Audit questions supervisor cuts at FAA

The Federal Aviation Administration needs a better plan for cutting one-third of its supervisors, the Transportation Department's Inspector General said in a new audit released earlier this week.

Under the FAA's recent labor-management agreement with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, the agency will be cutting 600 to 700 supervisors, expanding the supervisor-to-controller ratio from 1-to-7 to 1-to-10. The supervisory cuts will help offset the costs of a better pay package for controllers included in the agreement, as well as address controller complaints that there are too many supervisors at the agency. The cuts will come through attrition, and no layoffs will be necessary, the FAA says. No timetable has been set for the reductions.

The lack of a timetable is part of the problem with the FAA's agreement, the IG said in its audit report. The IG is also concerned with the FAA's plan to rely more heavily on controllers-in-charge (CICs). CICs are shift leaders pulled from the ranks of controllers to cover air traffic operations when supervisors are absent. Under FAA's agreement, the lower number of supervisors will be offset by giving more duties to CICs. But the audit found FAA had not designed a plan for assigning more supervisory responsibilities to the CICs.

"FAA's agreement to reduce the number of air traffic control supervisors will not have an adverse impact on the safety of air traffic operations, if FAA first identifies and implements the duties that CICs will assume from supervisors," the IG said, adding that CICs do not currently perform many supervisory roles. "A CIC does not call a controller in for overtime, make on-the-spot corrections or provide over-the-shoulder evaluations while overseeing operations."

The IG is concerned because the last time FAA reduced its supervisory ranks, operational errors increased. From 1992 to 1995, FAA scaled back its supervisory ranks as part of the National Performance Review's push to make the supervisory ratio 1-to-15 governmentwide. During the same period, operational errors increased between four and 14 percent. FAA hired a private contractor in 1995 to study the increase in errors, and the contractor linked the increase to the management cuts.

During that period, CICs were not given additional responsibilities to counter the supervisory reductions.

FAA officials agree with the IG report, and are working on a plan to increase CICs' responsibilities. The IG warned that CICs must also be held accountable for incidents that happen during their shifts.

The IG also warned that FAA must not be a stickler with its 1-to-10 supervisory ratio plan, since some air traffic facilities require more supervisors than others. The Federal Managers Association, which represents FAA supervisors, agreed.

"The supervisory ratio comes from the National Performance Review's recommendations," said Mark Gable, legislative director for the Federal Managers Association. "That's not hard science. It's not based on the needs of the FAA. It's based on what the NPR said."

The managers' association is also worried that the new labor-management agreement will make supervisory positions less attractive, because senior controllers could potentially make more money as controllers. Controllers are paid a 10 percent premium when they serve as CICs.