NATCA Going Down in Flames

On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 19:50:26 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:


"Roger" wrote in message
.. .
On 4 Sep 2006 05:04:28 -0700, "Jay Honeck" wrote:


I say, good for them! I don't trust any orginization that gives the
workers a dress code.

Small wonder the IT field is now over in Asia.

It aint the way they dress, they work a *lot* cheaper than we did.
And the company I worked for still has their own IT forces. I use
plural as there is both the corporate of which I was part, and then
all but the smallest sites have their own.

Unfortunately when we went with a large contract for pre loaded PCs
(Thousands of PCs) from a company notorious for requiring every one to
wear suits we really got screwed.




Next time you get waited on by some scraggy guy with tattoos, body piercing
and spiked hair, don't complain.

I did differentiate between computer geeks, ATC and restaurants.

However, I typically eat at ye ol' greasy spoon. Oriental restaurants,
the occasional curry house and the mom and pop restaurants with home
cooking. OK so I do go to Hooters and the local sports bar once in a
while. I do like their uniforms.





Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Jay Honeck wrote:
************************************************** *****************
Unbelievable! They're actually going to fight against their employer
for dictating what they must wear to work... Apparently their right to
look like bums in a professional setting has been violated, and the
union is going on the offensive!

I thought it was strange as well Jay, that a profession that considers
itself a very "professional" occupation (and is paid commensurately
with other professionals) dressed so shabbily. I know when I took a
tour of the STL TRACON I was surprised at how unprofessional some of
the controllers looked. It certainly didn't look like I was visiting a
place of business.

It was strange too, in that I was touring as part of an OPERATION
RAINCHECK event. Which for those who may not know is sort of an open
house for ATC.

Speaking of Operation Raincheck. At Oshkosh I asked at the NATCA tent
why we don't see more of these types of events. The answer came back
as with everything else in the aviation world, "funding". Then later
when I got home, I got to thinking about it, why is funding an issue?
On the event I went to, there were around 5 or 6 controllers there for
questions, and leading whatever discussion topic was being discussed.
There was some refreshments, but nothing of any real cost (probably
less than $1 a head),the building and equipment is already running,
obviously, so its not like they had to turn the lights on for the day
for us. Then I realized where the costs were. It was because the
controllers were getting PAID to be there with us (anybody that knows
different please correct my conclusion!)

I don't know why they would require that. I would think you would be
able to get enough volunteers to put such an event on at least once a
quarter, or probably once a month. Especially considering that by
having the dialouge with us the consumer, they could "educate" us
further in how things would be best run in our area.

For example, I was able to learn by talking with them (at least with
the approach controllers I talked to), that they HATE the "full" callup
for practice approaches, and prefer a "VFR request" followed by
position, etc.

I can't imagine this wasn't worth some amount of time on their part. I
know if I got a chance to educate my customers about things that they
could do that would improve my working experience, I would be happy to
volunteer that time.

I'm sure its a union rule that they can't volunteer their time like
that.

The dress code issue isn't about dress code. It's about a power
struggle between the union and the FAA. Each side wants to demonstrate
the power they have.

As the consumer, I'd like to be able to assume that the person on the
other end of the radio presents themselves professionally.

As an aside, it may have been in the same article, but I read recently
that the other rule the FAA put in place that has the union up in arms
is "no naps" while on breaks... Oh, and they have to stay at the
facility.....

The dress code issue isn't about dress code. It's about a power
struggle between the union and the FAA. Each side wants to demonstrate
the power they have.

Bingo. And I think that is the reason "little things" get so much air.

As the consumer, I'd like to be able to assume that the person on the
other end of the radio presents themselves professionally.

Why? The only thing they have to present is on the radio. It makes as
much sense as requring an auto mechanic to have a "dulcent telephone voice".

As an aside, it may have been in the same article, but I read recently
that the other rule the FAA put in place that has the union up in arms
is "no naps" while on breaks... Oh, and they have to stay at the
facility.....

This improves safety how? Oh yeah, what I said up top.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
As the consumer, I'd like to be able to assume that the person on the
other end of the radio presents themselves professionally.

Why? The only thing they have to present is on the radio. It makes as
much sense as requring an auto mechanic to have a "dulcent telephone voice".

Not sure what you mean by dulcent. I do require my auto mechanics to
have a "decent" telephone voice though, since thats the primary
mechanism with which I communicate with them.

I would argue that more professional dress inspires more professional
behavior. As an example, I'd point to the NYC "graffitti" cleanup
under Guiliani, and the corresponding crime rate drops. Cleaning up
the environment promotes a more professional working environment.

As an aside, it may have been in the same article, but I read recently
that the other rule the FAA put in place that has the union up in arms
is "no naps" while on breaks... Oh, and they have to stay at the
facility.....

This improves safety how? Oh yeah, what I said up top.

Um. by not having controllers sleeping? If they want to sleep they
should go home. Its more conducive to sleep anyway.

Turn it around, how does it impact safety by not letting them take naps?

I would argue that more professional dress inspires more professional
behavior. As an example, I'd point to the NYC "graffitti" cleanup
under Guiliani, and the corresponding crime rate drops.

I think this is oranges and grapefruit, and an example of selective
data. Guiliani did many other things at the same time, and it may well
be that it was those other things that reduced crime. What crime in ATC
are you aiming to reduce?

Turn it around, how does it impact safety by not letting them take naps?

Studies have shown that napping improves performance after the nap. (In
some political jobs, it arguably improves performance during the nap.
It is my understanding that air traffic control is a stressful job,
and that's one of the reasons scope time is limited. Anything that
would improve alertness while at the scope would be good. Naps do that
with no down side.

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:
I think this is oranges and grapefruit, and an example of selective
data. Guiliani did many other things at the same time, and it may well
be that it was those other things that reduced crime. What crime in ATC
are you aiming to reduce?

Ok an example that was probably too far afield. Are you suggesting
that the beautifcation projects had no impact for the better on the
city?

Studies have shown that napping improves performance after the nap. (In
some political jobs, it arguably improves performance during the nap.
It is my understanding that air traffic control is a stressful job,
and that's one of the reasons scope time is limited. Anything that
would improve alertness while at the scope would be good. Naps do that
with no down side.

What sort of nap? Length of nap? Location of nap? How much napping
per time on shift? Whas the study specific to the ATC function?
Please provide the data. If its true that napping will help our
controllers, then the FAA should enforce naps during break times.
Provide cots and blankies and teddy bears.

Studies have shown that napping improves performance after the nap.

In the article that I read, the FAA said that the napping had a
detrimental affect on performance. It meant the controllers were
groggy when returning to the scope.

So maybe the FAA has their own study.

On Tue, 12 Sep 2006 20:35:10 GMT, Jose
wrote:

I would argue that more professional dress inspires more professional
behavior. As an example, I'd point to the NYC "graffitti" cleanup
under Guiliani, and the corresponding crime rate drops.

I think this is oranges and grapefruit, and an example of selective
data. Guiliani did many other things at the same time, and it may well
be that it was those other things that reduced crime. What crime in ATC
are you aiming to reduce?

Turn it around, how does it impact safety by not letting them take naps?

Studies have shown that napping improves performance after the nap. (In

They are the mythical "Power Naps" which were hyped for a while. This
is the first I've heard them mentioned in several years..

They sure didn't include people like me in that study. I do not wake
quickly whether from a good night's sleep or a nap. In the morning I
roll out of bed into the "praying position" and then with the aid of
the bed and wall, work myself into a standing position. After a nap I
roll off the couch onto the floor, then climb into the praying
position with the aid of the couch.

I and others like me are a hazard to ourselves and those around us for
an hour or so after waking and we are a long way from being unique.

some political jobs, it arguably improves performance during the nap.
It is my understanding that air traffic control is a stressful job,
and that's one of the reasons scope time is limited. Anything that
would improve alertness while at the scope would be good. Naps do that
with no down side.

For *some* they do and some they don't. I'd sure hate to have to
depend on making any decisions of import for an hour or so after the
nap. Some can wake quickly when necessary, but then pay for it later
with a severe hit to performance, poor sleep patterns, or even
attitude.

For the mid shift nap to be safe you'd need to test every single
controller to see how they handled them under varying conditions.
You'd probably find about a 1/4 to a 1/3 of them did not do well for
some period after the nap.



Jose
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"bdl" wrote in message
oups.com...

Um. by not having controllers sleeping? If they want to sleep they
should go home. Its more conducive to sleep anyway.

Turn it around, how does it impact safety by not letting them take naps?


Letting them nap while on break makes it less likely they'll be drowsy while
on position. Is being drowsy while on position more safe or less safe?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"bdl" wrote in message
oups.com...

Um. by not having controllers sleeping? If they want to sleep they
should go home. Its more conducive to sleep anyway.

Turn it around, how does it impact safety by not letting them take naps?


Letting them nap while on break makes it less likely they'll be drowsy while
on position. Is being drowsy while on position more safe or less safe?

I'll admit I don't know what the "standard" shifts are. Nor, the
turnaround between shifts. But I would assume they aren't working
doctors hours, or anything similar. Please enlighten me as to typical
work shifts.

If they are drowsy on shift, maybe they shouldn't be on shift.