Airport.

[lcd]

5 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

No, he wouldn't be included in any of these numbers.  From the start it was known he wouldn't be qualified to have anything to do with landing planes, which was why a new job title of Head of Air Traffic Services had to created for him.  Someone said earlier on here that he had been picked by Reynolds to "sort out" ATC with his forces background - and I suppose he has in a way, though not in the meaning we would like to see.

It would have been perfectly possible for him to have converted to civilian ATC when he left the forces, many do but it takes a good while and of course he'd need to have also taken the extra training for IOM here anyway.  Most people I've spoken to are equally perplexed that he's not qualified, but the current thinking in IOMG is very much about 'professional managers', who don't really need to be able to do what their underlings do.

Why not? He is, from what I've read an Air traffic controller. That would then make sense why he's not available for operational duties in both roll-calls? 

If you're right @Roger Mexico, any ideas what the reason could be for the tower to hold on to any who weren't available for so long? 

[Numbnuts]

22 minutes ago, lcd said:

Why not? He is, from what I've read an Air traffic controller. That would then make sense why he's not available for operational duties in both roll-calls? 

If you're right @Roger Mexico, any ideas what the reason could be for the tower to hold on to any who weren't available for so long? 

My thoughts exactly hence why I asked the question. Seems the likely scenario tbh .

[The Voice of Reason]

7 hours ago, swoopy2110 said:

Or people could not be idiots and enter their own car reg number correctly ?

Once you've added your reg it's stored in the app and you just select it each time.

Or you may buy a new car with a different reg number and changing it in your Ringgo app is not your priority.

This app really is a piece of **** when there are so much better alternatives.

[madmanxpilot]

10 minutes ago, Numbnuts said:

My thoughts exactly hence why I asked the question. Seems the likely scenario tbh .

The person who is fully qualified but not available is not the HoATS.

The clue in the wording, ie ‘fully qualified’. HoATS has no civilian ATCO qualifications.

 

 

[Kopek]

From what Roger M says, the manager of ATC is needed to 'manage' the ATCs?

In view of the problems with tea breaks and time on duty it's not unlikely that the manager is sat at his desk for long periods working out the schedules for duty rotas of the ATCs???

I think that some of the above commenters are missing that, some have to 'do' and someone has to manage how they do do?

[Molly Coddle]

5 minutes ago, Kopek said:

I think that some of the above commenters are missing that, some have to 'do' and someone has to manage how they do do?

Or maybe they’re not missing anything and the person who cannot “do” also cannot “manage”.  

[Kopek]

That may well be but none of us truly know that? We are just having a swipe at anyone in govt employ?

There have been hints that the manager is not a 'people person' but that doesn't mean that he can't manage the actual situation and HR can try to manage the fallout???

He may not but I'm not qualified to judge!

[Molly Coddle]

5 minutes ago, Kopek said:

That may well be but none of us truly know that? We are just having a swipe at anyone in govt employ?

There have been hints that the manager is not a 'people person' but that doesn't mean that he can't manage the actual situation and HR can try to manage the fallout???

He may not but I'm not qualified to judge!

You’re trying to be fair minded, which is good but it appears that the ”hints” are coming from credible sources, not people  “just having a swipe” at gov employees.

You say “that doesn’t mean he can’t manage the situation” - there doesn’t seem to be much evidence that he can manage the situation though. If the situation is being managed, then why are ATCOs leaving? 

 

 

 

[madmanxpilot]

26 minutes ago, Kopek said:

There have been hints that the manager is not a 'people person' but that doesn't mean that he can't manage the actual situation and HR can try to manage the fallout???

That fallout has equated to ATCOs leaving in recent times - effectively cancelling out any recruitment gains. 
 

If any more leave, we’ll be up shit creek with half a paddle. And that is a distinct possibility!

Edited Thursday at 08:35 PM by madmanxpilot

[mai wei]

3 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Wait no longer - it's been issued today:

https://www.tynwald.org.im/spfile?file=/business/BusinessHansardIndex2126/W-202401-1190.pdf

At Tynwald Court on Tuesday 18 July 2023 [...] I alluded to a number of short, medium and long-term measures to increase the number of operational air traffic controllers at the Airport to 18.

At the time, the total number of air traffic controllers at the Airport was 14, comprising 12 air traffic controllers and 2 student air traffic controllers. Of these, 9 were fully qualified and 1 was part-qualified and available for operational duty.

For additional context, at the time of the question, the Airport had implemented a series of 5 short aerodrome closures of between 30-45 minutes during the day to facilitate mandatory rest breaks for operational air traffic controllers [...]

However, recruitment of air traffic controllers had already been initiated with one experienced controller joining the Airport in May 2023 and another subsequently recruited who joined in October 2023. A recruitment campaign for new student air traffic controllers was also completed in early 2023 with the 3 new recruits joining in August and September 2023 and then January 2024 respectively.

[...] The two daily short-term aerodrome closures resulting from the roster change implemented in August 2023 are still in place. It had been hoped to remove these in 2024 following the recruitment and validation of new staff, however this has not been possible as one experienced air traffic controller recruited in 2023 has subsequently left and another retired in March 2024, although this controller has been retained on a casual Bank contract for limited support during operational shortages.

Three's a lot of overlap with the answer to Christian of course though some new info (I've only quoted a little bit of the Answer, regarding numbers).

The trouble with the current numbers is that it will only take another departure to make things even worse.  That's why they keep promising things will get better and it doesn't because the experienced one who quit. They're also reliant on the retiree on bank, who will presumably have to retire permanently when they reach 65.

As expected from Alfred. 

the really interesting bit is the last paragraph:

The retention of experienced air traffic controllers has been an issue over recent years, but assuming no further losses of staff to resignation or medical issues and the continued success in training of the current cadre of experienced and student air traffic controllers, it is anticipated that the twice daily aerodrome closures (between 08:30 to 09:05 and 11:00 to 11:35) will be removed by late 2025. It should be noted that these two aerodrome closures are timed to limit the impact on scheduled traffic as has been described recently in an answer to a separate written question.

Reading back it seems there have been losses where people have left and the circumstances have been other than natural and possibly internally attributable. 
there's reference to a retiree on "bank" availability which presumably isn't sustainable mid to long term and also reference to a fully qualified controller not available but no reference to whether he/she will add to or further reduce the number in the future. 
There's a high level of trust placed in all the newbies qualifying too. Are we feeling confident? 

[Non-Believer]

Note the use of the word, "assuming"...

[Kopek]

11 minutes ago, madmanxpilot said:

That fallout has equated to ATCOs leaving in recent times - effectively cancelling out any recruitment gains. 
 

If any more leave, we’ll be up ah*t creek with half a paddle. And that is a distinct possibility!

Isn't that a matter for HR? Reign him in, point out the trouble he is causing in 'Moral' in his dept?

Who is not doing their job? HR or the manager?

[Molly Coddle]

1 minute ago, Kopek said:

Isn't that a matter for HR? Reign him in, point out the trouble he is causing in 'Moral' in his dept?

Who is not doing their job? HR or the manager?

I would suggest - both.  Regardless of whose job it is to fix it, it is going to be everyone’s  problem if it isn’t fixed.

Edited Thursday at 08:38 PM by Molly Coddle

[asitis]

Hopefully the situation will crystallise in the near future !

[Kopek]

For ronaldsway, yes, for MF, hmmm, doubtful???😃