Published in 2001 by the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations (IFATCA)

Suite 408, 1255 University St.,

Montreal. Canada.

Phone: 1 514 866 7040

Fax: 1 514 866 7612

e-mail: office@ifatca.org

Written and produced by Neil Vidler

1 Highbridge Rd.,

Killara. N.S.W.

Australia

Copyright © IFATCA 2001

This book is copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permission of the publisher.

Canadian Cataloging in Publication Data

Vidler, Neil, 1946-

Under Control - the story of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations

Includes bibliographical references.

ISBN 0-646-40574-8

1. International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations - History. I International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations. II. Title.

All the photographic images contained herein have been provided for publication from IFATCA archival material or the private collections of Walter Endlich, Bernhard Rüthy, Jacob Wachtel and Neil Vidler. Front cover photographs courtesy of ATC The Netherlands, Schipol Airport and S.T. Chu, Civil Aviation Dept., Hong Kong. Back Cover Photographs courtesy of Civil Aviation Dept., Hong Kong and The Controller magazine. Line images contained herein have previously been published in the IFATCA magazine, The Controller from whence permission to re-produce has been granted.

Permission to utilise 'Transmit’ extracts of John Platt's book 'Heavy Weather' kindly granted by the U.K. Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers.

Design and typeset by chinc. dzine, Sydney, Australia.

Front cover design by chinc, dzine.

Printed by Griffin Press Pty. Ltd., Netley, South Australia.

Typeset in AGaramond 11pt

FOREWORD

When I receive new reading material, I usually ask myself, 'is this important?' I also consider the same question in a deeper way when I reflect on that book or publication from a scholastic standpoint. The criteria I use in making a judgement is whether the publication offers knowledge and insight that enables me to be a person who is better able to understand people and institutions and where and how they live and operate. This is what I found about the book, 'Under Control - the Story of IFATCA'.

The book caused me to reflect on the nature of the context in which we air traffic controllers find ourselves working and how the industry operates and has grown, but simultaneously questions, what of the future?' This is important because I cannot assume that one country is like another or that one Member Association's culture is similar to another Member Association's culture'. The characteristics of the Federation and its components that emerged from the text included a sense of caring and concern, respect for others and provide initiatives to help them to empower themselves.

The book's contents are insightful and show a Federation dedicated to comprehending the realities and, finally, translating a vision into a realistic framework for action. For their part, these characteristics become a challenge to people (Member Associations) who are themselves evolving as professionals in the trade. The material on the 'Goals and Objectives' provides more depth in relation to the full development of the profession. It seems to me that the Federation's work objectives are descriptive of the elements inherent in any notion of a healthy, efficient and safe global air traffic management system.

The book is complementary to the goals of the professional air traffic controller or an informed air traffic management provider agency (employer) that is guided by the teachings of the Creator wherein the challenges of the circle of creation are to be honest, to share, to love and to become stronger in faith and humanity; in essence to help people to be stronger since in their strength lies their well-being and adeptness of all globally.

As a professional Federation, we need to be humble, diligent, respectful, efficient and caring. We do not do this in a relationship that maintains or places us in a higher position than other organisations. In this sense, this book is integral to the need to have a good character as professionals in the field and demonstrates that worthwhile active involvement in the development of safe and efficient systems of air traffic management systems in which air traffic controllers are called to perform must be our collective personal and professional challenge.

As current President of the Federation, I hope to pass on knowledge and insights that are useful for future or present air traffic controllers, knowledge that can be applied and that enhances the systems and that which will stand the test of time. Many of the personalities mentioned in this book have provided this kind of foundation and have demonstrated strategic skills and insights. They have assessed the political climate within organisations and how sources of power could be identified so that we can be 'real' in our approach to both our Member Associations and the people who make decisions.

Being able to affect your own environment can be the determinant that enables one to perceive having power or not. In that context, the work of the Federation captured in this book gives an analysis of power and facilitation of a shift in power and how this is dependant of where that power resides. This book captures quite succinctly the type of analysis (approach) that needs to be continued to allow for empowerment, which as the author makes clear, has to be more than a state of mind.

Finally, I am pleased that this book has offered a coherent historical overview of the Federation showing it to be a practical model which, at the same time, has maintained the important quality of original objectives and been an insightful guide to its Member Associations.

Mr. Samuel M. Lampkin

President and Chief Executive Officer

International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations

Montreal, Canada.

November, 2000.

INTRODUCTION

They say that everyone wants to write a book. If that is the case, this isn't the book I wanted to write. Authoring an historical narrative of the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations was not what I ever envisaged in my plans for the future. Whilst my involvement with the Federation over the years afforded me much pleasure and countless wonderful experiences, not for one moment did I ever see myself making further contribution in this manner.

Actually writing such a history was the furthest thing from my mind when one of my Executive Board colleagues suggested at a Board meeting in February, 1994 that we should do something to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of the Federation in 2001. However, it did sound like a good idea at the time even when, as Deputy President, I was given administrative oversight of the project, which initially was seen as a collation of material to publicise the 40th anniversary whilst most of the original personalities were still around. When we expanded that idea into the concept of an actual book, it still seemed straightforward. We would simply call for input and surely we would be overwhelmed with contributions. Accordingly, we placed advertisements in The Controller and the Circular and were confident of a fulsome response. Well, it didn't quite work out that way.

Lacking any contribution, initially I thought, to get the project under way, I would come up with titles for the book's chapters and was confident that they would generate some input. Receiving little with time passing, I thought then that I would write down some words in each chapter and surely a little text would jog memories and provoke contributions. At the outset, I settled upon twelve chapters. It was later when I found myself providing almost all the text that I cut them back to ten. By the end of 1996 it was obvious that if the book was to become a reality, considerably more personal attention would have to be devoted to it. My move to Hong Kong provided spare time which facilitated this although it meant having to purchase a second computer to avoid competition. As the decade began winding down with apparent increasing rapidity, the last twelve months in Hong Kong (1999) saw the book become a second job and, with early retirement back in Australia, it became my prime occupation throughout 2000.

In planning the narrative, one of the most difficult parts was the chapter tides and thus how to compartmentalise a history. How best to encapsulate logically all that IFATCA has done and achieved in forty years? Once I had settled upon them, the task was to track down aspects for inclusion under the headings and meld them into something of a readable account. Even though I still had all my Executive Board files and recourse to several other sources of information - The Controller, Circulars and early conference reports, for example - this was far from an easy task. I learnt very early that it was difficult to trust the written word and dangerous to take any single statement at face value. For almost every statement of fact in the account, I sought verification and corroboration from other accounts and differing people, sometimes two or three different sources for each point. Even articles in The Controller had to be checked and double checked for obviously the Editors included them (with the usual disclaimer) with little or no checking as to the veracity of the content. I say this not as a criticism of the Editors, for I know what an extremely difficult job they are faced with, but merely to indicate that nothing can be taken for granted, not even with articles in the Federations masthead. With a major publication such as this, and upon which a measure of IFATCA's hard won reputation will hang, I determined that it needed to be as accurate as possible under the circumstances. This practise, necessary as it was, added considerably to the undertaking but has, I believe, resulted in a highly accurate, verifiable and readable account that will stand the test of time. No doubt, there will still be some inaccuracies, minor I hope. It simply wasn't possible to double- and cross-check every single point and for these I apologise. I sincerely hope that these do not offend or misconstrue events.

Having effectively discovered that I was the one writing the tome, I decided that some more strategic planning was very necessary. Moving on then from random tracts of text and pages of les aides memoires, I conceived of the book as charting the course of IFATCA's development through the years, mainly by highlighting the conferences and special events of each year. I set out to show the milestones, the successes and disappointments of the growing Federation, feature a few key personalities who shaped the organisation, its development of policy, its increasing involvement and acceptance as an important player on the international civil aviation scene and, thus, its increasing maturity. It was immediately obvious too that a continuous recount of the forty years could be a tedious exercise so I decided to separate the chapters on the four decades with accounts of matters of shorter individual interest such as The Controller magazine and dealings with the international organisations. This served the dual purpose of condensing certain subjects, perhaps for later reference, for those specifically interested in them and breaking up an otherwise unremitting and concentrated discourse on the Federations history. Of course, if one wants to read the history as a continuous re-telling, one may do so by skipping chapters.

The four chapters individually detailing the chronological history of the four decades rely greatly upon accounts of the annual conferences. At first, this seemed to be too facile an approach and so I didn't set out to treat each year this way. I wanted the accounts to be a little more catholic in their review of the years and the treatment of events. But it became obvious that the Federation's annual showcase was always the most fulsomely reported event each year and regularly provided the most significant points of interest for inclusion in an account such as this. And perhaps, this is as it should be. The annual conference determines policy, provides and removes characters to and from the stage, is a prime source of stories and anecdotes and generally provides a focus. Aside from the conferences, in each of these chapters I have tried to round them out with the more interesting happenings of each year in a mostly chronological order. Occasionally I break away from this practise as it seemed more sensible, having started on a topic, to continue it through to its logical conclusion. Such an instance occurs with the Greek saga (I'll resist the temptation to call it an odyssey) which started in the seventies and continued right through the eighties and the nineties. The problem came to the fore in the seventies and it is mentioned there but the major difficulties and wider impact really started to be felt in the eighties. From then, it just seemed better and more coherent to treat the topic as a single entity and continue with it to its conclusion rather than again leaving it unresolved, returning to it a couple of chapters later. Several other events are similarly treated. In each of these chapters, and in several others as well, the narrative is therefore primarily meant to be discursive rather than simply a detailed technical recounting of facts and events. Naturally, and unavoidably, the story relies to a large degree on close detail of some events but I have tried to make the account as readable as possible to a wide audience, not just to IFATCA-philes.

ph3.03
Austria's Klaus Loidl (left) was an IFATCA enthousiast.

It seemed logical to commence with a brief history of the development of air traffic control. Since the Federation is an international body, it seemed equally logical to not confine examination of that development to one country or even one region. Why the USA, Britain and Australia? To me they represented the most important areas of development each being extremely aviation conscious environments and their contemporary paths to today's sophisticated systems were via very interesting but very different approaches. Perhaps equally importantlyy, they were relatively easy locations to obtain information on. Here I need to specifically acknowledge GATCO's permission to make use of their excerpts of John Piatt's 'Heavy Weather from their 'Transmit' magazine. It was an extremely valuable and interesting source of information and having it so rendered saved me valuable research time. I made no attempt to make the accounts in these countries exhaustive but simply settled upon key developments and milestones to illustrate their evolution. It is, after all, a history of the Federation, not air traffic control.

With the initial research, as I read more and more of the original editions of The Controller and other contemporary publications and corresponded with such personalities as Jakob Wachtel and Walter Endlich, the actual formation of the Federation naturally lent itself to an individual chapter and this is explored in chapter 2. It concludes with an expose of IFATCA's first President and I am indebted to 'Tek' for his willingness to share something of his intimate personal life with us.

The Federation's journal, The Controller, was an obvious choice for close examination since it has played such an integral part in the organisations history and development. In fact, the more I researched the magazine, the more fascinated I became with it and I found myself accumulating more than enough data. In the end, I left out quite a bit of detail to keep the size down and so to maintain interest in this facet. It proved to be the only chapter where this was necessary. The Controller really deserved a chapter on its own but it also occurred to me that the financial vicissitudes of the Federation also would hold interest for a lot of people. Therefore, I included something on this aspect in the same chapter and I hope that I have made this mostly esoteric (and facts and figures filled) topic interesting for the wider readership.

Whilst participation in the development of ATC systems and promotion of the air traffic control profession are the 'reasons for being' for IFATCA, nothing could be achieved without inter-reaction with the other big players on the world scene. Hence, an examination of the relationships with other world organisations seemed essential. The International Civil Aviation Organisation was an obvious choice, as was the International Labour Office. I then looked at including specific mention of our brother organisation, IFALPA, but whilst the relationship has been fundamentally important, frequently close and of mutual benefit, it has not been inherently interesting. This aspect of our international relations was thus discarded in favour of consideration of that with the International Air Transport Association, which relationship one would most assuredly have to say has been interesting, to say the least. Since chapter six was by then almost the wordiest, I thought it best to leave examination of our inter-organisation relationships there.

To be or not to be (an industrially involved organisation) has long been the question that IFATCA has grappled with. Really though, the question has been to what extent should the Federation become involved given that its charter was to remain a strictly professional organisation? The pros and cons of the arguments have engendered considerable passion and the debate still hasn't subsided. (I am in possession of a quote by a current Board member insisting that the Federation must become more union minded.) The question probably has yet to be finally determined. So it seemed, to me at least, that the subject was worthy of wide exposure and closer examination. Chapter eight is the result.

How does one conclude such a narrative? With a quick recap of events past (and therefore already examined in the preceding pages) or by a gaze into the future with guarded optimism? Since ICAO's CNS/ATM concept has occupied so much of our attention over the last decade and is about to come to fruition, a dissertation on the Federations approach to technology and change seemed appropriate. This seemed particularly so as the Federation opened a new decade and with the dawning of the new century and millennium. Whilst chapter ten is a little short in the crystal ball gazing department, it does note how IFATCA has always looked to the future, frequently with considerable prescience, and has been in the vanguard of change and acceptance of change. This in itself is remarkable given the basic conservatism of controllers. Such an approach conveys a sense of optimism and what better way to finish?

One of the more difficult aspects of writing such an account is how to treat one's own involvement. With a lengthy participation, and a particularly close involvement for most of the nineties, this question assumed significant proportions. In the end, I decided to write of my input in the third person and frequently identified my participation simply by title, that is, EVP ASP or Deputy President. Occasionally it was necessary, and at times seemed proper, to include my name and again, for consistency, I used the family name as I did for others mentioned. I think it was more important to retain the account over these years as a history rather than as a memoir.

I decided to keep all personalities at arms length by mentioning them by family name after their first introduction. Such a tactic sounds a litde blunt and impersonal but, whilst many of those mentioned are good friends and close colleagues, I thought it better to approach this aspect of the narration in a non-familiar manner to provide consistency and to maintain contact with and inclusion of the wider audience. Occasionally, nicknames and first names are used but this is done minimally and only in keeping with the persons involvement in the narration of events. It was my hope that this tactic of referring to the personalities by family name would ensure retention of familiarity of any reader with people they know whilst not divorcing the more general reader from inclusion in the history.

To avoid a bland narration of facts and events, I attempted a sprinkling of personal and anecdotal accounts. These are merely meant to improve the appeal of the history and the general readability of the story told. Nowhere is any offence is intended and I apologise if anyone feels slighted by any of the anecdotes.

In the interests of accuracy, I considered it best to retell as much as possible of IFATCA's personal and professional involvement and, whilst it is not totally a warts and air telling of events, it does manage to explore several sensitive issues. Where such sensitivities were identified, I provided advance text to one or more of the personalities involved for their consideration. As a result of these reviews, litle was changed and the resulting accounts have been rendered as accurately as possible. As with other more straightforward accounts of events, I hope they are acceptable.

In mentioning events, happenings, etc, throughout the years, I have at times been selective with what I included. Inclusion of some items and exclusion of others was made strictly on the basis of what I thought was interesting for such an account and what would appeal, not only to Federation members, but also to a readership beyond air traffic control. If in so doing I have overlooked some important occurrences that you thought merited inclusion, again I apologise. In defence, however, I can mention that over a period of some five years, I consistently asked for input and, a few notable exceptions aside, I effectively received none.

I am indebted to several people for their invaluable assistance in writing this book. I spent many, many hours reading through every item in every edition of The Controller, the Circular, conference reports, regional meeting reports, Executive Board minutes, copious other meeting reports and dozens of other potential sources of material and was still forced to rely upon personal recollections, mostly from the old hands'. The first I need to mention in this context is Bernhard Ruthy. It would be not too far from the mark to say that this account would not have been written without Bernhard's help. (In this instance I intentionally use the given, not the family, name.) Bernhard reviewed every word I wrote, some sections several times, corrected mistakes in fact and accuracy, was a constant source of information and corroboration, provided invaluable suggestions and generally was someone to rely upon.

Jacob Wachtel provided valuable information for the section on the Federations pre-history. A lot of the early information in chapter two relies upon Jacob s records and accounts and this section of the history would be incomplete without his major contribution. Similarly, without Walter Endlich's memories, the chapter on The Controller would be the poorer. Walter was also a source for several humourous anecdotes. His suggestions and corrections to chapter four were much appreciated.

Leo Tekstra, Daniel Monin, Ted McCluskey, Pat O'Doherty, Andreas Avgoustis and Daniel Gorin also deserve special mention for their willingness to take the time to sit down and speak at length with me and/or to write lengthy accounts of their time with IFATCA and to provide valuable personal insights into the personalities they worked with. I also appreciated Günter Melchert's assistance with some of the more modern aspects of European history.

In alphabetical order, I acknowledge Terry Crowhurst, Philippe Domogala, Gary Edge, Sture Eriksson, Maura Estrada, Janet Hall, Brian Houston, Preben Lauridsen, Henry Nkondaya, Sandy Oppenheim, John Redmond, Paul Robinson, Bert Ruitenberg, Andre Seguin, Chris Stock, Charles Stuart, Albert Taylor, Mark Vidler and Ulli Windt. Thank you, you all contributed in various ways.

Finally, as with all undertakings with IFATCA, you can't do it without your family's support, understanding and cooperation. A huge thank you to Andrew, Mark and Robyn.

This book is dedicated to

the air traffic controllers of the world

CHAPTER 1

The Development of Air Traffic Control

The Development of Air Traffic Control Air traffic control is one of the worlds youngest professions. Like many modern professions, it has developed from the humblest beginnings into a highly sophisticated and technology dependant occupation. With air traffic control (ATC), there was no "big bang"; it wasn't discovered or invented but it has evolved gradually, driven by need. Circumstances have dictated that it developed slightly differently from region to region, from country to country and even from city to city. The basic principles remain the same, however, whether one is using highly sophisticated synthetic radar displays and employing satellite communications or making do with antiquated procedural control methods with World War Two vintage High Frequency radio equipment. ATC is the science (some say the art) of maintaining safety by keeping air traffic separated whilst at the same time ensuring expedition and efficiency. At times, these concepts do not lend themselves to complementary action and it is then that a controller is tested and his or her skills come to the fore.

Once man became airborne in a heavier-than-air machine, his ingenuity and parallel developing technologies have permitted him to continually fly higher and faster. Much the same may be said of ATC. To safeguard the aviation scene, ATC has also employed developing technologies to manage the traffic. Sadly, the terrestrial developments have never kept pace with the airborne improvements and it has been in the area of this technology gap that the national air traffic control systems have been tested, often found wanting and frequently from whence the protests and controller disputes have derived.

Within two decades of the Wright Brothers changing the concept of travel, air traffic controllers' appeared waving flags. Rudimentary oversight of flights followed but, in reality, little progress was made with this infant profession until after the Second World War. The modern aircraft were then pushing the boundaries and testing hitherto notions of absolute sovereignty of airspace and governments were forced to take some action to ensure safety and efficiency whilst guaranteeing the freedom of the skies. Better route structures were initiated, more efficient radios and navigation aids were introduced progressively and international agreements struck. In more recent years we have seen the employment of space technologies so that today we are developing an air traffic control environment that could have scarcely been imagined by the controllers of even just two generations ago. Unfortunately, it still cant be today by controllers in some technically less well endowed areas of the globe.

It is this evolution of the profession of air traffic control from flags to satellites that is the underlying theme of this account. That the International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations (IFATCA) came along as and when it did may be viewed as simply another development in the advent of the ATC profession. But at the same time, it is more than that. Just as air traffic control evolved to satisfy a pressing need, so too IFATCA itself was created and has evolved to fulfil a demand. Just how it has done this needs to be told and it is logical to begin at the beginning and really, kites and balloons apart, aviation figuratively and literally took off at Kitty Hawk in 1903.

It is possible to theorise that Wilbur Wright was the world's first air traffic controller with Orville a close second. Whilst Orville did not need to file a flight plan nor seek permission to take offor land, Wilbur maintained what could be taken as an 'Operational Watch' over the safety of the Flyer during Orville's momentous 12 second flight on the 17th of December, 1903 at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina. As the Flyer slowly rolled down the track into a 20mph wind, Wilbur ran alongside holding the right wingtip and balancing the craft until it became airborne¹. He then watched with great concern until Orville touched down again about 120 feet later. Likewise, later in the day during that day's fourth flight when Wilbur was aloft for 59 seconds, Orville was equally vigilant whilst his brother flew 852 feet across the sand plain. Again, flying into a strong wind, Wilbur's speed across the ground was but lOmph with an elevation of only a few feet. After traversing 800 feet, he pulled the nose up (in fact, the elevator since it was mounted at the front) to clear a small hillock and, when he pushed it forward again, he over did it and nose dived into the sand.

Regrettably, whilst the machine was recovered from that mishap, that first Flyer was wrecked the same day when a wind gust turned it over breaking the engine mounts and most of the wing spars. So, when the Wrights built their second Flyer in 1904 back in their home state of Ohio, there was still no risk of a traffic conflict. Similarly, in 1905 when their Flyer No.3 was capable of half hour flights during which it executed turns, banks and figures of eight, it was still the only aircraft in the air. (Flyer No.2 was scrapped after the 1904 tests with the wooden components burnt and just the engine saved for further development.) Whilst one of the brothers flew their 'heavier than air machines' and learned the intricacies of piloting, the other always carefully observed proceedings and made observations.

The same kind of need for 'Operational Watch' over an aircraft in flight prompted the institution of air traffic control. Firstly, it was the need to know where an individual aircraft was that led airline companies and, later, national institutions to maintain such a watch in the event of something going wrong so that action could be speedily taken. To do this efficiently, the new invention wireless was to be utilised. Since there were precious few of those about, much cooperation was also needed. Fortunately, this was available and, for example, in Europe, national military and Post and Telecommunication Authorities, who employed professional radio operators, made available their ground stations for the relay and exchange of information soon after World War One ended. Then, as more and more aircraft took to the skies, the need to keep those aircraft apart, initially as they were manoeuvring on the ground and, later in the air, became paramount.

Over a period of little more than a decade following the Wright Brothers first flight, great strides were made in aircraft development, mainly in the field of military applications. In fact, the United States Army issued the first specification for a military aircraft in 1907 and the Wright brothers delivered in 1909, the same year that Louis Bleriot crossed the English Channel. Such development was particularly accelerated with the advent of the Great War. However, there were two important civil developments which accompanied the increasing military advances. The first carriage of mail by air took place on 23rd September, 1911 when pilot Earle Ovington carried a mail bag on his knees. His flight, over a distance of just 8km (5 miles), was from an air meeting at Nassau Boulevarde, Long Island to Mineola, Long Island, where he threw the bag overboard for pick up and transportation to the post office. Unfortunately, this service, a portent of the future, only lasted for one week. The second initiative was also in the United States and saw the institution of the worlds first scheduled airline service across Tampa Bay, Florida on 1st January, 1914. This 23 minute hop by open flying boat easily beat the land-based competition and firmly established commercial flying in the minds of the American public. The war put paid to much civil aviation and developmental emphasis switched to military applications. By war's end, progress was such that the best fighters were attaining speeds of 135 mph - the French Hispano-Suiza engined Spad S.XIII - and 'heavy' bombers, such as the British Handley Page 0/400, were carrying 2,000lb payloads.

It was shortly after the end of the First World War that people began to see that aircraft raised possibilities of profit and commercial aviation was borne. It was in this period that companies founded by far sighted individuals grew and, coupled with the general public's fascination with flying (fuelled by heroic feats of airmanship), there were great advances in aircraft manufacture, improvement and utilisation. Initially, these 'fabric and wire' aeroplanes earned their owners money through 'barnstorming' whereby they undertook practically any activity that would provide an income. They carried passengers, mostly on joy flights, provided rudimentary flight instruction, started aerial photography and performed stunts, as often as not operating from Farmer Brown's fields. Eventually, these daredevil - and dangerous - barnstorming exhibitions gradually gave way to more sedate pursuits and the carriage of mail and transportation of fare paying passengers became the norm and airlines came into being. The honour of being the world s oldest continuously operated airline goes to the Dutch carrier Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij (KLM), which was formed in 1919. Not far behind though, and about as far away from the sands of Kitty Hawk as it is possible to get, in outback Australia, the local airline QANTAS (Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Services) was formed in 1920. Soon after, it operated its first scheduled flight carrying its first passenger over the incredible distance of 800km (500 miles). This was in November, 1922, still less than 2 decades after the Flyers historic 120 feet flight.

By the end of 1920, European airline development was such that KLM, two French airlines, a Belgian airline and no fewer than eight British airlines were all flying between London and the Continent. The fare from London to Paris, by the way, was ten pounds on the British airlines and six pounds on the French carriers, the difference being brought about by government subsidies granted to the French companies. These subsidies were to prove fatal to the British carriers and by February, 1921 the fledgling British airline industry had collapsed. This embarrassment prompted the British government into a subsidisation policy of their own and several airlines were resurrected. At the same time, the carriage of wireless became commonplace and, in 1927, mandatory for aircraft carrying 10 or more persons. It was this carriage of the recently invented wireless that enabled contact with, and control of, the aircraft beyond the visual confines of the airfields.

By the 1930s intrepid aviators such as Alcock and Brown, Lindbergh, Earhart and Kingsford-Smith were demonstrating the feasibility of long distance flight. Britons Alcock and Brown made the first nonstop transatlantic flight when they flew from Newfoundland to Ireland in 16 hours in June, 1919 and the Australian brothers Ross and Keith Smith completed the first flight from the U.K. to Australia the same year. Charles Lindbergh made the first solo Atlantic crossing from New York to Paris in May 1927. In 1928, Amelia Earhart became the first woman to cross 'the pond* when she teamed with two countrymen for the crossing and then in 1932 she repeated the feat, this time crossing alone, and in so doing established a new record of just 13 hours and 30 minutes.

In 1927, the Australian Charles Kingsford-Smith flew around Australia and in June, 1928, together with compatriot Charles Ulm, made the first Pacific crossing from Oakland, California to Sydney with just 3 stops. 'Smithy and Ulm also made the first multi-engined Australia-England flight, the first round the world flight involving an equatorial crossing and the first Australia - New Zealand and Australia - USA flights.²

With aviators such as these proving the feasibility of long distance flight, the commercial implications were quickly realised and airlines sprang up everywhere around the world. Further impetus was given in 1934 by the worlds greatest air race from London to Melbourne. This was won by a twin-engined de Havilland Comet which reached Melbourne in less than 3 days. More importantly, second in the race - both outright and on handicap - was a passenger carrying KLM DC2 which covered the distance in just over 3° days, only 18 hours behind the Comet. It was this remarkable feat that had people asking "Why not link the capital cities with aircraft such as these?"

Since profit margins on the commercial' flights of the day were usually very thin, it was a requirement that, as far as possible, these flights operated directly from A to B. It was when other aircraft started flying simultaneously from B to A that people began to realise that they may have a problem on their hands. However, in the main, it wasn't this aspect that prompted the implementation of air traffic control. By the time of the Second World War, there still weren't too many aircraft about, at least not yet enough to warrant traffic separators. The bigger problem still was reliability and keeping track of aircraft in case something went wrong. We need to remember that these early flights were all conducted low level and thus very much susceptible to the vagaries of the weather and the constrictions of terrain. Also, there were precious few en-route radio navigation aids to assist, so nearly all flying was conducted using visual observation.

Although there weren't large numbers of aircraft taking to the skies, administrators realised that aviation was a burgeoning industry and, in the way of administrations everywhere, decided that regulations were required and that some standardisation should be applied. This was particularly important in Europe with its multiple national boundaries and languages and, in one of the lesser known decisions emanating from the Versailles Peace Treaty, the International Convention for Air Navigation (ICAN) was born. Nineteen nations signed this convention giving weight to the development of 'General Rules for Air Traffic'.

Apart from the ICAN regulations, in a practical sense, air traffic control probably has its earliest roots in that London to Amsterdam/ Brussels/Paris traffic growth. Following the world's first commercial mid-air collision on 7th April, 1922 over France, measures were taken to ensure it wasn't repeated. These measures included carriage of radio and organising a defined set of routes for all to follow visually. London's Croydon airport was expanding to cater for increasing traffic. The duties of the aviation staff at Croydon were to work out an aircraft s time of arrival, assist with take-offs and generally be with the pilot and arrange whatever they wanted'. As is often the case, another incident prompted the further expansion of these officers' role. A minor collision between an arrival and a departure at Croydon resulted in a Notice to Airmen (Notam 62/1922) from the Department of Civil Aviation which told departing pilots to obtain their order of priority and to await a signal from the controller' to take off. This represents the first recorded authority for airport staff to make a decision on the control' of traffic. This signal was to be the waving of a red flag but it soon became obvious that this signal could not be seen from all over the Croydon airfield as it had a slope to one side. To remedy this, the flag waver was moved to the first floor balcony surrounding the observation hut.

In July, 1922 the Croydon observation hut was rebuilt with a glass upper story. The purpose of this, however, was not to afford the officers a degree of comfort, or even to enable them to see aeroplanes, but to test a new direction finding wireless receiver. A little later this 'tower' became the centre for all wireless communications and one of the operators also developed a flight progress display. To keep track of the aircraft, Jimmy Jeffs stuck coloured pins into a map and with the aid of aircraft reports, arid on his own estimates, moved them along the route. He soon added little flag? to the pins detailing call signs and altitudes. If it appeared that two aircraft would pass close to each other, he was able to advise them of their proximity, which alerted the pilots to be extra vigilant. Thus was born the first advisory service'.

Notam 109/1924 amended the rules for take off permission and, in doing so, stated: When the aircraft is visible from the control tower, permission to depart will be given from the tower...". This was the first time that the term control tower' was used. These first control 'instructions' were thus limited to take off clearances and controllers were still not able to provide instructions on the best way to get to Croydon in bad weather. They could only provide advice and leave the final decision up to the pilot. Incidentally, the DF experiment proved to be a failure and the equipment was removed but the glass cabin was retained and, in the first instance, put to good use by the officers. They grew tomatoes in it!

In 1926 the system for controlling the traffic was given a new name: Wireless Traffic Control and the officers were called Control Officers. The term "control" was now becoming official and more and more in use although most aspects of the controller/pilot relationship were still based on gentlemen's agreements. This changed somewhat in 1927 when it was agreed that the controller would not only warn pilots of the proximity of other traffic but could actually decide on an appropriate course of action to resolve the confliction. 1927 also saw the start of compulsory use of the wireless service at Croydon by commercial operators, the introduction of the 'Q_ Code' and the first use of Standard Departure Routes. It is interesting to note that these short lived SDRs were not for traffic separation purposes but were instituted as noise abatement procedures following complaints from local residents! Some things never change.

1928 saw the introduction of defined and compulsory reporting points on the London-Continent routes and the year was highlighted by the opening of the new Croydon passenger terminal which was crowned by the purpose built 55 feet high control tower affording, for the first time, views over the whole airfield. Air traffic control was truly on its way in the U.K.

Despite being present in Versailles, the United States did not sign the ICAN convention. It wasn't until 1926 that it embarked upon a program to establish its own air traffic rules and it followed this in 1927 with a start on a 'Federal Airways System'. Like the Europeans, the USA introduced ATC by linking the communications service with the visual aids - the signalling lamps. The Airways System linked the major cities and basically comprised a network of radio beacons and low frequency radio ranges enabling accurate track keeping. To aid identification of the airways at night, light beacons were also installed. 1930 saw the advent of wireless communications and by 1932 all airline aircraft were installing this modern technology so that they could communicate with their ground stations advising expected arrival times and, in return, receiving weather information and company instructions. At the same time, the government was providing the flag men in the towers with radio and the first radio equipped airport traffic control tower was commissioned in Cleveland in 1930. Over the next five years, 20 other towers were similarly equipped.

Following the young army aviator, Lt. James Doolittle's demonstration of 'instrument' flying in 1929, the USA settled upon standards to cover this type of activity and in 1933 laid down Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) qualifications. With this progress, the need to separate aircraft flying at night and in bad weather was recognised.

The airlines themselves were also developing their own systems and initially, the individual airlines devised and relied upon their own methods of following their aircraft. When conflictions at the major airports such as Chicago and New York became apparent, the airline personnel commenced ad hoc cooperation and coordinated arrivals with each other. They expanded upon this by keeping the tower advised by telephone. This informal arrangement led in 1935 to an 'Interline Agreement' and formal rules to handle the traffic by Airway Traffic Control Centres' and such centres at Newark and Chicago resulted. The world's first IFR centre was commissioned in Newark on 1st December, 1935. Chicago and Cleveland centres followed in 1936. Whilst these facilities were termed Airway Traffic Control Centres, this was something of a misnomer for, in reality, they only 'controlled' airline traffic within 50 miles of the airport. The 'controllers' chalked up aircraft progress reports (received via the airline's dispatchers) on a blackboard and placed 'shrimp boats' on a map table to indicate the aircraft's position. The blackboard and map table later gave way to paper flight progress strips in movable holders on flight progress boards. However, these 'controllers' still only provided advisory information to their pilots and it wasn't until 1938, when the Civil Aeronautics Act provided Civil Air Regulations, that pilots were required to comply with ATC instructions.

Behind these scenes, the government was moving to ensure the direction and control of all flights, government, private and commercial. These moves resulted in a national air traffic control system and this was instituted by assumption of operations at the three established IFR centres in July, 1936 and the implementation of five more similar centres over the course of the next two years. The already rapid growth of air traffic can be gauged by the fact that these centres handled 30,000 movements within the first year of government operation. By 1941, a further six centres had been commissioned and, with the advent of a teletype network and a national interphone system connecting the centres, towers, weather installations and communications stations, the ATC system had made significant progress. This progress even included a prototype automatic flight data processor in Washington Centre. The entry of the U.S.A. into the Second World War put a stop to further development in this area. 1942 saw another nine centres come on line and, with around 500 controllers manning them, total coverage of the existing airways system - more than 40,000 miles of air routes in the continental United States - was provided. The early forties saw further expansion when responsibility for the approach (and departure) phase of flight was transferred from the centres to the towers. With full integration of the airways and airport traffic control facilities, a true air traffic control profession was born. The new profession saw ample career opportunities created for, by 1946, the Civil Aeronautics Board was responsible for 113 control towers and 24 centres with 1,800 controllers. The final major step in this progression came in the early fifties when adequate air-ground communications facilities were provided to the centres to enable direct controller-pilot communications thus eliminating the hitherto laborious and time consuming practise of relaying all instructions via the airline dispatchers.

At the other end of the world in that other great aviation centre Australia, air traffic control can trace its roots back to the crash of a scheduled Sydney-Melbourne flight in 1931. The resultant outcry over the loss of eight lives and the inability of search crews to even locate the wreckage of the Avro X Southern Cloud (it crashed in mountainous and heavily timbered terrain and the wreckage was not found until 1958!) led to three major recommendations. The investigation committee urged the carrying of two-way wireless in regular scheduled passenger aircraft, that ground radio stations be introduced and that more up to date weather forecasts be made available to pilots. However, before any of these recommendations were implemented, an even more serious crash occurred.

October 23rd, 1938 saw what was then one of the world s worst air disasters when a DC2 overshot Melbourne airport by twenty miles and crashed into a hill killing all fourteen passengers and four crew. The pilot had not availed himself of the installed radio range and seriously mistook his position whilst descending for what he thought was a safe approach through breaks in the cloud. ATC in Australia was then truly bom from the considerations of the investigation board aiming to make flying safer. To overcome the risk of miscalculation and errors of observation on the part of the pilot, the board believed "it would be a simple matter to introduce a system whereby the movements of aircraft could be checked by a competent person on the ground". These words also ensured that ATC started in Australia differently to everywhere else.

Firstly, and as in other countries, a rudimentary radio navigation beacon network was installed. Secondly, there were appointed Flight Checking Officers (FCOs). Unlike their American counterparts, who were employed by the airlines and who gave some directional and altitude guidance (through the airlines' dispatchers), these civil servant FCOs had a more strategic role to play. Their responsibilities were to supervise the preparation and accuracy of flight plans, to ensure fuel carried was sufficient especially if the weather en-route or at destination was marginal, to ensure changing conditions were relayed to the aircrew and to keep track of an aircraft's progress through position reports passed via the communications officers. Finally, and probably most importandy, Australia's FCOs were given the unique authority to dose an aerodrome if they became aware that weather conditions had deteriorated below defined minima and to compulsorily divert incoming aircraft to the most suitable alternate. It was hoped that this last authority would prevent a repetition of the 1938 disaster. There is no doubting Australia's unparallelled safety record over more recent years and this authority (passed on to modern air traffic controllers and retained until the late 1980s) contributed to this.

Radio facilities became more widespread during World War II and the first Flight Control Manual was published in 1943. Aerodrome Control services were equipped with radio in 1944 and full ATC centres came on line in 1949 following yet another crash. This mishap saw the already heavily overloaded 10 years old ATC system criticised and resulted in the birth of Operational Control as a separate entity. The FCO was now a Senior Operations Officer, relieved of traffic separating responsibilities and devoting his entire attention to oversight of flight briefing and planning, provision of flight information and flight deviations. Other controllers became responsible for the traffic separating functions. Raw display radar for terminal area use was introduced simultaneously in Sydney and Melbourne in 1959 with the first en route radar centre opened in Sydney in 1965.

It is appropriate also to examine here the development of aspects of air traffic control in the Netherlands, home of IFATCA's first President, as he played a role in its modern development. The Netherlands was also at the forefront in the introduction of modern techniques to handle the burgeoning traffic.

Scheduled services from Schiphol airport commenced in 1920 with a regular service to Croydon (London). This single service quickly became four services a day although these placed no great demands on the terminal facilities as each flight only accommodated two passengers. The earlier accounts of developments in England, such as carriage of radio and implementation of reporting points, were largely mirrored in The Netherlands through bi-lateral governmental agreements. The Dutch government quickly realised the importance of the growing aviation sector and, by 1939, the civil aviation authorities had made Schiphol one of Europe's leading airports with four paved runways, modern equipment and good passenger facilities. Following World War Two, which saw Schiphol totally destroyed, ATC literally had to start from scratch. Leaky, draughty wooden operational buildings were the standard as Schiphol was reborn and the cold and draughts and smoky heating stoves are still fondly (?) remembered by a fading group of originals'. The control tower consisted of a simple wooden building with a hole cut in its roof and a small glass structure placed on top so that the aerodrome controller could kind of pop his head up, look around and issue a clearance! Maybe this is the derivation of the IFR controllers' description of tower controllers: "Government pensioners sunning themselves".

In the control room, the main control tool was a large sheet of paper, which horizontally depicted the distance from Schiphol and the vertical axis represented the time from landing. Different coloured lines were drawn from the centre to represent the air routes. Call signs, altitudes (in metres then), descent and climb arrows were written in by pencil. Obviously, as the traffic became busier, the traffic picture (literally - perhaps this is where the expression comes from) became more complex and difficult to follow. Wireless/Telegraphy operators, seated opposite the controllers, handled communications and coordinated by passing back and forth slips of paper - white for flight information details, green for control instructions, arrival and departure information on red.

As the facilities at Schiphol grew outmoded and under increasing strain, some laughable measures were adopted to maintain operations. The roof of the original wooden building became so bad it was incapable of repair. Yet, it was still the main operations building and in order to keep the plotting paper and technical installations (what there were of them) dry, the maintenance people placed metal panels horizontally above the tables and equipment by means of metal wires from the ceiling. How often it happened that, as a controller was bent over the table concentrating on a traffic problem, a stream of water cascaded off the overhead panel and down his back.

By 1950, Schiphol's new tower was built (since twice superseded) and a degree of luxury was being experienced by some of the Dutch controllers. Technology hadn t yet caught up in the control centre, however, and the centre controllers witnessed the Berlin airlift in partial ignorance as many overflying aircraft en-route to Berlin didn't (and indeed couldn't) even report in to an already overloaded Amsterdam centre. Area control moved to a new centre in 1951 but nevertheless took with them the diagram paper for control. 1952 saw the implementation of airways in the Netherlands (the first in Europe) to replace all the direct routings which had become overcrowded and unsafe.

As well, the increasing demands of the Netherlands Air Force for airspace (by 1950 nearly all local airfields used for domestic KLM services had been taken over by the Air Force) made full positive control virtually impossible. In 1953, a surveillance radar was installed thus enabling a considerable increase in the movement rate. In 1952, for instance, Schiphol could only handle about ten arrivals an hour under procedural control. With the new radar, this rate increased to approximately twenty five per hour.

The original radar gave the Schiphol controllers oversight of their airspace for 100 miles around the airport but primarily it was designed for terminal use and was most effective within thirty miles. Modifications allowed for its wider use. However, the increasing speeds and higher cruising levels of aircraft soon highlighted the limitations of this 10cm radar and the Dutch CAD appealed to local industry for help - and help they did. Philips Telecommunicatie Industrie provided the main equipment, N.V.Hollandse Signaal Apparaten designed the huge antennae system and it was built by the Fokker Aircraft Factory. Still more Dutch firms contributed to the overall supply and, in fact, the only foreign component was provided by Marconi with 15 inch amber displays. This new surveillance radar (not to be confused with SSR - Secondary Surveillance Radar - the first of which in Europe was not installed until 1962 in France) provided coverage far beyond the lateral boundaries of the new airways and to a height sufficient for the emerging jet airliners. With the raising of the upper limit of their controlled airspace from 15,000 feet to 25,000 feet and the earlier replacement of Non Directional Beacons (NDBs) with VHF Omnidirectional Ranges (VORs), the Dutch controllers now had the tools they needed to satisfy the fundamental demands of air traffic control: a safe and efficient flow of traffic. Schiphol controllers had moved from asking each aircraft "Will you accept control?" to automatically routing traffic on the narrow airways, clear of military areas and providing radar vectors to final approach.

Initially, simple procedures were proscribed still reflecting the concept that it was a procedural system with radar backup. Soon, however, becoming more familiar with their equipment, the controllers became involved in formulating ftdl radar procedures and radar separation standards. It was at this juncture that a certain young controller named Leo Tekstra became prominent.

The Dutch administration developed some radar procedures for introduction with the new Schiphol Approach Unit. It would be fair to say that these did not meet with the approval of the tyro radar controllers and a sizeable row developed, one result of which was the formation of the Netherlands Guild. Leo Tekstra was one of the founders of this purely professional body and very soon had taken on the task of re-writing an acceptable set of procedures. 'Tek' and his friends eventually created a dual airways system with holding stacks at Terminal Area (TMA) entry points, Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs) and Standard Arrivals tracks (STARs). They also developed what is believed to be the world s first 'Planning and Executive Control System', a method of planning control decisions at flight progress boards but having those decisions implemented by another controller at a radar console. The Air Force's increasing demands, however, resulted in civil traffic only making limited use of the newly acquired airspace and, in this problem, the Dutch were not alone. Minutes from a meeting of the German association in 1961 (see Chapter 2) also clearly indicated the growing problems and frustrations that they were facing. In a decade and a half air traffic control in Europe had made remarkable progress technically and professionally but it was now encountering even greater problems that would prove a lot more difficult to solve. The tight national boundaries, the seeming jingoistic approach to localised problem solving and the almost insatiable demands for airspace by the military generated for the Europeans a professional jealousy for the wide open spaces and virtual seamless air traffic control systems of their North American and Australian counterparts.

Of course, not all national decisions were made in isolation. Following World War Two, the International Civil Aviation Organisation was developed³ and international agreements and regulations followed. Whilst these permitted, broadly speaking, a consistency in the making and application of rules, there remained local interpretations and nationalistic approaches to much of the problem solving. In large part, it was these uncoordinated approaches and incompatible solutions, and the ensuing problems that they created, that prompted controllers to look beyond their own borders and confer with their colleagues. So, whilst there was now in existence an International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) which established procedures and promulgated standards that most national administrations subscribed to, it was really the individual controllers who took it upon themselves to initiate true grass roots international action to solve their problems.

Right across Europe there existed pressing demands that, to the controllers, their administrations were not adequately addressing. The controllers were in a mood to do something about it. They certainly had amongst their numbers some individuals with the professional skills and necessary acumen and now, it seemed, the climate was right for them to collectively seek change based on actual operational experience. In so doing, their equal aim was to make air traffic control more than just a job but a profession and truly international. In the following chapters we shall see just how successful they were.

CHAPTER 2

The Formation of The International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations — IFATCA

Was there a need for a body like IFATCA?

Even today, many people are still not aware of the occupation of air traffic control and few comprehend just what is involved in 'keeping aircraft apart' and, sometimes, getting them (closer) together. For those of us that do, it is all too easy to sit back and take for granted the modern air traffic control systems (where they exist), the sophisticated aircraft that use them and the myriad components and facilities required to handle them safely and efficiently. It certainly wasn't always so, as the accounts in the previous chapter indicate. By the 1950s, technology was starting to catch up but, as always, demand was outstripping the authorities' ability (or willingness?) to keep pace for traffic was now doubling around every five years and the controllers' frustrations were beginning to show. In Europe in particular, air traffic controllers were being hamstrung by outmoded procedures and severe airspace limitations placed on them by the constraints of multiple national boundaries, nationalistic sentiments and cold war considerations. National trade unions existed but, in the main, they were ill equipped to cater to the needs of such a young and rapidly expanding specialist profession. Some local professional' organisations had sprung up in attempts to deal with the multiple problems facing the controllers but it became apparent that, because of the universality and nature of the problems, something more was needed.

The following extract from the minutes of a German Air Traffic Controllers' Association (the VDF - Verband Deutscher Flugleiter) meeting in 1961 highlights some of the problems the German controllers were facing in this era - and which were typical of others as well - and clearly demonstrates the growing need for an organisation to make representations on behalf of air traffic controllers.

"From November 23rd-24th, the German ATC Association held its 1961 annual conference in Nurnberg. The following resolution concerning critical problems of the Air Navigation Services was passed by delegates from Air Traffic Services units at all German airports.

Whereas the rapid rise of civil and military traffic in recent years and the grooving density of private sports and cross country flights have caused great difficulties for air traffic control, and

Whereas the forthcoming introduction of civil Mach 2 transport aircraft will even more affect the safety of air navigation, Now therefore, the following requirements were considered indispensable for the maintenance of safe and orderly systems of air traffic control:

A more intensive integration of civil and military air traffic control services in order to guarantee the expeditious and orderly flow of all air traffic. For this purpose, the control of all military flights, except those in the very vicinity of military airbases, shall gradually be transferred to civil air traffic control units, because military en-route flights and their approach and departure procedures are inseparably interlaced with civil traffic and therefore, cannot be controlled independently.

An immediate step-by-step extension of controlled airspace up to an altitude of 40,000 feet in order to achieve positive control of civil and military jet traffic, which is at present flying uncontrolled and is only provided with Flight Information Service.

All power driven aircraft shall be equipped with radio sets of adequate technical quality, if necessary with financial support by the government. Thus a continuous two-way radio communication with the ground units can be maintained, such a communication being the pre-requisite for the control of this traffic if required.

Experimental introduction of positive control of all air movements in a limited portion of air space over the Federal Republic to gather experience in the control of VFR flights within congested areas.

To increase the safety of flight operations, control towers shall be established at certain private airfields which are highly frequented or critically located in the vicinity of controlled airfields.

The aviation public is called upon to support air traffic authorities in the implementation of this program which is bound to increase safety in air navigation and to protect the public from avoidable dangers. It is particularly necessary to provide the competent aviation authorities with adequate financial means so that better technical equipment and facilities can be installed and highly qualified personnel can be employed in sufficient numbers to ensure efficient operations. The problem of how to avoid accidents in private sports and cross country flying was discussed by a working committee of the German ATC Association. The result of these investigations and the resolutions adopted at the Nurnberg annual conference will be passed to the appropriate Federal Air Navigation Authorities."

Reading these words it is not hard to sympathise with the German controllers of the day. Not only did they have to contend with six foreign air forces on their soil and poor attendant coordination and communications but further various problems were abounding and the authorities were simply not keeping up. Whilst their conference in Nurnberg had concentrated on domestic problems and their endeavours to solve them, it had earlier already become obvious to the German VDF that unilateral action on a national basis was not going to solve all their problems. Not only that but it was apparent the same problems were either mutually shared or were migrating across borders and becoming trans-national in their nature and effect. It was obvious that the authorities were finding it difficult to deal with cross border problems affecting their controllers and impacting on their practises. Some organisations existed to deal with international aviation matters and, in the main, the national administrations continued to place their confidence in the International Civil Aviation Organisation to address their air traffic control problems. To the individuals concerned, however, it was equally obvious that an ATC-specific organisation was needed too.

The idea of a world body for controllers was actually first proposed in 1956 by Mr. Jacob Wachtel, founder and first chairman of the Israel ATC Association. Wachtel started corresponding with ATCs all over the world exploring the possibilities of an international organisation. Over the next few years he wrote to associations in many countries on the six continents and received positive feedback. Because of these responses, Wachtel went so far as to plan a first meeting of representatives of various associations in Jerusalem in 1959 but difficulties intervened (mostly in the nature of government refusal to assist potential delegates) and the meeting had to be cancelled. As a consequence of the kind of problems existing in Germany (and similarly in many other countries), some national professional groups had already been independently established in Europe and thoughts were turning towards exchanging information on ATC problems and related subjects. The German association, in particular, was of such a mind and in 1959 they invited the ATC associations of neighbouring countries to their annual assembly. The Swiss were quick to accept the invitation and, in so doing, further suggested that all European associations could be invited with the idea of permitting a wider exchange of views and closer collaboration. Whether this proposal actually envisioned the establishment of a federation is unclear but nevertheless it was a positive step towards that concept. Picking up on the Swiss idea, the German association, and particularly its President, Hans Thau, then became the driving force behind the organisation of an actual meeting.

ph1.04
'Tek' Tekstra meeting Jacob Wachtel in Tel Aviv.

And so it was that, because of the existing widespread problems and the resultant communication of mutual interest groups, and perhaps in part because of the failed Israeli initiative, on 25th and 26th November, 1959 some thirty nine delegates from fourteen countries gathered in Frankfurt, Germany for discussions in an attempt to coordinate their approaches to the problems. In an opening speech, Thau frankly stated that a world- wide organisation should be formed and thus, from the outset, defined what was, until then, probably no more than a vague thought in most people's minds. However, Thau was, if nothing else, a realist and he further said that it would be too much to expect that this goal could be immediately achieved.

At the commencement of the first working session of this historic gathering, Thau stated that since Germany had only reacted to Switzerland's initial suggestion (of inviting all the European associations), he did not believe that Germany should chair the meeting. As a result of this unselfish act, it was further proposed that the chairman of the Netherlands Guild, being the most centrally positioned represented country, be elected chairman of the session and so the Dutch Guild's President, Leo Tekstra, assumed the chair.

Arising from their discussions was a declaration of their intention to found a European Federation of ATC Associations. The resolution said, inter alia, "It is indispensable that air traffic controllers of all nations be united in a world-wide professional Federation for the furtherance of safe and efficient air navigation and for the protection of their common professional interest." Despite this stated need for a world-wide' federation, the fourteen associations representatives present still declared their intention "... to found a European Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations."

Demonstrating typical Teutonic efficiency, the German association had wisely prepared draft Articles of Constitution and Bye-Laws to facilitate discussions. These were adopted with minor amendments only and by the end of the first morning, the delegates were able to move on to more prosaic matters such as membership fees for the new organisation. It was deemed prudent to finalise this matter so early in order that prospective member associations would have some idea as to what membership of this new Federation would cost them.

A working group was formed then to prepare the foundation of EFATCA. This group consisted of representatives from Belgium (Mr. Sadet), Germany (Mr. Thau) and the Netherlands (Mr. Tekstra and Mr. Meyers). When this working group met on the 17th June, I960 in Amsterdam, they were joined by Mr. Cerf from France and Mr. Pearson from the United Kingdom.

The working group decided from the outset to make the draft Convention and Constitution as acceptable as possible for all potential EFATCA members. They resolved to submit the final text to the different associations for approval with reply from them by 1st September, I960 to enable a founding meeting to be held in the northern autumn of 1961. The working group also suggested that a permanent headquarters be established in London and that it be the venue of the foundation meeting because of its better accessibility and avenues for publicity.

Of the fourteen associations present in Frankfurt, only the twelve founder countries ratified the draft constitution and convention. It transpired that Sweden had not yet formally constituted their own association and were thus not yet in a position to ratify the fledgling organisation's drafts. The 14th association, the Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers of the United Kingdom, had other problems. The Guild decided to conduct a referendum of its members on joining EFATCA and received a disappointing result. At the time, the GATCO consisted of 500 members and their officers expected a return from their referendum of 400 and thus set 300 as a quorum for the response. They received only 186 returns, of which 148 were in favour.

Whilst the returned proportion in favour was encouraging, the Guild prudently decided that numerically it was insufficient and reluctantly decided to delay ratification and therefore application.

Because of this development, the venue and timing for the foundation meeting had to be re-scheduled and it was finally decided upon for 19th and 20th October, 1961 in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

So the various European delegates came to Amsterdam to found their European federation. However, during the course of the conference it was made known (partly from Jacob Wachtel's correspondence over the preceding years) that at least twenty other national organisations also had expressed an interest in joining such a federation. These included the United States and Canada and, in fact, at the U.S. Air Traffic Control Association's fifth annual conference in San Francisco in I960, Canadian delegates had mentioned to the EFATCA working group members present (from Belgium, France & West Germany), the possibilities of an international federation. Those present in Amsterdam also came to the realisation that a world wide, and thus truly international, federation would provide a much better base for cooperation with other international aviation organisations.

Eventually the founding conference passed the following resolution:

"Whereas the objects, functions and problems ofATCare of a similar nature in all countries irrespective of national boundaries, and Whereas during the Constitutional Conference it became apparent that a number of national Associations outside Europe are interested in joining an international ATC Federation, and

Whereas the foundation of a regional European Federation would unnecessarily restrict such Federation from accepting affiliations from outside Europe, and

Whereas confining the activities of the Federation to a certain region could unduly hamper the establishment of worldwide relations, Now therefore, the Constitutional Conference resolved to change the name of the Federation from European Federation of ATC Associations into 'International Federation of Air Traffic Controllers' Associations'. "

This late decision to change from a purely regional organisation to a genuine world-wide body naturally has had far reaching effects as we shall see. It showed great wisdom and foresight and ably demonstrated an important facet of an air traffic controller's make up - the ability to think quickly and adapt rapidly to changing circumstances.

The late decision also produced a curious result which exists to this day. In the lead up to the founding conference, the organisers sought from the controllers' ranks ideas for an emblem to epitomise and symbolise the ATC profession and to carry an image of the soon-to-be-formed federation. The delegates to the 'European' Federation's founding conference were presented with a choice of three proposals. The delegates unanimously settled upon the design by Mr. Gerhard Stallmach, a senior controller from the Frankfurt ATC Centre. Stallmach's design featured representative aircraft shapes and a control tower cleverly worked into the bottom line acronym EFATCA. When the delegates present elected to change the Federation's title, they decided to retain the new emblem but necessarily with the slight amendment in the acronym to IFATCA. However, in changing the E to an I, and with an I being a much narrower letter than an E, they neglected to move the remaining letters a little to the left to compensate. The current emblem's acronym is thus slightly off-centre with the I only partly filling the space that the E was designed to occupy. This mild curiosity serves as a continual reminder of the pre-history and earliest days of the Federation. Also, the emblem has remained unchanged and still looks as fresh, relevant and illustrative today as it did in 1960.

Now the world's air traffic controllers had their representative body although, of course, not all were yet members. Most still didn't even know about IFATCA. To promote the Federation, the founding conference determined upon a series of Objects. These were (and still are):

To operate as a non-profit and non-political Federation of air traffic controllers' associations;

To promote safety, efficiency and regularity in international air navigation;

To assist and advise in the development of safe and orderly systems of air traffic control;

To promote and uphold a high standard of knowledge and professional efficiency among air traffic controllers;

To protect and safeguard the interests of the air traffic control profession;

To make mutual benefit affiliations with other international professional organisations

To strive for a world wide Federation of air traffic controllers' associations.

In order to follow these aims and objects, IFATCA will

Closely cooperate with national and international aviation authorities and other institutions or persons concerned with air navigation;

Assist in the development of new procedures and facilities necessary and useful for the safety of international air traffic;

Collect and distribute information on professional problems and developments;

Levy affiliation fees, annual subscriptions and charges upon its Member Associations and collect annual subscriptions from its Corporate Members to provide the funds for an effective management of the Federations activities;

Issue an official journal and other publications for the purpose of promulgating and advancing matters of air traffic control;

Sponsor and support the passage of legislation and regulations which will increase and protect the safety of air navigation through the improvement of working conditions in air traffic control.

The distinction of delivering the opening address of the Constitutional Conference belongs to Mr. J.W.E Backer, who was the Director-General of the Department of Civil Aviation in the Netherlands. Mr. Backer's speech, whilst short, was notable for two things. Firstly, he gave clear recognition to the increasing importance of the role of the air traffic controller and secondly, he emphasised the need for a Federation (and its Member Associations), such as IFATCA, to remain separate from trade union interests.

In fact, in those early days, it seems as though trade union paranoia was rampant. Almost every guest at early IFATCA functions delivered the message on the need to remain aloof from trade union activities. Eurocontrol's Mr. R.M. Soward, at the first annual conference, commenced his speech by stating "At the outset I must emphasise that the Eurocontrol Association (sic) is represented at this Conference on the understanding that the aims of IFATCA are technical and professional and that the Federations constitution specifically excludes from inactivities matters which are the prime objects of trade unions or staff associations." Probably, today such a statement would be interpreted as interference in a legitimate organisations affairs. However, in 1961 it seemed necessary for almost everyone to reiterate this thought and the first President himself, Mr. Tekstra, also saw the need to mention it in his inaugural speech when he said "IFATCA excludes from its activities all matters which are the prime object of trade unions or staff associations. Although it will be now clear that IFATCA cannot be a trade union......

To be fair, the ATC delegates themselves were also convinced of this necessity. Though most of them were members of industrial organisations already, they came to Amsterdam with the firm conviction of excluding all trade union type matters and activities from their repertoire and of making their new Federation a purely technical body. If that's what it took to form the international body they so desperately needed, that's what they would do. Despite some grave difficulties over the years, this non-trade union approach has continued. (See Chapter 8)

It seems appropriate here to include the very first speech to an IFATCA conference. It is significant for the recognition it affords of the profession. The speech also clearly indicates the reservations some felt about the advent of a new organisation in civil aviation. It was to be a forerunner of many such expressions of caution and even misgivings. In his opening address to the Amsterdam conference, Mr. Backer said:

"The profession of air traffic control is quite a new one. When aviation started ive knew only one profession: the aviator, the man who climbed into the machine and had normally played a good part if not the whole of it, in the process of manufacturing the aeroplane. Very soon the pure technicians joined the pilot, later on followed by the wireless operators, navigators and of course, the stewards and stewardesses.

On the ground a number of professions were introduced to give the pilot the necessary assistance for conducting a regular, orderly and safe flight. The meteorologist, the ground radio-operator and the dispatcher are with aviation nearly since its earliest days.

After them came the air traffic controller, who joined the ground services when the growing flow of traffic and the introduction of instrument flying on a regular basis required control from the local towers or air traffic control centres. The air traffic controller in the 1920s began his career with an Aldis lamp and fireballs which equipment is not so far from the smoke signals of the primitives. With the rapid development of aviation and communication techniques the controllers' tools rapidly expanded to the present system of automatically recorded radio- telephony conversations, radar displays, flight progress boards and computers. The responsibility of the air traffic controller is far greater and its work far more complicated than 20 or even 10 years ago.

The position of the air traffic controller therefore deserves careful attention. The Netherlands Department of Civil Aviation has constantly been aware of the developments, which affect the position and the responsibility of the air traffic controllers.

With the jet age being realised, automation being indispensable and supersonics at the doorstep, air traffic control is facing a number of complicated problems. I, therefore, welcomed the creation of the Netherlands Guild of Air Traffic Controllers, which, as its fellow organisations in other countries, can undoubtedly do constructive work for the development of air traffic control. It is however, in my opinion, of the highest importance, that the objective of a guild is kept clean cut and not mixed with trade union interests. This is the only way to really and objectively pursue the perfection of air traffic control.

Aviation is since long no national matter, especially not in Europe. The establishment of an international Federation of air traffic controllers' associations is therefore a logical step, if — and I would stress this again — it is the aim to enable the national associations to widen their range of vision to study jointly the problems of interest for the development of the air traffic control art and last but not least, to create a better understanding and good, fellowship among controllers serving international aviation.

I am glad to welcome those who came from abroad to this country, where since ages the advocates for international cooperation found hospitality. I wish your Federation a very good start and a fruitful life."

Other dignitaries present in Amsterdam included Mr. H.E. Pujade, Deputy Representative ICAO European & African Office, Capt. C.C. Jackson, Executive Secretary of the International Federation of Air Line Pilots' Associations (IFALPA), Mr. R.M. Soward, Operations Division Officer from Eurocontrol and Mr. J.L. Gilmore, Technical Liaison Officer European-African Region of the International Air Transport Association (IATA). All these gentlemen took great interest in the foundation of IFATCA and during the entire conference rendered very helpful advice which contributed to its successful accomplishment. They all delivered encouraging addresses during the meeting.

1961_Steps
Tap here to see the legend

Of all the assistance granted, none was more valuable than that of IFALPA's Capt. Jackson. Capt. Jackson commenced his speech with the words "It must be at least three years ago that I first heard of the early moves of the Federation (sic) of ATCs to found an international association (sic) and I have from time to time watched the progress made with considerable interest. During this gestation period, I have also been able, here and there, to offer a little advice in the administrative field." Capt. Jackson demonstrated considerable modesty as he was very much a guiding force in the formulation of the Objects of the Federation and provided substantial guidance with the fine details of forming an international organisation. (IFALPA was itself only formed in 1948 with 13 member associations and by the time of IFATCA's birth it had attained a membership of some 42 national pilot associations.) Indeed, Capt. Jackson took a very active part in formulating IFATCA's convention, constitution and bye-laws, a daunting task.

A little later in Capt. Jackson's address, he raised a topic which is very dear to the hearts of all honorary organisations - finances. He said "I mentioned earlier the voluntary nature of our two organisations. In my experience voluntary organisations are always short of funds. However, I would stress that funds are not everything for, although ATCs may not be very well off..... at least they have this very great advantage; everyone here will have spent most of his working life in improvisation of some sort - improvising traffic procedures, communication systems, rosters, building layout. Indeed I am sure, therefore, that if anybody can make out on the basis of an inadequate budget, it will be a group of air traffic controllers. This they have been doing all their lives."

These turned out to be prophetic words. It was to be some considerable time before IFATCA could call itself financially secure and a great many individual ATCs are still making do threefold on inadequate budgets: within their national ATC systems, their local association and personally.

Some fifteen national associations were represented at the founding conference in Amsterdam. The twelve that signed as originators of the Federation were Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, (Federal Republic of) Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Switzerland. Also present were representatives from Israel, Great Britain and Greece.

By an unanimous vote, those present elected the following officials to guide the Federation in its infancy:

Mr. L.N. Tekstra, chairman of The Netherlands Guild as President,
Mr. M. Cerf, General Secretary of the French ATC Association,
First Vice-President, Mr. R. Sadet, Vice-President of the Belgian Guild,
Second Vice-President, Mr. H. Thrane, Treasurer of the Danish ATC Association,
Treasurer, Mr. H.W. Thau, Chairman of the German ATC Association, General Secretary, and
Mr. W.H. Endlich, Editor of Germany's 'Der Flugleiter' as Editor of the IFATCA Journal of ATC.

The highlight of the Constitutional Conference was the inaugural speech by the newly elected President, Mr. Leo 'Tek' Tekstra from the Netherlands.

"The first official function of the elected President of IFATCA was one of the easiest points for the working group to decide upon: this should be the inaugural speech at this meeting. There appeared to be only one difficulty, namely the fact that the President would be elected on the day prior to this meeting, which would not give him much chance to prepare his speech. When I was approached for the candidature of president of the Federation for the first year of its existence, I realised that the success of this first official meeting would greatly depend on the publicity given to this event and also on the way that IFATCA would be presented to the world of aviation.

This speech has therefore been quite a headache to me in the last few weeks, because I am not at all sure whether it is possible to explain the character of a new born baby immediately after its arrival. Nevertheless, I can make an effort to explain to you how this European family of air traffic controllers has made the preparations for today's arrival and what we expect of it in the future."

ph1.03
'Tek' Tekstra addressing the delegates during the opening of the Amsterdam founding conference, October 1961.

Tekstra then welcomed various individual dignitaries and went on:

"Our next welcome is directed towards those national aviation authorities that have accepted our invitation to stand at the cradle of this youngest of international- aviation organisations. We know by experience, that in this field, nothing can be accomplished without the cooperation of the responsible national authorities, who are at the same time the employers of the preponderance of air traffic controllers. This double relationship sometimes gives rise to difficulties on a national level. We sincerely hope that our international activities will help to foster a. good relationship between controllers as professional men and the international and national aviation authorities. IFATCA does not intend to interfere with the national relationship employer-employee, which in our opinion should be left to the national trade unions, whose prime interest is the social welfare of their members. Until this moment, air traffic control has been a kind of 'secret service'.

The public in general, and, the flying public in particular, are hardly aware of the safety services rendered to aviation. One of our greatest concerns is the publicity given to our profession. We would like the public to know that it is, after all, a quite remarkable fact that, thanks to air traffic control, thousands of aircraft are flown safely everyday around our globe. "

Tekstra then proceeded to welcome the representatives of several airline companies and mentioned the difficulties being experienced in air traffic control through the introduction of jet aircraft. In going on to welcome the many air traffic controllers present, he emphasised that

"The main constitutional principle of IFATCA is that of cooperation on technical professional matters, the fundamental objects being the furtherance of safe and efficient air navigation and protection of the common professional interests. In negotiations with national and international authorities we have met with some doubt with regard to the technical pureness of the objects of IFATCA. Some of the objects appear to give rise to the suspicion that IFATCA will deal with trade union affairs.

I am not giving away a secret when I say that the ATC profession is in most countries not one to get rich in. In many countries the social status of the profession is very low compared with its responsibilities. It is therefore quite understandable that some national authorities, who are best informed on terms of employment of controllers, approach the Federation with a certain measure of suspicion. Is it not natural to assume that the first interest of the controller in his profession is the question of how it pays off At first glance this question must be answered with a sincere affirmative and there cannot be any doubt about the fact that this consideration has greatly contributed to our feeling of belonging together, which in turn resulted in the Frankfurt meeting of November, 1959- "One of the indispensable qualities of the profession, however, is common sense^ We do not regard the objectives of trade unions by any means dishonourable, but as this Federation is a Federation of national associations it is quite clear that its objects can only be those which they have in common. As some national associations are purely technical, whilst others nationally perform the dual function of technical association and trade union, it has been a principle of the working group and of yesterday's constitutional meeting to ensure that IFATCA shall not be a Federation of trade unions but a purely professional organisation.

IFATCA excludes from its activities all matters which are the prime object of trade unions or staff associations.

Although it will now be clear that IFATCA cannot be a trade union, it will be equally clear that it is a practical impossibility to draw a clearly defined dividing line between the fields of activity of trade unions and a professional organisation like IFATCA. They are bound to overlap on certain issues which they approach independently from different angles in accordance with their distinctive constitutional principle. Certain aspects of trade union activity, generally ranked by them as of secondary importance, are for IFATCA of prime interest. Take for example, professional training and advancement of professional knowledge. "Where IFATCA declines activity on matters which are the prime object of trade unions, we consider this to be their national negotiative capacity on terms of employment.

IFATCA reserves the right to study independently all matters which have a direct bearing on its main constitutional principle of safety in air navigation. As such we consider, for instance, professional training, working conditions, by which we mean the environment factors affecting personal efficiency, medical checks, pensionable age, etc."

In turning his attention to the articles of the Federation's convention, the new President highlighted the first four articles for particular mention.

"In accepting the first article, the member associations bind themselves 'to promote, maintain and enhance the stature of the air traffic control profession and to develop and disseminate knowledge of the control of air traffic in all its phases and applications.' This task, taken up voluntarily, calls for a good measure of idealism, a quality which appears to have become a rare asset of humanity, especially in the better off countries of our Western Hemisphere. Only the future can prove whether the air traffic controllers who founded this Federation expected too much of the individual members of our national associations. We fully realise that we have a great variety of professional problems which call for a solution. We do not have the pretension to know all the answers, but we have reason to believe that we have inside knowledge of the questions.

A clear statement of the problems will reduce half the work of coming to a solution. We intend to form working groups or standing committees, which consist of a number of members of the same national association, to collect all information on a given subject in order to study this information material and prepare working papers to be distributed to members associations or to be presented at an IFA TCA conference, where it can be discussed as basic material to determine IFAFCA policy.

The second and third articles simply define the principles of the Federation: cooperation and exchange of information. Communication and transportation will be the most money-consuming items on the Federation's budget, and this will have a direct bearing on the effectiveness of the fourth article. The member associations accept the principle that the Federation should be represented at any meeting, in addition to meetings of ICAO, which has under consideration matters associated with air traffic control and that, where possible, an observer should be sent to such meetings.

These four articles of the convention form the fundamental issue of IFATCA's existence. It should be borne in mind, however, that IFATCA's foundation is only intended to be a first step towards a much farther goal: the ultimate foundation of a world wide professional Federation. Contacts with associations outside Europe have already been made, and in preliminary discussions agreement has been reached on the fundamental objects, which shall be the same as those of IFATCA. "We are confident on the feasibility of this ultimate goal but we realise that it is not just around the corner. Therefore we start our work in Europe with even more determination, in the knowledge that we are sincerely trying to make a contribution to safety in air navigation, to which the professional life of every air traffic controller is dedicated. Thank you."

As Leo Tekstra said at the outset, this speech was to be extremely important. The original Executive Board identified the need at this first official function to clearly spell out IFATCA's charter of involvement whilst at the same time indicating to concerned persons and organisations that the new organisation would not become involved in affairs which were the domain of the trade unions. Tekstra's words neatly encapsulated the feeling and need for controllers to associate and at the same time answered the sceptics as to their intentions. The speech represented a perfect mix of optimism and realism. It also clearly stated IFATCA's intention to be involved as much as possible in meetings it thought relevant and to make considered contribution by way of its decision making processes. At its first exposure, IFATCA's opening move proved very successful. It satisfied both its proponents and potential opponents and showed a reasonable and responsible face to the world. In the first instance, necessarily this face was that of Leo Tekstra. It may have given him a headache but he didn't disappoint.

Just who was Leo 'Tek' Tekstra, the first President of IFATCA?

Leo Nicolaas Tekstra was born on 4th February, 1927 in Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands. From the earliest days he was known as Tekkie' and subsequently 'Tek'.

After the liberation of Leeuwarden in April, 1945 'Tek' volunteered for the Marines but instead was offered the option of aircrew training. Having accepted that, he was posted to England to join the RAF Volunteer Reserve, Dutch Section, as an aircrew cadet and eventually obtained his pilot's wings in September, 1947. Back home as a sergeant pilot, he commenced training for a navigator's licence in order to gain a commission in the Royal Netherlands Navy. After training on Fireflies, 'Tek' switched to twin engined aircraft and in the Spring of 1949 became a staff pilot in the navigator school. Gradually, he obtained all licences as a link trainer and IFR procedures instructor.

03_PresidentTekstra
Leo 'Tek' Tekstra

For medical reasons, 'Tek' left the navy in July, 1952 and embarked upon a new career - air traffic control. He joined the Netherlands Civil Aviation Authority, training as a tower controller at Schiphol airport. He was licensed in 1953 and completed the Traffic Director's Radar Course with the U.K. Ministry of Transport School of ATC at Hum (Bournemouth) airport in July, 1955.

When Approach Control was introduced at Schiphol in 1957, 'Tek' became one of the first radar approach controllers. Already by this time, Tekstra was demonstrating a keen interest in procedures, so it was no surprise that he was asked to rewrite the radar procedures for Schiphol as his colleagues had largely rejected the original procedures. This task had to be accomplished in his spare time since the staffing situation was such that a full time procedures specialist did not exist and indeed was unthought of. With a small number of colleagues, working groups were formed and they developed a more acceptable and user-friendly system for their colleagues and pilots alike.

The move to the new control tower in Schiphol's new terminal in 1967 saw 'Tek's' last duties as an active air traffic controller. Following this move, he became a full time research and development specialist. Then, in September, 1969 Leo Tekstra reached the pinnacle of his ATC career when he became Chief of Amsterdam/Schiphol ATS/COM units. Finally, 'Tek' retired in 1985 - pensioned with honours — after exactly forty years of government service.

Already demonstrating an interest in union-type activities, "Tek' had been an active member of one of the civil service trade unions from 1953 and was a member of the unions' consultative body to the Director of Air Traffic Services until 1965. The Netherlands Guild of Air Traffic Controllers was formed in September, 1957 after a major row with management about the risks involved with the original radar procedures mentioned above. From the outset, this matter was deemed by the controllers to be purely professional, as opposed to industrial, and it became the basis for the formation of the Dutch Guild. It seems only natural now that 'Tek' was on the Board of the Guild from the outset and indeed, at the very first meeting of the Guilds Board in 1958, a reshuffle of the offices brought 'Tek' Tekstra to the position of Chairman, which he held until 1966.

Being totally innocent in the workings of an ATC guild, one of the first expenditures of the infant organisation was on a booklet on how to run an association of this nature. Needless to say, the book was a wise investment and had a long and very useful life and, to this day, 'Tek' considers it one of the smartest investments he ever made.

The Netherlands Guild sent three delegates to the meeting in Frankfurt in November, 1959 to consider the formation of the European grouping. Again, it seemed natural that 'Tek' was appointed as chairman of the working group to prepare the final drafts for the Convention, Constitution and Bye-laws and this in turn led to the election of Leo Nicolaas Tekstra as President of IFATCA at the Constitutional meeting in Amsterdam in October, 1961.

Somewhere in all this involvement, Tekstra found time for a domestic life as well, but only just!

July, 1949 saw the happy union of Leo and Toos. Their first child, a boy, was born in April, 1950 and he was quickly followed by a daughter in August, 1951. Two more sons followed in April, 1956 and April, 1962. With IFATCA conferences initially confirmed as always being held in April, this fourth birth date showed that even IFATCA Presidents are capable of a marked lack of foresight on some matters. Expecting a child exactly in the hectic period between the Constitutional conference and the first annual conference in Paris had to place strains on the Tekstra marriage. Domestic relations obviously (and not unexpectedly) became strained in this period and, to make matters worse, immediately after the Amsterdam conference, 'Tek' had to depart for England for six weeks for his precision radar course. Three weeks into the Hum sojourn, it was mutually agreed that 'Tek' should fly home for a weekend in order to save the marriage. It is history now that this errand of love was successful for Leo and Toos celebrated their golden wedding anniversary in July, 1999.

But of course, that wasn't the end of it. As the children grew, their most familiar sight of their father was of his back since 'Tek's' writing desk was in a corner of the living room. The demands of office and the lack of technology in those days meant many long hours at that desk. Without fax machines, word processors, printers and e-mail, 'Tek' and his fellow officersall their correspondence on airmail paper with carbon paper creating copies for the others. The last couple of copies were usually very faint and probably contributed in no small measure to eyesight problems amongst the Board members of the day.

'Tek' himself readily admits that the pressures of the impending conference each year and the exhaustion and resultant workload afterwards left little time for birthday celebrations and his absences and self imposed workload drew many a tear from his children's eyes. When you commit yourself to a dream, it is difficult to pull back from it, even when the cost is self-evident.

IFATCA extracts a heavy price from its honorary officials and has done so from the first days until the present time. In recognition of this, this account of IFATCA has included a brief description of its first President and some of the pressures that came to bear upon him and his family. This has been done, not specifically to single out one person, but to illustrate the kind of individual air traffic controller who typically elects to represent his colleagues on the world scene and to highlight the sacrifices which each and every officer and his family must make and the pressures they must endure. That IFATCA has continued to attract the calibre of official that it has and the manner in which they and their families have acceded to the Federations demands is nothing short of astonishing. The President and his fellow Executive Board members (and, increasingly, other representatives such as Standing Committee Chairmen) give up incredible amounts of time to pursue the Federation's objectives and, no less, their families make an equivalent contribution.

In applauding an officer's contribution and occasionally granting awards such as the Scroll of Honour, the Directors at conference are acknowledging that involvement. Deservedly so, and without exception, in their annual reports and farewell speeches, IFATCA's officers in turn rightly give due recognition to their families for their contribution. Without it, IFATCA could not function.

CHAPTER 3

The First Decade of IFATCA 1961-1970

One of the first decisions of the Constitutional Conference in Amsterdam was to hold the inaugural annual conference in Paris. The brevity of the period from that first meeting in October, 1961 to the first annual conference only six months later in April, 1962 imposed a heavy workload on the new officers of the Federation and placed great strains on the fledgling organisation. That they managed to hold that first annual conference, and do so successfully, again demonstrated the remarkable resource-fullness of these air traffic controllers. In his opening address in Paris, 'Tek' Tekstra stated that "we have indeed started this Federation with little more than a lot of enthusiasm and a prominent lack of experience and therefore she months of experience is quite something to look back upon. Having supervised the activities of the officers in this short period, I must say that their enthusiasm has more than compensated for their lack of experience. That first six months was almost entirely devoted to building up a form of administration, to widespread international publication of the aims and objectives of the new organisation and to preparations for the first annual conference. One has to remember that each and every one of these men were full time air traffic controllers working in an era with no automation and with ATC systems that were coming under increasing strain as aviation transitioned from the piston engine to the jet age. Not yet in existence were today's familiar high level airways, sophisticated radar systems and efficient flow control techniques. These men, as did all others in their control rooms, put in long and often hectic hours and then, in their spare time, devoted nearly all of that personal time to selflessly establishing an organisation for the betterment, not of themselves or their colleagues directly, but of international civil aviation in general.

IFATCA's first annual conference was held in Paris from 25th - 27th April, 1962. The French hosts, Association Professionnelle des Controleurs de la Circulation Aerienne (APCA), excellently prepared for this important gathering and received valuable assistance and cooperation from Aeroport de Paris and the electronics industry, thus establishing from the outset a cooperative venture that is mutually beneficial to controllers and manufacturers alike.

In the intervening period between the Constitutional conference and the first annual conference, IFATCA's ranks had already begun to swell. On the 5th January, 1962 a letter of application for affiliation had been received from the ATC Association of Israel and it was circulated for the approval of the original twelve Directors. (Such procedure was normal in those days. Later in the sixties it was decided to only accept applicant associations on the vote of the Directors at conference.) The vote was unanimous and Israel thus has the distinction of becoming the first new Member Association (MA) to join IFATCA as well as being the first from outside Europe. However, Israel, having been elected by postal ballot, was then unable to be present in Paris because of travel costs, a not unfamiliar story which exists to this day.

Subsequently, at the conference, further applications were received from the British Guild of ATCOs and the brand new Swedish ATC Association. Both these associations were represented in Paris and were duly elected by unanimous decision. In his welcome speech to these new MAs, the President said that the affiliation of the British Guild should be considered as a milestone. Although not a founder member, they had played an active part in forming the Federation and there was no doubt that it would be able to assist the Federation with its valuable experience. Welcoming the Swedish association, the President stated that the formation of IFATCA had proved to be the incentive for the Swedish controllers to form their own association.

Thus, by the conclusion of the first conference, IFATCA's ranks had grown to fifteen Member Associations with a representation of just over 2,000 individual air traffic controllers. Further underscoring the already international flavour of IFATCA, letters expressing best wishes were received from Iraq and Cyprus. Unlike today’s major conferences, that first international gathering of air traffic controllers was a relatively modest affair although none the less important for that. It was convened over just three days with really only two of those days devoted to specific air traffic control matters. The first day, Wednesday 25th April, was given over to an internal meeting of the elected officers, the second day occupied the administrative part of the conference and Friday the 27th saw a demonstration of ATC facilities at Orly airport and lectures on recent technical and procedural developments. Thus was set a theme for conferences of the future. As now, the delegates arrived slightly ahead of time and got together for a 'meet and greet party' on the evening of the 25th. (Although the first official day of the conference, as already noted, that Wednesday was really only for the elected Board members' meeting so the various delegates arrived 'early' on that day.) Even in those days, there had been a relatively high degree of international contact and friends had been made in the ATC profession far and wide. In the official record of the conference is an observation from the Editor, Walter Endlich: "the first person he met in the hotel lounge was U.S. ATCA President Joe Moraski (accompanied by Councillor Tirey Vickers). Needless to say, and off the record, that old friends meeting in a town like Paris will not go to bed early." Another precedent for IFATCA conferences was set.

Probably the most important decision to come from the first conference was that reached to establish a special committee for financial affairs. Under the chair of the Treasurer, one of the duties of the 'Financial Affairs' Standing Committee (originally SC VIII) was consideration of a basis for a sliding scale of annual subscriptions for large associations. Another was how far assistance could and should be extended to applicants suffering undue financial hardship, which may prevent them from becoming members. The former question was of particular relevance to the USA association, which at the time had some 8,000 air traffic controller members. The Air Traffic Control Association (ATCA), whilst showing interest in joining IFATCA, was effectively prevented, at least in part, from doing so for a number of years because of the difficulties surrounding the potential cost involved. Even though, compared to many, they were an affluent organisation, the necessary annual affiliation dues for such a large organisation represented a not inconsequential sum, even for them. The United States was the world's most advanced ATC nation and ATCA was easily the biggest ATC association in existence and membership by ATCA would obviously bring a lot of credibility and technical expertise to the new international organisation. The fact that, from the very first conference, IFATCA was considering methods of ensuring ATCA's affiliation demonstrates how importantly the Federation viewed membership by the United States.

We will return to US ATCA and the issue of their representation a little later in this examination of IFATCA's first decade. In fact, it almost merits a story in itself.

Realising immediately the need to continue the work of the fledgling organisation beyond the conference, the Directors established seven more Standing Committees in addition to the Finance Committee. These largely reflected the issues of the day and included 'Relations and Cooperation with International Organisations’ (SC IV), 'Cooperation with Eurocontrol' (SC VI), 'Cooperation with Pilots’ (SC V) and 'Cooperation and Relations between Civil and Military ATC’ (SC Vll).

The second annual conference travelled across the English Channel to England with London nominated as the 1963 venue. (IFATCA selects cities nominated by their host associations as venues for their conferences rather than countries, in much the same way as the International Olympic Committee.)

Whereas the Paris conference conducted its business entirely in open (plenary) session, in London it was decided beforehand in a meeting of the Elective Officers, the Conference Secretary and Standing Committee Chairmen to shorten the procedure in plenary session by resorting to Sub-Committee sessions. Accordingly Sub-Committee A (for Administration and Nomination and Sub-Committee B (for Professional Matters) were formed and the Editor, Walter Endlich and Britain’s Arnold Field were elected as IFATCA's first conference committee chairmen. It was at this London meeting that the Directors decided to establish Standing Committees as we know them today. In the twelve months following Paris, it became apparent that the original eight Standing Committees were unwieldy and somewhat amateurish in their approach. In his report to conference, Honorary Secretary Thau commented there was too much overlapping of tasks between the committees and they needed better organisation. The Elective Officers suggested disbandment of the existing eight committees and replacement with just four: 'Professional Status and Environmental Factors', 'Technical Problems', 'Public Relations and Publications' and 'Financial Matters'. It was felt that these more narrowly defined groupings would be more focused on the titled issues and relevant subsidiary matters and the fewer personnel involved would aid work and coordination participation. The Elective Officers further believed that all other tasks and responsibilities could better be handled by themselves on a day to day basis.

Whilst the principle of fewer Standing Committees was accepted, a majority of the Directors was not convinced of the need for, or the desirability of, the first mentioned SC. They decided that the second, third and fourth committees only were required and numbered them accordingly SC I, SC II and SC III. This majority decision did not sit easily with all and, in something of a landmark protest, during final plenary proceedings, the Austrian association, displaying remarkable fortune telling abilities, protested with a statement decrying IFATCA's apparent sole "interest in the ATC services". They went on to complain that "no consideration at all is given to the problems of the man who is providing the service ..." and "... that IFATCA's present policy is disregarding completely the human factors of our profession ...". (See more in Chapter 8) Because of this statement from the Austrians, the proposition for the original four Standing Committees was then re- submitted but plenary also voted against it along similar lines to the Sub-Committee decision and then endorsed the original recommendation. This was not surprising since it was essentially the same people voting. This debate represents the first internal dissension in IFATCA ranks but even more importantly demonstrates that some Directors at least were already thinking of the important issue of human factors well before the phrase and the discipline came to prominence and popularity.

So, Standing Committees as we know them today came into being and assumed responsibility for 'external' work (and internal work in the case of SC III). On a yearly basis, they continue with work programs assigned by conference, the work continuing throughout the year with reports on progress, and recommendations for policy arising therefrom, being made to each conference. Member Associations seek election to these Committees and often competition is fierce as the numbers of Member Associations on each Committee are limited, mainly for financial reasons but also because of efficiency.

As we saw with the Austrian dissent in London, IFATCA's consideration of Human Factors goes back to early days and, in a complete about face, these matters were given their own Committee - SC IV - the very next year at the Brussels conference of 1964. Standing Committees V (Recruitment and Training) and VI (Constitutional) were born in Munich in 1968 and finally, the latecomer SC VII (Legal Matters in ATC), was formed in Reykjavik in 1973. So, after 10 years, they were almost back to the original number of committees! Since those days, SC II , SC V and, and very recently, SC VII have become defunct with SC Us tasks now being handled by the Executive Board (specifically the Deputy President) and SC IV has additionally assumed the responsibilities of the old SC V and SC VII. The old Latin numerals were dispensed with in the early nineties and Committees these days are numbered according to the Gregorian style. The London hosts, being members of a Guild (the ancestry and practises of which organisations date back to the Middle Ages), conducted the 1963 meeting, and especially the opening, along traditional Guild Hall lines. The colourful traditions and ceremonies made a big impression on the continental Europeans and those from the new world, especially when the Toastmaster in his long crimson coat boomed out "Pray Silence" and his command was immediately obeyed. (Perhaps, such a ceremony should have been re-invoked at some more recent conferences where there have been some problems with chattering delegates during speeches!)

So the London meeting took on the form roughly by which we know conferences today: Opening Plenary, Committee work sessions and Final Plenary. A formal proposal to establish the headquarters in London was accepted in conjunction with the idea of a joint Executive Secretary with the UK Guild (GATCO). The first draft of what was to become the Manual was also discussed in Committee A. In Committee B, all the working papers were prepared by GATCO and these immediately established a high standard of technical professionalism that the Federation came to accept as a matter of course and which eventually enabled recognition by ICAO. Committee B also had such a workload (or perhaps just loquacious debate) that the committee officers did not finish their work until 1 am on the morning after deliberations, an occurrence not totally unfamiliar today. The year 1963 also featured two notable events. In May, IFATCA received its first invitation from ICAO to an important international conference, the European Divisional RAC/OPS Meeting, which was actually held in Montreal. First Vice- President Maurice Cerf attended and, with typical French charm and his own inimitable style, impressed the delegates with IFATCA's professional advice. (For more detail on this meeting see Chapter 6.) Whilst a degree of scepticism from member States was partially assuaged, Cerf couldn't entirely overcome certain negative attitudes, even though he ably elaborated on the working papers he presented. Beyond this, he generally concentrated on keeping a relatively low profile. During one of his presentations, he was surprised to find that the IFALPA representatives didn't quite see eye to eye with him (on the matter of controller responsibility for terrain separation whilst radar vectoring) and opposite points of view were espoused during open session. Importantly, the public disagreement (although not the dispute) was settled via a joint statement that the two Federations would meet in the near future to study the problem.

The second milestone of 1963 concerned the appointment in September of Mr. Geoffrey Monk, OBE, DFC, as Executive Secretary.

Geoffrey Monk was a classical English gentleman of the 'old school' and throughout his 9 years in the position he was unfailingly helpful, never excitable and quietly went about doing what had to be done when it had to be done. Geoffrey was a former controller and founder member of the U.K. Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers and held various positions with the Guild over the years including Deputy Master of the London Lodge. He retired in August, 1963 as Divisional Air Traffic Control Officer, Southern Division in the UK NATS and, upon his appointment with the Federation just one month later, immediately set about organising the IFATCA Secretariat in an efficient and productive manner. It is acknowledged by the three Presidents he served that the Federation's early days and successes owe a great deal to Geoffrey Monk's outstanding contribution. Monk's contribution is all the more meritorious when we consider that in the earlier days he wore two hats. Not being able to afford a full time Executive Secretary themselves, IFATCA gratefully accepted the UK's offer to establish a joint secretariat whereby IFATCA and GATCO shared resources and Mr. Monk's time. Whilst Monk acceded to this arrangement, he was almost immediately in trouble and deluged with work but he soldiered on uncomplaining for several years, never failing to maintain his own high standards and quiet sense of humour.

Returning to the Continent in 1964, IFATCA's third conference was held in Brussels. With the new Executive Secretary in the seat, the Federation on this occasion was better prepared than ever for conference and Brussels saw IFATCA embrace a truly international flavour when two more continents became represented with the joining of Canada and Uruguay (in addition to Italy).

Continuing with the dual sub-committee concept established in London, Directors found they virtually had double the time to consider the working papers and for this conference their efficiency was further enhanced by the Secretariat providing Rules of Procedure. Sub-Committee A featured a discussion on concession travel and here we find the first reference to LATA's Resolution 200 (see more in Chapter 6) when the Directors confronted the difficulties faced by some delegates from distant shores in attending conference. It was destined to be the first of many such mentions as the subject was to remain on the agenda for some time, as we shall see. Illustrating how IFATCA's technical experts were up to date (and possibly even ahead of their time), Sub-Committee B discussions covered such topics as simultaneous use of parallel runways and data links. Some things never change. The disagreement with IFALPA that came to light in Montreal was also further aired.

IFALPA had recently amended their policy to state:

"During flight time, the safety of the aircraft is vested in the pilot. Therefore, instructions should not be requested by the pilot, nor passed by ATC, except in the case of emergency. In this event the word EMERGENCY should prefix the message. The word CLEARANCE should be used at all times by the pilot and the controller, except where the emergency prefix is used by the controller. " Naturally, IFATCA disagreed with this impractical approach and, relying upon ICAO documentation which stated: "It is undesirable to distinguish between ATC clearances and instructions", iterated the need for Federation to Federation discussions which recognised that the authority of the air traffic control service not be contested by the pilot group.

Overturning the previous year's final plenary discussions, conference voted to create the new SC IV 'Human and Environmental Factors in Air Traffic Control'. With this reversal, the President was moved to enjoin the association accepting responsibility (Ireland) to "... exercise discretion in dealing with subjects which might be contrary to our constitution, which specifically excludes subjects which are the prime objects of trade unions...". Laying the groundwork (and, effectively, the rules) for future reference, Tekstra further said "Common sense is a great asset in our profession and I trust this will be used by this committee, whose working principle will be that the controller, although an essential part of the ATC system, is no machine". It is true to say that this committee was born with a high degree of nervousness and not a little trepidation that it would be impinging in areas IFATCA was reluctant to venture into and which, essentially, were against its charter. Accepting its role, Ireland obeyed the strictures and undertook as its first task, creation of a mammoth questionnaire that eventually formed the genesis of today's Information Handbook.

Finally, in a prudent move, the Directors in Brussels decided that from the next year, the Elected Officers should not be elected en bloc. They resolved that in even years the President, second Vice-President and Treasurer be elected with first Vice- President, Honorary Secretary and Editor elected in odd years. The final night's party was held in a moated castle near the airport. This castle dated back to 1472 (with the plumbing presumably a little more modern!) and provided a memorable backdrop to a rousing evening. The night's entertainment was provided by the 'Schoenewald Cherry Pickers', a jazz band composed entirely of Rhine UACC controllers. Apparently they were so good at their night job even the Americans present swore they were the genuine New Orleans article. A year later the Vienna conference became the first three day affair. The first two days were given over to the opening plenary and working sessions. The morning of the third day saw presentation of some technical papers and films and an exhibition at Vienna airport whilst the conference Secretariat caught up with their paperwork. Finally, the closing plenary occupied the afternoon. The style and concept for future events was now firmly established. Next year would further refine it. The 1965 conference opened to some disappointing news. The Executive Secretary advised that he could no longer continue to work as Secretary for both GATCO and IFATCA and tendered his resignation saying that it had become a job for a younger man. GATCO subsequently announced that they would appoint a separate domestic Executive Secretary to enable Geoffrey Monk to continue solely with IFATCA as from the 1st October. This generous move by GATCO was much appreciated and prompted Monk to withdraw his notice and discussions turned, for the first time but certainly not the last, to the subject of a permanent secretariat. The Irish association distributed their questionnaire on working conditions and the discussions in Vienna on the replies later provided the nucleus of IFATCA's Information Handbook, and where would we be today without that publication? Regional organisation first took on some shape during this conference and Austria, Canada, New Zealand (who had just joined⁾¹ and Uruguay were asked to nominate Regional Liaison Officers to establish contact with non-member associations in their areas.

Hans Thau, who had continued as Honorary Secretary from IFATCA's inception until 1965, retired in Vienna due to being posted by his administration to the ICAO Air Navigation Commission in Montreal. In eulogising Thau, President Tekstra said: "Without Hans Thau there would not have been an IFATCA!" High praise but well deserved for it was Thau who was the driving force behind the original 1959 Frankfurt meeting. He was a member of the team which drafted the Convention and Constitution and it was in his home in Koln/Bonn that IFATCA's first headquarters resided. It has been said that Hans should have been the first recipient of the Scroll of Honour for his contribution and outstanding work but unfortunately, the Scroll did not exist in 1965 when he retired. During the final plenary session in Vienna, the representative of U.S. ATCA addressed the meeting. He advised that ATCA had recently gone through a difficult time. In a move that split the ATCA membership (and cost them a considerable number of members and some $3,000 in legal fees), they had decided to disavow trade union type activities and "... finally were steered back to the completely professional approach on which our association was founded ten years ago." Such manoeuvrings had cost ATCA dearly and they were no longer in a truly sound financial position. However, demonstrating an abiding enthusiasm for affiliation, Tirey Vickers announced that they had applied for corporate membership "as a first step towards full membership". He said that such membership would "enable IFATCA to become a little more international and it gives ATCA very good reason to become a little more professional." In accepting the application, the Elective Officers and ATCA thus set the scene for what was to become one of IFATCA's more interesting internal disputes.

By the time the 5th annual conference came around, IFATCA was starting to develop a real sense of confidence, a belief in itself. The representatives had found plenty to do but they were accepting their task and doing it well. ICAO was talking to them (sometimes) and seeking input (occasionally, and not always in the manner IFATCA wished - see Chapter 6) and relations with other international organisations were well established and progressing. Four Standing Committees were established, they were now well organised, had plenty in their work programmes and were making meaningful contribution. The conference format was relatively settled although each was still far from routine and each year something was learned and applied the next.

Discussions in committee had certainly expanded to fill the space available and delegates again had become pressed for time. So for Rome, the Board of Officers decided to devote even more time during this conference to working sessions. To achieve this whilst staying with a three day conference format, they decided that the opening plenary should be held on the evening before the conference working sessions. So, uniquely, the Rome conference opened at 1800 hours on the evening of 18,h April, 1966 and, following extensive speeches and the normal roll calls and appointment of sub-committees, closed at 2030. The working sessions of conference then effectively ran for 3 days from 19th to 21st April. An unusual feature of the Rome conference was that it did not see the affiliation of a new Member Association. U.S. ATCA joined, but as a corporate member. Prior to conference, the Iranian ATC Association had indicated a desire to join but their delegation was unable to attend and, in absentia, they failed to provide satisfactory documentation. Committee A decided to defer their application approval to a postal vote on receipt of their constitution. Iran subsequently affiliated the following year. So for the first time, IFATCA's ranks failed to grow. Not until 1983 would that occurrence be repeated.

Rome was witness to IFATCA's first discussions on loss of licence insurance for controllers. The first increase in annual subscriptions was proposed. It was decided to assume full responsibility for The Controller, managed until now on IFATCA's behalf by the German association. IFR separation minima were closely examined and a proposal made to ICAO, which was accepted, a first in itself. With SC I becoming more professional with every outing, Rome was a highlight for Committee B and particularly SC I². Delegates first decided that policy should be provided in the form of amendments to existing ICAO Annexes and other documents. With this guidance, fine detail on IFR separation was hammered out and some of the resolutions from Rome are still current text in the ICAO publication PANS/RAC Doc.4444 today.

One of the main discussions in Committee B concerned the IFALPA refusal to accept reduced separation across the North Atlantic. At the end of 1965, IFALPA had taken issue with ICAO's proposed reduction of lateral separation from 120nm to 90nm. This dispute created extra workload for the controllers involved and IFALPA took the opportunity in Rome to elucidate their objections and position. Delegates were sympathetic and shared the pilots' concerns. Finally, the first real 'Technical Panel' was held on the last day with a panel discussion involving Corporate Members on Air Traffic Control Displays. It was a groundbreaking conference. 'Tek' Tekstra summed it up: "The lively discussions have shown that we are learning the trade."

On the morning of Wednesday, 20th April the IFATCA Board of Officers and some delegates took part in an event that is never likely to be repeated. Along with some 35,000 other pilgrims they participated in a ceremony at St. Peter's Basilica and afterwards were honoured with a Papal Audience with His Holiness, Pope Paul VI. The IFATCA Officers were accorded a special place near the Pope's throne and he spoke of ATC in English with the President and the other officers prior to his departure. Vice-President Maurice Cerf summed it up thus: " It was one of the highlights of the conference. We were all deeply impressed by the majesty of the ceremony and the personal dignity of the Pope. The photograph and the medal I brought home will constitute an unforgettable memory of an important event." The conference ended on something of a down note although this itself managed to provide a highlight. The Italian government promised the organisers funding assistance which enabled special hotel room rates. However, this funding never materialised and the hotel was obliged to return their rates to the original price. In order to keep their promise to delegates, Italian controllers turned up at check out time and paid the difference themselves. The world-wide ATC family was expanding but at the same time becoming very close knit.

Another founding member hosted the 1967 conference. The Swiss association decided upon Geneva in April for the 6th forum. On the Committee A side, without doubt the most significant event was the first appearance of the International Labour Office. (Mr. Dunand's contribution and the Federation's later relationship is fully examined in Chapter 6) The Board could report that they had completed compilation of material for production of the Manual and delegates directed the Board to publish the Manual during 1967. The Swiss association's Bernhard Rüthy, who was by now also IFATCA's Treasurer, agreed to accept the task of typing out the first issue. And to this day, Rüthy is still responsible for the maintenance of the Manual with the annual amendments!

In the latter part of 1967 the Board of Officers became severely depleted. Second Vice-President Roger Sadat resigned in September to take up an ICAO posting and Honorary Secretary Brandstetter also departed towards the end of that year to work in private enterprise. The constitution at the time did not allow for Board replacements so the remaining four officers soldiered on until the Munich meeting in April. It was while the Federation had only a four man executive that a crucial event took place.

In November, 1967 the Pound was devalued 14.4%. Naturally, this had a serious effect on the Federation's financial situation since Sterling was the official currency. President Tekstra and Treasurer Rüthy both travelled to Montreal for the 5th ANC (Air Navigation Conference) on behalf of their administrations. (IFATCA per se was unable to attend due to financial restrictions.) They took advantage of their presence in Canada to travel on to Toronto, home of first Vice-President Campbell and so 75% of the existing Board met in emergency session. Their deliberations resulted in recommendations to increase MA subscriptions to compensate for the devaluation and, more importantly, to alter the Federation's currency to the Swiss Franc.

There was another great cause for concern for the Federation's officers at that time and that was that they did not have indemnity for their actions on behalf of the Federation. Inquiries and studies were commenced in 1967 and these resulted in a decision from the 1968 conference to move the Federation's 'siege sociale'³ to Switzerland. It wasn't until much later though, at the Melbourne conference in 1975, that the final decision was made to inscribe the organisation in the Swiss Commercial register, thus giving the Federation legal Swiss 'nationality'. It was on the 23rd of September, 1976, that IFATCA actually became a legally registered organisation creating its own moral and legal personality and at the same time clarifying the indemnity issue for its members and officials. Any debts of the Federation are now guaranteed exclusively by the property and assets of the Federation.

The financial concerns provided the backdrop in the lead up to the 7th annual conference, held in Munich. However, these worries and difficulties were put behind them and forgotten in the grand surroundings of the opening plenary, for it was held in no less a venue than the Plenary Chamber of the Bavarian State Parliament. The President of the Parliament himself, Mr. Rudolf Hanauer, offiaated at the opening. Noting the location, Mr. Hanauer remarked "The Chamber in which we are gathered ... is only in rare and exceptional cases made available for other purposes, and then only if institutions of equal or superior standing ask for it." These words from such an august personage were most complimentary and certainly reflected well on the standing the young Federation had developed in Europe. IFATCA has never since returned to an equivalent location for its conference commencement. Perhaps in part for the Board's tribulations in the lead up prior to conference, the social highlight in Munich was a visit to the opera. Delegates were treated to a special performance of Wagner's 'The Flying Dutchman', a highly appropriate choice as IFATCA's first President, 'Tek' Tekstra from the Netherlands, retired at the conclusion of the conference.

It was the Boards belief that Munich marked the end of the beginning for IFATCA. They considered that the foundations were now well laid and 1968/69 would be a decisive year. Contact with the ILO was now well established with involvement growing. ICAO was becoming more amenable and receptive to IFATCA contribution and a major input to the forthcoming 6th ANC was about to be made. Relations with IFALPA saw joint approaches on several items. The legal seat of the Federation was moved to Switzerland, the new official currency was established, a review of the constitution and bye-laws was to be conducted, a 5 day conference for next year was deemed necessary and an almost new Board would take over management of the Federation. The times they were a changing. One of those new' Board members was Maurice Cerf, elected in Munich as IFATCA's second President. Cerf had been first Vice-President for 6 years to 'Tek' Tekstra and it was agreed he stand down in 1967 preparing to comply with the Brussels decision to elect the President in even years and thus to allow another first Vice-President to be elected in 1967, an odd year. Short of stature, self deprecating in nature but very intelligent and witty in his approach, Cerf was a true Frenchman exhibiting classic Gallic charm. He never failed to impress with his knowledge and abilities and it was his style and professionalism at IFATCA's first foray into international affairs at that 1963 ICAO meeting that really ensured acceptance of IFATCA in lCAO.

Cerf was at the 1959 Frankfurt meeting as, as he said, "the 15th member of a 15 man French delegation". He said he was only "dragged along at the last minute under the pretext that I could speak some English". When the French association discovered he really was a pretty poor interpreter he was "demoted to the rank of Head of Delegation" and he was thus in the position to be elected first Vice-President at the founding conference twelve months later. He had also said that eating a frankfurter sausage sounded a better proposition than remaining behind in Paris and working at air traffic control.

It was around this stage of IFATCA's development (that is, the late sixties) that world politics forcibly encroached. The often brutal, at all times dangerous, political ploy of aircraft hijacking came to the fore and the world's air traffic controllers were confronted with situations for which they had no training and little, if any, direction. To counter this growing menace, the States had taken some action and the 1963 Tokyo Convention was a first attempt to define unlawful seizure. It was deficient, however, in that it did not actually proclaim hijacking as a criminal offence. Despite repeated appeals from the U.N. and ICAO, insufficient States⁴ actually ratified the Convention and basically it was left to individual States to apply their own laws against the crime where possible. This was obviously no deterrent as would-be hijackers were able to rely on several States for ideological sympathy and safe haven. The later 1970 Hague Convention fared little better although it did improve on Tokyo by seeking elimination of safe havens and contained provisions for prosecution and severe punishment of offenders by States in which an offender is found. It also applied to all aircraft whereas the Tokyo Convention would have applied only to aircraft of contracting States. Nevertheless, it took States some time to adequately come to grips with the phenomenon of hijacking and in the meantime the controllers were very much caught in the middle and, at times, were placed in very difficult positions.

IFATCA's first direct involvement in this highly volatile area came in July, 1968 when an El Al aircraft and its passengers and crew were detained in Algiers. Following a request from the Israeli association, President Cerf made representations to the Algerian government. Nothing resulted from these appeals apparently confirming the Israeli complaint that Cerf's protestations were too ineffectual but, in reality, little else could have been done.

As a result of this instance, the '69 conference gave lengthy consideration to the problem. The Federation urged States to become signatories to the Tokyo Convention and to adhere to its principles. The Directors also urged IFATCA to make representation to ICAO Council Member States to the effect: "Unlawful seizure of and unlawful attacks on civil aircraft shall be considered as equal in magnitude to the crime of piracy ... and ... recognised as a crime ... and ... the criminal is denied the protection of his own nation ... and whom any nation may, in the interests of all, capture and punish."

Further illustrating their concerns, the Directors then directed Standing Committee 1 to commence an early study with IFALPA of possible safety measures which may be taken by ATC and pilots to safeguard the aircraft unlawfully seized and other air traffic. Also to be considered were methods of identifying an unlawful seizure and methods of alerting air traffic services and police at airfields on the presumed route in the event of shortage of fuel and other emergencies. Unfortunately, the 1968 hijack was not to be the last such occurrence to affect IFATCA. The seventies would see many occasions were controllers were directly involved, at least once with tragic results. Whilst not joining IFATCA as a Member Association, US ATCA nevertheless established and maintained extremely harmonious relations and the two organisations regularly consulted, shared information and exchanged official visits to each other's conferences. ATCA, despite being unable to join IFATCA as professional members because of their domestic difficulties financially, found a way in via the back door, so to speak, and had joined IFATCA in 1966 as a Corporation Member. Realising that such membership could only be maintained as a temporary measure, the Board quietly conducted negotiations with ATCA throughout late 1967 and explored methods for affiliation which took into account ATCA's fiscal difficulties. Despite ATCA drastically amending its financial policies and some indication of interest, they hadn't responded with a proposal or an affiliation application by the time of the Munich conference. This membership of a professional grouping of ATCOs as Corporation Members rather than professional members did not sit easily with the regularly affiliated associations and disquiet began to be expressed.

The Canadian ATC Association (CATCA) put a proposal to conference that "...the position of the ATCA as a corporation member be reviewed". Following debate in committee, conference resolved ".. .that an air traffic control association qualifying for professional membership be declared ineligible for corporate membership". (Resolution 68.A.11) This appeared straightforward enough but, curiously, a later informal report of this conference contains the words "Another resolution to come from the sub-committee was 'that an air traffic control association qualifying for professional membership be declared ineligible for corporate membership.' This seemed to confirm the thought that the constitution of the American ATCA... would be reviewed to allow them to become a member of IFATCA." seat of the Federation was moved to Switzerland, the new official currency was established, a review of the constitution and bye-laws was to be conducted, a 5 day conference for next year was deemed necessary and an almost new Board would take over management of the Federation. The times they were a' changing. One of those 'new' Board members was Maurice Cerf, elected in Munich as IFATCA's second President. Cerf had been first Vice-President for 6 years to 'Tek' Tekstra and it was agreed he stand down in 1967 preparing to comply with the Brussels decision to elect the President in even years and thus to allow another first Vice-President to be elected in 1967, an odd year. Short of stature, self deprecating in nature but very intelligent and witty in his approach, Cerf was a true Frenchman exhibiting classic Gallic charm. He never failed to impress with his knowledge and abilities and it was his style and professionalism at IFATCA's first foray into international affairs at that 1963 ICAO meeting that really ensured acceptance of IFATCA in ICAO.

Cerf was at the 1959 Frankfurt meeting as, as he said, "the 15th member of a 15 man French delegation". He said he was only "dragged along at the last minute under the pretext that I could speak some English". When the French association discovered he really was a pretty poor interpreter he was "demoted to the rank of Head of Delegation" and he was thus in the position to be elected first Vice-President at the founding conference twelve months later. He had also said that eating a frankfurter sausage sounded a better proposition than remaining behind in Paris and working at air traffic control.

It was around this stage of IFATCA's development (that is, the late sixties) that world politics forcibly encroached. The often brutal, at all times dangerous, political ploy of aircraft hijacking came to the fore and the world's air traffic controllers were confronted with situations for which they had no training and little, if any, direction. To counter this growing menace, the States had taken some action and the 1963 Tokyo Convention was a first attempt to define unlawful seizure. It was deficient, however, in that it did not actually proclaim hijacking as a criminal offence. Despite repeated appeals from the U.N. and ICAO, insufficient States4 actually ratified the Convention and basically it was left to individual States to apply their own laws against the crime where possible. This was obviously no deterrent as would-be hijackers were able to rely on several States for ideological sympathy and safe haven. The later 1970 Hague Convention fared little better although it did improve on Tokyo by seeking elimination of safe havens and contained provisions for prosecution and severe punishment of offenders by States in which an offender is found. It also applied to all aircraft whereas the Tokyo Convention would have applied only to aircraft of contracting States. Nevertheless, it took States some time to adequately come to grips with the phenomenon of hijacking and in the meantime the controllers were very much caught in the middle and, at times, were placed in very difficult positions.

IFATCA's first direct involvement in this highly volatile area came in July, 1968 when an El Al aircraft and its passengers and crew were detained in Algiers. Following a request from the Israeli association, President Cerf made representations to the 4 Of the twelve required to ratify the Convention, only nine did so. Algerian government. Nothing resulted from these appeals apparently confirming the Israeli complaint that Cerf's protestations were too ineffectual but, in reality, little else could have been done.

As a result of this instance, the '69 conference gave lengthy consideration to the problem. The Federation urged States to become signatories to the Tokyo Convention and to adhere to its principles. The Directors also urged IFATCA to make representation to ICAO Council Member States to the effect: "Unlawful seizure of and unlawful attacks on civil aircraft shall be considered as equal in magnitude to the crime of piracy ... and ... recognised as a crime ... and ... the criminal is denied the protection of his own nation ... and whom any nation may, in the interests of all, capture and punish."

Further illustrating their concerns, the Directors then directed Standing Committee 1 to commence an early study with IFALPA of possible safety measures which may be taken by ATC and pilots to safeguard the aircraft unlawfully seized and other air traffic. Also to be considered were methods of identifying an unlawful seizure and methods of alerting air traffic services and police at airfields on the presumed route in the event of shortage of fuel and other emergencies. Unfortunately, the 1968 hijack was not to be the last such occurrence to affect IFATCA. The seventies would see many occasions were controllers were directly involved, at least once with tragic results.

Whilst not joining IFATCA as a Member Association, US ATCA nevertheless established and maintained extremely harmonious relations and the two organisations regularly consulted, shared information and exchanged official visits to each other's conferences. ATCA, despite being unable to join IFATCA as professional members because of their domestic difficulties financially, found a way in via the back door, so to speak, and had joined IFATCA in 1966 as a Corporation Member. Realising that such membership could only be maintained as a temporary measure, the Board quietly conducted negotiations with ATCA throughout late 1967 and explored methods for affiliation which took into account ATCA's fiscal difficulties. Despite ATCA drastically amending its financial policies and some indication of interest, they hadn't responded with a proposal or an affiliation application by the time of the Munich conference. This membership of a professional grouping of ATCOs as Corporation Members rather than professional members did not sit easily with the regularly affiliated associations and disquiet began to be expressed.

The Canadian ATC Association (CATCA) put a proposal to conference that "...the position of the ATCA as a corporation member be reviewed". Following debate in committee, conference resolved "...that an air traffic control association qualifying for professional membership be declared ineligible for corporate membership". (Resolution 68.A.11) This appeared straightforward enough but, curiously, a later informal report of this conference contains the words "Another resolution to come from the sub-committee was 'that an air traffic control association qualifying for professional membership be declared ineligible for corporate membership.' This seemed to confirm the thought that the constitution of the American ATCA... would be reviewed to allow them to become a member of IFATCA." (My emphasis) This last statement lacks credibility and is at odds with the sentiments expressed in the conference committee discussions and the resultant resolution and there is no record that this aspect was considered either by the conference or by ATCA itself. One has to wonder how the author could possibly surmise such a position and express a thought giving such a different slant to the conference discussions. Given the politics of the day, the friendship that existed between IFATCA (at Board of Officers level, at least) and US ATCA and the subsequent events and manoeuvrings of the Board, it is also possible to question the motives of the author (now unknown).

Despite Resolution 68.A.11, US ATCA remained a corporation member of IFATCA beyond the 1968 conference.

Between Munich and the 1969 conference in Belgrade, there was a flurry of activity in the United States. US ATCA held their 13th annual meeting in San Francisco in October, 1968 and, obviously seeing the writing on the wall for them as far as corporate membership of IFATCA was concerned, passed a resolution calling for the submission of an application to IFATCA for affiliation as a professional member. In their letter of 2nd January, 1969 they also advised that they had purposely deferred submitting their application sooner "due to some problems that we have been involved in with the Department of Transportation concerning their recently revised policies with respect to relationships between professional organisations and the various Federal Government agencies under their (DOT) jurisdiction, FAA included." The letter goes on to say "However, these matters are still pending and WC are aware of the necessity for submitting our application in proper time. This letter was replied to by the then Executive Secretary, Geoffrey Monk on the 6,h January. In his reply, Monk said "Although I cannot, of course, anticipate the decision of the Annual Conference, nevertheless I am sure your application will be unanimously approved, since it has generally been the opinion that IFATCA cannot be said to be truly international without your membership." However, other notable events in ATC were occurring in the USA — namely the birth and rise of PATCO.

The Professional Air Traffic Control Organisation came into being on the 11th January, 1968 with its raison d'etre "... the U.S. ATC system was not keeping pace, personnel or equipment wise, with the rapid growth of the aviation industry" Other prime reasons given for its birth were that "ATCA is unable to bargain effectively for controllers in the U.S. because F.A.A. management personnel are included as members" and that the other civil service union representing some controllers was so disparate in its representation that it could not devote enough attention to its small air traffic controller grouping. By the time of PATCO s constitutional convention in July, 1968 the professional membership was over 6,300 controllers (the majority of U.S. civil controllers) and growing. PATCO, representing only rank and file civilian controllers, was keen to establish themselves and they obviously saw IFATCA as a logical and legitimate vehicle to promote their organisation and to gain recognition, both nationally and internationally.

PATCO submitted an application for affiliation to IFATCA by mail on the 3rd February, 1969 (that is, only 1 year after their formation) and this was replied to by Monk on the 6th February. (Obviously the trans-Atlantic mail service was very good in those days.)

Monk's reply said, inter alia "It is probable that you are aware that the Air Traffic Control Association, Inc. has also applied for affiliation. There is nothing in the Constitution of the Federation that prevents the affiliation of two associations from one country and I should think that both will be elected at our conference in Belgrade in March." However, despite this optimism, Monk was realistic enough to state: " I think there are possible complications from this situation, or complications might arise in the future. However, my own view is that these can be dealt with as they arise, or if they arise."

There was thus quite a bit of correspondence between the IFATCA Board of Officers and the United States at this time and it didn't end there. In between these exchanges of correspondence between the IFATCA Secretariat and the two U.S. ATC organisations, on the 27th January, IFATCA's 1st Vice-President, Dick Campbell, a Canadian, had written to US ATCA seeking clarification of some aspects of their application. In this letter, Campbell sought ATCA's position vis-à-vis PATCO, so the IFATCA Board obviously knew that an application for affiliation from the rival U.S. ATC organisation was in the offing before it actually arrived a week later.

ATCA's response was to reiterate its Stated attitude of cooperation with all parties interested in the advancement of ATC. This attitude was cited in a letter of 2nd December, 1968 to the four other organisations in the U.S. that represented ATC personnel, one of which was PATCO, and to which PATCO never replied. In the response to Dick Campbell (dated 18th February, 1969), ATCA concluded by saying "we can envision no reason that would require our Association to withdraw application for affiliation with IFATCA."

The stage was thus set for an interesting situation at the 8th annual conference in Belgrade, 24th-28th March, 1969, the first held in an East bloc country Monks replies had effectively promised that both organisations would be elected to membership and the conference thus saw applications for affiliation from the two U.S. ATC associations, ATCA and PATCO.

The IFATCA Constitution at the time read "Eligible for affiliation as a Member Association is any professional association, organisation or guild of air traffic control personnel whose technical objects are essentially the same as those of the Federation. An ATC Association eligible for professional membership is ineligible for corporation membership."⁵ Whilst these words do not specifically exclude dual membership from one country, it is probably safe to assume that the expectation at the time of writing them was that any one country would have only one professional association representing its air traffic controllers. Such was certainly the case in Europe. 1 he Board of Officers chose to interpret the wording to include the wider allowance but in their discussions the Directors looked to a narrower definition.

The 1969 conference report contains the following:

"The applications of the USA Associations, ATCA and PATCO, were considered at length by the Directors.

Both Mr. Myers (sic) of PATCO and Mr. Riddle of ATCA gave a resume of the history and objectives of their respective associations and questions were put by delegates.

A number of votes and resolutions were considered on the matter. However, it proved impossible to arrive at a consensus of opinion that was substantiated by all of the Directors.

It was the feeling of the majority of the Directors that IFATCA should elect one Association only per State to the Federation. Because of this, the following is recommended to Plenary:

That IFATCA defer any decision regarding the applications of both ATCA and PATCO at this conference. That the Board of Officers conduct by the 1st July, 1969 a postal ballot on the question of amendment to the Constitution to allow one member only for each State.'" ⁶ (Res. 69.P. 1)

Addressing the final plenary, Mr. Riddle said "I had hoped for a different result but I understand the problems at this moment. I hope things will work out differently in the near future and perhaps at the 1970 conference things may be different." Mr. Meyer similarly concluded "Maybe next year will be a little different. I sincerely hope so."

The Board also felt required to add their comments and, in his closing speech, President Cerf posed the question "Are we happy with the decision taken?" He answered himself "Certainly not, we have been required to act in contradiction to one of our aims, which is to strive for a world wide Federation." He continued "Can we, on the other hand, regret our decision? I do not think so taking into account the general feeling on plural membership ... (it would have meant) .. .the necessity to make a rather brutal choice between two honourable groups ...(which)...would have resulted in our returning home with an uneasy mind." In bringing the Belgrade conference to a conclusion, President Cerf introduced the Federation's new award, the Scroll of Honour, and awarded it to the Past President, 'Tek'Tekstra. In making this first award, Cerf said ofTekstra: "'Tek' was the first President of IFATCA. He displayed during the seven years of his presidency the qualities of enthusiasm, energy and foresight which allowed this Federation to reach its present position. 'Tek's' working capacity is enormous, this, together with an incredible and communicative drive allowed him to lead his Board of Officers and the Federation at a scorching pace which, if it sometimes left us breathless, permitted a young Federation to achieve in a minimum of time what might have taken ages. At the same time 'Tek' always managed to be cheerful, to keep his sense of humour and to avoid the pomposity which Presidents often take a liking to. During the formative years, you earned the undying gratitude of the Federation for your untiring efforts to enhance its status and influence."

Replying, 'Tek' said inter alia: "I am greatly honoured by this presentation and will cherish this beautiful scroll for the rest of my life. I would like to stress the fact that my work was part of the work of a team." 'Tek' mentioned the Board members he was privileged to work with and then "Last but not least I wish to share this honour with my wife Toos and our four kids who have suffered through all those years under the IFATCA-itis that had struck me. This period which has flown by for me, has surely been a long time for them." Amidst very emotional scenes, 'Tek' Tekstra was then accorded a standing ovation.

The 1968 Munich conference had taken a decision that"... organisations eligible for professional membership should not be accepted as Corporation Members." Despite this, US ATCA inexplicably remained a corporation member throughout 1969 and in the lead up to the 1970 Montreal conference. This conference again was set to see application for professional membership from both ATCA and PATCO.

This dual application obviously again caused a dilemma in IFATCA ranks and the elective officers were struggling to find a solution. Then, at the opening of the conference, President Maurice Cerf, in his opening address, dropped a minor bombshell when he announced that ATCA had requested ".. .that consideration of their application be deferred for the time being." Remember, ATCA had said in their 18th February, 1969 letter "We can envision no reason that would require our Association to withdraw application ...". Cerf then went on to say: "In order to assist the Directors and to try to avoid the long discussions Sub-Committee A had last year, the Board of Officers has submitted a paper outlining its opinion on the matter of application for affiliation received from more than one professional Association of the same country. It is hoped that this paper can give rise to a decision making provision for such cases which, if we no longer run the risk of having one this year, are likely to happen again."

Clearly, a majority of the Directors were uneasy about permitting more than one association from each country to belong to IFATCA. Despite clear indications from their Directors in 1969 as to their feelings on the matter, the Board nevertheless intended to present a paper which effectively interpreted the Constitution "to mean that ANY professional association ... is eligible for membership ...". (Withdrawn Board paper 70.P.2)

As part of their supporting discussion in this paper, the Board stated "At that time (that is, at the Belgrade conference), the Board did not wish to unduly influence the decision of the Federation's legislative body ... nevertheless the Board clearly indicated that it considered the acceptance of more than one association from the same country possible and legal ...". The Board went on to propose that, provided the second association represented 15-20% of the ATCOs in that country, it would be eligible for membership. There is no doubt that the Board's interpretation of the Constitution was possible and therefore legal since the relevant clause did not specifically exclude more than one association per State. But, in doing so, with their approach they were deliberately taking the opposite tack to the expressed thoughts of a majority of the Directors from the previous conference. The Board faced a serious and difficult dilemma. Whilst ATCA (with 2,200 professional members) was now mostly a management, industry and military oriented organisation and, like IFATCA, disavowing union type activities, it had been a valuable supporter of IFATCA and a major contributor and was a respected organisation in the aviation world. On the other hand, PATCO, the upstart, was an outright militant, but much more representative, union body with 7,400 members, being the overwhelming majority of the rank and file controllers in the U.S.A. Which way to turn?

It would seem, certainly in retrospect, that when faced with just about the first really tough decision they had to make, IFATCA's elective officers went for compromise (i.e. dual affiliation from the one country) rather than take that decision. This is perhaps understandable given that US ATCA had been a good friend to IFATCA in its short history and had contributed substantially (in technical terms) to the Federation. The Board was also relying upon a strict, narrow interpretation of the bye-law. Nonetheless, MA opinion was known, resolutions had been made and it was time for a difficult decision. It is probably much to the credit of ATCA that they got IFATCA's representatives off the horns of a tough dilemma by withdrawing their application (or perhaps they themselves were simply facing reality !).

With ATCA's withdrawal, the Board also withdrew their paper proposing dual affiliation. The way was then open for PATCO's affiliation, which application was duly submitted and unanimously accepted. With resolution 68.A. 11 also now applied, IFATCA's close relationship over 10 years - the life of IFATCA — with US ATCA thus came to a most untidy and unsatisfactory end. Only in recent years (through the nineties) has any sort of real relationship re-surfaced. With all this manoeuvring and politicking in Montreal over the US ATC associations, it is easy to overlook the further significance of the 1970 conference. Montreal represented the first time that IFATCA had held its annual meeting outside Europe. Whilst the membership now consisted of some 26 Member Associations, only six of those were from countries outside Europe. So it was still very much a European dominated organisation and to travel to Canada was a major step. For one thing, international travel was quite expensive and still not all that easy then and the risk of a small delegate attendance was very real. The potential problem was solved in an unique manner. Some 100 European delegates were flown to Canada courtesy of the German Air Force!

President Maurice Cerf arriving in Montreal from 'IFATCA One' for the 1970 Conference.

Two members of the German association, Arnold Birnbaum and Horst Guddat, who was also IFATCA's Honorary Secretary, coordinated this extraordinarily generous gesture from the Air Force of the Federal Republic of Germany. The Air Force provided 2 B707s (GAF1004 and GAF002) to transport the delegates from Koln-Bonn airport to Montreal and return. The delegates gathered together at Koln-Bonn and, to ensure the trip commenced in appropriate style, the Airport Director, Mr. W Grebe gave a reception prior to departure. In flight, the delegates were further looked after by German Air Force pursers (westbound) and Air Canada stewardesses (on the return leg) in what, overall, was a truly unique and outstanding example of civil military cooperation. For the record, the flights' R/T callsigns were 'IFATCA 70'.

Further underlining the uniqueness of the event, for the first, and still the only, time, the opening conference was addressed by the President of ICAO. Mr. W. Binaghi commented that IFATCA has "...given ample proof of your dynamism, ... you have given better and better service throughout cities and regions and ... We support your contribution to air traffic activities." No doubt Mr. Binaghi's attendance was facilitated by holding the conference at the site of ICAO's Head Office but it remains a measure of the respect with which IFATCA was already held that the President found time to attend.

Finally, highlighting the growing universality of IFATCA, Montreal saw affiliation by associations from four continents: Australia, Hungary (thus the second East bloc country), Malta, Netherlands Antilles and South Africa in addition to the USA.

In his closing speech, President Cerf announced his retirement (after eight years as an elected officer) but in his farewell speech chose to highlight the work done by the retiring Treasurer, Bernhard Rüthy, departing after four years in the post. Those four years were an extremely difficult time financially for IFATCA (they were even forced to propose a deficit budget in Rome in 1966) and it was largely through Rüthy's Herculean efforts that IFATCA stayed afloat. In becoming IFATCA's second Treasurer, Rüthy established a 'dynasty' of Swiss IFATCA money managers that continued unbroken through three more individuals for a total of twenty years. Though not exactly 'Gnomes of Zurich', Messrs. Rüthy, Gubelman, Wenger and Grezet were all incredibly effective in ensuring IFATCA's financial viability and continued solvency.

Succeeding Cerf as President was Briton Arnold Field, OBE. Field was certainly no stranger to IFATCA having been Chairman SC I since its inception in 1963 and thus responsible for the standard of papers to Committee B and other forums. It was Field, as the Standing Committee Chairman, who could take a large measure of the credit for the high quality policies presented to ICAO at the 1969 6th ANC and which so impressed the delegates there and which really established IFATCA as a credible contributor to international civil aviation affairs. He had served in the Royal Air Force before becoming a controller and rose through the ranks to retire as Director General of the U.K. Air Traffic Services. A one-time President of the U.K. Guild, Field also chaired Committee B on many occasions. After his term as President, Field would again assume responsibility for the chair of SCI. And so IFATCA's first decade came to a conclusion. It had certainly been an eventful ten years and one can ponder, if they had been able to foresee the problems and difficulties ahead, would the founders of the Federation have still gone ahead. For the entire decade, it was a struggle financially. Unreasonable obstacles to attendance at international forums had been put in their way. There was a discernible growing unrest amongst the membership over their conditions. The first stirrings of pressure to relinquish the strictly professional approach of the Federation's charter were being felt. The difficulties of honorary office were being made abundantly clear. Some internal dissension had surfaced and a major controversy over membership of the most important potential member association had erupted and simmered away for a number of years.

Arnold Field (centre) and Geoffrey Monk (right) with Eurocontrol's R.M. Soward.

However, the elected officers were able to look back over what they had accomplished with pride and satisfaction. The Federation had experienced considerable growth - 33 MAs and 12,000 individual controllers following the 1970 conference - and now was a truly world-wide body. The Federation's representatives had established an early reputation for rational, well reasoned argument and professional involvement. The continuous efforts to enhance the safety of air navigation by providing input and expertise from operational staff were paying off and this was reflected in increasing numbers of invitations to aviation forums. They were, at times, being treated as equals by more experienced organisations. ICAO was including some of their recommendations in their documentation. Attention had been widened to include human factors considerations. Over ten short years, considerable development and progress had been achieved whilst maintaining an essentially conservative approach and so the Federation had remained true to its charter. It was a conservative decade and IFATCA had reflected the times whilst achieving its early objectives.

CHAPTER 4

The IFATCA Journal, 'The Controller'

The official journal of IFATCA has its roots in the German Air Traffic Controllers' Association's publication 'Der Flugleiter' Originally; the German association, Verband Deutscher Flugleiter (VDF), used to present a mimeographed bulletin of general information to its membership. It was later, in 1958, that the VDF's Dieter Ebert first published a printed bulletin entitled 'Der Flugleiter’ This domestic journal actually achieved a relatively wide circulation in Europe and gained an impressive reputation in a very short time both in Germany and abroad. The magazine became a valuable source of information not only for the ATC community but also for civil and military aviation organisations, the avionics industry, pilots, airlines, airport operating agencies and even (in Germany) legislative bodies.

'Der Flugleiter', however, became something of a victim of its own success and soon the demand was outstripping the VDF's financial ability to supply the magazine free of charge to its readership. The VDF sought subscriptions in July, 1961 and this request was enthusiastically responded to.

When the new organisation, IFATCA, came into existence, the newly elected officers immediately saw the need for, and the value of, exchanging expert opinion and disseminating information to those in the aviation business. They also identified the need for a respected vehicle to carry that opinion and information. The founding conference in Amsterdam (October, 1961) decided that IFATCA needed a quality publication and ‘Der Flugleiter’ fitted this need perfectly since it already had a semi-professional production facility, a wide circulation and respected reputation.

flugleiter-controller
After December 1961, Der Flugleiter changed to The Controller
and became the Federation's official Journal.

The German association, in turn, was happy to offer their publication as the Federations masthead.

So ‘Der Flugleiter’ became 'The Controller’ in January, 1962. By this time, Walter Endlich had become Editor of 'Der Flugleiter’. Born in 1933, Endlich studied electrical engineering and communications and worked in a telecommunications research laboratory before becoming a controller in the Frankfurt Area Control Centre and subsequently a member of the VDF Board. A founder member of the Federation, Endlich was a natural to assume a role on the Board as Editor of the Federations new journal.

First Editor of The Controller, Walter Endlich

In an editorial to his domestic readers in December, 1961 Endlich thanked IFATCA for "faith and acknowledgment expressed by appointing 'Der Flugleiter’ official journal of the Federation." From its first edition, The Controller switched from the German language to English, thus acknowledging its new international image, responsibilities and character. In a small concession to its multicultural readership, initial editions also carried 'inlays' from the respective Member Associations written in their native languages.

About this time, the Dutch Guild was also producing a quality domestic newsletter. The Guild itself was born in September, 1957 (as we saw in Chapter 2) and immediately recognised the requirement for a journal to contribute to the realisation of their goals. At their 1st annual meeting, the Guild decided upon publication of "Scanner" and, during its short life, it also received significant recognition and distribution, publishing articles from as far afield as America and Australia.

Scanner dosed its pages in February, 1962 acknowledging that The Controller was now fulfilling the same need that it addressed. From the outset, Scanner had made its presence felt in two areas. The original edition (and many that followed) stressed the need for recognition of the human element in air traffic control. The Dutch Guild was therefore at the forefront of consideration of human factors aspects in ATC. Scanner's second area of influence was its pursuit of international cooperation between the national ATC associations. The journal reported upon every step along the path of IFATCA's formation, constantly endorsing the aims of such an organisation. Scanner only ceased publication when it was obvious that IFATCA was a viable entity with its own publication which could replace national journals and which was furthering the aims of the Federation in the manner that Scanner itself had.

Whilst the German VDF's publication thus became the Federations window to the world, IFATCA discovered that it itself was unable to manage the magazine because of a paucity of resources. So, at the request of the Federation, the VDF actually volunteered to continue with overall management, production and distribution of The Controller from the outset. Just as importantly, perhaps more so, they also guaranteed the financial success by balancing the Income and Expenditure Account. However, the Board continually expressed concerns at the VDF accepting an undue burden as to the cost of The Controller. As a measure of their concern, at their October, 1963 meeting in Köln, the IFATCA Board Officers, voted to advance to the VDF the sum of £85 to defray the cost of producing the edition that featured the London conference report (Vol.2 No.2 April, 1963). This edition was much larger than normal. That same Board meeting concluded that it was “undue that a single Association should bear this extra burden on behalf of the Federation". The Board decided that IFATCA should assume the financial responsibility for the magazine whilst making every endeavour to make it self supporting. The VDF, however, renewed their offer to continue the subsidisation, provided it was not unduly high, and occasionally the magazine broke even. The VDF continued in this vein right up to 1966. It was, in fact, only at the Rome conference that year that a mutual decision was reached for the Germans to relinquish management of the magazine and it was agreed that overall responsibility for administration, finance and production would transfer to IFATCA from 1st January, 1967. Later, in October, 1966, the Board established a separate fund to facilitate this transfer and transferred £250 (at the time around CHF3050) to the fund and resolved to publish the magazine's accounts separately.

As part of this plan for the journal to be self-supporting, in 1964 Endlich reduced the circulation by 10% (by reducing the number of complimentary copies), obtained more advertising and proposed reducing the 1964 editions to 20 pages. Whilst accepted, this latter drastic proposal never fully materialised (although there was a small reduction in the number of pages) as the amount of copy and advertising allowed relatively normal production runs and, in fact, the VDF returned to IFATCA that year's grant of £100 as no loss was incurred.

In those days The Controller was meant to be published in early January, April, July and October in order to take advantage of German postal regulations allowing reduced shipping rates. Whilst this was the theoretical production schedule, in fact the journal seldom went out on time in the publication month. Thus it was with a high degree of pride that Endlich was able to report to the 1965 conference that "in April, 1965 for the first time in the history of The Controller, we have been able to mail the journal at the beginning of the scheduled publication month". This happy state of affairs came about through an amazing feat by the publishers, Dr. W. Kramer & Co., who somehow managed to print, assemble and mail the edition within one week.

The proposed 1967 transfer of responsibility did not quite eventuate as easily as was hoped. Prior to the transfer of management of The Controller, the Federations financial management also transferred from Denmark to Switzerland as a result of the change of occupancy in the Treasurer's position at the Rome conference in 1966. An unforeseen ramification of this move was that Swiss tax laws required payment of 27% of any gross interest earned in Switzerland be paid to the Board of Assessment in Switzerland. Since IFATCA by now had some funds invested in Switzerland and its operating accounts would likewise now be in that country, this law would impact upon them and they could ill afford to lose such revenues.

The way out of this was contained in Swiss regulations which allowed international organisations an entitlement to reclaim this tax deduction if they had their legal seat in Switzerland. The Federation at that time was officially domiciled in Köln, West Germany (still in the home of their original Honorary Secretary, Hans Thau) and its official currency was the Pound Sterling. Obviously, a major decision was called for and the legal implications to a very uninitiated group were a little daunting. With IFATCA now set to take over production of The Controller, new contracts for production and distribution would be required with their publishing house in Frankfurt. So it became apparent that whilst the Federation dealt in Sterling, was domiciled in Germany and fiscally operated out of Switzerland, new contracts which would be financially detrimental for the Federation were not viable.

In order to guarantee the uninterrupted publication of the journal, the Board of Officers therefore was forced to propose that the VDF again continue temporarily the management of the magazine. By the 6th conference in Geneva in April, 1967 this problem had still not been resolved and advice sought from other 'experienced’ organisations such as IFALPA and the 'Union des Associations Internationales' proved to be of no assistance either. In the end it was broader international fiscal developments on a much higher level that were the catalyst for a solution. In late 1967 the Pound Sterling was seriously devalued and, to protect their finances, the Board decided to switch their official currency from the Pound to the Swiss Franc.

Further considerations of the Swiss Commercial Laws also showed the wisdom of shifting the registration of the Federation from Germany to Switzerland and the 1968 annual conference obliged with the decision to establish the 'siege sociale' in Geneva, where it remains today. With all the Federations eggs now in the Swiss basket, the problem was solved. The Federation duly assumed full responsibility for The Controller owing Germany a tremendous debt, not only for its generosity in singly ensuring its continuation, but for its outstanding management as well.

Unlike Der Flugleiter, which was fully supported by members' subscriptions, The Controller has always relied upon advertising revenues and initially the production and very size of each edition was totally dependent on the amount of advertising sold. In the very early days, this always presented difficulties and the VDF, to varying degrees, relied upon the IFATCA subsidy. Things slowly improved, however, and by the time of the 1966 annual conference, Editor Endlich was able to report that The Controller had almost become self-supporting in 1965. This miraculous near-achievement was only possible though, effectively, through the outstanding efforts of two individuals. In those early days, Mrs. Ursula Endlich used to do all the typing for the magazine, solicit and sell advertising space and look after the routine correspondence and Walter Endlich was solely responsible for compiling articles, layout, proof-reading, production coordination and distribution. It wasn't until 1967 that IFATCA actually managed to break even financially with The Controller. For the first time, in that year, the management team (that is, Mr. and Mrs. Endlich) was able to report a small excess.

Ursula Endlich was key in the production

of The Controller magazine.

In the very early days when Endlich worked in Frankfurt, the printing house was just 10 minutes away and coordination was a simple matter. However, after his 1964 transfer to Brussels - a distance of some 380 Kms - putting an issue together became a little more difficult. Continually working on a shoestring, Endlich used to determine how many pages they could afford to print, put together some text and mailed it to Frankfurt for setting. Kramer's would send the proofs back to Brussels. Estimation of the overall volume of an issue and possible insertion of illustrations and their size was done in parallel with the proofreading. There followed the laborious exercise of layout and page make up via gluing the lot onto carefully prepared prototype forms. These had various frame patterns superimposed to facilitate the arrangement of text and illustrations. This finished product was then bundled off to Frankfurt where it was configured, printed and again mailed back to Brussels for final checking. In anybody's language this was a cumbersome procedure and changes had to be made.

Endlich alleviated his problem in the time honoured IFATCA way: he spent his personal time. When he had his text and illustrations ready, he took a few days of his annual leave, drove to Frankfurt and performed all the tasks on the spot with Dr. Kramer.

When we look at what was involved in producing each edition of the journal, we can start to appreciate the commitment of Ursula and Walter Endlich. Even so, Volume 7, Number 3 made other issues pale in comparison. Pursuing President Tekstra's aim of a more attractive figurehead and including a fulsome account of the Munich conference with many more photos than usual, the July, 1968 edition ran to an incredible 92 pages! It was by far the most expensive issue ever (DM12,650 for printing and mailing) and was, and still is, the most voluminous edition ever printed. The print run was also increased for this edition and a wider distribution given. Despite this considerable cost, Endlich was able to proudly advise the Directors in Munich that all costs would be covered by subscriptions and advertising.

Such extravagance couldn't continue. 1970 was to be a difficult year financially for the Federation and the journal also suffered seeing some advertising contracts cancelled. To cut costs, The Controller saw some tight budgeting with smaller print runs and creative shipping arrangements. A freeze on any changes was imposed and Endlich and Dr. Kramer even borrowed printing blocks from other publications.

Finally, the magazine was again reduced in size that year. To cover production and distribution costs for editions 1 and 2, it proved necessary to take recourse to the magazine's reserve fund and some CHF3,000 were taken from the piggy bank.

The 1970 conference report particularly (in relation to earlier conference report editions) was severely pared back with fewer conference papers, details and photographs included. Even so, Volume 9, Number 3 still consisted of 40 pages! Endlich's strict measures resuscitated the publication though and, by conference 1971, he again had managed to erase the red figures on his balance sheet, although only just!

The magazine continued to struggle, however, but apparently, at least in part, through its own fault. From the time of its inception right through to 1972, The Controller had not increased its subscription rates (8DM per edition) and continued to distribute a sizeable number of free copies to various administrations, airlines, etc. This dual policy of maintaining rates and providing free subscriptions was, in no small measure, detracting from the bottom line. This, plus the increasing difficulties in attracting advertising and the ever increasing pressures of the huge amount of voluntary work, was placing great, almost insurmountable, strains on the management of the journal. In his editorial in the December, 1972 edition, Walter Endlich came close to admitting defeat.

He said: "The tremendous growth of IFATCA and its increasing activity on a world-wide basis have brought about some problems, not only in respect of the efficient administration and management of the Federation, but also for the publication of its journal. A point has been reached beyond which the production of the journal on a mainly voluntary basis becomes extremely difficult." Looking at several organisational changes that were becoming necessary and probable increases in subscription rates, Endlich expressed his thoughts that publication of The Controller may have to be suspended temporarily. One can imagine what he must have been feeling as he put these words into print. After more than ten years publication for IFATCA, 3 years as a printed 'Der Flugleiter' and several years before that as a mimeographed handout, a lot had been invested in this publication and its antecedents.

In fact, by the time of that edition (December, 1972), publication of The Controller already had become rather desultory. 1971 saw Volume 10, Numbers 1 and 2 come out roughly on time in March and June but 1971 was to see only one more edition in the latter part of the year. Of great curiosity value, the second issue of 1971, whilst it appeared approximately on time, is actually undated making it unique amongst editions of The Controller. Perhaps it will be a valuable collector's item one day! The next year was to be even worse for the magazine.

The 1972 conference was witness to IFATCA's first change in its Board structure and The Controller was directly affected. Following a recommendation from SC6, the Directors in Dublin removed the Editor as a voting member of the Board and made him an ex officio officer, that is, non voting and his position became an appointment by the Directors. Coincidentally, The Controller reached its nadir in 1972.

Walter Endlich's final edition of the journal, called the IFATCA Anniversary Issue, was the only edition of The Controller published in 1972 (it was listed as Volume 11, Numbers 1-4) and, apart from Endlich's editorial, it consisted entirely of reprints of articles already published in earlier editions. This action brought some criticism but Endlich had been receiving many requests for reprints of technical articles by 'old' MAs and by newer ones joining. So this was seen as an opportunity to both comply with the Board's desire to highlight IFATCA's 10th anniversary in some tangible manner (although the anniversary had since passed) and, at a time of publication difficulties and material scarcity, to at least achieve publication of one edition of the journal that year.

The next edition of The Controller was not to appear until August, 1973. In the intervening period, the Reykjavik conference in May, 1973 saw Endlich step down as Editor. In his closing address to the conference, President Monin paid due homage to the man who had not only managed the affairs of The Controller but, as well, Standing Committee 2 since it was formed 10 years earlier. J-D Monin said: "You, Walter Endlich, a man of all work, are the last survivor of the first generation of Officers of IFATCA. For twelve years¹ you have not only been the Editor but also the Public Relations Officer and the whole of Standing Committee II. The Controller is your own child and has been of inestimable value for the settlement and the dissemination of the image of the Federation. Your work as Editor has not been free of obstacles and difficulties. The lack of time, the lack of finances and the workload have been part of your every day's life. Your devotion to IFATCA will remain undying in our memories ...". For his outstanding contribution, Endlich was awarded the Scroll of Honour becoming only the third recipient of IFATCA's highest honour.

Stepping in to the breach at Reykjavik was Mr. G.J. 'Ge' de Boer, a member of the South African ATC Association.

Upon his appointment, 'Ge' de Boer was immediately most impressed with the power and the reach of the young IFATCA. To facilitate the handover from Walter Endlich, it was arranged for de Boer to visit the Endlichs at their home in Aachen for a few days. This meant a flight from Johannesburg to Frankfurt and train trips from Frankfurt to Köln and on to Aachen. The days chez Endlich were very full and fruitfull, so much so that come the end of his sojourn, de Boer suddenly realised that he was cutting it fine for the return train from Aachen. If he missed this he would also miss the Köln connection and consequently the flight to South Africa.

Whilst Walter Endlich (very) quickly drove de Boer to the local station, Ursula Endlich phoned the Operations Chief at Köln Railway Station, explained the situation and requested he hold the train at Aachen until the men arrived. The Operations Chief generously acceded to this request and, on arrival at the station, de Boer was amazed to hear his name being called on the public address system with the invitation to proceed to a certain track where his train to Köln was waiting for him.

De Boer's first edition in August, 1973 (Vol 12, No 1-3) came with a new commitment from the Executive Board to re-establish The Controller as the preeminent ATC magazine in the world. For the first time, Reykjavik provided a sound financial basis for the journal along with guidelines to ensure that The Controller reflected the administrative, technical and professional aspects and aspirations of IFATCA. In so doing, the Board considered that continuation of The Controller was essential because it "is one of the Federation's main instruments in trying to bring about what all of us so ardently desire: true professional status for all air traffic controllers."

This August edition was part of the Board's promise to re-introduce the journal.

In a complete re-vamp, they decided the magazine needed a new, fresh cover page and reviewed editorial policy to increase subject matter such as the human element in ATC and contributions from the Federation's Corporate Members. Daniel Monin had been President for just over 12 months and the journal's contents and editorials started to reflect his philosophy of caring for the 'human' aspects of his membership. The Federation now was marching to the tune of a different drummer and, in consequence, in a different direction. The 'new' The Controller was to clearly enunciate this.

The Board further promised regular appearances on a quarterly basis commencing the following November although they recognised that the timetable was ambitious given that factors such as advertising revenue, subscriptions, contributions, etc would be difficult to re-establish after the recent haphazard publication record.

Not only that but now, with the election as Editor of a South African, there also would be major internal organisational problems as well.

Initially, the whole team (Editor, assistants and publisher) had been German based. Even when, in 1964, Endlich transferred to Eurocontrol in Brussels, close coordination and consultation was relatively easy. Now, the prime component, the Editor, was domiciled in South Africa with the other components still resident in Germany. This alone was a daunting thought and one would have to assume the Board had misgivings at the prospect. This geographic separation was overcome by de Boer organising an editorial team in South Africa and the responsibility for management and distribution was allocated to 3rd Vice-President (Administration) Horst Guddat. Guddat was to become Managing Editor with the added responsibility of negotiating advertising with agents. Production remained with Kramer & Co.

It is now history that they did fulfil the Board's promise and The Controller has appeared uninterrupted every three months from that time. Not only that but IFATCA's flagship is totally self-sustaining and now even contributes financially to the affairs of the Federation. But more on that later.

By the end of 1973, the appearance of The Controller was looking a little dated and the promised changes were introduced. The original cover design depicting several air routes meeting over a fix was changed to show a map of the world overlaid by a radar scope and the colour was altered on a regular basis with each quarterly edition. It remained that way for a further 17 years until 1990 when new production methods (and a better financial situation) allowed for a different image.

Initially, a key item in any issue of The Controller was the editorial. More than just the editor's ramblings, designed to fill space, this feature in The Controller always dearly indicated the Federations thoughts and directions. Walter Endlich and, even more so, Ge de Boer utilised 'their' space to articulate the Federation line and to keep members aware of important aspects and development of IFATCA thinking. A classic example was de Boer's IFATCA's New Direction editorial in August, 1975. He took this opportunity to explain to doubting members why the Federation had to stand up for what it believed in to achieve recognition and to maintain safety. He said that rather than abandoning the long cherished professional approach in supporting industrial type activities, the Federation was merely "moving with the times" and linking air traffic control efficiency with air traffic controller conditions of employment. Members were left in no doubt that the Executive Board (and Daniel Monin especially) had decided that "IFATCA needed a new direction" and were embarking upon it.

During those days, the editorial was occasionally used to berate where required.

In another very cogent editorial in November, 1975 Ge de Boer decided to criticise another "prominent aviation journal" that was ignoring IFATCA and air traffic control in general. In making the point that aviation magazines were not acknowledging, and did not understand, the importance of the ATC system, de Boer said they were "doing their readers a gross disservice in keeping them in the dark. Maybe the mysteries and complexities of ATC are beyond the average aviation journalist's comprehension… but what to think of a leading international aviation magazine, which published a lengthy report on IFALPA's 1975 annual conference ... but curtly rejected reports sent in covering IFATCA's annual conference in Melbourne." The same journal's "Vectors to Confusion" editorial saying that the poor, forgotten pilot of our times is so over monitored that his area of responsibility had become blurred was given similar short shrift by de Boer.

The fact that the Federation chose to make such statements and criticisms was further proof of growing confidence and maturity and was a dear indication of its, and its journal's, independence.

The Controller, less controversially, was also a purveyor of individual controller's thoughts on his job and, on occasions, published some pithy prose. The following, contributed by a PATCO member in 1975, was published in February, 1976 ironically just immediately after PATCO's withdrawal.

"He came home early that evening. It was a good day because he was on a regular shift, able to eat a normal dinner at 7pm. Next week he would be on the 3 to 11 pm shift, and see his children only briefly in the morning.

He should take his wife out more often, he thought, but somehow the time they could be together is brief and quickly eaten up with other matters.

"The phone rang and it was his brother on the line. 'Look, I've decided to go ahead with that real estate business. It's your last chance to get into it.' "'Give me a day or two to think it over' he answered. It was a subject his brother, who was doing very well, often brought up. They could become partners and he might have a lot more job security and money than now.

True, he often did gripe about the job. There was a long way to go in working conditions. But then he had been controlling aircraft for a very long time. It was the thing he enjoyed most doing. It was also a job he was darned good at.

"He walked over to the window to look out at the placid landscape for a few moments. Times before he had thought about getting out. He always came back to the same decision.

“There was nothing else he would be satisfied doing. He wasn't a hero by any means. But he knew how important his work was and he knew how good he was at it. He was glad his brother had called, however, he felt more relaxed. It was great to belong to a great profession."

In late 1976 Ge de Boer tendered his resignation as Editor and produced his last edition in February, 1977. In a parting salvo, he fired a well placed and well deserved shot at the American and Australian associations, both of which resigned in 1976. He said: "During my four years as editor I have been astonished to notice the still widespread indifference displayed by so many air traffic controllers regarding the obvious and absolute necessity to have a strong voice representing controllers' vital interests at an international level at forums which matter so much to us." De Boer was an internationalist to the end.

In farewelling him in print, President Monin remembered how de Boer was appointed Editor at the Reykjavik conference and "... how in a very efficient manner he revived within a few months our nearly dying journal. During four years and under somewhat difficult circumstances (he) worked hard to raise the quality and at the same time make The Controller more attractive and he succeeded beyond expectation". There is little doubt that The Controller would have died back in 1973 if de Boer hadn't breathed life into it. That he not only did so but did it with considerable flair and dignity in an incredibly short space of time and from the relative 'isolation' of South Africa is miraculous and the Federation owes Ge de Boer a huge debt. Succeeding Editors have been fortunate to embrace a flourishing and stable instrument.

Stepping into big shoes from the May, 1977 edition was Brian Jones, a military controller with the RAF in Germany and member of the U.K Guild. Jones started in fine fashion by stating: "Ours is the ultimate in service - if we do our job efficiently the majority of our customers will not be aware we exist. No ATC delays, no violent avoiding action, no headlines - no one need know we exist let alone know what our problems are. The flying public should know, but often don't. The pilots should know, but many need reminding. The authorities should know, but may need informing."

Such auspicious beginnings, however, were not able to be maintained and although he continued the high standard of production and editorial content, virtually from day one, Jones found himself in trouble with deadlines and material.

During his time as Editor, Jones resigned from the RAF but his hoped for better opportunities to devote time to the journal were not realised and he found himself increasingly under pressure from conflicting commitments. As he said at the time: "I don't think we've made a deadline yet. Without Contributing Editor Horst Guddat's constant efforts we would probably have missed the odd issue." The Board accepted Jones' resignation as from the end of 1978. No volunteers for the position were immediately forthcoming so, to guarantee continued normal production of the Federation’s journal, Vice-President Professional Andreas Avgoustis stepped in for what was intended to be a short term as 'Interim Editor'. He continued in the role of Editor until March, 1986!

At the end of the seventies, inflation was rampant in Europe and this had a commensurate effect on costs for the Federation and its publication. Printing costs in Frankfurt had become unacceptably high and the Board was forced to increase subscription costs which had remained unaltered (still in the original Deutsche Marks) since February, 1974 when they were reduced (yes, reduced) from 8DM to 6DM. At the same time, they reluctantly had to decide to move the journal's printing house from Kramer & Co, whence it had been since Volume 1, Number 1 and before with Der Flugleiter.

During 1980 the Board considered competing offers and the merits of moving the responsibility for printing The Controller to a site in Cyprus, Ireland or Switzerland. Simultaneous with the increase in subscription costs to 8 Swiss Francs for members and 20 Swiss Francs for non-members (advertising rates were, however, maintained at existing levels) as from 1981, printing was assumed by a firm in Bern, Switzerland ('Der Bund; Verlag und Druckerei AG) where it remained until June, 1993. If nothing else, IFATCA is loyal to its printers !

With the move to Bern, the Board decided that the services of a Managing Editor were no longer required and Horst Guddat relinquished this task after almost 8 years, having assumed the role whilst still Vice-President Administration to help Ge de Boer when he took over the editorship.

This move left Andreas Avgoustis on his own as Editor and, of course not only that, he was also Vice-President Professional. He had shouldered a heavy load although his output remained high and at all times very professional. Prior to becoming a controller, Avgoustis had spent some time as a reporter with a local Nicosia newspaper and this no doubt helped. He was also a qualified lawyer. So he had plenty of legal experience and an extensive background to rely upon. This was to stand him in good stead for he was continually 'changing hats' and he became heavily involved in two major disputes involving MAs during his tenure.

Whilst he once used a farewell reminiscence from Horst Guddat (on the occasion of Guddat's retirement after 10 years as an officer with the Federation), Ge de Boer otherwise retained exclusivity over the magazine's editorial page. Avgoustis adopted a different approach and frequently gave page one over to his President, Harri Henschler and occasionally featured dual editorials from himself and Henschler.

Demonstrating further originality, on a couple of occasions guest editors appeared, notably Richard Weston in 4/81 - he commented on the need for integrity in ATC systems - and in 2/83 the slot was given to the FAA’s National Transportation Safety Board. This article (in lieu of an actual editorial) covered the NTSB's initial report into 'Safety in the US Skies' following the PATCO strike and confirmed the validity of IFATCA's often voiced concerns that the critically reduced US ATC workforce was overextended.

Not quite as hard hitting with his editorials as de Boer, Avgoustis nevertheless accurately reflected exactly where the Federation was. Naturally, he found this easy to do being, as he was, also an Executive Board member and conspicuously involved in day to day affairs. He also made many valuable contributions to the magazine by way of articles. With his legal background, ‘AA’ provided his readership with informative material on the law and its relation to specifics such as hijacking and controller responsibilities. He continued with Ted McCluskey's long running series on international law and afforded plenty of space to problems besetting individual associations.

Thus, no doubt unconsciously, the magazine started to portray an increased concern with human factors type matters as opposed to the previous concentration on technical issues. Articles on and from the ILO and various safety aspects featured.

This was perhaps not unexpected given Avgoustis background and qualifications and the continuing industrial restlessness of the membership.

However, problems were brewing and the journal slid into serious debt by the end of 1982. The 1982 budget showed an expenditure excess of CHF9,000 over income and the 1983 proposal was for a further CHF8,000 deficit. This critical situation arose through difficulties with advertising agents and the rising costs of printing. Operating now by himself, Avgoustis increasingly relied upon agents to deliver advertising. This they did although at considerable cost (up to 50% of production costs) and then, frequently, after deducting their commission, they failed to remit the balance. Operating as EVP Professional and Editor and article author and continually chasing contributions (at which he was very successful), Avgoustis succumbed to the pressure and, in truth, he failed to ensure consistent payments from those agents. The burden of collecting those monies then fell to the Federation’s Treasurer since The Controller was not, at the time, a separate entity.

As the Directors in Split became aware of the problem, they viewed a potentially fatal financial situation with alarm and passed the following resolution: "The continuing financial deficit of the journal is not acceptable. The Executive Board is instructed to examine the whole question of the journal and its finances and make recommendations to the '84 conference." (Res.83.A.4)

Rarely have Directors at conference so instructed the Executive Board. It was a clear sign of their concern and of their determination that the financial threat to their journal had to be speedily removed. As the conference proceeded, the Directors gave further thought to the matter and resolved that even more immediate and direct action was required. A sub-committee was formed and this group made a series of recommendations which were adopted as replacement for the previously accepted resolution A.4.

Amongst other things, the new resolution (Res.83.A.28) required that a separate budget be established for the magazine. It also detailed for The Controller that there be better and more timely subscription payment requirements, that invoices to advertisers be sent earlier, that there be a drastic reduction in the number of complimentary issues distributed and that the size be held at 32 pages. (It had grown over the years from an original 32 pages to a consistent 48 pages since its resurrection in 1973.) Finally in this recommendation, they demanded an investigation into "the practise of payment of commissions to advertising agencies".

And the Directors didn't just stop there. They then placed on the work programme for SC3 the item "Assist Editor in production of The Controller”. So not only had the Directors taken positive steps to ensure the journal's financial position and its accountability to the membership, they also effectively placed the Federations financial watchdog in charge. Two members of the Swiss association, Bernard Laydevant and Michel Henchoz, were assigned responsibility for Sales Promotion and Accounting respectively. Together with Hans-Ulrich Heim (initially as chairman SC3 and then formally as chairman of the group) and later Patrick Schelling, these dedicated members formed The Controller Managing Group and exercised their responsibilities for more than a dozen years.

Things happened quickly after that. Issue 3/83 and subsequent issues reverted to 32 pages, where they remain today. This alone resulted in savings of approximately one third of previous printing costs. By the time of the next conference, the Treasurer was able to advise that income for the journal for 1983/84 was maintained at CHF68,000 but expenditure had been reined in to just CHF54,000. A similar excess was forecast for 1984/85. In his Executive Board report during the opening ceremonies at Estoril, President Henschler was able to note that the journal was back to a more balanced financial situation became of the various actions taken.

Henschler specifically mentioned the members of' The Controller Managing Group' of SC3 who helped greatly in bringing about the positive development. The Directors didn't relax, however. Whilst in Portugal, they maintained SC3's grip on things by adding to their work program an item: "Retain responsibility for The Controller Managing Group" and passed a further resolution (Res.84ak.51) “That advertising management for The ControUerbe the responsibility of SC3". Effectively, the Directors had resurrected the position of Managing Editor and now ensuring that, with The Controller's management, there would be no grey areas.

Things weren't all black and white, however. In 1985, whilst controllers still worked with monochrome displays, Avgoustis brightened their publication by introducing colour to the magazine. In that year, the first colour advertisements appeared and a few articles featured pale blue headings.

With the 1984 conference controls in place, a new maturity, a strong management team and, by the time of the 1986 conference, accumulated reserves of CHF27,000, the journal developed an authority and independence that only could have been dreamed of in earlier years. It was deemed time to take advantage of this strong position and guarantee its pre-eminence as the leading ATC magazine.

The San Jose conference decided that the journal could be released a little from the shackles imposed in '83 and '84 and resolved that a new, independent management group be established. SC3 was thus relieved of its responsibilities in this area and Directors determined to set up a separate and new unit to be "known as The Controller Management Group" (CMG) and that responsibility for it be vested in “a Member Association to be nominated by the Directors". " In a subtle move, however, it was the Swiss association, who was also responsible for SC3, that was first nominated. So the responsibilities didn't travel far.

The same conference decided to examine anew the finances with a view to guaranteeing continued production. Another resolution created a dedicated reserve fund to cover the cost of any cancellation charges arising in the event of cessation of publication. The Directors decided that such a fund should be capped at CHF30,000 and further decided, in a move that would have echoes a number of years later, that if reserves exceeded CHF30,000 those excesses should be distributed according to a working paper from the Board. A year later, the reserves stood at the figure of CHF30,000 and the new Editor, Harri Henschler, moved that year's surplus (CHF8,672) to the IFATCA reserve fund. The Board further agreed that the Editor could have sole discretion for outgoings up to CHF1,000. Circumstances had certainly changed.

But, as it turned out, they had changed too much for some. The new CMG strongly maintained the opinion that The Controller's monies should stay with The Controller and the next year, 1988, they fought back. The CMG presented a paper in Rio which radically altered what had been established in 1986. Despite some misgivings from the Board, the CMG now proposed creation of a 'Working Capital Fund' and capped that at CHF30,000. They then sought two more funds for 'their' publication: an 'Operating Reserve Fund' and a ‘The Controller Reserve Fund'. The Working Capital Fund was essentially a renamed Reserve Fund, still capped at CHF30,000 but now to cover the day to day production expenses. The new funds were to cover shortfalls in production expenses and improvements in the case of the Operating Reserve and the Reserve Fund was intended to cover any annual shortfall or closing down process. Then, in the key change, they were successful in convincing the Directors that "any income in excess over expenditures

shall be allocated 50% each to the "Operating Reserve" and "The Controller Reserve Fund". The Swiss managers of The Controller had deftly overturned the earlier decision to share the magazine's profits and ensured they kept 'their' money where they saw it as belonging. The Board's continuing reservations were somewhat ameliorated with the inclusion of a clause that the limits of these funds be determined from time to time by the President and the EVP Administration. Remarkably, the CMG then won some financial retrospectivity with two further resolutions and had returned to their coffers the earlier distributed (to IFATCA reserves) excess income from the previous two years. The Controller certainly had a strong management team in charge now!

In the mean time, early 1986 had seen Andreas Avgoustis' retirement and Volume 25, No 2 of June 1986 saw the new Vice-President Administration Ulli Windt step in as Editor ad interim. The next edition saw Immediate Past President Harri Henschler taking on the same role. Following completion of his duties in the then official post of Past President, Henschler subsequently became permanent Editor with the publication of the June, 1987 edition.

Always a major article contributor whilst President, Henschler continued in the same vein as Editor. His personal input by way of articles far outweighed that of any other Editor. He introduced innovations, such as providing book reviews, and culled esoteric articles from far and wide on mid air collision reports, wind shear, FAA musings on satellite communications and medical items such as getting a good night's sleep, to name just a few. Almost every edition featured an article or two authored by himself, no doubt more reflecting his own dedication to the task than a paucity of contributions. Edition 4/86 was a case in point as, apart from the editorial itself and the book review, he penned three other articles and provided data on the new Executive Council members for a personal contribution of seven pages out of twenty six (there were six pages of advertisements too). Harri Henschler was, if nothing else, a prolific contributor to The Controller.

Interestingly, whilst making such a major personal contribution and eliciting more than the equivalent, Henschler also reverted to an almost exclusivity with the magazine's editorial, only twice printing generic contributions on page one from the Executive Board and just twice more including contributions by the President of the day. In an almost equivalent period, as President Henschler had provided six solo editorials and two joint editorials with Avgoustis.

In 1990 Henschler took modernisation of The Controller a step further with the introduction of a new cover. Finally moving away from the radar scope overlaid on a map of the world that had served so well for 17 years, the new cover design would see a different photograph each edition. Featuring scenes of ATC themes (such as radomes, control towers, radar screens), the cover provided a bright new image and, with subtle changes, the new style has endured through to the new millennium.

Henschler imbued The Controller with a new identity and spirit and President Stuart fittingly and accurately described his contribution in this area at conference '91 when he said "Under his guidance, The Controller has grown and developed into a top quality publication".

The dawn of the fourth decade of IFATCA and its journal coincidentally saw a new Editor appointed at conference 1991. As with one of his predecessors, Terry Crowhurst was an air traffic controller in the RAF in Germany. The similarity ended there.

Crowhurst was fortunate in inheriting a very strong CMG still provided entirely by the Swiss association. Bernard Laydevant was now chairman, Michel Henchoz was accounts manager and Patrick Schelling was advertising and production manager.

This was indeed a formidable team and, since the CMG's origination in the early eighties, they had established a very sound and strong financial situation and operating autonomy, which they jealously guarded.

Of the group, Patrick Schelling in particular was keen to modernise production of the magazine (beyond the still employed 'cut and paste' technique) and found a willing supporter in Crowhurst who shared his passion for modern computer technology. These two took their arguments for new desktop publishing methods and increased colour to the other two CMG members. They finally won the day when Crowhurst was able to show significant savings on new equipment purchase through duty free prices by being a member of the British armed forces. Thus, whilst modernising, the accumulated reserves, now representing almost two years production, were not severely dented.

At the same time, a major rift was developing between the Executive Board and the CMG. In those days the Editor only attended the conference EB meetings and one other EB meeting during the year. IFATCA at large, rather than The Controller, paid for his attendant expenses. The Executive Board, viewing the considerable funds in the CMG coffers, believed that some of those monies should be made available to the parent body. This 'raid' on the journal's finances was resisted by the CMG but the Executive Board, at their February, 1992 meeting, decided that the Editor should again become an ex officio member of the Board attending all meetings with his expenses paid from CMG funds although, in part in compromise, IFATCA continued to meet his conference attendance expenses. Naturally, these manoeuvrings caused Crowhurst, new to the scene and now an ex officio board member, some discomfort since he was caught between divided loyalties.

Nevertheless, he adroitly managed to keep faith with both sides and simultaneously introduced some radical changes.

From edition 3/91, Crowhurst increased the amount of coloured advertising, more prominently used blue in article content and headings and introduced 'Charlie' to the world. Charlie's Column (actually 1 or 2 pages) set out to present humorous sidelights on the serious business of aviation and ATC in particular. Additionally, from Charlie's inception, British controller Ken Tully has provided pertinent and witty cartoons to complement the articles. The 'column' has become a firm favourite of readers and many controllers, on receiving their copy of The Controller, turn to the penultimate page first. The identity of 'Charlie' remains a mystery to most to this day.

Another Crowhurst initiative was to have the various Board members contribute to the editorial page in every issue. In fact, their 'Foreword' page now has effectively replaced the editorial. He has thus, in part, echoed Andreas Avgoustis' occasional dual editorials and certainly moved away from his immediate predecessor's approach.

This rotation of musings from the Federations senior officers allowed insights into the individual Board members, how the Board was thinking, the directions it was taking and lesser known developments in ATC matters around the world. We weren't always enthusiastic volunteers and sometimes at Board meetings when Crowhurst called for scribes for the next editions, eyes were collectively downcast and steps backwards taken. In fact, it wasn't only the Editor chasing us. The Executive Secretary was looking for Board contributors to his Circular too. Seldom was it that we left a Board meeting without a commitment to one of the publications.

In 1992 the Board continued with its aim of having the now very profitable journal contribute financially to the Federation. A decision was taken for the CMG to fund some social events at conference, particularly those where the Corporate Members were involved and where some advertising business for the magazine could be generated. This proved too much for the existing CMG. They maintained that the profits they worked hard for and earned for the betterment and security of The Controller should remain with the journal. It was a legitimate point of view but the wider needs of the Federations core business were pressing and such a resource could not be ignored. Sadly, after many years of extremely valuable and professional input, the CMG'S Swiss trio of Messrs. Laydevant, Henchoz and Schelling resigned. There can be no doubt that the quality and reputation of the magazine at that time owed much to these gentlemen. Brought in as watchdogs some twelve years earlier, they turned the fortunes of the journal around and contributed considerably to its viability, quality and prestige. Among other things, their changes enabled much later deadlines making inclusion of last minute news or changes easier. This added relevance to each edition. And the 'iceberg' of their changes was much more considerable than just this 'tip'. Later events were to further underscore the debt owed to them by the Federation.

Perhaps in small part, the CMG's collective resignation was also triggered by another factor. Terry Crowhurst resigned his RAF commission in 1992 and moved to a new position with the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority at Gatwick airport. These two events resulted in the U.K. taking over responsibility for the CMG during the 1993 conference and they accepted this task as from the June issue. Initially, Patrick Schelling reconsidered and decided to continue as advertising manager (along with his wife Lin who was responsible for layout and artwork) and this smoothed the transition for Crowhurst a little as none of the new team had any experience. It also fell to Crowhurst to find a new printing house, accept production responsibility and initially assume chairmanship of the CMG. No small workload! This situation obviously could not endure as, at the very least, it is the MA responsible for the CMG who should chair the group. Consequently, Guild member Tim McKay took over the reins of the CMG from 1994 and Ron Mahendran (well known from his earlier commitment as a Corporate Member representative and CM Coordinator) relieved Schelling of his tasks.

This early period of Crowhurst's editorship and new domicile saw him introduce colour to the artides with the first colour photographs appearing in issue 3/93.

Other more subtle changes further added to an overall better presentation and more professional image. The commitment to the new desktop publishing techniques was paying off!

The Board remained steadfast in their belief that The Controller should contribute financially to wider Federation involvement and later in the decade, and under a different President, when IFATCA's Vision Document was produced (see Chapter 10), it was the CMG who contributed some CHF30,000 for the 10,000 copies printed. As a further indication of the contribution of the journal as a result of this policy, it is possible to identify 'savings' for the Federation of some CHF75,000 during this decade. Successive Executive Boards have maintained the need for the Editor to attend all their Board meetings. He is after all a Board member, albeit appointed and thus non-voting. If one considers the CMG's payment of the Editor's Board meeting expenses, his honoraria and conference contributions each year, one can readily appreciate the journal's commitment in this area. It is a significant contribution and one only made possible by the continued professional management of the journal in the style established in the more recent years.

Despite the difficulties, the quality of the journal remained high, content was informative, interesting and entertaining and advertising revenues flourished. Each year tidy profits were made and reserves continued well above one year's production costs so continuous production was ensured. (A sum of about CHF100,000 is required annually for printing and distribution.) The Controller, however, has remained self supporting and sees a print run of around 5,000 copies per issue with a readership of over 60,000 in more than 150 countries.

These somewhat halcyon days of the nineties were marred, however, by a turn for the worse in 1998. The magazine suffered again from a classical cash flow problem. Incredibly, despite routine audits, outstanding advertising debts and non-invoiced subscriptions were missed and the CMG was embarrassed to find themselves unable to meet some expenses. To solve the immediate problem, in an ironical twist of fortunes, the Board provided a loan to ensure uninterrupted production. The U.K. Guild (responsible for the CMG) acted promptly and appointed a new subscription manager and a new chairman for the CMG - Edge Green, recently retired as Executive Secretary. Within a year, most of the outstanding monies were recovered, the loan was well within sight of being repaid and the journal's funds were almost back to representing a year's production costs in reserve.

Thus The Controller was again a healthy entity, financially secure and strong and well placed to see in the new millennium. It would have been a travesty of justice and an insult to all who contributed so much over the previous 40 years for it to have been otherwise.

In its life long campaign to achieve proper recognition of the air traffic controller and his profession, the Federation has made extensive use of its journal, The Controller. Whilst undeniably the journal has acquired some of the stamp of those given stewardship over it, the publication has always been greater than those who have served it. But it is a combined effort and, recognising that, editors and management have always got on well together. In having the same aim to produce the best possible product, the Executive Board of the day has given virtually free rein to their editors.

The editors, in turn, have accepted their duty to produce a high quality publication and, whilst doing so, have reflected the Boards' approaches to issues and, naturally, their own attitudes. Occasionally, this policy has alienated members and readers but in the overall context it appears to have struck the correct chord with its readership.

Editors of The Controller are not free agents able to do with the journal what they like since they have a responsibility to the Board and the Federation's Directors not to jeopardise its position or viability or the Federations reputation. Nevertheless, they do have considerable freedom to comment on events without reference to management which must have faith in their appointee to utter a generally acceptable point of view. It is self evident that this approach has worked for IFATCA has seen only six Editors (Ulli Windt's one-off issue aside) in the forty years of its history.

This in itself is remarkable when one considers the differing personalities and approaches of the Federations officials, the turbulent times covered and the vastly different and changing demographics of the readership.

There is no question that the Editor can make a major impact on the thinking of his readers and thereby, potentially, on the future policies of the Federation.

Hopefully, his pronouncements will be constructive and balanced. In the seventies, quite a few members and subscribers stopped reading Ge de Boer's version of the journal because they thought he was too radical, too critical of mired establishments and outdated attitudes and too committed to fostering ordinary 'bread and butter' issues. But over this same period, the membership of IFATCA grew consistently and The Controller steadily increased its overall circle of readers, its sales figures and its advertising revenue and became self-supporting.

During the sixties, and in keeping with the Tekstra aim of prestige- and bridge-building, Walter Endlich set a very high technical standard as the target for the journal and this was achieved. Little of controversy was explored. Then, the necessary approach for IFATCA's management was to establish the organisation, have it earn respect and gain involvement. The personalities involved reflected the mores of the day and they achieved the necessary invitations to the technical forums that counted. The Federations flag bearer likewise reflected this approach and, whilst it could be said that the mostly technical contents were bland, they were necessary and were certainly informative (at least for the more technically advanced associations) and, in the main, non-controversial.

The second decade kept in tune with the Monin approach and vigorously highlighted the many imperfections in the controllers' working environment all over the world and, equally importantly, what the Federation was doing to try to put things right. Ge de Boer's approach (and to a lesser extent Jones' input and then, late in the decade, Andreas Avgoustis' contribution) was to clearly outline where the existing and developing problems were and what should be done about them. De Boer's editorials, unequivocal and pointed, directly addressed and even confronted the issues and the content of the magazine reflected the changing makeup of the controller, his environment and aspirations. The impact was made and, throughout the seventies, there existed a climate for reform and professional involvement (in the broader human factors context) that was un-thought of, and indeed was not permitted, at the outset.

By the eighties, the Federation was a well established and robust organisation and IFATCA had earned itself a reputation for its professional approach through the quality of its representatives and their expertise. The Controller was able to reflect this and now was delving into some controversial esoteric issues such as the legal implications of controller actions, government negligence, systems engineering, human machine interface concerns and medical matters.

The eighties saw two very experienced IFATCA officers in charge of The Controller. Andreas Avgoustis put in four years as the Vice President Professional and, partly overlapping, had accumulated two years as Editor as the decade began.

He continued in the role for another five years. Ex-President Henschler followed with five years as Editor. Previous Editors had come from 'outside' the Board and, although Board members (and ex officio following Walter Endlich), they were somewhat quarantined from policy decisions and thus more able to independently editorialise on the Federations direction. As one might surmise, Avgoustis' and Henschler's wealth of experience and their prior involvement with, and commitment to, the issues as elected officers were well reflected in the journal. Whilst there can be no question as to their application to the task, the eighties did witness a discernible quietening of the more strident tones of the prior decade. Doubtless matters such as the sobering effects of the PATCO strike, the failed Australian demands for global industrial action and a general improvement in conditions (in some areas) added to this approach. The emphasis seemed again to switch to education rather than agitation and technical and professional issues were prominent.

The calm, professional approach of the Federation and its masthead during the eighties seemed to set the tone for the following decade. This was despite the fact that at the helm was a very new style Executive Board, one, that given the personalities, could have been expected to be a little more radical. Additionally, of course, IFATCA was now a respected, mature organisation. The issues might not have changed but the approach had. From edition 2/91 to edition 4/99, The Controller had just a single editor with Terry Crowhurst becoming IFATCA's second longest serving editor. No crusader, Crowhurst was nonetheless something of a reformer and set out to make the journal, if not radical, then certainly readable.

Along the way, however, the traditional editorial all but disappeared. No longer a vehicle for directly espousing the Federation line, Crowhurst's 'editorials' seldom offered comment on matters of concern in the manner of de Boer or Henschler and, instead, page one simply became an outlet for opinion and information from the elected Board members. Leaving the Board members to take on this role, increasingly Crowhurst confined his contribution to magazine management matters and brief reporting of events. Expanding the input from others even further, Crowhurst has also introduced regional contributing editors and invited individual rank and file controllers and others to contribute on specific matters. Whilst lacking the editorial punch of earlier decades, the product today is a readable and entertaining, whilst still informative, publication.

The Controller has survived more than forty years and today is better than ever.

Along with the Federation itself, it has seen its share of tribulations but, unlike its parent, it once went very close to dying. This event alone seemed to bring home to the membership the great need for the magazine and the inestimable value of its contribution and continuity. Like the Federation, it has suffered some severe financial crises and it has also seen its share of intrigue and bitterness. That the journal has experienced what it has, and emerged stronger for the experiences, is ample testimony to the incredible contributions that various individuals have made.

It is testimony also to the commitment of the varying Executive Boards that have placed their faith in the respective editors and granted them the editorial independence that they have. Rarely have they been let down or disappointed.

Walter Endlich was truly a one man band displaying unbelievable fortitude and, against incredible odds, sustained the publication almost single-handedly for more than a decade. Twelve years is a long time in one position and enthusiasm and ideas can wane and, not for want of trying on Endlich's part, the journal was out on its feet and needed a change. They were difficult and changing times and Ge de Boer was the man for the season. President Monin was a man for his time too and he was incredibly fortunate to have managing the journal an erudite individual who shared his vision and who was dynamic enough to rescue the moribund magazine. And not simply rescue it but totally resuscitate and nurture it so that it recovered in better condition. Along the way he alerted the membership to change and made the readership aware. Sometimes they didn't like what they read but read it they did. In reviving the journal, de Boer placed an unmistakable stamp upon it and made the task of his successors that much more difficult but, at the same time, easier.

Avgoustis and Henschler made outstanding contributions via the magazine to the field of air traffic control journalism. Their unique backgrounds and wealth of experience ensured a publication that both informed and instructed and, after Henschler's changes, caught the attention of an ever growing readership. In this latter period, the efforts of the Controller Management Group really enabled the magazine to flourish and provided a substantial vehicle for the Federations point of view. Crowhurst inherited a journal that had been brought to maturity and that was alive and well. Introducing modern techniques and methods, and with the same management group initially and changing personalities later, he sustained that well being and presented a publication that is more than just an esoteric in-house journal.

With Terry Crowhurst's retirement, past EVP Technical Chris Stock has assumed the responsibility for editorship of The Controller and will provide initial guidance for the journal in the 21st century. It is, of course, too early to assess Stock's impact in this commentary but he has promised to maintain the standards set by his predecessor(s) and to maintain the controller's perspective in future ATM. With challenging times ahead as the CNS/ATM concept comes on line and with air traffic services management undergoing a revolution, the need to clearly convey the Federations position and policies is an imperative and The Controller's role in this will be greater than ever.

The result of all these individuals' efforts, and a lot more background people too, is that today IFATCA is the proud possessor and publisher of the world's premier air traffic control publication and the Federations public face shares the same integrity and respect that the Federation itself enjoys. At the dawn of the third millennium, they have all played their part in bequeathing a publication unrivalled in the world and undreamed of by the producers of Der Flugleiter.

The Circular

IFATCA also disseminates information via another publication, the mainly inhouse 'Circular'.

The Federations first Executive Secretary, the U.K.'s Mr. Geoffrey Monk, printed a newsletter in June, 1964. This newsletter was designed to provide small snippets of information on IFATCA, its Member Associations and ATC in general in a 'chatty' style not suited to the more formal style and wider readership of The Controller. This first attempt was well received and it then evolved immediately into regular quarterly outputs as the IFATCA Circular commencing in September, 1964. Succeeding Executive Secretaries Tom Harrison and Ted Bradshaw continued in like vein.

IFATCA's fourth Executive Secretary decided, however, that changes were required. Pat O'Doherty was of the opinion that wider contributions were needed and, as well as changing the presentation of the Circular, 'invited' other Board members and the Regional Vice-Presidents to submit articles and reports. By the nineties, the Circular was regularly featuring a lead article by an Executive Board member. This lead usually consisted of the relevant Board officer providing his opinion on developments, or lack thereof, or happenings in his bailiwick. Frequently it was controversial and always informative.

The Circular continues to this day, published by the Executive Secretary until 1997 and latterly by the new permanent office in Montreal. In 1998 it was cut back to three issues per year whilst simultaneously being enlarged in size and content.

The presentation was again updated and it now appears as a mini booklet rather than a loose leaf handout. Without question, the Circular fulfils a valuable role in keeping controllers the world over informed of interesting and important occurrences in their domain.

Corporate Members

Another significant event at the commencement of IFATCA's first conference was the application for Corporate Membership from two manufacturers- Marconi's Wireless Telegraph Company Ltd. Radar Division, England and Hollandse Signaalapparaten N.V., The Netherlands. These two applications for membership were all the more remarkable since the information material on IFATCA membership had only been sent out to various aviation and electronics industries just three weeks earlier!

These two 'originals' were joined in the months immediately following the Amsterdam conference by Cossor Radar and Electronics Ltd. (U.K.). Marconi and Cossor remain corporate members of IFATCA to this day although in other guises through amalgamations and takeovers. Over the years, they have been joined by more than forty other companies although the absolute number has declined in recent years. Corporate membership of IFATCA continues as an important feature of the Federation and the Corporate Members are encouraged to play a major role in the Federation. They do this primarily by mounting a major exhibit during the annual conference, by participating in the technical panel during conference and by financially supporting the Federation with annual affiliation dues and function sponsorship. But we'll come to these aspects a little later.

By January, 1963 Corporate Membership had grown to eight with four countries represented. As well as the original three, membership had also been granted to Decca Navigator Co. Ltd (U.K.), Hazeltine Corporation (U.S.A.), KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (Netherlands), Telefunken GmbH (Germany) and Texas Instruments The 5th conference in Rome, 1966 was able to report on a further four new CMs including the Air Traffic Control Association of the U.S.A. The Federation had, for some time, been wooing the US ATCA but ATCA's own troubles had prevented them from joining as full professional members. The whole story behind the US ATCA and its rival organisation PATCO (Professional ATC Organisation) just about merits a book on its own and perhaps one day we will see it. In this book, (see Chapter 3) we just examined its relationship with IFATCA.

The conferences of the late sixties - particularly Vienna, Geneva, Munich and Montreal - presented some of the most impressive technical exhibitions ever staged.

The person most responsible for these was Cossor Electronics' Bob Shipley.

Bob Shipleywas also one of lFATCA's characters in the early days. He frequently ably demonstrated his technical bent by proving that liquids could defy gravity and flow upwards. At each conference he loved to sample the local brew and frequently he was seen performing his standard party trick of standing on his head and drinking 'up' an ale. In Munich in 1968 he took this a step further and, wearing traditional lederhosen, he confronted a stein in his inimitable manner. It wasn't exactly an April fest but, as always, Bob Shipley was entertaining. In 1973, it was Shipley, already the long term spokesman for the Corporate Members, who voiced the idea that the CMs should have a coordinator. The Board accepted this recommendation during a meeting with the CMs in Reykjavik and Shipley thereafter found himself in the role.

Bob Shipley performing his party trick.

The technical exhibition at conference has grown into a major effort (albeit depending on the venue) and it is inconceivable today to think of a conference without including the integral technical display. The exhibition provides a valuable alternate focus to the ATC aspects of conference and, as well as highlighting corporate products, affords delegates the opportunity to consider matters other than specific air traffic control policy debates and the like. A Corporate Member has never sold a radar display or other ATC related facility to a controller at conference but nevertheless IFATCA's Corporate Members annually expend considerable effort, time and money to mount their exhibitions. The importance the Federation places upon this display and the CM's support of the organisation is indicated by the ceremonial opening of the exhibition immediately following the official conference opening ceremonies.

When the welcoming and official opening speeches conclude, the President, EVP Technical and the Corporate Members Coordinator (CMC) accompany the guest of honour (these days frequently the Head of State) to the adjoining exhibition area for more speeches and a ceremonial opening. The guest of honour is then shown around the various stands, usually availing himself of the opportunity to speak with the representatives. The exhibition area itself is always placed dose to the committee meeting rooms so that later delegates can browse around during their morning and afternoon coffee breaks viewing the exhibits and chatting with the representatives, many of whom are old friends. Many a controller has been enlightened as to new developments, or in understanding older ones, during these times. It is also a fact that many IFATCA delegates progress to senior management roles and thereby have some influence in future equipment procurement exercises.

So perhaps the CMs really are engaging in some long term subliminal technical inculcation of future purchasers!

In later years, Marconi's Harry Cole was also of the opinion that ATC contacts made at conference were valuable 'in the field'. He said that when a new ATC requirement emerges in a country with IFATCA links (and there are now around 120 of them), a CM representative visiting usually will find a familiar and friendly face and this fosters mutual understanding and trust, established by shared IFATCA membership.

Shipley was followed into the role by 'Bobbie' Harrison who already had been around for so long that he was described in 1976 as the doyen of Corporate Members. At the Lyon conference, where a 15th anniversary celebration was held and many speeches were made following final plenary, Harrison represented the Corporate Members and spoke of the rivalry between the CMs that exists in the outside world but which never manifests itself during IFATCA conferences. The CMs have always cooperated magnificently at conference and from early days they teamed to present a cocktail party or luncheon for delegates in addition to their technical exhibition. Such contributions go a long way to ensuring the success of each conference.

Not only that, but many a regional meeting owes it success to local (and wider) Corporate Member support. The author was involved in organising several regional meetings in the late eighties and early nineties and there is no doubt that they would not have been the events they were without the significant financial input the CMs provided. The CM sponsorship of the Regional Meetings has enabled these gatherings to develop from minor local forums into major affairs which these days frequently are bigger than the original annual conferences. These Regional Meetings have become so important that government ministers and even Heads of State attend. Whilst the RMs have yet to present technical exhibitions in the manner of an annual conference, the CMs are generally afforded opportunity during technical panels or presentations to make an industry contribution. Associations that may not be able to afford to attend annual conference can make meaningful contribution at their Regional Meeting. In at least one case, regional policy was developed, which later translated into Federation policy, and RM delegates frequently provide guidelines for later conference deliberations. Through these occasions, many a local delegate has acquired a taste for IFATCA involvement that may not otherwise have been developed. A large measure of thanks can be directed to the Federations Corporate Members for their willingness to assist with these 'lesser' meetings thereby enhancing the opportunities for such contributions.

Corporate membership of the Federation grew steadily throughout the first twenty years. The 1980 conference in Toronto was a landmark for IFATCA as far as Corporate Members were concerned. That conference saw a record nine new corporate affiliations. However, although nearly every conference saw two or three new members, there always seemed to be one or two or three that declined continued membership for one reason or another. Generally speaking, these tended to be smaller companies and the major corporations, such as the radar manufacturers, have always retained membership. In more recent years, a disturbing trend has revealed itself with a large number of mergers and acquisitions which have deprived the Federation of a number of its individual long term and valued members. This has resulted in a reduction in the number of affiliates from the corporate sector at a time when increasing membership would be seen to be valuable. As the Federation enters its fifth decade, corporate membership stands at just over thirty, down from a high in the mid forties just a few years ago. This low figure more reflects the trend towards mergers and acquisitions over the last five years or so rather than a lessening of desire of members to remain as affiliates. Despite the apparent trend, interest in the Federation remains high and IFATCA always seems capable of generating interest from new companies each year.

It is not often that IFATCA refuses membership, especially by a corporate sector applicant but it happened in the eighties. International Aeradio Ltd. (IAL) made application but it was refused because they were employers of air traffic controllers in contractual situations in various parts of the world. At the time it was viewed that there would be a conflict of interest for a controllers' organisation to also have as members controllers' direct employers. Such thinking was coloured by a bad experience in Brazil where the controllers' employer had been accepted as a member but subsequently acted to the severe detriment of the controllers and IFATCA allowed their membership to lapse. Since that time, branches of several privatised ATC managements (New Zealand and South Africa, for instance) made application and they were accepted. These were (and are) commercial arms of the companies without direct responsibility for their national controllers. It is a fine line but one acceptable to the Federation and perhaps provides an indication of the progressive attitude of IFATCA. And IAL eventually made it into IFATCA membership when they affiliated via their new parent body and SERCO-IAL has now been a member since 1994.

As far as membership goes, it is interesting to note that there has been very little interest in corporate membership from a group who one would think would stand to gain significantly from affiliation with the world air traffic controllers' body the airlines. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines joined in 1963 but withdrew several years later. It wasn't until 1999 that we saw another airline join when British Airways stepped into the breach. BA had already been a major contributor to the Federation² in several tangible ways and this final act marked the culmination of the association.

Without question, one of the latter characters that our Corporate Members have thrown up was Henry William 'Harry' Cole. A forty three year veteran of working with radar systems in England (first with Cossor and the last thirty years with Marconi), Harry Cole had an affinity with controllers that he valued. Possessed of a quick wit and ever ready with an amusing tale, Cole was presented with a gift in appreciation of his contribution to ATC by President Stuart during the 1992 conference on the occasion of his retirement. His contribution included a long stint as CM Coordinator, long term Marconi representative to IFATCA, numerous articles and papers published in The Controller, Technical Panel participant and authorship of a 1985 book 'Understanding Radar' which was aimed at controllers and other radar users.

The Federation has seen a mostly amicable relationship with its Corporate Members and has managed to oversee a similar relationship between the members themselves. The closeness of this association is perhaps a little surprising. One could be forgiven for assuming that, given the nature of the businesses represented, the highly competitive market they are engaged in and the disparate countries and cultures involved, there could have been much more rivalry and even animosity shown. That there has not is testimony to the character of the personalities involved and probably their business acumen. However, IFATCA can also accept some credit for the sensible manner in which it has handled its valued members from the corporate sector. The early nineties, however, did feature one episode in which relations did become a little strained.

In 1992, the Executive Board, always on the lookout to increase income, examined the affiliation dues of the Corporate Members. The Bournemouth conference had just witnessed a significant raising of the dues for the professional membership and elements of the Board were of the opinion that it was time for a similar rise in CM dues too. At the time, these were in the order of CHF 1,000 per annum and had changed little in recent years. The Board proposed a substantial rise to CHF1,500 and forwarded a letter indicating this to the then CMC. The letter was intended to provoke comment from the CMs on this proposed hike in dues with a view to discovering just how much they were prepared to increase their commitment but this sentiment apparently was not conveyed to them. A new Coordinator, Rod Roper, then assumed the role, noted the proposal and forwarded it on to his members. However, something obviously got lost in the translation for it certainly provoked some comments and there was something of a rebellion in the ranks as, according to Roper who had conducted a survey, several threatened to resign their membership. As a result, the Board took the unusual step of inviting Roper to a Board meeting and he met with them in London in October, 1993.

The Board explained that they felt that CHF 1,500 was a not unreasonable amount but also clearly stated that the original intention of that figure was as a starting point for discussions. The CMs concerns were ameliorated and Roper (and an earlier CMC Ron Mahendron, who was also present) stated that a 10% increase would be acceptable. Since IFATCA’s general revenues had also improved over the intervening period, the Board agreed with this compromise. One would be hard put to declare this a serious confrontation but it does represent an unique moment in the relationship. It remains the only disagreement of any note the Federation has experienced with its Corporate Members as a group and basically it came about, as many disagreements do, through an initial inaction and a misunderstanding. The problem was solved and the relationship restored to its normal level keel.

Apart from their financial contribution and the always informative and valuable technical exhibitions, the CMs make a valuable input to each year's conference by way of the Technical Panel. For many, many years a feature of the conference, the panel often presents an industry view on subjects that are both relevant and topical.

The Federation, and the EVP Technical in particular whose role it is to organise the panel, place great store in this session and go to great pains to select presenters from amongst the CM ranks (and from elsewhere) to facilitate wide ranging viewpoints and technical expertise. The panel is not intended as a vehicle to showcase CM products, although it occasionally does so, as its real worth is in providing a window to technical developments and to CM thinking on new products and trends in ATC facilities. It is frequently a two way information flow as well for the audience's input by way of questions, etc conveys a sense of where the controllers themselves see progress as heading or how they would like to see products developed.

It is an essential feature of each year's conference, one that is always eagerly anticipated and attended and one that relies heavily upon the contribution of the Corporate Members.

The Corporate Members are vital to the progress and strength of the Federation.

They are a major source of our technical knowledge and without their financial support and sponsorship, every conference would be the poorer. No account of the history of the Federation would be complete without inclusion of the valuable role the CMs have played in its development and continued progress. This brief mention of their role is small tribute to their valued input. International civil aviation today owes a significant debt to IFATCA's contribution and, in turn, the Federation owes a great deal to the contribution of its Corporate Members.

High Finances

In the previous chapter, we saw how even at the very birth of IFATCA, the representatives were being advised that voluntary organisations are always short of funds. Nobody doubted Capt. Jackson's words at the time but there could not have been many who thought that IFATCA would struggle as it did and for so long. Not until the early eighties could it be said that the organisation achieved a real degree of financial assuredness and then it was cruelly snatched away by circumstance. That same degree of fiscal viability then took another six or seven years to be regained. Effectively, it was not until the time of the Federations fourth decade, that finally finances were such that the Board was able to really conduct business without continually feeling the fiscal pulse.

Having achieved that position through decades of financial rectitude and experiencing quite a few monetary troughs, IFATCA then made its biggest financial plunge ever and finally brought to reality its life long dream- a permanent office.

However, whilst the achievement of this ambitious project had the effect of satisfying the professional needs of the Federation, it necessarily resulted in the countering effect of ensuring that the Federation was again not overly endowed financially and again had to be careful with the purse strings. Whilst this massive outlay (for IFATCA) had long been considered essential, it nevertheless was taken with considerable trepidation from both financial and professional points of view. Those of us who were involved in the decision certainly were convinced of its necessity its potential and financial worth. However, it is still early days and it remains to be seen if this biggest of all IFATCA expenditures will justify the faith, conviction and, perhaps even more importantly, finances that have been invested in it.

Because finances play such an important role in an organisation such as IFATCA, this section of its history takes a brief look at some of the ups and downs, some financial highlights and lowlights and some of the more crucial decisions over the years.

One of the very first decisions during the 1st annual conference in Paris in 1962 was that to settle upon the calendar year as the Federations financial year. This made sense initially but as time progressed, this decision caused some operating difficulties, mostly because of the timing of conference. Later in this section we examine those difficulties a little more closely. No budget was brought down for 1962 since the founding conference did not make plans for spending, merely for outlining the objectives of the new body. Despite there being no expenditure plans, membership dues were levied and nearly all membership monies collected in that first year (14,000 Danish Crowns or £650) were immediately placed in a reserve fund. The first budget was brought down in 1963 and detailed the princely sum of around £1,500 or 34,470 Danish Crowns.

Because of the decision to base the Federation in London, or at least in the UK where the Executive Secretary was domiciled, it also was decided that the Pound would be the standard currency for the Federation and so all early finances were detailed in Sterling. The initial book keeping, however, was done in Danish Crowns since the first Treasurer, Henning Thrane, was from Denmark. That first budget's income column almost totally derived from the original subscription dues which had been set at just 10/- per member. (For those too young to remember, that is ten shillings which was 120 'old' pence or fifty 'new' pence.) The earliest affiliation fee was 5/-. A well paid British controller earned around £1,500 per year so 10/imposed no great financial burden. Even so, the Paris conference assigned to their financial committee the duty of investigating a sliding scale of annual subscriptions for large associations. No doubt the Elective Officers were already looking West towards the United States as a prospective member! From the outset exhibiting the compassion for their less well off colleagues that was to become a hallmark of IFATCA, the Directors in Paris further assigned to the financial committee the task of examining how assistance can be provided to applicant associations suffering undue financial hardship. The 1963 conference then accepted (Res.63.A.7) that conference could approve a reduction of, or dispensation from, annual subscriptions because of financial hardship.

This decision was immediately applied in 1964 when the Central African Association (comprising controllers from the Central African Federation of Northern and Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland, now Zambia, Zimbabwe and Malawi), which only affiliated the previous year, sought relief. Resolution 64.A.6 allowed the "outstanding debts of the Central African Association be cancelled and that the Association pay its affiliation fee and annual subscription when able to do so".

Another early decision from Paris was to grant the Honorary Secretary a "small" allowance. Further recognising the pressures already being placed on this individual, the London conference the following year determined to establish (with the U.K. Guild) a joint 'full time' General (later Executive) Secretary. In reality, this meant employing a retiree and paying him a pittance for being on call virtually 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The redoubtable Geoffrey Monk was the first recipient so privileged. (The joint Secretariat existed until September, 1965.) By the time of the Brussels conference in 1964, which featured a budget of £1,654 , the General Secretary's 'salary' was £350 and associated expenses amounted to £150. Reflecting his already high workload, the General Secretary was thus already accounting for 30% of the budget. Presenting the budget in Brussels, Treasurer Thrane was able to report IFATCA's first tangible profit of £96 for the previous year boosting the reserves to £953.

This situation, however, was immediately reversed with, for the first time, a deficit budget being proposed and accepted in Rome in 1966. The Treasurer actually originally intended to present a proposal for a small deficit of £185 incorporating a doubling of the General Secretary's salary to £700, plus the £150 for expenses.

On arrival in Rome, the Treasurer also came late to the conclusion that the budgeted £400 for conference may be too low and conveyed these thoughts to the Directors.

During the committee discussions, the Directors agreed with the Treasurer and voted for the conference increase to £500. But they also saw the need for an increase in the General Secretary's total allocation to £950 (up from £850) and voted accordingly. So the budget expenditure grew from £2,605 to £2,805 but, with a forecast income of only £2,420, the Directors were confronted with a deficit budget. With accumulated reserves already of some £1,900 this did not present a serious immediate problem but they were compelled then to consider a subscription increase from 1967 onwards. Quaintly by today's procedures, they were asked to think about it post conference and advise by August, 1966 just how much they could afford to raise their dues. The result was that Geneva increased the dues by 2/- (24 old pence, 10 new pence) to 12/- and, associated with a small membership increase, this allowed the budget to inflate from £2,710 in 1967 to £3,370 with the proposed 1968 budget. In the end, because of better than expected income, the Treasurer dosed the books on 1966 with an operating profit of £11, not much but better than the budgeted deficit of £385.

The Rome conference saw the first real change in the original elected officers.

Treasurer Henning Thrane from Denmark stepped down thus paving the way for the Swiss financial 'dynasty'. Bernhard Riithy became the first of four Swiss Treasurers who managed the Federations financial affairs for twenty years. Virtually from the outset, Rüthy was inundated with work. The annual surplus had been declining despite an increasing membership, for international involvement was rising significantly and, with it, expenditures. The Elective Officers needed to plan ahead more and increasingly needed to know exactly where they were financially. They brought a proposal to Geneva in 1967 for budgets to be approved for the current year and the next year. Anticipating approval for this, Rüthy came to conference armed with a comprehensive comparative review of the years 1965, 1966 and 1967, the actual situation as at 31st December, 1966 (that is, the end of the financial year just completed), the draft budget for the current year 1967 and a provisional budget for 1968. All this represented a mammoth undertaking but one which was to have far reaching consequences for it clearly established where IFATCA was spending, where the increases were occurring and what continuing involvements it could afford. Rüthy's efforts provided the benchmark for IFATCA financial planning and management to this day.

Later in 1967, President Tekstra and Treasurer Rüthy were both in Montreal representing their respective administrations at ICAO's 5th Air Navigation Conference. They took the opportunity of being in Canada to travel on to Toronto where Vice-President Dick Campbell lived and on 21st and 22nd November held a mini Executive Board meeting that was to have great consequences. Two other members of the Board had just resigned so Tekstra, Rüthy and Campbell represented 75% of the elected officials and thus the decisions reached represented a majority viewpoint.

Existing at that time was great uncertainty about the future of Sterling and the fears proved to be well founded when the British government devalued their currency by more than 14%. Naturally the IFATCA Board of Officers was concerned at the effect this would have on IFATCA’s resources. At the Toronto meeting, Tekstra, Campbell and Rüthy decided that a subscription increase was essential and made an in-principle decision to transfer the Federations funds from Sterling into Swiss Francs, a traditionally very strong and stable currency. The Directors in Munich at the next conference endorsed the moves.

Apart from that 1967 devaluation, the Pound continued to slide in value over the following years so the trio made the correct decision. As well, the Swiss Franc has appreciated strongly over the years. The Federations bank accounts are still operated in Switzerland and the Swiss Franc remains the currency of the Federation although some investments and operating accounts are held in other currencies as well.

Another outcome from the Toronto meeting was that Rüthy presented to the Directors in Munich two final budgets for the year just completed (1967), one in 'old' pounds and another in 'new' pounds, to demonstrate the Federations financial position following the 14% devaluation of the Pound in November, 1967. Treasurer Rüthy closed the 1967 books with a small deficit of almost £18 (approximately CHF200). A larger deficit had been approved by the 1967 conference and it was only through an agonising decision that the quantity of red ink was kept as low as it was. Subscriptions remained stable in 1967 but, as usual, expenditures continued to rise and nowhere more so than with representation at international conferences.

In 1967, ICAO held its 5th Air Navigation Conference (ANC) meeting and IFATCA, according to its objectives, should have sought an invitation. However, after prolonged consideration the Board very reluctantly decided that they could not afford to attend and so they declined to seek the invitation. It must also be stated that they considered their technical preparation at that time for such a meeting not to be of a high enough standard and this also affected their decision. It was mainly because of this painful decision that the deficit was kept in check.

The Munich conference of 1968 was fiscally an important meeting for IFATCA.

Firstly, it saw the last budget presented in Pounds Sterling for, in Munich, directors acceded to the Board's advice and voted to alter the Federation's monetary unit to the Swiss Franc. (See also Chapter 3) In those days the exchange rate was in the order of CHF12 to the Pound Sterling so things have changed a little in this department!

Munich also voted to both increase and reduce the annual subscriptions! This apparent paradox was achieved by the Directors voting for an overall increase in the dues with the accompanying introduction of a reducing sliding scale for large associations. An incremental increase over the next three years saw the current flat rate of 12/- change to 16/- for 1969 and 20/-, that is £1 (or approximately CHF12), for 1971 for the first 100 members, 151- and 18/- for the same years for the next 200 members, 14/- and 161- for the next 300 members, 12/- and 14/- for the next 400 members and thereafter big reductions for really large associations, of which there were none at that stage.

Another major decision was to formally endorse expense payments to officers travelling on behalf of the Federation. In the first instance this was done on a country by country basis with, for example, an overnight hotel stop in the USA allowing $14 with a daily per diem of $14. Following the agreed deficit budget of 1966 and the actual deficit in 1967, Directors wrote into the Constitution the ruling "The budget shall in principle provide for a credit balance" Finally, because of Swiss taxation implications (see Chapter 3), directors decided to establish the legal seat of IFATCA in Switzerland. The Swiss Franc continues as the Federations currency, the legal seat remains in Switzerland and the sliding scale for all was only replaced in 1997 by an even more equitable demand for subscriptions recognising financial ability and which, in part, also incorporates a sliding scale.

Rüthy's preparations and the Board's wise decisions up to and during the Munich conference showed immediate results for 1968 concluded with a surplus of £750 (CHF7,553 in the new standard currency), the biggest 'trading' surplus to date.

However, again the euphoria of this result would not last long.

Despite the Federation's success in some quarters, the times embraced by the ninth conference in Montreal again proved to be dark days for IFATCA. Treasurer Rüthy had to declare a loss of some CHF5,800 for fiscal year 1969. This came about mostly through the staggering increases in Board Officer travel expenses.

Despite continued pleas to IATA for consideration under their Regulation 200 for concessionary travel, nothing was achieved and the Board's related expenses climbed from CHF5,600 in 1968 to over CHF12,000 in 1969. Similarly, expenses for delegates to international conferences skyrocketed from 1968's CHF 1,500 through 1969's budgeted CHF7,300 to close at CHF10,800. Some of these spendings could be said to have been an investment in the future for much of them (but by no means all) were related to the difficult situation in the USA vis-à-vis PATCO and ATCA (see Chapter 3). Nonetheless, with reserves of just CHF22,000, it was a worrying situation and certainly highlighted the need for increased income to match the increased international involvement.

Montreal in 1970 saw the retirement of Bernhard Rüthy. By then, he was presenting a provisional budget for 1971 which had climbed to CHF74,000. His successor, Jean Gubelman, in 1971 presented an actual budget for 1971 of CHF86,500 (with a profit of CHF3,000 forecast) and, for 1972, a provisional budget of CHF90,000. These large increases in finances came about through the new large memberships of the USA and, to a lesser extent, Australia and the planned increases in membership dues now coming on line.

Despite the final new dues levels from Munich operating from that year, the Directors in 1971 in Athens saw fit to increase the subscriptions still further (albeit only marginally) so that from 1972 the first 100 members would pay CHF13, the next 200 CHF12, the next 300 CHF10 and the next 400 CHF9. Beyond that, the dues were reduced slightly. These increases and some strict budgetary controls allowed Gubelman to post IFATCA's first CHF100,000 budget with the 1973 provisional budget detailing expected income of CHF105,000 and a surplus of CHF6,000. The timely dues increases agreed in Munich ensured that the dark days of 1969/70 were behind them and finally IFATCA was now truly financially well established and dealing with high finances.

It was during this period that a relatively unusual concern arose. Because of the size of the PATCO membership, and therefore the dues they paid, the Federation recognised that it could perhaps be imprudent to commit the Federation to a heavy reliance upon the very large annual contribution from the USA. They foresaw (quite accurately, as it turned out) that financial difficulties would occur if reliance was placed upon such a large portion of income and it suddenly was not available.

Having already agreed that no one association should pay more than 99% of the dues of all the other associations together, the directors in Tel Aviv (1974) now alleviated this concern by concluding that the Americans should be billed for no more than 5,000 individual members. Naturally, this sat well with PATCO for it reduced their annual contribution substantially.

With a total membership now of thirty nine associations, the Board recognised that the administration was becoming unwieldy despite the Herculean efforts of the Executive Secretaries Geoffrey Monk until 1972 and now Tom Harrison. Tel Aviv placed on the work program for SC3 the "study of costs of a management establishment for IFATCA including a permanent secretariat. This thought was first raised way back in 1962 and again in 1970 and 1973 so it was not new but the increasing frequency of insistence on examination was indicative that such a need was growing and, more importantly; that the Federation was now assuming a financial situation where serious consideration could be given to such an expensive move.

This direction to SC3 was transferred to a working group established at the following year's conference in Melbourne and its conclusions were eventually translated into a major working paper to the 1976 conference. This group closely examined the costs of a full-time Executive President with a secretary/accountant assistant in a Switzerland based office and forecast office expenses to be CHF176,000. With otherwise relatively normal annual operating costs, the annual budget would then amount to some CHF333,000. PATCO had just resigned so a significant reduction in income was also being faced in any event. To compensate and to fund the outlay necessary with a permanent office, it was calculated that affiliation dues would need to be tripled. This would have meant in 1977 CHF48 for the first 100 members, CHF46 for the next 200 members, CHF44 for the next 300 and so on. Canada's 1600 members would have seen their dues rise from CHF19,900 to CHF65,600 and Denmark, with 160 members, would have been faced with a CHF2,500 to CHF7,560 raise. Not surprisingly, the Directors flinched at these figures.

The SC3 paper, which contained the working group's recommendations, also outlined two other budget proposals. The first was detailed to indicate a substantial dues rise of almost 100% to cover maintenance of activities with the PATCO withdrawal (CHF24 for the first 100 members) and the second covered a reduction in activity levels by a modest increase in dues (CHF 16 for the first 100 members).

Directors were forced to reject outright the first proposal as completely unrealistic.

Looking at the other two proposals, they decided to compromise and settled on a dues scale of CHF18 for the first 100 members, CHF17 for the next 200, CHF15 for the next 300 and so on. This increase was seen as affordable and, whilst enforcing a cutback in participation, still allowed a reasonable degree of professional involvement.

Even though calls for a permanent office had been around since the early sixties, this was the first really in-depth examination of the necessary financial commitment such an undertaking would entail. It is fair to say that the Directors in Lyon were shocked by the projected costs, costs which certainly did not exaggerate the requirements. The PATCO resignation, whilst unfortunate in its fact, was fortuitous in its timing for it allowed the Directors to soberly assess the implications of such a major investment in the future. The concept was thus, reluctantly, again put into abeyance and whilst there were occassional calls for Executive Secretary relief, further events and demands dictated that it would be more than another two decades before the dream was realised.

The 1976 conference in Lyon saw the retirement of Jean Gubelman after six years as Treasurer. Gubelman presided over an era of considerable financial consolidation for IFATCA. In that six year period, the budgets nearly trebled in size (from CHF66,000 in 1970 to CHF165,000 in 1975) and, despite seeing two annual losses posted (in 1973 and 1976), he could point to a satisfying bottom line of some CHF67,000 in reserves. Maintaining the Swiss domination of the The IFATCA Journal, 'The Controller' portfolio, Lyon saw Hans Wenger assume the mantel. Wenger also was to manage the Federation's accounts for six years. On election, little did he know what was in store for him.

That year commenced with the PATCO withdrawal and ended with Australia's resignation. The immediate effect was a reduction in annual membership income of some CHF33,000. This was offset to a limited extent by new MAs (albeit smaller ones) joining, increases in Corporate Member dues and improvements in the advertising revenues of The Controller but it would be three years before MA affiliations recovered to the 1975 figures. By then a further seventeen MAs had joined.

In 1979, however, although realising a profit of some CHF30,000 (at that time the biggest ever posted), President Henschler and his Board decided to cut back a little and become more selective with meetings attended and instead concentrate more on interchange with the Member Associations. A material manifestation of this policy was the creation of the 'Special Assistance Fund'. This fired was set up to assist MAs in difficulties and who may, stemming therefrom, be unable to pay their annual subscriptions.

1980 saw a further seven MAs affiliate (including PATCO again) so that membership was now fifty nine and a second consecutive healthy profit of CHF24,000 was realised. The Board, having decided that reserves needed boosting, placed nearly all the '79 and '80 profits into the reserve fired so that it jumped from CHF55,00 to CHF114,000 in just two years. Naturally, the rapid increase in membership over this period placed considerable pressure on the Treasurer (not to mention the Executive Secretary!). The Board was also maintaining their policy of fiscal restraint and Wenger was continually looking for ways to economise and ensure no overspending. It was not an easy time.

In Chapter 7 we examine the tumultuous events of 1981 surrounding PATCO and see how they affected IFATCA's operations. The Board had made the decision to cut back on involvement and, after the event, this was justified in no small manner by the loss of PATCO's dues. The measure of this cutback is seen in the budgets of the time.

The 1981 budget and the 1982 provisional budget (both approved before the PATCO dispute) each detailed an income and expenditure of CHF244,700. The 1982 conference (held 8 months after the strike) saw the provisional budget income cut back to an actual CHF207,000 with expenditures of CHF209,000 allowed. This represented only the third ever programmed deficit budget. (The earlier ones were in 1966 and 1967.) Directors further approved another provisional deficit budget for 1983 with figures of CHF214,000 income and CHF218,000 expenditure. However, by the time of the Split conference in 1983 directors were faced with an actual income of just CHF155,200. The Board's urgent actions ensured spending was kept down to just CHF154,700. So IFATCA’s budget had shrunk by nearly 40% in just two years and there can be no doubt that President Henschler's Board's prudent decisions kept the Federation afloat.

Wenger decided in 1982 that six years of the pressures he had faced were enough and, in the midst of severe fiscal contraction, he handed over to the fourth consecutive Swiss Treasurer. Bernard Grezet's two terms brought the Swiss management of IFATCA’s financial affairs to exactly twenty years, an outstanding commitment from the Swiss association to the cause.

Only the second of the post-war 'baby boomers' to join the Board (the first was EVP Technical Lex Hendriks a year earlier), Grezet was a Geneva tower controller and had been a member of SC3 (as had the previous Treasurers) since 1973. He was probably the luckiest of the Swiss line of Treasurers in that his predecessors, whilst encountering some pretty rough patches, had generally overseen a stabilising of the Federations finances and, by the time of his election, relatively stable times prevailed. Nevertheless, Grezet had the satisfaction of realising substantial profits (CHF31K, CHF30K, CHF66K and CHF49K) in each of his four years, an achievement unparalleled until then. By the time he quit, IFATCA's annual budget was in excem of a quarter of a million Swiss Francs.

Most of the conferences of the early eighties were significant financially for the Federation but none more so than the Split meeting.

1983 featured a decision to again raise affiliation dues so that the first 100 members were now to pay CHF22 each, the next 200 CHF21, the next 300 CHF19, the next 400 CHF17 and subsequent members were billed at CHF16 each. The increases were substantial but at least the division in dues made the costs of membership for the larger associations more bearable. The decision also ensured that the shrunken budgets of 1982 and 1983 could be recovered from. This dues structure remained unaltered until 1992.

The Split conference further saw the creation of an Equipment Fund. The Board considered it wise to start putting aside monies for equipment replacement for they saw an increasing demand on the Secretariat's resources and his facilities were operating almost around the clock. Directors approved an initial allocation of CHF10,000 to this fund and furthermore determined that CHF1,500 be budgeted annually to maintain it. In 1983 it was decided also to separate the Federations budget from The Controller magazine's budget and the Controller Management Group was formed with separate accounting responsibilities, amongst other things.

The increasingly important role of the Regional Vice-Presidents was recognised in Split. The Directors agreed to reimburse the RVPs for their attendance at conference and, indeed, placed them above the Committee Chairmen and Secretaries and Standing Committee Chairmen in prioritising allocation of these attendance funds. Not content with that act of largesse, the directors then granted honorarium payments to the Executive Board members.

These new outlays ensured a massive increase in the 1984 expenditures item of more than CHF30,000 over the 1983 budget. (Well, after such a shrivelled balance sheet, any increase would have been described as large!) This was countered by an expected dues income increase of CHF30,000 (because of the new dues structure) and savings in other areas. The conference budget alone rose from CHF9,000 to CHF25,000 reflecting the allocations of CHF8,000 to the RVPs, CHF4,500 to the conference committee chairmen and secretaries and CHF4,000 to the standing committee chairmen. The increase in income was due almost entirely to the new dues structure and certainly not from any new membership. In fact, 1983 and 1984 were the only years, apart from 1966, that saw no new associations affiliate with the Federation.

Ever since IFATCA's birth, the Federation had maintained a financial year concomitant with the calendar year. This continually caused problems for the Treasurer and Directors in juggling the figures. Such a practise meant that the financial year was already three to four months under way before the Directors met in conference. Thus, at each conference, the current year's budget, which had been provisionally approved twelve months earlier, had to be ratified being, as it was, already three - four months in use. The next year's provisional budget had to be approved too to enable operations beyond the end of December and up until the next conference. So, arriving at conference, Directors were presented with a plethora of budgets: the actual results from the previous year, the remains of the current year's provisionally accepted budget (approved at the previous conference), the current figures to enable acceptance of the actual situation (now the current budget) and they were then asked to vote on acceptance of a provisional budget for the next calendar year. It was organisationally difficult, confirming and, as the Federation grew and external involvement and expenditures increased, it became more so.

Something had to be done and the 1984 conference took action.

In Estoril, the directors decided to amend the financial year from the calendar year to 1st June-31st May each year. This action meant that at conference Directors would be operating on, and be aware of, the actual financial situation via a budget about to conclude and would be asked to approve the next budget which would operate in about two months hence, not some eight to nine months later. This was a much more realistic environment in which to make financial decisions.

Obviously such a major change could not be implemented overnight and it was agreed to introduce the new fiscal year in 1987. A special accounting period for the term 1st January, 1987 - 31st May, 1987 was created and MAs were invoiced for this five month period on top of their new normal dues for the 1987/88 year.

Whilst this course of action was agreed, we had to wait until the 1986 conference to actually implement this scheme since all decisions operate from the end of conference at which they are taken. So it was not possible to conclusively implement a new fiscal year for 1987 at the 1984 conference but planning had to be commenced.

Thus it was only in 1986 that directors officially changed to the present accounting period having taken the in-principle decision two years earlier.

The 1987/88 budget allowed for an income of CHF209,800 (up from 1986's provisional CHF 175,540) reflecting in large part the return in 1986 of the Australian association with their large membership of 1,200 (at the time, the third largest association behind the U.K. and Canada). But it was not until the 1989/90 budget (with CHF247,000), that IFATCA could say they had fully recovered financially from the setbacks of the early eighties.

This marginally profitable year was added to in an unusual manner. At the Executive Council meeting in September, 1989 EVP Finance Tord Gustavsson was forecasting an overspend on the budget item 'Executive Board'. This budget item covers Board members' expenditures at Board meetings and international meetings, their general expenses, etc. However, President Sermijn fell ill and was indisposed for some five weeks late in the year and was prevented from travelling to several meetings. Sermijn's ill fortune was IFATCA’s gain as the result was, that by year's end, the budget item was in surplus and the annual accounts showed a profit.

Sometimes profits are realised in unusual ways and, as the proverb says, It is an ill wind that blows no good!

The 1990 conference in Acapulco was the one that wrought great change for IFATCA. The re-structure brought the new EVP Region positions with all their new responsibilities but little changed for the EVP Finance, except perhaps, more of the same. Whilst the position didn't change in Acapulco, the occupant did as Tord Gustavsson called it quits and handed over to one of his countryman. Sture Ericsson came well prepared for the job having being the Treasurer for his domestic association for the preceding four years in addition to being IFATCA liaison officer.

By the end of the 1990 conference, IFATCA's membership had risen to over ninety Member Associations and many of them had financial problems. Ericsson found he was continually writing letters reminding associations of their obligations.

From the start, Ericsson had problems just keeping up with the mountain of correspondence. Of course, his prime office function presented a huge workload too and this seemed to be mostly occasioned by the manual book-keeping and he decided things had to change. His first move was to buy a calculator - the cost was CHF70 - but, while this helped with his currency conversions, it did little to alleviate the overall difficulties of his task. To simplify the account keeping and to keep better track of incomes and expenditures and late payments and claims - and thereby to make his own life easier- Ericsson went all out and, from April, 1991 with Board approval to the tune of CHF4,000, set about computerising the financial records of the Federation. It may not sound much but this small step for Federation man was indeed a giant leap for finance mankind as it modernised and revolutionised what previously had been an extremely onerous task. It certainly came as a surprise to the author, at least, to learn that the Federation was still maintaining the books 'by hand' into the nineties. Having little (nothing really) to do with the actual book-keeping, it had been taken for granted that we would have been employing some modern technology in this field already. Subsequent EVPs Finance owe Sture Ericsson a great debt for his undertaking.

The conferencaa of the nineties ensured that IFATCA remained financially viable and consequently operationally prepared to face the new millennium. Bournemouth in 1992 saw directors up the ante again for associations by charging CHF22 for the first 300 members (previously the first 100) and slightly increasing the charges for all members over the first 300. But it was the 1996 conference in Tunis that saw the really radical change to IFATCA's dues structure.

Whilst it had always been a principle of the Federation that all MAs should contribute at the same per capita rate, in Tunis directors argued that recognition of the poorer nations' inability to pay at the same level as the richer nations was essential. This debate resulted in IFATCA accepting a three tier membership level with MAs identified as belonging either to 'developed nations', 'developing nations' or 'under developed nations' along the lines of the United Nations Development Plan criteria. Dues were then set so that in category I (developed nations) the first 300 members paid CHF24, the next 300 paid CHF22, the next 400 paid CHF20 and subsequent members paid CHF19. Category 2 MAs (developing nations) were billed CHF15 for each member and category 3 associations (under developed nations) were expected to pay CHF10 per member. This entirely new structure resulted in substantial savings for the poorer associations (making membership much more affordable) and a considerable increase for the bigger (and generally more well off) associations. Nevertheless, the 'richer' MA's mostly were enthusiastic in their support of this new structure for they could see the obvious benefits it presented to their colleagues. Such generosity and understanding is sadly lacking in many other international organisations.

The new dues structure and the increases realised earlier in Bournemouth provided the financial platform for IFATCA's biggest ever decision. Since as far back as 1962 thoughts had occasionally turned to the establishment of a permanent secretariat. We have seen how the comprehensive assessment in 1976 made the Directors blanch at the requisite financial commitment. But now, the sheer size and international involvement of the Federation was more and more making an office imperative. By the mid nineties, it could no longer be ignored and the time had come for the Federations officers to seriously confront the issue.

At their meeting in Vancouver in February, 1994³, the Board created a Permanent Office Working Group. This Group was tasked to investigate the feasibility of an office, that is, how it would work and inter-react with the existing structure of the Federation, where it should be located (no small consideration in itself) and could it be afforded. Recognising that such an initiative would be expensive, the Board further presented to the '94 conference a working paper proposing the establishment of a 'Permanent Office Fund'. The idea of this was to accumulate ahead of time the necessary financial assets to enable the set up and initial maintenance of an office so as not to shoulder all of such a burden in the year of establishment, should that be decided. The fund was accepted by the directors in Jerusalem and an initial transfer of CHF47,000 (most of the profits from year 1993194) was made to it.

It is history now that the IFATCA Office was created in 1997 in Montreal, almost next door to ICAO. Over the intervening years the P.O. Fund had grown so that by 1997 it contained over CHF95,000. Its creation proved to be a prudent decision for, on establishment, more than CHF50,000 was needed for capital expenditure alone. The Office has a current annual expenditure (including salaries) of approximately CHF 105,000 which represents just under 30% of the Federation’s yearly outlay. This amount is almost exactly the same (in percentage terms) as that allocated to the original Executive Secretariat way back in 1964 and maintained through the years so, for the moment at least, the office does not appear to be an extravagance.

The EVP Finance shouldering the burden of overseeing the establishment of IFATCA's single biggest commitment, and who took IFATCA financially to the dawn of the new millennium, was Canadian John Redmond. An ex-President of CATCA, Redmond was elected EVPF in 1994 having completed studies in accounting, finance and computer science and spending two years as IFATCA's Liaison Officer to ICAO. It was Redmond who undertook most of the research of the office's feasibility geographically and financially; and who ensured that the venture was fiscally viable. As with his predecessor, Sture Ericsson, he was swamped by the amount of paperwork associated with the position and only kept on top of it by further improving on Ericsson's computerisation and continuing to refine the Federations accounting methods.

The Federation incurred a small loss for the year 1997/98, which fiscal year covered the office's establishment. This loss was recouped in 1998/99, but only just, with a modest profit of CHF7,300 being realised and this only because income was unexpectedly up by CHF26,000. So whilst the office was proving affordable, at least in the short term, again the Federations heavy commitment to involvement on the international civil aviation scene was providing difficulties. Directors were again faced with a tough decision in Marrakech but again they squarely faced their responsibilities. With it being some eight years since the previous general rise in dues (although Tunis in 1996 saw more than a 10% increase for the 'developed' nations), a 10% increase was accepted. In proposing this, SC3 emphasised that this rise would really only be sufficient to cover the intervening period since the last increase and that more would be necessary. Accordingly, the Standing Committee telegraphed their intention to present a working paper to the 2001 conference seeking automatic adjustments to subscription rates based on worldwide average inflation figures. This, no doubt, will prove to be a difficult undertaking and guarantees that IFATCA will enter its fifth decade with a most interesting debate on the Federations financial position. The size of the budgets may have grown but, 40 years on and entering a new century and a new millennium, not much else has changed financially for IFATCA.

It has been something of a roller coaster ride financially for IFATCA over the forty years. IFATCA’s officers occasionally have had to be creative and, at all times, if not parsimonious, then certainly very careful with their limited funds. How prophetic Captain Jackson's words were. Never well off despite a couple of very handsome surpluses and only a minimal number of deficits, the Federation has managed to keep its head above water and maintain a substantial and influential presence at aviation forums around the world. Whilst the various Executive Boards - and particularly the Treasurers and Executive Vice-Presidents Finance - have managed the funds adroitly and received deserved plaudits, one must also congratulate the Directors at the annual forums for their wisdom and far-sightedness too in seldom carping about the (continually increasing) costs of membership.

They have always ensured that IFATCA raised the affiliation dues only by the amount necessary and only when absolutely needed but always in time to meet that need.

Long may that insight continue.

CHAPTER 5

The Second Decade of IFATCA 1971 - 1980

The first decade of IFATCA had ended with some internal controversy. The second commenced in the shadow of continuing and escalating industrial activity and threatening politics. European air traffic controllers in particular were voicing their disquiet about conditions and traffic demands via widespread industrial disputes, Middle East politics seemed to intrude everywhere and air piracy became rampant. Naturally, IFATCA was not immune from these events and any thoughts carried over from the sixties of insulation from these two problems were quickly dispelled and indeed, despite its charter, the Federation was forced to become heavily involved. With industrial disputation widespread and increasing and international politics threatening and intruding, there was little possibility of IFATCA remaining isolated. The scene for a difficult decade was set.

For air traffic control, the sixties closed to a background of growing unrest with disputes featuring in the USA, France, Germany and the Netherlands and IFATCA's second decade had barely commenced when they were confronted with the German 'Operation Safety'. In April, 1971 the VDF took action to "protect themselves against the deteriorating safety in the German ATC system caused by further increase in lack of personnel, worsening maintenance of ATC equipment, intended reduction of the initial training period of newly appointed personnel and "... because of the unwillingness of the German Ministry of Transport to even further discuss urgent changes within our present ATC system". Stemming from this action, the German ministry even took steps to prevent delegates attending that year's conference. The VDF's action caused severe problems for their neighbours and the VDF had to make a plea to their colleagues for understanding. The decade was not off to a good start.

As the seventies unfolded, further serious disputes took place in France and Germany and, amongst other places, in Argentina, Canada, Spain, Australia, Mexico and Italy. In almost every one of these instances the dispute was centred on what could be termed "due recognition". IFATCA was certainly being accepted at international forums but its constituents were still faced with a serious struggle for recognition at home and saw little alternative but to take action to achieve sometimes even basic tools for their profession and minimal conditions. And nor had the situation improved greatly by the end of the decade for President Henschler was forced to remark in 1979 “The last twelve months has been a period of struggle and upheaval in our profession". He could well have noted "The last twelve years has been a period of struggle".

The early sixties saw the start of a new international crime, hijacking or, more accurately, air piracy. This first affected the USA with several instances of aircraft being taken over by armed assailants and forced to Cuba and initially the rest of the world looked on somewhat bemused. The phrase "Take me to Cuba" even became part of the vernacular for a time. By the seventies, however, the bemusement had turned to serious concern for the crime had become wide spread and had virtually turned into an epidemic.

ICAO had made some moves against the practise with their Declaration of Montreal on Unlawfull Seizure and Hijacking of aircraft in June, 1970 but the practise continued and worsened throughout the decade. IFATCA adopted the position of supporting Montreal's call for States to take effective measures to deter, prevent and prosecute the criminals committing such acts. The Federation also pointed out that the inherent dangers to other aircraft operating in close proximity to the hijacked aircraft and the difficulties faced by air traffic controllers in dealing with the situation seemed to have been overlooked. The Executive Board even took the unusual step (for that time) in late 1970 of issuing a press release to this effect. All the signs were there that this was not to be an easy decade.

IFATCA's 10th anniversary was marked by travelling to "the very birthplace of classical civilisation', as President Arnold Field remarked in his opening speech.

More than 350 delegates from thirty of the thirty two Member Associations and a very heavy work programme made Athens one of the most successful conferences to date.

Committee B saw a considerable technical agenda as usual but, on this occasion, Committee A's agenda was so swollen with 'Human and Environmental Factors in ATC' that the Board saw fit to deal with these items via a separate sub-committee.

Committee C itself was not quite ready for birth, however, and conference split the non-technical aspects with the normal Committee A dealing with Administration (and Nomination) as usual and the H & E Factors (primarily the reports of SC4 and SC5) were dealt with by 'Sub-Committee A'. Not until the 1972 conference did Committee C actually surface as a separate entity.

The head table at the 1971 Athens conference opening.

L to R: Walter Endlich, Gunnar Atterholm (2nd V-P), Geoffrey Monk. Arnold Field, George

Aslanides (President of the Greek ATCA), Dick Campbell (1st V-P), Horst Guddat

Argentina affiliated in Athens joining Uruguay as the second South American Member Association. (Venezuela had joined also in 1965 but were forced to resign in 1968 for economic reasons.) President Field's report to the opening plenary notably mentioned that ATCA had asked that its application for affiliation (deferred at the Montreal conference which saw PATCO affiliate) again be deferred for financial reasons. This was to be the last mention of ATCA in IFATCA circles for many years.

Maintaining concern for the Federations financial health, the Board proposed in Athens a system of budgetary control. Essentially, this meant that spending had to be at all times within the budget and the budget should provide for transfers to the reserves each year. Once more it was considered necessary to increase subscription rates and to promise another review in 1972.

Honorary Secretary Horst Guddat, in his annual report, made a radical call for change. He proposed a Board consisting of the President, Executive Secretary, the current two Vice-Presidents and the Treasurer and "5 or 6 Regional Directors in charge of specified regions". Whilst not acted upon in Athens, this proposal was very close to the concept adopted nineteen years later and with which we continue today. It was also Guddat who had organised the German Air Force flight for delegates to Montreal and he tried it again for Athens in 1971. On this occasion, however, the German Air Force had to decline "for capacity reasons". Undeterred, Guddat then tried the USAF, who initially agreed but then, at very late notice, he received the advice "Mission requirement was reviewed by higher authority and invitation was directed to be withdrawn." Delegates had to make their own way to Athens.

Already by this time, most conferences featured events or happenings, which made them unique. Apart from a very extensive press coverage of the conference, Athens' contribution to this field was the provision of a special post office in the conference hotel. The Greek Ministry of Communications further cooperated by issuing a special franking stamp honouring IFATCA's 10th birthday.

1971_stamp copy
A special post office was setup in the conference hotel in Athens, to issue

a special franking stamp honouring IFATCA's 10th birthday

Athens saw some potential IFATCA Treasurers eliminated from considerations. As an end-of-conference outing, a boat trip to the island of Hydra was programmed. On the morning of the cruise, the French franc was severely devalued. Correctly believing that the small bank on Hydra had not caught up with this news, some delegates made a killing by changing all their francs at the old favourable rate. However, the next day they fell foul of the limit on the amount of drachmas which could be exported and promptly surrendered their profit.

The following year Dublin certainly provided something unique which we will come to in a moment. Firstly, as a backdrop, just prior to the scheduled commencement of the 1972 conference, the Irish Republican Army planted a bomb in the British Embassy in Dublin and, with IFATCA’s President and Secretary both British, there were expressed some concerns and misgivings about the conference.

Arnold Field hands over to Jean-Daniel Monin in Dublin, April 1972

For the conference, the organising committee had booked a hotel under construction and the deadline for completion wasn't quite met. Delegates turning up on the Sunday were simply told "Your room is not yet ready" and of course they assumed that the housemaids were still tidying. As the afternoon wore on, the lobby saw dozens of sleepy and jet-lagged delegates sitting around, in fact not waiting for housekeeping to finish cleaning but waiting for construction workers to literally finish building their rooms. Tired of waiting, several delegates went to their rooms and, to the amazement of hotel staff, with sleeves rolled up, actually assisted the workers to complete the job. One delegate, on returning to reception, was heard to ask if he could have a room with a window. He had a room and he had curtains, but he didn't have a window! The hotel management was so impressed with the way the delegates accepted and worked around the circumstances that they hosted a cocktail party for them as a measure of their appreciation.

That year Ireland was also on the way to winning the five-nations Rugby competition having won in France and England. However, the embassy bombing stopped Scotland and Wales travelling to Ireland. The French Rugby Football Union generously volunteered to play another game in Dublin to enable Ireland to make something of the season financially. The team arrived coincidentally at the IFATCA conference hotel the day after conference when the IFATCA organising committee had organised an Aer Lingus trip to Shannon. But because Aer Lingus substituted a B707 for the programmed B747, not all the delegates fitted on the aircraft and some were offered a bus trip instead. The very large French IFATCA delegation volunteered to travel overland and waited in the hotel forecourt for their bus. A driver arrived, noted the French accents, boarded them and set off for a training run at Landsdowne Road. As they departed, the Rugby players gathered in the lobby and found another bus with a driver listening for French accents and they duly departed for Shannon. The comedie français was later rectified amidst much mirth.

The characteristic Irish sense of humour and efficiency overcame all obstacles and some important decisions were made in Dublin. First steps towards the Information Handbook were made with the determination of a comprehensive questionnaire and first policy on hours of work and duty rosters were decided, recommendations on age for active ATC and management practises and medical concerns were aired. Committee C was off to a good start. Committee B also broke new ground with initial policy on automated systems and made moves towards policies for the handling of Supersonic Transports. In the administration arena, 1972 saw the decision to grant the CHF5,000 conference contribution to the organising committee (uniquely to operate as from that year) as well as the CHF4,000 deficit guarantee. Changes were made to the Executive Board with the Honorary Secretary becoming the 3'a Vice-President and the Editor moving from an elected Board officer to an appointed official. In keeping with the scene set by the hotel, some re-construction was under way within the Federation.

In those days, the conference secretariat was not specifically managed by the Executive Secretary but was mainly left to the organising committee's own devices.

As with many other conferences before and since, in Dublin the secretariat fell behind with the committee reports at the conclusion of the committee sessions.

At 1am on the evening before final plenary, Dublin witnessed the most unusual sight of two Presidents (outgoing and incoming) and two Executive Secretaries (outgoing and incoming) under orders collating the reports. Whilst the individuals concerned have always been prepared to lend a hand to ensure the success of conference, not since have we seen such an august grouping of IFATCA 'heavyweights' so toiling!

The aforementioned incoming President- elected in Dublin - was Jean-Daniel Monin. Unusually, Daniel (as he is more commonly called) Monin was elected President whilst not a member of the Executive Board nor even of a Standing Committee but this is not to say that he was an unknown or hadn't been involved in IFATCA affairs. Indeed, Monin, as Geneva branch President of the Swiss association, attended the first annual conference in Paris in 1962 as deputy to the Swiss President Bernhard Rüthy. He surfaced again in Rome mainly as the promoter of Geneva's bid for the 1967 conference and became organising committee chairman for that conference. In the meantime, he had also taken over as President of the Swiss association following Rtithy's retirement from that post upon his promotion to head office.

1969 and 1970 saw Monin as vice-Chairman of Committee A and then step up to the Chair for the 1971 Athens conference. Apparently, the short notice given of this elevation was a deliberate ploy by the U.K. Guild to test his abilities as they wished to propose him for IFATCA President the next year when the U.K.'s Arnold Field would step down. He passed the test, albeit unknowingly.

Horst Guddat confers with Geoffrey Monk and Maurice Cerf.

Further evidence of this U.K. Guild 'plot' came when Monin visited the U.K for a briefing session with SC1 in connection with the upcoming 6th ICAO EUR RAN meeting. Every where he went, Arnold Field introduced him as "a graduate from Hum school" whereas his colleague, Jose Rodin, was introduced 'merely' as a tower controller from Geneva. On their way home, Rodin jokingly wondered if Monin had noticed that Arnold Field seemed almost to be introducing him as the next President of IFATCA. Perhaps with such keen perception, Roulin should have also held office in the Federation!

It was during the RAN meeting (held in Geneva 2nd-27th November, 1971) that Monin was first told by Gunnar Atterholm (the Swedish Western Europe Regional Councillor) that he should be prepared for a nomination for President by the U.K.

Guild. This was followed a few weeks later by a letter from the Executive Secretary, Geoffrey Monk, confirming the nomination. Several sleepless nights ensued as Daniel and his wife Romy pondered the implications. In a joint decision to accept the nomination, the Monins could see the advantages in Daniel stepping down as President of the Swiss Guild but they were unsuspecting as to just what the work for IFATCA would entail and little did they know that some of the more difficult aspects of this new involvement were about to descend upon them.

Ever since its inception, IFATCA had very carefully avoided becoming involved in politics and actions of an industrial nature. At conferences and other gatherings, speaker after speaker had warned against such involvement and all of IFATCA~s early leaders had professed IFATCA’s deep-seated desire to be a strictly professional organisation. Monin's predecessor, Arnold Field, even said he had a "blind spot" when it came to these matters. It is ironical therefore that at the very time that the Federation became deeply embroiled in the politics of the day (through no fault of their own) they also simultaneously became involved in the other issue which was against its charter, industrial disputation. This latter involvement centred around, firstly, the French ATC strike and then the German ATC dispute both of which, at that time, were probably the most serious examples of industrial disputation involving air traffic control. Certainly, the German action was the most serious dispute that IFATCA became embroiled in.

The French controllers took strike action in February, 1973 and immediately sought Monin's help. Monin was constantly on the phone with the leaders and conducted several media interviews from his home in Geneva and travelled to Paris for some on- the-spot representation. However, the dispute concluded through tragic circumstances with the mid-air collision of two airliners over Nantes in March and the strike ended with the leaders dismissed. Subsequent negotiations and appeals by IFATCA to the French President and government saw them re-instated.

(This dispute is more fully examined in Chapter 8.)

Almost immediately following the French dispute, the West German controllers commenced a go-slow action and again Monin and IFATCA played a part. This time the Executive Board as a whole also became involved and the VDF expressed displeasure at the way IFATCA interceded. It became a war on two fronts for the VDF and despite a measure of success following Monin's visit to Bonn in November, 1973, the VDF remained far from happy and the internal dispute dragged on into the annual conference in May, 1974. The punitive fines levied on the association all but crippled the VDF although they continued to fight on and represent their members and participate in international affairs. Recognising their difficulties, their IFATCA colleagues, intent on ensuring they remained as members, waived their affiliation dues for a number of years. (This dispute is also fully examined in Chapter 8.)

1973 saw IFATCA venture 'off shore', so to speak, to Iceland and that year's Reykjavik meeting in May was destined to be possibly the most important conference for IFATCA since the founding conference in Amsterdam twelve years earlier.

Reykjavik saw sweeping changes to the Constitution and organisational aspects of the Federation. SC6 (Canada) had undertaken an extensive review of IFATCA's representative structure and recommended that the Board now consist of a President, Past President (for one year only following the election of a new President), 3 VicePresidents, Treasurer and an Executive Secretary. The 3 Vice-Presidents were made specifically responsible for Administration, Technical and Professional matters thus now dearly defining their roles. As well, the Editor ceased to be a Board member but it was agreed that he should attend all Executive Board meetings.

Additionally; the concept of Regional Liaison Officers was done away with and an Executive Council instituted. This Council was effectively a 'second tier' of government and consisted of the Executive Board and a Councillor from each of the then ten regions around the world. The Executive Council continued until its abolition in 1990 with the next re-structure.

The newly constituted Executive Board was to come into effect following the 1973 conference at which it was created. It was decided, however, that for financial reasons, the Executive Council would not come into being until after the 1974 conference (slated for Tel Aviv) and the annual Council meetings were to commence after the 14th conference in 1975¹. Reykjavik also saw revised voting procedures allowing individual Member Association non-ratification and notices of variation to IFATCA policies and recommendations for better preparation of committee reports to final plenary were accepted. In consideration of the 1973 budget and the provisional budget for 1974, recommendations were made directing the EB to examine the possibility of paying expenses to attend annual conference for chairmen of the Standing Committees and chairmen of the conference committees. A working paper from the Swiss association on the feasibility of a permanent secretariat was accepted as guidance material and SC3 was directed to annually update for conference the figures concerning a permanent secretariat². IFATCA's final Standing Committee SC7 'Legal Matters in ATC', was also created in Reykjavik at the suggestion of the U.K. Guild, the primary motivator being Ted McCluskey. Initial responsibility was given to Cyprus (with Andreas Avgoustis elected as first chairman - we'll see a little more of Avgoustis later), the Netherlands, the U.K. and Uruguay.

In fact, SC7 only came into being via an “Any Other Business" resolution and since the budget for 1973/74 had already been settled, this latest committee was thus forced to operate for its first year without funds.

One can readily see from all these decisions that Reykjavik was a significant event in IFATCA’s history. Let us examine just one of those decisions.

The Directors at the 12th conference directed the Executive Board, whilst framing the 1974 budget, to examine the possibility of funding the attendance at conference of conference committee chairmen and SC chairmen. The fact that such funding was even a consideration is a measure both of how responsible and secure IFATCA had become in its short life. The Directors were now identifying the need to guarantee the highest quality of work at conference by ensuring the presence of the conference committee officers and their respective SC chairmen, collectively probably the most important individuals at conference. This was indicative of the recognition of the quality of output of the Standing Committees and that it had to be maintained and promoted at conference, even at some considerable cost. And, of course, cost was a key point. Again, such consideration presupposed that budgeting for these officers' attendance was in the realms of possibility. IFATCA had gone in a very short time from being critically short of finances to a position of being able to afford to fund attendees at conference. In fact, the period between the Dublin and Reykjavik conferences had been so difficult for the Federation financially that activities were cut back drastically. Indeed, even the Federations journal, The Controller, a regular since 1961, was languishing and was suspended for a short time as a cost saving measure. The various difficulties facing Jean-Daniel Monin and his team following Dublin, however, were overcome one by one and Reykjavik proved to be a turning point and so also proved to be a measure of IFATCA’s professional and financial health.

Despite the fact that delegates thought the matter of one State/one MA being finally agreed in 1970, the question was again on the agenda in Reykjavik and produced the most contentious discussions of the conference. Incredibly, that the Board was still struggling with this issue is obvious for, in his opening address, President Monin had said: " ...the time has come to reconsider the situation that would face IFATCA if more than one professional association from the same country applied for affiliation. Everyone remembers the reasons why no decision upon this was taken at both Belgrade and Montreal conference. However, time has gone by and the Board of Officers think that, apart from any emotional situation, it should now be possible for the Board of Directors to clearly define what the Federations policy shall be and efforts will be directed to this end."

So Committee A again considered this matter but still there was to be no clear cut resolution to the issue. The following amendment to the Constitution was proposed by SC6: "Eligible for affiliation as a Member Association is any professional association organisation or guild of air traffic control personnel whose technical objectives are essentially the same as those of the Federation provided that one Association only from any one State can be accepted.” Whilst the committee endorsed this proposal and final plenary accepted the report, yet another twist in the saga was about to be played out.

Conference had passed a new rule allowing non-ratification of policies by Member Associations. Six MAs now decided to invoke this new rule and, immediately on conclusion of the final plenary (when all new amendments come into effect), Channel Islands, Israel, Netherlands, Rhodesia, South Africa and the U.K. filed non-ratification against the new membership eligibility requirements.

Specifically, they were of the opinion that any association should be permitted to join (provided they met the requirements, of course) no matter how many from each country. The six said "We believe it is wrong in principle that IFATCA should exclude from affiliation, associations of air traffic controllers, whose aim and objectives are essentially the same as IFATCA and who could make valuable contribution to the work of IFATCA." Following conference, the U.K. Guild also wrote to Chairman SC6 and explained their action. This action (of not ratifying a resolution) also ensured that this item would be placed on the agenda for next year and again it was to become the most hotly debated agenda item.

At previous conferences and again in Reykjavik, membership discussions had centred on whether more than one association from a State could apply for affiliation. In Reykjavik, the debate also turned to whether less than one association could apply! This apparently paradoxical situation arose from the application of the Eurocontrol Guild (Maastricht Lodge) for full professional membership.

The Eurocontrol organisation commenced operations in 1972 providing upper airspace control from the Maastricht UAC with around sixty controllers from various countries such as Belgium, France, Germany; Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. They also commenced with an experimental centre in Brétigny (France) and had plans for other centres in Karlsruhe (Germany) and Shannon (Ireland). Many of the expatriate controllers working for Eurocontrol retained membership in their national association but some of those in Maastricht were recruits from organisations outside the scope of civil ATC representation. As the Eurocontrol controllers generally became more experienced, they collectively came to feel that they had something to offer and, correspondingly, to learn by forming a separate ATC Guild within Eurocontrol.

A couple of British supervisors in Maastricht, trying to form something equivalent to the U.K. Guild's Overseas Lodge, made up the first constitution of the Eurocontrol Guild of Air Traffic Services (EGATS) proposing a 'Lodge' in each Eurocontrol centre. By the time of their application for affiliation with IFATCA in 1973, only the Maastricht Lodge was functioning, although there were stirrings of interest from Brétigny too. The Directors in Reykjavik considered that the Guild (only being as it then was EGATS - Maastricht Lodge) did not exist as an all-encompassing entity and could not fully represent the potential members working for Eurocontrol at Brétigny, and, in the future, at Karlsruhe and Shannon. Following the rejection of their application, EGATS abandoned the 'Lodge' system and became a single organisation whereby every controller from any Eurocontrol facility could become a member. (Eurocontrol eventually gave up the idea of several centres and the Karlsruhe and Shannon sites were re-nationalised in 1975. Brétigny remains as an experimental centre.)

EGATS' application further highlighted another problem. During the debate on the constitutional amendment to permit only one MA per State it was obvious that Eurocontrol wasn't a State and yet it had a grouping of controllers working for it who desired representation. So at EGATS behest (and let's not forget they were not yet members), IFATCA (that is, SC6 in this instance) further altered their constitutional amendment, from what we saw above, to further allow membership from a "properly constituted international organisation". It was this significant change that permitted EGATS' application to be processed and eventually ratified, as were the applications of the East African Community and CENAMER in later years.

Finally, the Reykjavik conference saw the Icelandic association present to IFATCA the conference committee gavels, which are still in use today. These symbols of the conference committee chairmen's authority are beautifully made from whalebone and are presented each year during the opening plenary session to the elected committee chairmen. Hardly ever used by the chairmen in anger, they nevertheless marked the growing professionalism of the Member Associations, serve as tangible reminders of IFATCA's history and, during conferences, indicate the authority, not only of the committee chairmen, but also of the conference committees themselves as the Federation's supreme governing body.

We have, so far, charted the course of IFATCA mainly through its annual conferences, events, which in those days, were the focal point of each year and, to a large extent, still are. Without exception, each conference venue had been clearly endorsed and the MAs had elected unanimously to travel to the selected venue.

IFATCA was present at the official opening of Paris' Charles de Gaulle airport

in March 1974. President Monin was joined by Daniel Gorin, President of APCA (centre)

and Maurice Cerf, Past President of IFATCA (right).

1974, however, was a different matter!

The holding of the 13th conference in Tel Aviv was surrounded by controversy. IFATCA had, to date, studiously avoided being involved in politics but, by late 1973, given the times and the serious events and cruel acts that were taking place in the name of politics, it had become unavoidable.

The early seventies were turbulent times and the air traffic control services around the world did not miss out on being involved and occasionally air traffic controllers were placed in difficult situations. This was the era of aircraft hijacks, serious Arab-Israeli tensions and politically motivated terrorism. Already in 1970, we had witnessed a Swissair CV990 that crashed as a result of an altimeter triggered bomb and a BA VC10, a TWA B707 and a Swissair DC8 that were hijacked to Jordan and blown up in the desert. 1972 was even worse. In May, a Sabena aircraft was hijacked for ransom and 3 terrorists opened fire on passengers in the Tel Aviv terminal killing a considerable number. The world was appalled at the massacre of the Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympic Games and there were other acts of terrorism and air piracy at Rome and Athens airports on successive days in December. Mostly these acts were directed against the State of Israel but on the 10th August, 1973 the Israelis themselves forced down a Libyan commercial airliner. The B727 apparently was suffering from navigational problems and instead of making a normal approach to Cairo, overflew the Sinai desert, then occupied by Israel. The Israelis intercepted the aircraft and led it to a military airbase. When the Libyan crew refused to land, the aircraft was shot down.

This latter action prompted an outcry around the world, including amongst IFATCA's Member Associations. Those who protested included Canada, Hungary, the Netherlands, South Africa and Suriname. The mood was summed up by the Canadian association whose national executive issued a press release on the 15th August:

"The National Executive of the Canadian ATC Association Inc. views the recent action of the Israeli government in forcing down an international airliner as an incident which demands the strongest possible protest by air traffic controllers. In light of the position taken by IFATCA at several annual conferences and reemphasised in Iceland only last Spring, the Executive considers that IFATCA should do what is possible within the limitations imposed on controllers to publicise its condemnation of this illegal action by a national government.

Accordingly, the Executive proposed to the National Council, which voted unanimously, that:

"CATCA recommend to IFATCA that it notify the Israeli government that by their action they have forfeited the honour of hosting IFATCA '74 which should be re-scheduled for another location.

"It should be noted that no criticism of the Israeli (ATC) Association is intended or implied. However, the Council considers that however inconsequential such action may be to the Israeli government, it may serve as an indication of the Federations unity in pursuit of its published aims."

The Israeli Association responded with a press release of its own on the 23rd August:

"The ATC Association of Israel, being a member of IFATCA, does not support actions like the one taken place (sic) on August 10th, 1973. This Association has taken part in discussions concerning actions of sabotage or air piracy in the skies and vigorously opposed them. The position taken on this subject by IFATCA at several annual conferences and in May this year in Iceland is that every Member Association should do what is possible within the limitations imposed on air traffic controllers to publicise its contempt of such acts and to protest such action. The Israeli Association could not have prevented the action taken on August 10th in spite of its vehement opposition and policy adopted. This press release (which was forwarded to IFATCA’s Executive Secretary) should be circulated to all 38 Member Associations by the Secretary."

So IFATCA and its members became embroiled in the politics of the time.

Some controllers had been forced to refuse air traffic control clearances and services to hi-jacked aircraft, particularly landing and departure clearances. On other occasions, emergency actions were necessary to clear airspace for hijacked aircraft operating without clearance. Of course, these problems were nothing like those being experienced by the passengers and crew on board but they nevertheless placed great pressures on the ATC services and the controllers and illustrated how unprepared and ill-equipped to respond most administrations were.

Illustrating its concern for its members, IFATCA published in The Controller (February, 1974) an article on hijacking which provided controllers with international and national statute details on the act of piracy. Subsequent publications provided comprehensive details on various aspects of international aviation law.

Against this background, IFATCA's Executive Board held its regular (northern) Autumn meeting on 17th-19th September, 1973 in Geneva. High on the agenda was the issue of the venue for the 1974 conference. The Board carefully considered the pros and cons and finally decided to go ahead with Tel Aviv as the conference venue. The Board quite correctly carefully avoided making a decision based on political considerations and relied solely upon IFATCA rules and procedures in deciding that it was not constitutionally possible to alter a decision which had been made by the Directors at the 1972 conference and confirmed at the 1973 conference. As Jean-Daniel Monin said in his opening speech in Tel Aviv, the Board only gave consideration as to the safety of the participants and whether the host association was unable to carry out its undertakings. He went on to state: “Any other reason should be rejected for again it must be clearly understood that IFATCA, as a non-political and purely professional organisation, is not willing to take into account or give way to political pressures of any kind. I believe that if it were to deviate from this basic principle, the Federation would soon become discredited and forfeit its professional status."

Subsequent to the Executive Board's September meeting, the Hungarian and Austrian associations held a meeting on 1st November and both associations agreed that IFATCA general conferences should not be held in countries involved in war. HATCA stated they were not willing to send an official delegation to Tel Aviv. AATCA had not yet made a decision on the matter. IFATCA's Regional Liaison Officer for Eastern Europe (Alfred Nagy, an Austrian) stated that the decision to hold the conference in Tel Aviv was adversely affecting his work within the region.

Despite the controversy and protests, the conference in Tel Aviv eventually did get under way on 20th May. Controversy and dispute notwithstanding, some twenty eight Member Associations (out of a total of thirty eight) were represented and delegates were well satisfied with proceedings even though the organisers had been confronted with rather more than the usual difficulties in presenting a conference.

In facing these difficulties, and because they were a small association numerically, the Israel ATC Association created history in 1974. For the first time, instead of managing the conference themselves, the host association employed the services of two tour groups to organise the function. Initially; the Executive Board was reluctant to accept the idea of 'outsiders' organising and running the annual conference but they were won over (no doubt by the force of argument by the erstwhile President of IATCA, Mr. Willy Katz). In his final address to conference, President Monin acknowledged that the work of conference was organised in a very efficient manner.

Directors in Tel Aviv demonstrated some considerable financial compassion. Because of the on-going industrial difficulties in Germany, the delegates effectively wrote off the VDF's outstanding dues for 1973 and 1974. In fact, the VDF promised a token CHF2,000 for 1974 and 1975 but, in 1976, they were "granted respite for 1974, 1975 and 1976 pending the court actions". Identifying the large financial burden on PATCO with their considerable membership, delegates further granted a limit of payment for 5,000 members and fixed an annual ceiling of CHF34,800 for the American association.

"You must give me the name of your tailor" Daniel Monin (centre) impressed by PATCO

President John Leydon's sartorial style. PATCO RVP and IFATCA V-P Bob Meyer
demonstrates a little more restraint.

PATCO Convention, Hawaii, May 1974

A key resolution was passed in Tel Aviv, one very pertinent to circumstances. IFATCA decided to advise ICAO that the Federation would no longer remain inert but intended to take such action as necessary to assist a hijacked aircraft in effecting a safe landing in the name of safety in air navigation. This was later translated into policy during the 1978 conference in Copenhagen.

The EGATS situation failed to be resolved in Tel Aviv. Whilst, as a result of the Reykjavik meeting, both IFATCA and EGATS amended their constitutions, the Directors in final plenary failed by one vote to confirm the conference committee endorsement of EGATS’ affiliation. Apparently, part of the reasoning behind this rejection was the reluctance of some Member Associations to accept the loss of some of their members to another association.

In the end though, the Tel Aviv conference was probably remarkable for the fact that despite all the problems, forebodings and arguments, it proved something of an anti-climax³. The 13th conference also provided an interesting footnote via another religious creed. The conference fell late in the Christian religious calendar and the holy day of Ascension Thursday conflicted with committee proceedings.

To enable their Christian colleagues to celebrate this feast day, the Israelis offered to provide a minibus to the nearest Christian church, which, it transpired, was located a little distance away in Jaffa. This offer was accepted by no less than four of the six conference committee officers so conference proceedings in the Jewish State were halted for a couple of hours whilst the Christian devotees attended to their religious well being.

1974 concluded with an auspicious event for IFATCA. Following a request and decision at the Tel Aviv conference, December, 1974 saw President Monin undertake a fact finding mission to South America. During this ten day visit to Buenos Aires and Montevideo, Monin inspected several ATC facilities and held talks with the Director of Air Traffic Services in Argentina and the Director of Civil Aviation in Uruguay. Monin expressed great concern about the inferior conditions existing, pointedly raised the matter of six suspended air traffic controllers and, on his return home, wrote to the President of the Argentine Republic seeking normalisation of the local situation and offering IFATCA's assistance to ensure safety was maintained.

Whilst these approaches, on the surface, met with only token success, this first of its kind visit nevertheless very much raised the profile and spirits of the South American Member Associations and, more importantly, gave them added status for future negotiations. Monin's mission provided a forerunner of future such visits.

If there were concerns about delegates' ability to travel to Montreal in 1970, they were nothing compared to those expressed about attending IFATCA’s 14th annual conference. In April, 1975 the IFATCA 'circus' for the first time left the Northern Hemisphere and travelled down under to Melbourne, Australia. It seems quaint to think on it now but the decision to hold the conference in such a far-flung outpost was not taken lightly. In the lead up to the conference, many were the exhortations for delegates to attend. Such efforts to convince MAs of the feasibility and practicality of attending a conference were unheard of. The November, 1974 editorial from The Controller stated: "Australia has been selected by the Federation to host the 14th annual conference. The Executive Board urges its individual members to make an all-out effort to attend the 1975 conference. Do not let the distance discourage you ...".

In 1975, whilst the B747 had made its mark upon mass travel, the narrow body jets such as B707, DC8 and VC15 were still quite commonly used for long distance travel. Whilst themselves revolutionising travel, the early B747s, like the narrow bodied aircraft, did not have great range and, with whichever aircraft, it took some 32 hours (or more) to fly from London to Australia. In most cases, a domestic connection was then required from Sydney to Melbourne, about another hour's flying time. As well, there wasn't the frequency or range of services that exists today so delegates were faced with service constraints too. Very few European airlines made the trek to Australia that do today and most delegates were forced to fly round-about routes or backtrack to London to facilitate their travel. In any event they were faced with huge sector lengths. A typical London-Sydney flight consisted of London-Rome-Teheran-Bombay-Singapore-Darwin-Sydney. Of course it was possible for Europeans to fly westwards but this did not save time (typically London-New York-Los Angeles-Honolulu-Fiji-Sydney), the frequency of service was less and no one airline flew the complete route. Each and every one of these sectors was much greater than what most European and North American delegates were accustomed to. Despite the fact that Qantas, Australia's international airline, offered substantial discounts, the time and effort involved in travelling half way around the globe was proving a daunting prospect to many. Hence the entreaties from the Board and organising committee to make a "supreme effort".

The uniqueness of such travel even in the mid-seventies was very well captured in an article written for The Controller by Ted McCluskey following his visit to Melbourne.

The article was entitled 'Around the World in 40 Days, or What Kept You Jules Verne?' and was a lengthy and humorous account of what was described by many as 'the trip of a lifetime'.

In the end, the various fears about lack of attendance were not realised and a record 493 participants were registered from twenty four Member Associations, thirteen non-member countries, eight Corporate Members and twelve international and national corporations. The number of participants was partially inflated by the tremendous support given by the Australian Department of Civil Aviation, whose head office was, at that time, in Melbourne. Apart from other generous support, the DCA went so far as to fully sponsor to the conference two local association representatives from each of the six States of Australia (the author was one!). They also gave their trainees from the ATC college in Melbourne the week off from their studies to enable their attendance. Nonetheless, the high attendance from the MAs themselves was a welcome relief for the organising committee and the Executive Board.

Without exception, the delegates were extremely satisfied with the result of their arduous journey and most went home highly impressed with the unique Australian sense of humour and lifestyle, their hospitality and organisational professionalism. For most Australian air traffic controllers, this was their first exposure to their colleagues from overseas and they responded enthusiastically. They took every opportunity to 'compare notes' and friendships were formed in Melbourne that are maintained to this day.

One of the interesting aspects of this conference was the admission by the Minister for Civil Aviation during the opening ceremony that, with regards to aviation administration, Australia was a 'police state'. This accusation had previously been levelled at Australia in several quarters (even by IFATCA in an editorial in The Controller in August, 1974) but it was, to say the least, unusual for a Minister of State to verbalise the thought in this manner. The Minister, the Hon. Charles Jones, said that Australia, in developing an airways system that reflected an internationally high aviation safety record, was "tremendously proud of that record and completely intolerant of any action that may jeopardise it". Whilst the country had indeed been described in some aviation circles a police state, Jones said "...this country carried the label proudly. It was a recognition of an intense desire that aviation operations in Australia should be, above all things, safe. Far from considering the remark an insult, it was regarded rather as a compliment." It was a most unusual speech but served to highlight the outstanding and enviable safety record that aviation enjoyed in Australia.

Following the crash (and inability to find the wreckage) of an airliner in 1931 and a subsequent and more serious crash in 1938, the Australian government instituted what became known as Operational Control. This subsequently became an arm of the air traffic control service in Australia and performed an unique role amongst the world's ATC services. The government had determined that there was a need for an overall watch on commercial flights and later on all IFR flights.

Operational Control was given the responsibility to ensure that flight plans were correctly lodged, that the aircraft carried sufficient fuel in the event of poor weather en-route or at destination and on diversion and that changing conditions and facilities were advised immediately to aircrew. Most importantly, they were provided with the ability to close an airport if weather conditions deteriorated below certain minima. It was this latter ability that prompted the accusations of 'police state' for it also carried the right to compulsorily divert aircraft to alternate aerodromes if they encountered below minima conditions. This power was further extended to tower controllers and they were entitled to close airspace in proximity to airports, for example, on final approach, because of known hazardous weather conditions.

There is little doubt that what some (including IFATCA) called those heavy handed, even high handed, powers maintained Australia's enviable safety record although certainly the extremely favourable weather and lack of relatively high terrain helped. For the controllers, it was reassuring to possess the ability to prevent an aircraft blithely flying on into known hazardous weather and thereby possibly save lives whilst knowing that frequently, in situations overseas, tower controllers had witnessed an aircraft crash because the pilots had the prerogative to continue into such hazardous conditions. This power was rescinded, and the Operational Watch branch of ATC disbanded, in the late eighties.

There was an additional authority which added to the reputation and this continues today. Australian air traffic controllers exercise positive control over ALL flights in primary control zones around major airports. This means that all aircraft, whether IFR or VFR, require clearance to enter and are fully separated by the controllers except where visual separation is assigned by the controller. Until recently, VFR flights also required clearance to enter controlled airspace where, again, they were fully separated.

Australia's unparalleled safety record speaks for itself on this issue and is, arguably, ample testimony to intelligent practise. Even so, one can ask was it an aviation police state or simply prudent control? Now that those powers have been removed, only time will tell.

Unfortunately, politics again raised its head with this conference. For the first time, the delegates of a Member Association were refused an entry visa to the host nation.

In 1965 the Prime Minister of Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), Mr. Ian Smith, had declared independence from Britain with his Unilateral Declaration of Independence in contravention of Britain's moves to cede its colonial powers in favour of the indigenous peoples. Mr. Smith's manoeuvrings, designed to entrench the white colonial regime in power, caused great consternation, earned almost universal opprobrium and were outlawed by the United Nations at the behest of the United Kingdom. So, most of the Western world boycotted Salisbury (now Harare) in much the same way later that Pretoria was not recognised for its white supremacist government and apartheid policies. The sanctions and boycotts were widely flouted, however, and the Rhodesian delegations never had prior problems attending conference.

Australia it seems was a little more enthusiastic about joining in this boycott and, despite earlier assurances to the contrary, refused at the last minute to issue visas to the Rhodesian delegates. The Rhodesian ATC Association joined IFATCA in 1967 and up until 1975 had been a very active member (including supplying an Executive Board member in J.D. 'Tommy' Thomas from 1971-72) and their exclusion from the Melbourne conference weighed heavily upon the delegates present and their deliberations. Not surprisingly for an organisation professing non-political inclinations, IFATCA reacted to this situation and amended their rules so that, in future, before a Member Association can be confirmed as host for an annual conference, an undertaking must be given that, to the best of their knowledge and belief, no delegates of Member Associations will be barred for political reasons from entering the host country.

To be fair, the Australian association was under the impression that no country's delegates would be barred and they had been assured that there would be no problems of this sort. Australia's Civil Air Operations Officers' Association was as embarrassed and indignant about their government's about face as anyone.

In Melbourne also, the perennial question of concession airfares for IFATCA delegates on 'duty' travel again arose. The Federations relations with IATA were closely examined in light of continued absence of complete recognition and limited assistance with travel to industry meetings from that body. This lack of recognition was a major cause of dissatisfaction among controllers who viewed their (non) acceptance in this manner as totally unjustifiable and assumed that IATA'S stance indicated the level of esteem that IATA held for IFATCA and controllers in general.

The Australian and New Zealand associations, in particular, were very keen to see such recognition achieved. Their geographic isolation made discount travel a highly desirable aim, much more so than their colleagues from the Northern Hemisphere who usually already had some access to travel concessions and, in any event, enjoyed greater proximity to relevant events and meetings. Even amongst these two associations, the Australians became strongly of the opinion that something had to be done and, as we shall see with the Lyon conference in 1976, they set in train in the intervening twelve months events which would have long reaching effects.

By the way, the work of IFATCA went on and the 14th annual conference saw a record 133 recommendations to final plenary and a further three associations join the Federation, which brought the total membership of IFATCA to forty one Member Associations. One of these new associations was the Eurocontrol Guild who finally were admitted after eligibility requirements were at last defined and Member Association objections overcome. From a membership point of view, this was probably the most satisfying result to come out of Melbourne. Many delegates recalled EGATS President Roger Bartlett's stirring words of twelve months earlier when he admonished those who again had voted against admitting EGATS "... for refusing to accept the hand of friendship extended to IFATCA by a dedicated group of international controllers, as international as the Federation itself." His emotional appeal is one of the truly memorable speeches delivered to an IFATCA gathering and has gone down in the annals of the Federation. Bartlett also said in Tel Aviv "We'll be back next year" and, whilst EGATS certainly was, unfortunately Roger himself was not and the honour of accepting the Charter of Affiliation fell to a Brétigny colleague, Ted McCluskey.

On the social scene, unquestionably the highlight was the final night traditional dinner dance which, on this occasion, proved to be anything but traditional for it was held some distance out of Melbourne on a working sheep farm curiously named 'Emu Bottom'. On this property, the old sheep shearing shed had been converted into a dance hall. Before the evening's festivities got under way, much jocularity was occasioned by the sight of Jean-Daniel Monin and his fellow Board members closely studying the aerodynamics of the boomerang. Suffice to say that very few boomerangs returned to their throwers that evening!

Rivalling the events of Emu Bottom, Melbourne saw the creation of another conference committee - Committee D. It proved to be just about the most popular of the committees and delegates attending Committee D sessions swore that it was by far the best managed and easily achieved the highest output of conference with delegates happy to continue their technical discussions and work far into the night.

This was never a problem for the venue for Committee D was in fact the well stocked bar of the hotel next door to the conference venue. Many a problem was solved during these eventful discussions although the minute taking left a little to be desired!

Finally, in a major break from tradition, the Melbourne conference saw, for the first time, an official conference report produced as a separate publication replacing the normal comprehensive reports that had been produced in The Controller since the first conference back in 1961.

Despite strenuous efforts to remain aloof from it, politics dogged IFATCA's footsteps throughout the seventies. Another political event that caused problems for IFATCA was the war between Cyprus and Turkey in 1974. On 20th July that year, Turkey invaded the Eastern Mediterranean island and annexed the northern portion. This action caused a serious disruption to air services in that part of the world with a complete break in communications between the Ankara and Nicosia ATC Centres. To this day, ICAO does not recognise the airspace between northeastern Cyprus and the Turkish mainland. This airspace is still de jure part of the Nicosia FIR but under the control of Cypriots from the occupied territory.

At the Melbourne conference, delegations from Turkey (a member since 1968) and Cyprus (a member since 1969) were both present and IFATCA utilised its neutral political position to facilitate a meeting between their delegates. The topic of discussion was the restoration of normal regional planning facilities and the result was that the Federation reached an agreement with the two associations for the restoration of the navigation and communication facilities at Nicosia International Airport without delay on an urgent basis.

This agreement was conveyed to the President of ICAO, Mr. Binaghi, and further stated: "The Federation is aware of the talks to be opened in Vienna on the whole question of Cyprus, but I would be grateful if you could make it known to the Ministers due to meet in Vienna that IFATCA and its Turkish and Cyprus Associations strongly request the immediate restoration of the facilities and the associated Air Traffic Services as an essential step in the maintenance of air navigation safety."

Mr. Binaghi replied: "Since August last year we have been following the situation closely and doing our best to obtain an improvement in the air navigation system in the Eastern Mediterranean area. However, there are several non-technical considerations that play an important role in this matter and so far we have not met with success. Nevertheless, we continue in our efforts and I was glad to hear of the action taken by your Federation." However, even to this day, Nicosia airport remains occupied by U.N. forces and is prohibited to normal civil traffic.

Another letter written by President Monin about this time concerned the industrial situation in Greece. The Greek association was prevented from attending the Melbourne conference because of a general mobilisation of all controllers imposed by the Greek government. This situation arose when negotiations for improved working conditions ended in deadlock and the Greek ATCA proposed strike action. The mobilisation was the government's response. Imaginatively, IFATCA subsequently held an SC7 meeting in Athens. Attending, amongst others, were representatives from the Greek and Cypriot associations, including Andreas Avgoustis. The Greek Minister for Transport invited the Committee to his office for discussions and this represented the first face to face meeting of the local controllers and their Ministry and the Federations concerns were clearly expressed.

Monin's letter further outlined IFATCA’s concern with the safety implications. In direct contrast to the Cyprus problem, this situation had a speedy resolution with the Greek Minister's reply indicating a return to normal and the Greek association confirmed the rescinding of the mobilisation order and, subsequently, an increase of 35% on their basic salary! This remains just about the most successful intervention in a dispute that IFATCA has ever made. Unfortunately, subsequent actions in Greece would not be so readily resolved.

In these earlier years, IFATCA was continually on the lookout for ways to promote itself and the profession of air traffic control and an unique opportunity arose in June 1975 to do just that. The Melbourne conference had allocated responsibility for SC2 (Public Relations) to France and the APCA quickly got to the task and only six weeks later various officers of the French association and the Federation found themselves manning a booth at the Paris Air Show from 30th May to 8th June. The biennial Paris Air Show is, along with Farnborough, one of the world's biggest civil and military aviation expositions and afforded an excellent opportunity for the many visitors to become acquainted with an otherwise little known organisation. To many in 1975, air traffic control was still a mysterious occupation and this occasion proved an excellent and successful window to the profession. The ubiquitous Daniel Gorin, the then President ofAPCA, organised the stand and its manning and can take much of the credit for its success.

In contrast, 1976 was not a good year for IFATCA.

In January, the American Member Association, the Professional ATC Organisation (PATCO) withdrew from the Federation.

This step came as a complete surprise and shock to IFATCA. After all, it was only six years earlier that PATCO had joined the Federation and only did so through their own desires to be more international and gain wider recognition (and perhaps to thwart the more management oriented ATCA?). In the intervening years, PATCO experienced a turbulent domestic period with frequent disputes with their Federal Aviation Administration but throughout had maintained a high involvement with IFATCA. Their Great Lakes Region V-P, Bob Meyer, was also Vice-President of IFATCA from 1972-76.

IFATCA was completely at a loss to explain the departure of PATCO and this perplexion was not dissipated by the letter that PATCO's President, John Leydon, wrote to Daniel Monin announcing their withdrawal. In the same letter, Leydon made two seemingly conflicting statements. He said: "I personally believe that international air traffic is a very strong force for promoting world peace and improving the understanding and ties between nations" and paradoxically "We no longer felt that the international body could best serve the continuing interest of our membership as it is currently structured."

One can understand IFATCA being perplexed. The Federation had made great strides and by 1976 was regularly sitting in on ICAO meetings, medical symposiums, safety seminars, human and environmental study groups, etc and hence was very effectively advancing the air traffic controller's cause. Truly, if international air traffic was beneficial to all, then the personal and industry contacts fostered by all this representation was even more so. It was difficult to see how PATCO could rationalise their professed desire for greater internationalism for air traffic and air traffic controllers with their self imposed isolationism. It was also difficult to reconcile the fact that a group of controllers in probably the most air-minded country in the world had decided to withdraw from all effective international involvement and turn their backs on their colleagues. The question was asked: Have these people got their priorities right?

Coincidentally (or not?) PATCO had been seriously questioning the viability of the new Concorde operations into the United States. Although PATCO President John Leydon had earlier expressed favour with supersonic transportation, at the time of PATCO's withdrawal he was strongly charging that Concorde flights into U.S. airports would "place an unconscionably high level of hazards” on what PATCO considered to be an already strained ATC system. Despite the fact that the U.S. Transportation Secretary had considered the necessary operating techniques and approved the fuel reserves carried in granting a trial period for Concorde operations, Leydon opined that Concorde's fuel margins were "unacceptably low" and special procedures would add to the workload and responsibilities for controllers. In response, apparently rebutting this assertion, IFATCA’s secretariat, in an internal document, noted that “there is no lack of documentation, procedures or techniques ... and a maximum of two aircraft a day is small enough to allow a gradual acquisition of experience".

In his withdrawal letter to Monin, Leydon noted that whilst PATCO's objections to Concorde may at first appear nationalistic they were really based on safety questions on the current version of Concorde. In an interview with the U.S. aviation publication Aviation Week & Space Technology, Leydon emphasised that their withdrawal from the Federation was due to a dispute over staffing and affiliation dues.

It was not the first time, of course, that the United States (or arms of it) had embarked upon a course of isolationism but it was the first time that IFATCA had experienced it and naturally it had a serious effect. At the very time that IFATCA was beginning to become truly effective as the voice of the world's controllers and a serious player on the international aviation stage, to lose the biggest ATC Member Association was a huge blow in both the professional and financial sense.

Simultaneously with the PATCO problems, their North American cousins, the Canadian Air Traffic Control Association, became deeply embroiled in the bilingual issue in Canada. Whilst this was essentially a domestic dispute, CATCA sought to include IFATCA in the issue and Daniel Monin played a contentious part, naively on a self professed personal basis rather than as President of the world body.

This dispute had its origins in the struggle of francophone controllers to exercise their rights (in accordance with government policy) but essentially revolved around the issue of safety: whether bilingual ATC was as safe as unilingual ATC. The dispute developed into a most bitter confrontation between colleagues in the control centres, between controllers and pilots united against the Canadian Ministry of Transport, resulted in disruptive industrial action and almost saw CATCA withdraw from IFATCA as well.

In the conclusions to his excellent book on the subject 'The Language of the Skies', Sandford Borins eloquently sums up the dispute thus: The controllers "felt that informal use of French before proper procedures were developed was unsafe, although, because of political pressure, MOT would accept it as a fait accompli." The pilots were also very much involved in the dispute and Borins said "pilots' opposition to bilingual ATC arose primarily from their professional ethic, which gave rise to the belief that bilingual ATC would diminish safety" and "pilots opposed a change which they felt would provide no benefits, but would reduce safety." How did this dispute arise and how did IFATCA become involved (albeit peripherally) in what patently was a domestic issue?

By 1974, almost every controller in the Quebec Terminal Control Unit was francophone, or at least was bilingual. Thus, it was normal for controllers to coordinate amongst themselves in French and to speak to unilingual French VFR pilots in French. This was also the case at certain small general aviation airports in Quebec province, such as Baie Comeau (east of Quebec City), where the Ministry of Transport (MOT) had, as far back as April, 1962, approved the use of French but then rescinded that approval except in exceptional cases. This restriction on the use of French was widely flouted. At the bigger Montreal Centre, with a large proportion of unilingual English personnel, francophone controllers also expressed the desire to exercise their mother tongue but were forbidden from doing so because of the need for everyone to be understood. The Montreal francophones began a push to have their language recognised and to be permitted to use it in their control functions. Their basic argument was that it was safer for them to communicate with French speaking pilots and controllers in French.

Whilst CATCA President Dick Campbell had expressed some concerns for controllers' career prospects over the government's bilingual policy as far back as 1971, this was largely glossed over in return for francophone support for industrial action. This position changed when Jim Livingston was elected as President of CATCA on 1st June, 1975. Livingston was a true union man and he quickly expressed concerns about the possible ramifications of francophone ATC and in November, 1975 he issued a memo seeking reports of infractions from the existing language rules. Not unnaturally, this angered the francophone controllers in Quebec and they came to the realisation that as long as there were unilingual anglophones in Montreal, the language of operation would be English so they commenced using French to French speaking pilots, including IFR pilots. Ultimately this meant that the anglophones would have to conform, that is, speak French or leave. Naturally, this caused tensions in the control room to grow and it also caused considerable concern amongst the pilot fraternity.

By the end of 1975 the atmosphere in the Montreal Centre was extremely tense. Physical confrontation was close. A French insult was hurled at an anglophone and another hauled the francophone from his seat. Several controllers ceased work quoting tension induced stress. There were threats of violence against CATCA's Quebec regional director (an anglophone) and police were posted at his house for protection.

The shift supervisors were in a most invidious position. On the one hand they had been told by Ottawa to take disciplinary action if English was not used and on the other they had an already understaffed centre to run. Thus they were hesitant about taking action. As well, the francophones amongst them were not unsympathetic to the cause. These supervisors also received threats of violence and some were relocated to hotels also with police protection. The situation had become so serious that Walter McLeish, the Director General, actually threatened to close down the centre altogether if normality could not be restored. By this time, the MOT, mostly in the person of McLeish, had come to believe that safe bilingual IFR operations could be implemented and proposed a simulation study to trial procedures. Canadian Air Line Pilots Association members, who stated they felt unsafe and insecure when French was used, and CATCA now decided to launch a publicity campaign to promote their opposition to bilingualism in ATC. As part of this campaign they planned a 'Special International Air Safety Symposium' to be held on 2nd and 3a March under the auspices of IFALPA. It was to this symposium that Daniel Monin, as President of IFATCA, was invited and so the Federation also became involved.

The symposium was an emotion charged affair with plenty of histrionics. The president of U.S. ALPA was particularly emphatic in his denunciation of "a self evident unsafeness". CATCA's Jim Livingston concluded his presentation by saying: Kit is seemingly impossible to protest on grounds of safety without being branded as bigots. We can only hope that Canada will not act as some municipalities do (and) wait until several people are killed at one intersection and then put up a traffic light."

Daniel Monin took the opposite tack and condemned the emotionalism displayed believing it to be inconsistent with "the objective approach required". In the end the symposium achieved nothing and the Montreal-Matin summed it up as a "Dialogue of the Deaf"!

By far, the majority of Canadian pilots were concerned with the issue and even most bilingual francophone pilots supported CALPA's opposition. One, Capt. Charbonneau, wrote to a newspaper during the dispute and went so far as to declare his preference for using English for flying and French for making love.

CALPA agreed to support any action CATCA took, including strike action, and further undertook to call upon their international colleagues to do likewise.

They took their arguments to the IFALPA annual conference and on 7th April the pilots' international body overwhelmingly passed a Swiss ALPA sponsored resolution strongly condemning the Canadian MOT.

CATCA's next step was to try and enlist the support of the wider ATC community and they prepared a working paper for presentation to the Lyon annual conference.

This paper opposed the use of bilingual air traffic control but, countering the IFALPA stance, IFATCA's directors opposed the Canadian proposal with the strongest opposition not unexpectedly coming from countries such as France and Switzerland who did use bilingual and even multilingual ATC procedures. CATCA's impression of the discussions in Committee B was that President Monin, rather than taking an impartial stance in the issue, sided with his home association (Switzerland) and influenced the outcome. (In fact, the final outcome was that no decision one way or the other was made.)

As mentioned, the MOT was now moving towards a major simulation exercise to test their theories. In connection with this, a Mr. J.D.Lyon (an ex-President of CATCA and now working for the MOT) approached Daniel Monin immediately prior to the Lyon conference and asked him to be one of a number of impartial observers. Lyon had heard Monin speak at the Safety Symposium and also knew Monin from his (Lyon's) earlier days as CATCA President. Monin insists he was invited to attend strictly as an independent observer, not as a participant. Whilst both Monin and Livingston were aware of this approach during the conference, neither saw fit to mention it to the other. What follows has been hotly debated on both sides.

Monin initially rejected Lyon's overtures but after conference was eventually convinced to travel to Ottawa for three days at MOT's expense to discuss his attendance as an observer and he agreed on the proviso that CATCA had been informed and agreed to the visit. Monin says he then travelled to Ottawa as Mr. Monin rather than as President of IFATCA. Lyon and McLeish briefed Monin on a schedule and proposed a visit to the simulation in company with the Minister, Otto Lang. Monin, having already learnt that CATCA was upset, said that the visit was "not on" and refused to go without agreement from CATCA. According to what Monin had now learnt, the MOT had not coordinated any of the visit with CATCA. If that was the case, it is understandable then that CATCA was extremely upset at Monin's appearance in Ottawa. Monin's subsequent meeting with Livingston (who was in Ottawa for contract negotiations) was somewhat acrimonious and, in self defence, he claimed that he hadn't mentioned his potential attendance in Ottawa since MOT had confirmed that they would coordinate that with CATCA. In his book, Borins states that Lyon contacted CATCA on the 4th May seeking Livingston's reaction to Monin as an observer by the 6th May.

Apparently CATCA's response was to attempt contact with Monin in Switzerland only to learn he was already in Ottawa.

When Monin refused to attend the simulation centre with Otto Lang, Walter McLeish became furious and Monin felt equally upset at having being betrayed by Lyon. Monin departed Ottawa the next morning with CATCA now even more suspicious of the MOT's plans for the simulation and with heightened opposition to the concept of bilingual ATC. CATCA called for Monin's immediate resignation as President, which he resisted.

The dispute peaked in June, 1976 with wildcat walkouts and sickouts by many controllers in the face of prosecution by the government. CATCA claimed not to be orchestrating the moves and stated they could not predict when a centre or an airway would become uncontrolled. Certainly, a lot of this absenteeism (entirely on the anglophone side) was due to stress and they reacted spontaneously and independently. This proved too much for the CALPA members and on Sunday 20th June, the pilots stopped flying. They were joined by their international colleagues from British Airways, KLM and Scandinavian Airways, all of whom refused to fly to Canada. On Wednesday, 23th June the controllers' wildcat actions stopped, perhaps having achieved their aim. The pilots continued on strike until Monday 28th June when the industrial action was cancelled with an agreement to hold a Commission of Inquiry to determine if bilingual ATC was safe.

In early 1977 the Commission delivered its largely unanimous interim report in favour of bilingual ATC in Quebec and the simulation exercises proved that the procedures were safe. It was not until two years later that the final report was issued and by then the climate had altered considerably. Personalities and policies in the unions had changed and considerable reconciliation had taken place so that the full implementation of bilingual ATC in Quebec took place without further disputation.

Over time relations with CATCA normalised and good contacts were reestablished between Monin and Livingston during the 1979 ILO Experts meeting.

Monin agrees that he was ill advised to embark upon any involvement in the otherwise domestic bilingual issue given its extreme sensitivities at the time. He is now certain that he should have emulated Captain Amadeo Castro, a vice-president of IFALPA, who, though invited, did not show up at the Ottawa Symposium because of illness. When later pressed on this absence, Castro asked how could he have participated in such a panel when, on a flight from Mexico to Santiago, he himself would not speak any English to the air traffic controllers!

Perhaps the most infamous of all aircraft hijackings took place in 1976. In June, pro-Palestinian activists took over an El AI aircraft and forced the crew to fly to Uganda where it landed, without clearance and in fact against administration orders, at Entebbe. A daring raid by Israeli commandos freed more than 100 hostage passengers and crew members. Unfortunately the action resulted in the death of a passenger, an elderly woman left behind in hospital receiving treatment, and all the hijackers. Word of a tragic aftermath later leaked out. The President of Uganda, the notorious General Idi Amin, had murdered the four Entebbe tower controllers whose only crime was to have been on duty at the time of the rescue operation and who had 'allowed' the Israeli commando aircraft to land. Naturally IFATCA protested this act of barbarism but was extremely reluctant to press the issue for fear of further reprisals.

As if the resignation of PATCO wasn't enough, the 1976 conference in Lyon also saw Australia, then the Federations third largest MA, threaten to renounce its membership, which eventually it did at the close of the year. (This issue is more fully examined in Chapter 6) The loss of these two big associations and the attendant loss of the PATCO subscriptions had a major impact on IFATCA. 1976 income shrank from a budgeted CHF130,000 to an actual CHF85,900 and a deficit for the year of CHF4,600 was realised. (Chapter 4 examines these financial aspects more fully.)

The 1960s had been a brilliant flowering of the Federation and, to all, it seemed as though the dreams and aspirations were being realised without too many disappointments or hardships being placed in the way. Unfortunately, like most honeymoon periods, this did not last and the seventies were proving to be a much rougher decade for the organisation still growing and approaching some shade of maturity. So far our account of IFATCA's second decade has shown us major industrial disputation, ill feelings within the Federation, unavoidable political involvement without and the loss of some key Member Associations - a far cry from the relatively uneventful sixties. However, despite the gravity of these occurrences, an even more serious event was about to occur which everywhere cast a pall over air traffic controllers, their profession and the professional aspirations of their Federation.

The morning of 10th September, 1976 saw (what was until 1997) the world's worst mid air collision in the clear skies of northern Yugoslavia. One hundred and seventy six people died when a British Airways Trident and an Inex-Adria DC9 collided at FL330 (approximately 10,000 metres) 30 kilometres north-east of the Zagreb VOR.

From the outset, the Yugoslav authorities treated the matter as a criminal case and despite vehement protests, reasoned arguments, compelling testimony and appeals at the highest level, the air traffic controller responsible for that section of airspace was convicted of criminal negligence and sentenced to seven years imprisonment.

On that morning, Gradimir Tasic was working the upper airspace sector in the Zagreb ATC Centre. At about 1015 Greenwich Mean Time, he was quite busy handling traffic when the middle airspace sector handed off (that is, transferred control) the Inex-Adria DC9 which was climbing to FL 350 (that is, thirty five thousand feet). Tasic, "alone and overworked" (as his co-defendants Erjavec and Pelin testified) failed to give full attention to the hand-off as he accepted it. When he did look at it moments later, he saw to his horror that it was passing FL 327 (that is, thirty two thousand, seven hundred feet) climbing and that it was directly in the path of the British Airways Trident which was cruising at FL330 (that is, thirty three thousand feet).

Despite frantic attempts to instruct the DC9 to descend immediately; it was too late and the collision occurred.

In the aftermath of the accident, the authorities arrested five air traffic controllers from the Zagreb ATC centre. Tasic was arrested immediately and, following brief investigations, the others arrested were two upper airspace sector assistant controllers and the controller and assistant controller for the middle airspace sector who handed off the climbing DC9 to Tasic. Subsequently, three supervisors were also named as defendants. Tasic remained in prison right up until his trial in April/May, 1977 but the other four controllers were released some months after the initial arrest.

Despite the accepted fact that the Zagreb centre was suffering from a shortage of skilled controllers ,and despite the fact that work was being performed in breach of procedural rules and departmental regulations, the blame for the accident was sheeted home to the controllers. It was also undisputed at the time that confusion, mishandling and misunderstanding surrounded the actual handoff which led to the disaster. Following the accident, many were the words spoken and written calling for the air traffic control system to be examined for its shortcomings rather than have the blame laid solely upon the controllers. The fear for controllers everywhere was that they could easily find themselves in the same situation and they hoped for understanding from their employers and the general public that an error such as Tasic's should be accepted as just that and not construed as a criminal act of negligence. More than one air traffic controller silently uttered the prayer "there but for the grace of God go I".

It was not until almost eight months after the accident that the trial of Gradimir Tasic and his co-defendants got under way. It was at this stage that Mr. Richard Weston entered upon the scene. Richard C. W. Weston started his career as a clerk in a solicitor's office and qualified at the age of twenty-one. Having an interest as well in aviation, he spent some time as a cadet in the Fleet Air Arm. Subsequently, owning his own aircraft and enjoying both flying and the law, he decided to marry them both and turned to aviation law as a specialisation. He appeared at the trial representing the family of one of the British Airlines' stewardesses killed in the accident. However, he quickly became the champion of air traffic controllers everywhere as he passionately argued for the court to treat Gradimir Tasic as as much of a victim as the 176 who died.

Weston condemned the media as too quick to call the accused guilty and implored the learned judges to examine the implications of finding just the controllers guilty without considering the air traffic control system at large. He said: "If, as a result of the findings of this court, rulings and recommendations can be made, directions given and penalties imposed which will combine to minimise or indeed avoid, not only in Zagreb, not only in Yugoslavia but in the aviation oriented world as a whole, the possibility of a recurrence of the tragic events of 10th September, then I respectfully submit that this court will have erected a fitting monument to all those who on that day lost their lives in the form of a safer system for those who will fly in the future.

"I sincerely believe that, while ... this is a criminal trial of the defendants, this Honourable Court will more properly and completely discharge its obligations ... if it will use its powers in an imaginative and resourceful way and not limit itself to the punishment only of those who stand before it today. They ... are themselves victims of a system."

Relating how, in many western countries, a successful confidential incident reporting system operated, Mr. Weston said: "The system assures those concerned that the importance is to find out what went wrong and to take steps to prevent it going wrong again. Immunity from prosecution is granted - the object being to promote safety and not punish offenders.

"The real danger here, and this fear has been voiced again and again in the aviation community since the 19th September, is that the effect of a gaol sentence on (the defendants), will be disastrous for the air traffic control system generally and will directly affect the safety of the travelling public." Weston went on to instance some seventy six examples of mid air collisions from December, 1946 until March, 1975 involving commercial aircraft where controllers were held to be responsible in many cases and yet he was unable to find a single instance of a criminal prosecution of those controllers.

He summed up by saying: "The imprisonment of these defendants will be wholly counterproductive to the real solution which is sought. It is felt that if a precedent is set here with imprisonment being the wages for human failing, then the morale of air traffic controllers everywhere, by and large a dedicated body of men, is bound to be affected and, an even more sobering thought, the quality of people undertaking that profession, and it is a profession, could lower as a direct result of such a decision.

This Court has the means to order an investigation which could lead to dramatic improvements, not only in Zagreb, but throughout the world. Instead of being in the limelight today as the architect of the tragedy of 10th September, Zagreb could tomorrow be, by virtue of an enlightened judgement of this Court, a model for world civil aviation."

Whilst the Court paid due consideration to Richard Weston's submission and deliberated for some time, it nonetheless convicted Gradimir Tasic and sentenced him to seven years imprisonment and acquitted the other seven defendants. In passing sentence, Judge Branko Zmajevic said that Tasic had failed to follow regulation procedure for separating the two aircraft. He said Tasic was late in recognising the planes were on a collision course and did not take precise measures in the crucial seconds before the crash. The five man Bench had established that Tasic gave the permission which led the Yugoslav plane on to the collision course with the Trident. The judge added that the court had in mind that although Tasic made human errors, he did not intend to endanger life and property. "But he failed to fulfil his duty and he failed to apply the regulations."

However, the world's air traffic controllers were not going to let the matter rest there.

Monin and Weston held a press conference in Geneva on the 6th September and distributed the text of a petition to over thirty media representatives. They flew to Belgrade the next day and on the 8th September (just two days before the first anniversary of the accident), IFATCA's President, J-D Monin and Richard Weston presented a lengthy petition to the President of Yugoslavia, His Excellency Marshal Josip Broz Tito. This petition was presented on behalf of IFATCA and PATCO, the U.S. Professional ATC Organisation, and it emphasised the negative effect the sentence of imprisonment exercised upon the whole air traffic control system internationally. It further stated that Yugoslavia now had the possibility to urge International Civil Aviation Authorities to consider how to improve the air traffic control system on a world basis.

Curiously, at the same time, the Public Prosecutor's Office had lodged an appeal to the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia against the acquittal of Tasic's seven fellow defendants! There is no record of what became of that appeal but they were never tried.

Seemingly, the petition also failed to sway the Yugoslav authorities and Gradimir Tasic continued to languish in K.P. Dom Zabela prison near Pozareve although immediately following the Copenhagen conference in April, 1978 the news came that Tasic's seven year sentence was being reduced to three and a half years.

Worldwide interest in the case continued and Britain's Granada Television produced an excellent documentary film titled "Collision Course" which investigated the circumstances of the accident and the Yugoslav government's search for a scapegoat.

Then, Tasic was released on the 24'h November, 1978. He thus served two years, two months and two weeks in prison. There to meet Gradimir on his release was IFATCA's Vice-President Professional Andreas Avgoustis together with Messrs. Vuckovic and Cvarkovic of the Yugoslav ATC Association. Whilst waiting, Avgoustis pondered the earlier words of the Yugoslav Deputy Minister for Justice who had said: "The law has followed its course .... Tasic was found by the courts ... responsible for the deaths of 176 people. The finding of guilt was enough punishment and not the sentence." Avgoustis' reminisces were interrupted by Tasic's arrival and for a few poignant moments the four men looked at each other before saying a simple "hello". Subsequently, Gradimir and Andreas spoke together and Gradimir said: "Do not take (further) action for me (but) work for the anonymous controller's protection against similar occurrences. I hope I am the last to taste this bitter experience."

Gradimir Tasic was, in fact, released from prison one and a half years earlier than his re-scheduled parole release date. Was this an indication of belated recognition by the authorities that the act was not one of intent but one of misfortune? We will never know but we can certainly take it as some indication that the unremitting efforts of IFATCA, Weston and others to secure his release eventually met with some results.

Richard Weston's efforts on behalf of Gradimir Tasic were widely recognised and, as a gesture of their gratitude for his contribution, the Yugoslav ATC Association conferred Honorary Membership on him in late 1977. Weston was accorded a rare privilege by the Federation when he was invited to address the opening plenary session in Copenhagen in April, 1978. In thanking him for his efforts on behalf of controllers everywhere, Daniel Monin then presented Weston with picture from his own home. Entitled 'Tristesse', it was intended both as a gesture of gratitude and a reminder of a sad episode. Subsequent to these events, Richard Weston travelled far and wide espousing the profession of air traffic control and its awesome responsibilities. He was recognised and warmly welcomed by the world's controllers wherever he went. Sadly, he died prematurely at the age of fifty two in August, 1983.

The one bright spot in an otherwise tragic, difficult and disappointing year was the annual conference in Lyon, France. This was the first occasion when a Member Association had hosted a conference for the second time. (The French Association, APCA, had also hosted the first annual conference in 1962.) For this reason and because fifteen years seemed a respectably mature age to celebrate an anniversary, the Board and the conference organisers planned a true celebratory reunion.

Following the closure of the conference, a ninety minute reminiscence was conducted with nearly all IFATCA's past officers present. The first speaker was the original Editor, Walter Endlich who recalled that the 'good old days' were easy because there was no red tape, no terms of reference, no Manual and no policy statements, all of which made for very quick decisions. Bernhard Rüthy presented a slide show of earlier conferences which featured some very young representatives including one Jean-Daniel Monin "of whom no one took much notice at the time". Then came second President Maurice Cerf, who, in his inimitable fashion, delivered a witty and highly amusing account of his experiences. He said that he only went to the Frankurt meeting because "eating a frankfurter would be better than watching a radar screen". He followed up by declaring that at that meeting he was appointed translator but fell so far behind that he took it upon himself to express his views as those of the group. Because of this he found himself elected Vice-President!

Third President Arnold Field also fondly remembered the 'good old days' when, in Committee B, it was the correct approach to say: "this is the proposal you need to pass" and, before the delegates had any chance to say anything, the motion was carried. (He forgot to mention that he thoroughly confused everybody at most conferences, wearing, as he did, several hats. He was simultaneously chairman committee B, chairman SC1, Director of the U.K. Guild and senior U.K. C.A.A. officer and invariably failed to distinguish just who he was speaking as.) Next came ex-Executive Secretary Geoffrey Monk who, amongst other comments, highly praised the ladies of IFATCA who managed to put up with the demands on their men folk. It seemed to Monk that they were all bigamists who were married both to their husbands and IFATCA. Finally, for the Corporate Members, Bobbie Harrison highlighted the tradition of friendly relations between the CMs and IFATCA.

Lyon featured a special medical panel on the afternoon of the opening day. Conference had never before witnessed such an event and it could probably be considered the forerunner of what became the regular Professional Panel at conference from 1993 onwards. The panel, featuring some highly regarded aviation medicine experts from France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, addressed itself to general medical matters, human factors, psychology, ergonomics, stress and response to stress.

Five new MAs were admitted in Lyon bringing the total membership to forty six. Even more outstanding was the admission of no less than eleven new Corporate Members taking their total to thirty six. Elections to the Executive Board saw a third consecutive Swiss (Hans Wenger) elected Treasurer and the appearance as VP Professional of H. Harri Henschler, of whom we shall see a little more later.

The French efficiency of recording all committee proceedings had an unfortunate result through no fault of their own and panic ensued when, on the last afternoon of committee meetings, it was discovered that the secretary of Committee A had not taken any minutes "because they are recorded". A number of Board members, the Secretariat and several delegations missed the party that night as they wrote the minutes for the secretariat to type!

Not to be outdone by their French colleagues at Le Bourget, the U.K. Guild decided to also present an IFATCA stand at the 1976 Farnborough air show.

GATCO used the occasion to promote their forthcoming convention and IFATCA placed their emphasis on making known their international commitments. It was during this week (5th-12th September) that the Zagreb mid-air collision occurred and an increased public interest in ATC was clearly noticeable. Whilst the general media coverage was quite intolerable and irresponsible in the way that it immediately blamed Yugoslav ATC for the accident, those present at Farnborough reacted much more responsibly. The Guild's Larry Curry and Lesley Austin and IFATCA's Ge de Boer dealt with a large number of serious questions and were able to present a more balanced version of events.

The Cyprus tensions created another problem for IFATCA although it was readily resolved via some inter-association cooperation. Nicosia had been agreed as the venue for the 1976 conference (having volunteered and being accepted when Suriname were unable to continue - Res.74.A.47 "That the venue of Suriname 1976 be cancelled.") but in 1975 the Cypriots prudently sought a postponement.

The French, which had been provisionally accepted for 1977, stepped in and switched years with Cyprus. CYATCA was the smallest association to yet host a conference and fully 50% of its membership, twelve controllers, participated in the organising committee. To assist with arrangements, the committee decided to hold the conference in the premises of the Hotel and Catering Institute and delegates were looked after for the duration by students from the Institute. Everybody learned something!

Ted Bradshaw speaks with Cyprus' Andreas Papathomas after the Nicosia conference, April 1977

Perhaps as an extension of this matter, a problem then arose with election of the 1979 venue. Turkey was provisionally accepted in Lyon as the host association for the 1979 conference but come the forum in Nicosia, nothing had been heard from the Turkish association and delegates thought it wise to refer the matter to the Executive Board for further consideration. The result was that the Belgian association volunteered for the '79 conference and they were gratefully accorded the privilege of organising that year's meeting.

With an order of business different to today, one of the first items on the agenda in Nicosia was MA problems. Immediately, emotive statements from Cyprus, Germany, Greece and Israel on the subject of replacement of civil controllers by unlicensed military controllers were heard. This discussion on recent events in these countries was followed by other revelations on problems in Morocco and Sri Lanka. It was at this point that the Greek Chairman of Committee A, finding the job too difficult, indicated that he wished to resign. Confronted by a hitherto never encountered situation, the Vice-President Administration, Ted Bradshaw, took the chair temporarily until replaced by the Board appointed Larry Curry⁴ of the U.K. It was an unusual situation and one not re-visited.

Proposals referring to unsafe operations in the Nicosia FIR with respect to the unauthorised operations of the 'ERCAN ACC' were made and referred to ICAO, IFALPA and IATA. Guidelines for the Regions and Regional Meetings were laid down. Consideration was also given to the forthcoming ILO Tripartite meeting (see Chapter 6). Nicosia was to be the last of the three day meetings as delegates found themselves time constrained and were forced to work overtime each day.

Not unexpectedly, this then placed the secretariat under pressure and the final plenary started late, a not unusual occurrence.

Despite the problems, it was a most successful conference and without exception delegates departed overwhelmed by the hospitality, beauty and charms of the 'Sweet Land'.

In 1974 President Monin had visited South America in a first liaison visit to that continent. In November, 1977 Monin again travelled to the region, this time accompanied by vice-president administration, Ted Bradshaw. The ten day visit to Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay was concerned chiefly with the human and professional aspects of the controller's life in these countries. It also clearly demonstrated IFATCA's commitment, for as Bradshaw said: "The time available to us was 10 days. This necessitated 18 jet flights from 1 to 10 hours, many hundreds of kilometres by road, hours of tonsil tiring discussions and conversations and an average daily sleep of four hours!"

The tour enabled a greater understanding of the problems facing colleagues in South America and allowed Monin and Bradshaw to illustrate to officials the urgency of implementing various regional programmes. Local ATC officers were encouraged by the message that IFATCA was prepared to provide assistance where possible at the same time recognising that this would be difficult whilst dealing with military regimes. Heading off any criticism that IFATCA was meddling in industrial affairs by discussing salaries and conditions of service, Monin and Bradshaw noted that no one else is permitted to do so in those countries. If IFATCA didn't, no one would. At every opportunity, Monin and Bradshaw raised the question of adequate salaries and proper working conditions and emphasised that the plight of local controllers would be publicised through the Federations publications.

Subsequent to their departure, President Monin received a letter from the Argentine association which clearly stated how they felt about the visit. "It is difficult to measure accurately the impact of your visit.., but as the authorities are sensitive to outside opinion ... we had an excellent opportunity to put across our message. This was the most important part of your work here. The association was able to talk to important officials about its problems in the presence of two top officials of an influent (sic) world association and they (the administration officials) will try to comply with all the promises made. The balance of your visit is quite positive. It has permitted us dialogues and agreements that we feel will shortly lead to solutions to our many problems. We are glad you and Ted came." Such acknowledgement underlines the value of Board involvement with Member Associations' problems and demonstrates the kind of assistance that IFATCA can provide. It is also most gratifying to the officers putting in the time they do.

This South American visit was followed in February, 1978 by a full Executive Board meeting in Mexico, the first such meeting in North America. The Board was impressed by the apparent cooperation between controllers and all levels of management and the will to take into account each other's problems and constraints.

They noted it was an example of an enlightened approach that other administrations should follow.

Two months later, delegates were hosted by another founding association for the 1978 annual conference. Copenhagen brought back a few memories for delegates were confronted with a hotel in the grip of industrial action by employees of Scandinavian Air Services (SAS, the owner of the hotel). In scenes reminiscent of Dublin, delegates had to undertake tasks not normally associated with guests and were forced to work around the staff shortage. Undaunted, a record number of associations (thirty five) attended the opening plenary and Copenhagen proved to be 'one of the big ones' with a record attendance and a record number of resolutions. Establishing a theme from the outset, the opening plenary was unique for featuring two things. Firstly, President Monin called for a minute's silence for delegates to recognise their colleagues around the world being discriminated against in various manners. Secondly, Richard Weston was recognised for his outstanding contribution to the Gradimir Tasic case and was called upon to address the assembly. Not before and not since has an individual been accorded this right.

Richard Weston, advocate for air traffic control.

Copenhagen saw IFATCA introduce the concept of culinary flow control. With hotel staff lacking, it fell to the organising committee to be creative with eating arrangements and the huge dining room saw delegates given flow instructions table by table to line up for the buffet food service with local controllers assisting with the serving. It became a game for the visitors attempting to seat themselves in a favourable position to second guess Henning Christensen (Organising Committee Chairman) with his varying daily plan to commence the 'flow control'.

The 17th conference wasn't only big in terms of MA and delegate attendance.

The four days of committee discussions allowed plenty of freedom for debate and Committee A and C produced thirty six and thirty three resolutions respectively whilst Committee B saw a whopping fifty six resolutions presented to final plenary.

In possibly one of the most important conferences that dealt with technical aspects, Copenhagen saw policy determined on matters such as controller training for automation, details on en-route absorption of terminal area delays, Mode C verification and Airborne Collision Avoidance Systems. Remember, this is 1978; again IFATCA was at the very vanguard in considering these matters, still somewhat futuristic. Committee C was no less diligent and C delegates instituted policy on eyesight examinations, working with visual terminals, centre lighting, OJT training and consolidation after training. However, overshadowing all these important considerations, Copenhagen saw the world's controllers finally and really tackle the vexed issue of hijacking, a disease which had plagued the entire decade.

The 1976 hijack to Entebbe and other similar acts clearly demonstrated international civil aviation's fragility; national governments' inability to act cohesively and forcefully and controllers' impotence in the face of this threat. Time and again IFATCA had outlined the need for controllers to provide safe passage for not only the hijacked aircraft but for others in proximity but apparently without heed. In Copenhagen, Directors formulated machinery by which the Federation could effectively support its MAs who may assist hijacked flights in their efforts to ensure safety in the air and as a result act contrary to administrative direction.

In insisting that it is the duty of every controller to grant every assistance possible to ensure safe passage and ameliorate the ordeal of the occupants of a hijacked aircraft, IFATCA pointed out to ICAO that they (i.e. ICAO) had failed to indicate to States they are not fulfilling their obligations arising from the ICAO Conventions by avoiding assistance by shutting down air navigation aids and closing airfields to hijacked aircraft. The Federation took the matter even further and sought from the United Nations Security Council a call for action against States which default from the objectives of air navigation safety and against States which refuse permission for landings or switch off radio navigation aids or aerodrome lighting. It was heady stuff and represented a level of involvement in geo-politics that could not have been imagined in 1961. The policies decided in 1978 still comprise the contents of section 4.4.B of IFATCA's Manual.

Committee C didn't just stop there. In a wide ranging debate under the genetic title of "The Air Traffic Controller's Concern", 1978 provided policy on Recruitment and Training, Conditions of Service and the Work Environment, Remuneration, Career, Early Retirement and Pensions, Legal Matters and Medical Aspects. Written in to the Manual, this discussion and the resultant policies formed the basis for most of today's professional section in the manual.

Still not done with concerns on a controller's life, the Copenhagen conference also featured a Ladies Panel. This unique event was chaired by the then first lady of IFATCA, Romy Monin. Ever since 1963, IFATCA conferences had witnessed the presence of an increasing number of accompanying persons and a 'Ladies Programme' had become an indispensable part of conference. By 1978, the Board thought it time to convene a panel to allow the numerous wives present an opportunity to voice opinion and concern about 'Effects of the ATC Profession on Family Life'. Not just shunted to an out of the way time, the panel was featured mid-conference on the Wednesday afternoon and was very well attended. Whilst there were a few questions raised as to the need for such a panel and some people even felt uncomfortable with the concept, the Board circulated a discussion paper to form the basis for consideration. The original paper was considered a touch too controversial and it was toned down a little. However, it still included leading "Do questions such as “Do you find that the controller often feels a need to meet colleagues in off duty time to discuss problem?”, “In what way do you deal the frustrations of your husband associated with the job?" and "Is excessive drinking specifically related to the demands of the profession?" Whilst nothing concrete derived from the discussions, the response was positive and many women expressed their pleasure at the opportunity to voice their opinions. Whilst today air traffic control features many female controllers, there are obviously still a lot of wives (and no doubt some husbands) out there who experience the same frustrations and pressures brought on by their spouse's work. Despite this, another similar forum has never been organised but at least IFATCA conferences now include an ‘Accompanying Persons' Programme', rather than a Ladies Programme, and there are plenty of opportunities during the social events to mutually voice domestic and familial concerns.

The Copenhagen conference saw the retirement of Daniel Monin as President, the first ever air traffic controller recognised in 'Who's Who'. The preceding six years had been a turbulent and tumultuous time in the world and for the profession and controllers generally and Monin had genuinely been the man of and for the times. He was deservedly awarded the Scroll of Honour "for outstanding services and dedication to the profession during six years of presidency" but even this recognition didn't take into account his full input (for example, the earlier tremendous contribution to the ILO study). Whilst his style and approach weren't universally appreciated, there can be no denying his commitment and drive to have the profession identified and the Federation accepted as a genuine player on the world civil aviation scene. In recognising the new demands of the era and leading the Federation in embracing the acceptance and pursuit of them, Monin changed forever the face of IFATCA.

Replacing Monin as President was a Canadian, H. Harri Henschler who was destined to become one of the really big personalities of the Federation.

Henschler mainly left his mark on the eighties and his role is more closely examined in Chapter 7.

Rounding off what was an incredibly productive and successful conference, delegates were treated to another unusual event. On the Friday after the conference concluded, Corporate Member DataSaab and the Swedish Board of Civil Aviation provided a special flight- DataSaab One, an SAS DC9 - from Copenhagen to Malmö, Sweden. The purpose of the flight was to visit the new Swedish ATC Academy and Graham Williams, the Corporate Members' Coordinator, provided individual copies of the flight plan and gave a continuous commentary on the aircraft's PA during the very short but interesting flight.

Determined not to let the South American initiatives of late 1977 wither, the full Board travelled to Buenos Aires late in 1978 for a meeting. Not undertaken lightly, such meetings mean long hours for the Board members. In addition to the normal agenda which required three full days anyway, the Board further convened a series of meetings with the Argentine association, Argentine aviation authorities and the print and television media. As if that wasn't enough, the first South American Regional Meeting of Member Associations was held coincident with the Board meeting. All of this 'extra curricular activity' ensured the Board rose early and met well into each of the evenings. However, they were satisfied with the programme and the work achieved, as was the local association. It allowed both parties to dearly identify the difficulties each face, particularly with the working and living conditions on the continent and it was also helpful in initiating appropriate measures to provide support for the members in the region.

IFATCA remained in Europe for the 1979 conference. In hosting the 18th conference at the cross roads of Europe, the Belgian association became the second to manage an annual conference for the second time and Brussels became the first city to be twice invaded by IFATCA. 1979 was an auspicious year for it not only marked the Belgian association's 20th anniversary but the millennium of the city itself. Adding to the occasion, the conference was, for the first time, placed under royal patronage by King Baudouin. It was again to be a five hundred plus conference, this time with thirty nine MAs and delegates and observers from forty five countries.

With industrial activity on everyone's minds in Europe, President Henschler took the opportunity in his opening address to emphasise that controllers are fully aware of their responsibilities and of the inconvenience to travellers of their actions and so must be faced with grave circumstances to undertake such action. It had to be dear by now that the controllers' actions are not so much a sickness itself but more a symptom of underlying and basic problems.

Over the previous three or four years, the idea of biennial rather than annual conferences had been raised. Chief amongst the proponents for this concept was New Zealand. Arising from the IATA 200 arguments and the high costs of attending conference, usually in the Northern Hemisphere, the Kiwis were of the belief that a conference every two years had merit and presented a formal paper in Brussels to that effect. In opposing, the President said that whilst biennial conferences would save the individual associations money, it would mean a big increase in spending for the Federation. Board members would be faced with much more travel for meetings, liaison visits, etc, there was a real risk of loss of contact with MAs and working papers to conference could contain seriously out of date material. The New Zealanders bowed to the weight of opinion and withdrew their paper and, whilst the issue then seemed closed, it was to be raised again in 1982 and throughout many of the remaining years of the eighties.

The final plenary session in Brussels provided an interesting happening with respect to Committee C and one, which to my knowledge, has not been repeated.

Final plenary invariably sees the Committee C, B and A reports accepted as a whole on a simple vote, with the exception of aspects of the Committee A report which require two thirds majorities. In Brussels, the British Guild requested a separate vote for Resolution C.35: "That Member Associations will not clear aircraft into airspace or areas where it is known that a substitute air traffic control service is being operated by unqualified personnel." The Committee C report, minus C.35, was passed and, following the separate vote, C.35 was also duly accepted with GATCO and the Netherlands voting against.

IFATCA's second Executive Secretary, Tom Harrison, retired in Brussels and, like his predecessor, was awarded the Scroll of Honour "in recognition of his devotion and untiring efforts during six years as Executive Secretary". Harrison held several positions in the U.K. CAA until he retired in 1972 as Chief Airport Officer at Prestwick. A founder member of the U.K. Guild (and designer of their badge), he was Master from 1970 until 1972 and upon retiring and relinquishing that post he immediately became Executive Secretary for IFATCA. He worked closely with Daniel Monin who described him as the image of a typical Elizabethan and the last bastion of the British Empire. A hard working, dedicated and meticulous man he was easily upset over forgetting even the smallest detail. Whilst this account has given Monin much credit for the 'new' IFATCA, Monin himself says that it was thanks to Harrison's abilities that it was possible to give the Federation a new impetus and to develop the activities to a level that could have been hardly imagined a few years before. Harrison never complained about working long hours, even after others had finished for the day for he was a man, who having accepted a task, identified completely with it. Sadly, he died just five short years later in 1984. A man of many facets, who also enjoyed family life and his beloved piano as much as good food and wine, Tom Harrison is well remembered.

To replace Harrison, the Board displayed some innovation and Ted Bradshaw moved from EVP Administration into the vacancy. Brussels then saw the election of Patrick O'Doherty from Ireland to the Administration chair. The other change to the Board was the accession of France's Daniel Oudin as EVP Technical. This came about through the retirement of another indefatigable worker, Ole Jonsson. Jonsson was elected at his home conference in Reykjavik, becoming IFATCA's first EVP Technical when the positions of 1st and 2nd Vice-President were abolished. In six years in the demanding post, the jovial Jonsson displayed a passion and grasp for the increasingly complex technological world of ATC and his direction of matters technical from the position of EVP considerably added to IFATCA’s reputation.

The vexed question of the IATA 200 Resolution had been on the agenda for many years without making progress and, facing realty; the Board decided to change tack. With approval of the directors, the 1979 conference adjusted their emphasis and directed the Board to continue attempts to secure free or reduced travel, but now, just for IFATCA officials attending requisite meetings and delegates to conferences. As we shall see in Chapter 6, this change of thrust didn't succeed either.

The Brussels conference was held in the shadow of the pending ILO conference on Problems Concerning Air Traffic Controllers. This gave added impetus and importance to the Committee C deliberations and the delegates gave substance to these by formalising a Convention for the Profession of Air Traffic Control. Basically containing IFATCA?s policy on conditions decided upon in 'The Controllers' Concern' a year earlier, this convention formed the centrepiece of the Federations presentation to the ILO conference. (See chapter 6)

The 1979 conference addressed a number of fundamental issues concerning the functioning and management of the Federation and arising therefrom came a fuller understanding of the divisions of responsibility within the Federation. There had been some questions raised as to who actually ran the Federation, the Board or the Directors, and Brussels served to re-validate the Federations rules and bye-laws and the logic, right and necessity for the Executive Board to make decisions on behalf of the Directors between conferences. President Henschler summed up by calling the conference “a most successful event, in some ways a most unorthodox one".

1979 then witnessed an international event, the import of which IFATCA had been working towards since its inception and which, for the first time, clearly recognised the role air traffic controllers play in the arena of international civil aviation. The 8th- 16th May saw, in Geneva, the International Labour Office convene a Meeting of Experts on Problems Concerning Air Traffic Controllers. For the first time the ILO was to concentrate specifically on air traffic controllers as a worker group and the outcome was to have profound significance for the world's controllers and its representative organisation. The meeting itself and its lead up is dealt with more fully in Chapter 6 but it deserves mention in this account of IFATCA's second decade because of its timing and because its 52 Conclusions.

These covered Industrial Relations, Social and Labour Aspects, Hours of Work, Remuneration, Age of Retirement and Pensions, Occupational Safety, Health and Welfare, Legal Liabilities, Manpower and Career Planning, Training and Employment Security and provided all Member Associations with a benchmark for negotiations for the next decade and beyond.

The Conclusions couldn't have come at a better time and indeed seemed to have served as a recipe for success for the Italian controllers later in the year. On Friday 19th October, 1979 air traffic control suffered a 'black out' over Italy. At 1200GMT that day, nearly all the Italian controllers, who were members of the military, resigned from their 'civilian' duties seeking re-assignment to normal military tasks. The controllers were seeking 'civilianisation' and a deep reorganisation of air traffic services in Italy. The 'black out' ended at 2300GMT following the intervention of the Italian President who urged the government to immediately seek solutions to the controllers' problems. A happy ending followed this action for in late 1981 the Italian Parliament created an independent ATC organisation, self controlling in both finance and management matters- a most unusual occurrence in Italy. The new organisation gradually assumed responsibility from the military of ATC services and most of the controllers transferred to the new civilian service.

Ah, summer in Europe: Green trees, colourfull flowers, blue skies, golden beaches, holidays in the sun, air traffic control delays, frustrated travellers, stressed air traffic controllers, backlogged airlines, angry administrations. Throughout the seventies, increasingly, this was the scene. Perhaps not so much more holidays or golden sun but certainly more delays and anger. Every summer in Europe, the controllers waged war on the large numbers of travellers and holiday makers in order to press their selfish claims for more money. Or so it seemed. By late 1979 some, at least, thought there just might be two sides to the story and the BBC, in particular, decided to investigate.

In a programme titled “Just Place Chaos?”, the broadcaster took a look at the situation in the black spots of France, Greece, Italy and Spain, concentrating mainly on the air traffic controllers. In each of the countries, the interviewer found that the controllers laid the stress on staff shortages and insufficient and unreliable equipment. Jacques Fournier in Aix-en-Provence pointed out that due to staff shortages only twelve out of nineteen sectors were placed in service and that in May alone they registered 350 different failures of radio, radar and telephone facilities. Sakis Petropoulous highlighted that the seven sectors in Athens Centre are manned by a single controller employing antiquated procedural control which forced aircraft ten minutes apart instead of five miles apart. Madrid centre had new equipment but it was unsuitable - the controllers hadn't been consulted as to their needs - and Seville centre next door had primitive equipment which negated any benefits of the Madrid facilities. Entriques Moreno of the Spanish ATCA voiced his opinion that Spain's airports were inadequate to handle all the traffic even if they could have been accepted by the controllers.

Having their say, several members of the public said they would travel by car next time and "It must be something to do with air control (sic), mustn't it?" The program also featured an interview with Lord Donnington, who chaired a European Parliament meeting on problems with ATC in Europe. With a more detached and informed view, Lord Donnington was able to conclude: "I am satisfied that the industrial action is not so much a question of increased wages. It is a question of discontent amongst controllers with the kind of equipment they have to use and the conditions within which they have to use it." Perhaps getting in on the trend of the discussions at Lord Donnington's hearing, because he certainly was not stating his position vis-à-vis Resolution 200, IATA's Director General Knut Hammerskjöld even declared that the controllers "deserve adequate recognition in terms of salary and conditions of service and they need adequate technical equipment to perform their tasks". In the BBC programme, Hammerskjöld said "the system is inadequate to deal with the demands during the summer." Obviously he wasn't including the condition of concession travel for Federation representatives to attend meetings where those demands could be addressed. (See chapter 6)

The programme (and the overall problem) prompted an editorial in The Controller from President Henschler. He referred to a nightmare scenario where the Greek Director of Civil Aviation said there is no shortage of controllers and that the system must be safe because planes keep operating in the airspace. He assures it is safe, therefore the airlines fly, therefore because they fly it must be safe! Joseph Heller⁵ would have been proud of the logic. Henschler contented himself with calling it a classic horror story of elusive responsibilities.

The BBC painted a grim and distressing picture in 1979 of what was going on in Europe and in its ATC services. The consensus was that a very serious problem existed and it had to be solved. Speaking on the sovereignty issue, Lord Donnington said: "Some countries must carry out the European ideals to which they pay lip service. Eurocontrol, where staff control airspace that does not belong to their own country, shows that a European solution can satisfy." The programme concluded: "Of course, until such time that a safe system is achieved, controllers will agree to act as preferred by French controller Chaberty 'We prefer to handle less traffic with more safety than to handle all the traffic without safety'".

Sometimes some of the most innocent and straightforward decisions have great consequences. So it was with one of the final decisions in Brussels where directors confirmed Paramaribo, Suriname as the venue for the 1980 conference. This was done despite some concerns raised in the Treasurer's report to conference where Hans Wenger reported on his fact-finding trip to the site. Wenger had expressed some doubts on the association's lack of information on matters such as transportation, hotel accommodation, exhibition space, secretariat facilities and costs. Even so, directors gave an unanimous go ahead to the Suriname controllers (present in Brussels in sizeable numbers) for 1980. However, post-conference the situation did not alter with a continuing lack of information and by mid-1979 the Board had become even more concerned and dispatched a second Board member to Paramaribo. EVP Administration, Pat O'Doherty agreed with Wenger's earlier assessment and the Board was faced with a dilemma. They determined at their October Board meeting in Tunisia to resolve it with a first ever postal ballot⁶ of Member Associations. The Board presented the facts known to date and advised of the possibility of Toronto, Canada as an alternative choice in the ballot paper, which was to be returned by 30th November. The Board then held a special Board meeting in Frankfurt in December to consider the result of the ballot and, despite their continuing misgivings over lack of information and preparations, acceded to the Directors' wishes to persevere with Suriname for 1980. However, this was far from the end of it!

To further complicate the issue, political events in Suriname then intruded. In January, a coup occurred and civil unrest continued thereafter making the holding of the conference in that country most uncertain, if not impossible. At their meeting in Amsterdam in February, 1980 (which itself was something of an emergency session as the scheduled meeting in Rome had to be cancelled at the last minute due to lack of promised travel assistance by an airline), the Executive Board were forced to bow to the fates and cancelled Paramaribo with just nine weeks remaining to the scheduled start of conference. To strip a Member Association of the annual conference - the first such occurrence - was a huge decision but it was one which had ultimately been forced upon them, so really there was no choice. Fortunately, the Canadian association was prepared to step into the breach and the Board gratefully accepted their offer, no doubt with a huge collective sigh of relief. Thus, with just nine weeks of preparation, CATCA incredibly mounted a memorable conference in Toronto. Unusually, and no doubt because of the circumstances, the conference was conducted over a weekend, the four day gathering concluding on Sunday 11th May.

In his report to the conference, Henschler addressed the issue. Noting that there had been some allegations of a lack of cooperation on the Board's part to accept Paramaribo as a venue, he refuted those assertions (with supporting documentation) and plainly stated that acceptance and organisation of the Federations annual showcase cannot be taken lightly. The only consideration could be the success of the conference. Thus, personal feelings and preferences had no part to play. Certain conditions and timetables had to be met. To ensure that such a situation didn't again arise, the Board proposed to hold their February meeting each year in the country elected to host conference in the following year. This would enable the Board to experience the planning and arrangements and brief directors accordingly.

The business of conference then got under way and Toronto saw the biggest ever list of applicant associations. Obviously reflecting a lot of contact work by the American Regional Councillors, the list of affiliating associations included 6 from the Americas area: Guyana, Honduras, Jamaica, Nicaragua, Peru and the USA (PATCO) again. Also joining, and becoming only the third MA in Asia, was the Republic of China ATC Association (ROCATCA) of Taiwan. One of those Regional Councillors until 1979 had been Bill Robertson, now President of the host association. Robertson maintained continual contact with PATCO and in 1978 made an extensive tour through each of the Central American countries speaking on the benefits of membership of IFATCA and it is obvious the seeds he sowed then had borne fruit.

The rejoining of PATCO led to one humorous moment. During one evening party; a huge middle aged man wearing a tuxedo, red tie and sunglasses entered the room flanked by two bodyguards. Delegates thought it was Marlon Brando, or someone more sinister, but they were informed that it was 'only' Robert Poli, President of PATCO, bringing the money.

The main agenda item considered was a massive re-write of the Constitution provided, appropriately enough by Canada, which MA was in charge of SC6. This amendment defined Executive Board and Executive Council Members and considerably strengthened the regional organisation by, amongst other things, renaming the Regional Councillors as Regional Vice-Presidents and defining their regions and elective process. A new membership class of Associate Professional Member was introduced. The responsibility for appointment of the Editor was removed from the directors and transferred to the Executive Board. Area of representation was defined and this finally laid down in the Constitution that only one association could represent controllers within any one area. Finally, a new Section X 'Unforeseen Circumstances' was added to the Constitution to allow for replacement action in the event of vacancies on the Board. SC6 was then further charged with a complete review of the bye-laws for the following year.

In later discussions, directors gave impetus to the growing importance of the role of the Executive Councillors by deciding that one of the Board meetings each year (preferably about six- eight months after conference) should be a full Executive Council meeting, finances permitting. The rationale behind this resolution, fully accepted at the time although not implemented, was to have consequences later in the next decade. Also looking at financial matters, the directors amended the sliding scale for membership dues by limiting the dues for large MAs whereby after the first 3,000 members, an association need only pay CHF2 for the next 4,000 members and only CHF1 per member thereafter. No doubt the pending second affiliation of the USA was behind this. Finally, also in the financial section of the agenda, Toronto saw the directors establish a 'Special Circumstances Fund' whereby financial assistance could be provided to enable associations to establish or maintain membership.

A little controversially, and inevitably reflecting the turbulence of the past years, Toronto also considered action that the Federation could take in the event of industrial action by one of its affiliates. The Eurocontrol and French associations jointly presented a paper proposing the right of a MA engaged in disputation to indicate possible action to be followed by other MAs. They suggested a four stage plan with the first three stages detailing specific action and the fourth providing for an emergency meeting of the region's MAs if the first three fail to bring about a satisfactory result. There were some suggestions that this could represent interference in an association's internal affairs but the plan and policy contained were accepted.

As usual, SC1 led the way in Committee B, this time with a major working paper on 'The Effect of Automation in the Field of Air Traffic Control'. This paper considered all automation aspects including the concept of total traffic management automation. It mainly was a consolidation of previous years' working papers but it nevertheless was important for it first enunciated the principle that introduction of computerised facilities to improve system efficiencies should be gradual and that changes should be evolutionary rather than revolutionary. Partnering this discussion was consideration of a paper 'Automation and Conflict Detection'. This Eurocontrol Guild paper frankly stated that ATC separation responsibilities should not be altered, that workload should not be increased, the need for unambiguous conflict information and that procedures were needed for efficient usage. Other important topics covered included Wake Turbulence, Area Navigation (RNAV) and Visual Flight Rules.

Not taking a back seat, Committee C gave their full attention to the recent ILO conference's Conclusions. It was IFATCA's dedication to have solutions to the unique problems of air traffic control found that in the first place led to the ILO convening the meeting. Committee C resolved that the Board follow up on progress of the Conclusions in regard to employee/employer relations, that MAs make use of the Conclusions in contract negotiations and that the Board attempt to achieve an international instrument based upon the Conclusions by which aviation authorities would be encouraged to become signatories. Even though almost exhausting themselves with the ILO issues, C then turned to an even more complex topic: human factors aspects of the (then rifled) Man Machine Interface (MMI).

Delegates were strongly of the opinion that computers in ATC must be constructed to serve the controller and not vice versa. The special relationship between controller and pilot must never be lost. Delivering their recommendation to final plenary, Committee C delegates said: "IFATCA in general supports all endeavours to facilitate the air traffic controller's demanding objective. For reasons of safety, IFATCA believes that the decision making process must remain with the controller for the foreseeable future".

Final plenary saw the seven new Member Associations admitted to membership. Also granted Charters of Affiliation were no less than nine Corporate Members. Amongst these firms, from five different countries, were Philips Telecommunicatie Industrie (Netherlands), Westinghouse (USA), Raytheon (Canada) and Dictaphone (USA). In an increasingly merged and competitive corporate sector, the latter two remain members to this day.

It was a big conference and very demanding on the delegates. The four days were all fully occupied, for this conference saw some very significant changes to the Federation and to policy in some key areas. In amending the Constitution, the Federation was reacting to the new demands of the changing environment. Decisions on automation and other developing technologies ensured that IFATCA remained in the vanguard of considerations in the expanding ATC world. Human factors and legal aspects discussions saw the 'peripherals' of the profession protected.

It proved to be one of the key conferences and, socially, one of the most enjoyable and only made possible through an incredible effort by the Canadian association. With just nine weeks to prepare, Jim Kilburn and his organising committee did themselves and Canada proud.

May, 1980 saw IFATCA issue one of its occasional press releases. This release detailed two concerns. Firstly, it frankly stated that IFATCA had identified three areas in the world - Africa, South America and the Middle East - where the safety and efficiency that the travelling public expects is lacking. (It wasn't until the mid-nineties that IFALPA made the same pronunciation on Africa and received much more attention.) The release detailed a lack of proper equipment, navigation aids, skilled controllers and adequate training as giving cause for concern. Given equal concern was the second point, hijacking. This practise still plagued the world and IFATCA saw the need to again highlight the dangers this practise posed, not only for the hijacked aircraft and its passengers and crew but also for other flights and personnel affected.

The seventies decade came to a close with one of IFATCA's MAs still facing troubled times. We have already visited the events in Greece in 1975. In 1977 the Greek controllers took strike action and IFALPA advised its members not to fly into Greek airspace whilst "unqualified Greek military air traffic controllers" replaced civilian controllers. 1979 then saw the Greek association sued by the Telecommunications Union for libel. The Union had undertaken some strike action and the controllers claimed that they (the telecommunications staff) had switched off radio frequencies at peak times. The union denied this and sued the controllers' association. President Monin and EVP Professional Avgoustis went to Greece and defended the controllers in court. After three days of court hearings, the Telecommunications Union withdrew their suit.

In the meantime, the controllers had been conducting on-going negotiations with their government for better working conditions and salaries. When these negotiations proved fruitless, the Greek association members resorted to strike action of their own in 1980. The government's response again was to replace the civilian controllers with military personnel who, despite the fact that they "were trained abroad just as civilian controllers”⁷, could not cope. IFATCA, mainly in the form of EVPP Avgoustis, stridently condemned this action. The government relented and withdrew the military controllers and forced the civilians back to work through mobilisation. With this action, they did promise some negotiations but these amounted to nothing. The act of mobilisation and the inaction of the Greek government on the claims by the Greek ATCA, unbelievably, were to continue for the best part of two more decades as we shall see in Chapter 7.

In many ways, the Greek problems seemed to typify the decade that was now coming to a close. For IFATCA, the seventies had opened with serious industrial disputation and it continued, seemingly unabated, throughout the decade. As though aware of what the decade had in store for it, the Federation had changed its approach and, by the decade's end, it was better prepared to face the challenges of its MAs' disputes and the strife that ATC unrest created. President Henschler, unlike his predecessor, now had policies for guidance and the Federation had achieved some successes in the field. Henschler now also had a good degree of experience to fall back upon. All this was as well, for the next ten years would see no let up in this department.

*****************

One of IFATCA's great characters came to prominence in the seventies, although his involvement with, and work for, IFATCA commenced in the sixties. Germany's Helmut Eisner (an Approach controller at Frankurt) became notorious for his 'Square One' cartoons which appeared on a regular basis in The Controller magazine and elsewhere and earned him a reputation as a cartoonist of considerable talent.

The very simple illustrations of controllers' problems and frustrations were rich in humour, very close to the mark and touched a chord with controllers everywhere.

His illustrations were collated into the first ever booklet published on cartoons with an air traffic control theme in late 1977 and became a best seller amongst the air traffic control fraternity. Helmut also had a serious side, frequently writing technical articles and was a permanent contributor to the U.S. Journal of ATC, from which he once received an award for outstanding writing.

CHAPTER 6

Relations with International Organisations

International Civil Aviation Organisation
Friend or Foe?

The International Civil Aviation Organisation was formed during the latter stages of World War II. As the war swung the allies' way, civil aviation officials recognised that the improved performance aircraft and related technologies that would be available and the huge number of aviators that the war produced would have a significant impact on international aviation in the forthcoming years. It was also recognised that the availability and application of these resources would impact on international conventions and thus new rules and procedures would be required to ensure both a smooth transition to peacetime aviation activities and to facilitate the expected increase in activities. As a result, the Provisional International Civil Aviation Organisation (PICAO) was formed at a meeting of 52 States in Chicago in November, 1944 The meeting's Convention on International Civil Aviation "agreed on certain principles and arrangements in order that international civil aviation may be developed in a safe and orderly manner and that international air transport services may be established on the basis of equality of opportunity and operated soundly and economically”.

The ninety six articles of the Chicago Convention establish the privileges and restrictions of all contracting States, provide for the adoption of International Standards and Recommended Practises regulating air navigation, recommend the installation of navigation facilities and suggest the facilitation of air transport by the reduction of customs and immigration formalities. The Convention further accepts that each State has complete sovereignty over the airspace above its territory. The Chicago Convention provided a provisional organisation (pending ratification by at least twenty six States) which operated for some thirty months until April, 1947 when ICAO officially came into existence. At the invitation of the Canadian government, Montreal was chosen as the site for its headquarters.

The organisation's continuing purpose is to promote international cooperation in developing techniques and principles of air navigation and transport. The agency is empowered to provide financial and technical aid to maintain civil aviation facilities in regions where such services could not otherwise be continued. ICAO also produces technical publications and special studies.

ICAO consists of the Assembly, which comprises all the contracting member States (more than 180), and the governing body, the Council, consisting of a number (currently thirty three) of periodically elected States. ICAO has nine regions and seven regional offices in Bangkok, Cairo, Dakar, Lima, Mexico City, Nairobi and Paris. From time to time, Regional Air Navigation (RAN) meetings are held to plan an integrated civil air navigation system. Assisting the regional offices and the RAN meetings are regional planning groups with overall air navigation planning responsibilities. The main objectives of these groups are to ensure continuity in the planning processes for the purpose of maintaining an up to date air navigation plan through systems evaluation, monitoring and study in the light of changing traffic characteristics, operational requirements and technological advances. At all times when dealing with ICAO, one must remember that it is not an entity unto itself but is, in fact, a collection of individual States, each of whom must concur in the decision making process. It is a super bureaucracy and its often criticised laborious processes are occasioned by this fact. For ICAO to approve, the States must approve. With considerably differing levels of technical efficiencies and implementation processes across the regions, uniformity of application is extremely difficult. Over the years, the ICAO bureaucracy has found it difficult to keep pace with rapid aviation technological advances and, in some quarters, this has caused considerable frustration. In more recent times, and particularly with the implementation of the regional planning groups and the advent of some other informal bodies, ICAO's responsiveness to change and demands from States (and various organisations) has shown a marked improvement.

When IFATCA was born, ICAO was present. At the founding conference in Amsterdam, ICAO was represented by their Deputy Representative from the European and African Regional Office, Mr. H. E. Pujade. Mr. Pujade made a brief speech in which he said: "I should like to extend to you the warmest and most friendly welcome in the world of international aviation organisations and associations. You have all read the words of the ICAO Secretary General which are reproduced in one of the meeting's papers, i.e. 'We recognise the high objectives of IFATCA and the contributions it could make to safety in the air.” As a matter of fact, the air traffic controller, with the increase in the number of and speed of aircraft, has become one of the key figures of aviation. His contribution to air safety and to its efficiency is a most important one. We are therefore very glad to be represented at the inaugural meeting of your Federation. I wish IFATCA the greatest success first in its European activities and, since your intention is to strive for a worldwide Federation, I wish you every success in your future efforts towards such an expansion. Please be assured that ICAO will follow your development and achievements with the interest due to any endeavour to improve some field in the world of aviation."

These encouraging words from Mr. Pujade did not, however, materialise into concrete support and, in fact, at times, quite the opposite appeared to be the case. For many years ICAO and some of its member States seemed to be, if not directly opposed to IFATCA's intentions, then extremely wary of allowing it to independently represent the world's air traffic controllers. It was known during those early years that some member States of ICAO were reluctant or even opposed to accepting IFATCA as an equal partner in discussions on ATC subjects. Incredibly now, this view was held then because they were afraid that IFATCA's, or, more accurately, the controllers', views would not coincide with the views of the government officials. This of course was the very reason for the existence of the Federation: to present practical opinion and argument to officials who mostly had little current experience of the day to day difficulties of separating aircraft, especially at a time of great change. This doubt was not shared by all member States and the German government of the time seemed particularly enlightened. The Minister for Transport, Gustav Glunz, was even moved to comment "the fact that you are  .. members of a Federation whose opinions need not necessarily coincide with those of government authorities, should not be a hindrance." He went on to exactly capture the spirit of the Federations being when he said: "It is within your terms of reference as a professional organisation to take a critical position and to make proposals for further development of the air traffic services."

From the outset IFATCA had determined to be involved in international aviation affairs and to attend as many relevant meetings as possible. The Elective Officers, however, showed considerable appreciation of the difficulties that would be involved in approaching ICAO in the first instance. Whilst some members wanted immediately to seek invitations to each and every meeting, the Board restrained them and realistically argued (in 1962) that they should await further expansion through a geographically wider membership before making a formal request for general recognition. The Board appreciated that such recognition and therefore attendant regular meeting invitations would require a more efficient management on their part and saw the probable need for a secretariat just to process the resultant information that would ensue from Montreal.

Not only that but initially IFATCA really had little idea of the organisation and workings of the huge and disparate organisation that ICAO was.

It was determined that Standing Committee 1 would be the main conduit for the Federations technical involvement with outside organisations. Having then settled upon an internal operating procedure, it was also clear that little progress could be made in trying to influence the thinking of national authorities unless the available energies and arguments were directed in appropriate forums towards subjects which were the concern of those authorities and with which IFATCA could display its expertise. The obvious choice in the first instance naturally was ICAO and SC1 determined to direct its main effort towards discussions in the various ICAO Panels, Committees and Regional Meetings. Demonstrating considerable maturity in tackling this task, SC1 left nothing to chance and even went so far as to learn of the standard ICAO working paper format and make their own submissions in accordance. Such attention to detail would stand them in good stead.

Probably still riding the wave of good will emanating from the original conferences, IFATCA received its first invitation from ICAO's Secretary-General in 1963. Observer status had been granted to the RAC/OPS meeting in Montreal and first Vice-President Maurice Cerf was appointed to attend the full conference. Honorary Secretary Hans Thau also was dispatched to cover the last week of the meeting. Acknowledging IFATCA's immaturity in the arena, it was admitted that the attendance was primarily for familiarisation, although an important secondary purpose - to illustrate a willingness to be cooperative - was also emphasised. Cerf found difficulties from the outset with the familiarisation process. In normal ICAO fashion, the meeting split into several working groups for specific discussions and Cerf was expected to cover them all. Not surprisingly, he found this difficult and had therefore to concentrate on the more important issues and kept his input minimal. Despite the low key debut, two important issues arose. The first was an agreement for a common endeavour by IFATCA and IFALPA to evaluate area navigation systems. The second concerned a request by ICAO for proposals on the introduction of radar control procedures in PANS/RAC. Potentially of even more importance, Cerf was able to report that part of IFATCA's policy on ATC responsibility for terrain clearance, established at the London conference in April, 1963 and with which IFALPA strongly disagreed, was adopted by the meeting only a month later. The Officers and Directors were well pleased and convinced that the IFATCA/ICAO cooperative venture was on its way. It was to be a short- lived euphoria.

As soon as the very next year, the Board reported that several applications to meetings were given negative or evasive responses. It was then that it was learned that some members of the ICAO Council objected to controllers, all of whom were civil servants, voicing opinions not shared by their government representatives at the Council.

Probably, IFATCA's first serious disappointments with ICAO arose in the Organisation's twentieth anniversary year, 1965. At the Brussels conference, President Tekstra said "The recent refusal of ICAO to admit an IFATCA observer at some specified meetings has been a serious disappointment". Then, adding further insult, in September the same year the ICAO Secretariat convened a meeting of experts in Montreal to consider proposed amendments to PANS/RAC procedures on the use of primary radar. Again IFATCA was not invited. This omission was all the more incomprehensible when one remembers that ICAO had invited IFATCA to contribute to the procedures in the first place. Whilst the Board of Officers had made a decision to not seek official observer status with ICAO at this stage (because of a lack of funds, facilities and manpower that such status would inevitably require), they were nevertheless dismayed not to be included in such an important and basic discussion. You will recall that the President himself had played a key role in formulating those very procedures for his home Civil Aviation Authority and it is reasonable to assume, that at the very least, such experience would have been an invaluable contribution to the considerations of the international standards then being determined.

However, whilst the ICAO Council saw fit not to invite IFATCA to its working group deliberations, elements of the ICAO Secretariat seemed to be of the belief that IFATCA's opinion was valuable and, post meeting and very late, invited the Federations comments on the final draft procedures. But the request only arrived just before the deadline for comments. This necessitated the Executive Secretary flying to Amsterdam, with a hastily prepared SC1 submission, for discussions with the President and formulating IFATCA's response without consultation with the Member Associations. Not only was the timetable for input unrealistic but it came in the last days prior to conference when other business was, of course, pressing. IFATCA's reply was thus hurried and late.

So as early in IFATCA's history as 1966, President Tekstra felt the need to publicly express regrets about ICAO's cooperation. Bemoaning the lack of consultation on the introduction of radar procedures, he said in Rome: "We have received, just prior to this conference, the ICAO final draft amendments of the radar procedures paper. We are indebted to ICAO for requesting our opinion on this important subject. I regret, however, that we have not been furnished with all the deliberations which resulted in this final draft and therefore, following the conference, I intend to approach the Secretary General of ICAO to suggest that, whilst we welcome their approach to us to express our opinions, we consider it essential to be furnished with all the material which resulted in their draft conclusions." This apparently mild rebuke nevertheless served to highlight to the delegates IFATCA's frustration at failing to be consulted prior to drawing up of the final draft amendments as well as not being provided with all the necessary background material to enable a timely and reasoned submission.

Certainly it can be argued that IFATCA was still an infant, was still to gain full international credibility and was yet to establish a reputation for valuable input but if one is not asked, nor provided with the opportunity, how is one to establish that reputation? Even ICAO, at the very first IFATCA conference, was acknowledging the air traffic controller's contribution to air safety and efficiency and yet here they were, just four short years later in 1965, practically ignoring the potential and, certainly in President Tekstra's case, practical contribution of the very men who would be using the radar equipment and applying the radar procedures they were defining.

IFATCA's disappointment at receiving inadequate background material and initially at being excluded from the September, 1965 meeting of experts, which drew up the draft procedures, was conveyed to the Secretary General. Probably as a direct result of this representation, IFATCA was asked for comment on the PANS/ RAC changes and, subsequently, on the report of the fourth meeting of the ATC Automation Panel and the report of the sub-committee of the Legal Committee on the Liability of ATC Agencies as well. So having stirred the possum, results were forthcoming but they were not consistent. Unfortunately, this was to become an all-too-familiar scenario for many, many years.

A measure of IFATCA's contribution, and indeed prescience, can be gained from their comments to the Automation Panel meetings. In acknowledging the complexity of automation, little knowledge of which was then available to the profession, IFATCA was still able to recognise the necessity for early steps to ensure compatibility of equipment under development and planned for introduction throughout Europe. Even then, to the largely uninitiated air traffic controllers, it was evident that, with coordination the main bottleneck to efficient control, compatible systems in different countries would be essential. It is history now that this incompatibility became the bane of air traffic control throughout Europe and it was not until the late eighties that the Eurocontrol organisation began to tackle this problem through their program EATCHIP, of which we will see more later in Chapter 10.

Coming to the close of the sixties, IFATCA's relations with ICAO seemed to be improving again as we can witness from the Federations attendance at the 6th Air Navigation Conference in Montreal in April and May, 1969. (The Federation had not sought inclusion at the 1967 5th ANC because of a lack of invitation, scarcity of finances and manpower and lack of preparedness.) This 1969 conference proved to be a tour de force by IFATCA. The delegation, brilliantly led by SC1 member John Saker from the U.K., made a deep impression on those attending. It was IFATCA’s extensive preparation (mostly by SC1) and widely recognised spirit of genuine cooperation that impressed the States' delegates. IFATCA’s proposals, formulated during the Belgrade conference with the ANC firmly in mind, were well received and most of them were accommodated in the Conference recommendations. The IFATCA paper on ‘Application of SSR’, which featured close collaboration by several MAs, was accepted in its entirety. Several amendments to phraseologies and coordination in transfer of control between centres were accepted and remain in PANS/RAC to this day. IFATCA's policy on authorisation of Special VFR to enter control zones was closely considered with ICAO's formulation of procedures.

IFATCA's delegation also comprised two Canadian controllers (Foster Richardson and John Little) thus allowing full representation at all the sub-committee meetings. The problems the non-ubiquitous Maurice Cerf faced in 1963 were not encountered this time.

The success of IFATCA's representation at the ANC perhaps explains why, by 1970, relations with ICAO were good enough for the President of ICAO himself to officiate at the opening ceremonies of the Montreal conference, although the fact that the conference was in Montreal, home of the Organisation, must have helped. Mr. Binaghi delivered something of a 'motherhood' address though when he said, inter alia: "Yours is a young organisation ... but you have given ample proof of your dynamism. You have extended your field of interest more and more throughout the world, you have given better and better service throughout cities and regions ... We also support your contribution to air traffic activities. You have taken an active participation in our procedures for air traffic control, again I would like to thank you for your efforts...". These bland words were faint praise indeed but nevertheless Mr. Binaghi's very presence served to demonstrate to delegates that IFATCA had achieved a level of recognition from the world's premier aviation body. The Federation might not have been receiving automatic invitations to relevant meetings, and indeed still was being excluded from some, but some acknowledgment at least was forthcoming and progress was being made.

Some of that further progress was evidenced by IFATCA's presence for four weeks in October/November, 1970 at the PEL/TRG/MED meeting. The then First Vice- President Dick Campbell (in those days responsible for all Standing Committees) spoke in glowing terms of IFATCA's participation and opined that IFATCA had "...attained an affirmative degree of recognition ... and firmly established an excellent working relationship with ICAO". Responsible for the "sound foundation of respect and concern for the operational controllers' viewpoints" was Canadian Art Cauty who was IFATCA's chief delegate to the meeting. Following Cerf's and Saker's lead, Cauty further extended IFATCA's reputation at headquarters. Part of Cauty's preparation involved, along with colleagues from CATCA's Montreal branch, reviewing no fewer than 251 working papers. It was truly a monumental undertaking which, precise in its preparation and professional in its representation, substantially added to IFATCA's reputation. Following up on this representation, Cauty¹ also presented to conference '71 a forty two page report of the meeting and a "Preparatory Brief for IFATCA Observers to ICAO'. This last document, prepared under Campbell's direction, ensured that future IFATCA representatives to ICAO meetings would be fully aware of the working procedures, history and protocol of ICAO. The thoroughness of the Federations preparations and the quality of its input were ensuring that invitations to IFATCA from ICAO were deserved and treated very seriously and merited continuance.

Early in the seventies, the ICAO European office commenced a series of meetings dealing with flow control problems. This move was in recognition of the increasing problems controllers were experiencing with traffic saturation through certain air route fixes and capacity constraints in some areas. IFATCA's members, no less concerned, and in fact promoting the meetings, also reacted during the Dublin conference in 1972. At that meeting they proposed a flow control seminar themselves with invitations to all air space users. Whilst this move was approved by the Dublin delegates, in the more restrained atmosphere post conference, the Board felt that such a meeting required considerable in-depth preparation, extensive facilities and a financial commitment all of which IFATCA was currently unable to provide. Furthermore, they believed that whilst the motive was correct, without that preparation the meeting risked being less than successful and thus a waste of time and exposed a potential for damage to IFATCA's hard earned reputation. Finally, they anticipated that the return for considerable financial outlay would not match the hoped for results. The Board thus over-ruled the resolution.

SC1 though, seeing the necessity to be involved in flow control discussions, then suggested IFATCA attempt to participate in the ICAO discussions. Consequently, a letter was sent to the European Office seeking an invitation to the informal meetings on the organisation of traffic flow. This request was approved by ICAO and three IFATCA delegates attended the 6th meeting.

The Dublin conference further passed a resolution to ask ICAO to place IFATCA on their mailing list and to be invited to all pending relevant panel groups and meetings. However, the Board also over-ruled this resolution, again deciding that the Secretariat did not have the time nor the facilities to accept the demands this resolution would place upon it. The Board decided they would rather pick and chose from an ICAO list those meetings it deemed relevant and to seek individual invitations to those.

This approach seemed to work and pay dividends for the Federation. Over the next two years, IFATCA attended all the periodic Informal Flow Control meetings in Paris with three representatives, allowing coverage of the proceedings in English, French and German. During this time, significant input was made to two ICAO Technical Committees - Primary Radar Procedures and Monitoring of Reduced Horizontal Separation Standards. Countering this closer European regional cooperation, however, was the fact that IFATCA still had no global representation at all at the most important relevant Panel, the Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel. Nor was the acceptance by the European office mirrored in the other ICAO regions and a first request to attend an Asia/Pacific meeting in early 1974 was turned down.

Gaining attendance at any of these meetings was a time consuming affair. Having decided that a meeting was relevant and therefore attendance desirable, the Secretary used to write to the ICAO Council in Montreal seeking an invitation. Frequently, correspondence pertaining to the request (justification, counter argument, etc) passed back and forth before the invitation (if granted) was forthcoming. Hence, notice to the nominated representatives was often late in coming and, occasionally, preparations were thus hampered.

The relationship with the European Office was now being sustained at a satisfactory level as a result of the valuable input to the Flow Meetings (and others such as the 1971 6th EUM RAN Meeting). Following a review of the Secretariat's and SC1’s capabilities, the Board in 1975 finally decided the time was right to apply to ICAO for some official recognition and hence automatic invitation to appropriate future meetings. This approach was acceded to, at least in part. That year IFATCA was accepted as a full member of the West European Informal Flow Control Meetings and, as a result, received automatic invitations to participate with Observer status (that is, right to comment by invitation but having no vote) at a number of other meetings in Europe.

Also about this time, IFATCA started to become proactive in its dealings with ICAO rather than continue to react to actions and circumstances. The Melbourne conference expressed considerable concern at the lack of uniformity in wake turbulence separation standards around the world. National authorities and ICAO were urged to afford the highest priority to the development of standard procedures and thus prevent controllers being confronted with the danger and pressure of being involved in accidents attributable to wake turbulence. Melbourne also saw agreement on the submission of two papers (on computerised radar data and flow management) to the 9th Air Navigation Conference.

Shortly after Melbourne, IFATCA also accepted an invitation to participate in an ICAO Study Group on Monitoring Devices in ATS Units. This small group of experts from selected States and international organisations was to further develop the provisions of ICAO's Annex 11 to identify the need for, and the form of, presentation of instantaneous indications in ATS units of the operational status of visual and non-visual aids essential to approach, landing and take-off. Whilst the subject material of this Study Group was not of earth shattering importance, the Federation obviously decided that such invitations from ICAO should not be refused. Besides, this represented just about the first opportunity to become involved in a human factors type development, a field which was to assume tremendous importance in later years and in which IFATCA has played a leading role.

At the same time that the Lyon conference was being held (April, 1976), IFATCA also had representatives attending another Air Navigation Conference and others had just returned from an Informal Meeting on ATS Problems in Central and Eastern Europe. So by the mid '70s, relations and participation with ICAO had risen to a high level and it seemed that the climate was right for nothing but continued improvement. In Europe, at least, invitations were forthcoming to most meetings, automatic representation was available at some informal meetings and valuable and respected contributions were being made to, and welcomed by, the various working groups and committees. When he retired in 1976, the President of ICAO Mr. Binaghi was even moved to write "Throughout my years as President of the Council and, previously, as Chairman of the Air Navigation Commission, I always strove for fruitful cooperation between ICAO and international organisations devoted to civil aviation. I am glad to say that IFATCA has always rated high among those who made excellent contributions to our work." Something of a quantum leap from the blandishments of 1970!

But where were the equivalent reports of attendance and input to other regional meetings? Granted, IFATCA's regional development had not progressed a great deal but 40% of the Federations affiliates were from outside Europe and they represented a significant air traffic controller population. Effectively, they were not in local contact with ICAO and thus were not contributing local input to Regional Air Navigation Conferences and the like.

It wasn't until 1978 that Robin Soar (from the New Zealand association and later to be Regional Vice-President 1980-1986) was able to report on IFATCA attendance at an ICAO meeting in the Asia Pacific region. This occasion was an Informal RAC/COM meeting in Fiji to discuss provision of ATS in the upper airspace within Auckland FIR and over the Nadi FIR. Soar was responding to a first invitation sought by the then Regional Councillor Daniel Gorin (ex-APCA President and now transferred to New Caledonia but still active for APCA and IFATCA) who was unable to make it himself because of transportation difficulties and costs.

This invitation in the Pacific certainly did not translate into a regular occurrence, however. In his report to the 1984 Executive Council meeting, Soar complained of a lack of contact with the ICAO Regional Office in Bangkok. The Board was moved to comment that "liaison at other (than Europe) regional offices requires to be improved" and had the EVP Technical pursue the matter with ICAO Montreal. This approach only met with limited success and, at the 1988 Executive Council meeting, Soars successor had to report about being "obstructed" in his approaches to ICAO's Bangkok office. Despite some contacts being made, the RVPs were virtually left waiting for improvements in relations with ICAO HQ that would hopefully filter down to the regional level. This never really occurred, however, and various IFATCA documentation, such as Council minutes and regional meeting reports throughout the eighties, record little, if any, substantial contact with the ICAO regional offices.

Contacts on the European front, although occasionally cool, continued at a reasonable level, however, and the 1979 Brussels conference report noted that "our involvement with ICAO is increasing". President Henschler was able to advise on continued involvement with ICAO in a wide range of subjects such as: Surface Movement Guidance & Control Systems (SMGCS), Basic Operational Requirements & Planning Criteria Group (BORG), AIS Automation Group (AAG), Informal Flow Control & ATS Problems in Western & Eastern Europe, European Air Navigation Planning Group (EANPG) and the Bird Strike Committee.

Stemming from the tragic Tenerife accident in 1977 (which saw 582 people die when two B747s collided on the runway, probably because of misinterpreted RTF communications), IFATCA was invited in 1979 to participate in the ICAO RTF Study Group which was tasked with reviewing standard phraseologies. The controllers and IFALPA members were able to formulate standard phraseologies based on practical experience and the results are still in use today. We can, however, contrast this with the inexplicable failure to gain participation in the Air Traffic Management Group² around the same time.

So, contact maintained a relatively steady if slow upward trend throughout the seventies but relations with ICAO Europe really started to flourish in the next decade. The reason for this was quite simple - IFATCA got a man, in fact two men, on the inside!

Daniel Oudin was a controller in the Paris ACC for 17 years and served as APCA President for two terms 1975 to 1979. He then moved to the international arena and was IFATCA's Vice-President Technical 1979-1981. Oudin 'retired' as a controller in 1981 and joined ICAO in Paris. Coincidentally(?), shortly after this move, former President Jean-Daniel Monin was appointed chairman of the European Flow meetings, in the secretariat of which Oudin prominently featured, and the Federation secured permanent observer status to these meetings. IFATCA’s input and influence was thus considerably elevated and its reputation and credibility enhanced as a result. In the wider context, this participation saw a few more doors being opened and resulted in acceptance as a permanent observer to the European Air Navigation Planning Group's Traffic Management Group. Following the establishment of the Future Air Navigation Systems (FANS) Special Committee at the end of 1983, the invitations to the FANS meetings could also be attributed to this new involvement. (FANS membership consisted of twenty two member States and international organisations and ten other organisations with observer status.) The full FANS Committee met just five times over the ensuing four years and whilst IFATCA participated therein, the real work, with considerable IFATCA input, was being performed by various working groups and panels such as ADS, MICA, FLOW, FLOE, RGCSP and ATMG.

On top of the FANS work, IFATCA was also becoming even more heavily involved in the purely European civil aviation scene, initially through solid participation in FEATS (the Future European Air Traffic Services Systems Group). With a high degree of urgency arising from the myriad ATC problems in Europe, this latter group was forced to expedite its proceedings to complete its work ahead of its initial schedule and it was thus compelled to place great reliance upon experts from every field to complete its task. In turn, this placed enormous pressures on the IFATCA representatives to the various panels and working groups, including President Sermijn who somehow managed to find the time to attend all the meetings of the Federations special Standing Committee on FEATS. But the necessary input was made and the Federations concerns were more than adequately addressed. 1989 then saw IFATCA included in another major European initiative. The European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) established a task force on the integration of European air traffic control systems and invited IFATCA to give its opinion on the future concept of air traffic control in Europe. This forerunner to EATCHIP was expected to be a short term group but things didn't quite work out that way. (See Chapter 10)

Things weren't altogether convivial in the eighties, however. In 1982, the ICAO Air Navigation Commission commenced work on developing specifications and guidance material for simultaneous operations in IMC on parallel runways. Their SOIR Group (Simultaneous Operations on Parallel Instrument Runways) comprised experts from many countries around the world and representatives from the Airports Coordinating Council, IATA and IFALPA but, initially at least, not IFATCA and 1987 saw the Federation publicly regretting not achieving status in the North Atlantic Systems Planning Group. By now, these seemed to be relatively isolated hiccups though and, speaking for ICAO at the 1989 annual conference, Daniel Oudin said "It is appreciated that the expertise and contributions from professionals (from IFATCA) involved in air traffic control take more and more importance in the planning and development of the present air navigation systems. This has been recognised through an increased involvement of your Federation ... in FANS at the world wide level and ... in FEATS at the regional level and (your) technical input is fully recognised as an invaluable asset to the development of a coherent air navigation system."

Lest one think that all this involvement with ICAO was purely technical, the human factors aspects of air traffic control also had now become a prime consideration of ICAO, thus matching IFATCA's interest of many years. A resolution from the 1981 conference directed the Executive Board to seek participation in the deliberations of the ICAO Legal Commission on legal liabilities of controllers. The mid-eighties saw IFATCA split its single liaison position to ICAO and established a 'Liaison Officer Technical and Operational' and 'Liaison Officer Legal' (and subsequently re-titled Liaison Officer Legal and Professional) to ICAO in Montreal. In 1988, IFATCA made contact with ICAO regarding their Personnel Licensing and Training (PELT) review of the licensing requirements for controllers and 1989 saw IFATCA accepted as members of ICAO's LATCO Study Group also reviewing the licensing of controllers. By the end of the decade the President, Executive Vice-Presidents Technical and Professional and the liaison officers were making regular visits to the Montreal headquarters and meeting with the Secretary General Dr. Sidhu and other high ranking officials. On occasions, they even were drinking cocktails with them! The Federation had progressed a long way in the preceding ten years and the eighties appeared to be a defining period in our relationship with the International Civil Aviation Organisation.

Perhaps the strongest evidence of this is found in the Federations invitation to the 10th ANC and the CNS/ATM conference that preceded it. The two day meeting (4th and 5th September, 1991) debated weighty themes such as the 'Global Concept', 'User and Provider Views' and 'Global Planning'. IFATCA presented a paper, as asked, and had adopted in the final report, the following statement: "IFATCA, whilst supporting future improvement to the existing ATM service with current and future CNS/ATM systems, noted a need to address and resolve related human factors aspects associated with the automation of ATM. Such automation should not remove the controller from the decision making process. IFATCA cautioned that the future ATFM should not be seen as an alternative to ATC and that ATFM and ASM would be regarded as adjuncts to assist ATC within the context of ATM. IFATCA considered it timely for ICAO to develop Standards and Recommended Practises to guide the development of ATM on a harmonious, global basis." It was the same old pitch from the Federation harping on a theme enunciated from the first days of the FANS concept. This time though, it was delivered at the very home of international civil aviation and heard by the real movers and shakers of the profession.

President Stuart then delivered a lengthy speech to the opening of the 10th ANC. In observing that the earlier conference had taken note of IFATCA's position, Stuart again outlined the Federations support for the automation of ATM functions as an aim of supporting air traffic controllers in their work with the goal of increasing efficiency and capacity. He finished with a plea to not forget the less developed areas of the world. His words were well received. The Executive Board took the opportunity to hold a Board meeting in Montreal at the same time as the ANC meeting and one evening hosted a cocktail party which was attended by Dr. Kotaite, President of the ICAO Council, and most of the organisation's branch chiefs. It was an extremely cordial moment in the relationship.

Arguably matching the significance of the CNS/ATM involvement at this time (the early nineties) was IFATCA's participation in the ICAO Flight Safety and Human Factors programme. ICAO established the programme in 1986 when they established their FS & HF Study Group. The educational phase of this programme consisted of a series of global symposiums and regional seminars and, whilst IFATCA did not participate in the first symposium in 1989 or the first seminar in 1991, the Federation was a key presenter at the following events, including the Second Global Symposium in Washington in April, 1993. The Study Group thereafter continued its work towards its objective of regulation in the human factors field with IFATCA making valuable contributions. The most notable early successful input in this area was inclusion of the requirement for ATCO licences to demonstrate knowledge of human performance and limitations in the new Annex 1 on Licensing.

Whilst the eighties (and now the early nineties) certainly saw IFATCA and ICAO establish a sound and relatively consistent relationship, nothing could be taken for granted and confirmation of that was provided in the mid-nineties. Despite high quality and appreciated input to every forum attended, it seemed as though ICAO was still not totally accepting that IFATCA should be 'there'. IFATCA had established a reputation, had earned respect and gathered plaudits but apparently still had failed to achieve the right to participate as equals.

Despite the extensive and valuable contributions to FANS and FEATS over almost a decade, when ICAO moved the FANS project up another notch, IFATCA was left out. The original FANS committee was replaced by FANS II, which addressed institutional issues associated with the new global ATC system. When FANS II completed its work in 1993, the President of ICAO, Dr. Kotaite, then constituted CASITAF, the CNS/ATM Systems Implementation Task Force, a high level decision making grouping to coordinate and monitor the implementation of the FANS concept. The formation of CASITAF was agreed in March, 1994 and its composition was announced in April from Montreal, ironically as IFATCA's annual conference was being held in Ottawa. IFATCA was aware that this group was to be formed and had made immediate representations to participate. Given the Federations commitment to FANS since its inception, omission from such an essential part of the CNS/ATM implementation was a major disappointment. ICAO itself said that "the committee was to be composed of high profile individuals with managerial experience from States, airspace users, service providers, manufacturing, finance and other parties playing a major role in CNS/ATM systems provision, operation and utilisation. In this way, experience can be brought in from all sectors of the aviation community." IFATCA's initial exclusion from the group certainly appeared to be a contradiction of this statement.

Charles Stuart, in his final days as President, made strenuous representations at the highest levels to overturn this decision and received sympathetic hearings. However, the first meeting went ahead in May without IFATCA. The Federations absence from this meeting was noted by some of the task force's constituents and moves by them for future participation were immediate. As a result of these moves, and the Board's continued agitation, IFATCA was invited to present a paper to the second meeting in September, 1994. This paper, delivered by EVP Professional Bert Ruitenberg due to the last minute withdrawal of President Lauridsen, detailed controllers' views on priorities for implementation of CNS/ATM systems. The paper was delivered on the first morning and, whilst it received no direct comment at the time, it was referred to several times during subsequent presentations and discussions over the next 2 days. The CASITAF/2 report reflected several points from the IFATCA paper and it was generally accepted that IFATCA's presence and input were effective.

Ruitenberg's election to the Executive Board seemed to mark another turning point in IFATCA's relations with ICAO, notably in the Human Factors arena. Previously the Netherlands member on SC4 from 1983 until 1989 when he joined the Board of the Dutch Guild as vice-chairman and IFATCA liaison officer, Ruitenberg was elected EVP Professional in 1992 following the death of his compatriot Wim Rooseman. From the time of his election, he took to the portfolio with tremendous enthusiasm and seemed to make recognition of human factors aspects his own personal crusade. Within three months of his election, Ruitenberg had attended an ICAO Human Factors seminar in Mexico, an IFALPA HUPER (Human Performance) committee meeting in the U.K., introduced himself in Montreal where he had discussions on HF and licensing issues and visited the ILO in Geneva. He had also secured invitations to an ICAO HF Seminar in Cairo the following October and a Global HF Symposium in Washington the next April. These were to be the forerunners of many such forums and Ruitenberg had immediately signaled his strong desire for participation and input and dearly and closely identified with the human factors aspects of air traffic control.

In 1993, IFATCA was invited to contribute to ICAO's draft Digest on Human Factors in CNS/ATM Systems. Such an important invitation could be traced to the quality of Ruitenberg's input to the Cairo seminar and the Washington symposium and the very cordial relations established with the Personnel & Licensing/ Training section of ICAO, notably Dan Maurino, Chief of the section. These relations were to endure throughout Ruitenberg's term in office and have paved the way for further IFATCA input in the discipline. Having provided IFATCA's comments to the draft digest, Ruitenberg then visited ICAO to discuss the input. During this discussion it was decided that an appendix should be included in the digest. The intent of this appendix was to present 'a user organisation's perspective' and IFATCA was asked to provide it. Several drafts and comments thereto went back and forth between the two organisations (and others) over the following months. ICAO Circular 249 Human Factors Digest No. 11 was duly published in May, 1994.

However, between the invitation to write the appendix and the Digest's publication, other sections of ICAO objected to such a contribution and the Digest appeared, with an appendix, but one not containing a user organisation's perspective. The proposed IFATCA input to this section disappeared, although the Federations significant contribution to the body of the document was retained. IFATCA regretted the deletion of its input to the appendix but, nevertheless, the document is an important publication dealing as it does with aspects and principles of human centred automation. It conforms with, and indeed was heavily influenced by, IFATCA's policies on the subject and the Federations input is recognised in the foreword. The digest focuses on the qualities of human centred automation and aims for a system useful to the human operator who is recognised as still having the ultimate responsibility. Whilst a few of us made contributions to Ruitenberg's submissions to ICAO in this document, it is he who must take most of the credit for this invaluable input to ICAO's specifications for future automation, as he also must for IFATCA's unparalleled relations with those sections of ICAO dealing with human factors.

Ruitenberg continued IFATCA representation at the HF seminars and when the first series wound up in Addis Ababa in October, 1994, ICAO (Maurino) sought IFATCA assistance in development of an outline for an HF training programme. By this time, IFATCA/Ruitenberg was heavily in demand and he finished off 1994 with appearances at an ATM Privatisation Conference in London and another ICAO training conference (TRAINAIR Coordination Conference) in New Delhi. Another field was opening up as well and mid-1995 found Ruitenberg at the Ohio State Aviation Psychology symposium and then, in November, at the Australian Aviation Psychology Association's symposium in Sydney. With the introduction of CNS/ATM uppermost on many minds at the time, Maurino and ICAO required more though and, in early 1995, Ruitenberg provided feedback on an initial version of a Human Resources Planning Survey and then some thoughts on ADS licensing. At the same time, some criticism was being directed towards ICAO for failing to provide sufficient guidance to States after including a human factors knowledge requirement for controllers in their Annex 1. ICAO responded to this criticism by inviting IFATCA to submit an outline for a HF training curriculum for ATCOs. Ruitenberg complied, adding to an already very full year's involvement with ICAO.

Bert Ruitenberg retired as EVP Professional at the 1996 annual conference after four years of incredible input to the discipline of human factors. Without question, IFATCA's now acknowledged influence in this area owes a lot to his application, skill and knowledge and IFATCA's general relationship with ICAO has rarely matched the rapport established by him in his field during his terms of office. Ruitenberg didn't depart the scene entirely for he immediately was appointed by the Board as IFATCA's Human Factors Specialist and he became a roving ambassador and continued to ensure valuable Federation input in the field.

Ruitenberg's successors, initially Israeli Sandy Oppenheim and later Briton Martyn Cooper, maintained the strong Professional sector bonds with ICAO. The debate over the need for a separate ADS rating continued and, with IFATCA insisting on a distinct form of recognition of the 'differentness' of the proposed ADS method of control, EVPP was assisting in the work for an ADS rating. Additionally, the Federation was making contribution to the ICAO ADS Training manual.

Paralleling this increased cooperation in the HF area, contacts and acceptance by ICAO in the regions also seemed to be on the improvement in the early nineties.

In the Pacific, IFATCA was a regular attendee at the Informal South Pacific ATS Coordinating Group meetings and, whilst this wasn't an ICAO body per se, the Organisation was a prime contributor thereto and was responsible for overseeing the changes wrought by ISPACG. One could conjecture that continued attendance at the ISPACG meetings set the climate for the better relations in the Asia Pacific region for they certainly showed an upward trend in this time frame. Supporting evidence for this comes from the 1995 IFATCA presence at an APANPIRG South China Sea Working Group meeting on route re-structuring. Apart from the IFATCA contribution to the route re-structure and the accompanying reduced separation minima, a direct benefit deriving from this meeting, as a result of talks with the Regional Representative, was that the Federation was placed on the circulation list of ICAO correspondence to States and Organisations. This represented a 'step up' in our relations with the Bangkok office, which, until the ISPACG involvement, had been less than desirable with several requests for attendance at APANPIRG meetings, for instance, refused.

In early 1992 President Stuart made approaches to the new Secretary General of lCAO, Phillipe Rochat about regional IFATCA involvement. Rochat was positive with his reply and advised that if the Regional EVPs wanted to attend regional ICAO meetings they should approach the relevant ICAO regional office directly. Such authorisation appeared to represent an improvement over the previous requirement to continually make approaches via the Montreal office but initially, at least, seemed to have no effect. ICAO COM and ATS Groups established in the Caribbean region in mid-1992, for example, formed without IFATCA representation. A 1993 request for Observer status at the CAR/SAM Regional Planning and Implementation Group's third meeting in Rio de Janeiro was refused. A request to the Bangkok Office for EVP ASP to attend a 1994 Bay of Bengal ATS meeting was refused "because ICAO HQ did not inform the Bangkok Office of IFATCA's approval to attend”[3] However, the ISPACG involvement seemed to be gradually improving the situation in ASP and the DP finally attended the APANPIRG sub-group meeting in 1995. In AMA, the EVP, Sam Lampkin, pressed the case for IFATCA participation in regional affairs and eventually gained acceptance on the GREPECAS CNS/ATM, ATS and COM sub-groups and regional participation on four task forces. 1994 saw an observer seat granted to EVP AFM on the African CNS/ATM Planning and Implementation Task Force and this was followed in 1995 by membership of APIRG, the African Planning & Implementation Regional Group. Even two short years earlier, such forums had been well and truly closed to IFATCA participation.

The quality and eighties of IFATCA's representatives eventually bore fruit on all fronts and the late nineties saw develop a close collaboration with ICAO, mosdy prompted by a mutual need to ensure the CNS/ATM concept was successfully introduced. The active solicitation of IFATCA policy now by ICAO is a sure sign of recognition by the Organisation but that acceptance, in the main, is not similarly matched by national administrations and more understanding needs to be achieved in this area. Finally, participation by the Federation in ALLPIRG rightly can be viewed as the high point in relations with ICAO and as the culmination of effort by all of IFATCA's officials and representatives, past and present.

It has been an interesting relationship between the two organisations over the four decades that IFATCA has been in existence. ICAO, as the world's peak civil aviation organisation, generally has seemed to adopt a 'safe distance' approach to contacts with IFATCA. Whether this has been because of the attitude of a few key individuals or because of some bureaucratic policy is difficult to say. In the beginning, there is no doubt that IFATCA was distrusted by certain high ranking members of the Council and even by a few in the technical branches of the Organisation. Doubtless, the States' representatives jealously guarded their right to speak on behalf of the civil servants in aviation that they supposedly represented. But that assumed right, when one considered their almost universal lack of practical experience in the area, was hardly credible.

IFATCA was born under a heavy suspicion that it was a disguise for an international agitator for better conditions. The conservative strictures maintained throughout the sixties served to dissuade the sceptics and, despite one or two hiccups (most notably the failure to be consulted on the PANS/RAC amendments in 1965), relations maintained a steady, if not spectacular, rise. Whilst European contact showed significant improvements in the seventies, head office contacts stagnated a little, particularly early in the decade. Failure to gain acceptance to the Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel is a case in point. One can parallel this non-acceptance with the high level of industrial activity by air traffic controllers around the world at the time and IFATCA's apparent embracing of their industrial cause. There must have been a few people in Montreal saying "I told you so". However, participation in the 1976 Air Navigation Conference seemed to turn things around and, with the exception of a lack of regional contact outside Europe, the late seventies witnessed real growth in the relationship, the need for which IFATCA saw as only logical and right.

Since that time the relationship has blossomed, albeit still with some niggling exceptions but also with some highlights such as the invitation to IFATCA to contribute to ICAO's publication celebrating its 50th anniversary. Without doubt, the European experiences showed ICAO that IFATCA was able to make valuable and constructive input to any technical forum and do so at a time when industrial activity was again rampant. The Federations ability to separate the two issues of social needs and technical deficiencies won new friends and enabled acceptance of the arguments. For ICAO to publicly acknowledge, as they did, that the serious problems in Europe in the late eighties were a staffing problem would have been unthinkable in the sixties and seventies. Whilst IFATCA's technical input from the very first had always been of undeniable quality, the contributions to FLOW, FEATS, FANS and, a little later, Human Factors raised the standard of this contribution even higher and, one can surmise, ICAO's appreciation of them to new levels.

The emerging universal acceptance of the need for recognition of human factors as an integral part of air traffic control considerations has provided an unparalleled platform for IFATCA input. ICAO's acceptance that the front end users of the next generation technologies had to participate in the evolution of the CNS/ATM concept has led to an involvement previously not experienced. These two areas are separate in discipline but absolutely mutual in their needs and impacts and IFATCA is greatly appreciative of ICAO's acceptance of its experience and expertise and invitations to contribute. It could now be viewed as though IFATCA's early history and growing input has merely been preparation for today's contribution. And maybe that is so. Any organisation needs to prove itself and, by the mid-nineties, IFATCA had spent thirty five years doing just that. The new millennium and its associated new ATC concept have arrived at just the right time for IFATCA. Or perhaps we could theorise that IFATCA has come of age at just the right time to enable the most efficient implementation of CNS/ATM. With ICAO now looking to IFATCA for specialist input on a range of subjects such as ADS and GNSS and with invitations to join a Global Advisory Group to assist national administrations and regional groupings in the task of implementation, the latter appears credible.

Whichever view, there is little doubt that the relationship now existing between the two organisations has outgrown the initial mistrusts and earlier slights and that a partnership of mutual respect has evolved. It is as well, for the future holds challenges like none seen before and, to meet them successfully, ICAO and IFATCA need each other.

IFATCA has never sought permanent Observer status with ICAO such as IFALPA and IATA enjoy. In the early days, such membership would have placed an intolerable burden on the young organisation and doubtless would have been counterproductive. With limited resources, IFATCA preferred then to pick and choose where to make its contribution. It is also important to remember that, as often as not, when IFATCA was 'overlooked' as a participant at some forum and subsequently sought inclusion, it was granted. As the relationship ebbed and flowed and much time was spent corresponding back and forth seeking admission to various forums, the benefit of observer status would have been an absolute luxury but would still have produced problems for an organisation perennially short of finances and administrative resources although enjoying abundant technical expertise. Today, with considerable mutual respect and much bi-lateral information sharing, the relationship is such that possibly there seems little need for the recognition that permanent Observer status would accord. However, such an acceptance would have tremendous significance in that it would serve to confirm ICAO's recognition of the Federation as a contributor of equal rank and IFATCA's real arrival on the international civil aviation stage.

For ICAO, the situation today is that the Federations office in Montreal provides an immediacy of contact, high grade technical expertise is available and is appropriately sought and information appears to be freely shared. For IFATCA, the office now provides a facility ensuring administrative efficiency such that formal Observer status would be possible and, with financial security relatively assured and with the relationship at such a level, it seems the logical next step.

International Labour Office
A True Partnership

It is interesting and more than a little intriguing that for the greater part of IFATCA's first decade, the International Labour Office features hardly at all.

From the outset, IFATCA's officers had recognised the need to liaise with other international organisations and conference reports, for example, are replete with items mentioning contacts with ICAO, IFALPA, IAOPA and others. Hardly anywhere is there a mention of anything to do with the ILO. It seems that not until the 1967 conference in Geneva, the home of the ILO, did the ILO warrant serious contact. In noting this, one is forced to wonder if this was a by-product of the policy from the earliest days of steering clear of industrial activities and trade union involvement.

Inevitably, however, contact was made and immediately a relationship blossomed. When the ILO did come within IFATCA's expanding orbit, things happened quickly and today the ILO has come to be an extremely important organisation in IFATCA's dealings and an ILO representative now attends almost every annual conference. Since the highlight of 1979 (already briefly mentioned in Chapter 5), close liaison, particularly by SC4 and IFATCA's liaison officer in Geneva, has ensured that this important organisation remains fully across IFATCA's objects and policies.

Not surprisingly, since it was held in the city of their headquarters, the ILO was invited to the Geneva conference in 1967. Their Mr. Georges Dunand attended and immediately formed the opinion that the ILO should seriously consider the problems of air traffic controllers. The ILO had already published, a couple of years earlier, a study of air traffic control by Dr. Jakob Schenkmann but Mr. Dunand was of the view that it had not gone deeply enough into the problems. Later, at the 1969 Belgrade conference, Mr. Dunand informed delegates that the ILO and ICAO had decided to initiate a joint study on 'Conditions of Employment and Service of Air Traffic Controllers'.

By the time of the 1970 conference, Committee A was seeing an ILO representative regularly attending and in Montreal a certain J-D Monin (a Geneva resident) was providing an oral report on his contacts with the organisation. The ILO's representative in Montreal, Mr. Kaplansky, addressed the meeting and advised that an ILO 'Study on Conditions of Service in ATC' had commenced and would be available by late year and conveyed the good wishes of the ILO's Director General to IFATCA. A vast change from previous conferences!

Almost from the outset the study was beset with problems. The study was to be conducted via a questionnaire and the ILO identified the need for a controller for a six month posting to Geneva to consider the answers from States and staff organisations and to draft the report. Initially IFATCA's first Vice-President Dick Campbell considered helping with the questionnaire and the report but in the end refused. Since he was living in Geneva, Jean-Daniel Monin volunteered to assist with the questionnaire. It then proved impossible to co-opt a controller to Geneva for six months so, because he was already so committed, Daniel Monin further took on this role. Over the next two years, assisted by two local colleagues, Jose Rodin and Hans-Ulrich Heim, Monin became deeply involved in this study on a part time basis. His input was to prove invaluable. As we have seen already in Chapter 5, under Monin's guidance, IFATCA now was concentrating more on controllers' conditions of service and so it was no coincidence that IFATCA's involvement in this area and the relationship with the ILO were becoming more intertwined.

In typical fashion, answers to the questionnaire were not always clear and often were very late. The spare time toilers had frequently to seek clarifications to the answers from both the States and the staff organisations. This to-ing and fro-ing with the details ate up the time and the original twelve month timetable very quickly disappeared.

Then, when almost ready for publication, another serious and unforeseen difficulty arose. ICAO, as a joint sponsor of the study and being totally responsible for chapters 1 and 2 of the report ('Conditions of Entry into ATC Services' and 'Work Environment'), also demanded the right of review over chapters 3 to 8, which chapters contained the actual study details. In this review, ICAO objected to some statements on work conditions that Monin and his colleagues had drafted. Further time was occupied with exchanges of correspondence and there crept into the equation the fear that if the report was any further delayed, it would lose its relevance and impact. We need to remember that the study commenced in 1969 and the original timetable called for a late 1970 publication. By the time of ICAO's objection to the air traffic controllers' wording, it was already well into 1972. Reluctantly, the ILO and Monin acceded to the ICAO requests, altered their wording and the report was finally published in December, 1972 in English with French and Spanish versions appearing in 1973.

J-D Monin was then able to comment on the report from his position as IFATCA President in his opening speech at the Reykjavik conference, which was attended by the head of the ILO's industrial branch, Mr. Stoerman.

At the Reykjavik opening, President Monin said "This publication represents a great contribution by the ILO in spreading information on the ATC profession... Further, the governing body of the ILO has decided to include a small tripartite preparatory meeting on civil aviation in the programme of industrial meetings. The date and agenda for this meeting are not known but a close liaison is being maintained with the ILO and the Board of Officers will consider in due time whether IFATCA can attend the meeting." Given the speaker, his own contribution to the study, the relevance of the 'newly' found organisation and the importance of the issue, there is little doubt that such consideration would have been a formality.

Such was the development of this relationship that by the time of the Tel Aviv conference (1974), IFATCA was accepting routine invitations to attend important ILO meetings. We can contrast this with the observation at the same conference that "the Executive Board had applied for IFATCA to be put on the ICAO list of organisations for invitation as Observers at ICAO meetings without the necessity for the ICAO Council to decide for each individual meeting."

Receiving and accepting such an invitation from the ILO was a significant acknowledgement of IFATCA and its status as the controllers' voice. No less, the proposed meeting, a preparatory meeting for the "identification of social and labour problems and scope for ILO action in the field of civil aviation", also represented significant progress both for IFATCA, in bringing the profession of air traffic control to the attention of the labour arm of the United Nations, and for the profession itself.

The meeting was held in Geneva from the 3rd to 10th October, 1974 and saw the participation of government, employers' and workers' delegates from 17 countries. President Monin represented IFATCA and on the first day was able to distribute a special information paper which examined the working and employment conditions of the air traffic controller. Monin emphasised the importance of the human factor, which has to be relied upon even in the most heavily automated systems. Further stress was laid upon the need for a controller's physical and mental well being and the need for harmonious working conditions to optimise them. He concluded by frankly stating "It is high time ... to draw up a special status for this unique profession. Only a genuine recognition of the reality and rights of the profession will ensure that civil aviation will continue its development in complete security and retain the confidence of air transport users."

Of significance to IFATCA was Conclusion 3 from the meeting:

The Preparatory Meeting recommends the Governing Body to decide that the urgent problems concerning air traffic controllers should be the subject of a specialised meeting of the same type as a meeting of experts as soon as possible.

Whilst IFATCA had been leaning a little more to the left, closely involving itself with the world's peak labour body and becoming more and more involved with MA's industrial disputes, there was, of course, an element of the membership that was not happy with this. This new orientation and the close alignment with the world's workers' organisation did not sit well with everybody and The Controller's Ge de Boer was moved to note in his November, 1976 editorial:

"During the past four years, under the leadership of Daniel Monin, we have been making real progress towards a more effective approach in respect of controllers' problems, and this more radical stance in supporting Member Associations in their actions has been welcomed by our membership. This type of progressive attitude was unheard of back in IFATCA's early days in the sixties. And it is increasing. It can be said that IFATCA's SC4 and Committee C at annual conference have virtually been the industrial branch of IFATCA for years. The International Labour Organisation (sic) has acknowledged IFATCA and is embracing us (that is, controllers) in their considerations."

Whilst de Boer's description of these domestic bodies as IFATCA's 'industrial arm' may have been stretching the point, they nevertheless had become, at the very least, the Federations watchdog on matters pertaining to MAs' industrial activities and how they impacted upon their conditions of service. The real point here is that IFATCA was now confident enough in its dealings with the ILO and in its own beliefs to mention them in the same breath as its 'industrial' activities.

Whilst the so called 'Experts Meeting' was awaited, another gathering involving the ILO was in the offing. The ILO was to convene a tripartite technical meeting on behalf of the ICAO in December, 1977 to which IFATCA sought an invitation. (The invitation was necessary since it was an ICAO meeting rather than an ILO meeting.) Although the ILO's rules stated that at such tripartite meetings (involving governments, employers and employees), the employees (that is controllers, in this instance) had to be represented, there was some opposition by the participating governments to IFATCA's presence. The President was moved to call upon MAs to make every effort to ensure at your Association secures its participation within your national delegation". He further implored MAs to "endeavour to become members of their respective national delegations, when any further preparatory meetings regarding the intended International Civil Aviation Conference are convened by the ILO." Obviously, with some organisations, the fight for recognition still had some way to go.

Jean-Daniel Monin addresses the ILO, Geneva December 1977

In the end, IFATCA received their invitation and was represented by Daniel Monin, Hans Wenger, IFATCA's Treasurer and Egbert Just, Chairman of SC4. Other senior and respected IFATCA members - W. Kassebohm, J. Kalvik and B. Karlsson - made it on to the national delegations of Germany, Norway and Sweden respectively. Considerable support was also rendered by the Civil Aviation Workers Union of the USSR, particularly Mr. Zuev, the President.

President Monin was afforded the opportunity to address the gathering and he took the opportunity to again draw the attention of the governing body of the ILO to the specific problems of air traffic controllers. He highlighted the point that the current rampant industrial actions by ATCOs all over the world were more in the nature of distress calls than claims for higher pay or better conditions. As often as not, the controllers were seeking better airspace management procedures or better equipment. Without identifying countries for fear of further retribution, Monin instanced controllers who had been downgraded (in status and salary) to the equivalent of train controllers and telecommunications workers, 13 hour work days, controllers who had been militarised because they refused clearances to a runway out of sight of the tower and which had a constant stream of agricultural and military vehicles crossing it and controllers who were forced to hold down two extra jobs because their pay was so low they could not feed their families. On the weight of the evidence, the delegates had to agree that the situation in ATC had further deteriorated since the Preparatory Meeting in 1974 and Monin concluded with an impassioned plea for the genuine recognition of the ATC profession.

The meeting obviously accepted IFATCA's point of view and identified some problems for its Resolution 5 read:

The Tripartite Technical Meeting for Civil Aviation conveys to the Governing Body of the International Labour Office its earnest hope that, in spite of the present financial difficulties of the ILO, the ... Meeting of Experts will take place as planned during the 1978-79 biennium.

and eventually the ILO acceded to this request and scheduled the Meeting of Experts for May, 1979.

To maintain that this 'Meeting of Experts' has been the single most important event in the history of the air traffic control profession would not be too far off the mark. Many have been the advances to ease the controllers' burden and frequently have there been instances of major improvements to facilities and conditions but these were always on an individual national basis or relatively narrow in application. For the first time the problems facing the controllers, and the profession in general, were collectively being placed under the microscope by an international body and, as a result, foundations for future careers and conditions were established through the conclusions reached by the experts.

The IFATCA delegation to the ILO Meeting of Experts on ATC, May 1979

L to R: Andreas Avgoustis (EVPP), J-D Monin (Immediate Past President), Egbert Just (Chairman SC4).

The meeting took place in the Geneva headquarters of the ILO from 8th - 18th May, 1979. It was attended by fifteen experts appointed by governments and fifteen experts appointed after consultation with the Workers' Group of the Governing Body. Each expert was also accompanied by technical assistants. Also present were several observers from organisations such as the International Transport Workers Federation, Public Services International, Trade Unions International of Transport Workers, the International Federation of Air Traffic Safety Electronic Associations, IFALPA and, of course, IFATCA. The agenda consisted of a single item: Problems Concerning Air Traffic Controllers - Identification and Possible Solutions. Representing the Director-General of the ILO was Mr. Jean Reynaud, chief of the Industrial Sectors Branch and the Executive Secretary was Mr. Avi Gil of the same branch. Mr. Peter Dawson, from Transport Canada, chaired the meeting. IFATCA was officially represented by Immediate Past President Daniel Monin, Vice-President Professional Andreas Avgoustis and Chairman SC4, Egbert Just. However, amongst the workers representatives were numbered many individual IFATCA members as well, including President Henschler and future President Charles Stuart from Australia.

Harri Henschler (facing, centre) at the 1979 ILO Meeting.

It was thirsty work too for Charles Stuart (L).

From the outset Mr. Reynaud emphasised that future ILO activities in ATC matters would be orientated by people who knew and experienced the problems and who would be directly concerned with their solutions. The ILO was looking to the experts for authoritative opinions, ideas and concrete proposals on what the ILO should do. He wanted the meeting to identify the problems and propose possible solutions.

IFATCA's Avgoustis expressed the gratitude of the world's controllers to the ILO for convening the meeting. He pointed out that air navigation safety could not be ensured without taking into account the important human and social factors relating to the status, working environment and conditions of work of the controller. He went on to state that present international regulations for ATC procedures took no account of human factors essential to safety such as workload, hours of work, rest periods, retirement age, remuneration and training. He concluded by expressing the wish that the meeting would take the first steps towards international standardisation of the human and social conditions in ATC.

The observer from the International Transport Workers Federation said that the frequent industrial disputes in this field were indicative of far from satisfactory labour -management relations and that controllers' conditions were deteriorating both professionally and socially. He highlighted the fact that a controller's responsibilities were comparable to other professions in civil aviation but no international guidelines existed to regulate the ATCO's hours of work and that his remuneration was totally unrelated to his responsibilities. He finished with "Safety should not be compromised for financial reasons and budgetary restraints which were the root of world-wide staff shortages, the use of out of date equipment and low remuneration."

The ILO office had prepared a working document listing various points for discussion to assist the delegates and to give some direction to exchange views and information. It was from these discussion points that the meeting settled upon fifty two 'Conclusions' and it is these conclusions that have formed the basis or provided background for almost every ATC claim anywhere in the world since.

Under 'Industrial Relations' the meeting conferred the right for ATCOs to establish and join organisations and to be consulted in the conception, planning and implementation of ATC systems. In many parts of the world, these were radical concepts. The meeting found a correlation between industrial disputes and inadequate professional recognition, quality of ATC equipment and lack of ATC system capacity as well as concerns over wages and working conditions thus giving credence to claims that many disputes were professionally motivated rather than driven by selfish personal demands. In all, some nine conclusions were formulated under this heading.

'Social & Labour Aspects of the ATC System' settled upon eight conclusions which included the need for research to define system capacity and ATC workload, international standards for design and maintenance of premises and equipment, a preference for civilian rather than military ATC and non-recourse to unqualified replacement ATCOs.

The nine conclusions under 'Hours of Work' addressed hours of work, shift lengths, duration of uninterrupted work and other parameters of work schedules having a direct impact on safety and saw the necessity to establish guidelines to minimise fatigue. Overtime was seen as undesirable. It was noted that extra leave because of the special demands upon ATCOs had been established in some countries.

Under 'Remuneration' it was noted that one of the professions in which the responsibilities assumed closely resemble that of the ATCO is that of the professional pilot. Two conclusions under ‘Age of Retirement and Pensions' found the need for retirement earlier than other occupations and with a pension commensurate with normal age retirement.

'Occupational Safety, Health & Welfare' saw six conclusions requiring studies and research into all aspects of the titled elements, identified the existence of stress and called for its prevention. They noted that a system of initial and follow-up medical examinations should exist everywhere and called for adequate recreation, rest, welfare and sanitary facilities at all ATC units. Legal aspects weren't overlooked and the six conclusions of'Legal Liabilities' saw the need for adequate representation during accident/incident investigations, incident reporting systems, harmonised procedures and regulations and employing authorities' vicarious responsibility for their ATCOs.

'Manpower & Career Planning' examined the need for adequate manpower planning and staffing formulas. Under 'Training & Retraining' a conclusion noted that "In the interests of safety, the existing guidelines for the training of ATCOs should be revised" and the ILO undertook to bring this to ICAO's attention. Further conclusions mentioned basic training programmes and the need for regular refresher courses and familiarisation flights. Finally, with the two conclusions of'Employment Security' the need for loss of licence insurance protection was recommended.

In all, the fifty two Conclusions covered every professional aspect of the ATCO's employment. Of course, there was nothing definitive included as, with an international occupation such as ATC, there are so many variables from country to country and even from city to city on occasions. What the Conclusions did provide, however, was a broad definition of the needs of the controller and conferred upon their employers the onus to provide and allow same.

There has been a little criticism of these Conclusions stemming from the fact that they are just that: conclusions and therefore lack teeth. ILO Conclusions do not have the force of law and are of a lesser power than 'Recommendations' which tend to define factors. The fifty two ATC Conclusions are, as mentioned, an attempt to identify and cover a wide range of infinitely variable aspects and were only ever intended to provide a basis with which controllers and their employers could work. To this extent, they are valuable for they have provided many an association with strong supporting argument. If the employer chooses to wilfully and deliberately ignore these Conclusions, it is up to the association, to the extent possible, to publicise this to force some degree of compliance.

The Conclusions are essentially a wish list but, to any thinking and caring employer, they indicate exactly what is required for a happy, efficient and safe ATC workforce and logically, by extension, an efficient and safe ATC system and, surely, that is what every ATC provider should want. It is axiomatic that a happy controller will minimally engage in industrial disputation and that an efficient and safe controller will provide an efficient and safe service. The fifty two ILO Conclusions show us how these twin aims can be achieved.

In November, 1979 IFATCA was advised by the Industrial Sectors Branch that the ILO's Governing Body had taken note of the Report and "authorised the Director-General to communicate it: i) to the governments of member States ... requesting them to transmit it to the employers' and workers' organisations concerned, and ii) to the international government organisations concerned, in particular the World Health Organisation and the International Civil Aviation Organisation and the non-governmental international organisations with consultative status. Twelve months after the Meeting, during IFATCA '80 in Toronto, the Experts' Meeting's Executive Secretary, Mr. Avishai Gil, said that the Conclusions "represent the first attempt of drawing up international recommendations for the working conditions of air traffic controllers. It is therefore important that they should not remain mere ink on paper".

IFATCA disseminated the ILO Conclusions worldwide, including to many ATC associations who were not members. This step served to introduce many ATC organisations to ATC conditions in the wider world and several requested the ILO to undertake on-site investigations with a view to giving effect to those Conclusions. Such an investigation was conducted in Peru in September, 1981 just twelve months after the Peruvian association joined IFATCA and less than two years after the Experts' Meeting. In a first, Gil represented the ILO at an IFATCA Regional Meeting (the fourth North, South and Central American Joint Regional Meeting) and whilst in Lima, he conducted a study into the conditions of employment and service with a view to applying the 1979 Conclusions in the Peruvian ATC system. Other similar studies were conducted by Gil during the '80s in Costa Rica, Panama, Guatemala and the Philippines, further demonstrating his considerable commitment to ATC. The ensuing reports were widely utilised by the local associations in their dealings with their administrations and tangibly contributed to improvements in their technical and social working environments. In Costa Rica's case, 40% of the recommendations emanating from the survey were almost immediately implemented.

In an in-house survey in 1989, IFATCA, in following up on the application of the agreed principles, found that the Conclusions had been used by over twenty associations to successfully negotiate better working conditions. These improvements covered the areas of early retirement, manpower planning and staffing, remuneration, loss of licence insurance and professional recognition.

There were further instances of cooperation between the two organisations. Back in 1981, again for the first time, the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association also considered two complaints concerning ATC disputes, one in the United States and the other in Greece. In 1991, as with other instances, the ILO joined IFATCA in writing to the President of Tunisia seeking the repeal of the gaol sentences for the thirteen Tunisian controllers. (See Chapter 9)

Seldom, if at all, has IFATCA seen the personal professional commitment to the field by an 'outsider', much less an officer of a major international organisation, as we saw with Gil. From his first dealings until the time he left, Gil laid an inordinate emphasis on ATC matters, far more than one would have expected given that air traffic controllers are but a tiny minority of the world's labour force for which the ILO has oversight. When Avi Gil left the ILO in 1991 to work for Airports Council International, air traffic control lost a valuable friend.

On another continent, further tangible evidence of the ILO/IFATCA rapport and cooperation came to be known as the Tanzania Project.

In the mid-'80s the Dutch Guild were responsible for SC4's sub-committee on recruitment and training. Looking for sponsors to match needy prospective trainees to available training courses, they discovered that the ILO had a programme for multi-lateral funding for projects in developing countries. In 1984, the then EVPP Eric Sermijn and two Dutch representatives Rinus Schutten and Bert Ruitenberg visited the ILO to learn more. After consultation with the Tanzania ATC Association (TATCA), that country was selected for the project and was matched with an offer from the Danish CAA. In 1987 a proposal was put to the ILO. As the concept developed (albeit rather slowly), it became evident that a field study was required. With more prompting from Eric Sermijn (by then President of IFATCA), the ILO approached the ICAO (thus initiating the first joint ILO/ICAO mission) and eventually in 1989, ICAO dispatched one of their officers (Mr. Tage Jensen, an ex-controller from Denmark) to Dar es Salaam. Jensen's report confirmed that serious improvements in ATS training in Tanzania were both needed and possible. The report was published and submitted to the Tanzanian authorities and ICAO in 1990 but, sadly, the project then lost its momentum and it wasn't until 1994 that it was regained.

The new impetus was brought about by one of the originals in the project, Bert Ruitenberg (by now the EVP Professional), reopening communications with the TATCA and suggesting a meeting of all parties. In September, 1994 IFATCA, ILO, ICAO and TATCA met in Dar-es-Salaam with the Tanzanian Department of Civil Aviation. The validity and currency of the 1989 Jensen report was confirmed and ICAO agreed to start such a project and to seek the necessary sponsorship. To this end the Tanzania DCA made an official request for support to ICAO. Finally, 10 years after the idea was born, it seemed as though the Tanzania Project was actually happening but another twist was around the corner!

ICAO then re-directed the funding request to the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) which replied that it had no funds available for such an undertaking. (They had recently funded the establishment of the Tanzanian Civil Aviation Training Centre in Dar es Salaam.) After this rebuff, the Tanzania DCA made no further attempt to find another sponsor. On the surface this attitude seems inexplicable but at the time the Tanzanian government had embarked upon a trade liberalisation policy and transformation of its public service institutions along business sector lines. One result of this was the creation of the semi-autonomous Tanzania Civil Aviation Authority (TCAA). This re-structuring substantially altered the scenario for the relevance, priority and direction of the project.

One of the more important recommendations from Jensen's 1989 report had been creation of a more efficient and autonomous civil aviation body. The government's 'corporatisation' of the TCAA substantially realised this and, in so doing, effectively laid the groundwork for other improvements. Whilst there was a reduction in the number of controllers, those remaining received substantial salary increases (300% - 400%), 10% of the budget now is earmarked for training purposes, training is geared to needs, revenue collection from navigation charges has significantly improved and the Tanzania CAA is fiscally independent and reinvests in air navigation services and facilities. Had the project materialised along the initial time frame, many of these gains may well have been realised earlier but, although the delay and events appear to render the initial project inconclusive, the venture was certainly not in vain. Jensen's fact finding mission and his report and the cooperative venture with the ILO and ICAO alerted the Tanzanian government to a serious situation and they acted. The TCAA greatly improved ATC services, facilities and working conditions and its independence provides the environment for further improvements. The Tanzania ATC Association is eternally grateful to IFATCA for its initiative and to the ILO and ICAO for their contribution.

Contact with the ILO has always been on a steady level marked by occasional high points. Occasionally initiatives have featured but essentially it has been a relationship that has relied upon an 'as needed' basis. At IFATCA invitation, the nineties saw the ILO represented at a few Regional Meetings but the nature and scope of the Labour Office is such that these types of contact vary in value. The 1993 AMA Regional Meeting in Aruba, for instance, featured a presentation from an ILO officer but he admitted little knowledge of aviation matters and spoke in Spanish and, whilst the Spanish speaking delegates present appreciated the information and contact, it was largely generic in its application. However, Mr. Egerov's presentation to the 1994 EUR Regional Meeting had considerable applicability as he spoke on privatisation of ATC and its possible impact and consequences. His address was widely appreciated.

The two groups spontaneously share information particularly as it refers to working conditions of ATCOs. Frequently one party of the other has difficulty obtaining accurate information and the respective contacts are beneficial to each side. On nearly every occasion that the ILO intercedes, either on behalf of, or in conjunction with, the Federation to raise the issue of conditions during a dispute, the 1979 Experts Meeting's Conclusions are quoted.

The fifty two Conclusions remain as valid today as they were in 1979. During IFATCA '93, a critical review was undertaken to consider their relevance to the changing ATC environment. Applicability to both the emerging technologies and changing management style was examined and confirmed. Consequently, associations are able to continue to effectively apply the principles of those Conclusions in negotiations with employers and IFATCA representatives are still able to authoritatively quote them in a changing world. In 1993, IFATCA's then EVPP Bert Ruitenberg addressed the ILO's 80th International Labour Conference in Geneva. In a presentation examining safety implications in the newly emerging environment of ATC privatisation/ commercialisation, Ruitenberg was able to confidently state "The contents of the 52 Conclusions ... were agreed upon with air safety in mind and are therefore as applicable to ATC in the civil service as they are to ATC if privatised".

It is true, however, that developing countries still find it difficult to implement the Conclusions. To alleviate such problems, the ILO will, when requested, assist those countries to adapt and apply the general principles of the Conclusions to their specific circumstances and conditions. Such assistance usually takes two forms.

Firstly, advisory services, consisting of detailed surveys of the terms of employment, the technical and organisational aspects of the national ATC system and their implications for working conditions, are conducted. The objective here is to provide an impartial analysis of the problems observed and to propose specific solutions both to the government and the controllers' association for their consideration. Hopefully, bi-lateral negotiations then ensue. The second form of ILO assistance is in the arena of technical cooperation. In this context, both IFATCA and the ILO jointly explore ways of improving the training opportunities for controllers. The Tanzania project was a case in point.

The collaboration between the ILO and IFATCA has been, from the start, a true partnership. The relationship has, for many years now, featured regular consultations on all the social and labour aspects of the working conditions of controllers which may be developed by technical and legislative developments. For its part, the ILO has regularly participated in IFATCA conference debates and IFATCA's input has helped the ILO to direct the focus of its activities in air traffic control to the major social and labour problems affecting controllers. Even more importantly, the ILO provides the only international forum where ATCOs, through their representative organisation, may discuss relevant problems with their employers on an equal footing.

Without question, the contacts and the excellent working relationship with the ILO is one of the real success stories of lFATCA. With the benefit today of hindsight over 40 years of history, one can speculate just how much this very close cooperation between the ILO and IFATCA is based upon, and grew from, Jean-Daniel Monin's commitment, input and dedication back in 1969-72 with that original questionnaire and subsequent considerable personal and professional involvement.

International Air Transport Association
... and the Resolution 200 Debate

In the late sixties and seventies, probably no single subject stirred the collective air traffic controller breast more than the debate surrounding IATA's Resolution 200. To a large extent, IFATCA's subsequent relationship with the International Air Transport Association has been coloured by that dispute.

The International Air Transport Association is the representative body for the world's airlines. Today, representing more than 230 airlines, it has a permanent observer seat at ICAO and attends virtually every meeting in the world where civil aviation (and air traffic control) matters, and their possible impact on the airlines, are discussed. IATA has its head office in London with offices in Montreal, Geneva, Brussels and Singapore. It is an extremely effective lobby group and spares no expense to fully represent its constituents.

When the new Hong Kong airport at Chek Lap Kok was to open in 1998, proposing a substantial increase in landing charges over the old Kai Tak airport, IATA successfully took on the powerful Airports Authority and achieved a 40% reduction in those charges. Later, in 1999 during the Asian economic crisis, they were instrumental in achieving a further reduction of 15%. When the new technologies of Automatic Dependent Surveillance became available, IATA was in the vanguard of argument to lower separation standards to enable significant fuel savings on long distance flights. IATA was also heavily involved in overcoming the politics of closed airspace in the nineties when they lobbied effectively for the more direct trans-Siberian routes and the opening up of Chinese and North Korean airspace.

With this kind of later track record and a long history of similarly effectively representing its member airlines, IATA was a formidable opponent for a young IFATCA and its individual Member Associations to take on. Because it became such an emotive issue, heart was to rule and, in hindsight, it is no surprise that the controllers lost. Facing such an obdurate opposition that clearly was not prepared to recognise the controllers' contribution, without similar resources and lacking the possibility of cohesive action on the members' part, no other outcome was possible.

IATA Resolution 200 granted free and reduced rate transportation only to employees and their families of air carriers or specified organisations owned by IATA members and to a closely defined list of other persons, essentially retained professionals. It was the key phrase, "a closely defined list of other persons" that interested air traffic controllers. Whilst IATA claimed that several governments were strongly opposed to tariff discrimination against the general public by the introduction of special concessions for certain categories of individuals, IFATCA still saw no reason why its membership could not be included in that closely defined list.

With a perennial lack of finances, IFATCA and its Member Associations were always on the look out to save money. It was recognised from the outset that transportation would be just about the most expensive item for IFATCA's representatives in their stated aim of representing the world's controllers at as many meetings as possible. Likewise, in considering their affiliation to the Federation, associations had to factor in not only the affiliation costs but also the costs of travelling to the annual conference, their regional meeting and other forums such as Standing Committee meetings. So, if there was an opportunity to reduce that considerable expenditure item, the onus was there to explore it.

At the prompting of several Member Associations, the Executive Board decided to embark upon a campaign which, to IFATCA, came to be not just a quest for concessionary air travel on business but one which sought basic recognition by IATA of the role air traffic control played in their business.

This quest is, in fact, nearly as old as IFATCA itself for it was as early as the 1964 conference that the subject was mentioned. In Brussels that year, the U.K. Guild proposed a resolution which requested MAs to acquaint their national carriers with their transport problems and to seek their support by having them file with IATA an official proposal to facilitate the travel of IFATCA delegates to conferences.

At the 1966 conference in Rome, the subject again was brought into the open and this time controllers apparently took to the cause with a little more enthusiasm. In his report to the Rome conference, the Executive Secretary, Geoffrey Monk said: "Just before the annual meeting of IATA in Vienna, I asked Associations if they would contact their national airlines to ensure that they were aware of our transport problems. It seems that although there is a certain amount of sympathy, there is also considerable opposition from one or two countries (administrations). There appears to be considerable reluctance to re-open the subject, which is covered by IATA Resolution 200, partly because it is thought that any relaxing in favour of IFATCA would open the floodgates for similar requests from other organisations. The plea that IFATCA is in a rather special category in that its aims are directed to improving the expedition of air traffic and the safety of aircraft seems to make very little impression, even though these are of the greatest importance to the airlines." This reluctance on the part of IATA to possibly letting in other organisations through IFATCA's precedence was to become a familiar response.

One of the resolutions from Rome directed the elected officers to intensify their efforts on the subject of transportation by air on IFATCA business. Following this direction, the President wrote to the national administrations of seven Member Associations. Universally, the administrations regretted that it was not possible to sponsor such flights as "it was feared that sponsoring of controllers would lead to a flood of similar requests." A draft letter was also sent from the Secretariat to several associations to form the basis of a direct approach from them to their national carriers seeking support for an amendment to Resolution 200 favourable to controllers. As a result of action by the Italian and Austrian associations, the Italian airline Alitalia sponsored a consideration of an extension to the resolution at the IATA Traffic Conference in Honolulu in 1966. However, "After examination, the conference decided it could not justify special exceptions." It was also indicated that any further review would not occur until March, 1969. Whilst overall this initial campaign had yielded disappointing results, several associations had some success with their national airlines (and administrations) and some facilitated passages were now forthcoming, albeit on local and somewhat confidential bases.

Despite continued entreaties and some indications of progress (by late 1971 some 40 airlines indicated their preparedness to support a change to the resolution), the matter continued unresolved through IATA’s 1969 and 1971 'reviews' of the resolution. The matter had de facto settled down to a war of attrition with the controllers very much on the losing side. Despite this, the Executive Board were determined to maintain otherwise normal relations with IATA. By 1973, IFATCA’s conference reports were noting "good contacts has (sic) been maintained (and) as in past years invitations to annual conference have been sent to the (IATA) Director General, the Technical Director and the European Regional Technical Representative and it is hoped that at least one of them will attend."

IFATCA wasn't the only major organisation pursuing discounted fares for controllers. PATCO had also taken up the cudgels on behalf of their membership and, in early 1974, included a request for discount fares in their claim with the FAA. In support of this claim, PATCO's President John Leydon wrote to the President of the Air Transport Association, the American domestic equivalent of IATA. However, ATA'S response echoed those of IATA. They replied that there was no "official policy" but the airlines were unable to accede to a request for discounted fares for controllers. ATA also opined that reduced rate airline fares had no rightful place in negotiations with the FAA. The ATA further advised PATCO that the airlines indicated a strong adverse reaction when they learnt that this subject was part of their claim with the FAA.

Leydon's response was to write a tongue in cheek letter to his membership. He said "It may at first appear incomprehensible as to why the spokesmen for the airline industry are reluctant to make available 'empty seats' on a reduced or free fare basis for controllers and their families. Then again, a complete review of ATA and major airline management practises these past few years would indicate such a response is consistent with their previous errors of judgement. I think it certainly worthwhile to read very closely the concern ATA has displayed toward improving the morale of the controller workforce by providing us with additional incentives to help the industry out of their present financial crisis. I have great faith in the intelligence and foresight of the controller workforce and I am firmly convinced that the PATCO National Office need make no further overtures to ATA on this matter. I think the case for reduced fares is still wide open but it will require a radical departure from the present thinking which prevails in the minds of the leaders of the air transport industry."

Whether or not Leydon actually thought his members would undertake individual or collective action against the airlines is not known but, as with IFATCA’s similar veiled threat in January, 1976, nothing came of the issue as the American controllers concentrated on other more important aspects of their claim.

As IFATCA's 13th conference neared, Ge de Boer again decided to bring the vexed issue to the fore. In his editorial in May, 1974 he expressed the Board's official feeling. “All is not well in our relations with the airline world and here we mean that controllers believe the will to help and understand each other meaningfully comes mainly from one side, namely the controllers' side. The average controller leans over backwards, so to speak, trying to accommodate, to fit into complicated traffic patterns, to expedite and safeguard airline and other traffic. And he asks: are the airlines ever doing anything for me? Do they understand what we are doing for them?

"When it comes to dealing with the airline world as it is organised nationally and internationally, for example within ATA and IATA, we come up against the proverbial brick wall. From IATA's (recent) reply it is obvious to us that this organisation does not fully understand the vital role which our Federation plays in the airline industry of today.

“As long as a typist in an airline office receives preferential treatment over a controller who is selected by his Federation to attend an international safety meeting, which quite often means that he cannot go because of the costs involved while the typist will end up on that sunny beach, we find it most difficult to accept that the airline industry really understands the value of our input."

The ill feeling engendered by IATA's replies and intransigence was then exacerbated in Tel Aviv by comments made by an IATA representative speaking in Committee B. Effectively, the observer promised IATA would look at Resolution 200 for controllers if they tried harder to reduce delays. This implied criticism that controllers were not already trying their hardest incensed many delegates and the Canadian and Australian delegates jointly issued a strongly worded statement rebutting the IATA assertions. Even though the statement was strongly supported, although not unanimously, there were some attempts made to have the Canadians and Australians withdraw. They refused and the statement stood as a matter of record. The IATA representative was later dismissed, possibly over his crude attempt at bribery.

Earlier in 1974 a New Zealander, Sir Geoffrey Roberts, became President of IATA. The New Zealand association took this opportunity to write to Sir Geoffrey and re-opened the question of rebated travel for controllers to industry meetings. Now that the matter was again to the fore and because of the frustrations of the earlier negative responses, IFATCA followed up this New Zealand opening and wrote similarly to IATA's Director General, Mr. Hammarskjold, and it was his reply that precipitated de Boer's editorial.

In his response Mr. Hammarskjold emphasised the fact that "IATA and its member airlines were keenly aware of the contributions to air transport made (by IFATCA). However, you will no doubt recognise that there are many organisations with whom we have contact who have equally valid claims to the granting of rebate travel." So the old excuse of precedence was trotted out again. As well, several associations had approached their governments only to be told that it was an airline matter. When those associations then approached their national carriers, they were told the government would not allow them to change their rules. This revolving door form of obfuscation only served to further emotionalise the issue for those who had no access at all to some form of concessionary travel.

Then, coincidentally, IFATCA's 1975 conference was held in the country of the greatest proponent for change on the issue, Australia. Having now experienced first hand the distances (and costs) involved and the difficulties the Australians and New Zealanders faced in getting to relevant meetings, the Directors gave strong support to renewed moves to alter IATA's stance. Resolution 75.A.55 represented the strongest move yet to change that position.

75.A.55

Whereas for over 6 years IFATCA has attempted to gain complete recognition and limited assistance from IATA, these efforts have not been fruitful to the extent that we feel they should have been, and
Whereas this has led to a definite feeling (in some cases adverse attitude) of dissatisfaction amongst the controllers concerning the esteem which IATA has for air traffic control and
Whereas the recognition of the magnitude of the controllers" responsibility can be shown more positively by IATA, and
Whereas if IATA would, as it can, move to assist the controller in all endeavours, there would be a reversal of the present unacceptable situation. This can be done by changing one rule of IATA, at no monetary loss to IATA, and would demonstrate that IATA truly supports the efforts of controllers, and
Whereas IATA seems to have the inflexible position that they will not change existing policy on this matter,
Therefore be it resolved that all controllers maintain the same position in their operational circumstances throughout the world until IATA change is forthcoming, and be it also resolved that IFATCA does again request that IATA demonstrate its true support for the responsibility and integral part of the aviation community which a controller holds in the ATC system. This support would be shown by changing resolution 200 to include all air traffic controllers in all respects.

Not being an industrial organisation, IFATCA was unable to initiate some form of direct action over this matter, as several Member Associations wanted. Resolution 75.A.55, and in particular the final clause, came as close as IFATCA could to actually calling for concerted activity to gain what they saw as being deserved. To support this resolution, all MAs were to send a copy of the resolution to their national carriers and their governments. Again though, despite the veiled threats and calls for action, nothing tangible resulted. After all, as a controller, it would be extraordinarily difficult to take some form of action against all airlines and not make life impossible for yourself!

In conjunction with this direct 'attack' on IATA, individual controllers were urged to personally write directly to the International Air Transport Association and it was estimated at the time that some 10,000 letters were dispatched. The Member Association letters received some positive responses but overall the reaction was mixed and lukewarm. For example, Cyprus Airways were prepared to support the issue at the annual conference in September but advised that the matter was not raised. At the same time, replying to the Swiss ATCA approach, Swissair said "the moment is not favourable yet to obtain an agreement relating to tariff reductions in favour of air traffic controllers. Your members will nevertheless continue to benefit from all the special terms accorded by Swissair, so that the present development will not be prejudicial at all to them."

When he retired as Vice-President Administration in 1975, Horst Guddat touched upon the bitterness amongst controllers that the issue caused and summed up by saying: "In my view (IATA'S) incomprehensible attitude separates the pilot/controller team, a team that makes the system work". By 1976 frustration was beginning to show. The lack of progress, IATA's intransigence and outright obfuscation and the lack of recognition together conspired to push the members and the Executive Board into more action and the Board raised the stakes. In late 1975, the Board had written again to Mr. Hammarskjold and he replied in usual fashion. The Board's reply of 15th January, 1976 was the strongest worded communique thus far.

It said inter alia: "This misguided attitude is also due to confused thought we find in correspondence with governments, airlines and IATA." and "We disregard these matters which simply sidetrack our legitimate claim for inclusion of IFATCA Member Associations in IATA Resolution 200." "We must be insistent upon the acceptance of our clear logic on the prime function of controllers being an integral part of any airline function. We cannot accept your comparison with other 'similar bodies' as there is no one similar in this context. The logic which went into the acceptance of the bodies already named in your Resolution 200 should therefore apply to IFATCA members ....

"You will recall that your representative attended our 1974 conference in Tel Aviv and was given the rostrum to make the point regarding the saving of fuel and to achieve controllers support. This was unfortunate at the time and caused a great deal of anger among controllers, one of whose main aims is expedition of traffic at all times. We did not withhold the opportunity for unpalatable words to be said in our midst but it did highlight the lack of understanding of the controllers' function."

The Board's letter then turned to the growing crux of the matter: "Whilst we were able to anticipate your negative reply, it is equally easy for us to anticipate that our individual members will not accept the negative attitude of IATA airlines which will prevent them from attending our annual conferences, regional meetings or IFATCA representation at other important conferences. Your letter has now been forwarded to our individual member associations ..."

The Australian association, for one, had already indicated to the Board

“Association readiness to respond to any IFATCA call for action by affiliates to assist progress in negotiations with IATA over conditions of travel. "

and, whilst there was a growing body of opinion that some concrete action was needed, the apparent veiled threat in the 15th January letter was never going to amount to more than rhetoric as the disparate IFATCA membership was far from united on the need for, or the desirability of, action on the matter. And perhaps IATA knew this. Several European Member Associations had arrangements with their national carriers - some were even supported by their administrations - and the countries with real need, for example those geographically isolated such as Australia and New Zealand, were small in number and basically ineffectual.

This then was the situation pertaining as IFATCA approached its 15th conference in Lyon. The Australians certainly felt that the time had arrived for IFATCA to 'put up or shut up' on the IATA 200 issue and they came to conference with determination that something definite needed to be achieved this time. They were, of course, also reinforced by the 1975 A.55 resolution and the subsequent calls for united action.

The Australian association was somewhat heartened by proceedings and conference decided that efforts aimed at altering IATA Res. 200 should be continued within the terms of the 1975 resolution and pledged Federation support for members' attempts to sway LATA.

This was embodied in the Lyon resolution 76.A.51 which said, inter alia:

Whereas the very future of the Federation is in doubt because of lack of facilities for transportation, continued effort should be made by the Executive Board to maintain contact with IATA Headquarters and to ensure that our request for the necessary change in IATA Resolution 200 is kept on the IATA agenda for any appropriate meeting which we may learn about.

In the event that IATA at its 1976 Traffic Conference fails to agree to the request of IFATCA, the Federation will support any Member Association in its endeavours to implement those recommendations with their IATA carriers.

Despite this, within the Australian association, which had assumed the mantle of chief proponent of the cause, dissatisfaction increased. This widespread individual member dissatisfaction was not only with the lack of progress on Resolution 200 but with IFATCA's position overall. On 15th July they were moved to write expressing concern "at the lack of guts shown by IFATCA ... over the question of IATA 200". They went on to say that "IFATCA has proved a great disappointment to many of our members and there are strong pressures for us to disaffiliate. There is a quite evident need for a determined organisation to represent air traffic controllers internationally ...'.

These words were contained in a letter sent to the ATC associations of the U.S.A., Japan, Germany, Canada and New Zealand, identified by Australia as associations willing "to get up and fight and be more amenable than most to the idea of a strong international union organisation", (a copy was sent to IFATCA). They represented a first move to either unionise/industrialise IFATCA or start another international body with a more militant approach.

The debate over Resolution 200 thus served to crystallise other feelings of dissatisfaction with the general IFATCA approach and these were brought into the open by Australia. The letter to the U.S.A., Japan, Germany, Canada and New Zealand was given wide distribution by IFATCA and Daniel Monin, in particular, was concerned enough to seek opinions on the Australian stance. He was prepared to consider any and all arguments to ensure that the Federation remained a viable and dynamic organisation.

The Civil Air Operations Officers' Association of Australia is also the controllers' union, which most associations in IFATCA are not. In a general sense, the CAOOAA failed to appreciate that a Federation of mostly non-union associations from widely varying backgrounds would not be able to participate in industrial type actions in the manner that Australia was used to. The Australians had been successful with industrial disputation in the past (and would be even more so again in 1977) and saw firm and concerted action as the answer to the Federations disputes. Monin did not disagree with this and was himself of the opinion that a world-wide go slow would achieve a change to Resolution 200 within a matter of days. His problem as President was that if a world-wide action was called and 70% or 80% of MAs did not join in (either because they were not in agreement or were unable), IFATCA would be made to look foolish. Monin had stewardship over a Federation adopting a much less conservative approach than previously and he stated that if an association (or several in concert) took some form of action, then IFATCA would back them. But he was concerned also about government reactions in countries not directly affected by the dispute. The Federation had recently witnessed the killing by President Idi Amin of the four tower controllers in Uganda following the Israeli rescue raid at Entebbe and, this weighing heavily on their minds, had no wish to see such action repeated. Monin also did not want to see another international organisation representing controllers grow up as he was convinced that such a development would be counter productive.

The question of concerted industrial action and related issues were taken to the December, 1976 Western European regional meeting in London. An extensive questionnaire was distributed to gauge opinions on a more militant approach and the desirability of another international body (union). Five associations stated that they were prepared to take some industrial action over Resolution 200. With respect to supporting other MAs, whilst none were in favour of strike action, 100% were in favour of go slow action. Not one association thought that another organisation would be of benefit. The feelings of the European MAs were probably best summed up by the Irish association when they said they "... would like to see a more aggressive role played by IFATCA" and they were "... prepared to take industrial action (over) IATA Resolution 200". The Irish had "a lot of sympathy with the views expressed by the Australian association but (saw) the problem being solved not by... a breakaway organisation but by improving IFATCA from within".

This was the mood then throughout 1976 with communiqués, questionnaires, opinion polls and wide ranging discussions the order of the day. The issue must have placed an incredible strain upon the Federations already stretched resources and representatives. It is to IFATCA's credit that the points raised by the Australians were not summarily dismissed or given short shrift but were fully aired and opened to debate. It would have been easy to ignore the threatened withdrawal and dismiss the Australian demands as naive (which they were) and irrelevant but Monin ensured that the entire IFATCA membership was aware of the arguments and included them all in the debate.

Whilst all this internal discussion was taking place, the IFATCA Executive Board wasn't ignoring the central issue. In July, the Board twice wrote to the IATA secretariat (on 22nd and 28th) and then individually to all 90 IATA members on 20th August. This latter communication was designed to again bring the subject to the attention of the individual airlines prior to their Technical Committee meeting scheduled for 5th-7th October in Vancouver. Mr. Hammarskjold replied on 7th September and, in a three page response, himself started to show some frustration at IFATCA's insistence.

In pointing out that "the several points made in our previous exchanges have not yet received adequate consideration", Mr. Hammarskjold was plainly showing his frustration at the Federations refusal to accept his negation of their arguments. He went on to clearly indicate that the IATA secretariat had no authority to initiate amendments to resolutions (although, no doubt, they would have had considerable influence) and that "in such matters, airlines themselves have sole responsibility and authority to take decisions by unanimous vote, which decisions are subject to government approval". The Director General then attempted to explain history: "Historically, surface transport operators have extended transportation concessions as a fringe benefit to their employees as part of their total salary/benefit package, and this feature was incorporated by air transport companies. Resolution 200 was simply a formalisation of the practise of airlines to grant this benefit to their own employees and the employees of other airlines on the basis of reciprocity. The inclusion of the words "control tower" dates back to the time when airlines owned, and their employees operated, control towers at places where such services were not available from governments. The resolution is therefore limited to what is basically an intra-airline applicability."

Such a statement, of course, completely ignored the fact that there were, and still are, several groupings from outside the actual airlines that do enjoy the concessions afforded by Resolution 200. These include travel agents and air freight handlers to name but two. This 'oversight' was perpetuated when Mr. Hammarskjold went on with what was by now an all too familiar argument. “An extension of the applicability of the Resolution beyond this to any particular category of individuals would make it impossible to avoid similar extensions to a very large number of equally deserving categories outside the airlines." IFATCA had always maintained that air traffic controllers were an unique group within the aviation world and therefore deserved unique recognition and treatment. The argument was basically that they should be recognised as an integral and invaluable group essential to an airline's viable operations and that ATCOs had proven their case for recognition. If there were other groupings with the potential for equal recognition, then it was up to them to equally prove their case and it was not for controllers to be disadvantaged through the lack of, or inferior, arguments of others.

While the Australian association was going through their internal process of withdrawing from IFATCA, their President actually took the step of, effectively, publicly counter arguing the proposal. In mid '76 in their association newsletter, Ray Alexander wrote: "I reaffirm our support of IFATCA's aims and objectives. Its technical contributions to air safety are, without doubt, becoming increasingly recognised. There are controllers in many parts of the world who are badly in need of assistance .... We, in Australia, who enjoy facilities and working conditions better than most, can help our less fortunate colleagues by strongly supporting the world organisation ...". Such a statement of support of IFATCA affiliation by the association's President at a time when the association was in the throes of resignation clearly indicated that there remained a substantial body in favour of retaining affiliation but even stronger voices, opinions and, perhaps, motives held sway.

Despite Alexander's call, and with all the correspondence and discussion throughout 1976 achieving nothing, frustration and resentment down under increased. Eventually, the Australians, having made their threat to withdraw from the Federation if nothing was achieved on the Resolution 200 issue, had little choice but to carry out that threat. Their Central Council finally decided at a regular meeting in October, 1976 on withdrawal. The Civil Air Operations Officers' Association thus resigned from the Federation as from midnight on 31st December, 1976. This was an organisation of some 1200 controllers (with 99% membership of their association) that was also responsible for IFATCA's Standing Committees 2 and 5, was a member on SC7, was providing the Regional Councillor for Australasia (effectively the Pacific region) and only the previous year had organised the biggest and, to many, the best annual conference so far. In only 6 years of membership, CAOOAA had become a major contributor to IFATCA financially, professionally and, with Australia as a major and technically advanced aviation country, in technical terms. The Federation took the loss heavily and to heart, even more so than the departure of PATCO, and many Member Associations wrote to Australia imploring them to reconsider. The die was cast, however, and despite the best efforts of some individuals and several internal moves to rejoin in the near term, it was to be more than 9 years before the Australian controllers rejoined the international ATC family.

IFATCA's great standard bearer in the South Pacific, the New Zealand association, had not been idle in this argument. Suffering from the same geographic isolation (and therefore attendant costs) as Australia, the Kiwis were equally keen to see a positive outcome and had lent strong support to Australia and long had vociferously argued the claim independently. Thus it was with considerable dismay that the New Zealanders learnt in September, 1977 that it was their national airline, and only their airline, which had voted down the latest discussion on including controllers in Resolution 200. According to information received by the British Guild, at a meeting in London, IATA appeared ready to include controllers but the decision, which required 100% concurrence, was defeated on Air New Zealand's single vote. Elements of the association called for Air New Zealand to be not given any priority and even to withdraw provision of ATC services to the airline. Calm minds prevailed, however, and no direct action was taken.

Dismay over the failure to sway IATA and the continued costs of membership with a perceived lack of return also gave rise in the New Zealand ranks to discontent similar to that which festered in Australia. Comment that much of the discussion at conference was of little more than academic interest to New Zealanders was rife and the membership debate was evenly matched with the anti-membership view gaining strength. It was only a fortuitous event which finally saw the pendulum swing IFATCA's way and ensured New Zealand's continued membership. This event was attendance by NZATCA at an ICAO RAC/COM meeting in Fiji at which the association represented IFATCA and was thus, for the first time, involved in international technical discussions that affected local controllers. At one stroke the case for IFATCA membership was proven.

It was during these years that air traffic control industrial activity reached its peak, particularly in Europe. Naturally, IATA was quick to seize upon this issue and link it with the Resolution 200 question and condemned the controllers for the numerous actions and Mr. Hammarskjold remarked that "the airlines and travelling public are innocent victims". In response, IFATCA cleverly turned IATAs argument around and Daniel Monin said "the airlines and IATA have a great role to play and rather than innocent victims (we) consider that they are bearing a great responsibility in the latent dissatisfaction among air traffic controllers. Shall I recall that IFATCA's efforts to obtain a change of IATA Res. 200 have failed (and) shall I remind you further that our more recent suggestion that IATA could join the IFATCA petition to President Tito on the findings of the Zagreb court was rejected, which I may assure you was strongly resented by our members." This 'attack' was followed up shortly afterwards by Vice-President Harri Henschler when he wrote in a similar vein. He said "It is IFATCA's contention that IATA and its members should use their good offices, in their own interest, to ensure that controllers' working conditions, equipment, remuneration and benefits, are brought to safe and equitable levels as would make industrial actions by air traffic controllers a rarity."

At the same time, the Executive Board had decided to change tack a little and they were now requesting IATA member airlines to provide free or reduced fare travel for Board members on Federation business. The generic answer remained the same although individual agreements between associations and airlines were improving and, especially in Europe, several associations now had arrangements for travel for their representatives to meetings.

The subject then declined into something of a hiatus. Perhaps it was because of the removal from the scene of the chief proponent or perhaps it was because other matters intruded on the international horizon but, for whatever reason, the question of IATA Resolution 200 found itself well and truly on the backburner. At the 1979 conference, President Henschler reported: "Although technical cooperation with IATA continues, the old problem of IATA 200 is still with us. We are disappointed that a majority of IATA's members at the IATA Traffic Conference of October, 1978, voted against inclusion of controllers in the Resolution. The Executive Board will ... outline possible avenues of action towards a renewed effort to achieve the Federations aims". In March, 1981 Henschler was again in print stating: "IATA members, while stating they are supportive of... our aims, have shown no tangible support to IFATCA. While our experts are welcomed, and even requested to participate, in technical study groups on ATC related matters, IATA has not seen fit to provide any transportation facilities to IFATCA officers when travelling on Federation business".

In 1981, the issue of inadequate - and in some cases, nonexistent- ATC facilities on the African continent surfaced. IATA, whose member airlines were the prime recipients of the inadequate services they were paying for, protested and raised the issue at two separate forums. Their working paper to the 7th Plenary Session of the African Civil Aviation Commission in Nairobi in late April painted a frightening picture of the existing conditions and appealed to the States concerned to adhere to their responsibilities under their ICAO membership. The paper admitted that "there are air traffic control centres which are unable to control air traffic and flight information centres which cannot give information". The same paper was also presented at the 20th IFATCA conference in Cairo in May and ironically represented the first occasion that IATA sought IFATCA assistance in resolving an issue. IATA was not, however, prepared to reciprocate with the assistance that IFATCA sought from them and in an editorial about that time Andreas Avgoustis pointed out "When air traffic controller status recognition is achieved internationally and nationally IATA will most certainly benefit most. IFATCA demands from the world and particularly from IATA active participation in its efforts to ensure a safer system of air transportation. Joint effort will produce better and quicker results." IATA, however, remained unmoved and it is a sad fact that even with the dawning of the new millennium the situation in many parts of Africa has not improved a great deal. Perhaps with a little more cooperation from IATA (and others) back in the seventies in assisting IFATCA representatives to attend meetings where matters such as inadequate facilities could have been raised, things today could have been a great deal different.

Today we can look back on the IATA Resolution 200 dispute with regret, and perhaps even sadness, in that ostensibly it cost the Federation membership of one of its biggest contributors for a significant interval. It also tied up scarce and valuable resources for long periods when the Federation could scarcely afford it. With the benefit of hindsight it is obvious that it was an argument that IFATCA was never going to win without using some stronger form of leverage than words. But who is to say what the cost to IFATCA may have been if some form of concerted action, as the Australians hoped for, had been taken. The time and human resources spent fighting the issue were perhaps wasted given that it was an issue that was not going to directly affect the actual working conditions of the world's controllers and which had a low priority with many. What IFATCA wanted (and needed at a time of severe financial constraint) was the ability to get to the important forums where there was potential to make a difference to those conditions. Nevertheless, underlying the central public dispute, a principle was involved and, to many, it was the important issue: the principle of recognition. To Australia, New Zealand and some others it was simply a matter of cost.

By the late 1970s, IFATCA was professionally well recognised and had gained the respect of other major international organisations such as ICAO, ILO and IFALPA, who frequently sought IFATCA's cooperation and input. IATA, in contrast, became annoyed, and possibly even more intransigent, at the Federations persistence and insistence on that recognition and seemed determined to exclude IFATCA from its considerations. This was clearly illustrated in 1987 when IATA called a technical conference on System Demand and Capacity. The Board was astonished when its request for attendance was rejected. Not only astonished, the Board was annoyed and asked the MAs to write to their national airlines pointing out that their peak body obviously considered that input from the very people who must implement and operate any system was not desired. This incredible position was repeated in 1989 when IATA formed a task force to examine urgent European traffic congestion problems. In bringing together airline, airport and government interests for discussions, IATA also sought the cooperation of ICAO and the Airport Association Coordinating Council. With a group examining air traffic congestion, there is obviously a glaring omission. When this topic was raised at the 1989 Executive Council meeting, the President was forced to admit "We have no real contact with IATA at this time" and, other than some informal contact between the EVP Technical and some IATA representatives in Montreal, this indeed was the sad situation as the eighties came to a close.

One must remember that IFATCA wasn't seeking concession airfares for all and sundry. Whereas Resolution 200 afforded discounts to airline employees (no matter how lowly), travel agents, et al and their relatives, IFATCA was merely seeking concessions for representatives to attend related industry meetings! It didn't seem too much to ask in return for the contribution to safety and economy that the IFATCA representatives were prepared to make.

Perhaps in the end, IFATCA should have approached the issue in the manner of the Californian student who placed an advertisement in the San Francisco Chronicle offering to pay any airline stewardess $1500 a year for her hand in marriage. He said that she would never need to live with him, or even see him, as his sole aim simply was to secure the special concessional rates enjoyed by the spouses of airline employees.

Despite this lengthy and unsatisfactory saga, IFATCA has maintained a collaboration with IATA. Unquestionably tinged with shades of suspicion and even outright hostility over the years, it has now developed into a somewhat more cooperative relationship and, even though this more recent association didn't feature an auspicious start either, it has improved somewhat through the nineties.

The new start to the relationship, including its inauspicious beginning, occurred in 1993, which year witnessed an initiative of IATA - the formation their Air Transport Action Group, ATAG - and they invited membership by IFATCA. As we shall see in Chapter 9, this Group aimed to improve aviation infrastructure and doubtless stemmed from IATA's constant criticism that air traffic control was not delivering the service its member airlines were paying for. Although wary, IFATCA did join ATAG but the relationship immediately was in trouble. EVP EUR Lauridsen expressed concern about the philosophy behind the ATAG booklet 'The Need for a Single ATM System in Europe'. Coincidentally, Lauridsen was, at the time gathering capacity figures to remonstrate with the Group over their assertion that there was over- provision of services in Europe. Shortly after this, IFATCA was asked to write an editorial for an ATAG publication. The Federation acceded to the request but the Group objected to IFATCA's comments and subsequent amendments, so Lauridsen, by then President, withdrew from the contribution. A little later, the Executive Director of ATAG made a presentation at the Fukuoka ATFM symposium. This presentation was not exactly sympathetic towards the need for traffic flow management and mostly adopted the approach that ATFM would be unnecessary if administrations, etc would get going building more and better airports, terminals and facilities. Such beliefs and policies further led to the Board expressing concerns and, since 1996, contacts with this Group have withered.

A better example of the modern IATA contact is instanced with the mutual involvement with ICAO's CNS/ATM project. This renewed association can be seen to be one of the positive aspects of the CNS/ATM implementation in that all stakeholders have to be closely involved. A more outward sign of the improving climate was IATA's invitation to IFATCA to be a founder supporter of Global Navcom which developed into an annual event dedicated to the implementation of the CNS/ATM concept. Since 1993 IFATCA has actively participated in this forum, presenting papers and moderating sessions.

The Global Navcom meetings were heavily industry oriented and IFATCA's representatives (mostly EVP Technical Chris Stock) frequently felt like Daniel in the lion's den. Nevertheless, they provided ideal platforms for exposure of the Federation and its thoughts and policies to a wider audience. Some of the philosophies expounded⁴ reflected a highly sceptical opinion of the more fanciful ideas that were being floated at the time. With the earlier Global Navcom meetings, the twin themes of CNS costs and technology dominated but gradually it became accepted that unless the problems of ATM are understood and resolved, progress to full CNS/ATM will be hindered.

Another key association with IATA in the nineties was via the Informal South Pacific ATS Coordinating Group, ISPACG. This highly dynamic grouping of ATS service providers and users (see also Chapter 9) met bi-annually throughout the nineties and became the driving force for global CNS/ATM development using the South Pacific as a proving ground. IFATCA participated in the deliberations from the outset. Whilst ISPACG was certainly dynamic and achieved much mainly early implementation of new technologies, both airborne and ground based - it became a victim of its own overly ambitious target setting. In racing ahead with its agenda, it placed emphasis on early cost benefits which encouraged the setting of unrealistic schedules.

The planned uniform introduction of the varying elements of the system never eventuated and it deteriorated into a fragmented implementation of individual aspects by each of the participating countries with promised time frames suffering, in some cases, considerable slippage. The reputation this earned for ISPACG was unfortunate because the group overcame a tremendous amount of bureaucratic inertia and, in some key areas, demonstrated just what could be achieved if the will is there. ISPACG represented IFATCA's first real rapprochement with IATA and this collaboration with the Association and its airline representatives facilitated the Federations move from a tacit acceptor of ICAO standards to a participant in their formulation. Such proactivity was to become a trademark of the Federation throughout the nineties. In many ways, ISPACG paralleled the approach, and reminded the author, of the NEAT meetings (see Chapter 9) which also clearly demonstrated what can be achieved when the front end users get together to solve their problems.

Of all the dealings IFATCA has had with international organisations over forty years, those with IATA have been the least satisfactory. This has been a great pity for there can be little question that the two bodies have much to offer each other. It should have been a simple manoeuvre to grant controller representatives access to discount fares and one that could easily have been quarantined from others. That such recognition wasn't forthcoming, and the blinkered approach in continued obstinate refusal, soured a potentially beneficial cooperation so that all have suffered. Despite the Kiwi controllers' decision not to take action, Air New Zealand was not favoured in more ways than one by Australasian controllers following their vote in 1977. Controllers in needy areas were denied a physical IFATCA presence in some instances. With easier access to the problem areas of Africa and South America in the sixties, seventies and eighties, who knows what may have been achieved? The potential for today's problems to be either non-existent or minimal is unquantifiable but it is discernable and neither side benefited from the needless Resolution 200 dispute.

But we have moved on and today we are seeing a degree of cooperation in the technical field such that the future holds promise for mutual benefit. IFATCA is no longer seeking travel concessions - most representatives have travel arrangements in place and relations with some airlines are excellent - but the difficulties remain with travel. In the modern world of privatised ATC management, time off for IFATCA's representatives is becoming more and more difficult so that facilitated travel could again become an important issue. Need it be reiterated that any such travel would not be so much for the benefit of air traffic controllers themselves but for the entire aviation system?

As with the development and implementation of CNS/ATM, which has featured strong collaboration, there are still many other pressing matters throughout the regions that can benefit from continued and expanded cooperation. IATA's increasing requests for IFATCA participation in regional task forces augers well for the future. This contact must be developed and expanded upon. Nobody could suggest that today's relationship is on the same level as those with ICAO or ILO and it possibly even owes more to IFATCA's eventual capitulation over the Resolution 200 issue than to IATA's recognition of the Federations input. Despite this, the current relationship stands in stark contrast to that of the past and it behoves both sides to foster it further for the benefit of civil aviation in general.

CHAPTER 7

The Third Decade of IFATCA 1981 - 1990

The nineteen eighties saw the business world become voracious in its appetite for gain and the entrepreneurial and financial circles developed reputations for avarice so much so that the eighties became known as the decade of greed. For the IFATCA membership, struggling under booming traffic figures with increasingly inadequate facilities and widespread staff shortages, it was very much a decade of need.

Throughout the earlier parts of the decade, stock markets boomed and entrepreneurs built enormous paper empires backed by readily accessible credit from banks overly eager to lend. Chairmen, company presidents and CEOs everywhere were judged more on their rapacious takeover skills rather than business acumen as they fought to enlarge their empires and impress their shareholders. Businesses were bought (frequently on credit and wholly supported by assets which themselves were totally mortgaged to lending authorities) and added to company portfolios as trophies of war. As often as not they were stripped of their valuable assets and left as shells. These corporate battles led to inflated share prices and the global equities bubble grew bigger and bigger. Many of these new entrepreneurs didn't manufacture anything nor add to the common wealth. They simply bought and sold and competed for acquisitions in the name of development. Hollywood summed it up with the catch phrase "Greed is good".

Little of this development was based in altruism. It seemed as though self-gratification and -importance was the prime motivation and little was returned to the economies except by way of some profit taking and taxes. In the finest Roman tradition, the masses were provided with 'circuses' (the 1983 America's Cup sailing contest was a prime example) but little else trickled down to areas where needed. Governments seemed reluctant to act to rein in the corporate cowboys and it wasn't until after (and because of) the October, 1987 stock market crash that some real soul searching went on. Of course, by then it was too late and the tax havens and extradition-free bolt holes were well utilised. With all the new found 'wealth' generated during this era, little, if any, found its way to areas of public need.

During this same time, the demands and pressures on the global ATC system increased and it could fairly be said that the system had trouble coping. As the new decade dawned, air traffic control world-wide was in crisis. The crisis was not universal in its nature but took several forms depending on the location. In Africa, perennially suffering from a lack of adequate modern equipment, the sorry tale continued. In many locations very little of the air navigation charges collected was finding its way back into the air navigation systems. If it existed, in some locations radio equipment dating back to the forties was the mainstay of the controllers' communications. Vast areas of the continent had little or no radio coverage and pilots were relying on TIBA to keep each other advised of their relative positions.

In Europe, equipment was certainly not lacking. The problem was incompatibility and the enormous problems that caused. The rapidly burgeoning traffic picture was all but overwhelming the individual ATC administrations' abilities to cope. In some cases where controllers took action to maintain safety, overt intimidation and vindictive treatment resulted. Greek controllers were criminally indicted for "applying delaying tactics to air traffic", Italy saw controllers court martialled for participating in their en masse resignation (from their military status) threat and some French controllers were suspended for an alleged slow down.

In North America, Canada was being provided with a new radar system that would be out of date before delivery and that would feature unilaterally (by the Department of Transport) downgraded operational specifications. The Canadian ATC Association President, Bill Robertson, was heard to say "that so long as governments are responsible for ATC systems, controllers have no fear of being displaced by technological advancement". The USA was beset by staff shortages, equipment problems and major labour disputes. The world's most serious ATC dispute was about to erupt with calamitous results.

In the Asia-Pacific region, New Zealand was complaining of a 12% controller shortfall and Australia was similarly suffering. Vast tracts of airspace featured antiquated communication facilities and, in many parts of Asia, salary levels were simply inadequate. The Latin Americans were also chronically underpaid and ill-equipped, in some cases labouring under repressive military regimes and in many locations being forced into several secondary jobs to make ends meet.

Things were so serious that President Harri Henschler opened the Cairo annual conference in May, 1981 on a very downbeat note. With an extremely pessimistic tone he commenced by stating "Based on the display of intransigence of various employers and their ignorance - which after the conclusions of the meeting of experts.., at the ILO can only be termed 'deliberate' - predictions of future problems in our profession are ridiculously easy to make with a guarantee of being right.

"The past twelve months have seen government employers dismiss controllers who were fighting, in the name of their national controllers' organisation, for the profession and their fellow controllers. They have seen controllers 'mobilised', that is put under military jurisdiction and law, and military controllers introduced into civilian systems as either replacement or threat of that possibility.

"What makes us sad, on top of the ... degradation of aviation safety, the stress and aggravation of our members, is the fact that those who will suffer almost exclusively from these government created and perpetrated situations of confrontation over inadequate air traffic control equipment, working conditions and relationships are the airlines and their passengers."

Rarely has an annual conference opened to such gloom but it was a clear indication of the problems facing ATC and the collective need of the profession. Necessarily that need was visited upon IFATCA. Seemingly, as the Federation expanded, the problems were increasing exponentially. The problems faced in the sixties and seventies by a youthful IFATCA now seemed minor compared to the pressures being brought to bear by an aviation scene bursting at the seams and by the apparent reluctance of many administrations to address the critical issues. Nevertheless, the Board faced the eighties with guarded optimism buoyed mainly by pride in their profession and a strong desire to assist their less fortunate colleagues. They also had something that previous IFATCA administrations did not- the ILO Conclusions. The Board took it upon themselves to visit almost every corner of the globe expressing support and promising assistance and they went armed with the ammunition provided by the ILO. They became familiar faces everywhere.

Without question, the dominant IFATCA figure throughout the eighties was H. Harri Henschler. Born in Germany, Henschler began his ATC career in Hanover in 1959 qualifying as an IFR controller in 1962. Emigrating to Canada in 1967, he initially worked in Edmonton and Calgary Towers before checking out in the Edmonton Centre in 1970 and became an operating supervisor in 1973. It didn't take him long to become involved in CATCA politics and he had already served CATCA as branch chairman and Regional Councillor before election as national Vice-President in 1973. This position gave him responsibility for, amongst other things, Public Relations and IFATCA matters. He represented CATCA at four IFATCA conferences and became Chairman SC6 and IFATCA Regional Councillor for North and Central America in 1974. At the 1976 conference Henschler was elected Vice-President Professional and then, in 1978, President of IFATCA.

Henschler served as President for eight years - longer than any other President. When he finally stepped down after four terms to thunderous applause in 1986 he still didn't quit his involvement. Instead, he assumed the (then) official post of Past President for twelve months and simultaneously (except for one edition) took up the pen, so to speak, and became Editor of The Controller, in which post he continued for five years until conference 1991. This represents seventeen years as an elected and appointed official of the world body- a truly monumental dedication to the cause and one not even remotely approached by any other individual. Fittingly, Harri Henschler was awarded the Scroll of Honour at the 1987 Nairobi conference (having completed the one year term as Immediate Past President) "in recognition of outstanding service to the Federation". That surely was an understatement.

Henschler had succeeded the most proactive President IFATCA had seen to that time. Daniel Monin determined virtually from the outset that IFATCA needed to seriously consider the general working conditions of the air traffic controller and pointed the Federation in that direction. Whilst not steering the Federation deliberately on a course as Monin had, Henschler nevertheless placed his own stamp on the organisation he headed for eight years. During his tenure, the Federation grew significantly and really became involved in major developments in ATC, particularly in Europe. Determining that priorities lay with improved air traffic control equipment and procedures as well as working conditions, Henschler ensured that the Federation under his leadership placed emphasis in these areas. As well, and partly out of necessity because of financial constraints, Henschler more focused IFATCA's efforts by ensuring the organisation did not participate in forums unless it was very well prepared and only if a defined benefit could be accrued therefrom.

Harri Henschler

It was coincidental that the incompatibilities with equipment of the sovereign States of Europe manifested themselves at the same time as major industrial arguments erupted throughout the continent. Henschler thus was able to publicly address the technical problems besetting the controllers whilst at the same time directing his Federations energies towards the highly visible target of working conditions. As well, the first stirrings on direct routings and more efficient profiles were heard and associated procedures also needed to be addressed. It was essential from the mid-seventies onwards, and even more particularly in the eighties, that the crucial role of the air traffic controller be identified and understood and IFATCA, now as a respected, robust and expanding organisation, was better placed than ever to ensure that that role was recognised and accepted.

Henschler, for one, was convinced that whilst problems abounded, there was cause for optimism. His gloomy opening in Cairo ensured delegates were fully aware that they were confronted with tough times. However, difficult as it was to imagine, things were to about to get a lot worse.

As the Cairo conference was winding down, and with the labour contract between PATCO and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) having expired, their contract negotiations were seriously heating up.

Official talks on salary increases, improved working conditions, second career plan, early retirement and a reduction in weekly working hours (the main items in an original list of ninety seven demands) had commenced in February. As no headway was made, by June their President, Robert Poli, was starting to stress their demands for better pay, improved retirement conditions and a shorter working week. The FAA responded with an offer of $2,500, a 15% loading for night work and a guaranteed thirty minute lunch break. When this offer was presented to the PATCO membership, it was rejected by 95% of them. This massive rejection clearly indicated that the American controllers were more interested in bettering their professional and domestic lives than accepting a trade offwith what some saw as a substantial pay rise. The FAA then responded by refusing any further concessions. Bolstered by a March survey which indicated 78% in favour of strike action, the PATCO Board then determined on an all-out strike to support their claim and clearly telegraphed their intentions in the following months.

On the 3rd August, 13,000 of PATCO's 15,000 members downed headsets and walked off the job. Naturally, this action caused havoc. The administration reacted by severely limiting (initially by around 50%) the number of flights permitted and forced unrated supervisors (who were not members of the union under PATCO rules) and military controllers into the gap. Subsequent published figures showed a dramatic increase in the number of system errors and near misses, even with the traffic reduction.

Despite its charter, IFATCA could not turn its back on its largest Member Association nor could it ignore the wider problem that the PATCO action presented. President Henschler called upon Member Associations to apply Federation policy whereby they were not to act as substitute controllers outside their normal area of jurisdiction and reiterated IFATCA support for associations who were forced to impose their own restrictions as a result of extra traffic loading emanating from the dispute. Such action was taken by a number of associations but was misconstrued by their own administrations as direct industrial support for PATCO and the employers exercised pressure on their controllers to cease further action. The IFATCA Board met in emergency session on 13th and 14th August and decided that a renewed mandate for IFATCA support of PATCO was essential and called a first ever Special Conference for 22nd and 23rd August in Amsterdam. Despite the short notice, thirty two out of sixty one MAs attended. This figure included PATCO, who were represented by Vice President (and IFATCA Vice-President) Bob Meyer who briefed those present on the aims of PATCO and the present 'state of play'. That IFATCA was prepared to at least give consideration to actually endorsing wide spread industrial action in support of their PATCO colleagues is evidenced by the fact that observers from international and national trade unions were also invited. This step was necessary because in many cases the controllers' associations, being professional organisations, were unable to commit their membership to actions beyond their constitutions, which generally forbade such action.

The Special Conference attracted huge media interest and, during its course, Bob Meyer released details of near misses during the strike's first ten days and internal documents from US ALPA revealing grave concern over the "continued unsafe situation that exists in the US airspace as a result of the strike". This revelation resulted in an internal conflict for ALPA since their president had made public statements that the system was safe.

The deliberations of the Amsterdam meeting were in 'closed session' and so no minutes are available but it is known that the views expressed ranged from outright militant action to more temperate thoughts. IFATCA's constitution, however, had to be taken into consideration with any decision. The forum referred the FAA to the 1979 ILO Conclusions, particularly Conclusion 8 dealing with the settlement of disputes (essentially, through negotiation), and the Directors resolved that both sides should be brought together to start negotiations afresh. The PATCO controllers were urged to man their positions again to facilitate those negotiations and to ensure safety. The Board offered to mediate in the dispute and accepted the Secretary of Transportation's offer to visit the FAA and discuss matters of concern.

The invitation from the Secretary came about in an interesting manner. During the special Amsterdam conference, Executive Secretary Pat O'Doherty was interviewed by Britain's ITV and was asked if the American airspace was safe. Perhaps a little injudiciously, O'Doherty replied it was not and nor would he fly in it. Naturally, such an unequivocal comment made the headlines and for three days it featured widely on news bulletins. IFATCA received Mrs. Doles invitation within the week. O'Doherty and Lex Hendriks (EVP Technical) flew to Montreal, met up with President Henschler and CATCA President Jim Livingston and, of course, then had to drive to Washington, a distance of 1,600 kilometres.

Having finally arrived in Washington, the Executive Board representatives met, on the 8th and 9th September, with the FAA to discuss the impact the strike was having on aviation safety in the USA. The FAA's Administrator, Mr. L. Helms, was warned that "the only way to restore the United States ATC systems to a safer operation is the immediate return of all the striking controllers as quickly as possible. Failing such action on their part, IFATCA must report to their sixty one member countries that the US airspace continues to be unsafe". The Executive Board then further met with the Secretary for Transportation on the 10th September and conveyed much the same message.

All these meetings, discussions, manoeuvrings and appeals were to no avail as President Reagan had precipitously fired all the controllers, who did not respond to his threat, just forty eight hours after the dispute began. Under the draconian threat, some 1,600 did return to their consoles but more than 11,300 professionals (about 70% of the on-line controllers) stayed out and were summarily dismissed. Not content with simply dismissing this highly trained and specialised group of professionals, Reagan then vindictively declared a lifetime ban on their rehiring! Reagan's action was little more than dishonest for, before his election as President in 1980, he had openly acknowledged the deplorable state of the country's air traffic control system. In return for that acknowledgment and the promise of assistance, PATCO was the only union body to come out and support his bid for the presidency.

Across the country, PATCO leaders were fined and jailed. Evocative and emotional pictures of controllers being led away in chains were flashed around the world. Punitive fines of more than $US140 million were imposed on the union. PATCO had no option but to file for bankruptcy and effectively ceased to exist. Global ATC support was both moral and tangible but little could be done in the face of such governmental strong arm tactics and Presidential intransigence. Fellow unionists in the USA demanded rehiring of the controllers but themselves stopped short of any action in support. It was to be fourteen years until the next Democrat, Bill Clinton, was in the White House before the lifetime ban was waived and a precious few ex-PATCO controllers found themselves again working in U.S. ATC towers and centres. Eventually PATCO and twenty eight airlines agreed upon a $US28 million damages settlement to cover losses incurred over the first three days of the strike.

How did this situation come about and could it have been handled differently?

In the view of many, the FAA was to blame but PATCO also could have handled it better. Some insiders perceived the FAA deliberately moving towards confrontation as an alternative to having to solve some very difficult systemic problems. The controllers made their collective problems known to the FAA who directed them towards Congress but the FAA then failed to support their claims and even testified against them. Two earlier reports strongly criticised the FAA for their management style. The 1970 Corson Report noted that management-employee relations were "in extensive disarray" and recommended a reduction in work hours and overtime, the upgrading of equipment and revision of pay scales. The FAA's own report two years later came to very similar conclusions. However, the FAA largely ignored the findings of these two studies and implemented few of the recommendations.

For their part, PATCO lost the PR battle early on when they seemed to largely concentrate their demands on the monetary aspects of the claim. Most rank and file controllers still say that it wasn't the money so much as, as with any ambit claim, that would have been negotiable but they were more concerned with the working conditions and the amount of overtime they were being forced into with consequent damaging effects on their professional, social and domestic lives. For years PATCO had been citing stress as the number one problem facing them. Whilst studies had concluded that air traffic control is not inherently stressful, or not more so, than some other occupations, the conditions facing the PATCO members - autocratic management, mandatory (and at times unscheduled) overtime coupled with already long working hours, outdated and inadequate equipment and loss of second career options and, in some cases, fear of union activity reprisal - as a totality considerably added to their already high stress inducing factors. They accepted the strike as their opportunity to put their legitimate concerns of aviation safety and their own welfare before their government and the American people in a very public manner. The reliance of their leadership upon the most visible (and consequently most risible) aspect of the claim failed them.

PATCO did themselves further disservice when they started making noises about strike action even before the contract negotiations broke down thus alerting the FAA very early to their intentions. "Be One in '81" was the constant rallying call. Such early advice allowed the employer to make extensive preparations including developing extra supervisory positions filled by ex-controllers (remember, supervisors were not allowed to be PATCO members) who would thus be able to step into a walkout breach. The FAA also developed with the airlines a contingency plan specifying selective flight cuts. As the crisis continued to the end of 1981, the FAA were able to muster about 10,000 controllers, of whom more than 3,000 were supervisors, 5,700 were non-strikers and 1,000 plus were military. The traffic was slowly allowed to build up again so that as 1982 dawned this workforce was handling just under 80% of the pre-strike traffic level. This figure was achieved mostly at the expense of private flying. Even so, air traffic delays had doubled. The system operated continuously at maximum capacity through mandatory flow control and compulsory overtime.

To dispassionate observers, the controllers' demands did not seem excessive. A reduced work week could have been achieved through careful reallocation of personnel and the technology was certainly available to improve system faults and weaknesses. Basic management policies could have been improved and participation in decision making processes, long denied, should have been available. Over the previous ten years, inflation had risen over 150% and productivity over 50% but salaries had improved by just 120%. At the same time, pilots had increased their salaries by up to 245%. It was estimated, that to keep pace with inflation and productivity delivery, a $16,500 raise was necessary. Amongst their other claims, PATCO asked for $10,000. They were offered $2,500 and really little else.

With the collapse of PATCO as an entity, their affiliation with IFATCA effectively again ceased, although their membership was retained until 1983 when they were procedurally terminated. They had earlier dis-affiliated from the world body in 1976 expressing the feeling that IFATCA, as structured, was not serving their interests. In 1980 they returned (no doubt aware that some tough contract negotiating lay ahead), saying "We are anxious to get back into IFATCA; we ... have been gone too long. We assure you that we will get involved...". By the end of 1981, that involvement was again over.

1981 wasn't only a tough year for PATCO. With increasing amounts of overtime being forced upon their Canadian colleagues, CATCA took a stand against compulsory extra duty. Threatening fines and imprisonment, the Canadian government took fifty four Montreal controllers to court. Numerous other controllers were suspended for refusing to work the extra duty. These actions prompted a direct appeal to the Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau, and IFATCA's 1981 conference passed a resolution condemning the Canadian government. Fortunately, a repeat of the US situation was spared and no one was jailed and, in the end, in a controversial and hotly contested decision, the controllers involved in the action were simply fined the salary lost for the days suspended.

The Cairo conference imprinted itself upon all delegates memories for several reasons. Firstly, it was the first time that IFATCA had travelled to the vast continent of Africa. Secondly, several organisational difficulties saw the Executive Board actually assisting with the running of the meeting. This involvement even saw several wives of the Board members included in ensuring, amongst other things, the committee reports were produced on time. Finally, and truly uniquely, Committees A and C disagreed on what further action to take with the 1979 ILO resolutions. Committee A directed the Board to form an ad hoc committee to consider the best methods of promoting the conclusions whilst C noted a lack of interest from the MAs and decided that investigation of the ILO questionnaire be deleted from SCIV's work program! A vote in final plenary designed to break this impasse resulted in a tied vote. President Henschler, in a move worthy of Solomon, decided to abstain with his casting vote thus forcing the issue to the 1982 conference.

The Executive Board had already demonstrated its need for fiscal restraint entering the eighties by cutting back on external involvement. Only meetings of major importance, and where real benefit was readily identifiable to the Federation, were attended. To compensate, in part, for this policy, the Board placed extra emphasis on attending regional meetings and MA and SC meetings. The 1981 conference also continued to witness the effects of the damaging German dispute of 1973 as directors finally were confronted with the reality of writing off the VDF's outstanding debt of more than CHF20,000. Had this been available, it would have represented some 10% of the financial resources of the Federation for the year but the German association, faced with their staggering punitive fines, was simply unable to meet its dues. Indeed, they only survived financially through the generosity of their fellow controllers, particularly those in France (and especially in Marseilles), Ireland, Luxembourg, Eurocontrol and Norway.

This policy of disengagement was further emphasised in 1982 when the effects of the loss of PATCO subscriptions started to be felt and at the Amsterdam conference directors for the first time approved both the 1982 budget and the 1983 provisional budget in deficit. (See also Chapter 4) All spending plans in these budgets were revised downwards. Attendance at the few meetings planned on was made more difficult because of a wary attitude by airline companies in the wake of the events of 1981. The 1982 conference also downsized the Federation via disbandment of two Standing Committees: 2 and 5. SC2's Publications and Public Relations responsibilities were assumed by the Editor (initially, and later by the DP) and SC4 took over the Recruitment and Training tasks of SC5. So, the domestic dispute in America caused global ripples and not just with traffic handling problems.

Some good news did surface in late 1981 for one Member Association. The Italian association (ANACNA) had for many years been protesting their military status and had undertaken various actions including the threat to strike. Towards the end of the year, the Italian government announced the creation of an independent civil ATC organisation which would be self controlling in both financial and management matters. A long held dream was finally realised. ANACNA also organised a very significant event in December, 1981. The 4th and 5th December saw the world's first conference on the legal aspects of the air traffic controllers' responsibilities. This Roman forum was held under the patronage of the brand new civil ATS agency and the International Association of Lawyers, Jurists and Experts in Air Law. Speakers presented papers on subjects such as 'New legal status and new administrative responsibilities of ATCs', 'the air traffic controller's criminal liabilities' and 'searching for an improved legal protection'. IFATCA's Vice-President Professional Andreas Avgoustis, himself a lawyer, was present and spoke on 'How courts view controllers' responsibilities'. The conference was very well attended, mainly by local jurists, civil and military aviation authorities and pilots and controllers. It was an outstanding success in the manner it clearly conveyed controllers' concerns and portrayed their legal responsibilities in an ever increasing litigious and complex aviation world.

Just how litigious the aviation scene had become was demonstrated by a court decision in the USA. More than five years after the Zagreb mid-air collision, the McDonnell-Douglas Corporation finally won a verdict absolving them of blame in the accident. The plaintiff had argued that the cockpit windshield posts on the DC9 were oversized in violation of FAA regulations and that the centre windshield panel was too small thus constituting design defects and adding to the cause of the collision by obscuring the DC9's crew's vision of the Trident. Thus five years later and more than three years since Gradimir Tasic's release from prison, the Zagreb chapter was finally dosed. Such 'frivolous' legal proceedings continue and little has changed in this regard as we enter the new millennium. Governments, aircraft manufacturers and airlines are viewed as 'rich marks' and many are the relatives and friends of unfortunate aircraft accident victims, aided and abetted by avaricious lawyers, who seek to profit financially from tragedy. This approach hinders what should be the real outcome of any accident - the search for causal factors and preventative measures.

IFATCA returned to its birthplace for its 1982 conference. The Netherlands Guild became the third association to host two conferences when Amsterdam was again the venue for the 21st conference. (In fact, Amsterdam thus became a conference venue for the third time since the special conference on the PATCO issue in late 1981 was also in the Dutch capital.) With the devastating result of the PATCO dispute still on everyone's minds, directors determined that the American membership be retained without debt to PATCO. The complete failure of the PATCO strike, the continuing difficulties faced by aviation in the USA and the severity of the FAA's actions against PATCO cast a pall over the meeting and it was a very subdued conference.

Four Presidents: 'Tek' Tekstra, Arnold Field, Daniel Monin & Harri Henschler.

Twenty first conference, Amsterdam, May 1982.

Nevertheless, Amsterdam 2 left its imprint on delegates' minds. For one thing, this conference was placed under royal patronage and His Royal Highness Prince Bernhard, a keen pilot and friend of the Dutch air traffic controllers, addressed the opening session and formally opened the conference and technical exhibition. 'Telling it like it is', the Prince said inter alia: "The aviation industry is in deep trouble. In the process of getting the industry back on its feet, one of the crucial roles has to be played by the air traffic controller. The massive investments in modern technology on the flight deck have not been matched by improvements to ground facilities in many parts of the world. The major responsibility (for this) lies with governments who are the direct employers of the controllers. Failure to establish proper working conditions for the ATC staff will put at risk safety itself."

A hot topic for debate in Amsterdam was the concept of biennial conferences. This subject had been aired previously, notably in 1979, and rejected but it resurfaced and 1982 represented an even more serious debate and there appeared to be considerable support for the concept. The issue was referred to the Executive Council and they were directed to make recommendations for the 1984 conference to amend procedures with a view to actually implementing biennial conferences. The Council presented an interim report to the 1983 conference and its details were accepted as information. Then, with an apparently inconclusive working paper delivered in 1984, Directors referred the issue on to the Vice-President Administration and the Executive Secretary and instructed them to conduct a full review of all aspects of annual conferences. Obviously interest in the concept then began to wane again and in 1985 Directors accepted the recommendation (85.A.29) "That the concept of annual conferences be continued". However, during their deliberations on the re-structure of the Federation in 1988, the Executive Council yet again re-visited the issue. Responding to the Council's initial thoughts on restructuring, conference '88 directed the Council to consider every aspect of the organisation, including, once more, biennial conferences. A status report detailing the proposed new structure of the Federation delivered in Frankfurt the following year finally put paid to the idea and, whilst the biennial conference concept has occasionally been aired since, it has never again been given really serious consideration.

Reflecting the serious disarray of many ATC systems and multiple association problems, Committee A devoted 40% of its time in 1982 to closed sessions. Naturally, the PATCO issue featured here but several other associations, particularly Brazil, also took the opportunity to privately enunciate their problems with their employers. Such allocation of time was proof that not a lot had improved since President Henschler's opening remarks of a year earlier.

An event of mild interest during the 1982 conference in Amsterdam was an application for membership from a second U.K. association. Whilst they were able to claim representation of a significant proportion of U.K. controllers, the application from the Institution of Professional Civil Servants (ATC Branch) of the UK was rejected for failure to meet the requirements of the Federations constitution, that is, only one association per State.

Amsterdam saw two new faces on the five man Executive Board: the fourth straight Swiss Treasurer, Bernard Grezet, and Erik Sermijn as the new EVP Professional. Two important new policy initiatives were unveiled in Amsterdam: policy on Traffic Information Broadcasts by Aircraft (TIBA) was settled following the revelations of widespread misuse of the practise on the African continent the previous year in Cairo and, secondly, an early retirement scheme for ATCOs. This latter policy was based heavily on the ILO Conclusions from the 1979 meeting. Sadly, Committee C saw the retirement of the Chairman of SC4, Germany's Egbert Just after an incredible twelve years in the position It can be truly said that Standing Committee 4 came of age during Just's term.

Working under three Presidents, Just ensured that SC4 moved with the times and his committee was instrumental in formulating first policy on ATC duty hours, early retirement, medication guidance, annual ocular tests and workplace lighting conditions, military replacement of civilian ATC and automation interfaces to name merely a few areas. Just also had been a key Federation representative at the 1979 ILO tri-partite meeting of experts for which he provided the very comprehensive 'Convention for the Profession of Air Traffic Control'. This paper spelled out IFATCA's concerns with the key areas of selection and training, working environment, conditions of service and more and was the essential ingredient to IFATCA’s successful presentation. As a parting contribution before handing over the chair to compatriot Ulli Windt, Just oversaw the integration of SC 5 into 'his' SC 4. Just's term in office remains an IFATCA record for occupying a Standing Committee chair (narrowly beating Walter Endlich's effective 11 years stewardship of SC2 and The Controller) and, for that matter, any single position in the Federation.

Immediately prior to the Amsterdam conference, the Executive Council finally materialised as a group and held its long awaited first meeting. Created at the memorable Reykjavik conference in 1973, the Council was meant to convene annually following the 1975 conference but was continually frustrated, mainly for financial reasons. Over the years the regional organisation had evolved with varying degrees of success and efficiency and the Regional Councillors had established their marks and, in the main, were making significant contributions in their areas of responsibility. They maintained some direct contact by meeting ad hoc with the Board at intervening conferences and other meetings but formal forums eluded them. Finally, the Councillors' calls for a meeting could no longer be denied and President Henschler called a two day Executive Council meeting immediately prior to the conference. In a minor continuation of frustration, however, the Council was forced to meet in Rotterdam because of a scarcity of accommodation in Amsterdam. This system of meeting coincident with conference then continued for three more years. The Executive Council was again scheduled to meet in conjunction with the San Jose conference of 1986 but that meeting was postponed with eventual dramatic results, as we shall see.

In the early years of IFATCA, few members of the general public had heard of air traffic control let alone knew what air traffic controllers actually did. In the United States, at least, the 1981 PATCO strike changed that and now nearly everyone knew something of the role of air traffic control. This new found intelligence was no where better (nor more unusually) illustrated than in 1982 at, of all places, Hollywood's Oscar awards.

In that year, the Oscar for Best Song of the Year went to 'The Best That You Can Do' the theme from the hit movie 'Arthur'. In accepting his statuette, the Australian singer-songwriter Peter Allen gave thanks to the unknown air traffic controller who, one night, kept Allen's plane in a holding pattern "between the moon and New York City" and thus inspired the song.

Effectively, the final chapter in the PATCO saga was written in late 1982 with the legal demise of the organisation. Reflecting on the union's fourteen year history, new President Gary Eads noted that PATCO had been the only group effectively monitoring the FAA's operations and keeping the public educated on air traffic control matters. He said that if one was to closely examine the strides made by the FAA with respect to improvements in the ATC system, a direct line could be traced back to PATCO and its members. Eads continued: "It is over for PATCO. The union is gone. President Reagan has proven his point. What more can be gained by a policy which lacks understanding and flexibility and appears designed only to prove a point? Millions have been spent and billions will be spent to rebuild the ATC system. If the dismissed controllers were reinstated, this nation's ATC system would be operating at full capacity in a matter of weeks instead of years and at a much reduced cost." His words, however, fell on deaf ears. Reagan's edict was to stand.

1982 concluded on the saddest possible note for IFATCA. Whilst in Jugoslavia reviewing the 1983 conference arrangements and facilities, the Federations Executive Secretary Ted Bradshaw met with an untimely death. On 29th November, annoyed by street noise in his hearing aid whilst walking in Zagreb with his wife, Bradshaw turned off the aid, as was his habit. Whilst crossing the street he failed to notice, and was hit by, a quiet streetcar and died shortly afterwards in hospital. The other Board members had already returned home but on hearing the news, Harri Henschler, Erik Sermijn, Pat O'Doherty and Bernard Grezet all hurried back to Zagreb and, although there was little they could do, were with Ted when he died. The subsequent funeral in Bradshaw's home, Ayr, Scotland was so well attended by his international colleagues that, had it been a conference, a quorum could have been declared.

At the subsequent conference in Split, the Scroll of Honour was awarded posthumously to Ted Bradshaw "in recognition of his outstanding contribution". The loss of their Executive Secretary just three months before conference naturally caused great consternation for the Board and the Federation at large. The difficulties were largely overcome in a manner which speaks volumes for the contribution, dedication and spirit, not only of the honorary officers of the Federation, but of their spouses as well. Naturally, the remaining Board members accepted additional responsibilities but many of the conference arrangements necessarily managed by the Secretariat were continued with by Bradshaw's wife, Peggy. Always a major contributor to her husband's work as Secretary and a permanent fixture and character in her own right at conferences, Peggy put aside her grief and carried on almost alone (with some assistance from individual members of the UK Guild), managing the Federations Secretariat and ensured that the printing of working papers, invitations to conference, the final agenda and all the other one hundred and one tasks necessary in the lead up to conference were completed. She thus enabled the conference to proceed as planned and then, not yet done, Peggy supervised the conference secretariat. For this incredible contribution at a time of immeasurable loss, Peggy was also awarded the Scroll of Honour jointly with her late husband at the conference she was instrumental in ensuring went ahead. She remains the only woman and the only non-air traffic controller so honoured. Naturally gregarious and quick-witted, Peggy continued to attend conferences where, cigarette in one hand and gin and tonic in the other, she was frequently the centre of a jovial group until she herself died in 1999. As a pairing, the Bradshaws had few equals.

Peggy and Ted Bradshaw

The Split conference was further notable for three financial initiatives. It was in 1983 that Directors decided to separate the budget for The Controller from the general Federations accounts and make the magazine separately accountable. This made the journal's financing more transparent. The second move was the creation of an equipment fund. Instead of simply purchasing equipment as required from general revenues, the Board's move in establishing such a fund enabled accurate oversight of provision for, and spending on, equipment, one of its bigger expenditure areas. The third initiative seemed straightforward but was to be the source of some headaches later. Resolution 83.A.50 provided for all Regional Vice-Presidents to be reimbursed for expenses incurred whilst attending conference. Expanding on the desirability to ensure certain officers attended conference, Directors established a priority list and included after the RVPs, chairmen and secretaries of conference committees and SC chairmen. Thus the RVPs were funded for their two day Council meeting and ensuing four day conference attendance. Committee A's other major contribution in Split came from development of policy regarding national disputes. It was here that IFATCA, for the first time, publicly condemned situations whereby normal ATC services are replaced and provided guidelines to associations involved in disputes and to associations of neighbouring countries affected by a dispute.

There were only two applications for membership, both of which were rejected (the Turkish Cypriots, for the continuing reason of the disputed airspace question following the 1974 invasion of Cyprus, and Mauritania, for lack of information on their constitution) making 1983 the first year since 1966 that professional membership did not increase. Committees B and C, in the main, concerned themselves with major policy reviews.

A real growth area in the seventies and early eighties was Mediterranean tourism. Cheap charter flights and holiday packages fuelled a tremendous boom in visitors to the idyllic islands of the Mediterranean, nowhere more so than the Greek Islands. Whilst this caused problems for those responsible for traffic acceptance rates in ACCs throughout Europe, the impact on the Greek ATC system was especially serious. Not only were the Greek controllers faced with tremendous traffic numbers (300,000 in 1983) but they were surrounded by severe airspace restrictions from East Bloc countries and neighbouring war zones. Apart from a small wedge of radar coverage extending just 50nm to the south-east of Athens, all control was by procedural means. In peak times, and increasingly with equipment deficiencies and industrial agitation, severe flow control measures were needed and their imposition caused delays right back up the line so that, at times, Greek Island holiday makers waited in terminals as far away as the United Kingdom for hours, even days.

Lest one think that it was only the controllers who faced problems, we can spare a thought also for the pilots who were confronted, not only with limitations on duty hours, tiresome delays and cumbersome procedures, but in Athens itself they were faced with an extremely hazardous approach to RW15 whereby they had to aim for a VOR radial intercept at 3,000 feet marked only by a DME distance. An overshoot of the intercept could not be tolerated as there was situated just five miles away a mountain 4,600 feet high! New and more sophisticated equipment was promised for 1987 but, incredibly, articles in The Controller in 1998 were still musing on the Athens Centre active 'museum'.

As we saw in Chapter 5, the Greek ATCA had taken strike action in 1980 to which the government reacted with mobilisation. The promised negotiations failed to materially improve the situation and the association members endured the situation for three more years before they again found them intolerable. The Greek controllers then recommenced with 'quiet' negotiations in April, 1983 and formally submitted to their authorities a package of demands the following month. These demands included (and they will sound very familiar!) an improvement in retirement conditions, a reduction in working hours, recruitment of new personnel (the estimate was they were missing 100 controllers in a centre with 150 working - a 40% shortfall), an improvement in the qualified controller's allowance and application of the same tax deduction allowances granted to pilots for their night shift and public holiday duties. Negotiations broke down on 22nd July and industrial action was announced for the 24th and 25th July. Immediately upon this announcement, the government again invoked the mobilisation act (and so continued the civilian controllers under military jurisdiction and law) and no further discussions took place. Incredibly, this situation then endured until well into the 1990s. There had been some doubts cast in relation to Greece hosting the 24th conference in 1985 but, despite the Greek association finding it necessary in the preceding year to seek CHF600 for legal assistance in connection with their dispute with the government, the conference went ahead very successfully. Although in continuing dispute with their government, the conference organisers received invaluable support from the Ministry of Communications and the Hellenic Civil Aviation Authority. Opening the 1985 conference in Athens, President Henschler said "I am hopeful that by hosting IFATCA '85 a contribution to overcoming these problems will be made by furthering the understanding of our unique profession." They proved to be overly optimistic sentiments.

With no resolution by early 1987, Henschler again wrote to the Greek Minister of Transport seeking a solution to the long running dispute. The Greek problem featured in debate in Nairobi and, expressing their concern, Directors passed Resolution 87.A.40:

"Conference notes with concern the situation existing in Greece with respect to the mobilisation of Greek ATCs and instructs the EB to protest to the highest officials in the Greek government and to inform ICAO, ILO, IFALPA, IACA, IATA about the current situation."

These letters and more were transmitted to no effect. Vice-President Professional Avgoustis then made direct input by visiting Athens in June and, in October, President Henschler and Avgoustis travelled to Athens to discuss the issue with government officials. They were told that something was expected from a court decision in October but again nothing concrete resulted. Up until conference 1987, the RVP for the Central Europe region (which encompassed Greece) was a member of the Greek association. This meant that at least the Board and Council were receiving some information on the situation, minimal as it was. Subsequently, the RVP changed and, despite strenuous efforts by Austria's Kurt Kihr, the information flow dried up and even V-P Professional Avgoustis in Cyprus was having difficulty with his contacts. By the next Council meeting in September, 1988 the RVP was reporting "communication with the Greek association is at a standstill". In fact, communication with Greece seemed to cease altogether and very little was heard over the next few years. Even when some industrial action was undertaken in 1990 nothing was heard. Problems abounded, however, and it was obvious to all in Europe (controllers, pilots, airlines, holiday makers, administrators and politicians) that the situation in Greece was very serious. Then there arose some cause for optimism in early 1991 when the Greek CAA announced their choice for the supply of a national ATC system. A signature on the contract was "expected in the near future".

We will jump forward now to June, 1994 when the EVP EUR Günter Melchert made a liaison visit to Greece. A quote, inter alia, from his extensive report is illuminating.

"There have been serious problems with the situation of ATCOs in Greece since at least ten years. Our Greek colleagues have conducted various actions to improve their situation. On top of the list of requirements though has always been an improvement of their technical equipment. The actions they have taken to achieve this goal comprised industrial actions, negotiations (and, when they realised) they were promised all but got nothing, they started a hunger strike. Controllers were taken to hospital right from the control position. But even this action did not convince Greek politicians of the need to invest in a new ATC system. Since many months now Greek controllers are officially 'working to rule'".

Although many timetables for improvements had been announced, even with the latest 'firm' plans for a new control centre in 1996 or 1997, Melchert saw only "a few wires hanging from the ceiling" in June, 1994. The Minister, although professing full understanding of the needs of the controllers, did not agree with their demands and described the controllers as "maniacs" in asking for things that were impossible. "This makes me (Melchert) believe that the Greek government is not willing to contribute to an improvement of the ATC environment in the country." Melchert concluded his report with the hope that Greece would emerge from its "present ATC situation soon like a Phoenix from the ashes" and that we need to "keep on trying to liaise with our MA in Greece - although this is not as easy as one might think - and hope that no one turns a blind eye on the politicians responsible for that mess...". Melchert then had a meeting in 1995 with the manufacturers of the proposed new radar system during which they complained of technical components still in storage in an airport hanger and of substantial elements of the communications system which had simply been forgotten to be ordered in time.

Melchert was able to report "considerable progress in negotiations between the government and the controllers' union" in mid-1995 with an agreement which was due to pass parliament in July. However, as with many before it, this too failed to materialise. Around the same time, considerable media attention in Germany (a popular source of vacationers in Greece) caused a stir when the German Cockpit Association used a press conference to bring attention to the problems in the Greek airspace. This caused angry reaction in Greece with some newspapers responding with "Slander Against Greek Airports" type headlines. IFALPA were also expressing their concerns and were threatening to categorise the Greek airspace under a 'black star', indicating serious safety concerns. In mid- 1998, EVP EUR Marc Baumgartner joined an IFALPA delegation to Greece to again investigate first hand the problem. This time, however, some good news was forthcoming. Baumgartner learned that the Greek authorities now had firm plans to employ fifty extra controllers and to purchase nine new approach radars for their holiday island airports.

Finally, early 1999 saw the lamentable situation in Greece rectified. The modern equipment was at last provided and an agreement between the government and the controllers was reached in February that year which brought new work practises (and pay scales) for the introduction of that new equipment. The terminal area radars were introduced at four major airports, SSR coverage was provided over almost all the Greek airspace and separation was reduced from 60nm to 5nm! Almost all of Europe's controllers (and probably quite a few tourists) breathed a collective sigh of relief.

This sorry saga is practically a case study in how a Member Association should not retreat into isolationism and ignore their peak body. In the earlier days of their dispute, the Greeks corresponded and briefed the Federation on the situation and IFATCA responded as requested. Whilst nothing was achieved, what pressure was applied was allowed to dissipate through neglecting contacts and failure to maintain communication and the opportunity for the world representative body to make public the true facts applying in Greece was lost. We can't blame the Greek controllers entirely though as they were obviously battling an administration which was totally obdurate, even with their fellow politicians in Europe to whom they made major promises and then completely ignored them. The cost to innocent travellers, airlines and the controllers throughout Europe is a sad indictment of political intransigence and failure to act. How fortunate the world was that a serious accident did not result. When professionals resort to hunger strikes and start collapsing at the console through exhaustion, something is seriously wrong and the politicians of Europe must accept some of the blame for allowing their colleagues to sustain the situation in Greece and continue as it did for fifteen years.

Bad as the situation was in Greece (and Europe as a whole), it was nothing compared to the difficulties faced in some other regions. In the early eighties and particularly throughout 1983, the Executive Board was expressing concern over the growing problems for air traffic controllers in general in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. Story has it that when the first Comet flew from London to South Africa in 1952, despite taking almost twenty four hours became of five fuel stops, the aircraft still managed to arrive before the flight plan details. In 1982, telecommunication networks and navigation and radio facilities had not improved much through large parts of central Africa and pilots were forced to rely upon TIBA (Traffic Information Broadcast by Aircraft) to relay their position to other aircraft. In a region beset by civil unrest, instances such as the civil war in Chad, which saw the main AFTN link between Europe and sub-Saharan Africa cut, are not uncommon. In some regions of western Asia, HF was the only means of communication, both with adjoining ATC centres and aircraft, and controllers frequently were forced to rely upon aircraft transmitting their own coordination details for them. In Central and South America, similar communication problems existed and ATC salaries were so low that the controllers resorted to second and even third jobs just to feed their families.

The President and the VP Professional attended the 3rd Africa East Regional Meeting in November, 1982 and witnessed and heard first hand of the massive problems besetting the African controllers in general. The Board decided to concentrate extra efforts towards helping the controllers in these areas and one of the first actions they took in this regard was a visit by the new French-speaking Vice-President Professional Eric Sermijn to Cote d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast). Lack of professional recognition, poor salaries, lack of equipment and inadequate training formed the core of Sermijn's discussions with various authorities. A major television programme also featured during the visit and Sermijn had to endure one hour of politically sensitive and probing questioning from the journalists present. The visit clearly demonstrated the professionalism of the local controllers despite their difficult working circumstances and was adjudged an outstanding success. IFATCA's concern and willingness to represent the controllers to their authorities much improved the Federation's image and the local association's stature and this visit was to be the first of many more such forays over the coming years.

There were few witnesses to the tragedy that occurred in the early hours of 1st September, 1983. Nevertheless, the event reverberated around the world with many 'experts' espousing outrageous theories amid political hysteria, allegations, accusations and counter accusations. A B747 of Korean Airlines conducting Flight KAL007 strayed into prohibited airspace over the eastern Soviet Union and was shot down by Soviet fighter aircraft near Sakhalin. IFATCA issued two press releases on the 3rd and 9th September expressing its strong concerns that safety procedures had apparently broken down and calling for an improved and rapid exchange of crucial information in times of crisis and unplanned occurrences. These two press releases were followed on the 16th September by a letter to the President of the ICAO Council reiterating the Federations concerns and offering cooperation to prevent a recurrence.

Six months later, no apparent international moves had been made towards that aim and the Board presented a late working paper to the 1984 conference. The paper, delayed to the latest possible moment in the hope of some positive developments, proposed the setting up of an ad hoc committee of Member Associations on the "Establishment of a System of Flight Data Exchange in Sensitive Areas of the World'. The Directors recognised that IFATCA has a responsibility, on behalf of civil aviation and the safety of passengers, to contribute to a prevention of further civilian tragedies. The ad hoc committee was formed and funds allocated and IFATCA '84 thus went on record as being in favour of establishing an international system of exchanging aircraft movement information. The Member Associations on the committee (Canada, Costa Rica, Cyprus and West Germany with assistance from Finland and Japan) were requested to identify sensitive areas where hostile military action was either known to be a matter of course or could be expected. Possible affected ATC units and their VHF, HF and UHF frequencies were listed. Corporate Member Jeppesen provided full sets of air navigation charts for the use of the committee. Based on all this information, the committee considered the most efficient means of data exchange, establishment of central information units and identification procedures for unknown aircraft. ICAO was made aware of this committee and its work and aims.

By August that year - almost twelve months after the event - at last some movement by the States on the subject was detected. The Air Navigation Commission set up a plan for discussion at its September session to include identification of airline routes bordering sensitive territories, new procedures governing military interception of civil aircraft and installation of VHF on military interceptors. Having thus been alerted to the ICAO moves, President Henschler responded: “As you will be aware, the 1984 IFATCA annual conference established an ad hoc committee. It appears now that its conclusions and those of the ICAO Air Navigation Commission on the subject are very similar." Henschler went further, however, and suggested means by which air defence units could be advised of flight plan information and their need for immediate availability of information on flight movements. With the parallel ICAO plan now under development, IFATCA placed their ad hoc committee in abeyance at IFATCA '85. In August, 1986 a telephone and teletype communication system linking Japanese, Soviet and American area control centres in Tokyo, Khabarovsk and Anchorage was activated. Travellers across the north Pacific were then treated to a 'luxury' they were entitled to all along - international cooperation defusing a situation which already had proved fatal. There can be no doubt that IFATCA's prompt and professional actions immediately after the KAL007 tragedy spurred the international community into action and it is a reflection of the Federations expertise and influence that the resultant measures so closely paralleled those proposed by the Federation. The Executive Board's action in introducing their paper calling for an ad hoc committee at the 1984 conference is a landmark in IFATCA's annals.

The annual conference in 1984 was held in Estoril, Portugal and was immediately noteworthy for two reasons. Attending the opening ceremonies was the President of the Republic of Portugal, his Excellency Gen. Antonio Ramalho Eanes and his affectionate feelings for the profession and the importance his government placed in air traffic control were evident in his welcoming speech. This was the first time an elected Head of State had officiated at an IFATCA conference. Following the opening plenary session, delegates repaired to the venue hotel's balcony where they were treated to an outstanding thirty minute display by the Portuguese Air Force Aerobatics Team's six T-37Cs over the Rio Tejo estuary. This event alone will ensure that the Estoril conference lives forever in the minds of delegates present.

It seemed now that every year was bringing important financial decisions at conference. Estoril maintained the tradition with one of the biggest of them all. IFATCA's financial year had, since the Federations inception, been aligned with the calendar year. This caused multiple problems for the Treasurer and Directors at conference. Each year in March or April, Directors were presented with the final figures for the preceding year, actual income and expenditure figures to date for the current year, albeit only two or three months worth, projections for the remainder of the year and then were asked to vote on the provisional budget for the following year. It was cumbersome and confusing. At the very least, not knowing how the current year would conclude did not allow for accurate considerations for the next. The Board decided to do something about it and, in Estoril, they proposed altering the fiscal year to 1st June to 31st May as from 1987. This would allow Directors to consider the current year's financial situation much more accurately as there would only be one or two months of the year to run at the time of conference. Thus, a more knowledgeable base for making decisions on the next year's budget was possible. It was a simple move but vital in its ramifications and gready facilitated the Treasurer's job.

Since 1971 IFATCA had seen the need for a liaison officer to ICAO in Montreal. With the continuing increase in contact with ICAO, and particularly because of growth in the human factors area, the Federation now decided it needed two liaison positions. The Directors in Estoril abolished the old single liaison position and in its stead created a Legal and Professional Liaison Officer and a Technical and Operational Liaison Officer. Both these positions were filled by CATCA controllers (Jack Butt and Art Cauty respectively) and their implementation allowed a more efficient contact and information flow. 1984 again saw no new professional membership affiliations. El Salvador applied for membership but, with no representatives present to answer some Directors' queries, the application was postponed. The Turkish Cypriot association was again rejected.

Committee B had one of its quieter years with only eleven recommendations forwarded to final plenary. Though few in number they featured important decisions with policy on TCAS (Traffic Collision and Avoidance Systems) and Airspace Classification. The most significant happening in B in 1984 was the retirement of SC1 chairman John Saker after more than twenty years very active participation in technical matters. He deservedly was awarded the Scroll of Honour for his input. Committee C was even quieter with a review of the Information Handbook the feature decision.

A couple of decades earlier, General Charles de Gaulle said the Mediterranean basin had been the centre for trade and development in antiquity; that in more recent centuries the Atlantic basin had assumed that position and that for the future, it would be the Pacific basin. Embracing that philosophy, the RVP Pacific, Robin Soar, organised the first joint Asia-Pacific regional meeting in November, 1984. Geographically huge, the joint region was numerically tiny and there were only four MAs attending the meeting in Fiji. However, with two observer associations and Board members from Canada, the Netherlands and Britain present, an attendance of twenty six delegates was recorded. Such a large Board presence indicated the importance they were already placing on regional development within the Federation. This first venture of embracing all of the vast Asia and Oceania region was certainly a forerunner of future events, global as well as regional. Thus, when IFATCA restructured into just four regions in 1990, the Asia Pacific region was already showing the way, was well organised and had already held six ASP meetings.

Although it certainly hadn't died out entirely, 1985 witnessed a serious return of the disease of hijacking and air terrorism. After something of a lull, terrorist activity again was in the headlines. In June, Lebanese terrorists hijacked three separate aircraft and later the same month an Air India B747 with more than 300 people on board was lost over the Atlantic, apparently blown up by a terrorist bomb. November saw more lives lost with the tragic hijacking of an Egypt Air B737. Palestinian terrorists mounted separate attacks on Rome and Vienna airports in December when twenty people were killed. Whilst the world had become somewhat inured to the strife and violence of the times, nevertheless it remained that fare paying passengers had become the innocent victims of a phenomenon that knew no borders and respected no laws. Governments and airlines had taken some considerable measures since the seventies to eliminate the threat and pre-boarding screening, and in some cases, on-board armed guards, were the more visible efforts. But the fact remains, whilst some countries - or even just a single country - provide refuge for the criminals involved, air piracy and terrorism wilt exist. Whilst the practise of providing safe haven continues, innocent passengers will be exposed to unnecessary risk. Andreas Avgoustis editorialised on the issue in December, 1986 and, following the early 1988 Kuwaiti Airlines hijacking (which saw further loss of life), IFATCA issued a press release but, of course, the Federation is effectively powerless in such matters. As with the innocent victims, we rely upon governments to act. The 1988 destruction by a bomb of the PanAm B747 over Lockerbie is a case in point.

Convinced the Libyans were responsible for the Lockerbie outrage (and other events), the United States resorted to pin point bombing of the Libyan leader's Tripoli home and imposed sanctions in an effort to bring to court those identified as directly responsible. As the year 2000 dawned, the United States and the United Kingdom were still trying to bring the case in a neutral country against the continued obdurate efforts of the Libyan government who, by now, at least had admitted that the named defendants, who were Libyan citizens, had a case to answer.

For the second time in fifteen years, IFATCA travelled to the birthplace of democracy and Athens again was the venue for the 24th annual conference. This conference was one of the shortest on record, certainly in recent years since Munich in 1968 stretched conferences out to four days. The committee work was all concluded well within three days and this allowed the secretariat to be so on top of their tasks that final plenary was moved forward from the normal afternoon session to a 1000 start. Frequent conference attendees will testify that this is a far from normal situation.

The following year, 1986, marked the silver jubilee of IFATCA. The Board decided to celebrate this auspicious event in several ways and prominent amongst them was an account of those first twenty five years serialised in The Controller magazine. And who better to write it than Bernhard Rüthy, second Treasurer and one of the founding fathers of the Federation. Initially working for the Swiss Air Navigation Services as a radio operator from 1949, Rüthy became a full controller in 1957. In 1970 he was promoted to Head of Training and in 1980 became Head, Operations Division. Rüthy attended the Frankfurt meeting and the Federations founding conference as President of the Swiss ATCA and served two terms as IFATCA's Treasurer. Since that time he has attended all but two annual conferences and still actively participates in IFATCA affairs, mainly through maintenance of the Manual. Fittingly, Bernhard Rüthy was honoured at the 1986 conference with presentation of the Scroll of Honour.

Bernhard Rüthy addresses the Opening Plenary session at

San Jose, April 1986 on behalf of the founder Member Associations

Rüthy provided an interesting narrative over four issues of The Controller of the Federations history and supplemented his account with recollections and anecdotes from others, including 'Tek' Tekstra. Whilst most of the original controllers were still around, the ranks of IFATCA had swollen considerably in the more recent years and many controllers were unaware of the origins of the organisation they were members of. As with this book, it was decided that people should know more of their organisation's history. It is invaluable to be aware of how the Federation has evolved and why it is the organisation that it is. And as the man said, He who does not know the past will never understand the present.

The 1986 conference was officially labeled The Silver Jubilee Conference and, for the first time, the annual forum was held in Central America. The conference was very well supported by the local administration and the President of Costa Rica, who twice met with the Executive Board and the organising committee during the planning stages, officiated at the opening ceremonies. Apart from again being honoured by the Head of State, the Cost Rica conference opening also featured a ceremony whereby the original twelve founding associations and the three original Corporate Members were recognised with presentations of commemorative plaques to mark the silver jubilee of the Federation. Bernhard Rüthy was prominent, providing the address in thanks on behalf of the founder Member Associations.

IFATCA Corporate Member stalwart Harry Cole receiving a silver jubilee award from President Henschler,

San Jose, April 1986.

Creating a precedent, the U.K.'s Lesley Austin became the first woman to chair an IFATCA conference committee when she accepted the gavel for Committee A. Inviting the applicant Senegalese association to address the committee, she was immediately impressed when all the lights went out as their Director raised his hands skywards in an impassioned speech. When order was restored some time later, Directors were more than happy to welcome to the fold such an influential new member. The Australian association also re-joined in San Jose - after an absence of just over nine years -contributing to a then record equalling seven associations affiliating in a single year. This conference also saw Harri Henschler quit after eight years as President (and two as Vice-President Professional) and Erik Sermijn assume the top job after a first ever - and still the only - ballot for the position. Regrettably absent through ill health, Bernard Grezet also retired and Sweden's Tord Gustavsson was elected EVP Finance, finally breaking the twenty year Swiss domination of the portfolio. San Jose saw the effective decision to alter the financial year (see Chapter 4), establishment of The Controller Reserve Fund and changes to the nomenclatures of the Executive Board so that the President became President and Chief Executive Officer and the Vice-Presidents became Executive Vice-Presidents.

Committee B had, what can only be described as, a quiet year. The growing traffic difficulties in Europe influenced the debates and resulted in lengthy policy on Air Traffic Flow Management. Whilst this was primarily directed towards the European situation, Directors saw general application in the policy. Important policy on lateral and longitudinal separation was also settled. Unusually, B also went into closed session for the appointment of SC1.

If Committee B didn't make a lot of 'noise', Committee C made up for it although they went about their work in their usual quietly efficient manner. Without doubt, C’s major output in San Jose was their policy on stress reduction. In deciding that when a controller is involved in an accident/incident, he should be entitled to a full counselling service, the Federation gave recognition to a serious concern and provided important guidelines. Rather than just look at stress deriving from work related aspects, the delegates also emphasised that problems arising from socially related areas also should be included and that tuition in stress management should be regularly provided. Directors were provided with a complete new Information Handbook. Belgium's Emile Schodts was awarded the Scroll of Honour for his long commitment to this project. Implementation of Air Safety Reporting Systems resulted in some animated discussion and a Canadian paper on Incident/Accident Investigation resulted in draft policy.

In committee San Jose, April 1986. PCX Henschler and EVP Administration Ulli Windt.

EVP Technical Lex Hendriks is in the background.

The San Jose final plenary turned into a lengthy dosing session. In presenting his Committee C report, chairman Philippe Domogala made specific note of retiring RVP Pacific, Robin Soar. Mentioning twelve years of involvement and six as the RVP, Domogala praised Soars patience, conviction, perseverance and effective work and his ability to listen. In an unusual gesture, President Henschler presented Soar with a plaque inscribed 'In appreciation of long and meritorious service to the Federation'. Robin Soar attended IFATCA conferences as a New Zealand ATCA delegate, IFATCA officer and, later, as a corporate member representative. The author was proud to succeed Robin Soar as the RVP for the Pacific region and there is no doubt the job was made the easier for his efforts over a lengthy period. As well as a valued colleague, he became a good friend, which friendship ended all too soon with Robin's premature death from leukaemia in 1999.

Outgoing President Harri Henschler then addressed conference for the last time. He said, inter alia: "This conference is a first. It is the one where I did not stand for re-election. After eight years, I feel that I have made my contribution. I am happy to hand back to you and over to Erik (Sermijn) a Federation which has never been in better shape. Gone are the days when the Executive Board had to be concerned how to pay tomorrow's postage, or when we did not even own a typewriter. Financially, IFATCA is on an extremely sound footing. We are self-sufficient in equipment and ... our reputation and prestige in the international arena is now such that any matter involving air traffic control automatically means that IFATCA's participation is sought. When I was elected President, I said that there was no greater honour or privilege to a controller than to head IFATCA and now, as I am stepping down, I can assure you that statement was correct. I cannot conceive of any other hobby, although at times it became almost a full time job, which could have afforded me as much involvement and satisfaction."

A standing ovation greeted Harri Henschler's concluding words as delegates recognised the outstanding contribution that he had made to the Federation. In eight years of his stewardship, IFATCA had progressed from a struggling, adolescent organisation of fifty members still trying to define its identity and direction to a mature, self sufficient body with seventy eight Member Associations routinely invited to world forums and widely respected for its views. Harri Henschler must take a lot of the credit for this change.

Tall and dark with a walrus moustache and given to wearing three piece suits, Henschler was an imposing figure and always created an air of authority when dealing with Ministers, CAA Directors and the like. Frequently blunt but always fair, he tackled problems head on and was the ideal person for the tough decisions and the necessary reforms in the Federations administration. There was a perception in the early eighties that Henschler did not favour his colleagues in Africa and the Middle East because of his apparent concentration of effort in the Americas and the Pacific. These areas were naturally easier for him to visit from Canada and so he largely delegated liaison with French and English speaking Africa to Erik Sermijn and Pat O'Doherty in particular. When this disquiet came to his attention, Henschler reacted in typical fashion and visited the Africa region on almost every opportunity thereafter. This frequently meant travelling for three or four days for a one day meeting but that was his nature. A tough façade and approach masked a caring and deep concern for the less well off and he made every effort to ensure that the Federation did its best equally for all members. The dominant figure of IFATCA, and not just of the eighties, H. Harri Henschler provided deft guidance and strong leadership when it was surely needed and left a deep impression on a Federation to which he gave so much.

Replacing Harri Henschler as IFATCA's sixth President was the Belgian, Erik Sermijn. A controller since 1965, Sermijn was no stranger to air traffic controller representation and had, since 1969, been a member of the board of the Belgian Guild. Initially editor of their magazine, Sermijn was then elected Guild President in 1974 and served four terms in that position. No stranger either to IFATCA affairs, Sermijn attended most IFATCA conferences and regional meetings throughout the seventies, chaired the organising committee for IFATCA '79 in Brussels and was a member of SC 4. He became Vice-President Professional in 1982 and retained most of the responsibility for this portfolio following his election as President when the (now) EVP-P position was not occupied for twelve months.

Through two terms as President, Sermijn never failed to impress with his grasp of ATC matters and he appeared to have a photographic memory when it came to referring to the Manual or recalling pertinent matters. He had to step into big shoes but he was supremely efficient and went about his task in a quietly unobtrusive manner. Sermijn was predominantly a diplomat in the French manner who seldom sought confrontation but faced it squarely and approached it confidently always armed with the facts at his finger tips or to the fore of his memory. As with all the Presidents of IFATCA, Erik Sermijn possessed an abiding concern for the more under-privileged of his constituency and he enjoyed considerable credibility, particularly with his French speaking colleagues in Africa and the Middle East.

Promotional work by the Executive Board and the value of the 1979 ILO Conclusions were bearing fruit by the mid-eighties. The San Jose conference resolved "It is recommended to conference that the ILO be requested to undertake a study into ATC conditions in developing countries. " During the conference, the ILO representative reminded Directors of potential Office involvement and the upshot was that the ILO was invited by the Costa Rican government to survey local working conditions. The local government had enthusiastically supported the conference and willingly permitted this survey. Whilst in the neighbourhood, Avi Gil also performed the same task in Panama. No doubt the administrations of these two countries genuinely believed that they were adequately looking after their controllers and ATC systems but subsequent events proved that even these more enlightened administrations had some way to go.

Commencing with the first meeting in 1982, all Executive Council meetings had been held in conjunction with the annual conference. Similarly, the 5th meeting was planned for two days prior to the 1986 conference. However, following an examination of high costs associated with conducting the meeting in San Jose (mostly occasioned by extra accommodation costs through a lack of convenient flights), the Board, at their November, 1985 meeting, decided to break with practise and postponed the meeting until later in the year. It was re-scheduled for September in Amsterdam.

Opening that fifth Executive Council meeting in Amsterdam, President Sermijn explained the reasons for separating the Council meeting from conference. Whilst cost had featured in the original decision, the Board now believed that it was more efficient for it to be held separately as it allowed the Board to concentrate and devote their time unreservedly to the Council without any of the normal distractions at conference. After the normal agenda items like RVP reports, Board activities and international organisation relations, the main agenda item raised was 'Future of the Federation'. Included on the agenda more as the requisite on-going review of operations, this topic served to crystallise a few sentiments from the RVPs, more than half of whom were new since the 1986 annual conference.

During discussions which identified the need for better communication and education within, and more promotion without, the Council focused on the role of the RVP. It was generally agreed that the RVPs needed a higher profile to accomplish their task and that they were not being accorded adequate respect. In acknowledging the Board's acceptance of this fact, the President said this probably was because the Board was elected by all directors at conference whereas the RVPs were elected only by the MAs in each region. Thus, in at least two areas, the scene was set for subsequent events and the very change in time frame for the meeting, seemingly innocuous and otherwise logical in itself, provided the genesis for what was to follow next year.

The year 1986 also saw IFATCA embark upon an ambitious project- production of a publicity video. Entitled “A Blip's Trip", the fifteen minute tape followed a flight from Brussels to Athens and it highlighted the profession of air traffic control and the work of IFATCA. It was intended for use by local TV stations and the like during annual conferences and regional meetings and for Member Associations to publicise the 'cause' at every opportunity including their own conventions. It probably has to be said that this exercise failed to achieve its goals for the video received minimal distribution and very little air time and by conference '88 only thirty copies had been sold.

President Erik Sermijn made a liaison visit to the Asia region in February, 1987 when he undertook a promotional trip to the Philippines. This visit coincided with the commissioning of Manila's new radar equipment and Sermijn had a very full two day visit. On arrival he was involved in a press conference organised by the local association and the next day he met with the majority of the local controllers, CAA representatives and the Minister of Transportation. The topics for discussions, as always, were the poor working conditions and the lack of a realistic salary. The Philippine ATCA President was well prepared for these meetings and he was equipped with a 'Position Paper' outlining the various grievances and a copy of the 1979 ILO Meeting of Experts Conclusions. Sadly, despite this visit and appearances at several regional meetings since, the Philippines ATCA has still not decided to affiliate with IFATCA. It is known that the main obstacle to such affiliation is cost. The Filipino controllers are amongst the poorest paid controllers in the region.

The venue for the 1987 Nairobi conference was the very impressive Jomo Kenyatta Conference Centre situated a little distance from the hotels. This was the first time IFATCA had travelled to sub-Saharan Africa and we were not disappointed. The Kenyans went to considerable effort and were well supported by their administration who was in the process of installing a new national radar system. Even the conference centre administration entered into the IFATCA spirit of true internationalism and went to the trouble of flying the national flags of every Member Association in front of the venue. This caused an unforeseen problem though when the Chinese Embassy in Nairobi objected to the flying of the Taiwanese flag. To their credit, the Kenyans responded by removing all the flags.

There was another intrusion of politics too when South Africa was prevented from attending the conference. As with the experience in Australia in 1975, the organising committee had been assured that there would be no problems but at the last minute, visas were withheld and, for a second time, a southern African country was not represented through political intervention. In response, Australia proposed:

"Conference strongly reaffirms its non-political, international professional position and therefore expresses regret at the inability of some of its Member associations to attend conference." (Res. 87.A.59)

During the final plenary session, Kenya decided to treat delegates to some African weather and there occurred the most tremendous thunderstorm. It even seemed to be raining in the conference centre as the roof sprung several leaks and proceedings were interrupted on several occasions by the loudest thunderclaps imaginable. The thunderstorm resulted in severe flash flooding throughout Nairobi and delegates were forced to remove shoes and socks (and more in some instances) just to cross gutters to board the buses for the return journey to the hotels. Naturally, great delays resulted in the return and most delegates were very late for the final night dinner party which also necessitated bus travel as it was held some distance out of town.

1987 featured a major internal row which went to the very heart of how IFATCA operated and which produced heated, and at times bitter, debate. In what came to be seen in some quarters as something of a 'palace revolt', the hitherto very staid Executive Council erupted with various approaches and understanding of individual’s roles and responsibilities being hotly argued. A flame of argument and dissension was about to sweep through IFATCA. The spark that lit it was ignited in Nairobi.

Elected to the position of Regional Vice President Europe West in San Jose, EGATS' Philippe Domogala came to IFATCA’s upper levels, by those days' standards, as something of a radical, an activist and crusader for change. He also had scant regard for established rules and procedures. In Nairobi, Domogala highlighted the fact that now the Council meeting was not held in concert with conference, RVPs were no longer entitled to expenses to attend the Federations main forum. He demanded they be so recognised and compensated. He also sought representation for the RVPs at Standing Committee meetings, again to be at IFATCA expense.

The Directors agreed with this approach and sought amendments to the budget (which had already been voted on) to cover expenses (including travel if necessary) for the RVPs at conference. Such budgeted expense would have increased expenditures by some CHF13,500 and would have thrown the budget for 1987/ 88 considerably into deficit. The Executive Vice President Finance, Tord Gustavsson, maintained that the Manual did not allow for a deficit budget. The European Directors particularly wanted their RVP at conference and were prepared to pay for him to be there and accepted that paying for one meant having to budget to pay for all ten. There also was a strong body of opinion amongst all the Directors that a deficit budget was permissible and they voted accordingly. Gustavsson found this position intolerable saying he was not prepared to oversee a deficit budget against Manual guidelines and handed in his resignation. IFATCA was in crisis. In closed session, the Directors sought compromise but were faced with reality and Gustavsson only withdrew his resignation when they relented and accepted the original budget.

Tord Gustavsson meets some colleagues during his 14 day liaison visit to the Caribbean, May 1987.

Gustavsson's reconsideration, however, didn't alter some feelings that had developed during the committee discussions. Domogala asked for, and got, an emergency meeting of the Executive Council at the conclusion of committee sessions. At this meeting he sought to consider his position as a member of the Council. Having already received a vote of confidence from his MAs, he now sought similar from the Board in an exercise designed, as he said, to "clear the air". Domogala (and the other RVPs) were appreciative of Board moves to make some accommodation (for example, by moving for the RVP in the region of the conference to officially attend) but still saw some conflict. The point was made that whilst Domogala had authored the offending recommendation to Committee A, it was the Directors who endorsed it and voted for the deficit budget. Nevertheless, the Board opined that the modus operandi of the RVP for Europe West was underhanded in the manner in which he had broached the subject. An extract from the Committee A draft minutes was viewed by the Board as a continued attack on them and another very heated exchange featuring Executive Secretary Pat O'Doherty, Gustavsson and Domogala ensued. The latter two were both obliged to independently leave the room to calm down. The offending remarks were subsequently removed from the Committee A minutes and the emergency session of the Council ended, albeit on a strained note.

Preparing for the next Council meeting over the ensuing months, Domogala authored a paper on the position of RVPs at conference and sought input from his fellow RVPs. However, he made the serious error of only circulating it amongst the RVPs and excluded the Board members. Naturally the Board objected and temperatures at the Council meeting again rose to boiling point. In his defence, Domogala said the limited circulation was only intended to gauge the RVPs' opinions preparatory to presenting a final paper to the full Council but the Board refused to accept that there was unintentional exclusion. Tensions again were high. As discussions continued on how best to ensure that RVPs attend conference with expenses, calm was restored and consensus was reached that attendance by the RVPs was desirable; the question now revolved on how to finance it. The Council then determined to advise SC3 to study the possibility of creating a fund to pay travel expenses for attendance at conference to RVPs, Chairmen and Secretaries of the conference committees, Chairman of the Standing Committees and Liaison Officers. Having achieved this consensus, discussions then turned to 'The Future of the Federation' and this 6th meeting of the Executive Council late in 1987 came to be one of the more important meetings IFATCA has convened. Its importance stemmed not from the volatility of the debate, nor even for what that achieved, but essentially for the course it set the Federation upon. In giving consideration to this exercise in navel gazing, the Council decided that three items should be looked at in more detail: Technical Aspects (Future of ATC), Legal Liabilities of ATCOs and Recognition of the Profession (particularly in developing countries). The collective thought drew on the comments of twelve months earlier and looked to create a new executive structure more attuned to the Federations membership's needs and one that was more responsive to possible demands and communication requirements. Thus the groundwork was laid for the decisive meeting twelve months later.

There is no doubt that this debate, whilst at times acrimonious, benefited IFATCA in the overall context. By the time of the Executive Council meeting of 1988, the Board had come to acknowledge the changing and advancing role of the RVPs and recognised the disparity in the status of a Regional Vice-President vis-à-vis an Executive Vice-President. With their re-structure proposal, the Board sought to redress this by recommending full Executive Board status for them.

No organisation can afford to become moribund in its approach and, in a dynamic area such as air traffic control, the controllers' representative body must ensure that it retains its dynamism. The 1988 Executive Council, having reflected over twelve months on the Federations future, considered how best to do just that in order to meet the challenges of change with the approaching nineties. It was an unusual meeting for the body effectively voted for its own demise. The discussions focused on the need for better communications both top down and bottom up. The Council decided that the way forward was to abolish the current 'regionalisation' of the Federation and the Regional Vice-President position and consolidate the existing 10 regions into just four 'super' regions and to elevate the representatives for those regions to full Board members. Basically, they were cutting out the middleman. Such decision was conveyed to the Frankfurt conference six months later and the concept was accepted by the Directors. The Directors created 'Task Force 1' and charged it with definition of the necessary Constitution and Bye-Law changes and preparation of the documentation to enact the changes. Task Forces 2 and 3 were similarly established to oversee the amendments to the Technical and Professional aspects of the Manual.

The subsequent Council meeting in Lisse, The Netherlands late in 1989 was a sober affair with those present realising that some faces would be 'disappearing' from IFATCA after some valuable input. It was readily accepted by all the RVPs, however, that the changes were necessary. It had been highlighted more than once that the RVPs were in an invidious position. One situation in particular dearly demonstrated their lack of credibility with some administrations by not holding 'executive' status. The RVP for East Africa had a relatively high profile (despite his diminutive size!) through strong representation but was getting nowhere with a certain set of negotiations. Two members of the Board flew down to lend a hand and as soon as the Minister met with the Executive of the Federation, an immediate concession was made and a 40% salary increase was granted! The RVP, Steve Mworia from Tanzania, unfortunately was one of those who faded from the scene as a result of the re-structure.

Another example of the Board's commitment to developing areas came in May, 1987 when the EVP Finance, Tord Gustavsson made a lengthy liaison visit to the Caribbean. In fourteen days, Gustavsson visited five countries (some more than once) and had over forty individual meetings with personalities such as Ministers for Civil Aviation and Civil Service Affairs, Directors of Civil Aviation, Airports Authorities, Chief Air Traffic Controllers, airline chief pilots, local ATC associations and others.

In the long journey towards professional recognition that the founders of IFATCA embarked upon in 1961, there have been many steps, some large, some small. One of the significant steps was made in 1987. In that year IFATCA learned of a review of the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO). Following an approach via the International Labour Office, IFATCA was successful in having the occupation of air traffic controller moved from the clerical classification to the professional area. It was an apparently small but nonetheless significant change in status. The first article of the Convention framed back in 1961 states "The parties hereto bind themselves to promote, maintain and enhance the stature of the air traffic control profession .... ". In an attempt to create, and have recognised, a profession out of a job of work, the European associations founded an organisation with that view in mind. The ISCO recognition was further evidence that their lofty desires were being achieved.

In January, 1988 President Sermijn undertook a liaison visit to West Africa. In visiting two countries, new MA Senegal and non-MA Gabon, he was able to participate in frank and open discussions with the local aviation authorities on matters such as controllers responsibilities, working conditions, salaries, improved training and the desirability of assisting controllers to attend IFATCA meetings. The visits provided the opportunity for face to face meetings with senior officials, local controllers and other persons such as pilots and contributed to mutual understanding and impressed on all IFATCA's role in international civil aviation.

Not long after arriving home from the African continent, Sermijn again had to pack his bags when IFATCA travelled to the South American continent for the first time (although it was not Sermijn's first visit) with conference '88 held in Rio de Janeiro. In many areas of South America, air traffic control was in crisis in the late eighties and this 27~ annual conference served to focus attention on a critical area. The conference had as its central theme 'Efficiency in Air Safety' but it was noted from the outset that there were many controllers not being provided with the equipment necessary to ensure that efficiency, and therefore the optimum safety, in local air transport. The position was being further compromised by staffing and working conditions problems.

The host association, Brazil, itself was one of the Member Associations experiencing grave difficulties in these areas throughout the eighties. That they simultaneously managed to mount the Federation's annual showcase was nothing short of miraculous and most of the credit must go to their President at the time, Paulo Alfonso de Menezes, truly a one man dynamo.

Next generation technology featured in the discussions of Committee B in Rio. Deliberations on ICAO's new FANS concept and the Future European Air Traffic Services (FEATS) certainly represented major steps up from earlier technical considerations of Non Directional Beacons, etc but typically delegates were able to make major contributions to all aspects of the debates and additionally they determined policy on Airborne Collision Avoidance Systems and satellite based aircraft position determining systems. A major discussion on the 'new' topic of 1,000' vertical separation above FL290 also featured. Meanwhile over in the Committee C meeting room, they were expressing concern about the diminishing returns for the IHB questionnaires. Following the suggestion from an RVP, it was decided that the RVPs would, in future, be responsible for collecting the completed questionnaires from their MAs at the regional meetings. Consideration for the first time was given to night shift paralysis and first policy on the creation of air safety reporting systems and voluntary non-disciplinary confidential reporting systems was established. Committee C deliberations were, at one stage, interrupted by a loud scream when Madam Chairman Lesley Austin protested at the appearance of a large brown creature, with more legs than any creature has a right to, strolling across the front of the head table. Not one to be afraid of creepy crawlies, however, Lesley insisted that her loud protest was more directed to the fact that the animal wasn't wearing a delegate's badge!

Committee A noted that Rio represented Ted McCluskey's 25th consecutive conference and duly awarded him the Scroll of Honour "in recognition of outstanding service to the Federation". Following on from the Executive Council discussions six months earlier, directors took note of proceedings in that forum and authorised the Council to prepare working papers for 1990 for the restructure of the Federation. They also directed the Council to include in their deliberations the concept of bi-ennial conferences and permanent positions for Board members although, as we shall see, neither of these moves resulted in firm proposals. What did eventuate, however, was the later decision arising from a resolution directing SC3 to study the creation of a fund to cover attendance costs at conference for the RVPs, conference committee chairmen and secretaries and SC chairmen.

Despite a couple of incidents in the streets, delegates were most impressed by the beauty of Rio and its beaches and more than one immersed himself in the ambiance of the salsa and Copacabana restaurants and bars. It was a truly delightful four days although the visitors were constantly aware of the destruction just two months earlier caused by torrential flooding rains with a high loss of life in the barrios. Perhaps pre-occupation with that tragedy explained the total absence of governmental support for the conference. There had been some criticism of the lack of catered functions (despite a high registration fee) but delegates mostly took that in their stride and, in farewelling delegates, de Menezes said "We would like to apologise for the faults committed but we would like to make clear that this conference was done without any help from either the Federal Government or Brazilian airlines. The Brazilian ATCA, with few resources, but with a great disposition to work, made the dream come true." It was a remarkable effort.

Occasionally, individual members of IFATCA have been heard to query "What's in it for me?" Influencing ICAO and having well-considered policy accepted and introduced into international aviation guidelines is often a long winded and drawn out exercise. Air traffic controllers are accustomed to instant decisions and reactions therefrom and many delegates' home associations are very dynamic in their approach and, shall we say, more aggressive with their negotiations. The slower (more cautious?) pace of IFATCA and the bureaucratic machinations of ICAO were therefore a constant source of frustration to many; thus prompting the question. In an attempt to explain, convince and, perhaps, convert, Executive Secretary Pat O'Doherty produced two brochures - “Why IFATCA?" and "How Does IFATCA Work”. The first of these publications simply stated the benefits and need for membership of the organisation providing the only voice speaking for air traffic controllers where it counted and the second outlined the Federations structure and modus operandi for those unfamiliar with the organisation. Both publications are still available and also are now produced in French and Spanish.

1987 had ended with another needless tragedy when Korean Airlines Flight KAL858 was destroyed mid air by a bomb whilst flying from Baghdad to Seoul in November. As though having had the tone set, 1988 was then an even worse year for aviation with several serious incidents which continued to highlight the exposure of international aviation to culpable acts and the reluctance by governments on both sides of the political and moral fence to accept responsibility for their action or inaction. The first incident was yet another hijacking, this time a Kuwaiti Airlines aircraft, which ended with two passengers murdered. In July, an United States warship in the Persian Gulf shot down Iran Air Flight 655 with the loss of 290 lives. The U.S. government still maintains that the A300 failed to squawk the correct code and was identified as a threat to the American fleet in the Gulf. Then, in December, PanAm Flight 103 was destroyed by a bomb over Lockerbie, Scotland killing all 259 passengers and crew on board the B747 and eleven people on the ground. It wasn’t until 1999 that the United States and the United Kingdom were able to commence proceedings in the Netherlands (a tri-laterally agreed neutral country) against two Libyan citizens although there remains considerable speculation that the Lockerbie bombing was a revenge attack by Iranian extremists.

Following its birth in the Americas, the blight of hijacking had tended to concentrate mainly in Europe, the Middle East and Asia. One instance, however, in sub-Saharan Africa occurred in Tanzania in February, 1988 but on this occasion there was a happy ending and recognition of the prominent role played by an air traffic controller. An Air Tanzania B737, on a domestic flight, was taken over and ordered to fly to London. Realising they needed extra fuel, the hijackers ordered the aircraft to Lowdar airport in neighbouring Kenya but the Tanzanian controller, Gratis Rwenyagira, convinced the hijackers that the captain was talking to Lowdar tower and directed the aircraft back to Dar es Salaam. Discovering they had been tricked, the hijackers surrendered to security officials and the situation was resolved without casualties or damage to the aircraft. Mr. Rwenyagiri was subsequently awarded a Presidential Medal of Bravery for his actions.

We have already seen some of the difficulties faced by the RVPs and how they sometimes lacked the necessary respect. This in turn limited some of their approaches locally. Consequently, their endeavours did not always bear fruit but it must be said that sometimes this could be blamed on a lack of input by the RVPs themselves. Such lack of participation was the exception rather than the rule, however, and one initiative in November, 1988 highlighted what could be achieved by an RVP's imagination, dedication and perseverance. In 1987, the RVP for North and Central America, Hugo Esquivel, put a proposal to the Board that IFATCA sponsor a seminar on air traffic control supervision. The Board supported the idea providing it was at no expense to the Federation and that no resources be allocated thereto. Undaunted, Esquivel pursued the idea and, with IFATCA endorsement, managed to convince the Costa Rica Civil Aviation Board to provide financial assistance and the Costa Rica ATC Association to provide logistical help. Finally, he needed an instructor, a person with relevant experience, a desire to contribute without compensation and someone with the time available. In the end, he didn't have to look far, for such a person was sitting right next to him at the Executive Council meeting: ex-President and then current Editor, Harri Henschler. And as his record showed, Henschler was always a willing volunteer.

Esquivel's idea was for a course that aimed at providing an overview of the role of the supervisor within the framework of his ATC duties and to expand the supervisor's knowledge of management practises and principles. Subjects to be covered included behaviour theories, managerial functions, labour relations, delegation, problem solving, managing change, leadership, performance review and effective report writing. With time generously granted by Transport Canada, Henschler was able to spend ten days instructing and sharing his experience and knowledge with nine senior local professionals: six from Costa Rica and one each from Guatemala, Nicaragua and Panama.

Participants in Hugo Esquivel's supervisor seminar, November 1988. Hugo is 3rd from the right.

Was Hugo Esquivel's vision realised? One of the participants, Herbert Arburola, had this to say: "Costa Rica has been the scene of an extremely important event in the air traffic controller's professional field. More than a course or a seminar, it was also an experiment - its intent, to qualify a group of controllers in the supervision field. The experiment has ended very satisfactorily. The presence of Harri Henschler was instrumental for a successful course (and) thanks to his professional qualifications, effort and patience, the seminar was a success." Esquivel's seminar was a one of a kind and more is the pity. It is this style of input that IFATCA could well have indulged in more frequently and in more areas. The nineties did see some different styles of professional knowledge input but they were pitched to a wider audience and not directly and specifically towards individual controllers. The Costa Rica seminar was an example of significant contribution by a regional representative and one deserving of follow up. It was a perfect example of the very kind of representation IFATCA was aiming at with the institution of regionalisation via the Executive Council and, later, with the Executive Vice-Presidents.

After successively conferencing far afield in San Jose, Nairobi and Rio de Janeiro, Directors felt it was time to return to Europe and accepted the offer of Germany to host the conference for a second time. The VDF organising committee saved on airport transfers for the 28th conference was held in the Frankfurt/Main airport hotel. That seemed to be the only area where the VDF economised as it was a non-stop total package and the Frankfurt conference remains in the author's mind as the most 'full on' gathering ever attended. Socially, the accompanying persons' programme and the evening events started early and ended late and delegates were not left wanting. From the mayoral reception in the centuries old Römer (city hall) to a wine tasting and baroque string quartet in the medieval Eberbach monastery to a (very) late evening cruise on the Rhine river, delegates rarely had time to catch their breath. Somehow we managed to fit in the business required and it proved to be a most decisive conference.

It was a key time to return to Europe for whilst IFATCA's back was turned, as it were, traffic had escalated alarmingly and staffing levels had apparently stagnated. The German government, for one, was quoting annual traffic increases of 15% since 1986 (with some areas showing 28%) with a predicted doubling of traffic by the year 2000. Looking at the other side of the coin, an IFATCA survey revealed that many MAs were deficient in numbers and several were suffering a serious shortfall in controller personnel. Projecting ahead three years, the situation was set to worsen. The overall position in Europe - the most critical area - indicated that the shortfall averaged between 15% and 20%. With liberalisation of air agreements slated for 1992, the promised increased capacity might not be met because of the manpower problems. This had been a constant theme of IFATCA representatives to the ICAO Informal Flow meetings since 1987. Despite an historical reluctance to become involved in staff related matters, ICAO was forced to bow to the inevitable and put the ball firmly in the national administrations' court when they said that any substantial increase in capacity would depend upon the provision of adequately trained and motivated staff in sufficient numbers. Looking at the lead time for placement of qualified controllers, ICAO further noted that recruitment of sufficient staff for training should start forthwith for practically all ATS systems in the high density traffic areas of the region. Not only that but the shortages in the central administrative planning offices were threatening to delay the development of system improvements, improvements that would be needed to cope with the predicted traffic increases.

The Summer of 1988 had seen chaos and huge delays throughout the European system and serious questions were being asked by the media and the travelling public who also wanted answers. The realities of the declining numbers of controllers versus the tremendous increases in the numbers of aircraft movements became obvious and served to explain the industrial actions in France, Greece, Spain and Yugoslavia and the placement of Belgium controllers under mobilisation to prevent them joining in. The German controllers undertook a press campaign to publicise their working conditions and salaries and to explain the fantastic delays and financial losses the airlines were suffering. The European Air Navigation Planning Group asked ICAO to write to each European State to implement the recruitment and training conclusions. The twenty two Transport Ministers of the European Civil Aviation Conference fully supported the recruitment and training programmes and a review of ATC working procedures. The next informal ICAO flow meeting confirmed the ATC working procedures review "in an improving industrial relations climate" and affirmed, that since the controller remains the predominant element of ATC capacity, appropriate working environments, good facilities and sufficient staffing must be made available. All this unprecedented urging and action stemmed from IFATCA Member Association actions and prompting. It was against this background that delegates gathered in Frankfurt.

Reflecting the Board's pleasure and satisfaction with the efforts of IFATCA's representatives to the various groups and panels - and in particular, FEATS - over the previous twelve months, President Sermijn noted the high level of activity by the people concerned. The most notable of these were Philippe Domogala and Kurt Kihr, RVPs for Europe West and Europe Central respectively, and Sermijn said that the "application and dedication of our representatives to FEATS has resulted in the Federations concerns being more than adequately addressed". Naturally the serious situation in Europe occupied the thoughts of delegates in Committee B and they agreed that ATFM measures should not be considered as the long term solution to a shortage of ATC capacity and that future systems should be planned to accept increases rather than just meeting present needs. (Res. 89.B.18 and 89.B.19) Whilst on the surface not hard hitting words, the resolutions plainly stated the need bearing in mind that the Federations concerns were now being addressed by the politicians in ECAC. Delegates also considered other vital matters such as the effects on system capacity through reduction of vertical separation minima and looked to the future through a commitment for involvement with the emerging Communications, Navigation and Surveillance (CNS) technologies. Important in-house matters were addressed in Frankfurt and the Technical Policy Material was reviewed - including removal of Policy Support Material with replacement by Guidance Material - and the position of Technical Policy Coordinator was created. Frankfurt also saw an unusual (for those times) Committee B occurrence when a working paper was referred to another committee. A Canadian paper, ‘ATC Within ICAO Assigned International Airspace -The Impact of Technology', was deemed to have legal and labour implications in one of its recommendations and was thus deemed worthy of consideration by Committee C.

The Executive Board had become concerned with this subject as they saw possible intrusion into a less advanced State's ATC system by a neighbouring technologically advanced State should technology become a deciding factor in reorganisation of ICAO assigned international airspace. And more than just a technical consideration, it was believed there was potential - if such a reorganisation went ahead - for the neighbouring State to assume responsibilities in the event of industrial action and even that technology industries could begin to dictate ATC affairs and airspace. It proved to be one of the more interesting philosophical, technical and (sshhh!) industrial debates of the times. Finally, Directors decided

"That the current ICAO assignment of international airspace NOT be modified/ changed based solely on the development/implementation of technology by one or more States, unless agreed to by all MAs concerned." (Res. 89.C.10)

Continuing with this theme of industrial action concerns, Frankfurt saw a strongly worded recommendation which sprang directly from the industrial activity of 1988 in Europe. It said

"IFATCA strongly condemns the action of governments in resorting to civil mobilisation for the purpose of preventing national disputes. Only negotiation or arbitration shall be used to prevent or end disputes." (Res. 89.C.16)

Support for this stance came from the ILO and IFATCA's Liaison Officer in Geneva pointed out the ILO's Freedom of Association tenets condemn mobilisation to break a strike, freezing basic industrial rights and no alternative mechanisms being set up for immediate negotiations. (See also Chap. 8) Committee C then went on to determine policy for pregnant ATCOs (having the right not to sit in front of CRT/VDU screens), loss of licence insurance and ATC licensing (that they must be licensed and they must hold ratings appropriate to the position exercised). It was a big year for C and, for once, they finished after the other committees.

President Erik Sermijn opens the re-structure conference in Acapulco, April 1990.

Committee A came in second in the longevity stakes mainly because of a planned protracted discussion on the re-structure issue. More than 3 hours were devoted to the subject and this was certainly not too long for something of such fundamental importance. Directors expressed some concern over the sheer size of the new regions feeling that perhaps they were too large for a single representative. It was pointed out that along with regional sub-divisions, possible regional executives, direct access to other Board members and better communication and higher involvement, those concerns would be overcome. Once the question of how the new regional EVPs were to be elected was decided, Directors agreed in principle with the proposal and referred it to 1990 for a final decision. After many years of attending conference, the Russians finally affiliated, an appropriate move in the year of glasnost and perestroika. The Americans also turned up again as observers but were not quite ready to match their Russian colleagues and made promises for next year. Also joining in Frankfurt were three African nations - Djibouti, Namibia and Uganda and Bolivia and Papua New Guinea. The venue for the 1991 conference proved to be a hotly contested ballot with no less than four MAs volunteering. Trinidad and Tobago won through after three secret ballots.

At the conclusion of conference, the Board issued a press release and predicted that the 'chaos' of 1988 would be repeated in the forthcoming Summer. Alongside the airlines and passengers, the release identified the European air traffic controllers as 'victims' of the situation created by national administrations not taking advantage of their controllers' expertise, not following their recommendations and, in some cases, not even providing adequate facilities such as basic radar. The 28th annual conference had been timed to perfection being held in Europe at a time of great public frustration and high traffic demand. It proved to be the perfect vehicle to clearly delineate IFATCA's stance and convey the organisation's fears for the future as well as its recipe for a solution. It was with no sense of satisfaction that President Sermijn said at the outset in Frankfurt: "This Federation has been predicting for many years an air traffic control crisis. I have to say (now) that the crisis is no longer looming, it is there already in most parts of the world." However, IFATCA could ill afford, and had no wish, to sit back and say "I told you so". As Sermijn said: "Although we are not responsible for this crisis, we should use all of our efforts to find a solution and the sooner the better." With its invaluable input to the ATFM and FEATS meetings, and with the support given its delegates by the Frankfurt decisions, IFATCA had already taken great strides down that path and was, in fact, leading the way.

The press release generated considerable interest and resulted in an increased number of media requests for information on air traffic control in Europe. The Summer of 1989 saw a further 10% increase in traffic with little or no improvement in the staffing situation. What did materialise, however, was a better distribution of the traffic throughout the days and this greatly helped the situation. Some countries were looking at alternative methods and were even giving thought to privatisation of their ATC services. Change was on the way!

As usual, the Frankfurt conference was a four day affair but a special event was provided on Friday 12th May, 1989. For a very nominal cost, 110 delegates boarded a chartered B727 and flew to West Berlin. At the time, the East German State was alive (although, as events proved, not quite so well) and delegates were treated to a tour of the Berlin Wall and other parts of West Berlin. It was a fascinating visit and afforded many people their first (and as it turned out, their last) glimpse of the infamous Wall, East Berlin and the measures taken by the DDR to keep the two Berlins and two Germanys separate. The trip was made all the more memorable when, just a few short months later, the Soviet empire and European communism collapsed and the Wall was dismantled.

As a change from the usual disturbances in Europe, 1989 saw considerable industrial unrest in Zambia and legal action against the controllers was taken by the administration. IFATCA made some contribution towards their costs and President Sermijn made a liaison visit in connection. In the earlier part of the year, he also visited Kenya, Morocco, South Africa, and Tanzania. Sermijn further made liaison visits to the ILO in Geneva and the ICAO in Montreal where he met the new Secretary General and representatives of IFALPA and IATA. Added to the Frankfurt conference, an Association of European Airlines seminar, an ECAC task force meeting on integration, two meetings with IFALPA, the Council meeting and all the Executive Board meetings, Sermijn had an extremely varied and involved, but relatively typical, year. Little wonder that he fell ill just after the Council meeting and had to cancel several other official trips. (See Chapter 4- High Finances)

One of the final acts of 1989 was the last meeting of the Executive Council. (See earlier this Chapter) Created way back in 1973 but never actually meeting until 1982, the Executive Council was something of an enigma in IFATCA. The Regional Vice-Presidents, who made up the bulk of the Council, were largely powerless in their own bailiwicks and were mostly ignored by ICAO. Their real role was as internal organisers in their regions rather than serious external representatives and it was only in conveying the mood of their electorate to the Board directly at the actual Council meetings that they made positive input to the running of the Federation. It is supremely ironical that the 1988 decision reached with the Board members on the restructure, and which effectively sounded its death knell, represents the highlight of the Council's life.

Councillors and Board members at the last Executive Counsil meeting, September 1989. Hugo Esquivel, Kurt Kihr,

Philippe Domogala & Wim Rooseman (above) and Tord Gustavsson, Ulli Windt, Papa N'Daye,

Abou el Seoud el Karimy & Vivien Hanenberg (below)

We have already seen how Frankfurt agreed with the proposal of disbanding the Executive Council and expanding the Executive Board. However, the 1989 conference didn't actually change anything. The Board and the Council had seen the need to fully apprise the directors of the concept and gain their acceptance before taking the idea into concrete form. The specially created 'Task Force 1' under EVP Administration Ulli Windt was given this task. The actual changes were to be brought to Acapulco for implementation.

As we have seen before, all decisions taken at IFATCA conferences only operate as from the end of conference. Whilst this occasionally causes difficulties, it is a necessary tactic to ensure that Directors are aware of what rules they are operating under even though some of them may be in the process of being (or already have been) changed. However, this would of course mean that it would only be at the next conference again (that is, 1991) from whence any re-structure changes would be in force because any elections, etc conducted in Acapulco would be under the old rules and thus would be valid for the following year. To overcome this adoption period, the Board proposed a novel solution.

Two days prior to the Acapulco conference, they programmed a Special Conference with just one item on the agenda: Restructuring the Federation. There were three Working Papers presented. They covered in detail the necessary rewrites of the Constitution and the bye-laws dealing with the Executive Board and Regional Organisation. Directors accepted all the proposals without any amendments. Only the second ever Special Conference called, this tactic enabled the new structure to be in place for the normally scheduled conference. Thus the new positions could be filled without delay.

The main conference got off to a bright start with a typically direct address from President Sermijn. Comparing IFATCA to Mexico where ancient cultures meet modern life, he instanced items from the up-coming agenda whereby delegates would be discussing high-tech items such as FANS, ADS, MLS and TCAS alongside desperate measures such as TIBA. Thirty years earlier, the problems were more or less shared equally. In 1990, for some the problems hadn't changed, for others they had become more complex. The Federation was being forced to keep abreast of the high technology developments whilst simultaneously pressing for basic services. Increasingly, these conflicting pressures would have to be addressed by the 'new' IFATCA.

Along with the necessary Constitutional changes and bye-law amendments, the Directors accepted that the Acapulco conference proper could go ahead with elections for Deputy President (the old EVP Administration), EVP Africa (combining the old positions from Africa North, East and West and Middle East), EVP Americas (combining North & Central America, South America and the Caribbean), EVP Asia Pacific (combining, yes you guessed it, Asia and Pacific) and EVP Europe (consolidating Europe West and Central). These changes, the first real re-structuring of the governing body since the Federation's inception (the institution of the Executive Council could more be considered an additional tier of government rather than a basic change to the style of government), better positioned the Federation to enter the new decade with its attendant challenges and problems.

Adding to the 'newness' of the new format Executive Board, Acapulco elections resulted in a new President (transferring from just one year as EVP Technical), a new EVP Finance, a new EVP Technical and a new EVP Europe. (The EVPs for Americas, Africa and Asia/Pacific were familiar faces having being elected from their areas of responsibility on the old Council.) These new positions, fresh faces and incumbents (the average age was only 41 years) were to bring a change of style to match the changes wrought. In terms of both structure and personnel, IFATCA was ready for the nineties!

Heading this fresh team as President was Charles Stuart from Australia. Already a serious internationalist by his teens, he was born in Egypt of British parents, lived in India until he was eight and then was educated in England. Leaving school, Stuart became a merchant seaman before emigrating to Australia (and air traffic control) in 1962. Stuart served four terms as President of the Australian association (1976-82 and 1986-88) and the Australian controllers made great advances under his leadership, particularly during the first three terms when gains such as significant salary increases and loss of licence insurance (paid by the employer) were won. He was one of the international experts at the 1979 ILO meeting on ATC and became IFATCA's EVP Technical in 1989. Charles Stuart was a real consensus man and superb team leader, always leading by example and always able to extract the best from his fellow board members.

Of course, for there to be new faces, there must be departures. The reduction in the number of regions ensured that nearly all of the Council faces would be disappearing but coincidentally, several key players from the old Executive Board were also exiting. Foremost amongst these was Erik Sermijn. Full of innovative ideas and probably more responsible for the changes this conference wrought than anyone else, Sermijn said his goodbyes "not because I am bored with the job as President" but satisfied that he "was instrumental in the restructuring of our Federation". He was elected President in 1986 in San Jose in the North and Central America region. He retired in Acapulco in 1990 in the same, but now re-titled, Americas region.

Acapulco marked the last conference too for Executive Secretary Pat O'Doherty. The 'Doc' became Executive Secretary in 1983 when Ted Bradshaw tragically died. Four years as Irish ATC Association President and several conferences as Committee C chairman preceded his election to the IFATCA Board. Originally elected as EVP Administration in 1979, O'Doherty and Bradshaw were soul mates who spent considerable time planning the administrative reorganisation of the still conservative Federation they jointly administered. This had only been partly achieved when Bradshaw tragically died so it was a natural transition for O'Doherty to migrate to his friend's position - a move that Bradshaw himself had made. O'Doherty then occupied the Executive Secretariat for almost eight years and in that time oversaw great changes. Chief amongst these was the introduction of computers - O'Doherty started with a Commodore 128 - and faxes. It was he who started IFATCA printing its own stationery and he who had conference working papers formatted and printed in uniform presentation. Prior to that, the WPs were presented to conference as submitted and frequently were not exactly professional, to say the least. O'Doherty was also chiefly responsible for changing the nomenclature of the Board officers in the way of corporate entities. The 'Doc' worked for IFATCA from the seventies into the nineties, a time of great change and pressure and he formed an especially close knit working relationship with Harri Henschler and Erik Sermijn. The Federation benefited hugely as a result and Pat O'Doherty left a substantial void as he bowed out in Acapulco¹.

Also saying farewell in Acapulco after four years in the demanding position was EVP Finance, Tord Gustavsson. No doubt in part because of his refusal to accept the deficit budget proposal in 1987, Gustavsson was able to depart leaving the Federations finances in a very healthy state. This situation allowed Directors to make some provisions for those MAs experiencing difficulties in paying their dues through financial or currency exchange problems. The USSR, for instance, was permitted to open a bank account in Moscow and paid their dues, in roubles, into that account. As a means of then utilising those funds, the Board held a meeting in Moscow in June, 1991. Gustavsson handed over to another Swede, Sture Ericsson, although an epoch to rival the Swiss financial era was not envisaged.

Another key decision in Acapulco was that to revert to a five day conference. Recent conferences, with Frankfurt in particular, had demonstrated that four days now meant crowded and hurried committee deliberations and placed great strain on the conference secretariat. From 1991 onwards, delegates would meet over five days.

New age technology made an appearance in Committee B with Secretary Art Cauty introducing his lap top computer for minutes taking. It assisted greatly and such use is now relatively common. Additionally, there was another first with a visual presentation on MLS by SCI's Paul Johnson. Again, this style of presentation has become commonplace, especially in Committee C in more recent years. Committee C's major contribution in 1990 was a definition of 'Minimum Service' for guidance to MAs. Interestingly, this varied from the ILO's definition as delegates considered the ILO didn't go far enough. An extensive policy on accident and incident investigation was also accepted.

Certainly, there was expressed some scepticism and concerns about the new structure, especially in regard to the sheer size of the regions, and Europe in particular, but the overwhelming feeling was that this was the correct way forward to ensure better representation and efficient management of the Federation. The preceding special conference provided the perfect vehicle to address the concerns and allay the fears. No doubt, partly because of this, in the business sessions Acapulco seemed to be a 'quiet' conference. The committee agendas were less extensive than usual and certainly less controversial. It was as though delegates were coming to grips with the new style management structure, taking a deep collective breath and preparing themselves for a very important decade in aviation and Federation history.

IFATCA was learning that every day presented new challenges and that the degree of those challenges was increasing. Over thirty years the Federation had witnessed a relatively slow evolution in ATC technology. The next decade would be witness to a quantum leap both in procedures and facilities and the challenges presented would surely outstrip all of those previously met. Without doubt, somehow IFATCA involvement would need to commensurately increase, both qualitatively and qualitatively. In stepping down as President, Erik Sermijn was proud to say that he had been instrumental in providing the structure that would enable an efficacious management of the challenges the nineties were about to bestow upon IFATCA. The Federation would need that new management, and a great deal more, for its fourth decade.

CHAPTER 8

IFATCA: Super Union or Professional Organisation?

Which way to go - professional or industrial? This was the leading question that confronted IFATCA's founders from the outset.

In the aftermath of the Second World War, Europe had to concentrate on rebuilding its cities and industries and wages were maintained at low levels. In the main, people accepted this but, by the end of the fifties, some dissenting voices were beginning to be heard. It was in this same era that many of the national ATC associations in Europe were formed. Since a number of the founders of those associations had met each other during their ATC training courses (mostly at Hum in England), they were, from the outset, communicating on matters of mutual professional interest. Thus it was a natural extension for the principle of these ATC associations to be centred on professional cooperation and technical concerns formed their base. Whilst industrial activity in many industries wasn't a natural course of action and, for that matter, not even a strong philosophy in many parts of Europe in the late fifties, there is little question, however, that union activism played an important role in the approach to aspects of the job for a number of controllers. Unionism was an accepted facet of life in some leading European countries, notably England and France, and many who had given some thought to founding an international organisation for air traffic controllers saw international unionism as the way forward for the controllers too. However, unions did not have an enviable reputation at the time and the leading figures in the formation of IFATCA, many of whom were strong union members themselves, fell back on their national association principles concluding that the betterment of the air traffic control profession lay in that direction.

Accordingly, Tekstra, Thau, Rüthy and their fellow European controllers, whilst not disavowing their industrial roots, went to the 1961 Amsterdam meeting with the conviction that another way was more appropriate. The goal of improving the professional status of the controller was the same with both the pro-union and the anti-union parties. Only the philosophy or strategy differed. The belief that an improved status, achieved by way of high quality input to international technical forums, would eventually lead to a rise in the social standing held sway. As well, there was a realisation that a professional approach would form a better basis for, and facilitate discussions with, other international bodies. Militant unionists would have little chance of serious engagement with the States' representatives at ICAO or Eurocontrol or with the technical representatives at those organisations.

Many of these men present in Frankfurt were senior figures in air traffic control in their respective countries and already knew the people they would be dealing with as Federation representatives. Thus there was a degree of behind the scenes discussion and consultation on the most practical approach and it came as no surprise to them when high placed personalities in their Authorities and elsewhere laid particular stress upon the direction that they believed IFATCA must take.

Delivering the opening address to the inaugural conference in Amsterdam, the Netherlands' Director General of Civil Aviation immediately set the theme.

Speaking of the Dutch Guild, but certainly including IFATCA in the ambit of his intent, the D-G said "the objective of a Guild (must be) clean cut and not mixed with trade union interests. The establishment of an international federation is a logical step, if- and I would stress this again - it is the aim to enable the national associations to widen their range of vision to study jointly the problems...".

Eurocontrol's Mr. Soward wasn't far behind when, at the first annual conference six months later, he frankly stated that he was attending only "on the understanding that the aims of IFATCA are technical and professional and that the Federations constitution specifically excludes from its activities matters which are the prime objects of trade unions."

Interestingly, no such enjoinders were forthcoming from the various ICAO representatives attending the first IFATCA meetings. It was a poorly kept secret at the time that the establishment of an international organisation for air traffic controllers was viewed with a great deal of suspicion by ICAO member States. Despite the sincere idealism of the founders, some States foresaw difficulties with future relationships and maintained a belief that the individual controller's interests could best be looked after by the States themselves. Of course, it was the contrary belief that was the very foundation for the moves towards an independent international organisation.

As we saw in Chapter 2, 'Tek' Tekstra entered into the spirit of non-trade unionism when he outlined IFATCA's philosophy of not interfering with the employer/employee relationship which was to be left to the national trade unions.

He couldn't have been more emphatic in this approach when he said "IFATCA excludes from its activities all matters which are the prime object of trade unions or staff associations." Whilst no doubt such lofty ideals were promised in good faith, one would have had to have been extremely naive to fail to consider that overlapping of aims and concerns were bound to occur. Furthermore, whilst in Europe staff associations may not have been trade unions, in the New World (and IFATCA sought such membership from the outset) this certainly was the case. Very early affiliations from countries as geographically and culturally diverse as Canada, New Zealand and Uruguay and increasing activities on 'the home front' with countries such as France¹ ensured that difficulties in holding to this approach would come sooner rather than later. Nonetheless, 'Tek' and his colleagues made their promises in good faith and, generally speaking, kept to them for IFATCA's first decade. Throughout the sixties, the Federation did remain aloof from engagement in any industrial activities. Because of its charter, and no doubt its oft stated distancing from involvement, in turn its Member Associations did not seek to include either the Federation or their fellow Member Associations when their members were engaged in a form of action. Such an attitude was to make things difficult for President Monin early in the seventies as we shall see. Well before that though, IFATCA's first 'rebellion' would have its genesis, not in the technical or professional fields as one might suspect given its avowed intentions and emphasis in those areas, but in concerns over members' welfare, traditionally a trade union domain.

In its initial year, responsibility for the Standing Committee for Professional Status and Environmental Problems in ATC (the original SCI) was vested in the Austrian association under the chair of Mr. Ottokar Schubert, President of the association and a signatory to the IFATCA Convention. In the most comprehensive committee report delivered to the 1963 conference, Schubert mentioned an already distributed questionnaire on organisation of ATC units, recruitment and training aspects and licensing issues. The report went on to advise that a further questionnaire was planned to gather information on working conditions, duty hours and legal responsibilities, among other things. After evaluation of such information, the committee planned to frame associated proposals for the following conference.

Whilst the committee's report was accepted, concerns were expressed that some of the activities of the committee could be misinterpreted in regard to the technical character of the Federation. Under pressure from the Elective Officers (the Executive Board), it was therefore decided that "the committee shall undertake no action or disseminate data outside the Federation without the prior consent of the Elective Officers".

At the same time this slap on the wrist was being delivered to Schubert's committee, conference sub-committee A was reducing the original 8 standing committees (see Chapter 3) to just three committees: 'Technical and Professional', 'Publications and Public Relations' and 'Finance'. In so doing, they were ignoring the Secretary's recommendation for four standing committees to include the existing SCI 'Professional Status and Environmental Problems'. Such behaviour, whilst understandable from the Federations point of view to comply with the demands to remain strictly technical and professional, outraged the Austrians. In a prepared statement on behalf of his delegation, Schubert² said inter alia: "To protect and safeguard the individual and collective interests of the ATCO's profession was one of the main reasons which have led to the foundation of IFATCA. Right now, IFATCA is only interested in the ATC services. No consideration at all is given to the problems of the man who is providing the service. We do not want IFATCA to be a trade union, but we want to say, that due to the fact that IFATCA's present policy is disregarding completely the human factors of our profession we are not satisfied with IFATCA policy at the present stage. We are of the opinion that IFATCA should first of all deal with the human problems in ATC."

It was an important protest and testimony to the fact that, only 18 months after the Federations formation, some members were of the opinion that human factors considerations must play a part in IFATCA deliberations. Already the strictly technical and professional ethic was being tested but the elected officers held the line remaining true to their charter and promises. Whilst Schubert's protest did not sway delegates to final plenary in 1963 (they voted in line with sub-committee A's recommendation of just three Standing Committees), the 1964 conference immediately overturned the decision and from then onwards, IFATCA had its watchdog for human factors matters.

IFATCA's first decade was essentially notable for its measured development, a garnering of experience and a gradual earning of respect. Undeniably, this was a necessary approach and a little pandering to the conservative nature of the times was called for. Presidents Tekstra, Cerf and Field all acceded to this approach and, in doing so, served the Federation well. They read the winds, bent to the breezes and established their organisation with a respect for, and appreciation of, the style of the times and, perhaps even more importantly, the powers and personalities at play.

The conservative sixties, however, soon translated into the rebellious seventies and a much different approach was needed.

By the time of the Reykjavik conference in 1973, there had been quite a lot of industrial activity involving air traffic control in the years immediately preceding it. This activity was conducted by the various unions responsible for ATC matters and whose individual members frequently were also members of IFATCA. The industrial unrest was often generated because of various administration refusals to accept the unions' demands for improved conditions and wages. In the main, these demands were the unions' reactions to the increasing pressures on the controllers via increased traffic and lack of concomitant improvements in facilities. Consistently (and truthfully) citing safety as their main concern, the controllers of the time naturally saw an opportunity to push for wage rises in line with their considerable productivity increases. To them, it was a realistic ask. To their employers and the public, both of whom had little concept of the operational demands being placed upon the controllers, it appeared a selfish grab for money.

At Reykjavik, discussions on the several contemporary union actions occupied a considerable amount of the debate. This led to opinions being expressed in some quarters that IFATCA itself was tending towards unionism. IFATCA has continually battled against this impression and has continually sought to impress upon individuals and organisations that union type activities per se are not the Federations brief but that involvement with, and consideration of, the human aspects of the profession are. The distinctions between these two positions often necessarily become blurred but the Federation has sought, as much as has been possible, to maintain a distinction and occasionally has trod a very narrow line.

The words of the then President, J-D Monin, uttered following the 12~h conference in Reykjavik are worth quoting in this respect. He said, in an article later published in The Controller (August, 1973), "I have already mentioned at IFATCA '72 in Dublin the fact that human factors would require an ever increasing consideration. Again in Reykjavik I have stressed the necessity for the controller to remain closely involved in the supervision of the traffic flow and its expedition, regardless of the complexity of the man/machine or, better said, of the man/system relationship. After Reykjavik, I have been told that dealing with too much human factors, IFATCA has made a turn towards unionism. I do not share such an opinion. On the other hand, however, I firmly believe that as a professional body, we just cannot avoid the human aspects of the profession. It is further worthwhile to note that conflicts between controllers and their administrations are not always concerned with reduced hours or salary claims. Quite often there are complaints concerning a lack of planning, insufficient staff or lack of adequate equipment for ATC units. As I already mentioned above, it must also be kept in mind that the decision factor, hence the responsibility, in today's ATC system rests solely on the controller, thus his physical and psychological health remains a basic element for the good functioning of the whole system. In order to prevent a complete failure, it is our duty to seek adequate working conditions for the controller."

Member Associations of IFATCA (and many more associations around the world who were not MAs) faced two major problems in the early years of IFATCA's second decade, the seventies. These twin problems were increasing industrial restlessness and a lack of recognition by their administrations and the aviation industry at large. These two problems, whilst independent in their growth, became inextricably interlinked. It seemed to the world's controllers in the nineteen seventies that their administrations were not accepting the new mores and the major contribution being made by them (the controllers) under increasingly difficult circumstances with rapid changes and growth in traffic worldwide. Air traffic controllers have always considered themselves as professionals and it was only natural for them to seek better recognition of the profession of air traffic control. This they decided to do and, whilst they never acted in concert, at times it appeared as though they were doing so with industrial action occurring in almost every corner of the world.

This desire for recognition was expressed by many people in the early seventies but by none more so, nor more articulately, than Jean-Daniel Monin. Monin, from the Swiss association, was elected in Dublin as the Federations fourth President. Almost from the outset, Monin seemed to set the Federation on a different course designed to achieve due recognition. He involved the organisation, if not in the actual industrial disputes, then certainly in discussions, and perhaps even negotiations, to resolve them. Such involvement and expressions of support were a radical departure from past practise and naturally attracted attention and IFATCA was accused of becoming more union oriented and left wing in its approach. However, IFATCA was, in reality, merely reflecting the now less conservative nature of its members in the new era. There is little doubt that IFATCA commenced its life as a very conservative body and probably correctly and necessarily so in what was then still a very conservative world. But with the dawning of the seventies - an age of rampant protest and considerable individual expression amongst the younger generation in the wider world - controllers had a new sense of their responsibilities and they coupled this with a burning desire for professional recognition in a fast changing aviation environment. The post war baby boomers of air traffic control were becoming restless. This restlessness manifested itself with domestic associations via increasing industrial action and internationally with their Federation via what could perhaps be best described as a lean, rather than a turn, to the left.

With such forces at play the Federation needed a leader to reflect the new mood and represent the 'new' controller and they found just such a person in Jean-Daniel Monin. Monin was raised in a religious Protestant family with his father a simple factory worker. The family was by tradition more liberal than socialist and Monin remembers more than anything being raised and educated to have respect and compassion for others. Such a humanitarian upbringing led him to 'feel' for his constituents during the industrial turmoil of the era and it was a natural instinct for him to seek redress of the inequalities facing them. His predecessors were all conservative by nature and design but Monin had other motivators. Following two Presidents who both occupied the chair for just one term, Daniel determined to be, at least, a two term President and was equally determined for IFATCA to forcefully announce its arrival as a mature and representative player. With the backing of a Federation now consisting of thirty six Member Associations, and an increasing involvement with, and respect from, ICAO and the ILO, he was able to do that. Hence intervention with, and offers of assistance to, administrations during industrial disputes seemed a natural step in the interests of safe and efficient international air navigation and air traffic control.

Monin also believed in taking the Federation to the members and March, 1973 saw the initiative of an Executive Board meeting being held in Luxembourg. This first meeting of the Board held by invitation of an association was at Monin's suggestion and it afforded the opportunity to meet the Minister of Transport and individual members of the association on their home ground. The association's profile with its government was raised and it benefited from the initiative and the Board was revealed as an accessible entity. The practise is now common place.

Concerns about IFATCA's 'shift' to the left continued to be expressed in several quarters, including IFATCA's own ranks for, of course, not every Member Association or individual was entirely happy with developments. These concerns were addressed via an editorial in The Controller by Mr. De Boer (August, 1975): "That the Federation has moved away from its former direction has been evident for some time and probably warrants a few words of explanation and reassurance. The Executive Board under the leadership of Daniel Monin believes that the Federation must stand up for what it believes in. If we believe that we are not getting the recognition as controllers that we deserve, or that the safety of air traffic is impaired somewhere in the world, then we must make the world aware of this need and the reasons behind it. To this end we must comment to the media and to the authorities in question on matters that affect controllers.

This does not mean that IFATCA has abandoned its faith in the professional organisation approach, or is lending itself to non-professional actions in support of persons or groups of persons in the ATC system. Far from it. But the Federation does move with the times. And in particular, it supports the contention which was reaffirmed at the recent Melbourne conference and mentioned also in the conference report that the safety of air transport in all its forms is directly dependent on the efficiency of the air traffic control services and since ATC efficiency is itself directly related to the conditions and circumstances of employment of ATC personnel, any delay in working towards a solution of outstanding problems in this area can only be to the detriment of flight safety. And here is where the Federation comes in.

IFATCA needed a new direction. Our profession is an unique one and we must behave like the professionals we are. This we are doing to an increasing extent." This editorial itself was unique in making such a definitive statement that IFATCA had turned in a new direction and it also identified the Executive Board, and Jean-Daniel Monin in particular, with that new direction. Some of Monin's inclinations could have been prompted by moves afoot in Europe to form a more human factors oriented body similar to the existing 'Europilote'. Several meetings between the German VDF and some Swiss air traffic control unionists were held, mostly in Köln, to explore such a possibility. In similar manner to his later arguments with the Australians, Monin opposed such moves arguing that developments within IFATCA would be more appropriate.

The seventies were indeed a turbulent time for the world's air traffic controllers. The decade saw major industrial disputes in Argentina, Australia, Brasil, Canada, Cyprus, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, Mexico, Portugal, Spain and Sudan and this is by no means an exhaustive list. The Italians took action in 1979 and the Mexicans in 1978. The Australian controllers, for the first and only time in their history, took strike action for one week in 1977. The French staged a go-slow in 1978 and also struck in 1976. The Canadians had their bilingual dispute in 1976. But without doubt when one considers the ramifications and aftermath, the two most serious actions of the seventies occurred in Europe in 1973 and saw firstly the French ATC unions united in dispute and this was followed immediately by an escalation of the German association's confrontation with their government. These successive disputes both saw IFATCA become involved, albeit in different circumstances and manner, and represented the first direct forays of the industrially innocent Federation into disputation. As such, they were defining moments and are worthy of closer examination in the context of this chapter.

The French action had its roots in inter-union and inter-union federations' politics of the late sixties and early seventies. At the time in France, there was no ATC-specific trade union (as is still the case today) and controllers often found themselves being dragged into disputes on behalf of other union members and where, of course, they had a major impact but received little of direct benefit for their contribution³. 1970 saw a re-classification of the engineers' grade above the controllers, which effectively meant a downgrading of the controller ranks. The controllers' section of the Air Navigation Services Union continually protested and threatened industrial action throughout 1971 and 1972 but their threats were never taken seriously as they were considered an insignificant rump of a larger organisation not prepared to take action on behalf of a small minority. Finally, the controllers and their broader union (SNCTA) agreed upon mutual support and, pressing their claims for improved conditions and attempting to re-establish industrial credibility, they gave notice of strike action for late February, 1973. The strikers were primarily led by SNCTA President J-M Lefranc and APCA President (and SNCTA Board member) Daniel Gorin. The four day strike was immediately countered by the French government refusing their right to strike and locking out the striking controllers⁴, replacing them with military personnel. With Lefranc then not prepared to negotiate - his stance was everything or nothing - the strike continued beyond the original four days into March. The substitute service initially only accepted a 30% traffic level but on the 3rd March the Minister of Transport arbitrarily raised this despite industry wide misgivings and warnings - even by neighbouring CAAs - of the dangers of such action. IFALPA's thoughts on the situation were ambiguous (according to Gorin)⁵ and despite some reluctance, the French pilots' association members continued to fly.

Throughout the strike, APCA established and maintained contact with IFATCA President Monin. In fact, they phoned his home every day, sometimes several times a day. These calls were always made from varying locations including public phones as the strikers feared phone taps. With an Executive Board spread all over the world and, with no Federation policy existing for IFATCA involvement in industrial dealings or even any human related activities, it fell to Monin to make several decisions basically on his own. Mindful of the need to safeguard the status and image of the Federation, still only just twelve years old, he continually relied upon his common sense for a professional (as opposed to an outright industrial) approach in dealing with the problem. In Geneva he conducted several media interviews on the unsafe situation in France and finally made plans to travel (by train, naturally) to Paris for a major press conference.

A major and tragic event was, however, about to intercede.

On the 5th March, two airliners under the substitute military control collided over Nantes in Western France. The Iberia DC9 crashed killing all 68 people on board while the Spantax CV990, having lost a portion of its wing, made a successful emergency landing at a nearby French air force base despite some difficulties in obtaining assistance from the military. This tragedy effectively ended the strike and the majority of the controllers returned to work under an amnesty granted by the government. However, the strike leaders were called to Paris for disciplinary measures and seven were fired. Some 300 other controllers were downgraded and/ or posted to other positions and the union's office at Paris ACC was closed. Daniel Gorin, President of APCA, was one of those fired, but not specifically for his part in the strike. At a press conference (the one Daniel Monin travelled to) two days after the crash, Gorin 'insulted' the Minister of Transport by calling the sixty eight deaths an "assassination" and he was thus singled out for special treatment.

On the 8th July, 1974 Monin wrote for a second time to the French government on behalf of the seven sacked leaders. This time he wrote directly to the new President Valerie Giscard d'Estaing pleading for an extension of the general amnesty to cover the seven dismissed. Giscard d'Estaing replied on the 25th July granting the request. In the intervening period, the unemployed Lefranc and Gorin had both been offered jobs with French firms in South America but refused choosing instead to remain in France and continue activities on behalfof SNCTA andAPCA.

Gorin was re-employed in September about one month after the other six who also won their proceedings before the State Council, which is the higher court for State affairs. Such victory vindicated their interpretation that the strike was not illegal. Gorin returned to Orly ACC and immediately set about the organisation of IFATCA '76. He maintains that the significant financial support he obtained from the government and the CAA for this event was further indication of their acceptance of wrongdoing in the whole episode. In subsequent court proceedings into the crash, the government was apportioned 100% blame and fully condemned for the tragedy.

Giscard d'Estaing's positive response represents the first occasion a Head of State had replied to a Federation request in a union related matter. There is no doubt that IFATCA's intervention, whilst not in the actual dispute itself nor in the initial settlement of it, contributed in no small measure to the satisfactory final conclusion for the dispute's leaders. Monin trod a very fine line with his pronouncements and dealings with government and the media and his performance, ad hoc as it was and without the benefit of any supporting Federation policy, enhanced the organisation's reputation despite its charter not to be involved in industrial activity. His willingness to be involved and his actions dearly signalled the new direction the Federation was travelling. Editorials and articles to this effect figured prominently in The Controller (see Chapter 4) and so at all times the membership were kept fully aware of the trend and, despite some misgivings, generally accepting of the change of course. The strictly technical and professional ethic of the organisation of the sixties was evolving and embracing the realities of the seventies. However, it wasn't going to be an easy transition.

As serious as the French dispute was (particularly considering its tragic resolution), for IFATCA an even more significant dispute was brewing north of the border. The West German ATC Association, the VDF, had been for some years attempting to enter into meaningful discussions with their employer on conditions of employment and the general state of the ATC system. In 1971, a government appointed committee had identified problems within the ATC system but nothing had been done. By 1973 things had progressed to the stage where the VDF's frustrations could no longer be contained and the protracted dispute was about to come to a head and become more serious and very bitter - on several fronts. In May, 1973 the VDF initiated a national ATC go-slow. The effect was instantaneous and damaging and immediately affected all of West Germany's neighbouring ATC colleagues. So, virtually immediately after the French action, IFATCA was to become engaged in another national action but, with this dispute, the involvement was to be closer, more complex and professionally more injurious.

We will pick it up at the Executive Board meeting of September, 1973. The Board had two serious items on its agenda: the problems with the Tel Aviv conference (see Chapter 5) and the deteriorating situation in the Federal Republic of Germany.

During the meeting, the Board held a press conference (a first for IFATCA) and issued a press release:

"IFATCA is in contact with the German Ministry of Transport and the VDF and sincerely regrets that there has been no solution to the present problem. It is unfortunate that the controllers have not achieved professional recognition and that, so far as we understand, they have not been invited by the aviation Ministry to discuss vital matters of the profession.

The proposals of an expert committee established by the German government to examine the problems within their ATC system (the Schlieker Committee) in 1971 have not been realised and until some definite steps are made to accomplish this there can be no progress on either side.

IFATCA suggests that the whole question be reviewed immediately with open mindedness with the object of resorting to normal air navigation facilities in Germany thereby relieving the pressure on controllers in neighbouring countries."

Following that Autumn meeting, there was considerable behind the scenes activity which helped to ease the deadlocked situation between the German association and their national authority with the result that the six month old escalation of the confrontation and concomitant go-slow was called off at the end of November. A formula was found enabling the two sides to resume negotiations for a settlement without sacrificing respective positions.

On the 15th and 16th November, Jean-Daniel Monin travelled to Germany and had a series of meetings. He met with the German Minister of Transport, Dr. Lauritzen, the Director of Civil Aviation, Dr. Rehm, representatives of the Bundesanstalt für Flugsicherung (the executive body for ATC in Germany), the Board of Directors of Lufthansa, the German Air Line Pilots Association and the German ATC Association. As a result of these meetings, the IFATCA Board expressed confidence that a solution would soon be found. Indeed, shortly after this visit, the Federal Chancellor, Mr. Willy Brandt, personally intervened and assured the warring parties that a legitimate and definitive solution to the problems would be sought. So it was anticipated that Mr. Brandt's contribution and the Federations initiatives at the highest levels would go a long way to restoring the situation to normality and in fact the go-slow was ended on the 23rd November.

The Executive Board discussing the German ATC crisis, Geneva, Sept. 1973

Clockwise from left: Horst Guddat, Ge de Boer, Tom Harrison, J-D Monin, Bob Meyer, Jean Gubelmann and Oli Jonsson

Despite the 'ending' of the dispute, relations between the VDF and the Board now became strained. It transpired that IFATCA Vice-President Horst Guddat (a member of an opposition political party to VDF President Wolfgang Kassebohm) was the object of some resentment. The VDF complained about the way events were reflected in IFATCA circulars although it later appeared that probably this was more a matter of translation into English than anything else. To resolve this lingering animosity, the Executive Board decided to hold its next meeting in Frankfurt on 6th-8th March, 1974. The Board again broke fresh ground when part of one afternoon was set aside for a comprehensive discussion of the German dispute with President Kassebohm and the Executive Board of the VDF.

The German Board indicated they were unhappy with some aspects of the Federations involvement in the dispute, in particular where they touched upon circumstances connected with President Monin's visit to the German Ministry of Transport in Bonn the previous November. President Kassebohm provided a thorough briefing of the entire dispute and outlined some reservations about the Federation's sentiments expressed in print following the ending of the go-slow action. The Federation pointed out that perhaps association-Federation communications did not function well as the Federation apparently had not been in possession of all the relevant factors prior to their meetings with the German authorities back in November.

Despite Monin's belief that matters were resolved in Frankfurt, the situation was such that, come the Tel Aviv conference two months later, considerable ill feeling was still being expressed and discussions in Committee A became quite heated. In fact, at Germany's insistence, the Directors found it necessary to have the President amend his report to conference before accepting it as a true account. Eventually, Monin's report was accepted with the following additions:

Because of statements made in the IFATCA Circular, approved by the Executive Board, concerning the troubles the German Association was having with its administration, it was deemed necessary to have a meeting with the Board of Officers of GATCA (that is, the VDF), which took place at the Executive Board meeting in Frankfurt in March, 1974. After an open and frank exchange of views, it was agreed that any inferences that might have seemed derogatory to GATCA was (sic) not the intent of lFATCA. Incomplete information by IFATCA resulted in inappropriate dissemination of news. This was most certainly not the intent of lFATCA as it is our responsibility to help and not hinder any Member Association. Therefore, we feel it is appropriate to apologise for any personal feelings of misunderstandings and to do so at this time.

Further to the statement made previously by the Executive Board concerning the meetings held with various aviation parties in Frankfurt in an attempt to help in some manner to resolve the problem existing, we must further state that this was not coordinated in the proper manner. We assure you it will not happen again. "

In turn, the German Association then issued the following statement:

The statements as made by the Executive Board of lFATCA have solved the problems which had resulted from the publications in the IFATCA Circulars and by meeting various aviation parties in the F.R.G. GATCA would like to express its appreciation and its belief that further fruitful participation in the work programmes of lFATCA is continued. On this occasion GATCA would like to apologise that for various reasons it was unable to provide complete information during 1973. "

So IFATCA's first major foray into industrial disputation had mixed results with some success in helping to bring the dispute to a conclusion but ending somewhat ingloriously on the domestic front, albeit not totally through its own fault. The fact that both sides found it necessary to apologise for their actions (or lack thereof) demonstrated very clearly their dearth of experience in this arena. This was probably the lowest ebb IFATCA's relations with any individual Member Association ever reached and, despite the above statements, the Federations involvement and Chancellor Brandt's personal intervention, it turned out the industrial problem was still far from a final resolution. IFATCA and the VDF may have gone some way to patching up their differences but the situation in Germany had not been fully resolved. With five controllers still suspended by their Authority and a further 100 drawn into disciplinary action, with court actions pending and with no apparent sign that the national authority was prepared to honour its undertakings to the full, the outlook in Germany in May, 1974 remained grim.

The German government had decided to pursue a claim for damages against the VDF for their actions. This claim was to drag on through appeals and counter appeals for almost five years. Eventually, in early 1978 and with two controllers still suspended, the VDF lost a final appeal and were held responsible for all the financial damage to the airlines and were fined 223 million German Marks. Naturally the VDF was unable to meet such an obligation and they were faced with disbandment. However, one glimmer of hope remained and they commenced preparations to file an official complaint before the Federal Court of Constitution. It is history now that the punitive fines were reduced to a more manageable sum and eventually shared equally by all members of the VDF to ensure their association remained an entity and a member of the Federation. IFATCA played its part too by reducing and waiving affiliation dues for several years to enable the VDF to regain its feet. Despite the acrimony, Federation/association cooperation endured. Incredibly, throughout this saga, the VDF continued to fully represent its members and even as they were being hit with a staggering damages bill of over 220 million marks, they were still gathering information from other associations around the world to assist with a claim for improved salaries and conditions.

Participation in these two disputes clearly highlighted that the Federation was ill-prepared (one could even say unprepared) to deal with what had become a fact of life. It wasn't just that industrial disputes affected those directly participating, but a serious case could be made that safety was being compromised as other ATC systems were impacted upon. Obviously, a multi-national and respected international organisation such as IFATCA could not afford to rely upon the judgement and ad hoc decisions of one or two individuals.

The Reykjavik conference which was held just two months after the French dispute saw, for the first time, delegates considering action to be taken when their colleagues entered into serious industrial disputation. The issue was considered so serious that the subject was discussed in Committee A even before the Officers' Reports. Resolution 73.A.5 detailed who and what was to be notified in the event of a stoppage, use of Special Newsletters and liaison requirements and frankly condemned the use of unqualified substitute organisations. Whilst certainly by no means providing guidelines for actual involvement in the dispute by IFATCA itself, this resolution was definitely a quantum leap from the earliest provisos of not being involved in "matters which are the prime objects of trade unions". The Board wisely also formulated their own guidelines for their involvement in future such situations.

IFATCA then experienced a flirtation with international trade unionism in 1976 with the abortive Australian attempt to form an international industrial body to represent controllers. This apparent act of pique stemmed from the IATA 200 Resolution arguments and Australia's withdrawal from the Federation when nothing was achieved. (See Chapter 6)

When Australia failed to persuade other MAs to undertake a more active and militant approach - rather than continued letter writing - to IATA's obduracy over the issue, they resigned their membership at the end of 1976. Whilst doing so, their industrial officer (an employee of the association) wrote to several other countries which he identified as likely to join the Australians in an organisation intended to be more proactive in achieving their aims. President Monin viewed such action with some alarm for he intuitively believed that two organisations representing the world's controllers would dilute the effect of the existing body (IFATCA) and minimise the impact of both. The December, 1976 European regional meeting gave full consideration to the issue and there was some measure of support for the Australian position but not one MA thought that another international organisation would be helpful. Whilst many at the meeting (Monin included) believed that some form of concerted action would see IATA alter its stance, the reality was that there was little chance of a large majority of controller associations engaging in a form of action such as a go-slow and, without large scale support, the Federation would appear ineffectual and even inept. Furthermore, fears of some form of a government or an executive backlash against activists were also uppermost in some minds.

These moves proved to be the real end of hopes for a change of heart by IATA (although attempts to convince them otherwise continued for some years) and Australia duly withdrew from the Federation at the end of 1976. Their attempts to entice other associations into what would have amounted to a world ATC trade union also came to naught thus ensuring that IFATCA remained as THE voice for air traffic controllers in international civil aviation.

The late seventies saw a dramatic upswing in the level of ATC-involved disputes. The Australian strike in 1977, the French go-slow in July, 1978 and the Italian actions in 1978 and October, 1979 with a mass resignation threat and the continuing Greek disputes with their mobilisations were merely some examples⁶ of disputes that President Henschler was able to instance in enunciating a crisis in world air traffic control. By this time, the alarming shortage of controllers and the failure of ground based control systems to keep up with airborne equipment could not be ignored. Henschler was forced to focus attention on the legal and criminal liabilities of controllers who continued to accept traffic in circumstances where they lacked proper staff and/or where their equipment was inadequate and outmoded. In challenging governments to make available the necessary funds to redress an urgent situation, he cited system incompatibilities, poor equipment, underpaid controllers and under-staffed units as all contributing to a system which was not as safe as it should be.

The disputes continued, however, and frequently their effects seriously impacted on the originator's neighbours, who themselves were already struggling with significant traffic increases. Typical of this was the lengthy Italian dispute in which they threatened mass resignation and imposed in their domestic airspace flow restrictions which reverberated across the entire European continent. The 1979 Brussels conference resolved "the Federation should express its strong concern over the inadequate military air traffic control system and conditions existing in Italy". (Res. 79.A.23) Furthermore, the Board was charged with taking all possible steps to implement a civil ATC system in Italy. The result was that IFATCA was repeatedly drawn into this dispute and on several occasions Board members visited Rome and, for one of the few times in its history, actually entered into direct negotiations with government officials. This involvement proved successful for the Italians achieved their aims and eventually won their claim for 'civilianisation' and better conditions.

One of the other very few examples of direct intervention by the Federation in negotiations concerned the Israeli strike in 1977. The members of the Israel ATCA went on strike for nearly a month over claims for better working conditions and salaries. The government dismissed them and placed military controllers at the consoles and the Israeli airline El AI sued for damages. Representing President Monin, EVP Professional Andreas Avgoustis went to Tel Aviv and entered into direct negotiations with the administration. Replacing dispute with discussion, Avgoustis spent a week in Israel eventually reaching an agreement which saw the controllers re-instated and the damages claim dropped.

A more common method of involvement was to visit a country and highlight IFATCA's objectives. Such a visit occurred with the holding of an Executive Board meeting in Khartoum, Sudan in February, 1979. With working conditions in the country absolutely atrocious, the Board took the opportunity to promote the aspirations of the profession and bring to the attention of all concerned the problems facing the controllers.

With administrations desperately seeking to obviate the effects of such domestic activities by appealing to neighbouring authorities for assistance, the Member Associations came to the conclusion that even more coordination and cooperation on their part was needed. The French and Eurocontrol associations jointly presented a paper to the 1980 Toronto conference greatly expanding upon action to be taken. The paper (accepted under Resolution 80A..13) gave the right to an MA involved in a dispute to indicate possible action to be followed by other MAs. There were detailed four stages of supporting action, the first three indicating specific actions whilst the fourth provided for an emergency meeting of the region's MAs to decide on future action if the first three steps failed to resolve the situation.

The French and EGATS delegates were just in time with their joint paper to the Toronto conference for the 1981 PATCO dispute was soon to burst upon the ATC world. This stop work action, immediately outlawed by the American President, Ronald Reagan, who fired the striking controllers, is probably the most serious industrial confrontation ATC has witnessed. When one considers the cost to the American economy, the airlines and certainly to the controllers themselves, it rates above any other dispute. PATCO was a member of IFATCA (having rejoined in 1980) in August, 1981 when the strike commenced. IFATCA could not turn its back on its largest MA and IFATCA members around the world did what they could (from financial contributions to flow restrictions) but, in reality, in the face of such Executive intransigence, there was little that could be done.

The special conference called in Amsterdam to consider the issue heard some strident calls for strong support of the American controllers. Trade union representatives of various national controllers were also present so, for a time, a widening of the confrontation was seriously considered. But calmer more moderate views were also expressed and, when soberly considered in conjunction with the strictures of the Constitution, these held sway. President Henschler called upon the MAs to take action as per the Reykjavik and Toronto resolutions and the meeting resolved that both sides should be brought together again for fresh talks. Given the provisions of IFATCA's Constitution, this was as far as the MAs could legitimately go but there had been calls for outright industrial action in support of PATCO. IFATCA teetered on the brink of changing its nature but drew back.

What the Board did do, however, was to travel to Washington⁷ and hold talks with the FAA Director and the Secretary for Transportation. The IFATCA Board attempted to institute new bi-lateral discussions and warned that only the immediate return of the striking controllers could restore the US ATC system to a safe operation. It was involvement in dispute resolution at the highest strata and akin to Monin's intervention in Germany in 1973 but this time there was to be no satisfactory outcome, no resolution to the crisis. Reagan's summary dismissals stood, the controllers moved on to other fields (literally in many cases) and the US ATC system staggered along for many, many months.

Apart from the USA itself, the Member Association most affected by the PATCO walkout was Canada. American airlines tried to beat the delays and potential dangers of flying in US airspace by re-routing via Canada where possible and this placed tremendous strain on the members of CATCA. In response, to maintain the integrity of their system and to avoid overloading themselves, they were forced to impose some restrictions and in some cases even refused clearances for unnecessary cross border flights. The Canadian authorities then viewed this as a form of industrial action by their controllers in support of their US colleagues and threatened disciplinary actions of their own. The Canadians were thus forced to accommodate the extra traffic and, even though some flow restrictions were put in place, for a considerable time they were controlling signiflcantly increased traffic levels.

The 1983 annual conference in Split, Yugoslavia saw IFATCA again address the issue of industrial action. This conference witnessed the final disaffiliation of PATCO and this no doubt added to the discussions on Resolution A.26 which saw the Federation publicly condemn intervention by other agencies and replacement of controllers by unqualified personnel and further refine its policy on national disputes. The result clearly recognised the rights of members to take industrial action and, whilst as always, the Federation declines to be involved in such actions themselves, the rights (and needs) of their individual members to so do was, for the first time, specifically stated. This, of course, is completely in line with the Conclusions emanating from the 1979 ILO Meeting of Experts. The policy has remained largely unchanged to this day although in 1991 it was further refined with an examination of a definition of essential and minimum ATC services. In Trinidad, delegates asked the MAs to establish local policies on services to be provided during industrial disputes and to make agreements with their authorities on exactly what minimum service would be provided during disputes. It was accepted that any 'minimum' service so agreed should not be such as to render ineffective the industrial action undertaken.

The late seventies crisis of booming traffic versus inadequate facilities and controller shortage was eventually solved but only via a world wide recession in the early eighties. This saw a drastic cutback in aviation activity such that the demand for additional controller staff could be ignored by the authorities. Administrations then took the opportunity to cut back on their recruitment and training programmes thus guaranteeing continuing shortages for the immediate future. The 'boom and bust' cycle merely ensured that, come the next 'boom', the same cries for adequate staff numbers and facilities would again be heard. And so it would be that the late eighties were to be a repeat of the late seventies, only worse.

1988 was a bad year for European air travellers. System wide, huge delays featured as passengers cooled their heels in terminals. In nearly every case, the blame was sheeted home to the air traffic controllers pursuing their 'selfish' claims. The peak Summer season of 1989 was marked by a further 10% rise in traffic. As we saw in Chapter 7, this increase was not matched by increasing numbers of controllers. In fact, the reverse was the case and this prompted the widespread disputes in such countries as Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Spain and Yugoslavia[8]. Again, these disputes were not, in any shape or form, a concerted campaign but were individual association manifestations of local frustration over conditions and facilities. They ensured that the public was aware that there was a major problem although, unfortunately, the real message frequently was lost in the hysteria of the media footage covering the end result of the dispute - delays to passengers.

Not being a peak industrial body for the individual Member Associations, IFATCA never placed reliance upon the separate associations highlighting the crisis in Europe, although their individual disputes were certainly accomplishing that, to solve the problems. IFATCA, as an organisation, more relied upon the important work in forums such as the FEATS working groups and panels that was being contributed by the likes of Philippe Domogala and Kurt Kihr. It was the quality and validity of their arguments that eventually convinced the EANPG of the need to bring to the attention of those who mattered, and in as forceful a manner as possible, the real underlying reasons for the continual strife in the control centres. And so it was that ICAO was asked to write to the twenty two ministers of the ECAC States seeking implementation of their recruitment and training conclusions. (This issue is more fully examined in Chapter 9) As an action, it has no parallel.

Another key initiative at that time was the press release at the conclusion of the Frankfurt conference. It is a good example of proactive input from the Executive Board. The Board's 'air traffic controllers as victims' press release was extremely effective and it generated a great deal of media attention and, as an individual action, quite possibly did more to bring about change than any form of industrial activity. Whilst the 'chaos' of 1988 was repeated in 1989, the public now knew the real reasons for the problem and administrations were being forced to act, with impetus for that action coming from all sides, including, uniquely, ICAO.

In July, 1990 IFATCA became closely involved with a serious dispute in North Africa. This first such engagement on the African continent came about following the imprisonment of thirteen Tunisian controllers who instituted flow control measures to handle traffic. This was viewed as an unauthorised industrial action in support of claims for an industrial agreement had that had already been reached in December, 1989 but not ratified by the government. EVPP Wim Rooseman and Past President Erik Sermijn visited Tunisia but were blocked from visiting the imprisoned controllers. They did, however, speak with the relevant Minister and the Director General of Civil Aviation who expressed a desire for "an honourable and amicable settlement". Six controllers were released at the end of August (on the grounds of not having a case to answer) and IFATCA continued with representations on behalf of those still incarcerated. Part of those further negotiations consisted of another visit by IFATCA board members at the request of the Tunisian association. This time President Stuart flew from Australia and joined Rooseman and EVP Africa Abou el Seoud el Karimy in Tunis for the October 4th court appearance[9]. At the same time, financial assistance for the families of those in jail was contributed by controller colleagues in Eurocontrol, France, Sweden and Switzerland and IFATCA was providing legal financial aid. The IFATCA representatives appeared and were presented to the court. The IFATCA appearance had no effect, however, as on October 11th, six of the controllers were sentenced to six months for unauthorised activities and the seventh was given a twelve month sentence for political reasons. The Tunisian association lodged an appeal and IFATCA members wrote letters to the President, the Prime Minister and the Minister for Transport; all to no avail as the appeal was dismissed.

Following this dismissal, President Stuart was moved to write to the President of Tunisia in the following terms: "The IFATCA has just been informed, to our deep regret, that the October 11th, 1990 court sentence against seven air traffic controllers has been confirmed and that the recourse for appeal of the defence has been refused. These controllers have been imprisoned for over four months. IFATCA takes the liberty to appeal to your presidential powers to discharge them. This gesture of clemency would ... guarantee the development of a serene atmosphere of good will and cooperation ... essential for developing air traffic control in harmony in order to allow for the growth of tourist activities in Tunisia."

Shortly afterwards, six of the controllers were pardoned and then on February 12th 1991 the final controller was released. Stuart again wrote to the President of Tunisia acknowledging these pardons and pleading for their reinstatement as air traffic controllers. However, this was not to be as the dismissed controllers were replaced by military personnel. The situation then worsened again in October, 1991 when the President and General Secretary of the Tunisian ATC Association were re-arrested and questioned for sixteen days "as to whether they had extraprofessional dealings with a controller detained by police on a charge of belonging to a non-authorised political organisation". Whilst so detained, their employer fired them for unjustified absence[ They were also subsequently banned from attending the Africa Regional Meeting in December.

Reporting to an Executive Board meeting in June, 1992 EVP Africa el Karimy gave information of a meeting with the Chairman of the Tunisian CAA who claimed that all the problems were 'political' and therefore asked that IFATCA refrain from further involvement. Although the seven controllers remained not re-instated, the Tunisian association, which had elected a complete new executive, now advised that relations with the government were good and that any further IFATCA 'interest' in the matter may prejudice this position. IFATCA had achieved some measure of success in the early instance but again, when faced with an obdurate administration and the politicisation of the situation, were forced to accept the fact that little more could be done.

On the other side of the coin, just what IFATCA could achieve through involvement in domestic disputes was being illustrated around the same time in July and August, 1991. The Zimbabwean controllers resorted to strike action in July and the administration responded by firing all of them except one. President Stuart wrote to the Zimbabwean administration offering to assist with a resolution. Following discussions, all the controllers were reinstated and an assurance was given that their grievances would be examined. Subsequently, a 35% pay rise was awarded! IFATCA expressed its gratitude to an administration willing to enter into meaningful discussions and prepared to listen without prejudice to the merits of the controllers' claims.

In December, 1995 the New Zealand controllers undertook industrial action in support of claims for maintenance of conditions under their newly privatised employer. When extensive discussions on their contract renewal failed to reach agreement, the Kiwis resorted to stop work action. The Auckland Oceanic control centre is responsible for a considerable portion of airspace in the South Pacific so a stoppage would have major impact beyond the shores of New Zealand. To counter this, and to keep some traffic moving in domestic airspace, the New Zealand Airways Corporation implemented a contingency plan. The local association and IFATCA determined that this plan was seriously deficient in that it involved pilots providing their own separation regardless of weather conditions. A 'traffic information service' from unqualified personnel was also to be provided. IFALPA was apprised of the New Zealand association's and IFATCA's concerns and, agreeing with them, they advised their members not to fly under the rules. IFATCA further relayed its concerns to ICAO pointing out the errors and serious deficiencies in the NZAC contingency plan. The Board was also involved with the Deputy President conducting several media interviews dearly putting the controllers' and IFATCA's point of view. Such action had become typical of IFATCA's involvement in domestic disputes.

Whilst the current policy on national disputes is now more genetic in its approach than some of the earlier attempts at intervention, it is still both comprehensive in its coverage and in tune with IFATCA's original charter and philosophy. It is important to note that IFATCA clearly recognises a member's right to withdraw services. In so doing, IFATCA also makes clear that it condemns normal ATC services being replaced by substitute services and member associations acting outside their normal area of jurisdiction[10]. IFATCA also offers support to an association who itself needs to impose restrictions for safety reasons on extra traffic generated by their neighbour's withdrawal of service. Policy imposes on MAs the need to provide early advice on withdrawal of service to enable support and possible assistance with a resolution. None of this indicates actual involvement in a dispute by the Federation itself but it provides the means to ameliorate effects on neighbouring MAs and allows assistance to be provided.

The effect is that IFATCA, as it has done from the outset, mostly shuns actual involvement in industrial activity whilst now willingly engaging in conflict resolution discussions. The Federation understands and promotes the philosophy that until the controller obtains the full professional recognition he deserves, some form of action will be required to achieve it. Unfortunately, it is a fact of life that industrial action frequently has economic and social impacts. IFATCA is alert to this but maintains that it is the governments and air traffic service providers who have the obligation to obviate these effects through proper professional recognition for dispute prevention and promotion of dispute settlement through arbitration and conciliation rather than confrontation.

As with many of its policies, IFATCA has arrived at its present position through trial and error, application of common sense and practical experience. From the days of personal intervention without any guidance material to calls for change and a few instances of direct involvement, IFATCA's policy in this area has evolved but has seldom strayed beyond the original narrow parameters. With its approach, IFATCA complies with the admonitions and entreaties espoused at its birth and enshrined in its Constitution. It also manages to simultaneously and adroitly assist its MAs with their problems and satisfy demands for protection of human factors issues which are often at the heart of these disputes.

IFATCA continues to walk a fine line on this touchy issue.

CHAPTER 9

The Fourth Decade of IFATCA 1991 - 2000

It is fair to say that the biggest concerns expressed about the restructure of 1990 were the added workload and expanded responsibilities given to the new Executive Vice-Presidents for the regions. Replacing 10 Regional Vice-Presidents with just four new positions and making them full Board members raised a few eyebrows and generated most of the discussion in Frankfurt and Acapulco. The sheer size of the resultant four 'super regions' presented a daunting challenge in themselves, let alone creating them at a time of massive technological and administrative change throughout the world. Additionally, for the bulk of two of those regions, and for sizable portions of the other two, the air traffic control environments were far from ideal. The roles and responsibilities of the new EVPs had changed dramatically from those embraced by the old RVPs whilst the job functions of the original and continuing Executive Board officers varied hardly at all. Effectively, it was the new EVPs for Africa/Middle East, Americas, Asia/Pacific and Europe who would make or break the new Federation.

The newest of the new was Denmark's Preben Lauridsen, EVP Europe. The only one of the four regional EVPs not to have been on the Executive Council, Lauridsen was faced with both a very steep learning curve and managing a burgeoning region beset by high level technical concerns, severe traffic management problems and acute staff shortages. Because of these problems and the coming changes, the region saw a huge increase in the number of meetings and IFATCA, and Lauridsen particularly, faced a heavy burden in responding adequately to them all. It was, of course, too much for one man and one of the earliest decisions of the new Board was the creation of Regional Task Forces. These were designed to look at the technical problems in the regions and suggest solutions. In the developing regions they sought answers to the paucity of adequate equipment. In Europe, the pressures for harmonisation and the traffic crisis in the West were matched by expanding traffic, poor facilities and altering politics in the East. From their inception, the RTFs became essential elements to enable the EVPs to cope. (Asia/Pacific was the only region not to form an RTF, at least in the initial years of the new structure. Whilst the region was the biggest geographically and had its share of problems highest traffic growth rates, poor communications, inadequate equipment and conditions - the small number of MAs meant that the EVP ASP was able to cope, with selected assistance.) The Federations new style management has endured through the ten years of the decade and today it is virtually inconceivable to think of an alternative. This chapter, as well as tracing IFATCA's progress through the nineties, as much as anything, provides an account of just how successful the concept proved to be.

IFATCA's fourth decade opened to yet another recession in the aviation sector but with privatisation of air traffic services a growth industry. This trend towards a more business oriented approach to the service augured well for controllers and, in the main, the Federations members were enthusiastic proponents albeit, as always with controllers, whilst maintaining a healthy degree of scepticism and sounding notes of caution.

Most, if not all, controllers felt frustrated by the shackles of bureaucracy imposed by the civil services they were obliged to work for. Because of this they welcomed an environment which effectively self funded better equipment and working conditions, gave higher priority to training, improved career prospects, and quarantined them from creating workplace precedents for other groups in the public sector. However, it took no eye strain to see that the application of business methods to air traffic control had great potential for the expenditure side of the equation to be manipulated if the income side could not. Since ATC cannot manufacture revenue earning flights, 'privatised' management must always be on the lookout to reduce costs to secure a healthy bottom line. The chief product of air traffic control is safety and it is difficult to quantify such an intangible, except perhaps when it has failed. Likewise, the quality of the service delivered can be invisible until it reaches the level where it affects the economics of the customers. It was the fear of their 'invisible' product being compromised that caused the concerns amongst the world's controllers as the nineties unfolded with this new modus operandi starting to spread like a virus.

As experience grew and discussions increasingly turned to the concept, IFATCA decided it needed to be clear exactly what they were speaking of with respect to the two terms ‘privatisation’ and ‘commercialisation’. The Federation adopted a definition whereby privatisation of air traffic control was viewed as "the process by which the functions and/or assets of air traffic control are transferred from a government department to either the private sector or to a company or corporation owned either partly or fully by the government but operating independently of total government control". As with many definitions, IFATCA's view of privatisation is necessarily broad since there can be many variations on the degree of privatisation. Essentially, the Federation sought to differentiate for its members those services provided along business lines but still, to the largest degree, owned by the State (commercialisation) from those owned and provided by private enterprise (privatisation). The main differences here are the degree of control exerted by the government over the provider and the ultimate method of funding the services.

The Federation settled upon its definition and promoted discussion on the subject since it wanted to clearly distance itself from any circumstance whereby the prime motivation was financial gain with a possible attendant reduction in safety levels. From IFATCA's point of view, applying business methods to air traffic control practises is one thing, but operating for profit at the sacrifice of quality is something completely different!

Nearly all early moves along business oriented lines for ATS provision were accented towards commercialisation rather than privatisation¹, Essentially, this meant that government agencies sold their ATS operations to corporations that were either wholly or partly State owned. In almost all of these situations, while the enterprise remained under the ownership of the State, it was removed from the civil service and operated under private sector legislation. These new enterprises were then expected to operate independently as 'private' businesses, separate from government involvement. They were to be self funded, raising their own revenues from navigation charges and were allowed to borrow for capital expenditures in the public marketplace.

As the year 1994 came to a close, more than 20% of IFATCA's Member Associations were commercialised or were on the way to that situation. A few of those associations were now experiencing first hand some of the downside of the new corporate business style applications. By the end of 1995, one of the first associations to experience this change, New Zealand, was about to enter into contract negotiations which threatened, as they saw it, to compromise the high levels of safety they provided. The New Zealand ATCOs' commercialised employer was insisting on separate employment contracts for various workplaces and for new employees and refusing to implement joint working party decisions on health and safety issues. The controllers also submitted a claim for higher salaries based on sharing the increased revenue generated by the rising productivity from the controllers during the period of the preceding contract.

IFATCA shared the view that the hard won working conditions in New Zealand and elsewhere weren't conditions of privilege, generous arrangements for an elite few but identified them as key safety related factors necessary for a high responsibility profession. When negotiations failed and industrial action ensued, the resultant plan to allow non air traffic controlled operations met with NZALPA² and IFATCA protests to the New Zealand government and ICAO. As part of the commercialisation process, the nineties has seen ATC in New Zealand considerably downsized with the three main ATC centres reduced, initially to two and then, to just one centre³. Of course, accompanying this facility downsizing, the Kiwis saw their staff ranks reduced as well. The dispute resulted in eighteen months of negotiations and included four strikes but concluded on a positive note with a settlement which saw no erosion of conditions, the maintenance of a single contract for all controllers and a significant pay rise. The strike actions were the first in New Zealand ATC history. They were further noteworthy for the fact that they were not in opposition to the concept of commercialisation itself, which had been supported as far back as 1987, but in protest at some of the commercial practises proposed and employed.

There is no doubt that a commercialised entity is better able to run an efficient system but, at the same time, there must still be room for good labour relations and maintenance of existing safe working conditions. Commercialisation presented many of the world's ATC associations with a huge challenge through the decade just completed. It may well prove to be the big challenge in the next as well.

The year of 1991 had a dramatic opening following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and the 164 January saw us 'Stormin' with Norman' as the Gulf War unfolded. Whilst the world's attention was focused on what was happening in Kuwait, the requisite changes to surrounding air routes had a more dramatic impact on the air traffic controllers responsible. The conflict region naturally saw huge air route diversions as aircraft were forced to re-route around closed operational airspace. But the build up to the war also witnessed vast numbers of military aircraft ferried into the region and all these had to be accommodated with the standard civil traffic⁴. Air traffic controllers as far away as England were severely inconvenienced but all accepted the added pressures with quiet professionalism.

A noteworthy ATC sidelight to the Gulf War was that Tel Aviv tower controllers were employed as 'Scud spotters' for the civil defence forces! Two missiles actually landed on the airfield though, fortunately, with no ill effects.

No sooner had the conflict in Kuwait settled than the tragic confrontation in Yugoslavia flared. Subsequently, mid-September saw the Zagreb FIR closed with consequent serious repercussions for neighbouring controllers, especially in Hungary, where deviated traffic raised their movements from around 600 to up to 2,000 transit flights a day, and Austria, where a completely new route structure had to be established, virtually overnight. The dosure of the Zagreb ACC naturally meant that the Croatian controllers became unemployed and, in fact, some were even taken hostage for a brief time. In many cases, airports were the scene of fierce fighting and the Zagreb ACC particularly was the target of attacks by Yugoslavian troops and most of the ATC technical equipment and communication facilities were destroyed. At an ICAO FLO meeting, IFATCA was instrumental in having States agree that the airspace should not be re-opened until all technical and operational aspects were solved. By early 1992, both Croatia and Slovenia were being recognised by ECAC (although not yet by the United Nations and ICAO) and an ATC association had been formed in each country. They both applied for affiliation in Bournemouth in March. Despite considerable pressure from the Croatian representatives and one of the lengthiest debates ever over an affiliation applicant, the political realities dictated that IFATCA could not accept applications from an area still officially represented (by Member Association Yugoslavia) and for which there still existed, albeit in name only, a recognised alternative government. The ensuing twelve months saw the wider politics of the situation resolved and both associations subsequently affiliated at the 1993 conference. Traffic problems remained, however, as the impact of the dispute took a lot longer to dissipate than that. The northern summer of 1993, for instance, saw neighbouring Romania recording increases in air traffic of 300%, most of which was attributable to the continuing crisis in the former Yugoslavia.

Whilst the tragedies of Kuwait and Yugoslavia were unfolding, IFATCA travelled to scenes as far removed from those theatres of war as one could imagine. Those confrontations, actual and looming, doubtless were uppermost in the minds of the European delegates in particular, but the idyllic surroundings of the Caribbean islands of Trinidad and Tobago helped divert their attention to matters of a wider nature.

Upon arrival in Port of Spain, capital of Trinidad and Tobago, for the 30th annual conference, delegates were faced with a disconcerting situation. They were housed in what appeared to be an upside down hotel! The hotel lobby and conference venue were built on top of a hill with accommodation floors constructed down the face of the cliff. So, in order to travel from, say, the 7th floor to the lobby and committee rooms, delegates had to travel up, rather than the usual necessity to go down, to meetings. It doesn't sound like much but for inveterate conference goers, pushing the 'up' button in the mornings took some getting used to. A high degree of informality also was the order of the day as befits an equatorial climate and laid back life style. Following two abortive attempts by Suriname to host the conference, finally IFATCA was able to present its first conference in the Caribbean area and it coincided with the Trinidad and Tobago association's 10th anniversary and 9th year of membership of the Federation.

Avi Gil presents the ILO view in Port of Spain, April 1991.

The advent of five day conferences provided delegates with ample time for their deliberations. Committee A discussions provided a fundamental change to operating procedures. Previously, final plenary had often been a lengthy and tedious affair but Committee A changed the bye laws so that henceforth plenary could vote en bloc on the various conference committee resolutions except for those requiring a two thirds majority. Given that the directors had already passed these resolutions in committee, it was eminently sensible for them to not require another vote by basically the same people for them to become (bye) law. 1991's decision certainly cut down on the proceedings of conferences final afternoon in later years.

The 'upside-down' hotel in Port of Spain, Trinidad & Tobago.

One of the results of the recent chaotic European Summers was the implementation of Air Traffic Flow Management. This first attempt at providing a more global form of traffic management was excellent in concept but proved to be flawed in execution as some sought ways around the slot time system, notably by filing several alternative flight plans. The directors in Port of Spain sought to prevent this and further addressed the staffing issues ofATFM centres. The trials and technological advances being employed in the Pacific (see Chapter 10) came in for close scrutiny and conference passed policy, specific to the ASP region, relating to reduction in longitudinal separation minima and, for the first time, defined the requirement for Direct Controller Pilot Communications (DCPC) when employing the new standards and facilities. On the other side of the world, the on-going poor status of facilities in central Africa was re-examined and strong policy on TIBA was agreed. As well as the ATFM staffing issue, Committee C determined policy on substance abuse and automation. This last topic, which provided five resolutions, clearly put the case for the requirement to assist and support controllers in the execution of their duties and for the controller to remain the key element of any system. The discussions on random drug testing generated considerable heat and provided some of the most controversial and emotional debates ever seen in Committee C.

Port of Spain's final plenary saw the presentation of the Scroll of Honour to the recently retired Executive Secretary, Pat O'Doherty. 'The Doc' was duly honoured for outstanding service over 11 years as Executive Vice-President Administration and Executive Secretary. It was a fitting tribute to one who, almost single handedly, dragged the administration of IFATCA into the computer age.

Pat O'Doherty acknowledges the awarding of the Scroll of Honour.

Port of Spain, April 1991.

A month after conference, an air traffic controller strike in Russia was narrowly averted, being cancelled at the very last minute. In settling the dispute the Russian authorities and the controllers agreed on a 60% salary rise, a 32 hour week, six weeks holidays per year and early retirement at age 50. Things had certainly changed in the old Soviet Union! Partly to see first hand the problems the Russians were experiencing - the other reason was to use the rubles the Russians had paid as affiliation dues into a Moscow bank account - the Board travelled to Moscow in June for a routine meeting. We were all impressed by what we observed and by the 'openness' of the new Russia. However, just a month later the world saw the 'coup' which led to the overthrow of Mikhail Gorbachov. Within a few months, all the gains had been eroded by high inflation and there was little social or political stability.

The Executive Board's next meeting was in September and was programmed for Montreal to coincide with ICAO's 10th Air Navigation Conference. An invitation to the President to attend this meeting - and the Future Global Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Systems symposium preceding it - was an indication of how high IFATCA's stocks with ICAO were at that time. IFATCA was able to have incorporated into the symposiums final report a comment on CNS/ATM and President Stuart also delivered a speech to the ANC. Relations were further improved when one evening during the subsequent Board meeting, the Executive Board hosted a cocktail party which was attended by selected members of the ICAO Secretariat, members of the Air Navigation Commission and several ICAO dignitaries including the President, Dr. Kotaite. Little did we know then that this first ever Board meeting in Montreal would be followed just six short years later by our own permanent secretariat in the city.

The Executive Board in Montreal during the ICAO 10th ANC, Sept. 1991

L to R: Preben Lauridsen, Wim Rooseman, Ulli Windt, Edge Green, Sture Ericsson, Neil Vidler,

Charles Stuart and Abdou el Seoud el Karimy.

With so much attention being placed upon technology and its impact, there grew some feelings that the lesser developed nations in IFATCA were missing out. A mood developed in Central America and around the Caribbean area that the countries of the region would be better served by forming their own regional federation. The previous October had witnessed a meeting in Venezuela where the creation of a Latin American Federation was discussed. As in 1976, IFATCA naturally opposed such a breakaway and determined on a higher level of attention. December, 1991 saw the Americas Regional Meeting held in Costa Rica. One day prior, IFATCA and the Costa Rican association organised a one day seminar with the theme "How Does IFATCA Work?". The EVP AMA and the EVP Finance attended (EVP ASP was also meant to be present but at the last moment work requirements prevailed) and they outlined the principles and objectives of the Federation and how it functions. The seminar was by no means a proselytising lecture as plenty of time was afforded for two way discussions and perceived deficiencies and ways to improve on both sides were explored. The event provided an ideal platform for the ensuing two day Regional Meeting. Directors at this gathering agreed to promote membership of IFATCA as the best method of overcoming the region's problems. It was accepted that working together within IFATCA would be more beneficial to both the MAs and IFATCA. The Board followed up this seminar initiative by holding a full Executive Board meeting in San Jose nine months later. This meeting also was preceded by another forum, this time a gathering of the Presidents of the Central American associations. This opportunity afforded another frank exchange of views. Further follow up action (another one day seminar on 'How Does IFATCA Work?') occurred at the upcoming Regional Meeting in Mexico.

The Board then arranged for a presentation from the ILO at the 1993 Americas regional meeting. This delivery, 'The State of Basic International Labour Standards and Problems with Regard to Structural Change in Civil Aviation', was provided in Spanish for the benefit of the Latin Americans (even though it was held in Aruba!) and was very well received. This particular regional meeting was concluded with a press release deploring the severe deficiencies in Central and South America.

1992 opened on a sad note for IFATCA with the death in February of EVP Professional Wim Rooseman. Becoming the second Board member to die in office, Rooseman was actually at home preparing for another trip on behalf of IFATCA when he suffered heart failure at the too-early age of 48. A tireless worker, who always made considered and valuable contribution to any undertaking, Rooseman was a man of incredible organisational ability and meticulous preparation and his relationships with ICAO and the ILO especially were a major contribution to the affairs of the Federation. As a mark of respect and appreciation, Wilhelm (Wim) Rooseman was accorded a minute's silence during the opening ceremonies and was posthumously awarded the Scroll of Honour at the Bournemouth conference.

With Canadian Mike Dooling having stood down in Port of Spain after just one year leaving the position of EVP Technical vacant, following Rooseman's death, IFATCA was now in the unusual position of going into its annual conference without its two frontline professional officers. Never before had the Federation been without two such key figures at conference. It is Board policy to provide, for the duration of each conference, the relevant Board member for each committee plus, as much as duties permit, at least one other member to assist. The absence of both EVP Technical and EVP Professional meant representation would be at the minimum, numerically speaking. Even under these circumstances committee requirements could not be ignored and a presence by officers with some knowledge of the respective disciplines was necessary. The Board decided that EVP EUR should be the Board's representative and prime spokesman in Committee B and EVP ASP assumed the same roles in Committee C.

The Bournemouth conference itself proved to be the biggest IFATCA has ever presented. There were over 1,000 individual registrations, 40 companies providing easily the biggest and most comprehensive technical exhibition ever and some 30 different print and broadcast media organisations from around the world ensuring the occasion did not pass unnoticed. It had taken 29 years for the conference to return to the country of one of the Federations biggest contributors and strongest supporters and the President of the U.K. Guild took advantage of the attention with a hard hitting opening speech. David Grace noted, that despite the fact that there had been great technological changes over the previous decades, the way aircraft were controlled had not fundamentally altered. The Guild was now demanding that this must change and Grace outlined three issues that (as he said) were dominating the thoughts of controllers: the training and professional standards of controllers, the apparent inability to use the experience and expertise of controllers and air traffic flow management. It was his opinion that the challenge of meeting a doubling of traffic by the end of the decade would only be met by a full partnership of all the players- administrations, airlines, industry and controllers. He concluded by saying that the professionalism, flexibility and enthusiasm of the ATC service would be necessary to incorporate the vision required for the future ATC service to meet the demands of the customer. Grace was clearly telegraphing IFATCA's appreciation that the new high tech world of ATC was almost with us and that air traffic controllers were ready to embrace it. Underlining the importance that the British government had placed in the conference, the opening ceremonies were then addressed by the Chairman of the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority and the Minister of State for Aviation. With almost a thousand people in attendance in the custom built Bournemouth International Centre, it was a most impressive opening to IFATCA's thirty-first conference.

With the opening of committee proceedings, the Committee A Chairman took the opportunity to explain that this was the first conference whereby directors were to arrive at resolutions in committee rather than make recommendations to final plenary. Displaying typical personal operating style, the Netherlands' Bert Ruitenberg earned the appreciation of delegates for his clear explanation of a major change to operating methods. During the committee sessions, Ruitenberg was to be elected as the new EVP Professional, succeeding his compatriot Wim Rooseman. The vacant EVP Technical position was also filled. A past President of the U.K. Guild and Chairman of SC1, Christopher Stock, accepted the not inconsiderable responsibility for guiding the Federation into the new technological age. Another person destined to be around for a time, Samuel Lampkin from Trinidad and Tobago, was also elected as EVP Americas.

A most professional EVP, Bert Ruitenberg

With a heavy commitment to meetings experiencing an exponential rise, IFATCA had seen a commensurate decrease in operating surpluses over the previous four years. Whilst IFATCA is certainly a 'not-for-profit' organisation, it is prudent to achieve surpluses each year so that a reserve fund (usually agreed to be equivalent to one year's operating costs) can be maintained. Since 1987, the Federation had seen its positive operating balances deteriorate from relatively healthy figures down to practically zero in 1991 At this point, reserves stood at CHF219,000 and the current year's turnover was expected to be CHF270,000. With membership fees unchanged since 1983, it was time to again address the always sensitive issue of the cost of membership of the Federation. In a relatively small impost, Bournemouth raised the cost of IFATCA membership by a single Swiss franc for associations with more than 100 members. The resultant gain of CHF7,000 per annum was not overly large but was sufficient to ensure continued operating profits coupled with the necessary minimum outlay for the Federations constituents.

The European region's involvement in no less than eight planning groups and study programmes ensured a high level contribution to Committee B discussions with much emphasis on ATFM matters although the biggest debate again was centred on TCAS. The talks highlighted concerns over a general lack of knowledge and instruction about TCAS and the growing mistrust of its current capabilities.

The directors saw fit to pass the following:

“AII Member Associations should ask their national administrations to introduce as a matter of urgency, procedures that will absolve their controllers for a loss of separation caused by an aircraft following a TCAS advisory." (Res. 92.B.5)

This was a widely considered debate and certainly not an ill-informed, insular MA whine for, on this occasion, the contributing MAs were joined in their deliberations by representatives from the Corporate Members, IFALPA and the USA National ATC Association (NATCA), who were present as observers and subject to most of the current experience with the tool. (We look a little deeper into the whole TCAS problem in Chapter 10.)

The Committee B discussions on ATFM were complemented in Committee C with new policy on the rating of ATFM staff resulting. IFATCA ensured continued controller involvement in these centres by deciding that so called ATFM controllers must be qualified ATCOs with recent experience in control duties (Res. 92.C.2) and that an ATFM controller must hold an ATFM rating (Res. 92.C.3). The Professional committee also arrived at policy on rating ATC instructors, accident and incident investigation and the use of recorded data. Directors concluded by settling upon a practical legal aid programme and committed IFATCA to endeavouring to provide legal representation (if requested) to a Member Association involved in a legal action.

The Bournemouth conference concluded with the traditional dinner dance evening. Massive sponsorship by British Airways ensured that this final soiree lived on in delegates memories. The entire banquet hall was transformed into a Victorian England scene and entertainment was provided by the renowned singer, Marty Webb. It was a most spectacular finale to an outstanding conference.

The wide ranging developments in Europe and IFATCA's reaction and participation in the many working groups ensured that the Federations members, at least in Western Europe, were being well looked after. There remained many parts of the world where the same could not be said and problems abounded even in some areas where technology was relatively modern. There were (and frequently still are) also existing situations, the solutions to which are hindered by politics because of which, even ICAO is powerless to help. Such a convergence of circumstances arose in North East Asia in 1991 and 1992.

At the informal Asia-Pacific Regional Meeting during the Bournemouth conference, the Hong Kong association presented a working paper which outlined some problems they were experiencing with traffic management during peak periods and at times of severe weather. The flow control techniques they applied to alleviate their problems resulted in serious flow on effects for their colleagues in Taipei and Naha (Southern Japan) ATC centres. The search for a solution would obviously need to involve the three Member Associations and ICAO would not be able to assist since the Republic of China (Taiwan) was not recognised by the United Nations. Certainly something needed to be done and, since ICAO could not be involved, IFATCA decided to use its good standing as an apolitical body to seek a solution. On 27th and 28th July, 1992 EVP ASP Neil Vidler convened a meeting in Hong Kong which was attended by ATC representatives from the three associations, the Hong Kong administration and Cathay Pacific Airlines, China Airlines and Japan Airlines.

Several initiatives were explored but finally an agreement to pursue creation of a uni-directional parallel track system between Hong Kong and Taipei was agreed, as was increased utilisation of direct routing for Pacific Ocean/Japan flights to South East Asia from the Hong Kong FIR's Eastern boundary to its South Western corner rather than overflying Hong Kong. Other short term re-routings during peak times, such as Chinese New Year, were agreed. The biggest advantage of the proposals was that they did not involve changes to the air route structure nor amendments to the Regional Supplementary Procedures. There was, therefore, optimism that they could be quickly implemented. The approaches and plan of action were communicated to the ICAO office in Bangkok where they were endorsed.

Through a series of four more NEAT (North East Asia Traffic) meetings, the group elaborated and refined their proposals and eventually saw the creation of a complete parallel route from Hong Kong to Japan. Whilst the parallel route remains, its utilisation is still not as ideal as it could be due to some military restrictions and operating requirements. However, it does provide some relief to an otherwise very congested piece of airspace. The direct routing across the base of the Hong Kong FIR also became standard practise saving airlines thousands of dollars in fuel each flight.

Because of the politics in the region, the meetings could not have occurred except for IFATCA's apolitical stance and its ability to call together multinational work face controllers, administration and airline representatives for strictly professional discussions at grass roots level. The willingness of the Federations officers and members to explore a better way of operating provided substance to IFATCA's objectives of promoting safety, efficiency and regularity in international air navigation and assisting and advising in the development of safe and orderly systems.

Early in October, 1992 an aviation tragedy visited the Dutch capital, Amsterdam. An El Al B747 freighter crashed into an apartment building shortly after take off killing the crew and a number in the building. Whilst ATC was not causally involved with the accident, its impact left lasting impressions on the controllers on duty. The incident provided a textbook study of the pressures on the controllers at such a traumatic time as they continued to process the continuing stream of traffic to and from the airport. Few actually witnessed the accident but all on duty felt its effects. Extra perseverance for the task at hand was called for and each instruction, each new clearance seemed to require enormous effort and one controller reported not trusting anything and being startled at every word that sounded different from the norm. Soon, off duty controllers started calling in offering their help and management provided excellent support including the services of the department's physician. Those most closely affected took days to come to grips with the situation, gradually realising that it could not have been handled any better way. Discussing doubts and fears with colleagues, listening to the tapes and watching a video reconstruction all aided with understanding that their feelings were quite normal and, with acceptance, little by little trust in aviation and confidence in the profession returned.

Whilst the politicians and technology were making strenuous attempts to 'catch up' in Europe (in 1992 the ECAC Transport Ministers were able to instance a reduced overall delay for 1991 despite a 15% increase in traffic since 1988), the region was still plagued by many problems: lack of harmonisation and integrated systems, staff concerns, pressures coming from the break up of the old Soviet Union and the emerging nations of the East and the Baltic and more. October of 1992 saw one of the more important European Regional Meetings take place in Strasbourg, France and high on the agenda were the EATCHIP Programme and concerns over developments in Europe including the staffing imbalance between North and South, overloading situations and simplistic solutions offered by 'instant experts'. A major point of discussion was, as always, ATFM and the traffic delays due to congestion of the previous Summer and IFATCA's input to the forthcoming FLOW meeting was settled.

Clearly encapsulating their concerns, the delegates to this regional meeting (President Stuart also attended) issued a statement to the media immediately the meeting concluded. In this press release, IFATCA stated inter alia: "The position of IFATCA (is) that there should not be duplication of work between various bodies in Europe responsible for civil aviation. The Federation urgently asks for a common approach to the ATC situation in Europe. Concentration of efforts should be on the short and medium term. Enormous increases of traffic caused many aircraft to be delayed this Summer and remedial action is called for. The controllers at the meeting unanimously condemned the simplistic approach being voiced by the Association of European Airlines on air traffic control." IFATCA now was involved in some twenty different working groups amongst various bodies such as Eurocontrol, ECAC, EC, ICAO and the European Parliament and there were fears that the disparate efforts and very moves towards the harmony being sought could themselves contribute to disharmony and result in a continuation of non-integrated solutions. It was time for concerted action and coordinated decisions.

IFATCA, and especially the European region, was advantaged in this period having Preben Lauridsen as EVP EUtL Lauridsen joined the Board in 1990 and thus grew into the job as EATCHIP evolved. The Chairman of the project was fellow Dane Val Eggers and this coincidence of nationality undoubtedly aided IFATCA's acceptance as either participants or observers at all levels of the project including, at the very top, the Project Board. This certainly represented a major breakthrough for until 1990 such full recognition was lacking. Shortly afterwards, ICAO accepted the Federation's request for European Air Navigation Planning Group (EANPG) observer status. It is no coincidence that similar acceptance then started to be realised in other regions and IFATCA's global involvement, and hence influence, accelerated. As always, however, there is a downside and these newly won acceptances started to place unprecedented pressures on IFATCA's financial and personnel resources. In this respect the rapidly expanding membership from Eastern Europe assisted gready with the extra income they provided enabling some accommodation of the increasing commitment. The Board still found it necessary, however, to once again institute tight cost controls and attendance at meetings came to be judged against 'desirable or essential' criteria and participation considered accordingly. The nineties were only two years old but already were providing the strongest test yet for IFATCA's commitment to maximum involvement in pursuit of recognition of the profession.

Part of that involvement involved, for EVP EUR, a presentation to the Janes Information Group's ‘ATC 93' conference in February, 1993. Fresh from the first ever Board meeting in the Far East (in Tokyo 5th-8th February), Lauridsen raced home for the three day conference which looked at 'Europe's Present ATC Crisis: Maximising the Capacity of Today's ATC Systems'. Lauridsen simply stated IFATCA's view that the crisis was that the capacity of the ATC system is not meeting the demand of the customers, the airlines. The result was delay. Having being intimately involved with the EATCHIP project from its inception, Lauridsen was perfectly placed to detail IFATCA's scepticism with the initial timetable and the political commitment. He endorsed the ECAC developmental approach in the second phase whilst focussing on the fact that lack of capacity was not only an efficiency issue but very much a safety issue as well. Moving from short term considerations to some crystal ball gazing, the EVP EUR was again moved to repeat IFATCA's (by now) well worn assertion that automation must support and assist the controller, not replace him. Lauridsen made an impression on the 250 airline, airport national administration and international organisation representatives present.

Lauridsen's pitch to the European rule makers was being matched by his Board colleague, Bert Ruitenberg. Maintaining IFATCA's two pronged attack on the problems of the day, in April Ruitenberg travelled across the Atlantic and made a significant presentation to ICAO's Second Global Symposium on Flight Safety and Human Factors. Zeroing in on inadequate controller training and lack of simulation when transferring to new equipment or locations, Ruitenberg made an analogy with Air Force equipment training. Everyone would be aghast if pilots transitioned to new fighter aircraft without adequate training and simulation (especially if there was a major operational need such as a war) but administrations appear to routinely accept exactly such a scenario with new ATC facilities.

Ruitenberg made a similar compelling case for retention of 'manual' controller skills with automation through continual simulator exercises, which in turn require more staff. The popular misconception that automated ATC systems will require less staff was very adequately dealt with and Ruitenberg concluded by imploring his audience to not get carried away with the technological possibilities; the human remains the heart of any ATC system.

Leaving the pressures of Europe and the Northern Hemisphere behind, the 32nd annual conference was held almost as far South as it is possible for IFATCA to go. Delegates weren't, however, travelling to a backwater or a Pacific idyll for the Asia-Pacific region was fast developing major problems of its own. The ASP region was already claiming thirteen of the world's busiest 25 airport pairings and had predictions of 30% of world traffic by 2000. With up to 20 airports either under construction or planned but a concurrent sad lack of ATC facilities in many areas of the region, air traffic control in ASP was feeling the pinch. At the time, the Pacific was being utilised as a proving ground for CNS/ATM applications, Automatic Dependent Surveillance and Area Navigation trials and development of Mach Number Technique separations. It was likely that the innovative developments in the region would be the blueprint for global application. There was a lot happening 'down under'.

Almost exactly geographically opposite Bournemouth at 44°S and 173°E, Christchurch was the venue for only IFATCA's second conference in the region. Delegates were no doubt interested in observing first hand New Zealand's experience with commercialisation and they registered in unforecast numbers, so much so that the 1993 conference witnessed a registration second only to Bournemouth. The opportunity to observe the Southern Cross constellation apparently was another motivator for the high attendance as the author was frequently asked to point out the group by many from the Northern Hemisphere.

The Christchurch conference saw the Swiss association relinquish responsibility for the Controller Management Group after an outstanding thirteen years management. In that period, the CMG had raised the magazine to a very high professional level which in turn generated high advertising revenues. With the Editor now resident in the U.K., the British Guild assumed responsibility which they have maintained to this day. Continuing with their concerns for the less well off members, the Board had presented to the 1992 conference a proposal to financially assist these members to attend conference. SC3 took it on board their work programme for the ensuing year and Christchurch saw the creation of the Conference Attendance Fund. Each year now, one director from up to five MAs would be paid their expenses at conference. By this means, someone from these countries can now at least afford to be present and the plight of the poorer nations could be brought more to the attention of the Federations supreme governing body. Membership numbers increased dramatically with no less than ten new MAs affiliating. Six of these were from the Europe region reflecting the changed political and demographic landscape.

Committee B had a familiar feel to it with the usual discussions on ATFM and TCAS although, this year, two other major discussion points were the subjects of Microwave Landing Systems and Area Navigation. These two debates produced some seventeen and nine resolutions respectively out of a total of 30.

Privatisation was the word on everyone's lips (at least in Committee C) and delegates came up with the definition of privatised air traffic services and therefrom derived policy whereby safety and quality levels of ATC should not be compromised by commercialisation of the service. Complementing this, the requirement to develop accompanying policy on the legal consequences of commercialising air traffic services was referred to SC7. The following year, their paper concluded that commercialisation is viable provided safeguards are enacted in legislation to ensure the protection of the employees and the safety of the travelling public. Staying with the legal theme, delegates also agreed that a controller should not be held liable for incidents that occur due to the use of inaccurate data whilst employing automated systems. Recent events in Europe prompted a lengthy discussion and eight resolutions dealing with unlawful interference to civil aviation and facilities.

Delegates were seeking safety assurances for their colleagues and determined that controllers should not be held responsible for being forced to deviate from published ICAO rules.

Professional matters devotees were well catered for in Christchurch with the introduction of a Professional Panel to complement the long existing Technical Panel. An initiative of the region's EVP, Neil Vidler, the panel featured presentations on Human Factors in ATC, the Use of Imagery in ATC and Critical Incident Stress Management. Although it had to be squeezed in to an already tight timetable, it was well received and the high attendance ensured continuation of the practise.

Concluding, proceedings in final plenary saw the retiring Deputy President Ulli Windt awarded the Scroll of Honour. A member of the Board since 1985 and chairman of SC4 for three years prior to that- Windt had served the Federation with distinction as EVP Administration and Deputy President. He had become the font of knowledge for the newer Board members and if one needed some background information or the whereabouts of some fact, 'you had only to ask Ulli'. It was Windt who was largely responsible for the tremendous amount of work required for the re-structure exercise at the special conference in Acapulco. Not only an administration wizard, he also very creditably represented the Federation in the technical areas in Europe, particularly with the EATCHIP and APATSI (Airports/ATS Interface) projects, being on the Project Board for both. It provoked a great deal of soul searching in 1992 when he first asked the author to consider succeeding him and he certainly was a daunting act to follow when he called it a day at the Christchurch conference in 1993.

Over the years (some) delegates had established a peripheral reputation for IFATCA people as major socialisers capable of prodigious drinking feats. Around the world, many a bar had been drunk dry as delegates continued their discussions well into the evening. The New Zealand organising committee, complete hosts that they were, obviously believed that this aspect of conference should be well catered for too and, just along the street from the conference centre, targeted a small pub as the official watering hole. The committee had the presence of mind to forewarn the licensee of the IFATCA predilection for late evening debates and sensibly he applied to the local liquor licensing authority for a special late night licence for the week. When it was granted, he also prudently employed extra staff.

It was just as well for every evening the discussions and debate continued well into the night and the pub matched its annual profit with just the one week's takings! Only two months later, the Executive Board was again assembled in the Southern Hemisphere. Following a request from the Uruguayan association, the Board held a full meeting in Montevideo in June, 1993. The Board took advantage of this opportunity and continued with their on-going policy of increased assistance to Latin America by arriving early and contributing to an association organised International Regional Symposium immediately preceding the Board meeting. Several Board members made technical and administrative type contributions to the symposium and again generally highlighted how IFATCA can be of assistance. It was whilst returning home to Australia from this Board meeting that PCX Stuart and DP Vidler briefly stopped off in Rio Gallegos in Southern Argentina, which, at 52°S, marks the southernmost visit by IFATCA officers.

1993 seemed to herald something of a turnaround in relations with IATA. For so long strained following the failed attempts by the Federation to achieve a breakthrough on the Resolution 200 issue, relations with IATA had not been the closest and, in fact, they had apparently intentionally excluded the Federation from some of their forums. So it came as something of a surprise when the Association formed their Air Transport Action Group and invited membership by IFATCA. ATAG's stated aim was to achieve improvements in all areas of aviation infrastructure with a declared objective of supporting expansion of air traffic control capacity. The Board was a little wary initially of joining an organisation that had been so vocal with criticism of ATC over air traffic delays. However, as we saw in Chapter 6, a decision to join ATAG, initially on a trial basis, was made and the U.K. Guild's Allan Shaw⁵ represented IFATCA at several further meetings around the world.

The sheer numbers of meetings that the Federation was being invited to was occasionally causing problems. As always, costs were a concern but the organisation was now also finding it difficult to always provide suitably qualified speakers and representatives to some forums. Sometimes, the people we wished to send to convey the controller's point of view simply could not fit the meeting into their schedule and reluctantly we had to decline invitations. Then, during 1993, an unusual problem arose with regard to meeting attendance. On two occasions, IFATCA found itself advertised as a participant providing a speaker to a conference we had no knowledge of and to which we had received no invitation or notification. It now seemed that even our silent voice had become a drawcard!

Most Executive Board meetings are straightforward gatherings ensuring the continued smooth running of Federation affairs with the agenda set over time and items reported on as a matter of course. Sometimes, a matter is raised which adds interest because it is new or which assumes added importance because of events or the timing or location of the meeting. Every once in a while, however, a Board meeting stands out for decisions arrived at. The February, 1994 Executive Board meeting in Vancouver was just such a meeting.

Normally little of note occurs in the first meeting of the calendar year, traditionally conducted as one making final preparations for conference. The 1994 meeting provided a little more than that. Firstly, under the administration section of the agenda, two significant matters were raised. The first of these centred around discussion on possible celebrations for IFATCA's 35th anniversary due in 1996. It was agreed that the 35th was of little importance but a decision was made to do something more concrete for the 40th anniversary. (You are reading it!) Under the innocuous tide of 'Upgrading the Executive Secretariat Equipment' (a common agenda item), EVP EUR raised the question of establishing a permanent secretariat. This, of course, was not a new idea having being raised many times, and as far back as 1962, but on this occasion something positive resulted. The Board decided to form a small working group to look into how a permanent secretariat would function and investigate other aspects such as cost. The Permanent Office Working Group was tasked to complete its preliminary investigations by conference 1995.

There followed a proposal that we should financially support the authors of technical papers to attend conference. The importance of having the authors of important technical papers - particularly ones containing policy recommendations - present to expand on their work was accepted and supported. President Stuart, due to retire in two months, presented a draft working paper proposing scrapping official recognition of the position of Past President. In the old days of a five man Executive Board with the potential for two or three new officers each year, the availability of continued guidance from a departing President was considered important. In 1994, with nine elected and two ex officio officers, it had lost its relevance and Stuart's intelligent and sensible proposal (with attendant cost savings) was accepted. And who better than a retiring President to propose the idea?

EVP Technical then introduced his proposal for a more 'corporate' image for the Federation. He proposed ensuring that all IFATCA presentations were made via standard format (consistent layout, logo displayed, etc) to enhance the Federations image. With ever increasing IFATCA presentations to international conferences, this was accepted as essential. Speaking of international conferences, the final decision on the proposed Kuala Lumpur educational symposium was made and monies committed to the project. The increasing importance and technical content of the ISPACG meetings was recognised and EVP Technical assumed overall responsibility⁶ for the Federation (thus relieving the ex-EVP ASP and now DP of that burden) and, as well, the Board committed two representatives to the forum instead of the previous one. It was a most significant Executive Board meeting.

With 30 years membership behind them, the Canadian ATC Association (CATCA) had only once before bid to host a conference. That was the 1970 forum. In 1980 they accepted the responsibility for managing another conference with just nine weeks notice when the original choice was unable to continue. By 1992, CATCA thought the time was right for them to bid on and be awarded another meeting. They were successful in this endeavour and the Federations second biggest MA chose for the 1994 venue their national capital Ottawa, from whence had come the recent decision for Canada to follow other countries down the ATC commercialisation path.

However, on this occasion, the heretofore hot topic of commercialisation took something of a back seat and the SC7 paper on the subject was accepted as information, as we have seen. What Committee C did get their teeth into was policy development on early retirement (ideally between the years 50 and 55), remuneration (not specified but commensurate with levels of skill and experience and reflecting their employment status in accordance with ILO conclusions) and recency and competency (minimum hours agreed with the administration). The Ottawa conference also resulted in firm policy on the introduction and use of area recordings and the liability of controllers involved in incidents resulting from the failure of automated systems (complementing the previous year's policy on corrupted data). EVP Professional again organised a successful Professional Panel ensuring that this now regular feature of conference remained on the agenda.

Committee B addressed a record number of work study items and deliberated over an incredible 46 working papers. The concerns raised as a result of progress with Area Navigation in the Pacific saw flexible policy determined to fit in with changing standards and associated operational applications. A very extensive discussion saw the previously agreed requirement from the ASP region for DCPC with 80nm separation replaced with the DCPC requirement for minima below 80nm with ICAO determining the appropriate safety levels of relevant separation minima in this respect. As always, it is up to the controller to determine the adequacy of his communication links before accepting traffic levels that may be compromised. Similarly, extended discussion ensued with the application of data links. A table (presented by ICAO) was agreed as acceptable in defining various airspace regimes where voice only was required and where data link or voice was acceptable. Then came the really big discussion.

Whilst some concerns over TCAS had been ameliorated over the past year, Ottawa saw a resurrection of the debate. These new discussions examined the expanded applications of TCAS, notably in-trail climb. This technique alarmed delegates and they left the topic with the following statement read into the minutes: "It is becoming apparent that the use of ACAS is not transparent to the ATC system. This is detrimental to the effectiveness of the ATC system and potentially will lead to reductions in capacity. IFATCA is gravely concerned about the current developments being carried out by some States, individually, to use ACAS technologies as a separation tool. To compensate for deficiencies in the ACAS system, it has been suggested that controllers modify their techniques. This undermines the integrity of the air traffic control system." (At this stage, IFATCA was still utilising the European expression and speaking of Airborne Collision Alerting Systems rather than Traffic Collision Alerting Systems.)

In the quieter (for once) confines of Committee A, IFATCA membership climbed to exactly 100 Member Associations with the acceptance of 15 new affiliates another record. Seven of these were from Europe, further indication of the changed politics and adding even further to the already considerable workload ofEVP EUR. Being up for re-election, it was little wonder that the incumbent, Preben Lauridsen, took the easy option and had himself elected President instead, replacing the retiring Charles Stuart. (Just joking Preben!)

Charles Stuart bowes out, suitably rewarded.

In fact, no one could accuse Lauridsen of shirking work. His involvement over the previous four years in the Europe region was nothing short of incredible and there is absolutely no doubt that a large measure of the respect now held for IFATCA, its mounting influence, universal recognition and inclusion in the various working groups is directly attributable to his outstanding contribution in Europe. A controller only since 1982 (at 36 years of age Lauridsen was the second youngest, after 'Tek' Tekstra, to be elected President), he joined the Danish association's Board in 1988 immediately assuming responsibilities for IFATCA liaison, staffing and medical matters. His grasp of the new technologies and changing politics enabled him to move easily and confidently in the new Europe and certainly lightened the load on EVP Technical. His easy going style and very approachable nature belied a steely interior and he could be relied upon to very forcefully put a necessary point of view. Despite his diminutive stature, he was a President we could look up to.

Of course, as Preben Lauridsen assumed executive responsibility for the world ATC organisation, Charles Stuart bowed out, appropriately honoured. A standing ovation indicated the esteem with which Stuart was held and he was awarded the IFATCA Scroll of Honour, the Asia-Pacific Region Merit Award and, from ICAO, the Air Navigation Bureau Director's Award, something never previously awarded to an air traffic controller. As he said though "The ICAO Director's Award is very much the result of the efforts put in by the various members of the team who have to deal with ICAO. I see the award as recognition by ICAO of the work of IFATCA" That may be so, but the team had to be managed and managed well. Charles Stuart did that.

Stuart was joined in departure by EVP Finance, Sture Ericsson. Keeping financial tabs on an organisation that had grown by 50% and a Board that doubled in size at the outset of his four years was a demanding task, one he couldn't have handled had he not simplified the system by single handedly computerising the Federations accounts himself. He also played a full role in general Board representation always ready to attend regional meetings or forums in locations far removed from his native Sweden and as diverse as Costa Rica or Egypt. Ericsson was replaced by Canada's John Redmond, an ex-President of CATCA. Slipping into the European hot seat was Günter Melchert from Austria.

Conference '94 wound up with over 700 ATC registrations from 73 countries and staged one of the best technical exhibitions ever and the organising committee received deserved plaudits for an outstanding job. Comments from the CEOs of several ATC organisations and senior officials from ICAO andACI (Airports Council International) revealed that they were astounded at how well run and efficient IFATCA and its annual conference is.

Mid-1994 saw the Executive Board expressing some concerns for their own personal safety. The previous year had seen Algeria volunteer as the venue for the 1994 AFM Regional Meeting but the early months of the year saw considerable unrest in the country with Islamic fundamentalists protesting against the government and killing many foreigners. The Algerian association itself became worried and, at the time of the Board meeting in Copenhagen in June, were seeking more time to confirm their ability to host the event. The Board, concerned about the security of its members (EVPP, EVP EUR and EVP AFM were designated to attend) and for all the African delegates, made the decision then that Algeria should no longer be considered as the venue for the meeting. Fortunately, there were other MAs willing to step in at short notice (both Egypt and Tanzania volunteered immediately) and the meeting was eventually staged in Harare. At that stage, this represented the only time that the Board had 'interfered' in this manner in regional affairs but it was repeated in 1999 when the regional meeting was again removed from Algeria (and held in Tanzania).

It was around this time that the Executive Board really started to reach out to what could be described as the less advanced of the membership of the Federation. Spurred by the success of the NEAT meetings, the positive reactions from the direct approach with the Latin American associations and the activities of the RTFs, the Board decided to become even more proactive. In part, this decision also was prompted by the pace and scale of the technological developments confronting the membership and the Board was conscious of the strong potential for some of them to be ill informed, or even uninformed, on the advances. With the inadequate preparations surrounding the introduction of TCAS still fresh in the collective memory, the Board determined that history should not repeat itself and decided upon some education of its own.

At the October 1993 Executive Board meeting, EVP Technical Chris Stock made the observation that there was a growing need for education of MAs in relation to FANS and its CNS/ATM derivative. Agreeing, the new EVP ASP, Hong Kong's David Moores, then mentioned that he was examining the possibility of a technical seminar in Malaysia as part of a local education programme. Getting the go-ahead from his constituents at the November regional meeting, Moores firmed up his ideas and gained approval for his seminar at the subsequent Board meeting in February, 1994. Titled ‘ATC in Asia in Transition', the two day symposium was held in Kuala Lumpur in September, 1994.

EVP Technical Chris Stock in typical pose.

Over 100 controllers and invited guests from 20 countries attended and were presented with a wealth of information. The DP got proceedings under way by stating the reasons for IFATCA venturing into such a forum: the wish to be involved in, and influence, the future development of ATC in the Asia-Pacific region whilst avoiding the mistakes made by others. Three key note addresses followed - with themes of CNS/ATM from ICAO, a pilot's view of ATC in the region from Cathay Pacific and how IFATCA works and the importance the Federation is placing upon the human factor in future ATC systems from the President. An address by a representative of Alenia on technical developments in the region neatly led into a technical panel which covered capacity problems, ADS and licensing problems and ATFM.

The Malaysian Minister for Transport opens IFATCA's first symposium, Kuala Lumpur, September 1994.

The symposium organiser, EVP ASP David Moores is second from the right.

Signalling recognition of the importance of the event by the Malaysian government, day two of the symposium opened with an address from the Malaysian Minister of Transport. There followed another panel session, this time on the professional aspects of the business: Crew Resource Management by an aviation psychologist from Qantas, IFATCA's methodology in policy development by EVP Professional, ATC privatisation updates from New Zealand and Sri Lanka and incident investigation by an Australian Bureau of Air Safety Investigation representative. EVP Moores then gave a real time demonstration with his lap top computer of live radar data via normal telephone lines from the Hong Kong ATC centre. The ease of displaying such information graphically demonstrated the new technologies and highlighted potential applications in air traffic control.

An interesting programme over two days provided those attending with valuable information on where technology is taking us, and the implications thereof. Also, and especially for the many non-IFATCA members present, there was education on the Federation itself and observations as to where IFATCA believes emphasis must be placed with the new technologies. As a first of its kind, the KL symposium was adjudged an outstanding success and its style and format ideal in imparting the needed information. Its success spurred grass roots thoughts of further events and indeed, during the meeting, the author was approached with just that idea in mind.

And the Board was also given to immediate considerations of similar follow up forums (particularly for the AFM and AMA regions).

The Japanese Civil Aviation Bureau had determined on a centralised flow unit for their airspace and built in Fukuoka an Air Traffic Flow Management Centre, the first such establishment in Asia. In Kuala Lumpur, the Japanese Federation of ATCs (JFATC) approached the DP seeking the staging of a similar symposium to coincide with the official opening of the ATFM Centre. Recognising this as an ideal opportunity to build upon the Kuala Lumpur experience and to again provide some education on more new ATC related technology and modern techniques, the Board quickly accepted the proposal and formatted another educative forum. The two day symposium in February, 1995 featured two working sessions, complementarily framed and rifled 'The Industry View of ATFM' and 'The ATC Perspective of ATFM'.

The colourful opening to the Fukuoka ATFM symposium.

The DP ensured that the symposium did not degenerate into an 'Us and Them' scenario and whilst, on the one hand, there were presentations from the Air Transport Action Group, Japan Airlines and Cathay Pacific and, on the other, from controllers from Europe, Canada, Hong Kong (relating local experiences and approaches) and Fukuoka and a scientist from the Australian Artificial Intelligence Institute, the symposium was conducted in good humour with some good natured banter. The symposium was followed by the official opening of the ATFM Centre and a visit to the Fukuoka ATC Centre. Coming just five months after Kuala Lumpur, Fukuoka provided conclusive evidence of IFATCA's ability and capacity to present well structured and organised events to the international civil aviation community on topics which are relevant and in a manner which is informative and entertaining.

Returning to 1994, the last month of the year witnessed another unique initiative of IFATCA translate into concrete evidence of assistance, this time on the African continent. But first we need to back up even further to the previous November of 1993. That year's AFM Regional Meeting in Tunis saw seventeen MAs present, most of whom presented a litany of problems such as lack of communication and navigation facilities, lack of personal security at the workplace, staff shortages and little English language (re)training, Also present was a representative from the Agence pour la Securite de la Navigation Aerienne en Afrique (ASECNA) who spoke of their commitment to improving facilities and conditions for the controllers in the fifteen countries of West Africa that ASECNA provided ATC services to.

Since the MAs were detailing substantial continuing problems and ASECNA were speaking of improved facilities and conditions, there was an apparent contradiction and DP Neil Vidler, present representing the Executive Board, suggested that a meeting between IFATCA and ASECNA be held to identify specific problem areas and address the issues. On behalf of the MA delegates, Vidler worded the following motion which was passed unanimously: "IFATCA approach ASECNA with a view to organising a symposium to allow direct discussions on the serious matters concerning the associations working with ASECNA. These matters include training, salaries and allowances and facilities." Subsequent discussions settled upon Abidjan in Senegal for the forum and the meeting took place in December, 1994.

Maintaining the input from his original initiative, Vidler again represented IFATCA in Abidjan. The first day of a three day affair consisted of an all day open forum with the representatives of eleven of the regional associations. Almost simultaneous translation enabled DP to keep up with the points raised and the day concluded with clear indications as to where the delegates saw their problems. These were prioritised to include facility security, the effects of political/military interference, undue priority afforded Presidential flights, fire safety, English language training and career opportunities. The DP was impressed that the controllers viewed facility security and political interference as much more important than, say, salaries and promotion as one might expect. The second day in Abidjan consisted of discussions on the salient points with ASECNA and the local administration. The general professionalism of the controllers, evident from comments made, was recognised by the administration officials and they undertook to investigate the issues. For example, an English language exchange program was promised and English language-based countries such as Kenya and Tanzania would be considered. ASECNA was made aware of offers from Egypt in this department and DP suggested South Africa could also be considered⁷. The method of controller promotion within ATC, which was based on an obsolete French system, was agreed to be a waste of time and resources. Change was promised. The third day saw DP de-briefing the regional association representatives on the results of the discussions and a technical presentation on FANS and related issues was made. A second follow up meeting was promised. It was a most worthwhile exercise and, at one stroke, served to further demonstrate the local controllers' professionalism, their real concerns for the security of civil aviation, IFATCA's willingness to assist the less advanced MAs of the region and, again, the Federations ability and preparedness to organise such meetings which other organisations are unable or unwilling to.

Over the years IFATCA has maintained a consistent apolitical stance which has stood it in good stead. It is this position of not being involved in global politics that has enabled it to function as it does, earn international respect, intervene in disputes and organise forums such as the NEAT meetings. There have been a couple of occasions though where this position has caused it some problems and led to some discomfort, both within and without. Such a time was occasioned by the acceptance of the venue for the 34th annual conference, for it was confirmed as being held in the disputed city of Jerusalem.

The Israel ATCA was the first association to affiliate after the 1961 foundation of the Federation and it first hosted conference back in 1974 in Tel Aviv. Twenty years later, the Israelis were enthusiastic to again have the IFATCA showcase visit their shores. Unlike the dispute which raged in the lead up to the previous hosting but which saw an anticlimactic meeting, the 1995 conference was quiet in the lead up but significant in its proceedings and outcomes. Jerusalem is situated in the volatile area of the West Bank of the Jordan River, which was occupied by Israel during the 1967 six day war and further developed since that time. Arabs, Christians and Jews all lay claims to the Holy City. The general area of the West Bank was (and still is) the scene of considerable civil unrest and, with Palestinian agitation for an independent State of Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital, the decision to travel to Jerusalem was a 'brave' one. With maps still showing the area as 'Under Israeli Occupation', United Nations recognition of the divided and disputed city was non-existent and consequently organisations such as ICAO were not in evidence at the conference. There were several parties who urged IFATCA not to continue with the conference in such a compromised location but IFATCA did continue, relying upon its Constitution and the good sense of its Directors for guidance, and a superb conference ensued despite the absence of ICAO and all the Arab Member Associations, save one notable exception.

The highlight of the Jerusalem opening ceremonies was an entertaining speech by His Excellency, the President of Israel, Ezer Weisman. Mr. Weisman started his flying career training with the RAF and ended it as head of the Israeli Air Force. Not one to mince words, Mr. Weisman openly regretted the absence of the Egyptian delegation but gratefully recalled the arrival, by B707, in 1978 of President Sadat of Egypt, an arrival which marked the breakthrough in Arab-Israeli tensions and the start of the mid-East peace process. Mr. Weisman certainly added to the stature of the conference opening, as did, to the size of the opening attendance, the considerable numbers of well built young men with ear pieces, lapel mikes and bulky lumps under their jackets who accompanied him.

The Americans are coming...again. NATCA President Barry Krasner

accepts the Certificate of Membership from President Lauridsen

in Jerusalem, 1995.

Also at the opening of conference, his first as President, Preben Lauridsen broke new ground by delivering a 'State of the Federation' address rather than the more traditional Report of the Executive Board. It was a small change, one of style rather than form since it encapsulated the same material, but it was an indication of a new generation being in charge.

The politics of the region had to have something to do with one of the major discussions and its outcome which emanated from the administration committee in Jerusalem. A year earlier in Ottawa, Cairo had been selected as the venue for the 1996 conference but, by one year later, hardly any information from the organising committee had been forthcoming. Regular updates to the Board on progress of the organisation of conference are a Manual requirement and the Egyptian association was seriously deficient in this area. Even a visit to Cairo by the Editor to review facilities and preparations was inconclusive and lacked the necessary confirmation that arrangements were in place. The Board became worried.

On the Saturday prior to conference, the Egyptian association still had not registered for conference and the signs were they would not be doing so. The DP faxed a letter to Cairo requesting an immediate, full and comprehensive advice on the status and preparations for the 1996 conference. The response, three days later, was extremely sketchy. The DP's letter and the Egyptian response were circulated to all MAs present in Jerusalem and, in conjunction, delegates considered the Egyptian working paper, which contained just the barest of information, in their absence. Then, during the committee discussion on the matter, EVP Finance revealed that Egypt had not yet paid their affiliation dues for the year 1994/95 and thus were liable for suspension as at the end of the current conference. The agenda item, Confirmation of the 1996 Conference, then saw Directors refuse to confirm Cairo as the venue. The Federation now was in uncharted waters as never before at conference had a venue not been confirmed after being elected and there were no bye-laws to cover the position. On the surface, one could have been forgiven for thinking there were apparent political overtones present as well for here we were in the Jewish sector of Jerusalem taking a conference away from an Arab country.

This was certainly not the case as it was purely coincidental for IFATCA that the two factors emerged simultaneously. It was a difficult situation but one that could have been eased, if not resolved, by the presence of the Egyptian association. It was resolved when two of the MAs bidding for the 1997 conference decided to move their bids forward and replace the Cairo offer. In the resulting ballot, the one and only Arab MA present in Jerusalem, Tunisia, was successful and they were awarded the succeeding conference knowing full well that they had only twelve months to prepare. The Board, at least, was pleased and relieved to see the situation resolved particularly with another Arab country gaining the right to host conference.

Few people were happy with the actions taken, necessary as they were, and the matter left all present a little saddened with events. But conference is the most important event of the IFATCA year and delegates must be assured that the forum will be properly organised and will function as required for the conduct of business.That's why the Manual bye-laws exist and why successful bidders must abide by them.

The fuss surrounding the confirmation of the 1996 venue served to partially mask the importance of another decision although, in reality, nothing could overshadow what probably is the single most important decision ever made at an annual conference. Over the preceding twelve months the Board had conducted an in-depth review of organisational, operational and financial aspects of the way the Federation does business. In conjunction with this was an investigation of the feasibility of creating a permanent office to replace the existing honorary Executive Secretariat. The Board concluded that the current modus operandi, whilst efficient, was nearing the limit of its efficiency. The Board was of the view that, financially, the Federation could probably just afford such a move and, operationally, it was both feasible and highly desirable. So, in Jerusalem, the Board presented a recommendation to the effect that "Directors accept the principle of establishing a Permanent Secretariat" with the Permanent Office Working Group continuing "to explore the subject of establishing a Permanent Secretariat". These twin recommendations were accepted unanimously and Directors thus made a momentous decision. They hadn't actually established the office but the concept was given effect by the in-principle decision and this provided considerable impetus to the on-going investigations and other moves towards that end. Paralleling this decision was another to create a Permanent Office Fund which was then fed by the annual excess of funds in order to ameliorate the large setup costs in the year of establishment. Effectively, the permanent office now was all but fact.

For some time it had been felt that there was a need for IFATCA to more publicly express its thoughts and strategies in connection with technical developments such as CNS/ATM. Whilst the Federation now had no shortage of forums at which to expound its policies, increasingly the Board, and PCX Lauridsen in particular, was of a mind that there should be created something like a 'Strategy Document' which clearly detailed IFATCA's position on a range of issues. Such a document, in an attractive and stylish format, could then be distributed to relevant organisations and parties as a reference document. The February, 1995 Board meeting in Vienna saw the first mention of such a document and by the June meeting (held in Melbourne, Australia) it had developed into a concrete proposal. It was at this meeting that there was discussion as to its aims and direction with first conceptual thoughts as to size, format and content. Although the Melbourne meeting settled upon the twin aims of stating the Federation viewpoint on future ATC development and confirming IFATCA's objectives, it would be quite some time, however, with several amendments as to the style and layout, before the final document was born.

The 'Vision Document' eventually ran to sixteen pages and was published in 1997. Despite this size, it is a definitive statement of principles and policies presented in an easily readable layout, attractively illustrated. The sixteen glossy pages handsomely explored the advantages of the proposed CNS/ATM system whilst simultaneously warning of major inadequacies in some areas. As always with IFATCA, safety was a major theme with the booklet and the cautionary note that the race for financial gain must not be at the expense of safety was a constant thread throughout. Likewise, the entreaty for retaining a human centred automated system is loud and clear. It was a different approach to getting the message across but it has succeeded admirably in its aims. From the moment of its release, the Vision Document found a ready audience and received nothing but praise.

Another important document first saw the light of day in 1995 too. The Chairman of SC1, Dave Grace, proposed the collation of the myriad technical papers floating around IFATCA into one document for better reference and utilisation by the various representatives. Bringing together the diverse technical papers and conference working papers as accompanying background material for the relevant policies into one publication, Grace created a Technical Manual. It was a simple idea but one sorely needed by the many representatives to the numerous working groups and they could now confidently quote each policy fully aware of its source and derivations. It was only natural that the Chairman of SC1 be made responsible for the Manual's maintenance, a task Grace willingly accepted.

Of lesser visible import but an important development nonetheless, 1995 further saw the Board keep up with technology and adopt e-mail as a standard form of communication. By the end of 1996 almost the entire Board were employing this facility. It had been only a few short years previously when the Board agonised over equipping with fax machines to aid intra-Board member communications. The pace of change and increased representation and involvement meant that even faster methods of communication had to be embraced where available and this time there really was no question as to acceptance of the new medium. Without doubt the internet has revolutionised communications between the Board members and others and one can only sympathise in remembering how the original Board members used to pound away on their typewriters producing multiple copies of their correspondence on flimsy air mail paper for mailing.

We have seen how the Board had started reaching out to the under-developed and dis-advantaged countries of the membership. Such proactivity resulted in initiatives such as the Kuala Lumpur symposium and, to an extent, the NEAT meetings. The results of such activity in turn provoked some soul searching within the hierarchy of IFATCA as to treatment of, and support for, the financially less well off membership. The Jerusalem conference saw membership rise to 103 associations (including the new association from the USA). Balancing this, however, was the termination of two associations and, for financial reasons, a very sobering fourteen suspensions. In part, this large number was forced by strict application of the three year rule with the Special Circumstances Fund (SCF). This rule, introduced in 1991, meant that a consistent applicant would not be able to re-apply to use the fund after having done so for three consecutive years and the effect of this stricture was immediately seen in 1995, even sooner than the Board had figured. With fourteen suspensions, a high termination rate at the next conference was likely. Weeding out the poorer nations was never the intention of the three year rule. Rather, the rule was formulated to impress upon the associations that membership is not something to be lightly considered, that it carries responsibilities, one of which is the obligation to make contribution to the Federation, both financially and professionally. It was impressed upon MAs that continual inability to pay subscriptions was more of a generic situation than a special circumstance and that granting of the SCF in one year should enable generation of at least partial contribution towards annual affiliation fees the next. The Board was always willing to recommend payment of the SCF to deserving cases and stated that payment of even 10% of the annual subscription indicated that an MA valued its membership and was making an effort, which could influence the Board's recommendation as to application of the fund to the Directors.

From a personal point of view, the author had come to the Board with the belief that MAs should at least be seen to be helping themselves before seeking outside help. However, over the years this conviction underwent considerable change. By 1995 it was evident that many associations, for a variety of reasons, were reluctant to ask for help. Conversely, there were others that expected it. It became apparent that it was the Federations responsibility to identify those who needed assistance, in whatever field, and offer it and the Board collectively came to accept this premise. This was the logic behind the Conference Attendance Fund and the same sensitivity to need came to be applied in other areas as well, for example, with the creation of Member Association Assistance Teams (the idea for which came from the U.K. Guild).

Discussions in 1994 had prompted SC3 to again review MA subscriptions, which they did for the 1995 conference. The subsequent proposal, which effectively penalised late membership declarations and did little to ease the financial burden on the poorer M_As, was rejected. A better way of ensuring membership at a realistic cost for the less advantaged associations, whilst at the same time not financially further penalising the better off members, had to be found. IFATCA's management set its mind to this apparent fiscal oxymoron. The Tunis conference delivered, as we shall see.

Industrial unrest amongst air traffic controllers is a common occurrence as they press for recognition. It sometimes appears as though the activity peaks on a cyclical basis and the mid nineties seemed to provide such a peak with major disputes occurring, literally, in all four corners of the world - New Zealand, Trinidad and Tobago, Malawi and Italy, for example. One of the more unusual, and certainly serious, was the dispute that engulfed ICEATCA, the ATC Association of Iceland, late in 1995.

Whilst overtime was an accepted component of their salaries, the Icelandic controllers were working well beyond what could be considered acceptable (average 70 hours per month!) due to a severe staff shortage. Although this raised obvious safety issues, the government refused to negotiate improvements to the overall work contracts. Frustrated at the lack of progress with their claim, the 100 members of ICEATCA resigned en masse! Being civil servants, they were required to provide three months notice of their resignation which they did on the 30th September. So, from 1st October to 1st January, there developed an increased sense of urgency with, and a quantitative increase in, the subsequent discussions. Demonstrating considerable flair, and their determination, the Icelandic controllers employed the services of a public relations firm and placed an advertisement in the magazine Flight International offering their individual services to the world⁸. The October European Regional Meeting issued a press release citing safety problems in the North Atlantic and, in December, President Lauridsen and EVP EUR Melchert visited Reykjavik for talks with the CAA. Following the Executive Board members' visit, and literally at the eleventh hour with an all-night meeting on the 29th/30th December, a resolution was reached. The controllers were able to commence the New Year withdrawing their resignations and were granted a limit to their overtime, the promise to hire more controllers and an 11% pay rise. As well, a bi-lateral committee was formed to investigate ATC workload, time spent at each position and association involvement in future planning.

Executive Board meetings are nearly always held in a country following the request of an MA for a specific reason (to facilitate negotiations, to raise their local profile, etc) or at the Board's initiation (to view conference facilities, to coincide with another event, for example). It is very seldom that the Board holds a meeting in a country that does not have a local association affiliated with IFATCA. In February, 1991 the Board met in Los Angeles through sheer convenience and partly for some technical contact with the new unaffiliated association, NATCA. There were strong ulterior motives, however, when the Executive Board gathered in Bangkok in February, 1996. This scheduling of a meeting in Thailand was part of a process of raising the Federations profile with controllers and ICAO in Asia, IFATCA's lowest membership region. Furthermore, it also was intended to raise the local association's profile and to hold discussions with its management with a view to Thailand joining the Federation. In all its subsidiary aspects the meeting achieved its aims and the Thai association affiliated just two months later at the Tunis conference.

PCX Lauridsen and VP Vidler stepping out in Bangkok on their way

to a press conference. It was during this Board meeting that

Thailand agreed to affiliate with IFATCA.

An organisation can never afford to stand still with its approach to internal affairs and whilst conference had assumed, by the mid nineties, a sense of running on automatic, there had been many changes to the way IFATCA conducted its business in the recent past. Thus some thought was directed towards ensuring that delegates at conference were completely up to date with all the important changes.

Following a suggestion by EVP Professional Bert Ruitenberg, conference '96 saw the institution of an Administration Panel⁹. Held immediately after the opening plenary, this panel allowed DP to provide a comprehensive briefing to delegates on the various recent rule changes and voting procedures. The briefing, utilising PC Powerpoint projections, was well received and certainly contributed to the later general committee proceedings and, more importantly, to a reduction in the number of spoiled ballot papers with the elections. The briefing, with updated detail, was held again in 1997, this time expanded with a tri-lingual presentation to reach and benefit an even wider audience. It was further repeated in 1998.

Some very late and significant changes to arrangements for the 1996 conference (for example, there was a change of conference hotel) had the Board worried and again they were forced, at their February meeting, to give serious consideration to a change of venue. With only eight weeks to go this would have represented a major step but, via a series of phone calls between Bangkok (where the Board meeting was held) and Tunis, the Board came to the conclusion that Tunis still offered the most viable option. IFATCA's third conference in Africa then proceeded and the Tunisians exceeded expectations with a very efficiently managed affair attended by over 650 delegates from 61 Member Associations. As in 1987, the conference meeting venue was a conference centre some distance from the hotels and delegates found themselves enjoying the vista of rush hour Tunis from coaches each morning and evening. We certainly got to know the city!

There can be little doubt that THE decision from the 1996 conference was that to amend the Member Association affiliation dues structure. For the first time since the Federations inception, the principle of 'equal pay for equal representation' was abandoned in favour of recognition of the different economic circumstances of the member associations. The previous sliding scale itself did not absolutely adhere to the 'equal pay' principle but in fact provided discounted representation for the larger associations which invariably were the more economically advantaged MAs. In adopting a three tier level of payments based on the United Nations Human Development Reports categorisations of Developed, Developing and Under Developed countries, Directors recognised the inequities in remuneration and difficulties in paying the same subscriptions across the global air traffic control fraternity. MAs from countries classified in the 'Under Developed' category were made liable for just CHF10 per member and those under the 'Developing' categorisation were billed CHF 15 per member. This represents a significant change to the prior liability of CHF22 for the first 300 members where all of these members fell. The 'richer' nations under the 'Developed' criteria continued with an abbreviated sliding scale but also saw a rise in their dues of 10%. The overall result was revenue neutral for IFATCA¹⁰ but the changes went a long way to ensuring that needy nations were able to firstly affiliate with, and then remain as members of, IFATCA. It was the most radical restructuring of the fees scale ever and once again clearly demonstrated the Federation's commitment to assisting the disadvantaged in the profession.

In settling upon the new structure, the opportunity was provided for MAs who wished to be considered in a higher bracket and four MAs immediately volunteered for this. Algeria, Morocco, Papua New Guinea and Russia all elected to move to the higher bracket (from 'Developing' to 'Developed' in each case) thereby committing themselves to the higher dues scale and making a further valuable contribution to the Federation.

The feared high termination numbers did not eventuate in Tunis due to the application of the Special Circumstances Fund and the generosity of two or three associations. This generosity provided for payment of one year's dues for several countries but, with MAs liable for termination if they owe two year's subscriptions and with more becoming due as at the end of conference, the same situation again arose. We left Tunis with, this time, sixteen MAs going into suspension. This meant that they could not take an active part in any Federation activities and received no information apart from the Circular. The question was being asked 'Why don't these countries apply for some assistance from the various funds available?' The Directors now had certainly taken a huge step to assist the less advantaged membership and it was hoped that the new dues structure would alleviate this problem in the future.

Those with technical inclinations may challenge the assertion that the dues restructure was the most important decision of conference '96. Whilst the technical Manual was already an accepted fact, it was in Tunis that it was provided with authenticity by inclusion in the IFATCA Manual. Of even greater import, however, was creation of the position of Technical Secretary. Another initiative from the hard working Chairman SC1, Dave Grace, this provided a significant step forward in IFATCA's quest for even higher technical efficiency. Identifying the need to centrally collect and disseminate technical information via a separate internal medium, Grace realised that this was beyond the scope of the present Secretariat and that SC1 should assume the task. His proposal, with some minor modifications, was accepted. The Technical Secretary is now responsible for a technical document library, oversight of changes in the technical area and production of a technical news sheet detailing the reports of representatives, a diary of meetings, a current list of relevant documentation and contact information. In itself it seems to be a mammoth undertaking but Grace accepted it without murmur in addition to his tasks as Chairman SC1 and collator of the Technical Manual.

As is common, Committee C finished first in Tunis - as Chairman Martyn Cooper said: "In a safe, orderly and expeditious manner" - despite the fact that its agenda was expanded by an unique event. 1996 saw the first joint sitting by Committees B and C. The joint session considered the responsibilities and functions of aerodrome controllers with regard to surface movement operations. It was evident that whilst the discussions would concentrate on the technical aspects of the subject, there were considerable professional considerations and delegates would benefit from the combined sitting. Specifically, the discussions related to the unacceptability of the use of electronic aids for situational awareness resulting from poor aerodrome or tower design. Six 'B' resolutions resulted. Looking to the social aspects of the air traffic controller's employment, Committee C also redefined a 'Model Contract of Employment Agreement'. This invaluable document fills a necessary role in providing guidance to controllers negotiating conditions with their employers and has been widely utilised. In providing the model contract, IFATCA was making no attempt to enter into industrial negotiations with or on behalf of its members but was simply detailing the minimum requirements for a mutually beneficial employment.

Tunis saw the retirement as EVP Professional of Bert Ruitenberg (as well as his close colleague in professional matters, Hannes Ziegler, chairman of SC4 for 5 years). Over four years, Ruitenberg had expended an incredible amount of energy in raising the collective consciousness of human factor matters and had travelled the world attending symposiums and seminars making the point. The relentless march of automation had made the task all the more important and Ruitenberg ensured that IFATCA's thoughts and policies were given maximum exposure. His involvement with ICAO, in particular, raised the inter-organisation relationship to new levels and paved the way for better contacts in other areas as well. Fortunately, Ruitenberg was not lost to the system as the Board immediately appointed him as IFATCA Human Factors Specialist, a form of roving ambassadorship to facilitate his and the Federations continued input to the field. Typical of his on-going presentations was that to the ICAO Fourth Global Flight Safety and Human Factors Symposium in Chile in April, 1999. In Santiago, Ruitenberg noted that up until 1991 most research, whilst making extensive use of field studies, had been basically academic in nature and had little direct practical value for working air traffic controllers. The nineties saw a more practical application of the research. As a result, there evolved a realisation that the aviation system does not consist of isolated units but is a complex socio-technical system with multi-level interactions. Ruitenberg's input had become as integral to IFATCA's contribution in the discipline as the acceptance itself of the human in the process.

IFATCA's second foray into Arabian Africa proved to be an outstanding success. Despite only having half the normal time to prepare, TATCA's diminutive President, Khaled Kooli, solicited considerable support from his administration and the Airport Authority and presented a most efficient conference. After the previous year's difficulties in confirming the venue, Tunisia exceeded all expectations and, from the excellent pre-conference major media interview to the impressive facilities and arrangements at the conference venue, they comprehensively erased from the Board's collective mind any lingering concerns over the decision. With echoes of one of their famous forebears, Hannibal, who set out from the nearby ancient city of Carthage and took his elephants over the Alps to conquer the Roman Empire, TATCA proved that it could be done.

With the Air Traffic Control Association's withdrawal of its application for membership in 1970, the relationship between IFATCA and ATCA went into deep hibernation. The PATCO membership(s) and problems over the years ensured that that organisation was continually to the fore of IFATCA's thoughts and ATCA was given scant consideration. The nineties saw a renewal of the involvement that previously existed although not on the same close professional level. In the intervening years, ATCA resurrected itself as a purely professional organisation and its membership reflected its approach to civil aviation. Now consisting of FAA personnel, ATC managerial staff, military controllers and industry representatives, ATCA embraced a new role as educator and modern philosophy facilitator. Each year their annual conference in the USA was attended by thousands of delegates and the technical exhibition regularly featured displays by around 100 exhibitors from all branches of the aviation industry. The UK Guild regularly sent a delegation to these massive conventions and IFATCA occasionally made presentations. (For example, EVP ASP Dave Moores in Nashville in 1993.)

EVP ASP David Moores meets the President of Fiji. November 1993.

Having for some years presented domestic symposiums (in conjunction with their annual meetings) to bring developments to the attention of those who mattered, ATCA set out in June, 1994 to do the same thing internationally and presented a technical conference and exhibition in Hong Kong. IFATCA attendance in Hong Kong was followed by presentations in June, 1995 in Brussels by GATCO's Dr. Tony Smoker, emphasising cooperation by all stake holders in the evolution of modern systems, and Sydney the following year by DP, Neil Vidler, speaking on human factors aspects in CNS/ATM. The DP raised a few eyebrows at this latter gathering when he reminded delegates that ATCA was, for a number of years back in the sixties, a corporate member of IFATCA. The Association continues with their international exposures, annually alternating between Asia/Pacific and Europe with their conferences and IFATCA continues to receive invitations and provide input. The relationship is again cooperative and cordial without being overly close.

It had been 20 months since IFATCA held its last educative symposium when they presented the next in the series in October, 1996. The Americas region was an obvious choice and, for what affectionately became known as the Panama Seminar, Panama City was chosen as the venue because of its central location, accessibility and affordability. This third seminar opened in very impressive fashion with attendance and an opening speech by no less a dignitary than the President of Panama himself. The Federation had become accustomed to Heads of State opening the annual conference but to have one officiating at an educational symposium certainly raised that function to a new strata. The presence of His Excellency undoubtedly lent considerable prestige to the event and no doubt raised the profile of the Panamanian association and IFATCA in Panama and neighbouring areas. The value of such exposure cannot be underestimated and probably ensured the success of the event before it even commenced.

This seminar concentrated on CNS/ATM as a whole and closely examined several individual aspects of the concept such as Data Link and ADS. Other relevant topics such as ATFM in Europe and the (mis)use of air navigation revenues were also canvassed. IFATCA's policies on the subject matter were aired and the need for safety regulation was highlighted. Some valuable contributions from ICAO, IATA, USALPA and the FAA added to the international flavour and rounded out the presentations. The two day event concluded with a very lively question and answer period and the 90 plus attendees benefited from the simultaneous translations provided by the Panama association. As with the Kuala Lumpur and Fukuoka presentations, it was a very interesting, topical and educational exercise and added to the knowledge of the subject for the many local air traffic controllers and administration officials in attendance. The success of this seminar immediately prompted plans for the next one and this time the needs of the Africa region were recognised. It was scheduled for June, 1997 in Harare.

Head table at the 'Panama seminar'. The President of Panama is seated centre, on Preben Lauridsen's

right. EVP AMA Sam Lampkin is extreme right.

It was ironic that at the very time we were in Panama mentioning the use of air navigation charges to support the civil aviation infrastructure, another of our Member Associations was involved in a very serious dispute with their management over that very issue. However, surprisingly, the dispute was in Europe, not a region where we would have expected it. In Bulgaria, some revenues already collected and earmarked for ATC improvements and salaries were diverted to recover two national airline aircraft from impoundment. The controllers were already in dispute over conditions and salary issues and this government action further incensed them and industrial action resulted. This in turn led to the dismissal of over 40 controllers and the association's assets being seized. Some controllers were locked out of their facility and still others were held in police custody. IFATCA seriously and publicly criticised the Bulgarian government over their handling of the dispute. IFATCA's contribution from the Legal Assistance Fund and further contributions from individual MAs materially assisted the Bulgarian association and, over time, all the controllers were reinstated.

Returning to the Panama Seminar, whilst the central theme concentrated on the future via the CNS/ATM concept, there was considerable discussion on the present and the current inadequacies of air traffic management in the region were specifically mentioned. The opening address of the seminar was by the EVP AMA Sam Lampkin and, by way of introduction to the future concept, he presented a 'Review of Demand and System Capacity in the America Region'. This presentation and subsequent informal comments brought to the fore the difficulties being faced by controllers throughout the region. To more publicly highlight this problem, a press release was issued at the end of the seminar. This statement cited the lack of adequate air traffic management which was endangering the safety of aircraft and passengers. IATA, for one, took on board the concerns raised and initiated a series of meetings themselves to address the problems. Shortly afterwards, the concerns being similarly expressed in Africa over technical deficiencies and the apparent misuse of revenues from air navigation charges were again to the fore during the regional meeting held in Senegal.

At the subsequent Board meeting in February, 1997 the respective EVPs again mentioned the problems and the Board issued another press release. Mentioning both regions, the release said inter alia: ‘Air traffic controllers lack the basic tools to fulfil their functions ... and frequently where such facilities as radar and radio are provided, lack of proper maintenance is hampering their effective utilisation. There is clear evidence that revenue from air navigation charges is regularly diverted to other disciplines. Minimal funds are being returned to ... the provision of air traffic services. Pilots are increasingly relying upon airborne TCAS and blind radio transmissions ... because of a widespread lack of confidence in the ground based ATC systems in these areas."

During their annual conference in 1996, IFALPA had declared the majority of African airspace unsafe to fly in. Calling the area critically deficient, IFALPA defined the FIRs as having inadequate or inappropriate ATC systems. In response and leaping to the defence of the controllers and the ATC systems in the area, in a forthright article in The Controller, AFM Task Force member Arthur Kitao took IFALPA and IATA to task over their assertions. Kitao mentioned that many deficiencies were the result of insurgency activities and vandalism rather than management neglect and that reports were being filed on 'missing' equipment which was in fact NOTAM'ed¹¹ out of service. Nonetheless, despite Kirao's spirited defence of his region, problems did exist and concerns continued to be expressed over the continued need for TIBA procedures. At the 1997 conference, IFATCA again looked at the widespread use of TIBA over the African continent and reaffirmed and redefined its policy on the issue.

The fourth IFATCA symposium (Harare, June, 1997) was a further opportunity to press the point. With a theme of ‘ATC in Africa at the Crossroads’ the focus of the meeting pointedly addressed the deficiencies and problems associated with ATC in the region. These problems were highlighted as the neglect by some authorities to comply with ICAO Standards and Recommended Practises, lack of proper training, poor equipment and poor working conditions. This symposium actually delivered some resolutions for continued action over the issue and called upon States to comply with international aviation standards. It also supported the creation of a safety oversight organisation to visit areas where safety concerns had been expressed.

The symposiums, the IFATCA press releases, the IFALPA assertions and other public utterances all served to publicise the problems and perhaps embarrass the various administrations, negligent in their application to the safety requirements posed by their inadequate ATC management, into some form of redress. IFATCA had learnt that such activity, rather than direct confrontation and disputation, was frequently a better way to achieve the desired results. Certainly, in recent times, there has been a discernible improvement in equipment provision and proper revenue utilisation in the area.

In general, 1996 probably saw relations with IFALPA at an all time high. Never a bad relationship despite not always seeing eye to eye on some matters, the problems in Latin America and Africa seemed to galvanise the two Federations into even more cooperation than previously and to reinforce the close links already existing. Issues such as the ATC deficiencies, the role of the human operator in the future ATM system, legal protection in connection with incidents and reduced vertical separation minima had become mutually shared concerns and common stands were agreed. An agreement was reached over a joint approach to ICAO to express common thoughts over matters such as in-trail climb. It was believed that such a joint approach would lend even more weight to what both organisations believed to be breaches of correct international aviation procedure.

Delegates were back in the buses again for conference '97, the first in Asia, but this time our Taiwanese colleagues were well prepared and had organised with the city council permission to use the commuter bus only lanes during the rush hours.

This worked well and the morning and evening transit times were very reasonable.

It was just as well for the Taipei traffic jams were something to behold. They had two levels: very bad or worse!

Having negotiated the traffic, delegates were treated to the wonderful Taipei International Convention Centre which challenged the Bournemouth venue for the best facilities ever experienced at conference. Certainly the committee meeting rooms were second to none and provided luxurious meeting space. The conference was again graced by a Head of State. On this occasion the Republic of Chinas President Lee performed the official opening and spoke of local developments including the recent introduction of the new air routes through the Taipei FIR between Hong Kong and Japan (the NEAT initiative).

Edge Green in charge in the Taipei Conference secretariat, March 1997.

After accepting it in principle in 1995, Directors formalised the creation of the IFATCA dream of a permanent secretariat during their deliberations in Taipei. The Board's Permanent Office Working Group had, over the intervening 24 months, surveyed the membership and collected relevant information from potential sites around the world and compared costs and unanimously recommended Montreal as the logical venue. The Directors endorsed this view via Resolution 97.A. 12 and further directed the Board to recruit the necessary staff. The long-held dream finally was coming to reality and would take effect in September with the employment of an Office Manager and the rental of office space adjacent to the ICAO office.

Dave Grace was at it again in Taipei. Not content with creating a Technical Manual and introducing the position of Technical Secretariat to the system to assist the working of SC1 and the Federation, Grace now turned his attention to the very composition of 'his' Standing Committee. He now proposed the very radical theory that the continued democracy of fully elected MA constituents to SC1 was limiting the standard of its technical output. At a time of high technological change and advance, he said it was essential to maximise the expertise on the committee and he was firmly of the opinion this could only be achieved through appointment of individual experts. Grace sought a technical committee composed solely of appointed experts. In the main, the Directors saw some wisdom in this approach but were reluctant to exclude volunteer MAs from participation. In time honoured manner, it was decided to form a committee to further consider the issue. A Task Force was formed, under the auspices of the PCX, to examine the structure of all the SCs and to report its findings at the following conference. We shall examine its work a little later.

Taking the line that what was good for the technical guys must also be good for the professional delegates, Committee C decided that there should be created a Professional Manual. Similar to SCI's tome, this would contain a definitive list of working papers with policy decisions, working paper references and conference details. Thus all relevant professional and legal policy could be correlated with their respective working papers at the same time identifying the supporting information and discussion. In similar vein, the first version of a Data Bank of Jurisprudence was introduced. This potentially very valuable reference collates relevant court decisions and proceedings on ATC related incidents.

The new (since the previous conference) EVP Professional Sandy Oppenheim had made it a project of his to improve the presentation of working papers in conference. It had become obvious that many delegates were not properly prepared for the discussions on each working paper and he sought ways to redress this deficiency. In Taipei, Committee C saw every working paper introduced with a formal presentation which consisted of a five minute or so discourse by the paper's author accompanied by overhead projections of the subject material. There is no doubt that this technique considerably aided understanding of the issues under discussion. This style of presentation has expanded to the other committees and the presentations themselves now have developed almost into feature events of their own with Powerpoint projections allowing for highly entertaining graphics, even accompanied by music in some cases.

During the conference, the Executive Board Award (for services to the Federation) was presented to a long time and most valuable friend of IFATCA. Mr. Colin Hume of British Airways has unquestionably been the outstanding non-member contributor and supporter of IFATCA for many years. His input has ranged from enabling function sponsorship through considerable travel assistance for many representatives to innumerable meetings to providing his own office staff to work in the conference secretariats. The award was a simple acknowledgement of both Hume's and British Airways' tremendous support and the Federations gratitude. Another award presented in Taipei was the Scroll of Honour during the final plenary session. Personal involvement prevents the author from elaborating directly but a quote from the conference report and The Controller summary is pertinent.

"In an exceptional but most welcome move, the President invited the Immediate Past President Charles Stuart to make the next award, the Scroll of Honour. As a personal friend and colleague of many years, it was most fitting that Charles should deliver the valediction for the award. In an emotional delivery, Charles acknowledged the retiring Deputy President, Neil Vidler, who had been a loyal and dedicated servant of IFATCA for many years. (Inter alia Stuart said) 'It is a very great honour to present Neil Vidler with this award as I received mine from Neil. He became Regional Vice-President in 1986, Executive Vice-President Asia Pacific from 1990 to 1993 and was then elected to the post of Deputy President in 1993. He has never sought personal gain during this time. The highlights of his work included the first NEAT meetings. He was our first representative on the ISPACG. He chaired 3 seminars and worked in West Africa in an effort to help some of the less advanced nations. He has more friends than most of us! It is a richly deserved award which Neil has truly earned'."

The author 'tied up' by President Preben Lauridsen and past President Charles Stuart presenting

the Scroll of Honour. Taipei conference, March 1997.

One of the Federations newest CMs, Breitling SA, was present in Taipei and sponsored a very pleasant lunch for the Board members. During this luncheon, at which they demonstrated their new emergency aviation beacon timepiece, they also generously donated eleven watches. These were one-of-a-kind items and featured the Federation logo on the face. A little at a loss as to what to do with them, the Board decided to raffle the watches amongst the delegates at conference with the proceeds directed to the Special Circumstances and the Conference Attendance Funds.

In bringing the proceedings to a close, President Lauridsen noted that it had been one of the most efficiently run conferences ever. To the organising committee, he issued compliments on the manner in which they had represented their city and people and confirmed that we had all been left with ren qing wei (warm feelings).

Perhaps the symposium concept had become contagious but for whatever reason the idea started to spread. Just one month after the Taipei conference, the Israeli association conducted a domestic forum 'Controller Airspace - A National Resource?'. Since they were going to be discussing widening of a key air route which would mean impinging on some Israeli Air Force military areas, not surprisingly, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force was amongst the 120 participants. The relatively new peace process, whilst welcomed, was causing serious congestion problems in Israeli airspace and traffic had doubled in four years. El Al reported that 'Proximity Incidents' now made up the bulk of their incident reports. However, the air force requirements and the small size of the FIR made compromise difficult. The Chief of Staff said "We have no choice but to cooperate with one another". The Israeli association is to be congratulated for its enterprise in initiating such an event, which, even if it didn't immediately achieve solutions, realised its secondary aim of raising everyone's consciousness as to the increasing problems.

A mid-air collision off the coast of Namibia prompted yet another IFATCA press release detailing its concerns on the inadequate provision of air traffic services within the continent. The collision was between two military aircraft (an USAF C 141 and a German Air Force TU 154) and apparently occurred as the TU 154 was flying at the wrong level and its presence was unknown to the Namibian controllers. The media release emphasised that the African controllers were struggling to provide the best service they could despite a lack of suitable equipment, inadequate training and difficult working conditions. The evidence against, and the pressure on, the providers was mounting!

Late '97 then saw IFATCA achieve two long held aims - one a slightly longer held desire than the other. Simultaneously, IFATCA's permanent office opened in Montreal and the Vision Document was released.

IFATCA had willingly entered into moves towards the development of the CNS/ ATM concept believing in the goal of globally harmonised procedures and integrated ATC systems. However, the Federation came to see that some ATS providers were attempting to change the focus of CNS/ATM so that words like 'efficiency' and 'cost effectiveness' were being promoted ahead of the prime task ofATC - safety.

In some strategies, safety was no longer being considered as an issue in its own right but merely referred to in notes. This lack of attention to such a critical aspect of the profession caused serious concern to IFATCA. Predominantly, it was President Lauridsen who demanded some counter to a debate now concentrating too heavily on financial benefits and technically driven solutions and too little on the elements of safety and the operational requirements of the controllers. The result was the Vision Document, IFATCA's view of ATC in the 21" century and how the future global ATC environment should be constructed and what the priorities should be to achieve a safe and efficient air traffic control service into the next millennium.

1255 University Street, Montreal was the scene for the physical manifestation of the Federations 35 year goal for an end to the tribulations of an honorary Executive Secretariat. From Geoffrey Monk to Edge Green, IFATCA had been incredibly fortunate to have attracted the calibre of Secretary that it did and on whom the organisation had come to rely so much. That an international organisation of its continually increasing size and influence owed so much to the good graces of, basically, retirees (Pat O'Doherty aside) was nothing short of amazing and was the source of wonderment amongst all the other international organisations that IFATCA dealt with. When Ms. Maura Estrada, a native of Montreal, was hired to manage and initiate operations from the new office, a new era was established for the world's air traffic controllers. The manner in which Estrada did so, and thereafter to function, was virtually transparent to the membership and entitled her to the same admiration as afforded her Executive Secretary predecessors. With the office routine largely bedded down and a successful conference secretariat behind her after Toulouse, a collective sigh of relief could be heard around the world. The permanent secretariat was fact!

The President of ICAO, Dr. Kotaite joins the Board during the opening of the office.

The exotic location of Bali in Indonesia was the setting for the next symposium staged by IFATCA although this one came about, and was managed, in a different manner to the previous events. During their annual ATC Exhibition and Conference in Maastricht, Corporate Member Miller Freeman approached the Federation about cooperating with a similar event in Indonesia. IFATCA agreed to manage a one day symposium in conjunction with the proposed two day exhibition. The exhibition (10th and 11th December, 1997) became known as ‘Asia Pacific '97’ and IFATCA's symposium took the title and theme 'Planning the Way for a National CNS/ATM Plan'. Ex-EVP Technical Chris Stock made the arrangements and gathered together an interesting and varied collection of presenters. They discoursed on subjects such as systems planning, human factors, data link, CNS/ATM systems, trials and safety regulation and finished with IFATCA's representative to ISPACG, Kevin Broome, enlightening all with the New Zealand experiences with data link and their impact on CNS/ATM training. Soon-to-be-Corporate Member Raytheon provided considerable financial sponsorship which permitted free registration for all the delegates. This was the first time that IFATCA had worked in partnership with a commercial exhibition company and the positive feedback indicated the success of the venture.

It had been a very full year for IFATCA and all the Board members had been heavily engaged in various activities on behalf of the Federation and, in one notable case, on behalf of himself. In Zimbabwe, the EVP AFM, Oliver Farirayi was in the thick of a two year old domestic dispute with his administration and he was counted amongst the nearly all Zimbabwean controllers dismissed without just cause or due notice. Along with the association, ATCAZ, IFATCA protested the dismissals and the ignoring by the Zimbabwean Authority of some ICAO recommendations on improvements to safety and infrastructure agreed at the AFI RAN meeting in May. In an attempt to maintain some form of service, the government approached South Africa for assistance which was refused. An IFATCA CM, Swedavia, was then approached to provide six controllers to train new personnel. This was initially agreed but when IFATCA contacted Swedavia and presented the full and true picture, the company withdrew its personnel from the project. Zimbabwe then approached neighbouring Zambia for assistance and this was acceded to.

Simultaneously, another serious dispute was in progress on the other side of the world in Panama. Here, following a legal strike, more than 90 controllers were dismissed, although over 20 subsequently returned to work. The government then criminally charged the strikers with endangering the lives of the flying public. However, the judge in the case also commenced investigations into the government's actions, including the flouting of some ILO Conventions. It was IFATCA who raised this issue and also brought it to the attention of the ILO. In both disputes, IFATCA provided considerable support, including financial, and issued several press releases highlighting the real underlying causes of the disputes and calling upon the respective governments to reinstate their controllers in the interests of safety. With the election of a new President in Panama in 1998, IFATCA again appealed for justice and were rewarded in the following year when she ordered the reinstatement of all the controllers.

Farirayi, the EVP AFM, provided the editorial to the February, 1998 Circular and spoke on the issues confronting his region. He mentioned the successful symposium and the work of his task force and support group in ensuring representation on the several ICAO working groups now trying to come to grips with the many problems. In an emotive conclusion, he summed up: "Our gains have not been without casualties. The reluctance by the region's authorities in recognising the controllers' problems has sadly resulted in some MAs having to resort to industrial action in order to be heard. Of late, this has happened in the ASECNA region, Kenya, Ghana and Zimbabwe. This state of affairs is unfortunate but surely what other options do the controllers from the region have? The price of such sacrifice is high resulting in some members losing their jobs in the process. The message is now clear - the controllers in the region have now stood up to the challenge and are not about to go back."

The sheer expansion in the size of the European region, the ever increasing membership numbers and the vast amount of technical involvement finally took its toll in 1997 and the EVP EUR, Günter Melchert, was forced to admit that he needed help. When the restructure took place back in 1990 it was these very concerns that were expressed when delegates considered the changes. Then, no one could foresee the astonishing changes in every area that were about to sweep over Europe and it is a source of wonder that IFATCA's European representatives managed the region as they did for so long. In a move to work more efficiently, Melchert coordinated a major splitting of his tasks and the region established the new position of Regional Vice-President Technical. Obviously, still not having enough to do, Dave Grace also took on this position. There has been talk too of creating a Regional Vice-President Professional but, as yet, this has not eventuated. As a result of this splitting of responsibilities, Melchert was able to return to a more 'political' role and concentrate more on the administration of his region and thus eased his considerable workload. Consequently, more liaison with his MAs was possible and, with considerable unrest and problems in Bulgaria, Greece, Kazakhstan, Macedonia and Turkey (to name but a few), it was certainly needed. The Europeans also decided to establish their own European Fund. This resource, voluntarily contributed to, is intended to finance activities which cannot be covered by other Federation funds. Thus, although it hardly seems possible, Europe is now able to engage in even more activities than before.

Many of IFATCA's endeavours have been beset by problems so it came as no surprise - to the Board at least - when all kinds of obstacles fell Manra Estrada's way when she was setting up the office and with her preparations for the official opening. Not the least of these were a Canada Post strike and a two week long ice storm which struck Quebec in January, 1998. The storm brought power poles down throughout the province and much of Montreal was without power supply and in total darkness. Nevertheless, Estrada struggled in each day and managed the organisation of the office and arrangements for the official opening on the 122 February. The opening was a gala function attended by the President of ICAO, Dr. Kotaite and many members of the ATM section of the Organisation. Also present were representatives from IATA, CATCA, IFALPA and the Corporate Members Coordinator, George Dooley. It was an auspicious start made possible by a completely new to the scene but super efficient Office Manager, with more than a little help from the outgoing Executive Secretary (Edge Green), the new Deputy President (Paul Robinson) and the EVP Finance (John Redmond). As if all that was not enough, just six short weeks later, Estrada was packing her bags for Toulouse and her first conference. It was a very steep learning curve!

In organising the 37th annual conference in Toulouse, the French Association APCA became the second MA to host conference for the third time (after the Canadians in 1970, 1980 and 1994). There were a few 'old hands' around who fondly remembered the 1976 Lyon experience (and even a very small number who were in Paris in 1962) and there were many who wished to partake of La Belle France for the first time. The result was that by week's end, more than 970 people had registered from a record 90 Member Associations.

In an opening perhaps more suited to Jerusalem but certainly well timed for Toulouse, President Lauridsen opened proceedings with the cry "Hallelujah, our prayers have been answered". No, he hadn't mistaken conference for a Billy Graham crusade or a celebration of some religious feast but was rejoicing in the fact that over recent months the industry's focus seemed to be switching from efficiency and cost effectiveness back to safety. He especially instanced the ICAO RAN meeting in Africa which introduced, with IFATCA participation, a scheme of safety audits and the ECAC inclusion of a safety policy within the EATCHIP Programme. Also noted was IATA's initiative in looking at safety elements in Latin America - a move prompted by the concerns raised during the Panama Seminar! It was a positive and upbeat start to the conference, one seldom previously seen.

It proved to be a most positive conference overall and it saw some major revisions to operating procedures, mostly occasioned by the implementation of the new office, considerable new technical and professional policies and the presentation of the new Professional Manual. Over recent years, the pressures of the various activities at conference had seriously increased and was placing strain on the overall timing and management of the event and especially so for the secretariat. The Board decided that some consolidation was required and agreed that the long running Technical Panel and the five year old Professional Panel should be combined. For 1998 'The IFATCA Panel' was instituted. The first theme ‘Target Level of Safety’ featured presentations on vital topics such as Limited Delegation to the Cockpit of Separation Assurance, Human Machine Interface for Voice Communications (and for the CNS/ATM Transition) and Free Flight. It was an outstanding success and the new format continues.

Whilst the conference was generally upbeat, there was a down side, however, and the very lengthy closed session in Committee A saw comprehensive consideration given to MA problems. The sometimes unbelievable and dangerous conditions that some colleagues were being compelled to endure were recounted and the facts behind the drastic action forced upon some associations outlined. Whilst IFATCA is not supportive of industrial action per se, it recognises that some times such activity represents the only method of bringing attention to the plight of some air traffic service professionals in some areas. Committee A carefully considered a related working paper 'IFATCA's Role in the Area of Professional and Industrial Disputes' and referred it to Committee C because of its implications. Committee C made six policy recommendations as a result. These detailed IFATCA's right to develop policy on all matters associated with the provision of ATS and that IFATCA should continue in the intermediary role in disputes with the Board exercising discretion as to the appropriate scale of involvement.

The move towards reduced vertical separation generated considerable debate with the benefits of more optimum use of flight levels obvious to delegates and this, and the additional flight level orientation systems to be utilised in the ECAC area circa 2001, held attention. Additional policy was determined on Airborne Separation Assurance Systems, Cockpit Display of Traffic Information, Short Term Conflict Alert, the preference for ATN Data Link over FANS-1/A CPDLC and downstream clearances. Whilst this was a weighty and frequently controversial Committee B sitting, it nevertheless finished its work inside schedule providing testimony again to the quality of the working papers and preparations of SC1 under Dave Grace. Incidentally, Grace wore two hats at the conference doubling as Committee B Chairman because of a late enforced withdrawal.

Committee C again saw Martyn Cooper in the chair, for the sixth consecutive year and this time presiding over committee sessions more popular than ever. Obviously, the entertaining and enlightening presentations of the previous year had earned a reputation and the crowds flocked in. They weren't disappointed as the entertainment was even better in Toulouse. Cooper even awarded an 'Oscar' to Geert Maesen for his lively movie, replete with musical accompaniment, demonstrating the content and use of the Information Handbook. Featuring in C's final report was policy on ADS ratings and legal responsibilities of aerodrome controllers with regard to surface movements. In all, 1998 saw Committee C provide no less than 37 new or modified policy statements, an incredible amount of work and, again, testimony to the outstanding work of SC4 and SC7 and the guidance and experience of Chairman Cooper. Six years is a long time to chair a committee, especially one dealing with such intense and complex subjects as the professional committee. Toulouse saw Cooper say "enough" and, in order to avoid being cajoled into another committee chairmanship for 1999, Cooper took the 'soft option' and was elected Executive Vice-President Professional.

During final plenary, time was accorded to Mr. Yves Lambert, Director General of EUROCONTROL. Mr Lambert had some things to say that pleased the assembly. Mentioning the Federations now global influence, he indicated that IFATCA had a role to play in the development of the structure of EUROCONTROL, including the new Provisional Council and the Safety Regulation Commission. Lambert concluded by saying that "You have specialised knowledge in the field. Your astute professional understanding of the issues affecting ATM is of the greatest interest to us and of benefit to all players in ATM affairs. We value your partnership highly and look forward to continued close cooperation". Such acceptance by the D-G represented the first occasion that IFATCA had been appointed as a full participating member on such a sensitive political panel and it would perfectly position it to define a strategy', working within the teams of the ATM 2000+ Strategy Board¹², for ATC in the new millennium.

Following Mr. Lambert's address, final plenary witnessed a series of awards. The first featured a new category of membership, Honorary Associate Membership, and it was granted to Mrs. Wendy Green, wife of the retiring Executive Secretary, in recognition of her support, not only of her husband's role, but of the Federation at large and of her own not inconsequential contribution. It was the first such membership bestowal. The President then awarded the Scroll of Honour to Edge Green recognising his outstanding service to the Federation. The Federations second longest serving Executive Secretary, Green had shouldered an almost inconceivable amount of work as the Federation's membership exploded in the early to mid-nineties and the global reach and influence of the organisation assumed tremendous proportions. The time, effort and commitment of the Executive Secretary were nothing short of outstanding and he would have been a very hard act to follow. It was just as well the Federation had moved into permanent premises in Montreal!

The Greens recognised in Toulouse, 1998. Edge is rewarded the Scroll of Honour while Wendy

is elected as the first Honorary Member.

The author had the very great pleasure of presenting the next award to a long term Federation colleague and fellow Board member. Preben Lauridsen retired after the Toulouse conference and, to the author's mind, the Scroll of Honour was, at the same time, both a fitting but an inadequate award for his contribution. Lauridsen first came to the Executive Board with the restructure of 1990 and over the next four years it was he who truly defined the new IFATCA in Europe and beyond. It was a time of tremendous change with the proliferation of new States and Member Associations, technological advance, surging traffic demand and increasing Federation involvement, recognition and influence. Much of the Federation's acceptance in this period, and certainly our excellent relations and reputation with ICAO Europe and Eurocontrol, can be traced directly to Lauridsen. The author, for one, was continually in awe of what Lauridsen had to contend with, what he achieved and the quality and quantity of his work output. He deserved the award for this alone but there were four years of equally high quality input as President to follow.

As President, Preben Lauridsen saw IFATCA become a truly major player in Europe and on the wider world stage. He presided over accession to the top level bodies of CASITAF, GREPECAS and the ATM 2000+ Strategy Board, and other groupings, as a full participant. He foresaw the need for, and insisted on, the publication of the Federations vision for the structure of the next millenniums ATC system. He realised the 35 year dream of establishing a permanent secretariat. He saw the membership rise more than 25% to well over 100 affiliates and very ably managed a respected and influential organisation, now the equivalent of a small business. Very little of this was an accident of timing. Preben Lauridsen was short of frame but made up for it with a huge professional stature and, at the very least, was truly and fully deserving of IFATCA's highest award.

Toulouse saw Europe lose its other European stalwart as well. Günter Melchert also called it a day after four difficult years. His job as Chief of Training in Vienna had placed great difficulties in his path and the aforementioned massive changes in his region made for a very tough term in office. He did, however, oversee the Federation's increased participation where it counted and he was a key player in introducing the many States of the old East bloc to IFATCA, firstly as the Eastern Europe Coordinator 1993-94 and then as the EVP 1994-98. Melchert's patience and guidance was a major contributing factor to their affiliation. Martyn Cooper stepped into the shoes of retiring EVP Professional Sandy Oppenheim. As the first 'legal' EVP since Andreas Avgoustis, Oppenheim had provided deft guidance in his short term with the minutiae of the professional aspects of the Federation. His professional approach to the presentation of working papers in committee has left an indelible mark upon the Federation.

Finally, moving from EVP AMA into the top job was Sam Lampkin. A native of Trinidad and Tobago, Lampkin had been President of the T&T association until he became EVP AMA and was the chairman of the organising committee for IFATCA '91. A big man with a booming laugh but a quiet voice and laid back style, he was in many ways the antithesis of Lauridsen. He was well prepared for his new role for he had frequently represented his administration in several East Caribbean ICAO Task Forces and, as EVP AMA, had already acquired major international stature with his representation in the growing list ofICAO GREPECAS working groups. It was to be his job to lead IFATCA into the 21st century.

Samuel M. Lampkin, Millennium President

During the final evening, a second Breitling watch was raffled in Toulouse and, in an extraordinary coincidence, again the very same person, Mr. Ibrahim Haroun from Egypt, was the winner. With over 1,000 tickets being sold, it was an amazing occurrence. There is no strength to the rumour that he was refused a ticket in Santiago.

The air traffic world, and particularly the AMA region, were shocked and saddened to learn of the death of the Executive Vice-President for the Americas, Carlos Olmos Mendoza on the 9th August, 1998. Only elected at the Toulouse conference four months earlier, Mendoza was an indefatigable worker for the Federation and the Mexican association. He was a founder member and former President of the association, had for six years (1980-86) been the Regional VicePresident for the then region of North and Central America and was chairman of the 1990 Acapulco conference organising committee. He was deeply involved with his Authority's modernisation program and tasks with the ICAO regional office. Even an earlier stroke did not slow him down too much and, at the time of his death from a heart attack, he was working as a classroom specialist instructor. Carlos Olmos Mendoza was in love with air traffic control and will be greatly missed.

Carlos Olmos Mendoza officiating as chairman of the organising

committee at a function during the 1990 Acapulco conference.

1996 saw the Executive Board embrace the wonders of e-technology and connect to the Internet. 1998 saw the Federation take another step into cyberspace with the establishment of its own web site. Mainly through the considerable efforts of the UK's Rob Marshall, the Federation these days can now be accessed via www.ifatca.org and visitors to the page can access directly IFATCA documents such as the Mission Statement, the Vision Document, media releases and calendar of events. Under restricted access (all IFATCA members have the password), other publications such as the Manual, conference guidelines and reports, the Circular, annual conference and regional meeting information and reports and Executive Board minutes. For reasons of confidentiality, however, other relatively sensitive publications such as the Information Handbook and the Technical and Professional Manuals are not included on the site. Members wishing details from these documents should contact the office. The web page has proved its worth with numerous 'hits' and other web page owners have established links for the exchange of information.

Whilst the serious dispute in Zimbabwe raged around him, EVP Farirayi continued to represent his African constituency. It was through his efforts, his colleagues' determination and IFATCA's contributions that the dispute was satisfactorily resolved. ATCAZ fought the illegal dismissals through the courts and in late 1998 achieved success when the dismissals were rescinded and the controllers reinstated without loss of benefits. ATCAZ had, throughout the dispute, kept the Federation informed of events and proceedings. They were, of course, aided by having the EVP amongst their number but nonetheless the information flow enabled the Board to provide assistance as and when it was required and to materially contribute to a resolution of the matter. Unfortunately, also throughout the dispute, the Zambian controllers had maintained their presence in Zimbabwe despite, at the Toulouse conference, being suspended from IFATCA "for serious noncompliance with their obligation to abstain from any action detrimental to the common interest of the profession". They only departed Zimbabwe upon the announcement of the ATCAZ success and the reinstatement of the local controllers. The calls now came for even stronger action against "the brothers who had stabbed us in the back".

While this dispute was reaching its climax, African controllers held their annual regional meeting and the conduct and outcome of the meeting underscored the recognition now being accorded and very much deserved. With a much fuller working relationship with ICAO (observer status on APIRG and participation in various sub-groups) and IATA (membership of their ATS Incidents Working Group), calls were made for programmes to ensure optimum staff levels, refresher training and better working conditions. They also endorsed the ICAO recommendations for sub-regional cooperation to harmonise operations and the conduct of safety auditing. African controllers had long cried out for change. Now, they were participating in the forums where their voice really could be heard. The pronouncements of IFALPA and IATA had received considerable recent publicity but there can be little doubt that IFATCA's, and its membership's, quieter and consistent approach over many years was now being shown to be effective. Letters written, media releases, national visits, meetings and symposiums and inter-organisation dialogue were all instrumental in reaching this position. Farirayi summed it up: “As employees of our respective authorities, the quiet diplomacy was the obvious choice and although we may not yet have achieved what we wish for in entirety, we have managed to raise the awareness amongst our employers".

It was also during this period that the 'Free Flight' debate raged. As the front end managers of the airspace, air traffic controllers could see, and enunciated, the limitations to the rationale for this concept but nevertheless the proponents kept on with their support. Although some elements of the proposal were of value and accepted, by the end of the decade the complete proposal was seen for the impossible dream it was and it had taken a back seat to more achievable and pressing goals. (The concept of Free Flight is more closely examined in Chapter 10.)

Following Dave Grace's request for an amended composition of SC1, the Standing Committee Task Force¹³ was formed and gave full consideration to this concept and the other Standing Committees over three years. Between the Taipei and Toulouse conferences, the SCTF conducted a review of the composition, structure and operating methods of all the Federations Standing Committees. The Task Force came to the conclusion that SC1 was indeed in need of change and recommended that a trial be instituted to test the effectiveness of the Grace ideas and the SCTF's suggestions. The recommended trial was for a two year period commencing at conference '98 and included a two year term for an externally (to the Standing Committee) elected chairman. The SCTF further proposed a fourteen member committee comprising six elected MAs and eight specialist technical representatives. At any SC meeting, no more than ten members should attend with the six MAs having automatic right and the remaining attendees to be four of the specialist members decided by the chairman on a meeting/work programme as needs basis. The SCTF then looked at the other SCs and concluded that the compelling reasons for change to SC1 did not apply to SC3, 4, 6 or 7 and recommended against amalgamation of SC3 with SC6 and SC4 with SC7, against name changes and for retention of internally elected chairmen. The Task Force did, however, recommend a reduction in the size of SCs 4 and 7 from ten and eight to seven and five respectively.

To enable the trial for a newly formatted SC1 to commence immediately after the Toulouse conference (and thus circumvent the twelve month period between introduction and effect), the Board decided to introduce the subject via a special working paper to opening plenary. The recommendations were accepted and conference subsequently proceeded to confirm Dave Grace for a two year chairmanship and elect just six MAs to the committee. Another important consideration with this manoeuvre was that no changes were to be made to the Manual for the term of the trial but should await the outcome of the trial. In the interim, the procedures were included into the IFATCA Guidelines document under the responsibility of the EVP Technical.

In October, 1999 the SCTF met again to review the trial to date, that is, after 18 months of operating under the new procedures. The Chairman SC 1 stated that the trial had been very successful and had enabled a greater degree of expert input into its work programme while at the same time providing a balance of resources and views from the elected members. After also considering comment from the Executive Board, the other Standing Committee chairmen, some ex-Board members and certain long term participating individuals, the Task Force was unanimous in recommending that the terms of the trial should be enshrined in the Manual and thus become practise. At the same time, the Task Force recommended biennial external (to the Standing Committee) elections for the other SC chairmen to bring them in to line with SC1. Recommendations for the remaining four SCs to continue as per the 1998 decisions were also made. Having delivered this report, however, the Task Force was asked by the Board to review their assessment on the desirability of amalgamating SCs 4 and 7 following its (the Board's) further consultation with the EVP Professional and the two SC chairmen. All of these gentlemen were now expressing the desire for an amalgamation. This re-visit resulted in the Task Force respecting this wish and its working paper to conference recommended amalgamation of SC4 and SC7. As per the original report, SCs 3 and 6 were to remain as separate entities. All these recommendations were accepted by the Directors in Marrakech in 2000.

So, the Federations first real examination of the working methods and structure of its crucially important Standing Committees in more than thirty years came to an end after, effectively, three years of critical review. Standing Committee 1 was radically altered, reflecting the increasing need for high quality technical input in a fast moving technical world. Gone now were the times when the Federation could, and had to, rely totally upon volunteer MAs thinking they may be able to make an input. The requirement now was for advanced and committed MAs and individuals with the necessary knowledge and expertise to make the input. In a back to the future scenario, SCs 4 and 7 would return in 2001 to an amalgamated body from whence they sprang in 1973. The 'internal' administration Standing Committees 3 and 6 were left unaltered, save (as with the new SC4) for their biennially elected chairmen. In one more fashion, IFATCA had prepared itself for the future.

Since IFATCA last visited the Southern Hemisphere six years earlier, the annual conference had travelled to the new world, the old world, North Africa, the Far East and one of the Federations spiritual homes, France. As if by natural rotation (there were some proponents for this concept!), IFATCA '99 found itself again in the Southern Hemisphere and, for only the second time, on the South American continent. After a good deal of encouragement by the erstwhile EVP AMA, Sam Lampkin, Chile had only affiliated in 1995 but they immediately made their mark proving themselves to be an enthusiastic and involved participant in the Federations actlvmes. There haven't been too many associations who have bid for annual conference only two years after joining and the Chileans' successful bid in Taipei was met with thunderous and sustained applause. It seemed nearly everyone wanted a taste of the extremely varied country perched narrowly on the West Coast of South America. By the 19th March, 1999 all who attended most definitely had experienced the wonderful Chilean hospitality and organisational skills and not one delegate or observer came away unhappy. It was truly a remarkable achievement by such a new and relatively small association.

Sharing the city's main square with the Palace Moneda, home of the Chilean President, the Hotel Carrera was the conference venue and residence for the bulk of the delegates. A splendidly restored hotel in the former 'grand' style, it provided fitting and excellent conference facilities although the opening plenary was actually held some little distance away in the Congress Centre. Apart from evening sojourns, in venues such as the National Theatre (for a folkloric display) and the final night dinner party at the fabulous Castillo Hidalgo on Santa Lucia hill, with the city laid out below, all other proceedings took place in the hotel.

1998 had been the first full calendar year of operation by the Montreal office and so the Santiago delegates were very interested in the assessment and report on the first year's operation and this occupied much of Committee's time. The Federation was still very much in a transition phase and, as well, there were several Constitutional and Bye-law amendments brought about by the changeover from an Executive Secretariat to an Office to be considered. Whilst these were mostly editorial in nature, they were essential minutiae and occupied more than five pages of text in the final report.

Proud Executive Board members at the official opening of the IFATCA Office, Montreal February 1998.

L to R: Sandy Oppenheim, Sam Lampkin, Oliver Farirayi, Martin Cole (partially obscured), Preben Lauridsen,

Paul Robinson, George Chao, John Redmond, Günter Melchert with Terry Crowhurst and Edge Green seated front.

A record was set in Committee B with the presentation by SC1 of no less than 17 working papers. Whilst many of these were classified as information material, it is important to reflect on the fact that these papers deal with subjects that are either new or developing and are being monitored closely with a view to developing policy. They therefore require almost as much attention as do papers containing actual policy recommendations. The close collaboration with IFALPA was now featuring and it was as well for there were a few controversial subjects, such as the transfer of some separation responsibilities from the ground to the cockpit and the use of cockpit display of traffic information. These engendered considerable discussion and mutual benefit derived. The close association with the pilots' Federation was also valuable in the debate over the interface between flight management systems and ATC.

The concept of transfer of control/separation to the cockpit occupied the delegates in Committee C too. Whilst this subject is mainly technical in nature, there are also serious human factors and legal implications and SC4 and SC7 were in the vanguard of these considerations. Not the least of these was the fear of loss of situational awareness and the potential for degradation of skill base with such responsibility transfer. Almost half of the 33 resolutions from C dealt with this topic alone. In connection, it was agreed to establish a joint task force with IFALPA to evaluate the free flight concept with a view to determining a concept document on the future of ATC. Perhaps appropriately in a Latin American country, SC7 started throwing around a few Latin phrases and the philosophy of mens rea was examined. It was agreed that a 'guilty mind' must pre-exist before a crime can be committed and, therefore, before a controller can be accused under criminal law as opposed to civil law. It is an extremely important differentiation and one with grave implications for controllers.

Putting something of a down note to an otherwise excellent meeting, the 1999 conference provided an unfortunate occurrence, one which the Federation had not witnessed in its previous thirty eight years. Directors in Santiago terminated the membership of a Member Association for action against the Constitution. We have already seen how 1997 and 1998 provided a protracted industrial dispute in Zimbabwe, which resulted in the dismissal of most of the controllers there. To maintain services, the government sought assistance elsewhere and, unfortunately, the controllers in neighbouring Zambia complied and provided services. IFATCA's Constitution and bye-laws expressly forbid this. IFATCA’s policy regarding national disputes condemns a situation whereby normal ATC services are replaced by an unqualified substitute organisation, including another Member Association, for safety reasons. The constitution obligates a Member Association to faithfully support the objects and principles of the constitution and bye-laws. The actions of Zambia flouted this obligation and provided clear grounds, under the Swiss Code, for termination. Despite being suspended during the Toulouse conference for their actions, the Zambians had continued with their involvement in Zimbabwe throughout 1998. Lacking any knowledge of mitigating circumstances or explanations from Zambia during the Santiago conference, the requisite two-thirds majority for termination was duly achieved and, sadly, the ultimate sanction was applied for the first time.

Immediately following conference, Europe again witnessed the effects of military action upon civilian air traffic control when the Kosovo crisis escalated into outright war with the NATO bombing campaign. Civilian traffic dropped in some areas but in certain French, Italian and Swiss sectors, throughout the Czech and Slovak republics and in Austria and Hungary there was a dramatic impact on workload as civilian traffic was re-routed and mission aircraft were accommodated. All of the Slovenian airspace and the southern half of the Hungarian airspace were closed on the 24th March to permit unrestricted NATO operations out of Italy and the Adriatic Sea. A month later, when certain flight levels were again released to Ljubljana, the Slovenian controllers shouldered a great burden coordinating both military and civilian flights, all the while living with the threat of war again affecting their country. The Austrians and Hungarians again saw complete new route structures implemented and civilian traffic had considerable extra mileage added to their flights as they were re-routed. On top of all this, a major humanitarian airlift also was underway. IFATCA was forced to intervene at an European ATFM Group meeting to warn that safety could be affected and the CFMU was urged to protect the sector controllers by instituting appropriate flow restrictions on the traffic. Recognition of the controllers' efforts was forthcoming. The Head of the CFMU had "a particular word of praise for all the controllers in the front line and those quite far away" and said that it added up "to a great achievement for all concerned" and described the quality of the service as "without doubt exceptional". Four months later, the situation had 'normalised' with traffic levels settling down to reveal a 5% increase and traffic delays rising 28%! Of course, the Association of European Airlines was not happy and predictably blamed ATC without mentioning their efforts at maintaining the traffic flow throughout the crisis.

The middle of 1999 saw IFATCA’s Human Factor Specialist invited to Montreal for a short term consultancy with ICAO. The Organisation had decided to produce a HF Manual for all the various groups and panels involved in the development and implementation of CNS/ATM systems and for the ATS providers who would ultimately acquire such equipment. Bert Ruitenberg's eight month sojourn culminated with production of the Manual 'Human Factors Guidelines for Air Traffic Management Systems'. Drawing on his own experiences and knowledge and gathering input from aircraft manufacturers and ATS providers, Ruitenberg put together a valuable document which detailed the three essential concepts that should be inherent in the new ATM systems: human centred automation, situational awareness and error management. Data link infrastructures, the human machine interface, new flight deck technologies and new standard operating procedures for the new systems were closely examined. The exercise gave further recognition to the importance of the human factors discipline and to IFATCA's (and Ruitenberg's) expertise in the area. In an excellent example of controller solidarity, Ruitenberg's contribution was only made possible through the cooperation of his Amsterdam colleagues. Initially not being released from his Schipol job because of a staff shortage, Ruitenberg only managed to go to Montreal when his Tower and Approach co-workers volunteered to cover his absence via unpaid overtime.

Delegates had been tempted by the evocative images of the cross roads of northern and southern Africa when they voted for the venue for conference 2000. An eleventh century imperial city where Arabs meet Berbers, the ochre hued Marrakech provided a magnificent backdrop for the Federations 39th annual conference. The new Palais de Congress just outside the old city's ramparts and the facilities of the adjoining Mansour Eddahabi hotel (where the swimming pool provided welcome relief from the already energy sapping sun) were equally splendid and the unique Moroccan approach provided a conference that was both different and memorable.

Committee C in Marrakech had one of its busiest ever conferences. A late night sitting until after 6.30pro on the Wednesday was necessary but still the Professional Committee was the last one to complete its business. With increasing automation uppermost in the minds, a considerable amount of time was spent discussing the professional and legal aspects of working with unserviceable or degraded equipment. Policy emanating from this discussion aimed at ensuring regular and adequate maintenance for equipment plus controller refresher training in degraded mode operations. It was also agreed that a controller should not be required to use equipment that is known to be unserviceable or inaccurate. The elections for SC4 and SC7 followed normal lines albeit in the knowledge that this would be the last year of separate operations following the Committee A decision (as per the Task Force recommendations) to again amalgamate these two committees. EVP Professional Martyn Cooper decided to call it a day and retired after just one term. (His Committee Chairman said he needed to re-cooper-ate!) He had made an outstanding contribution in a very short time and the professional arena was the poorer for his early departure.

Obviously still feeling the effects of their record output a year earlier, SC1 came to conference with just 5 working papers, only one of which addressed policy issues. This paper kept IFATCA in line with IFALPA in proposing retention of imperial measurements rather than metric for vertical distance, vertical speed, speed and long distance measurement. The lack of working papers enabled the committee to devote more attention than normal to the various representatives' reports. Most of these dealt with the current and future developments in CNS/ATM and their scope provided strong indication of the breadth and depth of IFATCA's input at regional and global level. Marrakech saw the two year trial of the revised SC1 composition conclude and delegates agreed it was an outstanding success. Thus, the new style Standing Committee 1 was permanently accepted with Dave Grace being elected for a two year term as Chairman.

Money is always a sensitive issue in any organisation and IFATCA is no exception. Well over 80% of the Federation's income is derived from annual Member Association subscriptions with the bulk of the balance being provided by Corporate Member subscriptions and interest from investments. Recent inflationary trends had seen the ever increasing professional involvement and administrative expenditures either matching or outstripping income and the year 1997-98 realised a deficit. As the Federations financial watchdog, SC3 decided it was again time to do something about the delicate state of finances. The Committee proposed, and it was accepted, to increase all fees by 10%. Of course, it was not a popular decision but it was accepted that it had been a number of years since the last rise and the move was essential. Having provided outstanding fiscal oversight for six years, Canada's John Redmond announced he needed a break and stood down as EVP Finance.

Redmond's departure opened the door for IFATCA's first female Executive Board member as the U.K.'s Stephanie Simmonds accepted the responsibility. Previously a Director Finance for GATCO and the current Subscription Manager for The Controller, Simmonds was bringing plenty of financial experience with her.

Recent years had seen several problems arise in connection with the organisation of the annual conference. Problems such as lack of requisite update information on the progress of arrangements, changing venues and conditions and even nonstandard registration forms were a source of continual frustration and aggravation to the Board and consumed their valuable time. In an attempt to ensure firmer control of arrangements and to achieve more standardisation of approach to the organisation of conference, Directors in Morocco saw fit to create the position of Conference Manager. This post is now responsible for liaison between the Board and the host MA and for the overall management of the business activities at conference on behalf of the Board. Thus it is hoped that this officer would remove from the day to day duties of the Board members the problems associated with managing what is now a major undertaking each year. Underscoring the importance placed upon this new position, it was made an Executive Board position (albeit appointed and ex officio) being combined with Board Secretary (effectively, the Board meeting minute taker). To compensate financially, the position of Editor was removed from the Board. Along with a couple of other key changes, such as bidding procedures, the discussions on changes to conference management provoked extensive and lively debate and not all the proposals, for example, profit sharing, were accepted. With new Standing Committee arrangements in place, new membership subscriptions agreed, a new Board position created and an Office Task Force set to review the Montreal operations, Committee A had taken some big steps in Marrakech to ensure the Federations continued credibility and viability. The change from one millennium to another may have been largely symbolic but, for IFATCA, a real corner had been turned.

One of the lesser noticed decisions in Marrakech was that to establish a data base of Member Association experiences with commercialisation and privatisation. (Res. 00.C.8) SC4 were of the belief that on-going monitoring of MAs who had already experienced commercialisation would be of value to other MAs who were faced with the concept. Positive and negative aspects of their experiences then could be assessed in conjunction with local factors to aid negotiation and implementation. It was more than a little ironic then that, just as the 2000 conference was making this decision, one of its members was being seriously affected by the process the data base was meant to guard against.

The Zimbabweans had been vindicated in court but now faced an even more insidious and vindictive assault on their fights. The government decided to establish a new Civil Aviation Authority of Zimbabwe (C_AAZ) and 'invited' all controllers to apply for employment in the new organisation. Some twelve controllers, all of whom had played key roles in the earlier dispute, subsequently 'failed' their interviews and were not offered employment in the new organisation. Among these highly qualified and experienced 'failures' was the former EVP, Oliver Farirayi. The CAAZ then had to hurriedly employ and train replacements to fill the shortage. Despite the fact that negotiations to reinstate the controllers have recommenced following the CAAZ restructuring being ruled invalid in mid-2000, the overall political situation does not bode well for a speedy resolution. This entire episode graphically highlights that air traffic controllers and the air traffic control profession still have a long way to go in some parts of the world.

Those close to the Federation were saddened to learn of the resignation of its first office manager, Maura Estrada, in July, 2000. Estrada's original mandate was to not only be our first office manager and employee but also to initiate operations from the permanent secretariat whilst simultaneously maintaining the same level of service that the MAs were accustomed to. Not only did she achieve all of that, and more, but her immediate commitment and dedication were outstanding and she took to the job in a way that one would only have expected of a seasoned air traffic controller. In departing she said: 'Although I leave with a heavy heart, I can say that every day I was excited to be given the opportunity to work for IFATCA and will never take for granted the many friendships I have been afforded". For the world's controllers she worked for, for all too brief a period, it was a mutual sentiment. Estrada was replaced by Ms. Alyssa Blais, an administration graduate and visual data designer for flight simulator manufacturer CAE Electronics Ltd. Blais was to join the Federation and enter an office now settled into its task, operating efficiently and totally involved on behalf of a membership optimistic as to its future.

It is perhaps fitting that we close this chronological account of IFATCA's history at this juncture. The Federations fourth decade was coming to a close with the organisation in as good a position as it has ever been. Financially, things were tight - whenever had they not been? - but the revised subscription rates and increasing membership should ensure continued fiscal viability. The advanced technologies and 21" century air traffic management systems were coming on stream and IFATCA had, in large part, contributed to their definition and implementation. From a professional point of view, the human factors considerations of those technologies and other aspects have become de rigueur. In a social sense, the quality of professional life for much of the membership has improved markedly although in some notable areas it is still sadly lamentable. The partnership with the ILO has continued to blossom and that with ICAO has risen to hitherto unknown levels. Over the years the relationship with IFALPA promised much but has delivered little although there have been some notable instances of cooperation and the millennium ends with it evidencing renewed vigour. IATA - well what can one say about an organisation that pursues us when they want assistance with their campaigns but offers little reciprocity? Membership of the Federation is extremely healthy at around 115 and, hopefully, finally the most important of those - the United States of America- is totally committed and involved as we have not seen with its previous two affiliations. The world's biggest developing aviation nation, China, shows some indications towards affiliation but sadly, the next biggest, India remains an enigma. Membership in Europe is almost total and in Africa and the Americas, most associations have realised that strength lies in unity with the Federation.

Unfortunately, the same realisation has not dawned in Asia where so many controllers are not, or cannot be, represented and continue in at least partial ignorance of their world body. Much more work needs to be done here.

The potential dark cloud on the horizon is caused by the new form of ATS provision- that by commercialised or privatised authorities. Initially enthusiastically embraced by controllers seeing tremendous system benefits in self funded employers, commercialisation is now warily viewed and with good reason. In many instances, commercial practises have provided great benefit with, for example, equipment acquisition now frequently occurring almost overnight as opposed to yesterday's experience of many years via government procurement requirements. And some associations enjoy good relations with their commercialised employers although it could be said that those that do are still in the honeymoon period. For some others, the honeymoon is well and truly over and some are in serious dispute with their employer.

In this context, it is worth quoting from the Canadian working paper (W.P. 162) to the 2000 conference.

"CATCA discovered that once the ball had started rolling towards privatisation, it was difficult to control and impossible to stop. Other interests - airlines and government - shaped the final product. Privatisation is a viable alternative to a stagnant and bureaucratic government run system but the structure, purpose and direction of the private system must be defined before its creation. Labour's input to the operation of the new company and employee's working conditions need to be at the forefront of the creation process.

Air traffic controllers are the key ingredient to the success of a privatised system but once the transfer is complete, promises are worth nothing. Member Associations facing the possibility of privatisation would be advised to review the experiences of countries like Canada and then carefully consider the pros and cons of their particular situation."

It was CATCA itself that began the Canadian push towards privatisation but the system envisioned by them never materialised. The system now "appears to be run as a business in a highly competitive market" and "services that don't pay for

themselves are reduced. Human factors and employee relations are given scant regard". (W.P. 162) As noted at the outset to this chapter, commercialised and privatised ATC systems demonstrate great potential for providing efficient ATC systems. But the individual associations and IFATCA cannot afford to have efficiency held to be the over riding concern with purely cost effective system efficiencies implemented at the expense of safe operations. There is, simply, too much riding on it.

Simultaneously, this new form of employment is seeing difficulties placed in the way of individual's availability to represent their colleagues. Federation representatives are increasingly finding obstacles in their path to attending important meetings and the last few years have seen several occasions where even Executive Board members have not made it to the Board meetings because of workplace problems. In this area as well, IFATCA needs to direct its attention. Previously, enlightened civil service administrations actively supported the Federations officers in their endeavours but such support now seems to be waning as ATC provision transitions from the public to the private domain. The Federation appears to have largely solved the problem of international recognition and is now routinely invited to the important forums. It would seem that the same level of recognition still needs to be gained (or, in some areas, re-gained) on the universal domestic front as well. As IFATCA enters its fifth decade, the various problems posed by privatisation quite possibly represent the greatest threat to IFATCA's objectives.

When he opened the 1st annual conference in Paris in 1962, President Tekstra noted that six months of experience was quite something to look back on. This history of IFATCA will be first distributed at the 2001 conference in Geneva and from that position we can review forty years of experience and surely this is quite something to look back on too. With this review, what immediately strikes one is that the problems haven't disappeared. Mostly they have altered location or merely altered in nature. Importantly, the idealism demonstrated by the original officers hasn't disappeared either but is now supported by hard nosed pragmatism and sophisticated engagement and backed by considerable practical experience.

In its forty years, IFATCA has achieved much as this account has detailed. In an air traffic services environment becoming even more dynamic than previously, IFATCA will need to retain an equal dynamism for there is still much that needs to be done before we can say that the air traffic control profession has been fully recognised.

The Breitling Orbiter 3, the first balloon to circumnavigate the globe non-stop, in March 1999.

IFATCA members played a significant role in facilitating the voyage and one, Patrick Schelling,

was a member of the mission control team.

CHAPTER 10

IFATCA and The New Technologies

In supporting the development and steady progress of aviation and the carriage of passengers by air, the civil aviation administrations of Western Europe have always been forward thinking and amongst the most progressive authorities in Europe. None have been more so than the Department of Civil Aviation of the Netherlands. By 1939 Amsterdam-Schiphol airport could already boast 4 paved runways and modern equipment and terminal facilities. Following the Second World War, Schiphol was one of the first airports to be rebuilt and by 1950 had regained its prior efficiencies. The Dutch DCA was not satisfied with that, however, and in 1952 it instituted some of Europe's first airways and equipped Schiphol airport with surveillance radar in 1953. Initially, the radar was modified to 'see' out to 100 miles and the controllers were now able to observe when aircraft were clear of each other and give instructions to effect separation on the new airways. Using the radar as it was designed, the DCA conducted operational trials throughout 1954 in the terminal area. At first, these trials simply consisted of aircraft flying training circuits but the controllers readily saw the benefits for general air traffic, particularly through the elimination of procedure turns to final and much of the associated holding patterns. The controllers were like kids with new toys and they happily experimented with their new equipment, rapidly learning and teaching themselves new techniques on the job. By 1957, the DCA had moved on from the trial phases and introduced radar separation standards and some very simple procedures.

In September, 1957 the Dutch DCA introduced a completely new unit Approach Control. Initially, the approach controller was intended to function as a procedural controller even though he was provided with a radar display. The existing Finals Director was still in charge and was to provide the vectoring on to final and ensure the correct spacing. The controllers immediately questioned the inefficiency of such an arrangement and took their complaints to their chiefs. The DCA adopted an enlightened approach and invited the controllers to do better and re-write the procedures. The person who took on the job (along with several other colleagues) in his spare time was 'Tek' Tekstra, soon to be IFATCA's first president.

'Tek' and his colleagues developed completely new procedures whereby the approach controller assumed the responsibility for developing the initial sequence. This was achieved by vectoring the traffic from the inbound tracks directly towards the final approach path, simultaneously establishing appropriate longitudinal separation. In so doing, the approach controller delivered to the Finals Director a manageable stream of traffic for him to fine tune for his final sequence. This technique became the standard and greatly reduced the delays that all in-bound traffic took for granted. As part of their professional approach to this problem, the Schiphol controllers formed their ATC association immediately signalling their intention to work with their employer on technical issues in a cooperative manner. Whilst IFATCA itself was not yet formed, this anecdote serves to illustrate the fact that IFATCA people have embraced new technology and procedures from the outset. From the Federation's earliest days, and even in its nascent period, far from resisting change, IFATCA representatives sought to be involved in the design, formulation and implementation of new procedures, rules, equipment and facilities. Nothing has changed.

From the time the U.K. Guild of Air Traffic Control Officers (GATCO) joined IFATCA at the first annual conference in 1962, the British assumed responsibility for Standing Committee 1 - Technical Matters in ATC. The first chairman was Arnold Field and he continued in the role until being elected President in 1970 (and resumed it again for a time after his term as President). It has been largely through the work of this Member Association, and the other associations who have constituted SC1 over the years, that IFATCA has established the reputation that it currently enjoys in international civil aviation. The hard won respect that the technical committee earned even paved the way in later years for the entrée of other representatives on to the international scene, particularly in the human factors field. Upon joining the Federation, the U.K. Guild immediately set the tone with work of the highest quality producing working papers of the highest standard. This approach would stand them in good stead for they would be immediately tested.

Just prior to the 1963 conference, IFATCA received its first invitation from ICAO. The Secretary General invited IFATCA to Montreal as an observer to the next RAC/OPS Divisional Meeting in June. This meant that SC1 had only four months to prepare. Undaunted, Field and his committee prepared six lengthy working papers for submission in Montreal. Key amongst these was 'Control of Flights in VMC', 'Cruising Level Systems' and 'ATS Personnel Responsibilities'. The first of these proposed the extension of air traffic control to aircraft flying VMC in controlled airspace - and, not surprisingly, prompted the first attendance at a conference in 1964 by a representative of the International Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. The latter paper represented a move for clear ICAO guidelines to controllers to take into account terrain clearance when radar vectoring aircraft. ICAO accepted the IFATCA position outlined in the various papers and 'granted' "Extended Control" as requested, instituted the table of hemispherical cruising levels and defined air traffic controllers' terrain clearance responsibilities. This last proved to be a source of irritation for IFALPA who, at the time, believed "that ATC is in the nature of advice to the pilot rather than instructions to him. For this reason 'instructions' should never be requested by the pilot or used by the controller."¹

ICAO's acceptance of the quality of the IFATCA input to this first international foray (low key as it was) could not have been better highlighted than when the Federation was asked subsequently to assist in the preparation of proposals for the introduction of primary radar control procedures in ICAO's PANS/RAC document. As we saw with an experienced individual in the Netherlands in 1957, the infant Federation also was more than willing to participate in the development of such crucial procedures. With radar an accepted fact of life in North America and now Europe, the input of the work face controller to these new procedures was needed, particularly with Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) now coming on stream as well².

IFATCA sent its position paper to Montreal in December, 1963 and ICAO released its draft procedures six months later. Substantive contribution had been made by only five States - France, Germany, Spain, the U.K. and the U.S.A. - and one organisation - IFATCA. A rather tight timetable for comment on the draft procedures meant that SC1 had to forward their considerations (via the Executive Board) to ICAO without the benefit of wider MA consultation. A few subsequent alterations, which did not materially affect the Federations proposals, were later conveyed to Montreal. The IFATCA contribution was welcomed by ICAO and a substantial portion of the material was incorporated. Incredibly, IFATCA was then not invited to participate in the September, 1965 meeting where ICAO finalised its draft procedures. The Federation was to become accustomed to such treatment. IFATCA protested this exclusion and subsequently was invited to comment on the final draft, which appeared in early 1966. Despite its non-participation in the September meeting, the later written contribution was found by ICAO to be of great value and IFATCA's comments formed the basis for the standards and procedures in use to this day.

Further attempting to come to grips with the modern technologies, IFATCA was also studying around this time the impact of SST operations and the implementation of air/ground data links. It was a time of great technical advance, both airborne and terrestrial, and IFATCA was certainly in the vanguard of research and discussions.

At the same time, IFATCA was asked for comment on the report of the fourth meeting of the ICAO ATC Automation Panel. The introduction of every piece of equipment to air traffic control has always engendered considerable discussion, debate, argument and feeling. Probably none has prompted more than has automation. Controllers have viewed automated functions from outright scepticism to, in a few cases, total acceptance. The majority, though, are notoriously conservative and thus have maintained a healthy wariness with this progress. They have been cognisant at all times that automation is less likely to remove their job or their status than it is to improve their skills and abilities and, perhaps even more importantly, to improve the capacity of the system whilst maintaining the essential safety element.

In the earliest days of development in this field, basic data handling was the leading edge of ATC automation. Most controllers were quick to see that minimal individual data input could overcome the current coordination bottlenecks by providing maximum data retrieval capability for multiple users. Thus controllers came to accept that the individual controller (or control position) now was not necessarily the most important consideration. Rather, the system at large became important. In order to serve this new master, a new mentality was required and the controllers showed themselves ready to embrace the requisite skills.

Part of IFATCA's submission on this ATC Automation Panel report displayed great prescience despite the acknowledged lack of expertise in the area. Even in these earliest days of automation considerations, the Federation clearly highlighted an area of concern that, as it turned out, would not be adequately addressed. This would be the eventual cause of massive problems and would contribute significantly to the increasing delays throughout Europe in the coming years. IFATCA said in 1966: "We recognise the necessity for early steps to ensure compatibility of equipment under development. Automation is the only way to provide tools for fast data processing and exchange, which is a condition for improved coordination between ATC units. If the systems used in different countries are not made compatible, automatic international coordination will be severely restricted."

However, little resulted from this panel and the various administrations in Europe continued on their independent, nationalistic ways. National pride and, in some cases, national industry were at stake and, where they were, equipment and procedures developed independently much to the chagrin and frustration of those forced to operate with the resultant incompatible equipment and procedures. In some other centres, ATC systems had simply stagnated over the years. Throughout the seventies and eighties IFATCA continually promoted the concept of, and the need for, compatibility. Controllers intuitively understood that the most likely way to achieve this was to acquire more controller participation in the automation process and recommendations passed in 1979 in Brussels, for instance, were intent on pursuing this line. The traffic crises in Europe in the late seventies and eighties accentuated the situation and, with some thirty States, fifty four ATC centres, twenty two computer operating systems and more than thirty programming languages, finally the European aviation authorities had to act.

A recommendation from the European Regional Air Navigation meeting in 1986 (EANPG/26) proposed the creation of the Future European Air Traffic Services Systems Working Group, more commonly known as FEATS. IFATCA's Executive Board, keen to be involved, decided it may be appropriate to participate in such a group and immediately sought the draft terms of reference and an indication as to whether it would be appropriate for IFATCA to participate. ICAO quickly dismissed IFATCA's approach replying that it was far too premature for such a request and the minutes from the Executive Board meeting where the letter was tabled indicate that the Board was embarrassed by the nature of the rebuff. Nonetheless, early 1987 saw the Board again requesting membership of the group. This time the request was acceded to. ICAO granted IFATCA participation in November, in time for the first meeting in April, 1988.

IFATCA readily saw that the deliberations and impact of FEATS would be very important, so much so that they would need a full time representative to the meetings (they selected Steve Hall of the U.K.) with attendance by one of the RVPs, at least part time. This latter role fell to Philippe Domogala, RVP Europe West. To support this commitment, the Europeans also formed a Special Standing Committee for FEATS, the meetings of which were also attended by President Erik Sermijn. This specialist SC provided advice and guidance to Hall and Domogala and went a long way to ensuring that the Federation's concerns were adequately addressed. These concerns fell mainly into two areas: air traffic flow management (ATFM) and human factors and it was on these two key areas that IFATCA focused its energies.

With ATFM, Hall pursued the policy that change had to be framed around the controller's ability to cope with demand and not simply to adjust the demand through ATFM. Complementing this approach, Hall also pursued the point that ATFM should be developed only to the extent necessary to ensure optimum flow. Also elaborating on the Federations concern for the human aspects of change, Hall proposed to FEATS that "Development shall be carefully balanced with the associated changes to the tasks and role of the human elements, controller and pilot, in particular in relation to the responsibilities carried for monitoring and, most importantly, decision making. Higher priority to be given to the human element, both ground and airborne.., ergonomic considerations and man-machine relationships must also be given due consideration in order to ensure the best exploitation of the skill of pilots, controllers and support personnel.”³ The ATFM policy was noted and at least partially accommodated. However, the human factors principles were accepted in totality and the entire IFATCA input was included in the final FEATS report in mid 1989. This represented an outstanding achievement and signalled IFATCA's arrival on the scene as a serious human factors contributor. An important side benefit arising from this acceptance was that ICAO was now forced to acknowledge that staff shortages and poor relations with administrations were real and serious factors contributing to the difficult problems facing European controllers in managing the burgeoning air traffic. Further, it gave weight to individual association and IFATCA claims that the traffic chaos was not attributable to industrial activity alone. It is one of the very few times, if not the only time, that ICAO has ventured into such territory.

The eighties were ending on a high note for IFATCA with respect to relations with ICAO. These were further boosted when ICAO Paris advised in December that the Federations application for membership of the European Air Navigation Planning Group had been approved with observer status. IFATCA was, at last, being recognised as the responsible voice of air traffic control in its area of expertise.

Whilst all these developments and progress with FEATS were unfolding, IFATCA simultaneously became involved in another high profile and extremely important ATM improvement program. In 1988, a ministerial meeting of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC - then representing twenty eight States) decided upon a joint programme to alleviate the air traffic congestion problems in Europe. A task force was immediately created to analyse the existing problems and formulate strategy to overcome them. All parties involved in air traffic in Europe were consulted and IFATCA represented the controllers' viewpoint. The unrealistic call from the Association of European Airlines for a single ATC system (a/a the United States) was dismissed by the task force as it was considered that concentration of task was not the answer for Europe. The consensus was that the way forward was through harmonisation and integration of national ATC systems in order to achieve a seamless, that is without artificial boundaries, European air traffic management system. IFATCA's calls over more than twenty years were finally being heard. As a result of the task force's findings, EATCHIP was born. The European ATC Harmonisation and Integration Plan was a bold move to manage a progressive harmonisation and integration of the European ATC systems in a single programme.

IFATCA was accepted as a full member of the Project Board and the Consultative Committee and was thus involved at the forefront of deliberations and decisions and these bodies placed extensive reliance on an IFATCA paper on European Air Traffic Management Systems. However, reporting on his attendance at the 10th Project Board meeting in November, 1993 the then EVP Europe, Preben Lauridsen was forced to note: "The results after five years of intense work are very poor". Despite Lauridsen's pessimism at that point, EATCHIP did deliver some tangible capacity benefits by 1995 with ATM delays being cut to levels not seen since the mid-eighties. These gains were realised through increased investment in technical facilities and system upgrades together with an increased focus on airspace problems. Importantly, a high degree of computer harmonisation was achieved to facilitate improvements such as silent hand-offs, which enabled reduced separation standards, and significantly added to overall efficiency.

However, the "progressive" side of the plan didn't entirely materialise. Still, national protectionism managed to frustrate some airspace management plans and the technical investment was not carried through to the same extent with the human resources domain. In this area, IFATCA also participated in the EATCHIP Human Resources Team which commenced its work in 1994. This team was to work on safety related working conditions and selection, training and licensing of controllers. Although IFATCA urged the States to greatly improve their investment in training and pushed for more flexible use of airspace, the Federation often found the national service providers reluctant to seriously take action and it has to be said that it was in these areas where EATCHIP failed.

Whilst not satisfying the expectations of many, EATCHIP could be declared a success in that over time it created the infrastructure for European harmonisation.

And within its limited scope, it produced the sought after capacity increases, facilitated by one of its main achievements - the creation of the Central Flow Management Unit (CFMU). It was, however, a short term success as all the capacity gains have since been absorbed by the increased traffic demand. Whilst the airspace capacity demands were kept in check (or relatively so), airport capacity problems grew at a much higher rate as the lack of sufficient concrete played an increasingly prominent role. Such deficiencies could not be ignored by the late nineties and yet another new plan was called for. The ATM 2000+ strategy will concentrate on setting up a legal and political framework within EUROCONTROL and ECAC to eliminate some States' reluctance to agreed strategies and to allow more focus on a total system approach - the so-called 'gate to gate' principle. But reference must also be given to "considerations of environmental issues" so there is little likelihood of a total elimination of ATM delays in Europe in the near future. But, as always, IFATCA will play its part again through its representation in ATM 2000+ to minimise them.

This late coming heavy political commitment in Europe with the EATCHIP project and the heavy contribution to FEATS were also being mirrored on the wider international stage with a commensurate input to the Future Air Navigation Systems (FANS) project. FANS was established by ICAO in late 1983 as a technical committee of the ICAO Council. It formed part of a special machinery devised by the Council to deal with important, complex and urgent problems, the resolution of which requires expertise not available through normal Council means. It was only the third time that the Council had made use of this special machinery.

The special committee held its first meeting in mid 1984. In opening the meeting, ICAO President Dr. Kotaite made the point that the nature of the committee's task was so complex that it would be given the initial task of establishing its own work programme. The real work commenced with the FANS/2 meeting of April, 1985 with a review of the functional shortcomings of the world's air navigation systems. This meeting also established various task forces to study elements of the current and proposed systems. Whilst the reviews for future systems were to assess new concepts and technologies "including the use of satellite technology”⁴ with regards to communications, navigation and surveillance, it was readily apparent that this was where the concentration of effort would lie. Having settled upon broad details for a global system architecture, the FANS committee published a description of its future concept in 1988. The committee concluded that "satellite based communication, navigation and surveillance systems will be the key to improvements of the air navigation environment on a global scale.”5

With the foundation laid for the development of air navigation for the next quarter of a century or so, the committee's work was then largely complete although it continued as a forum for automation considerations for a little longer. In 1990, the original FANS committee gave way to FANS(II) - more affectionately named 'Son of FANS' - which set out to address the institutional arrangements for the provision of the future system. Its supporting aim was to describe the necessary research, development and trials for implementation and to produce a global transition plan covering the necessary implementation schedule for all regions of the world. The task it had set itself became evident when, at its April, 1992 meeting, it addressed no less than forty four working papers on current activities. When both the Americans and Russians made their respective GPS and GLONASS satellite constellations available to civilian aviation at no cost, and undertook to make them compatible, further impetus was provided to develop a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) with unprecedented navigational accuracy world wide. The most radical change to air traffic control since the inception of radar was about to be visited upon the world of air traffic management. Naturally, most of the research and developmental work would be carried out by developed nations seeking capacity enhancements and cost benefits but the nature of the new system was such that it would be capable of providing substantial benefits to underdeveloped countries as well. It would enable many of these countries to leap frog from today's (or even yesterday's) technology to tomorrow's more advanced systems. It was crucial that the world's air traffic controllers were represented and make input to these futuristic deliberations and plans.

IFATCA was accepted as a full member of the FANS group from the outset. FANS was the first ICAO group to invite full (as opposed to observer) IFATCA participation. At the original meeting IFATCA presented a paper "Contribution to the Work Program FANS' which stressed the need for the continued acceptance of the human factor as the ultimate fail-safe system and the need for a real time link of navigation position of aircraft. From FANS/2 in 1985 onwards, EVP Technical Lex Hendriks attended the main FANS meetings on a full time basis. This in itself was no light commitment for these meetings each occupied almost three weeks. There was also plenty of work in between the main meetings with commitments to the 'spin off' groups such as the Automatic Dependent Surveillance Panel (ADP) and the Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel (RGCSP). When Hendriks stood down as EVP Technical at the 1987 conference, the Board considered his input to have been so significant and so valued his on-going participation, that they sought his continuance as the IFATCA FANS representative. He did continue until the FANS committee had completed its work (by FANS/4). He was succeeded at FANS/5 and then in the FANS II work by the RVP Europe West, Philippe Domogala. The new EVP Technical, Bob Randall, a Canadian, naturally also became involved with the FANS work with participation on the ADSP, further demonstrating IFATCA's commitment to the global concept. When Randall moved on in 1989, the Board again desired continuity with these important panels and he remained as the representative on the ADSP and, a little later (in 1990), on the RGCSP. Still later, Charles Stuart's successor as EVPT, Mike Dooling, another Canadian, only spent one year as EVPT but then served as the IFATCA representative on both ADSP and RGCSP for several years.

The new EVP Technical, Chris Stock, attended the final FANS II meeting in September, 1993. Marking acceptance at an even higher level, IFATCA then accepted an invitation⁶ to attend, as an observer, meetings of its successor CASITAF, the high level CNS/ATM Systems Implementation Task Force chaired by the President of the ICAO Council, Dr. Kotaite. Although holding only observer status to this decision making body, having gained acceptance, IFATCA effectively was treated as a full member whose opinion was sought. The paper on priorities presented to the second CASITAF meeting was remarked upon in subsequent presentations and discussions, with several points from it being reflected in the meeting's report. It was also becoming apparent that the emphasis was shifting from CNS to ATM and this was reflected in some senior ICAO officers' comments. One was even so impressed by IFATCA’s input that he opined IFATCA should take the lead in CNS/ATM discussions.

Both during and since these involvements, the Federation has formulated its policies on the various aspects of CNS/ATM around a concern over the impact that the transition to a more automated system would have on the controller. From the FANS/5 meeting, Domogala was immediately into his stride reminding delegates not to forget human factors and of the need for a similar approach to FEATS. The USSR delegation not only agreed with this but frankly stated "We fully support IFATCA's position". Such IFATCA consistency (and persistency) of approach was absolutely essential as automation was high on the agenda and there was a discernible shift from considerations of automated CNS functions only towards including ATM matters and some powerful vested interests were seeking a 'more efficient' (that is, automated) ATC system.

FANS and the CNS/ATM concept were the cornerstone of the technical work undertaken by the Federation in the nineties. This area became a battleground as the various industry factions argued vociferously about the benefits of early implementation, including such issues as separation reductions and the use of TCAS for in-trail-climbs. The technocrats had commandeered the heights and there grew the fear that if they were allowed to take full control then the human input on the ATM side of the equation could be compromised and safety denigrated. IFATCA was caught in the line of fire and sometimes took a position which was considered ultra conservative by some of the technological progressives. The crux of the problem lay in the rapid development of CNS, with the commensurate need to develop a clear and viable ATM concept being overshadowed. That imbalance is only now being redressed. IFATCA, and others such as IFALPA, experienced grave difficulties during these debates with at least some of the technocrats claiming that the human element could, and should, be reduced to a monitoring role.

As an example of this line of thought, one work group agreed to "develop policy guidelines for the evolution of ATM to maximise the efficient use of airport and airspace capacity. The extent of automation made possible by the introduction of new CNS services requires that appropriate standards are developed which will ensure harmonious treatment of flights transiting all airspace". No consideration here of safety and humans, only efficiency and machinery. If the evolving system was to feature a human centred concept, it was obvious that IFATCA's continued vigilance and input would be required throughout the FANS II phase and beyond.

In close cooperation with IFALPA during the FANS II meetings, that input produced tangible results which served to negate several innovative but flawed concepts. At one stage there was the suggestion that TCAS be included in the calculations for separation minima reductions. The two Federations strenuously objected to this proposal and there was some considerable relief when ICAO mandated that safety nets such as TCAS could not be used thus. Similar cooperation was evidenced with the discussions on datalink, direct voice communications, the removal of terrestrial aids to leave GNSS as the sole means of navigation and, of course, the pivotal role of the human in the automated system.

IFATCA’s delegates introduced a great many human factors aspects and proposed conditions to be met before any new element is introduced. At IFATCA's insistence, it was agreed that there be a clear definition of responsibilities between controllers, pilots and system engineers in place before any new automated system is implemented. Further urging ensured that the plan incorporated proper training, studies and tests to determine the most appropriate human-machine interface and determination of system constraints. The global implementation plan is now based on the premise that the human will retain the decision making process.

ICAO has mapped out a lengthy gestation period with final reliance upon the new system not expected before 2015. Such an evolutionary process implies that existing systems will operate in parallel with the replacing systems to a greater or lesser extent for that period. It is also agreed now that the best of the current line-of-sight systems will continue, particularly in high density areas. Without a huge increase in the number of controllers - and a massive global recruitment campaign is not envisaged - the existing personnel will be expected to migrate from one system to the other and perhaps even to operate both systems on a day to day basis. Such a scenario must give rise to some concern. Additionally, the various elements of CNS/ATM themselves each present separate concerns.

As an example, the introduction of data link as the primary enabling technology represents a fundamental change for controllers and pilots alike. Voice, being immediate and subject to various nuances of intonation, is able to convey levels of urgency and inquiry. Voice is another backup in a highly redundant environment with its subtlety providing the ability to identify mistakes and convey urgency. Similarly, Automatic Dependent Surveillance (ADS) is an ATC cultural quantum leap. ADS is an advanced tool which will permit considerable reductions in the current generous lateral and longitudinal separation standards in non-radar coverage areas such as oceanic regions. It does, however, provide a display target derived from an airborne navigational system rather than via an independent source, the radar sensor. Aircraft on radar are fixed relative to each other through the independent sensor whereas aircraft ADS positions are not relative to each other. Future controllers will enter a brave new world scenario, from the outset co-existing with the new facilities, but the new technologies will require considerable adjustment and acclimatisation for existing controllers. In one of the great ironies, it has been identified that older, more experienced controllers will need to be trained to trust the new system while new, younger controllers will need to be trained to mistrust the system.

During the time that IFATCA was heavily involved with FANS (mainly with Montreal) and EATCHIP/FEATS in Europe, other parts of the world were not idle.

Australia had, for some years, been applying reduced longitudinal separation minima over non-radar covered areas of the continent using the Mach Number Technique (MNT). Canberra saw value in applying a similar technique over some of the oceanic areas under its control. Obviously, this would require cooperation with neighbouring authorities. A conference was called in Perth in January, 1990 to consider such wider application of the Australian RNAV standards which were similar to those being applied in the North Atlantic Minimum Navigation Performance Specification airspace at the time. A series of trials commencing May, 1990 were proposed covering the air route Singapore-Bali-Sydney and the routes between Australia and New Zealand. The meeting was attended by RVP Pacific who impressed upon delegates the impact of amended separation standards on the overall ATC system. Questions as to what training was envisaged in the short time frame available prior to the trials commencement also were posed. As a result of a decision emanating from the meeting, the Australian CAA conducted a training seminar in Indonesia to ensure the Indonesian controllers (covering the central portion of the trial route) were prepared. This training exercise proved to be a forerunner to a series of such seminars over the next couple of years and the Australian CAA has to be given credit for this professional and generous initiative.

The initial trial proved very successful and a second meeting was held in Sydney in August, 1990. IFATCA again attended as did additional personnel this time from Fiji, Papua New Guinea and the USA and some airlines. This meeting resolved to expand the trials to routes between Sydney and Japan and Sydney and Honolulu over Fiji. The other important matter to come from this meeting was the formation of the Informal South Pacific ATS Coordinating Group. ISPACG was to become a very influential body in international civil aviation and not just in the South Pacific. The author attended both of these meetings, the first one as RVP PAC and the second one as EVP ASP. As a result, IFATCA was accepted from the outset as a member of the group, contrasting sharply with our contemporary failed efforts to join ISPACG's North Pacific equivalent, IPACG.

Jointly chaired by Australia, New Zealand and the USA, ISPACG conducted a series of bi-annual meetings over the ensuing years and delivered to the industry a raft of beneficial changes. It proved to be a most dynamic group and vigorously pursued change which frequently had the ICAO Bangkok office 'breathless'. By October, 1992 (the third meeting of ISPACG), the group had expanded the MNT trial routes, instituted flex tracks between Los Angeles and Sydney and Auckland and commenced data link demonstrations and discussions on Dynamic Airspace Route Planning in the South Pacific. At the behest of ICAO's Asia Pacific Air Navigation Planning and Implementation Regional Group (APANPIRG), ISPACG formed a working group to develop a regional CNS/ATM transition plan. Little wonder that the ICAO representative was calling ISPACG "the most important informal group in the Pacific, if not the world".

The benefits of such dynamic activity were immediate. Qantas was able to report a financial gain of US$30,000 over just five days of the flex track trial in September and accordingly the airlines (Air New Zealand, Qantas and United) and IATA were enthusiastic participants. The members of 'proactive' ISPACG expressed some concern that APANPIRG was not sufficiently task oriented and that the real leading edge work was now being done by bodies such as ISPACG. However, they did recognise that APANPIRG was intended to handle planning in general terms and support for that body (itself only recently formed) was confirmed.

By ISPACG/6 in May, 1994 the output of the group had become such that IFATCA needed two representatives. By now, the author had become Deputy President but was still attending this technical forum because of continuity and logistical reasons. The New Zealand association provided the second delegate, Chris Dalton, who was soon to move to ICAO in Montreal. This meeting was something of a watershed for ISPACG, however, as it revealed that its pro-activities were getting beyond even its own members' reach. On the group's promises, the airlines were investing heavily in new equipment (the new FANS/1 package, data link equipment) to facilitate the trials and continued applications but the service providers were now starting to back away from the optimistic timetables. The authorities were advising of variable dates for implementation of the three key components of ADS, CPDLC (Controller Pilot Data Link Communications), and AIDC (ATC Interoperability Data Communications). What's more, other differences were surfacing with Australia believing that simultaneous introduction of CPDLC and ADS was essential whilst the USA was of the view that incremental development of the new functionalities was satisfactory. On a more positive note, ISPACG/6 secured representation at the upcoming meeting of the North Atlantic Special Planning Group (NATSPG), so South Pacific developments would be aired well beyond the group's home turf.

By the time ISPACG/9 came along in November, 1995 (the author's last involvement with this body although IFATCA's participation was continuing and being enhanced through Kevin Broome from New Zealand), ISPACG had achieved an incredible amount of change in the South Pacific which would facilitate similar changes elsewhere. Some of the new technologies were being introduced far ahead of what would have been considered a normal timetable. Sixty nautical mile separation standards had been agreed with moves towards fifty miles well under way⁷. The two main communications providers (ARINC and SITA) broke new ground by agreeing on internet working protocols. New weather deviation procedures taking the reduced separation minima into account were implemented.

On the debit side, severe slippage had occurred with the implementation of the new technologies. New Zealand were operational with data link but nothing else, Australia was about to initiate CPDLC with ADS twelve months later and the USA only had CPDLC operational with ADS not programmed for another two years. Nobody was within twelve months of introducing AIDC despite the fact that ARINC and SITA were ready. IFATCA made input to the new weather deviation procedures, the new South Pacific Operations Manual (containing ISPACG members' common procedures and references for CNS/ATM), the new separation standards and countered some arguments in favour of In-Trail Climb. The most important contribution though, was to have the group accept the need for direct controller-pilot communications (DCPC) when the 50/50 separation standards become fact.

ISPACG played a valuable role and shook a lot of people out of their complacency and showed just what can be achieved and how quickly and efficiently new procedures and facilities can be introduced if the will and impetus is there. The members of the group, though pushing ahead, were always prepared to listen and evaluate other opinions. IFATCA's participation was appreciated and the involvement important. As is frequently the case, the Federation didn't change a great deal but sometimes we were able to keep the other participants focused on who they were really working for and, occasionally, reined in the more 'adventuresome' of those present.

Around the same time as ISPACG/9, the APANPIRG formed a South China Sea Working Group which met in Bangkok in September, 1995. The Deputy President also attended this meeting since the new EVP ASP, George Chao, was engaged as a representative of his Hong Kong administration. This was another key technical meeting with considerable IFATCA input which proved valuable for controllers in the region. The forum addressed a new route structure across the South China Sea, a new Required Navigation Performance (RNP) Operations Manual and amendments to ICAO documents to support the regional introduction of a 50nm longitudinal and lateral (50/50) separation standards between aircraft approved to RNP 10 or better. The IFATCA position of DCPC being essential with 50/50 was again reinforced and accepted by the meeting. Sadly, the agreed new route structure, incorporating parallel routes in key areas, has fallen foul of regional politics and has still to be implemented. The meeting did, however, lead to reductions in some separation minima which have relieved pressure on some key routes.

Similar, although not quite as extensive, contacts were developing elsewhere and 1989, for example, saw a first invitation to the limited AFI RAN (Africa Regional Air Navigation) meeting and the RVP CAR was present at the 2na CAR/SAM RAN (Caribbean/South American Regional Air Navigation). These contributions, by no means an exhaustive list, provide an insight into IFATCA's development both as an originator of policy and as a contributor to international guidelines. In recent times though, there is probably no better example of IFATCA policy making and technology cooperation than that with the Traffic Collision Avoidance System, or TCAS.

The development of airborne anti-collision beacons provides an illustrative pointer to IFATCA's acceptance of new technology and the manner in which the organisation's approach and policies evolved in parallel to (and partly ahead of) the technological evolution. In fact, the evolution of these systems itself is informative. IFATCA's approach to their first faltering steps and later development clearly shows that the Federations representatives in the technical field have always supported their introduction and never felt overly threatened by the onset of such a cockpit based tool designed to provide the ultimate measure of separation.

Moves towards some form of a collision avoidance system date back to the fifties. It was a 1956 collision over the Grand Canyon in the United States resulting in the death of 128 people that led to several rudimentary anti-collision systems, all of which were rejected for a variety of reasons. Being aware of these moves, the new Federation was content in its early years to maintain a watching brief. In 1974 thoughts began to crystallise and it was decided that some form of definitive statement was required. Consequently, still well before any actual operational equipment had seen the light of day, IFATCA issued its first policy in connection.

Resolution 74.B.6 stated:

"That the development of Airborne Anti-collision Devices be encouraged and developed as a matter of urgency. However, it must be recognised that the primary means of collision avoidance within the control environment must continue to be the air traffic control system."

Obviously, IFATCA had been watching these first attempts to provide some form of ultimate separation assurance with interest and had become concerned at the lack of progress, hence the "as a matter of urgency" enjoinder. Air traffic controllers were more than prepared to accept such equipment although they were cautious enough in clarifying at the outset of such development that they wanted to remain in charge of separation. On further reflection, the Federation decided it had no wish to see a less than optimum system placed in service and they subsequently deemed it wise to editorially amend the policy by removing the same phrase. Little did they know that this very "matter of urgency" aspect would become the cornerstone of criticism of anti-collision beacons some 16 years later. Over the next few years one or two more editorial-only changes were made to the policy.

Another mid-air collision over San Diego in 1978, which killed a further 144 people, gave fresh impetus to development. Some aircraft equipment installation was carried out and this new programme evaluated the first stages of the concept which would later come to be known as TCAS II. Committee B delegates maintained a close watch on this progress, continually reviewing the existing policy but saw no need for change until 1984 when they elaborated on the dictates in view of the progress being made up to that time.

"The use of automatic airborne collision avoidance systems should allow for safe operation within different types of airspace, with different ATC procedures and with different aircraft equipment capabilities without detriment to the ATC service or to aircraft not fully equipped.

The inevitable changes in ATC procedures, techniques and phraseologies, as the result of airborne collision avoidance and traffic alert systems, should be compatible, not only with a controller's responsibilities for providing positive separation, but also with a controller's ability to discharge them.

Mode S should automatically provide an indication to the ground service, at least, when an aircraft is the subject of a collision avoidance advisory.

IFATCA encourages any development which automatically provides the ground service indications of conflict or potential conflict which have been provided to the pilot.

Whenever a manoeuvre contrary to an ATC clearance is made as the result of a collision avoidance advisory, the pilot shall inform ATC as soon as possible." (Resolution 84.B.5)

The rate of progress of the airborne beacons was now such that IFATCA felt it needed policy more definitive than merely encouraging development. The beacons were now a fact (although lacking commitment and direction for widespread carriage) and Directors saw the need to place their position on record for the benefit of developers and legislators. Now they were calling for a method of employment recognising different situational environments and equipment deployed compatible with existing systems. It was an important step forward and one still well ahead of any requirement for carriage of this equipment.

The great leap forward in this area can be traced directly to the Cerritos, California collision in 1986 following which President Reagan initiated legislation calling for a form of beacon installation in all aircraft in U.S. airspace by 1991. This in turn prompted an endorsement of the existing IFATCA policy at the 1987 conference. SC 1 was also charged with investigating the impact of automatic collision avoidance systems on ATC world wide and this resulted, in 1988, in an affirmation that a ground based ATC service is the primary method of separation assurance and should be totally independent of airborne emergency devices. Further, it was emphasised that autonomous airborne devices should not be a consideration in the provision of adequate air traffic services. (Resolutions 88.B.3 and 88.B.4)

Was there some concern now that terrestrial ATC was to be side stepped? Quite possibly, especially when one remembers that this was the era of President Reagan's anti-missile 'Star Wars' concept and early positive moves towards satellite based global communications and surveillance. Advanced technology proponents were rampant and many were the calls for fully automated ATC systems. One can forgive the conference Directors for perhaps feeling a little paranoid (if in fact they were) but one must also admire them for not condemning nor dismissing the technology but still maintaining support for it, however, just on their terms.

In the United States a little common sense prevailed and the intemperate haste of the 1987 Reagan legislation was ameliorated somewhat in 1989 when a phase-in approach was adopted. This was in part prompted by the industry when the U.S. Air Transport Association sought deferment of the 1991 implementation date. It appeared to the ATA that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) would have trouble certifying the system prior to the due date. Additionally, many representatives of non-U.S, airlines questioned the FAA's authority to mandate the carriage and use of equipment on their aircraft. Eventually the FAA agreed to an amendment and a postponement whereby all aircraft flying in U.S. airspace with a capacity of more than thirty passengers must be TCAS equipped by the end of 1993. This new more moderate approach would also permit an orderly and evaluated introduction to ensure no disruption to the airspace system. This was exactly what IFATCA had called for and Directors took the opportunity to re-affirm and strengthen their policy in 1990 in Acapulco.

By the end of 1991 sufficient units were flying and controllers and pilots were experienced enough to utter opinions on the devices. Opinions varied greatly. TCAS Mark 1 was seriously deficient in its parameter settings and capabilities, only providing traffic advisories, which many pilots acted upon, and the U.S. National ATC Association (NATCA) was highly critical. Citing more than 300 cases in a three month period, NATCA quoted advisories that were malfunctions falsely generated by high vertical speeds, transponder errors, beacons detecting their host aircraft and 'conflicting' traffic with adequate separation. Manufacturers and the FAA disputed the figures although they admitted there were faults that they were trying to rectify. The U.S. Air Line Pilots Association (USALPA) suggested the problem was not as big as NATCA believed but nevertheless hosted a safety workshop where pilots voiced their complaints. The European controllers expressed great concerns about not having guidelines to handle the 50% or so of U.S. traffic operating in their airspace with TCAS with its resolution advisory or traffic advisory mode selected or left to the pilot's discretion as to its use.

IFATCA entered into the debate too when 1992 saw the introduction of TCAS to Europe.

President Charles Stuart attended ‘Air Forum '92’ in Geneva and used the opportunity to frankly state IFATCA's concerns over the United States' mandated introduction with unseemly haste of an aid that was inadequately validated and unreliable and its subsequent indiscriminate application in other environments. He expressed the opinion that TCAS was suffering from a serious ailment: Cybernetic Entomology- a bug in the system! One of the reasons for this was the fact, admitted by manufacturer Allied Signal, that there had been very little consultation with the users as to possible problems that could be caused by TCAS. Finally, Stuart emphasised the point that there had been little or no training for either pilots or controllers in the use and effects of TCAS.

The gradual access to the improved TCAS II with much better performance saw ATC acceptance of the device rise. But the incidence of TCAS was not accompanied by universal guidelines for procedures for use with resolution actions and, certainly, responsibility waivers for controllers faced with separation losses as a result of resolutions were non-existent (apart from in the United States). Concerns on this last issue generated another review of Federation policy on TCAS in 1995 to again bring it up to date. This time, directors decided that:

"All MAs should urge their national administrations to assemble, disseminate, administer and maintain a comprehensive ACAS training package for ab-initio and regular refresher training. (Res. 95.B.27)

All MAs should ask their national administrations to introduce, as a matter of urgency, procedures to absolve their controllers of responsibility for any losses of separation caused by aircraft executing a Resolution Advisory from the point in time where the RA was initiated to that point in time where the aircraft concerned have been cleared to, and are maintaining new altitudes and/or lateral spacings." (Res. 95.B.28)

With this review, directors made an important break with the past. Previously, the policy saw as desirable the development of the provision of automatic advice to the ground service of an aircraft subject to an advisory. In Jerusalem, directors took the opposite tack:

"Due to the fact that there is currently a lack of compatibility between ACAS and the ATC system and the risk that controller workload therefore should be increased by unnecessary information, IFATCA is opposed to the downlinking of any advisories generated by ACAS." (Res. 95.B.30)

This new approach represented the only backward step (albeit a small one) taken with policy development on this technological advance, an advance which was, to say the least, contentious in its early days. From the outset controllers identified with the desirability and benefits of a last resort separation device and consistently welcomed its introduction, provided it was done within a recognised ATC system and not as a substitute for ground based positive control. The main concern controllers had with the matter was with the somewhat unseemly haste with which it was introduced in the United States and then forced upon others before it was proven. At all times, IFATCA's policy complemented development of the aid and, in fact, was mostly ahead of it, particularly in recognising the need for compliance with differing environments. Nobody was ready for the rushed introduction as a result of a political edict rather than a technical need nor the lack of accompanying training but IFATCA was more prepared than most - at least in the philosophical aspect - and demonstrated a consistent and amenable approach to the technology.

TCAS today is totally accepted and recognised as an invaluable facility, a device that provides for last resort separation assurance. It provides both pilots and controllers with an extra comfort factor and is now an integral component of the overall system, whereby it complements the ground based air traffic control separation function. Where feasible, national ATC systems have been adapted to (or built to incorporate) acceptance of TCAS transmissions and there are a number of pilots and a few controllers around the world who are grateful for its efficacy. This was exactly the position that IFATCA envisaged from the outset and directed its policies towards achieving. In this instance, one can safely assume that controllers' protests, concerns and appeals were heard and a result achieved. The Federations policy in 2001 remains the same as that passed in 1995.

With TCAS, we witnessed a classic example of systems designers developing a product without due regard to the effects it would have upon the front end users of the airspace system. No air traffic control input was made to the facility's design or specifications, no training was conducted to explain or manage its use. Worse still, the concept was invoked at political whim, by executive dictate rather than through an operational driven need. It is a system that is now proven but which achieved that status through 'live' application when more thorough controlled testing should have been conducted. However, even so, throughout its development, IFATCA had in place adequate policy guidelines and was able to espouse those, upon invitation, in various forums. Essentially though, IFATCA policies rarely see the light of day until exposed at those forums. In part learning from this, IFATCA decided to be a little more proactive in respect to the CNS/ATM concept.

The ramifications of a global air traffic control concept were such that there could not afford to be another scenario whereby systems designers and engineers were allowed to overshadow the requirements and demands of key personnel such as air traffic controllers. The transition from the current air traffic control regime to the future air traffic management system is recognised as necessarily being evolutionary in implementation. However, the emphasis on the new technologies to achieve that transition is nothing short of revolutionary. Accordingly, IFATCA was firmly of the belief that there was a need to ensure that operational judgement and front end user expertise be projected in a more forceful and public manner than normal. Likewise, in order to counter some of the more aggressive approaches of the commercial and technical sector of the industry, IFATCA decided to produce its 'Vision Document- towards the 21st century'.

Published in 1997, this document is a lengthy dissertation essentially on how IFATCA envisaged the ICAO CNS/ATM concept as ideally being implemented. Whilst exploring the obvious benefits of the new system, it simultaneously states that we must be mindful of the major inadequacies of ATC in many of the less-developed parts of the world and cautions that striving for financial gain from the concept must not be to the detriment of safety benefits. In discussing safety issues, with echoes of the recent past no doubt still resounding, the document emphasises a concern that new technologies should not be deployed merely because they are available. Instead, they should be implemented and utilised because they meet a valid operational demand. The document seeks decisions on new equipment based on sound operational and safety related needs, not on mere availability or novel value. Emphasis is again placed on the need for a human centred concept, a system where the human remains in active control and where automated tools support the controller, not supplant him.

Whilst it does run to some sixteen pages, the document is a well presented and reasonably concise statement of principles and policies whilst being very informative and readable. It was a novel approach to elucidation of a point of view on a very complex subject but it achieved its aim of clearly and forcefully detailing the Federation's approach to, and acceptance of, modern technologies, in this case, the CNS/ATM concept. Ten thousand copies were distributed to ICAO, the ILO and other international organisations, national administrations, airlines and individual controllers and the document was universally well received.

The mid nineties also saw another major debate centred on technology develop. For some time there had been growing calls for acceptance of a form of uninhibited travel, eliminating constraints on freedom of the skies. It became known as 'Free Flight' and variously provoked considerable support or outright condemnation.

Mostly the push for this concept came from the United States and its advocates demanded that the new technologies be implemented to allow them to depart at will, fly directly to destination with minimal ATC intervention and land without delay. With increased automation, superficially it seemed a reasonable request, given that modern gizmos such as TCAS would enable pilots to maintain their own separation and with sophisticated computerised flow metering ensuring a slot at destination. However, it completely ignored the lack of runway capacity at each end of the flight, airspace limitations, other limiting factors such as airline duster scheduling and the controller's need to retain situation awareness for when (not if) the system failed. Free flight must necessarily operate within controlled airspace and there must therefore be a concomitant need for ground based control and awareness of the flight. With increasing demands, such controller awareness could only be maintained with increased usage of technological aids such as data link and improved voice communications and more advanced conflict detection and resolution systems which, in themselves, seemingly would remove the need for increased pilot responsibility in this department. As the push gathered some momentum, commercial pilots themselves became hesitant about accepting separation responsibilities as they had become busy monitoring their automated cockpit functions and ensuring they were fully aware of just what the aircraft was doing. By late 1998, even some previously diehard Free Flight proponents were starting to query its absolute viability and were questioning some assumptions, including the far fetched one that saw Free Flight as the ultimate goal of the CNS/ ATM system.

As always, IFATCA wished to confront the issue and, in as many forums as possible, maintained its philosophy of retention of a fully ground-based ATC system with human centred automation ensuring maximum situational awareness. The Board saw that such thoughts also needed to be more publicly aired so that its full membership could be made fully aware of the issues and decided to devote an edition of The Controller to the subject. With an almost total concentration on the topic, edition number 4 of 1998 gave space to EVP Technical, EVP Professional, a controller's viewpoint, a pilot's perspective (IFALPA's ATS Committee Chairman) and others for their point of view. There was no repudiation of progress but rather a further confirmation of the need (and desire) to participate at all levels in the development of modern concepts - including some elements of the Free Flight concept - so that air traffic control remained the safe provider of the service that it was.

The 1999 conference took this a step further and themed the IFATCA Panel 'Conflict Detection and Resolution'. AS one of the panel presenters, EVP Technical Martin Cole provided an excellent treatise on 'The Future of Separation" in which he closely examined the potential for transferring separation responsibilities to the cockpit. Cole very cogently laid out the essential issues that need to be addressed before such a concept can become reality. He posed two questions, Who will be held ultimately liable when responsibility is being shared or delegated and an operational loss of separation occurs? And, when cockpit priorities or unusual circumstances require the pilot to hand back delegated separation responsibility, will the controller be in a position to revert to full separation assuredness? Emphasising that controllers are responsible for the overall efficiency of the system, Cole conjectured that airborne technology must be capable of providing the pilots with much more than simply the location and short term intent of aircraft immediately around them. The means must be provided so that pilots have available all the information that controllers have that enable them to make the considered decisions they do. These include the routes, type and destination of all the surrounding aircraft, airspace constraints, wide area weather considerations and even the workload capacities of the relevant ATC sectors. The pilots must then be in a position to take all these factors into consideration and be willing to make decisions that may not be the most efficient for their particular flight but that support the efficiency of the system overall. Cole already knew the answer to his unstated question on that scenario.

So, in one more way, IFATCA had openly approached the advance of technology and its potential for replacing the human air traffic controller. Again, in its experts' minds, the technology was found wanting, certainly for the foreseeable future and for the maintenance of an efficient ATM service. Nevertheless, the Santiago conference maintained the Federations proactive reputation and proposed a joint grouping with IFALPA (who also presented a paper to the Panel: 'Conflict Detection and Resolution - Their Place in the Air Navigation System') to examine the role of ATC with respect to delegation of separation to the cockpit.

In Europe the expression 'Free Routing' came to be used and, at an EGATS forum, a presenter (who shall remain nameless) suggested that this was a viable way to reduce delays in Europe. Apart from new equipment, re-training and more controllers, he said that all that was required was for controllers to open their eyes wider. Apparently, the more a controller opened his eyes, the more traffic he could handle! The philosophy was not accepted.

No review of IFATCA's approach to technology over the four decades would be complete without mention of the Federations chief think tank. Throughout its history and particularly during the nineties - unquestionably the most momentous period in air traffic control evolution - IFATCA's development of policy on many issues has been challenged to meet and stay ahead of the new technologies. Standing Committee 1 has been the body most responsible for meeting that challenge. Over the years, the Committee members have produced and provided to conference many articulate and informative papers and, in so doing, they have developed a logical sequence to aid delegates' understanding of the subject matter and policy evolution. Initially, the topic is introduced as information material allowing all aspects to be aired and considered. This allows a direction of thought to be determined and gives guidance to the committee members. Following on from this, a paper is presented which proposes policy adoption. Debate in Committee B either accepts or refines this proposal. Over the years, quite a number of leading edge papers have produced policies that were advanced for their time and they have been widely referred to and sometimes even adopted by external organisations, viz ICAO, in their entirety. A review of the papers and policies produced, especially in the sixties and even more so during the last ten years, reveals cogent and articulate thought which is a credit to the authors in particular and to SC1 in general. For IFATCA, SC1 has been an invaluable vehicle as a policy developer and it continues to produce relevant and timely policies and bring to the fore representatives, both of the highest quality and of inestimable value. In many regards, the chairmen of SC1 have been IFATCA's unsung heroes for it is they who, in managing the Federation's approach to technological change, have engendered the respect with which IFATCA is held today.

At the time of reading this, IFATCA will have progressed into its fifth decade and the world into a new millennium. For IFATCA, it has not been an easy journey and, one supposes, from the outset no one thought it would be a simple task. To begin with, to run an international organisation on a shoe-string budget and with purely voluntary staffwas a Herculean effort. To have done so at a time of incredible technological change and advancement and under a commitment of maximum involvement has been a daunting challenge.

From the humble beginnings and involvement of those twelve countries and few idealists in 1961, through the dedication and commitment of so many individuals over the ensuing forty years, IFATCA today has matured into a truly professional representative of the air traffic controller and his and her profession. Twelve founder associations have increased ten-fold to almost 120 members, three original corporate members have materialised - and metamorphosed - into more than thirty affiliates. Sparse technical input has developed into consistent and valued contribution in several disciplines to the world's aviation forums. The very raison d’être of the organisation, once questioned and even opposed, is now championed and its views and policies now sought, perhaps not universally but certainly by those who really matter.

IFATCA's aim has always been to positively establish operational experience and expertise as an integral aspect in system design, evaluation and implementation. As a key component of any ATS system, the controller - and his representative body - have fully supported the development and evolution of air traffic control systems. This includes a global ATS system. From the outset IFATCA recognised that the new system would need to be introduced in parallel to a currently operating system, and this whilst maintaining current safety standards and accepting continuously increasing traffic levels.

Realising that there would be manpower, time, cost and, importantly, acceptance constraints, IFATCA has always been a little less optimistic and a little more guarded than some as to the early introduction of CNS/ATM. Furthermore, the Federation could clearly see that the huge investment required - ground based, airborne and orbital - would drive the need for early financial returns and raise the potential for a proliferation of incompatible and/or differing systems for the same task. The experiences of Europe in the seventies and eighties have made IFATCA wary of such rapid and wide ranging acceptance of disparate technology. Additionally, the realities of the more under-developed regions hindering a global implementation has also figured in IFATCA's thinking and, compared to some, a more pragmatic approach and acceptance has featured as a result. That approach has also been considerably shaped by the perceived (one could say, proven) need for measured evolution rather than rapid revolution. It is true that controllers down the ages have complained that terrestrial technology has badly lagged behind airborne technology but at the same time they have never expressed a wish to see unproven facilities raced into use in a wild bid to catch up.

Today, the introduction of CNS/ATM is at such a stage that we can notice a maturing of ideas and a more sober and realistic approach to the implementation processes. Global Navcom 2000 provided some considerable vindication for the Federation when ICAO stated "... for many reasons, our FANS forefathers did not describe in great detail just how the new technologies would lead to a more effective ATM system". The tacit lament eloquently ascribes to the oft stated IFATCA belief that it should have been ATM/CNS from the outset!

IFATCA was born as radar became the necessary and accepted tool for control and as the jet age was beginning. Then, the infant IFATCA and its tyro representatives had to rapidly adapt and keep pace with change. Now, possessed of considerable maturity and a wealth of experience, IFATCA is again being forced to adapt and keep pace with even more radical and rapid change. The difference now, of course, is that the Federation has been able to make an input and has helped shape that change through its expertise being appreciated, accepted and applied in forums where once it was excluded.

Far from being a barrier to progress, IFATCA's concerns have more been calls for a measured, cooperative introduction of new procedures and new technology giving due regard to all aspects of such introduction for the ultimate benefit of all stakeholders. This was the approach of 'Tek' Tekstra and his fellow Schiphol controllers in 1957; this is the approach of the world's controllers in 2001.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aviation Week & Space Technology, March 8, 1976

Borins, Sandford E, 'The Language of the Skies: The Bilingual Air Traffic Control Conflict in Canada.' McGill-Queen's University Press. ISBN 0-7735-0403-6

Charlwood, Don., 'From Take-off to Touchdown -The Story of Air Traffic Control'.

Angus & Robertson. 1st ed. 1967. 2na ed. 1972. ISBN 0-642-01659-3 (Casebound).

ISBN 0-642-01620-8 (Paperback).

Eisner, Helmut., 'Square One. Air Traffic Control Cartoons.' W. Kramer & Co. 1977 

Encyclopaedia Britannia. Year Books 1972-1982

Future Vision Multimedia. ‘Australian Infopedia'.

Gilbert, Glen A., ‘Air Traffic Control: The Uncrowded Sky'. Smithsonian Institution, 1973. ISBN 0-87474-140-8

Howard, Fred. 'Wilbur and Orville. A Biography of the Wright Brothers.' Dover Publications, Inc. 1998 ISBN 0-486-40297-5

ICAO, Human Factors Digest No. 8 - Human Factors in Air Traffic Control. (Circular 241)

ICAO, Human Factors Digest No. 11 - Human Factors in CNS/ATM Systems. (Circular 249)

ICAO, Memorandum on The Story of the International Civil Aviation Organisation. ICAO, 1994

IFATCA. Annual Conference Reports, 1961 -2000

IFATCA, Circulars 1962-2000

IFATCA. Executive Board Meeting minutes.

IFATCA. Executive Council Meeting minutes.

IFATCA, The Controller magazine. Volumes 1 - 39

IFATCA, Vision Document. 1997

Isaac, Anne & Ruitenberg, Bert. 'Air Traffic Control: Human Performance Factors'.

Ashgate Publishing Ltd. 1999. ISBN 0-291-39854-5

Lapping, Brian. 'End of Empire', St. Martin's Press, 1985. ISBN 0-312-25071-1

MacLean, Stephen, 'Peter Allen: the Boy from Oz'. Random House, Australia. 1996.

ISBN 0-09-183052-4

Platt, John S. 'Heavy Weather'. (Extracts from 'Transmit')

Stackhouse, John. '... from the dawn of aviation. The Qantas Story.' Focus Publishing, Sydney. 1995. ISBN 1-875-359-23-0

'Transmit'. Magazine of the United Kingdom Guild of ATC Officers

CHAPTER 1

[1] Manus Dirigens - the Guiding Hand - is the motto of the Canadian ATC Association

[2] The Dutch aviation pioneer Anthony Fokker described 'Smithy* as "the greatest flyer in the world today".

[3] See Chapter 6 for a more complete history of the development of ICAO

CHAPTER 3

[1] When the New Zealand delegate, Keith Naisbit, announced 'present' at the opening plenary, other delegates were amazed that he had travelled so far and accorded him a standing ovation.

[2] The FAA representative, Mr. A.M.Waldin said "I have been very impressed with the quality of the exchanges which took place on some very controversial subjects. I believe it points up a growing maturity of IFATCA. Nearly every time I was about to inject a thought, one of your able delegates would rise and say it so much better than I could have anyway."

[3] Legal Seat, established in the Canton of Geneva.

[4] Of the twelve required to ratify the Convention, only nine did so.

[5] The first sentence is the original wording from 1961. The final sentence represents the amend- ment brought by the Canadian resolution in 1968.

[6] However, for reasons now unknown, this ballot was never conducted.

CHAPTER 4

[1] In fact, Endlich assumed responsibility for the original SC for Publications and Public Relations at the 1st annual conference in 1962, having already been elected Editor at the founding conference. In 1963 he became Chairman of the new SC2 thus contributing 11 years as Chairman of the Committees and 11 1/2 years as Editor.

[2] British Airways' Colin Hume was also earlier recognised at the 1997 conference with the Executive Board Award for services to the Federation.

[3] a Possibly one of the most important Executive Board meetings ever. See Chapter 9 for more detail.

CHAPTER 5

[1] Things didn't quite work out that way, however, and the first formal Executive Council meeting was not held until 1982. Lack of finances was the mason for the continuing postponement.

[2] The subject of the establishment of a permanent secretariat is more fully dealt with in Chapter 4 'High Finances' and Chapter 9.

[3] Remembering the politics of the day, with a conference in Israel now history, a door for associations from Arab countries was opened, them knowing that another conference in Israel in the near future, to which their governments would object, was slim. And in fact, three joined within the next three years.

[4] Larry Curry was well remembered as Chairman of Committee A over a number of years having stepped in, literally, with no notice in 1977. A former President of the U.K. Guild, Curry never held office for IFATCA but was a long time supporter and Chairman of SC1 for a number of years. He is well remembered for a wry sense of humour and fairness from the committee chair and he made a point of encouraging speakers from the smaller associations

[5] Joseph Heller, author of the classic black comedy Catch 22.

[6] Whilst a postal ballot on the ATCA/PATCO question was proposed in 1969, it never went ahead.

[7] Letter from Greek Commissioner for Civil Aviation to EVPP Avgoustis. March, 1981.

CHAPTER 6

[1] Art Cauty proved to be a long term IFATCA stalwart. He was chairman of the 1970 conference organising committee, liaison officer to ICAO for ten years and conference Committee B secretary on many occasions until well into the nineties.

[2] Permanent observer status eventually was granted by the European Air Navigation Planning Group to their Airspace and Traffic Management Group in 1984 after continued pressure by IFATCA.

[3] EVP ASP Report to Executive Board meeting, February, 1995.

[4] The first paper presented in 1993 was titled: ’The Effect of Automation of the ATM Function on ATC Skills - the Controller's Viewpoint'. By 1997, the emphasis in IFATCA's presentation had changed to: 'Readiness of ATC Organisations to Accept the CNS/ATM - What Still Needs to be Addressed?'

CHAPTER 7

[1] In fact, O'Doherty continued as Executive Secretary until July, 1990. His last Board meeting was in June that year in the town in Ireland where he lived. The 'Doc' was awarded the Scroll of Honour at the 1991 conference.

CHAPTER 8

[1] However, the French Member Association APCA (mostly representing Paris Orly and Le Bourget controllers) was itself initially viewed with some suspicion by the majority of French controllers in the ACCs, most of whom were members of the four trade unions representing them. Few of these controllers were members of APCA until their unions encouraged dual membership from 1964 and then in 1970 a convention between APCA and the trade unions' federation was signed.

[2] Ottokar Schubert spent several years during and after WWll as a prisoner of war in Russia and, as a result, spoke fluent Russian. Despite his POW experiences, when Aeroflot commenced operations to Vienna, he coached their aircrews in RTF English. His time in the camps made him a militant unionist and an ardent fighter for a better quality of life.

[3] Such a situation was repeated in Fiji in the eighties and led to the Fijian controllers forming their own breakaway association/union and then in the nineties establishing the world's first controller owned company providing ATC services.

[4] In fact, only 500 out of 2,000 French controllers participated in the strike. They were, however, mostly key personnel in Paris.

[5] This despite IFALPA's 1969 resolution "When the normalATC system of a region is not available, for safety reasons all commercial flying within its limits should cease."

[6] There were also major disputes in Israel, Mexico, Portugal, Spain and Sudan about this time.

[7] EVPT Hendriks and EVPA O'Doherty actually flew to Montreal and with President Henschler then drove to Washington, a distance of some 1,600 kilometres.

[8] The situation was alleviated somewhat, however, by a better traffic distribution through efficient flow management techniques.

[9] President Stuart was also arrested briefly for using a video camera outside the courthouse, which was within a religious precinct. It took 30 minutes of pleading by the accompanying Tunisian controllers before he was released, minus the video film.

[10] In 1999 IFATCA actually expelled a Member Association which so acted.

CHAPTER 9

[1] To date, the only truly privatised full ATS provider is Nay Canada. Established in 1996, Nay Canada is unique amongst providers in that it is a non-share capital corporation created under the Canada Corporations Act. Whilst it earns profits, these are recycled within the company to maintain low customer charges and finance capital expenditure. Around the world there are several privatised providers of ATS personnel contracted to provide ATS. Notable amongst these is Fiji's Strategic Air Services Limited, a company formed and wholly owned by the Fijian controllers' association.

[2] The controllers' association NZATCA merged with the pilots' organisation NZALPA in the eighties following government union size requirements. NZALPA is now the formal negotiating body for the controllers but has a separate ATC division specifically for the ATC members and which is largely autonomous.

[3] 1999 saw New Zealand further consolidate to just one ATCC. Over the same period, Australia consolidated their six ATC Centres to just two and the late nineties also saw Canada experiencing severe birthing pains with their newly privatised system.

[4] Whilst passenger figures declined significantly as a result of Iraqi threats against airlines of those countries taking part in operations against Iraq, civil traffic movements only dropped by around 5%.

[5] This representation came about because the first ATAG meeting was held in Hong Kong and the Board could not find a suitable available representative until we discovered that Shaw was holidaying in the city. With IFATCA, you are not even safe on holidays!

[6] However, it proved difficult for Chris Stock to make the bi-annual trip from the U.K. to the Pacific and DP continued with this group for a couple of more years.

[7] In 1995, ASECNA arranged English language training courses for their controllers in Egypt and South Africa.

[8] The response to the advertisement was such that ICEATCA did lose some of its members, thereby exacerbating the already critical staff shortage.

[9] This 'pay back' was only fair since it was DP Nell Vidler who instigated the Professional Panel in 1993 and committed EVPP to that involvement

[10] By the late nineties, inflation and increasing commitments ensured that another subscription rise was necessary and an across the board rise of 10% was voted in 1999.

[11] NOTAM: Notice to Airmen. Information provided to aircrew on matters relevant to their flight.

[12] ATM 2000+ Strategy Board: superseding and replacing EATCHIP.

[13] The SCTF consisted of Paul Robinson (DP and ex-chairman SC6), Dave Grace (chairman SC1), Neil Vidler (ex-DP) and Antonio Lanca (Portugal).

CHAPTER 10

[1] 1963 IFALPA Policy. (RAC Section 'T' Manual, Para 1.3)

[2] July, 1965 saw the first requirement for transponders for aircraft using the upper airspace of the London Southern Flight Information Region. Other countries were making similar plans and, at that time, it was expected that there would be complete SSR coverage over Western Europe by 1968.

[3] Report of IFATCA Representative to ICAO FEATS Group. Frankfurt Conference. May, 1989.

[4] Opening Statement by Dr. Kotaite FANS/1

[5] Special Committee on FANS. 4th Meeting Report

[6] IFATCA was actually omitted from the original CASITAF participants as we saw in Chapter 6

[7] However, some concerns over the reducing standards were being expressed by IFALPA. The pilots' Federation was worried that the reduction to 60nm lateral separation was based on insufficient data and that future standards would derive from the Tasman Sea methodologies. A June, 1995 meeting in London between ISPACG and IFALPA (and attended by IFATCA) resolved that matter but revealed the Federations' mutual concerns on the poor HF performance in the Pacific. The two Federations again emphasised that 50nm lateral separation was not acceptable without better communications. (It had long been IFATCA's position that VHF coverage was essential to support 50nm separation.) Without fully resolving the issue, the London meeting concluded with agreement that 50nm separation was acceptable under VHF coverage. The meeting had the side benefit of improving IFATCA-IFALPA communications with agreement to work more closely together on subjects of mutual interest.