Narrative:

The midshift policy scares me. We are given 2 controllers; no supervisor and told to both remain in the operating quarters for the bulk of the shift. Per a recent memo in our read file our management has instructed us to take 'reasonable' breaks and stagger our breaks to meet the traffic conditions. The problem is that there isn't really a good time to take anything more than a small meal break. We are making control decisions while fatigued. If there are admitted periods of 'substantial traffic'; then why are there only 2 controllers scheduled? Perhaps 3 controllers or a supervisor would meet the traffic demand. Two controllers who are tired seems to be a recipe for bad things. We have been told that management has asked for additional staffing on the midshift; but our time on position doesn't support it. They are asking us to work more hours on position on a mid than a day or swing; and that seems very wrong to me. Considering the fatigue memorandum of understanding and national attention of about 5 years ago; someone needs to address why we only have 2 people scheduled for a mid when it is one of our busier overall shifts. We were encouraged to take fatigue breaks and sleep at work on the midshift before; yet this local policy seems to be in direct conflict with the fatigue guidance and common sense. Being scheduled for 2 midshifts at the end of our workweek seems to be normal here. To clarify this controllers are scheduled a swing; day; day; mid; mid week due to staffing.please take a look at this and ask if it aligns at all with the fatigue guidance that was jointly put out before. Further; take a look and see if it passes a common sense test. Additional staffing is needed on the midshift and at this facility in general.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZAU Controller stated that having two people scheduled for the midnight shift is insufficient for staffing.

Narrative: The midshift policy scares me. We are given 2 controllers; no supervisor and told to both remain in the operating quarters for the bulk of the shift. Per a recent memo in our read file our management has instructed us to take 'reasonable' breaks and stagger our breaks to meet the traffic conditions. The problem is that there isn't really a good time to take anything more than a small meal break. We are making control decisions while fatigued. If there are admitted periods of 'substantial traffic'; then why are there only 2 Controllers scheduled? Perhaps 3 Controllers or a Supervisor would meet the traffic demand. Two Controllers who are tired seems to be a recipe for bad things. We have been told that management has asked for additional staffing on the midshift; but our time on position doesn't support it. They are asking us to work more hours on position on a mid than a day or swing; and that seems very wrong to me. Considering the fatigue Memorandum Of Understanding and national attention of about 5 years ago; someone needs to address why we only have 2 people scheduled for a mid when it is one of our busier overall shifts. We were encouraged to take fatigue breaks and sleep at work on the midshift before; yet this local policy seems to be in direct conflict with the fatigue guidance and common sense. Being scheduled for 2 midshifts at the end of our workweek seems to be normal here. To clarify this controllers are scheduled a Swing; Day; Day; Mid; Mid week due to staffing.Please take a look at this and ask if it aligns at all with the fatigue guidance that was jointly put out before. Further; take a look and see if it passes a common sense test. Additional staffing is needed on the midshift and at this facility in general.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.