[Peetwo]

A point of comparison: Alphabets, fatigue and ATC across the ditch.

NZ ATC Union calls for legislated breaks for solo staff.

https://www.nzalpa.org.nz/Media-Centre/N...nts-to-era

Excellent link Bumaye, that article is worthy of being put up in full...  

ATC calls for amendments to ERA

Air Traffic Controllers call for legislated rest and meal breaks

Basic human needs became a public topic of discussion when Air Traffic Controllers (ATCs) took to Parliament to voice their concerns on the proposed amendments to the Employment Relations Act (ERA).

In May the Select Committee heard that the proposed legislation could require ATCs to work continuously for up to 9.5 hours without any rest and/or meal break.

Air Traffic Control is widely recognised as one of the most stressful occupations in the world with the highest need for mental alertness. The current and proposed restrictions on the ability for ATCs from having ‘normal’ breaks like other workers is unsafe and has the potential to lead to a serious incident or accident.


“Many ATCs, particularly those based at regional airports, are often solo controllers working the shift by themselves. This means that they have the sole duty to ensure that the aerodrome and surrounding airspace remains safe,” NZALPA President Tim Robinson explained.

“While many of these regional airports would seem to have relatively low levels of aircraft movement, ATC’s must maintain continuous visual watch throughout the duration of their shift, and often have to respond to unexpected and sometimes urgent situations involving the safety of aircraft.”

In its presentation NZALPA pressed the Select Committee to consider the safety impact of excluding ATCs from having mandatory rest and meal breaks because it is an essential service.

Addressing media after the Select Committee appearance, Robinson said that in many comparable jurisdictions such as Canada, every control tower is routinely staffed by more than one person.

“In many countries in the European Union it is a legal requirement to have more than one person on duty following on from fatal accidents.

“Does New Zealand have to wait for a major accident to occur in order to highlight the need for proper rest and meal breaks to be legislated?” he asked.

The proposed ERA Bill outlines employees’ entitlement to, and provision made for, mandatory rest and meal breaks during their work shift. However this requirement excludes those employed in an ‘essential service’ including ATCs.

Although the proposed ERA Bill reflects the wording of the current legislation, NZALPA submitted for this to be amended to allow ATCs the same meal and rest breaks as other workers.

NZALPA also explained to the Select Committee that under the current law, ATCs have had to come up with creative ways to be able to relieve themselves while still maintaining watch of the air space. This poses a threat to the health and safety of not only the ATC, but also to the airspace users and, ultimately, the travelling public.

Airways General Manager Air Traffic Services Tim Boyle, was contacted by media following NZALPA’s submission but replied that “these had not been raised as an issue with the state owned enterprise,” and that “there had been long standing meal and toilet break provisions at regional towers, which have been endorsed by NZALPA.”

This is disputed by ATC Industrial Officer, Dave Mainwaring who said that issues relating to ATC breaks have been brought up on numerous occasions, particularly during contract negotiations.

“In our on-going negotiations starting in February this year, Tim Boyle as negotiations leader for Airways gave us a flat refusal to discuss any breaks at domestic towers,” recalls Mainwaring.

“Our position has remained unchanged for the last 25 years, that provisions must be made to allow ATCs to have breaks free from all duty. The current arrangement does not allow meal ‘breaks’ or freedom from duty ‘while your pants are around your ankles’.”

The Select Committee is due to report its findings to Parliament on 1 August.

 
Slight thread drift but while on NZ ALPA website, I also found the next in line blogpiece of interest:

Australia's fatigue rules review
[font=Arial, ​Helvetica, ​sans-serif]
REVIEW OF AUSTRALIA’S FATIGUE RULES UNDERWAY
Modernising the rules around issues of pilot fatigue, specifically a review of the Australian Civil Aviation Order (CAO) 48.1, has begun across the Tasman in an effort to align more closely with international practice.

In March this year, an independent review team delivered its report to the country’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to assess the appropriateness and necessity of the proposed changes to CAO 48.1.
This review is of significance to the New Zealand Aviation Industry given the current local review of fatigue rules.

NZ CAA are in the process of finalising their policy for fatigue management, and are monitoring the CASA development of fatigue rules closely.

The Australian review team was asked to assess new rules regarding potential safety risk due to fatigue and whether the rules would impose unnecessary costs or hinder participation in aviation.

The review team looked at current regulations (both nationally and internationally) and considered human factors and safety management processes.

Twenty-four recommendations were made to the CASA to help them determine what changes were needed and the process for finalising the rules.

Key recommendations included:[/font]

• Revising flight duty period (FDP) limits to align more closely with international practices.
  
• Increasing the flexibility of the Fatigue Risk Management System (FRMS) by including a risk-based tiered system.
  
• Introducing a standardised approval process (other than FRMS) to increase flexibility for operators who operate beyond the prescribed limits.
  
• Removing Part 137 aerial application operations from CAO 48.1 or adopting limits from Civil Aviation Safety Rules subpart 137.Q due to lower exposure to risk to the public.
  

[size=undefined]

It was also recommended that a staggered rollout of these changes should occur, with the highest risk areas given priority. Subsequent to the independent review the aviation industry has had an opportunity to comment to CASA on the review recommendations.

The review of fatigue rules for air operators and pilots is part of the CASA’s regulation reform programme.

This programme seeks to align Australian practices with international standards, improve aviation safety, address known risks and maintain their reputation for safety.

Whilst no date for finalising the new rules has been given, it is expected that this work might be completed by the end of this year.
 [/size]

 
Gotta love this load of bollocks - "..This programme seeks to align Australian practices with international standards, improve aviation safety, address known risks and maintain their reputation for safety..."

The difference here is that CAANZ have proud proactive history of addressing regulatory reform issues in a timely manner, whereas Australia will merely pay lipservice to the ICAO SARPs and Dr A will once again sharpen his pencil and write another ream of notified differences to ICAO - FDS...

Reference: Three decades of Australia taking the piss out of ICAO - Part II
 

Next it would appear that Harfwit has some more 'please explain' weasel word confectionery to cook up on Tassie airspace safety issues.

From the Oz today:

Antarctic flights frozen out of plans
MATTHEW DENHOLM
Airservices failed to cater for Antarctic flights when it introduced new flightpaths for Hobart Airport.

---

Antarctic jets frozen out of Hobart flightpath plans

Airservices failed to cater for Antarctic flights when it introduced new flightpaths for Hobart Airport, forcing aircraft to waste time and fuel needlessly flying well north of the city.

The airspace regulator’s failure to provide for aircraft arriving from or departing for Hobart’s south when new flightpaths were introduced in September last year created headaches for Antarctic Airbus A319 operator Skytraders.

Company executive director Terry Vickers said the initial decision to force departing and arriving Antarctic flights to head well north of Hobart to comply with new fixed flightpaths wasted time and fuel.

“It’s just crazy stuff — it adds 10 to 15 minutes to a flight — $3000 to $4000,” Mr Vickers said. “There was never any real logic to it.

“We had to go up to the north just to come back to the airport, even though we could do a visual approach coming from the south and not have to worry about any of the flightpaths.”

Airservices initially failed to make provision for the Antarctic flights — used to ferry supplies and personnel to and from Australia’s Wilkins ice runway, near Casey Station — despite the service operating for more than a decade.

Mr Vickers said after discussions with Airservices, a meeting had been held and alternatives agreed, and he did not expect any further problems ahead of the next Antarctic flight season.

Airservices confirmed “alternative options” were now available for Antarctic flights, which are expected to increase with plans for a new paved runway near Davis Station and interest from tourist flight operators.

However, the initial failure to consider the issue is seen by critics as further evidence of bungled implementation of the controversial flightpaths.

The Weekend Australian recently revealed a dramatic spike in safety breaches in the skies north of Hobart directly linked to the new flightpaths, known as Standard Instrument Departure and Standard Arrival Route.

This included at least two “loss of separation” incidents, in which Airbus A320 and A321 passenger jets came closer to one another than permitted under safety rules, typically 305m.

An Airservices map shows these incidents are focused on an area where the SID and STAR intersect near Richmond, north of Hobart.

Airservices says the new standardised flightpaths improve safety and efficiency, but in an internal report it conceded these benefits had been undermined by implementation failings.

Virgin pilots were the latest to call for changes to the Hobart flightpaths. The Virgin Independent Pilots Association said making better use of radar-type surveillance to guide planes to low levels at Hobart airport would address many of the concerns.

“Specifically (it would allow), increased flexibility for air traffic controllers and the ability to provide more direct routing away from noise-sensitive neighbourhoods in periods of favourable weather,” VIPA said in a statement.

The new flightpaths, currently under review, have outraged residents of once-quiet rural towns suddenly bearing the brunt of aircraft noise from 60 flights a day.

Airlines have complained about the extra fuel required, while internal reports reveal some aircraft lack the equipment or speed required to comply with the new flightpaths.

Airservices has promised to consider changes to provide “short term” noise relief to impacted communities, such as Dunalley, Murdunna and Boomer Bay.

Residents questioned why their rural lifestyles had been shattered for what appeared to be a less safe and less efficient system. “We want to regain our peace and quiet — that’s why we live here,” said Murdunna resident Rachel Dean.

&.. it would appear that Civil Air continues to ramp up advocacy...  

Melbourne helps out Launceston
MATTHEW DENHOLM
Launceston air traffic control tower was recently unmanned for four hours during the busy morning period.

---

Melbourne called on to help vacant Launceston tower

Launceston air traffic control tower was recently unmanned for four hours during the busy morning period, forcing contingency arrangements to be adopted, after a controller called in sick.

Airservices Australia confirmed the incident on April 29 left the tower vacant from 5.50am to 9.50am, a time when most of the main passenger jet morning arrivals and departures occur.

Radar controllers based in Melbourne had to provide a covering service for Launceston usually only applied during the quiet overnight period.

Some controllers feel it is inappropriate for Melbourne to provide this cover during busy day periods because its service does not generally extend below about 7000 feet and cannot “see” planes at all below about 1500 feet.

Civil Air, the air traffic controller’s union, said the morning closure of the tower would have required a temporary reclassification of the airspace, with greater inherent risks.

“It’s not a good thing and it would have been reviewed by Airservices,” said Civil Air president and controller Tom McRobert. “It’s a contingency measure, a last resort.

“The last thing you want to be doing is changing airspace and reclassifying it. It puts a lot of things at risk for the pilots and the controllers because they are doing something that’s not normal.”

Normally Launceston air traffic control tower is manned from 5.50am — in time for the major passenger jet morning arrivals and departures — until 10.10pm.

Between 10.10pm and 5.50am there is little air traffic and a Melbourne-based en route radar controller takes over responsibility for managing Tasmanian airspace.

Airservices insisted the contingency adopted on April 29, of maintaining the night-time service through a Melbourne-based controller until another tower controller could start at 9.50am, was safe. “On 29 April in Launceston … the air traffic controller rostered to open the air traffic control tower at 5.30am called in sick shortly before the shift commenced,” said an Airservices spokeswoman.

“The tower remained closed until an alternative staff member was available from 9.50am. During that time, services continued to be safely provided from Melbourne Centre, in the same way they are when the tower is closed (overnight). There was no breach of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority regulations.”

Mr McRobert said the morning tower closure would have required pilots of planes arriving and departing around the same time to talk to each other to ensure they were adequately separated.

“The very last bit in what’s called the circuit at Launceston, if there were two aircraft — (coming) in and out — they would have had to have discussed which runway who is going to, which taxiways, and so on,” he said.

matthew denholm

TICK..TOCK Harfwit, TICK..TOCK indeed -   



MTF...P2