Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

Post Reply
jan_olieslagers
Posts: 2832
Joined: 24 Jun 2006, 08:34
Location: Vl.Brabant
Contact:

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by jan_olieslagers » 09 May 2019, 20:33

as you allways do
s/allways/always
:)
Men moet me ook niet uitdagen, hé / you asked for it!

But - to remain on topic - please elaborate about the "nonsense" bit? Surely it is a manager's job to make the company deliver to promise? Surely that didn't work out, over the last few months?

Phoenixx
Posts: 64
Joined: 16 Mar 2018, 12:45

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by Phoenixx » 09 May 2019, 22:54

Passenger wrote:
09 May 2019, 20:31
The mediators agreed with the trade unions not to continue with their sickess notes during the negociations. The union(s) didn't respect that, hence it was obvious for management that further negociations were just a loss of time. For atco's, "negociations" means "you have to give us everything we demand".
I think you would do very well in the hln comment section if you're not there already.
At what point did the mediators and unions say
"Sure, we will get the people at home with a burnout some xanax so they feel fit again, people receiving treatment for long term serious diseases we will let them control from home and for someone with a broken limb -put at home by an aviation doctor-, we'll just remove their cast, then they're as good as healed right, nobody gets to call sick anymore!" ?
I think I missed that internal memo.
Also missed the secret memo after where the unions advised us to call sick.
Didn't notice how there were no reports of fake illness in the last two weeks? Odd how that suddenly disappeared while closures and delays continued.
And now management is suddenly even denying a staff shortage in general.

For atcos, "negoTiations" means having something to say and decide, same as the guy on the other side of the table. Together.
Finding a workable compromise that ensures both parties see at least some of their intrests met.
I suppose the CEO always knew they were a waste of time since he had no plans of giving in, but he had to play the part.

I imagine negotiating with the CEO is a bit like trying to talk to you.
No matter what is presented to you, you just keep your fingers over your ears and stick to what you think you know.

User avatar
luchtzak
Posts: 11106
Joined: 18 Sep 2002, 00:00
Location: Hofstade, Zemst - Belgium
Contact:

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by luchtzak » 10 May 2019, 15:52

According to the management of Belgian air navigation service provider Skeyes an agreement has been reached with the unions representing the air traffic controllers. An agreement with one union (ACOD) only as the two other unions (ACV-Transcom and VSOA) still disagree.

https://www.aviation24.be/air-traffic-c ... one-union/


SR20
Posts: 351
Joined: 17 Apr 2017, 09:14

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by SR20 » 10 May 2019, 16:47

luchtzak wrote:
10 May 2019, 15:52
According to the management of Belgian air navigation service provider Skeyes an agreement has been reached with the unions representing the air traffic controllers.
I'd rather rephrase it this way : an agreement has been reached with one union (ACOD/CGSP) representing nearly none of the air traffic controllers ! :roll:

nordikcam
Posts: 873
Joined: 24 Aug 2008, 10:22
Location: Uccle

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by nordikcam » 10 May 2019, 18:47

SR20 wrote:
10 May 2019, 16:47
luchtzak wrote:
10 May 2019, 15:52
According to the management of Belgian air navigation service provider Skeyes an agreement has been reached with the unions representing the air traffic controllers.
I'd rather rephrase it this way : an agreement has been reached with one union (ACOD/CGSP) representing nearly none of the air traffic controllers ! :roll:
Surréalisme ! We are in Belgium !

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 34725
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by sn26567 » 11 May 2019, 08:35

SR20 wrote:
10 May 2019, 16:47
luchtzak wrote:
10 May 2019, 15:52
According to the management of Belgian air navigation service provider Skeyes an agreement has been reached with the unions representing the air traffic controllers.
I'd rather rephrase it this way : an agreement has been reached with one union (ACOD/CGSP) representing nearly none of the air traffic controllers ! :roll:
RTBF said in its TV news last night that the agreement had been signed with unions representing 2/3 of the Atcos. Fake news? If so, what's the origin of such news?
André
ex Sabena #26567

User avatar
KriVa
Posts: 1319
Joined: 31 Mar 2010, 20:15
Contact:

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by KriVa » 11 May 2019, 12:41

ACOD represents hardly any ATCOs, hence the disgruntlement. ACV and VSOA, representing the vast majority of the ATCOs, did not agree with the terms set out in the proposal, since it contained hardly any, if any, of the demands made.
Thomas

jan_olieslagers
Posts: 2832
Joined: 24 Jun 2006, 08:34
Location: Vl.Brabant
Contact:

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by jan_olieslagers » 11 May 2019, 12:48

Yes, I think that is now generally understood by all who follow the matter. It only makes André's question more poignant: What is the origin (or "source") of such "news"?

Passenger
Posts: 5993
Joined: 06 Dec 2010, 20:54

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by Passenger » 11 May 2019, 12:57

sn26567 wrote:
11 May 2019, 08:35
RTBF said in its TV news last night that the agreement had been signed with unions representing 2/3 of the Atcos. Fake news? If so, what's the origin of such news?
Fake news indeed.

The agreement hasn't been "signed by the unions". The agreement has been accepted/voted during a meeting of the relevant Paritair Comité / Commission Paritaire (think it's PC 315.02).

Phoenixx
Posts: 64
Joined: 16 Mar 2018, 12:45

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by Phoenixx » 11 May 2019, 16:32

jan_olieslagers wrote:
11 May 2019, 12:48
Yes, I think that is now generally understood by all who follow the matter. It only makes André's question more poignant: What is the origin (or "source") of such "news"?
When this PC meets, there are 12 people voting the offer on the table.
- 6 from the employer side
- 6 from the employee representation side.
For the employee representation, they use old numbers of union membership where ACOD has 2 votes, VSOA has 1 and ACV has 3 votes. This is based on a company union membership count, so the administrative staff, meteo, technicians, atcos, ... are included.

For any vote to be succesfull, they need a 2/3 majority according to Belgian law, so 8/12 votes. They have 6 from the employer side at any moment, all they need is 2 more. The union votes are not changed based on the employees they are voting for, so to vote on this proposition involving 98 percent atco arrangements, ACOD keeps their 2 votes even when they represent less than 5 percent of all air traffic controllers in a union.

In 2016 ACOD had more atcos in their members when there was an offer on the table involving the change in dispo age from 55 to 58. None of the three unions wanted to accept the offer as it was, so the CEO approached ACOD outside of the official negotiations and made a back alley style deal with them: All company staff get a yearly financial bonus if he sold these 3 years for atcos. They came back in the room and signed immediately, ACV and VSOA were speechless. While it may have been a deal that would be accepted by a majority of ACOD members (non-atcos), I don't think I have to explain what a rat move this was. Most air traffic controllers that were acod member before, obviously cancelled their membership. But the damage was done, a 'correct and valid vote was held'.

After this, acod kept their 2/6 votes, surely still representing employees from different departments, but now with only an estmated 10 air traffic controllers in their members.
So in this whole matter, that has been ongoing for years, the unions now agreed (and let's say they had a lot of pressure from all sides to do so too) to not have 1 party sell off the CEOs request for a bit of gain for their members, to stay on one line and to only sign when they collectively agreed on the offer on the table.
Negotiations lasted for years and nothing came out.
Untill recently, beginning of the year when the ACV strike announcement was filed, the cracks started showing in this 'united front'. ACOD did not agree on the strike and they felt their spine bending a bit under the weight of the CEO.
De Cuyper saw he finally had the chance to force himself in there again, all he had to do was put a text on the table ACOD would accept. And he managed, twice already this year, to have a text that sells off atco rights accepted by ACOD, the last one yesterday.

Both of them don't give a damn about the demands and the rights of the atcos, they just push their agenda through in this very questionable way.
That's how you come to 'an agreement' that the actual party involved does not want and will not accept.

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 34725
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by sn26567 » 11 May 2019, 16:45

Thanks phoenixx for explaining how the 'agreement' got a 2/3 majority. Or not? Because for me it should be 2/3 + 1 to be a 2/3 majority.
André
ex Sabena #26567

mvg
Posts: 122
Joined: 08 Jun 2017, 04:30

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by mvg » 11 May 2019, 17:03

@Phoenixx

Two things come up after reading your explanation (thanks for it, by the way):

1) the CEO is from CD&V so not really the same side as ACOD... How do you explain this?

2) the rules of the company are such that with 8 votes out of 12 decisions can be made. Skeyes is a company with Atcos (a minority of the employees) and many other types employees (a big majority): what else can you expect as a minority? Isn’t it called democracy?

Phoenixx
Posts: 64
Joined: 16 Mar 2018, 12:45

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by Phoenixx » 11 May 2019, 18:24

Well the rules specify 2/3, because 2/3 +1 would be 75 percent already (9/12).

Our CEO has goals in mind, and he wants to get there one way or another.
There is nothing Christian or democratic about violating rules and laws and then changing them afterwards to be compliant.
They are each others means to the end they are after.

While I agree very much on the importance of democracy, you see there is something dodgy in this situation right?
A union supposedly representing only 1/3 of all unionized Belgocontrol staff (not even 1/3 of all staff), with only around 10 air traffic controllers in their members that don't even agree on this deal either, accepting a deal for all air traffic controllers? (255 people they do not represent)
And this is called democracy then?

This deal did not involve measures for administrative staff and made only minor changes in non atco matters to a previous deal acod solo accepted all the same. I don't see a majority of the staff benefitting this time. This was a deal about atcos, so would have been 'nice' if acod at least had the decency to admit that while they might have the legal right to sign, they were not in the correct place to do so.

mvg
Posts: 122
Joined: 08 Jun 2017, 04:30

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by mvg » 12 May 2019, 06:53

@Phoenixx

I can understand your frustrations but this is the way Skeyes is functioning. Those rules have been set up (in laws) and the role of the unions is paramount.

Management is indeed using those rules to have their proposals accepted but this is just what the game is about!
Everyone uses the rules when it suits his needs.
So do controllers when it’s about stealing hours, breaking the rules when they are working every day, calling sick when they are not (not always but that happens) and so on.
What do controllers want? Work in a company that does what they want, that adapts the rules to their sole needs and that lets them work as they feel it’s the best?
Well Skeyes isn’t the right place for that. Controllers are only a tiny minority of the employees, it still depends on the State (with all those kind of rules and objectives to achieve).
Of course management also has to follow the rules but at some point you have to realize that your job is to control traffic and that the management is there to manage the company.
Their proposals should at least be given a chance to be put in place and see if they bring results. In any other company it would be like that.
Here we only see that controllers are refusing whatever they are given and whatever is not what they want.


User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 34725
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by sn26567 » 12 May 2019, 20:26

Just two remarks:

1. How can the situation improve with ATCOs working less hours?

2. How can one consider that an agreement has been reached when a large majority of the ATCOs is against the agreement? It seems to me that there is an agreement only if it is approved by a majority on BOTH sides of the negotiating table.
André
ex Sabena #26567

jan_olieslagers
Posts: 2832
Joined: 24 Jun 2006, 08:34
Location: Vl.Brabant
Contact:

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by jan_olieslagers » 12 May 2019, 23:10

@André: the exact same thoughts came to me, too. But it seems more and more clear that Belgocontrol exists in a universum of its own, with perhaps even a different concept of gravity, let alone such details as democracy and logic. Small wonder that mediation does not work, there.

And perhaps slightly off-topic: German DFS seems to suffer from staff shortage, too. For those who can make out the local language: https://www.pilotundflugzeug.de/forum/2 ... 20,4529211

Phoenixx
Posts: 64
Joined: 16 Mar 2018, 12:45

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by Phoenixx » 13 May 2019, 00:12

mvg wrote:
12 May 2019, 06:53
@Phoenixx

I can understand your frustrations but this is the way Skeyes is functioning. Those rules have been set up (in laws) and the role of the unions is paramount.

Management is indeed using those rules to have their proposals accepted but this is just what the game is about!
Everyone uses the rules when it suits his needs.
So do controllers when it’s about stealing hours, breaking the rules when they are working every day, calling sick when they are not (not always but that happens) and so on.
What do controllers want? Work in a company that does what they want, that adapts the rules to their sole needs and that lets them work as they feel it’s the best?
Well Skeyes isn’t the right place for that. Controllers are only a tiny minority of the employees, it still depends on the State (with all those kind of rules and objectives to achieve).
Of course management also has to follow the rules but at some point you have to realize that your job is to control traffic and that the management is there to manage the company.
Their proposals should at least be given a chance to be put in place and see if they bring results. In any other company it would be like that.
Here we only see that controllers are refusing whatever they are given and whatever is not what they want.
While I appreciate the core of your logic, you must have missed a few of my earlier posts.
- I find it difficult to call this a way of 'functioning', malfunctioning seems more appropriate.
- The previous agreement voted on the PC literally includes an article overruling a European law, supposedly excluding Belgocontrol of the obligation to follow it.
This is ofcourse complete nonsense, we will take this to court among with all the other things we already did. But while the other points are open to the judges interpretation, they can not win this one, their own lawyers know this too.
It simply buys them a bit more time to do what they want untill a judge forces them to comply.
And then, just like now, there will be a "sudden unexpected shortage" and they will ask goodwill to solve it (a joke if you had to fight for 2-3 years to get the law applied in the first place), and since they won't get it, they will take to the next best thing to enforce it. And we will take them to court for this all the same.
They are non stop making holes to close the previous holes, essentially solving nothing.
- If the management would actually manage the company with respect for the rules or for us, we would let them.
But they don't, so we don't.
- Controllers are not a 'tiny minority', there are 265 of us.
10-15 are with acod and none of them agree on this offer as far as I know. No other staff members benefit from this agreement.
Have you read it? "atco this, atco that, service continuity importance, loss of rights for atcos, change of rules for atcos and increased management power, listed in between disclaimers and statements that benefit the CEO."
There is no greater good benefit here, no needs of the many vs rights/needs of the few or however you want to call it, except their precious continuity.
"Safety is in our DNA" he said, for atcos maybe, but this CEO has only numbers floating in his veins.

I know we are not the center of the universe, I agree we shouldn't have our every demand met, but this is the exact opposite.
Not one of our important points got met and we simply got the ACOD trick in our back, again, for the third time.
Untill you change a rule, you are ought to follow it.
As long as you are subject to a law, you're supposed to do the same here, and its not because your employees rights don't match with your target numbers, that you can just discard them of start cancelling whatever you see fit.

A while ago, i posed a hypothetical question to a user (i believe 767copilot) on how many times he would give his ex a new chance. Same story here. We know how this offer came to the table and how it got 'accepted', we know what this offer includes and means, we know who made it and what his mindset was.
This is just same old, same old in a new coat. Giving this a chance means more of the same and worse.

His interview in terzake was a load of lies and pr talk.
Controllers refuse this offer because it solves absolutely nothing.
He used this situation to push something through he has been after for years, and he found the perfect way to wrap and sell it.
Making a nightshift 8 instead of 10 hours will not reduce our fatigue, on the contrary. Early shifts have to start earlier and late shifts have to stay longer.
While it might (big questionmark) reduce our number of hours per week, it actually means working more days per month, making the whole balance problem worse.

They consider the agreement reached, valid and good because it suits them. And while I have to admit that this one is indeed valid according to the rules, any person claiming this is a good, democratic or fair agreement has no clue what they are talking about. They lie non-stop in the media about everything, and we have nothing but anonymous testimonies left to respond.
We got to the point where unions and even some courtcases can not help us anymore (they are overruled or discarded in a very dirty way) because he simply finds a way around.

The only options he leaves us are to accept and shut up or to take action.
Well...

mvg
Posts: 122
Joined: 08 Jun 2017, 04:30

Re: Social actions at air traffic control service skeyes (Belgium) - possible air traffic disruptions

Post by mvg » 13 May 2019, 11:21

Hi Phoenixx,

Sorry to say but some of your statements aren't correct.

The way Skeyes is functioning (or malfunctioning, depending on the point of view but irrelevant anyway) is the way it has been working since its creation (and well defined by rules/laws). It was well explained in your previous posts: they need 2/3 of the votes to implement new rules. Half the votes come from management and the other half from the unions.
This is it!
When this way of functioning was advantageous for the controllers in the past, nobody was complaining. Now that it's not so much anymore, you say it's not correct... You may call it old fashioned, but until today, these are the rules and nobody (management, unions, employees) can change them. It is a typical way of functioning for former state owned companies.

About the article overuling the European law: they still have the right to do this. Let's see if a court tells them to withdraw it. But we all know that many European rules aren't followed and that following all of them would not be very positive either for the Atcos.

About the respect of the management for their controllers: we agree. By the way the interview on VRT was shocking. BUT about the CEO, because he is your main problem: controllers always think they know better than anyone else but now they are facing a wall, a person who will never give up and use all possible tricks to achieve his goals. Sometimes borderline tricks. Unions are starting to give up: he is too strong and he was put there to sort out the mess! Since the beginning. It's on its way and unless a decision coming from very high is made, you won't get rid of him and will have to follow what he says. You are facing a person who is more capable than controllers to negociate! Because it's not your job to do that (and unions aren't at his level either).
You know his plans for the company, don't you? Everyone knows...

About controllers being a minority: of course you are a tiny minority in the company! 265 out of (around) 1000 employees: how else do you call this? Yes ACOD only represents a few Atcos (not even agreeing with the proposals themselves) but there is no change of rule that is supposed to be negociated at the Atco's level only. "Paritair comité" (PC) is at the company's level, not at the Atco's level. You are indeed not being listened to because you are only a small part of the business.
And to change it, to be more represented, to be only ones, you gonna have to be privatized. Because under the current rules, even if that frustrates many of you, you have little to say, apart from striking when decisions made democratically (= following the rules of the company, decided by the governement) do not suit you.
That is one of the little disadvantages of having a State nominated job. Atcos want the job security and all the advantages (never fired, good salary, unlimited sickness, and so on) of a State employee but don't want the rules that come with it (when they don't suit them).

Post Reply