SEARCH
Imposed FAA Contract Could Threaten Air Safety |
The Federal Aviation Administration is poised to impose unfair work rules and pay cuts that could compromise air safety and worsen existing staff shortages among air traffic controllers.
After demanding pay cuts of up to 30 percent and inflexible work schedules, the FAA declared an impasse in contract negotiations with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) on April 5. Unless Congress acts by June 5, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey will impose the agency’s last offer, which could result in as many as 4,000 controllers, about 25 percent of the workforce, choosing to retire.
“Controllers take their responsibility to the flying public very seriously, and we feel it’s vitally important that travelers are informed about the possible ramifications of this contract situation,” says NATCA President John Carr. “The FAA has a big staffing problem on its hands already. This new round of retirements would create safety and delay problems.”
Ed Wytkind, president of the AFL-CIO’s Transportation Trades Department, says Blakey is misinterpreting current law in maintaining she has the right to submit the impasse to Congress, which has 60 days—until June 5—to reject FAA’s final offer or the agency has the right to impose it on workers.
Wytkind wrote to Blakey on May 1, telling her:
It is time for the FAA to end the rhetoric, pull back its impasse submission currently before Congress and return to the bargaining table. Collective bargaining only works when both sides negotiate fairly and reasonably. The strategy being deployed by the FAA is neither fair nor reasonable.
NATCA is supporting H.R. 5449, a compromise bill sponsored by Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio), which has bipartisan support. The bill would allow the normal resolution of the contract dispute available to other federal employees. House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) has promised a vote on the bill next week when Congress returns from its Memorial Day recess, says NATCA Executive Vice President Ruth Marlin.
If the FAA is able to impose its unfair contract on NATCA, Wytkind expects the agency will try to do the same thing to other FAA employees, represented by the Professional Airways Systems Specialists (PASS). Currently, the FAA is at impasse with four of PASS’s five bargaining units, according to Abby Bernstein, PASS’s legislative director. The FAA could submit these disputes to Congress at any time, which would allow the agency to impose the contract without further bargaining.
The FAA dragged its feet and refused to negotiate in good faith, Bernstein says. “The system gives them an advantage. They don’t have to negotiate—they declare an impasse to Congress, and if Congress doesn’t act, they can impose a contract.”
Many of the provisions that PASS is seeking in its contract already are included in other collective bargaining agreements with the FAA, Bernstein says. Some of these issues include child care subsidies, changes in work schedules and on-the-job training.
“PASS intends to negotiate in good faith with the FAA and expects the agency to do the same,” Bernstein says. “Quite simply, PASS is looking for fairness: a fair contract developed through a fair process that benefits all parties involved.”
Marlin concurs with Wytkind that Blakey is incorrect in maintaining that a 1996 law, which gave the FAA flexibility in personnel rules, allows the agency to unilaterally impose a contract after submitting it to Congress. The labor management practices and rules available to other federal employees allow disputes to be submitted to the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP), a presidentially appointed group that resolves federal contract impasses. But Blakey claims the FSIP has no jurisdiction, Marlin says.
“When you let one side write a contract, you’re going to have problems,” Wytkind says. “Both sides have to be at the table.”
The situation in our nation’s air traffic control towers already is tenuous, with the FAA being short of 1,000 controllers, Marlin says. Should the FAA impose its offer, it would exacerbate an already critical staffing shortage and likely lead to serious flight delays, she says. NATCA estimates that by next year, one in four controllers might retire, rather than continue to perform their jobs.
A recent NATCA study shows that imposing the FAA proposal would have serious and dangerous impact on the air traffic control system.
With control towers already short of staff, controllers are forced to work overtime to make sure air travel is safe. The FAA claims the workers make enough money to be able to absorb a 30 percent pay cut. However, a big factor in controllers’ pay is forced overtime. On average in some locations, controllers can be assigned 52 overtime shifts per year just to keep up with the huge number of planes in the air, Marlin says.
The result is massive fatigue across the air traffic control system. Overtime and fatigue are the controllers’ big issues in the contract negotiations, Marlin adds. NATCA has warned FAA repeatedly that it must address the issue of too few controllers, she says. The FAA has suffered net losses of controllers every year for the past three years. It takes three to five years to train a new controller, and not enough controllers are being trained to make up the shortage that exists now. Should more controllers retire in 2007, the shortage of qualified controllers will create a major crisis in air travel and safety, Marlin says.
“For this administration, safety is not part of their vocabulary. Only money is,” she says.
In February, the AFL-CIO Executive Council cited the short staffing and the acrimony from an imposed contract as two of the “dangerous” consequences of the FAA’s short-sighted policies:
The FAA is pursuing a dangerous course. Imposing contracts with no real bargaining will only create additional acrimony and distrust among FAA employees who are so critical to the safe and efficient movement of aircraft. It is unconscionable that the FAA would be so short-sided to put cost-savings ahead of safety. Undoubtedly, the FAA’s actions will lead to increasing problems with employee retention and recruitment. If the FAA is allowed to force its unfair contract terms on employees, the exodus of skilled employees will outweigh any recruitment efforts. At a time when the air traffic controller workforce ranks are facing a wave of mandatory retirements and other critical personnel such as inspectors are already woefully understaffed, the FAA’s position is not only unfair, but risky.
No Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
