Lawmakers, air traffic controllers wage war against privatization
Officials at the National Air Traffic Controllers Association plan to challenge the new "commercial" designation assigned to air traffic control activities last week in the last round of 2002 job inventories.
"We just feel that we are an inherently governmental function and, if we're not, then who is, is the question we ask," NATCA spokesman Doug Church said Wednesday. "We believe that we fit the definition of an 'activity that is so intimately linked to the public interest as to mandate performance by government personnel.'"
Under the 1998 Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act, agencies are required to identify federal jobs that are "commercial in nature" and could be performed by contractors. The Office of Management and Budget reviews the lists and periodically releases them to Congress and the public. In the final round of 2002 FAIR Act lists air traffic control activities were designated as Category A commercial, a move that NATCA officials said opens the door to privatization of air traffic control jobs. Though Category A activities are not subject to competitive outsourcing, they could be shifted into another category that would allow the administration to compete them. Several hundred professional airways system specialists jobs-all union-slipped from Category A to Category B last year.
"For this administration to federalize airport security workers and then take steps toward privatizing air traffic control is not only a stark, head-scratching contradiction in policy, it's the continuation of a march toward the erosion of safety in our skies," NATCA President John Carr said.
In a Dec. 19 memorandum to employees, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey said the agency would not pursue competitive sourcing for air traffic controllers because they represent a "core competency" to the agency.
While NATCA is challenging the "commercial" designation, several lawmakers are attacking the measure through legislation and appeals to the administration.
On Wednesday Rep. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., told members of the House Transportation Subcommittee on Aviation that privatization of air traffic control was not an option. A day earlier, Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., introduced S. 338, a bill that would change the air traffic control designation from commercial to inherently governmental, and protect those jobs from competitive outsourcing.
"These men and women perform a critical government function," Lautenberg testified Tuesday before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. "It should not be farmed out to private contractors."
On Jan. 30, Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minn., sent a letter signed by 47 other House lawmakers to President Bush asking that he reconsider the commercial designation of air traffic control activities.
"They can say all they want about 'Well, we have you on commercial designation reason code A,' but certainly that's not a permanent spot and we are very skeptical about what the future holds in terms of that changing," Church said. "We are looking for some long-term assurances here and we're not finding them from OMB, so we're looking to Capitol Hill and using every means we have at our disposal to have this overturned."
Proponents of privatizing the air traffic control system challenge NATCA's position.
"The practice in much of the world is air traffic control is not seen as inherently governmental," said Robert Poole, director of the Reason Public Policy Institute's transportation program. "One of the explicit reasons for doing so [privatizing] has been to put them at arms length. Air traffic control…is the only part of the system that is provided by and regulated by the same entity. These functions should be separated."
FAA currently uses contractors to staff 214 low-activity towers in smaller communities.