1. Our 24 hour roster at Sydney must be protected. Every staff member here loves it.

    • Wes Garrett

      G’day Brett, Airservices are not looking to remove Sydney’s 24 hour roster per say, they are seeking to change/reduce Sydney’s published hours of operation. Concurrently, as a stakeholder at ongoing CASA Regulatory Policy Review meetings Airservices are advocating for the ability to redefine/relax definitions that would narrow ARFFS ‘published hours of operation’. This holds the potential to impact on multiple ARFFS locations should their advocacy be successful. The UFU’s position on alterations to clauses 21.7 and 21.9 of the EA has been made clear to Airservices for many weeks now, NO.

      The NSW BCOM and our Industrial Officer will be visiting Sydney in April (11th-14th) to discuss the current status of EA negotiations and the implications of the CASA Regulatory Review.
      Some of the key elements Airservices are advocating for in the Regulatory Review include:
      – Amending the functions of ARFFS
      – Removal of DRV capability
      – Restricting the ability for ARFFS to respond to ‘non-aviation’ incidents
      – Redefining and narrowing the definition of ‘rescue’ to diminish the requirement of ARFFS to rescue injured or trapped passengers
      – Redefining and narrowing the scope and intent of ICAO’s Task Resource Analysis (TRA) methodology
      – Redefining and narrowing ARFFS establishment requirements
      – Redefining and permanently integrating the role of the ARFFS Officer In Charge (OIC) into the on-duty fire crew, effectively reducing fireground staffing.
      – Opening up ARFFS provision to private providers

      Refer to clauses 21.7 & 21.9

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *