In July, a Qantas turboprop narrowly avoided a collision with a Qantas Boeing 737 on the runway at Sydney Airport. The incident, the first of six near‑misses in a month, has drawn attention to the fatigue‑management system used by Airservices Australia.
Fatigue ratings reveal staffing strain
According to an internal log obtained by Reuters, five of the ten controllers on duty were rated “H” for high fatigue risk, one was rated “M” for medium risk, and one was rated “L” for low risk. The remaining three controllers were not assigned a fatigue rating. Two of the three controllers directly involved in the near‑miss were flagged as high‑fatigued, while the third was medium‑fatigued.
A shift manager described the situation as “a bit insane,” noting that the high‑fatigue ratings made the crew “pretty rattled.” The manager’s comments were captured in an internal call with an air‑traffic‑management director.
How the fatigue‑management system works
The system does not measure actual tiredness; instead it uses an automated assessment of workload, scheduling and other factors to estimate risk. Controllers with higher ratings may receive longer breaks, reduced traffic loads, or early shift termination, subject to approval by shift managers or directors.
Civil Air President Scott Nugent, whose union represents about 85 % of Australian controllers, said the number of high‑fatigue ratings has risen as controllers work longer hours with fewer days off. “Short staffing leads to people working more overtime, having fewer days off, working under more pressure and fatigue increasing,” Nugent said.
Staffing shortages and overtime pressures
Airservices Australia reported unusually high short‑term absences in Sydney over a six‑week period ending August 28, which hampered its ability to fill operational shifts. Controllers told Reuters that despite high‑fatigue ratings, they are often urged to take extra shifts, and few are removed from duty for fatigue concerns.
Under the agency’s enterprise agreement, controllers can work up to ten consecutive shifts and a maximum of 80 hours during a continuous run. By comparison, Canadian controllers may work up to eight consecutive days and U.S. controllers up to six, according to union officials.
International context
Australia is not alone in facing controller shortages. In the United States, overtime spending for air‑traffic controllers rose more than 300 % between 2013 and 2024, reaching $200 million last year, according to a U.S. National Academies of Sciences report.
The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is investigating all six recent near‑misses to determine any common safety issues. Airservices Australia declined to comment further, citing the ongoing investigation.
Original reporting: Appleton, WI News Feed (HLL/CB) — read the source article.
