ?
Once again you apepar to justify salaries based on how many deaths there are.

The more you post on this topic, the worse you make yourself look.

Alcatel

If we were to hire in Europe for equally good ATC's, what would we have to pay? A lot less than 110,000EUR if we simply look to the UK, which isn't miles away from us in terms of living standards or costs.

Set the salaries people will work for, not just the people you have.

Galwegian44

Maybe because the statement began with "It is likely......". And put yourselves in their shoes, would you not do the same? I would.

But the government needs to let them know that their demands are excessive, that their remuneration is satisfactory to say the least and that they are replaceable.

ixoy wrote: »

So if technology is going to make it easier for them - and growing in sophistication - why the hell are they whinging about having to adapt to these new systems?

smellslikeshoes

Alcatel wrote: »

If we were to hire in Europe for equally good ATC's, what would we have to pay? A lot less than 110,000EUR if we simply look to the UK, which isn't miles away from us in terms of living standards or costs.

Set the salaries people will work for, not just the people you have.

That works both ways, Spain isn't that far away from us either and have a look at the link previously posted in this thread http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6991798.ece


Without us knowing what exactly the technological changes involve there is no way for us to know if the 6% increase they are looking for is warranted. But coming from my own personal point of view as someone with a PPL and have had to deal with them I can tell you right now that ATCs deserve every penny of what they earn.

neilthefunkeone

Fair enough it seems to be a fairly stressful job and they share responsibility along with piolts to see in planes safely.. But at €115,000 atm i dont see the need to be looking for increases..

Is this new technology they are arguing about going to up their daily work load? make their job unsafe to do? Endanger lives?

Heard yesterday and read today that Air traffic and passengers were down last quarter by 3% and expected to be down this year something like 900,000 passengers.. (Last word and Irish times..)

Not on same scale at all here but this quarter my dept are changing our os to Win7.. Now i can imagine my managers reaction if i refuse to use win7 and ask for a fairly large pay increase.. P45 and a boot in the arse...

ixoy

Galwegian44 wrote: »

Maybe because the statement began with "It is likely......". And put yourselves in their shoes, would you not do the same? I would.

For a change in technology? If people in IT wanted a pay increase for every new software or methodology employed, the industry would shut down over night. Did I moan when I had to re-learn a skillset when moving from Ant to Maven technologies? Of course not, I accepted it as progress and (rightly) thought of it as part of what's required for a job.
Do you think peope should be consulted over technology changes? Where does it end then? Do I get to complain if I'm moved desk and seek a re-settlement charge?

NOGMaxpower

Jasus,

This is a no brainer and I duno why you's all going on and on about it.

Q: Do they deserve high salaries??
A: Too right they do!

Q: Are they right to strike during a recession over 6% increase?
A: Too right they don't - Recession ring any bells?

Q: Should they agree to go back to work and review the 6% increase in 12 months time?
A: Logically yes - logic is tainted by greedy self serving Unions.

Q: Are we the people of Ireland a bunch of moaning fooks?
A: Too right we are.

Q: Is there any point to all these recession rants every day?
A: No.

Q: What should we be doing instead of ranting?
A: Get up stand up, stand up for your rights!

woodseb

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Q: What should we be doing instead of ranting?
A: Get up stand up, stand up for your rights!

i'd rather the air traffic controllers just had a rant rather than standing up for their perceived rights.....

stereo_steve

NOGMaxpower wrote: »

Jasus,

This is a no brainer and I duno why you's all going on and on about it.

Q: Do they deserve high salaries??
A: Too right they do!

Q: Are they right to strike during a recession over 6% increase?
A: Too right they don't - Recession ring any bells?

Q: Should they agree to go back to work and review the 6% increase in 12 months time?
A: Logically yes - logic is tainted by greedy self serving Unions.

Q: Are we the people of Ireland a bunch of moaning fooks?
A: Too right we are.

Q: Is there any point to all these recession rants every day?
A: No.

Q: What should we be doing instead of ranting?
A: Get up stand up, stand up for your rights!

I'd bet everything I have that you are a public servent

Eliot Rosewater

Tim Robbins, clearly you don't have a clue what your talking about. Saying that bus drivers or lifeguards hold as much responsibility as air traffic controllers. It would be funny if it weren't so perverse.

Id hate to be an air traffic controller. I imagine its a very stressful job. My godmothers husband was one. Lots of night shifts, working Christmas Eve, that kind of thing. Sounded like hell with all the responsibility.

It kind of makes me sad that you would try and dismiss the whole profession and those individuals just to support your anti-Union posture. Id bet that I'm more "anti-Union" than you and 95% of Boards. Im anti this strike, obviously, and anti any attempt for the Unions to hamper progress. Yet I wouldn't go saying such ridiculous things as you have just said to support my point of view.

stereo_steve wrote: »

I'd bet everything I have that you are a public servent

If hes not with you hes against you, right?

Japer

Galwegian44 wrote: »

This reminds me of the ATC strike in the USA in 1981 when Ronnie Reagan fired anyone who went on strike and replaced them....seems like a good precedent to me.

+1. Lots of people who work hard would like to have a six figure salary, and pension which cost their employer 30% of salary. Time the country got real. They are paid too much, not paid too little.

jmayo

ixoy wrote: »

For a change in technology? If people in IT wanted a pay increase for every new software or methodology employed, the industry would shut down over night. Did I moan when I had to re-learn a skillset when moving from Ant to Maven technologies? Of course not, I accepted it as progress and (rightly) thought of it as part of what's required for a job.
Do you think peope should be consulted over technology changes? Where does it end then? Do I get to complain if I'm moved desk and seek a re-settlement charge?

A few points here.
1. We don't really know what is the new technology and how is affects their working operations ?

2. Getting to grips with an ATC systems isn't like getting used to a new version of windows, a new DB or a new programmming system.
If you f*** up, misprogram settings, misinterprid a warning people could die and not in ones or twos but in the hundreds.
I remember a CAA switch over a few years back going horribly wrong and flights delayed all over the place. They had to roll back to old system.
Thankfully no accidents took place.
And no not new terminal at heathrow :rolleyes:

3. Sadly for all the fine work they do and all the stress they endure, they are public sector workers and are members of a union where it has long been the practice to look for remuneration & compensation everytime the members do have to change work practices however minor.

What pees me off about this thread is the total lack of cop on some posters are displaying as they rant about a profession of which they haven't the slightest idea of what it entails.
the comparisons are ludricrous.

I actually recall someone previously complaining (on thread on boards) that air accident investigators were being hired (public servants) and how they were vastly overpaid seeing that the job could be performed much cheaper by gardai who investigated road accidents after all. :rolleyes:

lind.

For God sake it's not like they are being asked to continue working for less pay they don't know how lucky they are

Tim Robbins

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Tim Robbins, clearly you don't have a clue what your talking about. Saying that bus drivers or lifeguards hold as much responsibility as air traffic controllers. It would be funny if it weren't so perverse.

Id hate to be an air traffic controller. I imagine its a very stressful job. My godmothers husband was one. Lots of night shifts, working Christmas Eve, that kind of thing. Sounded like hell with all the responsibility.

Working social hours isn't exactly a good argument.
Bouncers at nightclubs work similar hours.

I can't understand the highly emotive responses here. Facts are they get paid far less in the UK and we are been ripped off.

Don't give me the stress cr*p - most of use work twice the hours in stressful jobs.

And there are plenty of jobs which directly involve people's life's.

So the only differentiating factor can be the complexity of an ATC vis a vi a lifeguard or a fireman.

The complexity is mainly handled by the software, there's no way they are doing applied maths equations in their heads.

In fact, I doubt the complexity they are involved is beyond first year engineering. Perhaps anyone who disagrees could give an example of a mathematical problem they have to work out in their head.

Things like bad airport design surely adds to the complexity and the stress. But it makes much more sense to design airports correctly to minimize this complexity.

Eliot Rosewater

Whatever. If your going to let your anti-Union dogma dictate the currently ridiculous terms of this discussion then Ive no interest in posting here. I know your trying really really hard to think that Air Traffic Controlling is an easy job so that it will fall right into line with your anti-Union position, but life isn't so black and white unfortunately.

Tim Robbins

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Whatever. If your going to let your anti-Union dogma dictate the currently ridiculous terms of this discussion then Ive no interest in posting here. I know your trying really really hard to think that Air Traffic Controlling is an easy job so that it will fall right into line with your anti-Union position, but life isn't so black and white unfortunately.

Why are you putting me in a "anti-union dogma" box?

If all you want to do is put someone who disagrees with you in some facile box well then why are you wasting both of our times.