Nav Canada to Hike Service Fees by 30%

[McKinley]

Ggapl,

I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic?

The discussion is raising service fees when the aviation industry has been upended. ( pretty valid from where I’m sitting)

Nobody ( that I’ve read) has advocated for “ minimum wage for controllers or others in the industry.

I see a dialectical conversation regarding service fee increase, the positives of navcanada and their staff and frustrations with some systemic issues with Nav Can. There’s also discussion about WAWCON worsening for employees in the airlines while other segments appear to be bilking the industry and living high on the hog as a result..

You might see things differently and that’s ok.

[florch]

Ggapl,

I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic?

The discussion is raising service fees when the aviation industry has been upended. ( pretty valid from where I’m sitting)

Nobody ( that I’ve read) has advocated for “ minimum wage for controllers or others in the industry.

I see a dialectical conversation regarding service fee increase, the positives of navcanada and their staff and frustrations with some systemic issues with Nav Can. There’s also discussion about WAWCON worsening for employees in the airlines while other segments appear to be bilking the industry and living high on the hog as a result..

You might see things differently and that’s ok.

+1. This is the point of discussion.

[gtappl]

Ggapl,

I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic?

The discussion is raising service fees when the aviation industry has been upended. ( pretty valid from where I’m sitting)

Nobody ( that I’ve read) has advocated for “ minimum wage for controllers or others in the industry.

I see a dialectical conversation regarding service fee increase, the positives of navcanada and their staff and frustrations with some systemic issues with Nav Can. There’s also discussion about WAWCON worsening for employees in the airlines while other segments appear to be bilking the industry and living high on the hog as a result..

You might see things differently and that’s ok.

I'm exaggerating but people here seem to want to have things both ways. Nobody ever wants to accept pay cuts in hard times since you take years to negotiate them back (I'm totally willing to listen to this point since it seems to be the case) but we're also asking controllers to take a pay cut totally ignoring the previous statement.

Nav was understaffed, cutting pay will just make things worse when traffic returns and we can complain even more about how much they "suck"

[florch]

Ggapl,

I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic?

The discussion is raising service fees when the aviation industry has been upended. ( pretty valid from where I’m sitting)

Nobody ( that I’ve read) has advocated for “ minimum wage for controllers or others in the industry.

I see a dialectical conversation regarding service fee increase, the positives of navcanada and their staff and frustrations with some systemic issues with Nav Can. There’s also discussion about WAWCON worsening for employees in the airlines while other segments appear to be bilking the industry and living high on the hog as a result..

You might see things differently and that’s ok.

I'm exaggerating but people here seem to want to have things both ways. Nobody ever wants to accept pay cuts in hard times since you take years to negotiate them back (I'm totally willing to listen to this point since it seems to be the case) but we're also asking controllers to take a pay cut totally ignoring the previous statement.

Nav was understaffed, cutting pay will just make things worse when traffic returns and we can complain even more about how much they "suck"

I'm not sure anyone was advocating for a cut or layoffs. The point that caused a problem was that they raised their fees on airlines in trouble because their revenue was down. They didn't seek to cut their own costs first. Then parallels were drawn.

[TheRealPapaK]

Most trainees are in their 30’s with mortgages etc and are making very little. Get rid of them and most will be gone for good which will kick back training by at least 2 years. No offence but if you say pilot staffing/training and ATC staffing/training are similar, you showing you have no idea what you are talking about.
NC was critically staffed before. You literally have specialties that don’t have enough people to train so you can only trickle one trainee through at a time and 1/3 will make it. This isn’t an overtime protection thing. Just hard facts.

Everyone seems to think that one controller can automatically work more airspace outside of their specialty. Airspace changes take YEARS and training a controller into a new specialty takes at least 6 months.

Staffing is currently setup so that so if there is a covid out break in a facility, there is no loss of service. That requires the staffing to be less efficient than typical but the costs to the airlines would be way higher than routing around large swaths or closed airspace due to staffing.

Everyone seems to think there have been no cuts and NC is just heaping it on the airlines. There have been lots of trimming of fat but you don’t see it. Traffic is down to 25%-30% so a 70% cut to revenue but the rate increase is only 30%. What does that tell you about their cost cutting?

Controllers have taken pay cuts and voted to forego back pay wages during covid. Many nonoperational staff have been laid off and many more will be once CEWS stops.

Controller layoffs aren’t off the table. NC is a big ship and it takes a long time to turn. They don’t want to have a knee jerk reaction and have months of staffing issues that cost the airlines even more as they attempt to ramp up staffing again.

I feel like the controller/pilot relationship is overall very healthy with mutual respect both ways. Let’s try not to tarnish that. You’re all acting like airlines seat prices aren’t going to to rise 30% after they take out all the middle seats.

If you think controllers are over paid and don’t work very hard I recommend you apply. There is no age restriction and you are home every night. Maybe you should apply for management, a lot of you seem to think you know the inner workings of running an ANS better than the people who do it full time!

Lastly, as a not for profit, NC is legally not allowed to keep X amount of money in the bank. Hence why the rate cuts and rebates previously. It would be nice if they could stock up a rainy day fund but no one saw anything this magnitude coming so the way the system was designed is that NAV couldn’t weather anything out that lasted more than 6 months. Hopefully post covid that will change

[A346Dude]

Remember your ‘descend via’ fiasco from a few years ago because I sure do.

Controllers were unanimously against the descend/climb via phraseology from well before it was rolled out. The lazy, incompetent controllers you hate worked hard to make a bad procedure safe for the short time it existed.

How is LGA able to run with only 1 into wind rwy when you guys whine sooooooo much about having to switch to the north south runways?

Controllers have no problem running whatever configuration is warranted. Some configurations are more efficient than others, and most of the "whining" about 2 hour GDP delays on the 33s is from pilots, not controllers.

I truly believe that if you took one controller from New York centre, Chicago’s LA they could run all the YYZ sectors simultaneously and do a better job of it.

This is an objectively ridiculous statement, but thanks for making it clear you have no idea what you're talking about.

[gtappl]

Remember your ‘descend via’ fiasco from a few years ago because I sure do.

Controllers were unanimously against the descend/climb via phraseology from well before it was rolled out. The lazy, incompetent controllers you hate worked hard to make a bad procedure safe for the short time it existed.

How is LGA able to run with only 1 into wind rwy when you guys whine sooooooo much about having to switch to the north south runways?

Controllers have no problem running whatever configuration is warranted. Some configurations are more efficient than others, and most of the "whining" about 2 hour GDP delays on the 33s is from pilots, not controllers.

I truly believe that if you took one controller from New York centre, Chicago’s LA they could run all the YYZ sectors simultaneously and do a better job of it.

This is an objectively ridiculous statement, but thanks for making it clear you have no idea what you're talking about.

Reminds me of the guy in another post who didn't realize Dr Tam (health minister) isn't a man

So many clueless people here (I'm in that boat)

[goingnowherefast]

Maybe the NavCanada's controller union should represent pilots as well, since they've done so well to match international pay rates. The controllers are weathering this crisis fairly well, that's great for them. Now what can we pilots do to better our collective situation.

I too have been rather disappointed in the level of service and bureaucracy of NavCanada. It's not not the front line controller's fault, they see and understand the problems too. It takes 2 years to do a study, another year to implement the changes. By then, the world has moved on and there's other problems. The bureaucracy is too reactive and slow. Airlines have spent millions (billions?) on ADS-B mods to their aircraft to increase surveillance capabilities and receive increased service (reduced separation requirements, better routing, increased efficiency). Is NavCanada intending to increase training and controller staffing levels to realise the increased service capabilities? Or are all the expensive new ADS-B toys going to sit on the shelf and rot because there aren't enough controllers to use them and provide the increased service level promised?

[Driving Comet]

Maybe the NavCanada's controller union should represent pilots as well, since they've done so well to match international pay rates. The controllers are weathering this crisis fairly well, that's great for them. Now what can we pilots do to better our collective situation.

I too have been rather disappointed in the level of service and bureaucracy of NavCanada. It's not not the front line controller's fault, they see and understand the problems too. It takes 2 years to do a study, another year to implement the changes. By then, the world has moved on and there's other problems. The bureaucracy is too reactive and slow. Airlines have spent millions (billions?) on ADS-B mods to their aircraft to increase surveillance capabilities and receive increased service (reduced separation requirements, better routing, increased efficiency). Is NavCanada intending to increase training and controller staffing levels to realise the increased service capabilities? Or are all the expensive new ADS-B toys going to sit on the shelf and rot because there aren't enough controllers to use them and provide the increased service level promised?

Nav is heavily invested in a company that just spent 100s of millions of dollars setting up global ADS-B satellite coverage. The technology to track aircraft globally is right around the corner, and controllers will be ready as soon as they’re allowed to utilize it to provide reduced separation, better routing and increased efficiency.

My colleagues are some of the best trained, safest, and most well respected providers of ANS in the world. I don’t know any controller that shows up not wanting to do a good job. In principle, we reduce our workload quicker by moving you where you want to go quicker.

Im sorry our pilot friends are going through this - the frustration and anger is understandable. Controllers work in a realm of operation being pulled at all sides from airlines, airports, management, TC, ICAO, etc. I think we do our best to provide the best service possible with the tools we have. Sometimes we fall short, and I know when I do, I encourage feedback through appropriate channels. If you every have an issue, I hope you to call a unit manager or a shift manager at the ACC and ask what happened. I fly recreationally and I want the best service provided when I'm on that side of the mic.

With regards to increased fees, Nav has deferred the fee increase payments to 2021 and then amortized them over 5 years. As stated, the company was legally not allowed to hold huge sums of rainy day cash. Nor would the airlines (as they sit on the board) have allowed it. It is what it is, and this is the consequence. Something something about hindsight. The front line workers had no say in it, and it's hard to fault senior management for it either in these circumstances. I hope our pilot/dispatcher/ground support/whomever weather this storm and come back strong. I look forward to the days when we're back with full radars and stacked pending flight strips.

[TheRealPapaK]

Is NavCanada intending to increase training and controller staffing levels to realise the increased service capabilities? Or are all the expensive new ADS-B toys going to sit on the shelf and rot because there aren't enough controllers to use them and provide the increased service level promised?

NAVCAN is the world leader in ADS-B surveillance. They have already saved the airlines billions in fuel With more efficient oceanic routings and global adsb is part of a plan to reduce it by billions more( https://www.navcanada.ca/EN/about-us/Do ... um_Res.pdf ).
Controllers can work more traffic more efficiently so it actually helps with staffing. You went from a 80NM standard to a 15NM standard with staple based ADSB and now NAVCAN can is developing a PTT sat com system to enable 5NM standards so more aircraft can get efficient routes

No offence but you guys really have no idea what you’re talking about. Is NAVCAN perfect? No. But you guys sound like that friend at a party that tells you you how bad the airline you work for because every time they go flying their flight gets delayed when they have no clue about the inner workings of an airline.

[rigpiggy]

Saying Nav Canada is a terrible product is simply not true. I’m not saying we’re perfect but it’s definitely not terrible.

I agree. Every country's ATC has its own idiosyncrasies but calling it "terrible" is over the top....

. I truly believe that if you took one controller from New York centre, Chicago’s LA they could run all the YYZ sectors simultaneously and do a better job of it.

I always said, if they could clone "E-Rog"(michel) you could run canada on about 32 of him

[Braun]

I agree. Every country's ATC has its own idiosyncrasies but calling it "terrible" is over the top....

. I truly believe that if you took one controller from New York centre, Chicago’s LA they could run all the YYZ sectors simultaneously and do a better job of it.

I always said, if they could clone "E-Rog"(michel) you could run canada on about 32 of him

Having worked a couple years with Rog his reputation was a lot bigger than what he actually could do as a controller. I’m glad you enjoyed the services he offered but there are a ton of just as efficient approach controllers. I won’t get into it more than that but the perception of efficiency from a flight crew isn’t always the correct way to measure efficiency.

[GoHomeLeg]

I always felt the problems with the efficiency of YYZ is the lack of parallel taxiways between 24/06L/R. You can only land and takeoff so many aircraft before the high speeds exits are full. Unlike large airports in the US were you have parallel taxiways between two runways, you can fill that taxiway up with arriving aircraft and position them at hold short points along the take runaway while launching a half dozen aircraft followed by clearing arriving aircraft to cross while still accepting landing aircraft. Poor disign of YYZ layout.

[altiplano]

SFO runs close parallel with no middle taxiways. plus intersecting departures.

Yeah, in bad weather movements go down, but when it's running like it does 98% of the time they are moving a lot of aircraft with 1 tower controller and 1 ground controller.

Some navcanada controller on here will tell us there's a special reason why we can't move traffic like that in a place like YYZ and that's fine, but I think it's strange, more runways, more real estate, more controllers and we do less. Noise abatement is probably a big problem... ridiculous STARs, excessive vectoring workload, published altitudes that often can't be made with the decent profile you get left on, what's the point even putting them in there?

[thenoflyzone]

I always said, if they could clone "E-Rog"(michel) you could run canada on about 32 of him

I'll take that as a compliment, considering I had him as an instructor in my old unit. He's the one who did my checkride. I still have some of his bad habits. Well, the big one, really........ So much so, that pilots used to think I was him !

I always felt the problems with the efficiency of YYZ is the lack of parallel taxiways between 24/06L/R. You can only land and takeoff so many aircraft before the high speeds exits are full. Unlike large airports in the US were you have parallel taxiways between two runways, you can fill that taxiway up with arriving aircraft and position them at hold short points along the take runaway while launching a half dozen aircraft followed by clearing arriving aircraft to cross while still accepting landing aircraft. Poor disign of YYZ layout.

Up until 2008, LAX didn't have a parallel taxiway between the 25s. They still don't have any between the 24's either.

Having that 3rd parallel runway at YYZ is still better than not having it, even with no taxiway between the 24s. Could be there is not enough room to build a taxiway.

SFO runs close parallel with no middle taxiways. plus intersecting departures.

SFO is a disaster waiting to happen. Don't use that airport as an example for anything. That being said, they have new FAA safety measures in place (runway status lights, runway entrance lights, etc), things that we don't have here in Canada yet, to make sure that disaster doesn't happen anytime soon.

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/rwsl/pet/

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Nav Can is not the only ATC corporation running into trouble

https://www.turningleftforless.com/the- ... t-survive/

[altiplano]

SFO runs close parallel with no middle taxiways. plus intersecting departures.

SFO is a disaster waiting to happen. Don't use that airport as an example for anything. That being said, they have new FAA safety measures in place (runway status lights, runway entrance lights, etc), things that we don't have here in Canada yet, to make sure that disaster doesn't happen anytime soon.

Some navcanada controller on here will tell us there's a special reason why we can't move traffic like that

LOL... Exactly.

[thenoflyzone]

SFO runs close parallel with no middle taxiways. plus intersecting departures.

Yeah, in bad weather movements go down, but when it's running like it does 98% of the time they are moving a lot of aircraft with 1 tower controller and 1 ground controller.

You said it. When it's running like that. When it isn't - and it happens more often than you think - SFO is a gong show.

Some navcanada controller on here will tell us there's a special reason why we can't move traffic like that in a place like YYZ and that's fine, but I think it's strange, more runways, more real estate, more controllers and we do less. Noise abatement is probably a big problem... ridiculous STARs, excessive vectoring workload, published altitudes that often can't be made with the decent profile you get left on, what's the point even putting them in there?

You need to get your facts straight.

You do realize that YYZ has a higher AAR (airport arrival rate) in VMC than SFO does right? Up to 66 arrivals/hour at YYZ vs 54 for SFO. And SFO needs to use all 4 runways to achieve that rate. YYZ only needs to use the 3 parallels. And you're dreaming if you think 1 air controller is working those 4 runways at SFO when they are pushing 54 arrivals/hour.

Not to mention as soon as a single cloud pops over SFO, GDP's start running all the way to the east coast. Look at those abysmal AAR as soon as they can't do sideby visuals on the 28s. YYZ has a much more balanced AAR rate no matter the weather.

https://extranetapps.navcanada.ca/ois/A ... ?icao=CYYZ

https://www.fly.faa.gov/Information/wes ... fo_aar.htm

SFO approach controller routine is probably to step into work, and before reading any briefings, pray to God they can do visuals on the 28s that day !

Anyways, aren't you an AC pilot? You and you're company, if anyone, shouldn't be commenting on SFO, what with your recent mishaps that have happened there.....

[altiplano]

So defensive!

This isn't a shot at you, but you're going to take a shot at me for something that I had nothing to do with?

This was a comment about moving traffic on close parallels, it's not a shot at you. The Canadian setup is goofy, maybe you don't see it that way but from the STARs to the excessive vectoring to the noise restrictions it's not as efficient.

Yeah I said 98% of the time. Maybe it's 95%, Either way that's how it usually runs. I acknowledged when weather is down it doesn't go like that.

And yeah it's 1 tower controller. No dreaming. And SFO will only be arriving on 2 runways and departing on the intersecting except the occasional heavy.

What's the YYZ arrival rate when they don't open both 6's/24's? How many tower & ground controllers for 66 arrivals/hour?

[thenoflyzone]

So defensive!

This isn't a shot at you, but you're going to take a shot at me for something that I had nothing to do with?

This was a comment about moving traffic on close parallels, it's not a shot at you. The Canadian setup is goofy, maybe you don't see it that way but from the STARs to the excessive vectoring to the noise restrictions it's not as efficient.

Yeah I said 98% of the time. Maybe it's 95%, Either way that's how it usually runs. I acknowledged when weather is down it doesn't go like that.

And yeah it's 1 tower controller. No dreaming. And SFO will only be arriving on 2 runways and departing on the intersecting except the occasional heavy.

What's the YYZ arrival rate when they don't open both 6's/24's? How many tower & ground controllers for 66 arrivals/hour?

Hang on a second. YYZ can handle more movements/hour, and needs 1 less runway to do it, and yet it's the one with a goofy setup? Ok boss.

As for the AAR's in YYZ without the 24's, it's still higher than SFO's without the visuals on the 28s.

it doesn't matter if they only have 1 air controller. if anything, the fact they only have 1 should scare you. it's not something other airports should emulate. It's safe, orderly and then expeditious. Not the other way around. I can tell you from personal experience that a single controller working 3 runways (with 1 being a crossing runway), is dangerous when movements are as high as 54 arrivals/hour. Let's not even begin to talk about 4 runways with 1 controller. It all comes back to my original point. Don't use SFO as an example. It's a dangerous place.

And btw, it is a shot a me - and all Nav Canadians in fact- even though I dont work at YYZ. You are under the impression that Canadian controllers can't move as much metal as American ones. I find that offensive, especially when it's false, and that you base it off your anecdotal experience at SFO of all places. I gave your hard numbers and facts that prove YYZ can move more metal. So what if they use 2 air/ground controllers to do it. Who knows, if SFO had that second air and ground controllers, maybe they could to, in a much safer manner.