National Discussion Paper Launched (Potential site closures)

[adhc2]

One thing that makes me suspicious is the notice was issued Dec 1 with only a 6 week window for input hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[lilfssister]

I am all for streamling and eliminating waste, but when I followed the link posted I came to a dead end, I just hope it is,nt about a quiet adjenda to
slash and burn and compremise safety and expedience.

I want to look further when I have time does any one know where further info might be available namely where specific agenda is shown. Lets all make sure they do this right and submit our input,
I'm gonna.

http://navcanada.ca/NavCanada.asp?Langu ... efault.xml

Near the bottom of the left hand column you'll see the link to Level of Service, and Aeronautical Studies.

[Mohun]

The problem I have with these cutbacks are that NAV CANADA has been quietly expanding its' office workers. Bureaucratic creep has made its way back into NAV Canada at the expense of operations. Back in the government days, we used to call it "Empire Building". It is still very much alive and well.

[Zatopec]

And now they are asking all FSSs what their career plans are for the next 12-24 months... what's next?

[W0XOF]

One thing that makes me suspicious is the notice was issued Dec 1 with only a 6 week window for input hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

How much time would you like?

How about 6 "real" weeks. Like ones without Christmas and New Years holidays, and maybe when Parliament is sitting.

[lilfssister]

It IS only round one. If you have some input, get it there by mid January. If there is no input, then things will progress as "studied". If you have an opinion, now is your chance.

[Mohun]

Nav Canada has 1,000 fewer administrative staff than when the ANS was run by Transport. Check their annual reports.

Any other questions?

Yes, why is your information so old?

[...]

Nav Canada has 1,000 fewer administrative staff than when the ANS was run by Transport. Check their annual reports.

Any other questions?

Yes, my question is there a link to this information. OR if you only have hard copies can you scan them and post them to me OR email them to me?

I can't find any information regarding your claim that Transport Canada had 1000 more office staff @ ANS.

[W0XOF]

How about 6 "real" weeks. Like ones without Christmas and New Years holidays, and maybe when Parliament is sitting.

3 stat holidays over the course of six weeks...

And what does Parliament have to do with it?

What does Parliament have to do with it? Political pressure/involvement will be the only thing that saves these sites. Especially at the Federal level. This is nothing new (maybe to you).

Yes, 3 stats over 6 weeks. I can tell you having worked at a small town site facing closure in the past, it's hard to get stakeholders/local politicians involved in letter writing campaigns within a short time period, let alone the 2 weeks over Christmas, for numerous reasons.

[Mohun]

cpl_atc wrote:

Nav Canada has 1,000 fewer administrative staff than when the ANS was run by Transport. Check their annual reports.

Any other questions?



Yes, my question is there a link to this information. OR if you only have hard copies can you scan them and post them to me OR email them to me?

I can't find any information regarding your claim that Transport Canada had 1000 more office staff @ ANS.

I believe cpl_atc is referring to the fact that 12 years ago when we privatized, we re-orged and lost some 1250 office/management types. This has nothing to do with the fact that recently, various departments associated with paperwork have increased their numbers at the same time that operational groups have started reducing numbers.

In addition, the fact that there are 3 stat holidays is a pretty lame excuse due to the fact that many people book additional time off to be with family's. I have a few connections, and have called a few politicians at home these holidays. All of them have been surprised/shocked that a reputable company would do this over Christmas.

[natej]

And now they are asking all FSSs what their career plans are for the next 12-24 months... what's next?

This is being done so they dont have to lay people off. Whats next, is the company will decide what sites will be closed/reduced, and decide how much staff it has to cut. Then it will look into other options such as cross training, or offering retirement packages, then, if necessary, I assume people will be laid off, if necessary.

And 6 weeks is plenty of time to write a single letter to Nav Canada....not sure why you guys need more time then that?

[W0XOF]

And now they are asking all FSSs what their career plans are for the next 12-24 months... what's next?

And 6 weeks is plenty of time to write a single letter to Nav Canada....not sure why you guys need more time then that?

If you have ever been a part of one of these you would understand. 6 weeks not so bad. 6 weeks over Christmas turns into more like 4 weeks.

I would guess your site isn't on the list?

[GilletteNorth]

NAVCANADA could give a one year notice and it wouldn't make a difference, other than there would be the usual complaints that now the process is taking too long. Either you care, therefore 6 weeks is plenty of time to think of any points you wish to bring to NAVCANADA's attention and send them in, or you don't. If you are interested in giving your input, get on it.

The LOS review is not a make-work project thought up by bean counters. It is being pushed forward by complaints concerning costs from users in the aviation industry. Everyone outside of NAVCANADA using ATS services continues to bitch about cost of sevices DESPITE it being cheaper now that it was under Transport Canada, DESPITE maintaining the low cost of the services even against inflation, DESPITE services improving, DESPITE equipment being replaced and modernized, and DESPITE reduced staff doing more work. What more do you guys want?

WOXOF:

What does Parliament have to do with it? Political pressure/involvement will be the only thing that saves these sites. Especially at the Federal level. This is nothing new (maybe to you).

How many times must this be explained? NAVCANADA is NOT a federal department. The only influence the government really has is that our operations are reviewed by Transport Canada insofar as we follow federal regulations, and we honor our agreements with the federal government that we made when we converted to NAVCANADA (those agreements did not contain anything related to maintaining a certain level of service without regard to whether those services were required or not). A politician can stand up in parliment all he wants and lament how an airport in his district is being reviewed for LOS and possible reductions and all you'll hear is a small violin playing in the background. When I worked in Dawson Creek and it was being shut down, the local politician wailed in the newspapers alot and told everyone how he was going to Ottawa to appeal to the government to stop it. It had absolutely no effect on anything although I'm sure a few people actually believe he had some influence. The same thing happened previously in Fort Simpson when it was closed and converted to a CARS site. The local government representative said much the same thing as the politician in YDQ while at the same time pointing out how local people would now also have job opportunities as CARS personnel and so played both sides of the fence. Again, nothing the politicians can say will change or affect the process. NAVCANADA is mandated to provide efficient service to it's customers AND is being driven by customer demands and expectations that it will be able to reduce costs even further. Bottom line, you will get what are willing to pay for.

PS: I'm at a site with potential reduced services so it does affect me.

[W0XOF]

Well then Gillette North, you're out to lunch. The only user Nav Canada listens to is Air Canada and the overflights that pay the for the bulk of the ATS. They could care less about Dawson Creek, Simpson or anywhere else other than the YVR-YYZ-YUL corridor. If you don't think political pressure has any influence, then tell me why YXS is still a tower after the last review (no offense meant to the controllers there, just basing this on movements)? Why has YQZ been a RAAS for over 15 years? Comparing the numbers for the sites on the latest LOS, why isn't YCG on list? Maybe because a local politician in the YCG area is also on the BoD of Nav Canada perhaps?

If you don't think that this is a much political as it is business you're a fool.

Don't get me wrong, I'm convinced that the final report for the LOS is already written, but the sites can't go quietly.

Rupert does about 35k movements a year. The company is only using the airport stats for the LOS. The FSS was moved from the airport to the Cove years ago because of the dense amount of traffic at the water. Now they dismiss CZSW numbers? You don't think the local MP wouldn't want to know that and wouldn't be able to put pressure on? Oh that's right, float traffic pays almost nothing in fees comparably. That, I do understand. I thought safety was # 1.

I certainly hope that you're not the local site rep. Our regional and national reps DO happen to think that political pressure matters.

Maybe you can just sit back and hope with you're potential reduction services that you're not moved. Even with you're inaction, don't worry, the collective agreement has you covered.

I happen to be at a site that is closer to being changed to a tower rather than a CAR's or an ATF, so it would be easy for me to say who cares. But I do, and I know how these things work from past experience and having a past and present involvement in the union. Maybe you should get more informed and provide a bit of action.

[W0XOF]

Furthermore GilletteNorth, it's ATSAC members like you which offer nothing to our profession. Do you think that if any CATCA sites were to be facing closures that it wouldn't turn into a HUGE political issue overnight? They have strong solidarity from the operational level right to the top of the union executive.

You think that little of your brothers, sisters and profession?

And we wonder why we're the poorer, uglier second cousin. Have some pride!

[GilletteNorth]

NAVCANADA management have already realized they've been 'caught out' by the 'error' of not including the off-airport stats but that won't prevent them from getting staff reductions anyway through other means such as doing away with midnight shifts or creating new RAAS. At least we share the view "that the final report for the LOS is already written".

Our own union management is working with the company to conduct the LOS review and to try ensure any reduction in staff is done through retirements, transfers, re-training etc. Why? Because according to our own national updates, there is an initiative inside the company to reduce staffing levels and FSS are overstaffed by 76 people. I was very surprised to read this as only a few years ago we were being told how short staffed we were. I have read that they are advising only shop stewards to contact local politicians (or users as well for whom the LOS review is being done anyway) to try to 'influence' the process and to direct any federal political contacts to the union VP's. I have to totally disagree with you and say it's a waste of time and a red herring to union members if any of them or our union management believe that will do anything. Despite your assertion that

Political pressure/involvement will be the only thing that saves these sites. Especially at the Federal level

NAVCANADA management already have their agreements with the federal government on traffic levels needed to justify a certain Level of Service.

How many tower closures have there been in the last 15 years?? Compare that to the number of FSS station closures there were. Which union do you really think has more clout when it comes to influencing management when there are proposed changes to the sites levels of service? Why do you suppose that is? Transport Canada didn't have the balls to reduce services at ATC sites because they were open to direct influence by federal government politicians. However, even as a private corporation, upper management in NAVCANADA do not want to confront the CATCA union over any tower closures. FSS belong to the the CAW. Why hasn't the CAW made the same efforts at really unionizing FSS members the way they do in the auto factories? Where is all the union training, the rabid development of union mentality, the weekly meetings at every site? Why is it when the "Brotherhood of so-and-so members number 0000" in Ontario have a problem like this, the CAW steps in and says "We support our brothers in the blah-blah-blah and are staging sympathy strikes here here and here in protest" and yet here are FSS (mostly) facing some serious reductions and I hear diddly squat from the rest of the CAW? Think about that one for a while. Please don't try and use the excuse the auto workers have bigger problems at the moment. They were doing fine a few years ago and they didn't help us then during site closures either.

I myself have already been through 3 FSS station closures so I think I know a bit about the process, maybe even ALOT better than you. Just because you want to believe the union is somehow going to pull a rabbit out of it's ass doesn't justify your snide remarks about my actions related to the LOS review since you don't know what they are.

Lastly, Why don't we wait until it's over and you can come back here and tell me how much 'influence' the politicians had over the results? I'd actually welcome being proven wrong on this one.

I'll take my lunch break now...

[GilletteNorth]

One more thing...

Furthermore GilletteNorth, it's ATSAC members like you which offer nothing to our profession.

I may not agree with you on this union issue but it's always guys like you who use the phrase "it's guys like you" since you know nothing about me or my actions related to the union, other than I've disagreed with you.

I'm pretty sure that even as a union member we are allowed to have our own opinions concerning the effectiveness of getting politicians involved and I expressed my opinions to you without being snide or calling names. However, inferring I'm some kinda union riff-raff using snide comments while posting as an anonymous FSS even in a private forum tells me that if you are a union member you aren't any better than me. What the @#$! have you done that's so great?

Take the advice I posted and leave it til the dust clears. Then you can come back here and tell me how right you were, cause I'm going to come back and remind you when it actually turns out I'm right instead.

[W0XOF]

[quote="GilletteNorth"]One more thing...

"It's guys like you" that are misinformed and because of that your full of s***.

Your points about the CAW aren't valid. Isn't CATCA CAW??? Again, it's the rank and file members like you that make the difference. Also, since you don't know, we are 100% essential, NO right to strike.

It was in days when we were Federal Gov that our MP's had not clout. They couldn't go against their Gov's decision or agenda. Now that we are non government and the decisions are being made on Metcalf, MP's can put pressure on. You understanding all this? Probably not.........................

How many towers have converted in the last 10 - 12 years? How many converted from the mid 80's to mid 90's when we were TC?

Ya, you can just sit back and tell me how you did nothing when this is all over and you were right. Instead, why don't you do EVERYTHING you can, call your MLA, MP then gloat about how you were right all along when your 4th site closes. Aren't you the angel of death!

Maybe it's time to change your tactic.

[lilfssister]

I don't think the in-fighting is helping our cause, guys. Take it to PM if you must bicker, please!

[GilletteNorth]

He started it...

Even a simple statement like this is so rife with bullshit

since you don't know, we are 100% essential, NO right to strike.

First, who said I don't know we can't strike? Second, did I say that WE needed to strike? I said the REST of CAW, ie: other unions within CAW like the autoworkers could strike in support, so how does we not having the right to strike get into this??????

WOXOF seriously believes

It was in days when we were Federal Gov that our MP's had not clout. They couldn't go against their Gov's decision or agenda. Now that we are non government and the decisions are being made on Metcalf, MP's can put pressure on. You understanding all this? Probably not.........................

Remember that back in the day when the ATS system was part of TC, most of the governments were Liberal majorities so the MP's WERE the government. According to him, back in the days when we were under Transport Canada, the government could not tell one of it's departments (TC) that it was not in the government's interest to keep a site a certain way at a certain level of service, but NOW that ATS is run by a private company the government suddenly has clout to tell a private company exactly what it's supposed to do internally because an MP wants it? And WOXOF thinks I'M the one who doesn't understand???

He continues to make assumptions of what my actions are based on my voicing of a disagreement with his opinion.

Ya, you can just sit back and tell me how you did nothing when this is all over and you were right.

Maybe it's time for him to change his tactics.

[grimey]

Rupert does about 35k movements a year. The company is only using the airport stats for the LOS. The FSS was moved from the airport to the Cove years ago because of the dense amount of traffic at the water. Now they dismiss CZSW numbers? You don't think the local MP wouldn't want to know that and wouldn't be able to put pressure on? Oh that's right, float traffic pays almost nothing in fees comparably. That, I do understand. I thought safety was # 1.

You should see what happens when you tape a paper saying "Affordable Safety" over the corporate values poster the day before VPs show up on site. NCMs throw chairs, it's great.

[GilletteNorth]

Grimey hit it on the head. The ONLY clout to use against NAVCANADA is to pull them up on safety issues related to reduced levels of service. Even then it's a low probability tactic. For example, when YDQ closed there was lots of concern over the safety of not having personnel in place to observe the weather conditions during regular morning fog conditions. So NAVCANADA 'addressed' this concern by installing cameras showing the views on the approach that pilots can access on the NAVCANADA's website.

why don't you do EVERYTHING you can, call your MLA, MP then gloat about how you were right all along when your 4th site closes.

You better read that National Bulletin again WOXOF and remember that our union representatives are the ones who are supposed to be contacting MLA's, MP's and have union protection regarding that.

Thanks for the suggestion for the posters Grimey. I love it

[grimey]

I wasn't making an argument either way. I'm no longer affiliated with Nav Canada, and have no direct interest either way. I was just remembering something funny from my time in Thompson.

[W0XOF]

You better read that National Bulletin again WOXOF and remember that our union representatives are the ones who are supposed to be contacting MLA's, MP's and have union protection regarding that.

You better look up the word ficicious. Appears to be a few things you're not catching on to.

My whole point is, if we even have a chance, it will be through political (and public) pressure. You can't tell me any different because I have seen it's influences.

[sigmet77]

You two sure have a lot of time to bitch about what is right and wrong, that is a true fact.
Here is another, you both have valid points, and if WOXOF didn't make it personal off the start you may actually both see that.
Will politcal pressure work? Probably not but it is still worth a try.
Will public pressure work? Maybe, it did last round for YXS tower.
Can you do something if you are not the local Union rep? Sure, give him/her all your information, letters, emails you want sent. You're still following the Union line, just adding a layer to the communications. And if you don't like it then speak up on your own, it's a free freaking country and if I want to call my MP I'll damn well do it. The Union is not going to stop me from speaking my mind when I want to so if you want to do something then just do it.
Remember, this is 6 weeks to respond to the discussion paper, not the aeronautical studies that are sure to follow. You can speak to it now, later or both, but if you don't speak up then you really should shut up when it is all said and done.