Step Up for Aviation Labor

[GIVDrvr]

The present Agenda for the FAA includes privitization and user fees. These are all incremental steps at dismantling the greatest aviation system in the world...not perfect but the best. As aviation labor organizations are taking it on the chin nationwide I think its entirely appropriate to for all aviators to step up and defend the ATC folks that stood their posts during 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, and your last inflight emergency. See below:

[FONT=Arial Black,LB Helvetica Black][SIZE=+1]Help for air traffic controllers[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Verdana,Trebuchet MS,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva]WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Transportation Trades Department (TTD) of the AFL-CIO has requested help in telling Congress to stop the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) from trampling workers' bargaining rights. [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana,Trebuchet MS,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva]Earlier this month, the FAA broke off contract talks with the air traffic controllers union -- NATCA. Instead of good-faith bargaining, the FAA has chosen to pursue a twisted interpretation of the law to unilaterally impose contract terms on its workers. Forcing contracts on your workers isn't true bargaining. And if the FAA gets away with it, members of the two other AFL-CIO unions at the FAA may face the same fate. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Trebuchet MS,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva]Members of Congress can do something about it, but they must hear from transportation workers nationwide. UTU members can help in urging Congress to pass sensible legislation that simply forces the parties to resolve their differences at the bargaining table and sends the unresolved issues to binding arbitration. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Trebuchet MS,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva]Click on the following link to tell Congress it's time for our elected officials to stand up for fairness and the bargaining rights of FAA workers. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana,Trebuchet MS,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva]http://63.66.87.48/cweb4/index.cfm?orgcode=ttd&hotissue=42[/FONT]

 

[Say Again Over]

I saw something posted concerning the average salary, what is the average 10 year guy making, if it's anything near what was posted, I'd like to know who will pay?

 

[GIVDrvr]

My post was not intended to create a forum on the merits of the various positions. Employers should not be exploiting system loopholes to avoid fair negotiating...this applies to all aviation trades. As every professional knows you are only worth what you can negotiate.

 

[Hold West]

I saw something posted concerning the average salary, what is the average 10 year guy making, if it's anything near what was posted, I'd like to know who will pay?

I'm going to guess a 10-year controller right now might be averaging around $110k. Raw guess.

Who will pay? Who should pay - all of us that benefit from having a safe, efficient air traffic system, which is anyone who works in aviation, in or around an airport, anyone who flys anywhere in this country, or whose loved ones fly... in short just about everyone. Which we all do, courtesy of Uncle Sam.

I complain about paying taxes, too, like everyone does. But you know what? There are a lot of things I don't mind paying for. I could list them all out here, but you can figure them as well as I can - police protection, fire protection, the schools my daughters go to, you name it. If it's for the public good, I'll chip in without complaint. I am certainly biased, but I think ATC fits in the "public good" category.

Now, if the FAA has its way, all of our pay will be cut. You'd better get it straight right now that that's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to their agenda. Once they get the overhead cut way back by pay reductions and work rule changes, they will be looking to contract out the entire ATC system. Can you say "user fees"? Who will pay for it then... you will.

 

[Say Again Over]

Thanks, a lot different than the figure I had heard. Personally I am completely against any privatization plan, I would think most pilots would agree.

 

[sky37d]

I am completely against any privatization plan, I would think most pilots would agree.

Me too. That is, I agree, I am against privatization. I hear that private industry can do it cheaper. If that is the case, why not ask them how, and do it inside the federal government. Of course, there is an upside.
PATCO went on strike, and Reagan fired them, because gov't workers can't strike. Now, if it went private, there would be nothing preventing 'job action' over any labor agreement. I can see it now, Chicago TRACON files a grievance, mgmt (the private company running ATC) doesn't respond, so instead of showing up at first shift, all the first shift people stand outside with their picket signs. Now, that would be cool.:beer:

Unfortunately, at that point, no one will remember that the FEDS sold us all out to help some of their buddies get rich. :smash:

 

[Hold West]

Thanks, a lot different than the figure I had heard. Personally I am completely against any privatization plan, I would think most pilots would agree.

That's because you've heard what the FAA is spinning on the topic. They've quoted a bunch of wildly differing numbers as high as $236K. One reson their numbers are so inflated is they count everything they put in as pay. For example, they count the employer portion of FICA and Medicare taxes as part of our income.

Yes there are controllers out there making $180K or so. They are in the busiest facilities, working lots of overtime (I don't count working OT as a benefit, just for the record, I'd rather have the day off), living in high cost of living areas, assigned to difficult facilities. I think we should be paying folks in NY TRACON or Center more than they get in Omaha. If a guy wants to do a stint in ORD tower, good job, he should be paid more than someone sitting in Fargo.

The FAA thinks that we should all be cut back and leveled. Incentive to move up to busier facilities would be destroyed. The staffing crisis will deepen, and the only way out will be to contract it all out.

If you oppose eventual privatization, go to www.fairfaa.com and use the tools there to advise Congress of your opposition to the FAA's labor practice.

And remember, we are not asking Congress to preserve our paychecks status quo. We are smply asking that the final step be binding arbitration, not the FAA's imposition of a "nontract".

Both the FAA's and NATCA's last offers mean, to me personally, that I've seen my last payraise. Thus, regardless, I'm exiting in 22 months when I'm eligible.

 

[sky37d]

Speaking of that, I met someone who was 8 days from retirement when Lockheed took over FSS.

 

[GIVDrvr]

Really the important thing to capture here is not what anyone's W2 says but this is just the first step of a process that will ultimately adversely affect every NAS user. The FAA has already approached Goldman Sachs about floating a bond issue to get the ATC system off the govt books, then we get user fees, and the then the entire system goes on the block. Safety to the lowest bidder. When user costs go up an entire segment of private aviation gets priced out of the market and with them go pilot jobs...maybe yours. Or maybe the the same call center in the Phillipines that keeps you waiting for 20 minutes to find out what happened to your overdue Sams Club rebate is now the outsourced location for FSS and IFR releases. Far fetched? Maybe. Maybe not. Nothing is off the table when profit is the motive instead of safety. I sure hope my local fire dept never faces this dilemma. Imagine this:

Dear Mr. Citizen:
We are sorry your home and your lifelong possessions were detroyed by fire last night. Only one firefighter was assigned to duty since our statistical analysis showed that relatively few fires occur on Wednesday nights at 0300 a.m. We had to cut back somewhere in order to deploy our resources effectively and ensure a profit for our stockholders. We hope in the future to serve your fire defense needs at a more appropriate time. Best of Luck.

John Doe, CEO S.U.C. Systems Underwriters Corporation.

Step up now or Kiss It Goodbye.

 

[sky37d]

Your post reminds me of something that happened in Australia, last year I think, where the tower shut down because the one and only controller left to go to the bathroom.

Another time, the tower shut down, again in Australia, when the relief shift person failed to show up. The on duty controller locked the doors and went home.

 

[wmuflyguy]

Your post reminds me of something that happened in Australia, last year I think, where the tower shut down because the one and only controller left to go to the bathroom.

Another time, the tower shut down, again in Australia, when the relief shift person failed to show up. The on duty controller locked the doors and went home.

That would be pretty awesome at like LGA or ORD.

 

[Metro752]

Walk out May 1st

 

[big_al]

I hear that private industry can do it cheaper.

ask the "private industry" how much they would charge to send a letter

 

[big_al]

Dear Mr. Citizen:
We are sorry your home and your lifelong possessions were detroyed by fire last night. Only one firefighter was assigned to duty since our statistical analysis showed that relatively few fires occur on Wednesday nights at 0300 a.m. We had to cut back somewhere in order to deploy our resources effectively and ensure a profit for our stockholders. We hope in the future to serve your fire defense needs at a more appropriate time. Best of Luck.

John Doe, CEO S.U.C. Systems Underwriters Corporation.

Step up now or Kiss It Goodbye.

exactly! It boggles the mind how many people fail to realize this

 

[GVFlyer]

Thanks, a lot different than the figure I had heard. Personally I am completely against any privatization plan, I would think most pilots would agree.

I agree with you that US ATC privatization would be disasterous.

In the interest of fair plan here is the other side of the story. The FAA news release says average controller pay and benefits total $166K per annum.

http://www.faa.gov/news/news_story.cfm?contentKey=3848


The Wall Street Journal article states that average controller pay is $161K while New York controllers may make over $200K.

http://www.careerjournal.com/salaryhiring/industries/airlines/20050405-mccartney.html



GV

 

[GIVDrvr]

Once again this is not about equal time. But it is about FAIR PLAY which is binding arbitration. If a 30 percent pay cut is the product at least it is decided fairly. If I could email the bankruptcy court to support any one of the legacy carriers that have been on the cutting side while management is on the cashing side i would do that to.

FWIW from what I've heard those salary figures cited include the Agency's contribution to medicare,FICA, 401ks,etc. Its not like controllers at TEB are cashing 160K paychecks. They are not.

 

[Hold West]

Someone in one of these threads asked how to save money, then, in the FAA without cutting controllers' pay?

I was thinking about that last night, and came up with something worth mentioning. I work in a medium-size facility with about 80 controllers. To "manage" that operation we have:

1 Air Traffic Manager
1 Assistant Air Traffic Manager
1 Support Manager
2 Operations Managers
8 Staff Specialists
10 Operations Supervisors
5 Traffic Management Coordinators

Yep, 28 people to oversee 80. And those are just the air traffic management types, those who were controllers and whose job requires controller experience. I am not counting our tech ops wizards (understaffed too) or our automation support folks or our office administration people.

So where do you think we should start cutting?

 

[Vector4fun]

Someone in one of these threads asked how to save money, then, in the FAA without cutting controllers' pay?

How about making the idiots in Management who squandered One and a Half Billion Dollars on the Advanced Automation System, with absolutely NOTHING to show for it, pay it all back? That's right folks, according to the GAO, the FAA spent $2.5 BILLION dollars back in the 1990s on the AAS, and only $1.1 Billion went towards projects that were NOT cancelled. $1.5 Billion went right down a rat-hole somewhere. Now the Administrator is going to impasse on a contract with her largest Union over $400-500 million spread over five years.


$1.5 Billion down a rat hole, pat the suits on the back, re-decorate their offices in Washington D.C., pass out some awards.

NATCA offers $1.4 Billion in concessions, and the Administrator turns that down and insists on $1.9 Billion; going to impasse, destroying morale, cutting controller pay, possibly causing havoc with the ATC system over $500 million spread over five years.

For all you airline pilots:

If an unfavorable contract causes 2000 controllers to elect to retire in the next two years, (almost 4000 will be eligible, I'm being conservative) and the resulting controller shortage causes just a 10% increase in delays for the Airlines, those delays will cost your airlines that half million bucks we're talking about each and every one of those five years. That's using the ATA's own figures on costs of ATC delays. The Administrator is going to the matt to save the FAA $500 million over five years, but it could very easily cost the airlines and other users more than five times that amount in extra delays.

BTW, I personally became eligible to retire last summer. (Thank God)

I was thinking about that last night, and came up with something worth mentioning. I work in a medium-size facility with about 80 controllers. To "manage" that operation we have:

1 Air Traffic Manager
1 Assistant Air Traffic Manager
1 Support Manager
2 Operations Managers
8 Staff Specialists
10 Operations Supervisors
5 Traffic Management Coordinators

Yep, 28 people to oversee 80.

That's just about the same ratio at my facility. One chief for every three indians. But that's just in the field. There's another thousand or more chiefs running around in the Regional and National Offices.

So where do you think we should start cutting?

About half the MSS grade positions, natch.

 

[PC800]

...[FONT=Verdana,Trebuchet MS,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva]the FAA has chosen to pursue a twisted interpretation of the law to unilaterally impose contract terms on its workers.[/FONT]

Um, no. While you'll seldom find me defending anything the FAA does, that's not what's happening here.

Most government employees don't have the right to negotiate for wages or benefits, and are severely limited with regard to what they can negotiate with regard to working conditions. Government employees accept these terms as a condition of employment, and in return receive adequate salaries, generous benefits, and job security that is (for the most part) unmatched in the private sector.

That was the case with air traffic controllers, too, back in the days of PATCO-- and we all know what happened when PATCO staged a strike in an attempt to force the government to negotiate items that were, by law, non- negotiable.

However, in 1996, the Clinton administration agreed to give NATCA an unprecedented amount of leeway (in comparison to other government employee unions) in negotiating wages, benefits, and working conditions-- under the condition that, in the event impasse was reached, Congress would be offered the opportunity to resolve the situation. If they failed to do so, the last, best FAA offer would be imposed.

At that time, NATCA had a choice-- they could continue to have the same rights, responsibilities and options as all other government unions, or they could accept the Clinton administration offer, including the imposition of the FAA contract offer in case of an impasse unresolved by Congress.

They CHOSE to accept the new deal-- this is no "twisted interpretation" of the law-- they knew that was the deal, and they agreed to it.

Now, understandably, they don't like it, and they're asking Congress to change the rules so they can get out of it. Maybe Congress will (and I hope they do, since a lot of my former colleagues at ORD are making such big money these days that I can't buy a meal when we get together <g>). But, to be fair, Congress would be totally within their rights to say fine, we'll let you out of the deal you made in 1996-- all you have to do is agree to work under the same rules as all the other government employees.

If that were to happen, trust me, NATCA couldn't agree to that "last, best" FAA offer fast enough!

 

[GIVDrvr]

Um, no. While you'll seldom find me defending anything the FAA does, that's not what's happening here.

Um, Yes. That is exactly what is happening here. The current contract contains an 'evergreen clause' that provides for the entire contract to continue in force until another Agreement in reached between the parties. The FAA is pursuing a policy that 224 Representatives and 37 Senators have already agreed is unfair. See HR4755 and S2201 both searchable at www.loc.gov

Most government employees don't have the right to negotiate for wages or benefits, and are severely limited with regard to what they can negotiate with regard to working conditions.

I see. I will advise AFSCME and their 1.4 million govt employee members that their negotiated rights no longer exist.

At that time, NATCA had a choice-- they could continue to have the same rights, responsibilities and options as all other government unions, or they could accept the Clinton administration offer, including the imposition of the FAA contract offer in case of an impasse unresolved by Congress.

Funny I can find nothing in the Congressional Record regarding NATCA being given any choices. Title 49 s. 40122 concerning FAA Reform is a public law passed by both Houses of Congress and signed by the President...levels of Govt well above even the most ambitious Union activist's reach. This legislation also containes numerous requirements for the Administrator to negotiate changes to the personnel policy...which she has conveniently overlooked.

They CHOSE to accept the new deal-- this is no "twisted interpretation" of the law-- they knew that was the deal, and they agreed to it.

Once again they 'chose' the Agreement that the Parties signed and ratified. The one the Administrator thought was good enough to ask the Union to extend for two years in 2004. The one that has the 'evergreen clause' she reaffirmed with her signature in 2004. And the one that 261 Members of Congress have stood up to defend.

But, to be fair, Congress would be totally within their rights to say fine, we'll let you out of the deal you made in 1996-- all you have to do is agree to work under the same rules as all the other government employees.

I sure the Administrator and you will have a chuckle over your 'fairness' at her weekly bridge game. Also funny that course of action you suggest has never been floated by anyone else. ATC, like law enforcement, or fire fighters is unique working environment. Each of those employee groups have negotiated their own unique set of work rules and have unique retirement plans as well
​