TOPICS
TOPICS
Senators try a new tactic to reopen FAA's negotiations with controllers
Two senators have introduced a bill to address an issue that has stalled along with legislation reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration: the collective bargaining rights of FAA employees.
The Federal Aviation Administration Employee Retention Act (S. 3416), introduced last week by Sens. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., and James Inhofe, R-Okla., would require FAA and its unions to work with the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service if contract negotiations reach an impasse, or adopt a mutually agreed-upon process to break the deadlock. If those methods failed, then the negotiations would go to binding arbitration and the bargaining unit could require that union members ratify the resulting agreement.
The FAA reauthorization bill contains similar language, but that measure has been stalled since May. Lawmakers have been unable to reach agreement on fees and other mechanisms to fund the agency.
Currently, FAA's administrator can impose the agency's final offer on a union if negotiations stall. In 2006, then-FAA administrator Marion Blakey imposed new pay and work rules on the National Air Traffic Controllers Association. Many controllers said those rules contributed to their decisions to retire, thinning ranks at some of the nation's busiest airports.
"The Bush administration's disregard of FAA workers' rights has put the safety of our aviation system at risk," Lautenberg said. "The administration's heavy-handed tactics have forced experienced air traffic controllers out the door in record numbers. It's time we treat these workers with the respect they deserve."
Inhofe, a pilot, called the implementation of the pay and work rules "a very unfair process," and said his support for the bill grew out of his experiences with FAA employees. The bill would nullify the pay and work rules under which controllers have worked for almost two years and reinstate the terms of their last ratified contract until NATCA and FAA could negotiate a new one.
Restarting negotiations and ending the pay and work rules have been among NATCA's highest priorities. The union's political action committee contributed $4,000 to Lautenberg and $2,000 to Inhofe as of July 30 in the 2008 election cycle, and has made substantial contributions to Lautenberg's campaign dating back to 2002, when he returned to the Senate after retiring in 2000.
Both NATCA president Pat Forrey and Professional Aviation Safety Specialists President Tom Brantley praised the legislation, saying it would guarantee good-faith bargaining in the future.
"Passage of this bill will provide the incentive for controllers to remain on the boards so the safety of the flying public can be restored," Forrey said.
COMMENTS
- What the public does not understand here is that this was NOT a cost savings initiative by the FAA...it was a first and only a union busting tactic...the proof is the fact that the first line superviors who throughout all of government normally make about 5% more than those they DIRECTLY supervise. In a remarkable trick, the FAA left the first line and all those abouve them OUT OF this so called cost savings effort....so now because controllers above the new pay band which was instantly 95% of all controllers on the books as of Sept. 2006 are now 20-30% behind the pay of those supes...in other words...about 11,000 or more controllers unlike the rest of the 3 million FED and military workers..have not gotten COLAS since essentially January of 2006..that was their last pay raise. The FAA has rewarded these supes with this exemption thinking they would need them if there was a strke...which NATCA will never do. So this was a union busting/anti worker bush admin move...not a cost saving move as they so loudly promote...nowhere in all of government will you find such disparity between worker pay and first line supe'pay. I had to get out to get my COLAS under CSRS....it was a losing proposition staying in the FAA after 40 years....Those last two years from every point of view were the worse in my entire career. I am not alone in that opinion either...Hopefully Obama will do something about this. Antony Posted November 26, 2008 5:09 PM
- Aside from the labor issue- whether you believe that unions are good or evil- there is one burning fact that cannot be ignored. The current (and past ) FAA management KNEW , without a doubt that large numbers of controllers would be retiring. This is a result of the PATCO action and Reagan's reaction. The people hired in then are rapidly approaching Mandatory retirement. The FAA "know-it-alls" seemed to have forgotten this fact. It is public record that they KNEW they would be needing from 3000 to 6000 personnell. They hired few (if any) in the recent years knowing full well that it takes YEARS to train controllers. Add to that a couple years seasoning before they are effective and safe! Now after they have pissed off their workforce;they are trying to hire "off the street" and pay low wages! That is P Poor management ANY way you cut it! FAA technician Posted September 3, 2008 11:31 AM
- But seriously folks. Where was the impetus to negotiate in good faith when the FAA always knew (make that "eventually figured out") that they could offer squat and say take it or leave it. Congress doesn't have the time or the unity of purpose to refute the one-sided presentation of how negotiations went and finally broke down. If you've watched any of the reauthorization sessions you'll realize that this legislation is only being introduced because Congress now knows, without a shadow of a doubt, that the FAA was nothing short of disingenuous. Joe Controller Posted August 11, 2008 8:12 PM
