Quote of the week

Last week the Office of Special Counsel raised the matter with President Obama, writing that

"we found a substantial likelihood that FAA officials were engaging in conduct that constitutes gross mismanagement and a substantial and specific danger to public safety."

FAA: How can we degrade safety

The Federal Aviation Administration is a huge organization. It may be impossible for a single person, say the FAA Administrator, to keep up with it all.

That doesn't mean he/she shouldn't try.

Hell, if all these disasters in the making are obvious to me, they ought to be obvious to someone who is charged with overseeing the agency, a full time job that pays pretty well to boot.

The latest folly to cross my desk is that the FAA is trying to save money in the official charting business.

Pilots are required to have the latest information related to their planned flight. One place to get a lot of information is through aeronautical charts. Sectional charts for VFR (visual flight rules) pilots and Low Altitude and High Altitude charts for IFR (instrument flight rules) pilots.

Pilots do not buy these charts once a year. In order to provide the latest information, these charts are updated often.

VFR sectional charts are update every six months. IFR charts are updated every 28 days. I am sure most full time, professional pilots have subscriptions to IFR enroute charts and approach plates. But what about the rest of the general aviation pilots who stay current, but don't fly enough to justify a subscription?

They buy their charts locally.

Well, that is about to change. On October 5, 2009, the FAA changed the rules that affect who will have current charts for sale.

The FAA will no longer offer wholesale rates on aeronautical charts to dealers with less than $5,000 per year in sales, as of this week.

Instead, retailers who meet the sales minimum can be designated as Chart Agents, under a new system overseen by the FAA's National Aeronautical Navigation Services division (formerly NACO). Agents can buy charts at 50 percent off the list price if they give up the option of returning unsold charts after they expire, or they can take a 40 percent discount with up to 20 percent returns.

What does this mean?

It means that 90% of the retail charts sales were made by dealers who can no longer buy the charts directly. They will be left with the option of buying charts from a third party dealer who will likely not buy back unsold charts.

That means that local dealers who don't sell all of their charts may not make any money or may actually lose money by carrying charts.

The outcome? Small chart dealers, usually local FBOs (fixed base operators) will no longer offer aeronautical charts. Since pilots will no longer have the option of buying charts at most airports, they will be left with the choice of buying an expensive subscription they don't need or doing without the latest, most up to date information.

Legal? No, but this is the reality of the situation.

The FAA hopes to save money by conducting all sales online and dealing in larger batches for fewer customers.

That's it in a nutshell. The FAA 'hopes' to save money at the expense of aviation safety.

Too bad administrator Babbitt is too busy touting NextGen, a ground based radar replacement that will cost billions, won't reduce delays, will degrade aviation safety and simply won't fulfill all the promises made as to its safety and efficiency.

FAA = Fail

So, we have a new contract and despite the FAA's upper management's attempts to circumvent it, working conditions are slowly changing for the better at FAA air traffic facilities across the country.

However, it is clear that change is needed at the top and that change is sorely needed.

FAA administrator Babbitt has promised to continue AIA mouth piece Marion Blakey's long march to decline, i.e. NextGen.

The latest debacle is ERAM, Enroute Automation Modernization. ERAM is supposed to replace and update the current enroute automation program, HOST. Apparently ERAM is necessary to interface with ADS-B, which the FAA is touting as being deployed already in select locations around the country (i.e. southern Florida).

The fact is that ADS-B is useless without every participating aircraft having bought on board equipment costing from $20,000 for a minimal install on general aviation aircraft to probably hundreds of thousands for airliners. Unless the FAA is planning on subsidizing that, don't expect 100% participation. Here is the kicker: if you don't buy the equipment, you won't show up on the FAA's new gee whiz ground based radar replacement displays.

That means that those aircraft whose owners can't afford the equipment will be not only be unable to get ATC services, but they will also be invisible to air traffic controllers. It is one thing to not paint a flock of birds, which may or may not bring down an airliner, but history has shown that a Cherokee will bring down a DC-9.

So, painting every aircraft on ATC radar, whether they have a working transponder or not is not only a good thing, but is entirely necessary. Sounds reasonable, but the FAA is still pushing to get their pie-in-the-sky, ground based radar replacement online.

ERAM is one step in that direction. Despite missing numerous deadlines to attempt to put ERAM online because the system simply isn't ready for use in controlling and separating live air traffic, the FAA is still pushing forward.

Last Saturday, the FAA turned on ERAM at Salt Lake Center, an enroute air traffic control center responsible for controlling and separating air traffic over a large part of the northwest US including parts of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming and Nevada.

The system failed. No big surprise to us because the system is still full of bugs. Each time a new release comes out to fix known problems, additional bugs are created. It is time to step back and either start over, or stop trying to implement a hodgepodge of software fixes when it comes to the safety of the American flying public.

The system we have now is complex, but it works.

ERAM is necessary to implement ADS-B. Both are part of NextGen, ex-FAA administrator Marion Blakey's golden parachute. ERAM isn't working, isn't reliable and is NOT ready to use on live air traffic.

It is time for Randy Babbitt to stop listening to his failed subordinates and take charge. Involve NATCA, so the controllers who have to work with the mess will have some say in how it is implemented.

See here for NATCA's press release on this latest problem.

It's a contract!

The contract ratification count is completed. The new contract was ratified with 97.04% voting in favor. 8729 voting yes to 266 no votes.

This will be the start of a new period in which the air traffic controllers have a chance of getting a better work environment. There are no guarantees.

Rumors abound about how management is already quietly seeking ways to circumvent the new agreement.

However, this is yet another chance for administrator Randy Babbitt to prove himself something other than another self-serving temporary public servant, out for nothing more than personal gain.

The world is watching.

Locally, it seems management is getting shaken up. Nobody fired so far, but at least action is being taken to remove incompetent management types.

Who knows what the future holds.

Why worry?

There is an old joke that goes something like this:

Why worry?

Either you will be sick or healthy. If you are healthy, there is nothing to worry about. If you are sick, there are two things to worry about.

Either you will live or you will die. If you live, there is nothing to worry about. If you die, there are two things to worry about.

Either you will go to heaven or you will do to hell. If you go to heaven, there is nothing to worry about.

If you go to hell, you will be too busy saying hi to all your friends to worry, so why worry?

Should we be worried? I mean, we are on the brink of implementing a new contract, the fairest one we could get under the circumstances, so we will certainly be celebrating the demise of the FAA's illegally imposed work rules.

Aside from the screwing every air traffic controller took over the arbitrated pay rules, is there any reason to complain? Should I just call everything good and close up JurassicBark and start smiling every time I see a management puke?

The real question is whether anything has really changed. The union had filed well over 250,000 grievances over unfair treatment by the FAA. Last I heard, most of those will be dismissed. Nothing to celebrate here.

How about those in charge of the FAA while they illegally implemented their imposed work rules. Besides the fact many of them needed to be fired a long time ago and some really should have been put in prison, some of them are STILL in charge.

What difference does it make if we have a contract if the FAA will not honor it. Our last fairly negotiated contract had an Evergreen clause that stated that contract would be in effect until a new one was negotiated. The FAA conveniently decided to ignore that one in order to impose their work rules.

Read here about how administrator Babbitt is already attempting to circumvent the newly agreed upon dress code.

The FAA is still being run by a bunch of bozos who would have run any business into the ground years ago by virtue of their gross mismanagement and unfair treatment of their employees.

There is, unfortunately, a lot to worry about.

The light green book

I haven't gotten mine yet, but the newest contract is in the mail. The cover is pale green, presumably to denote that it is a watered down version of the Green Book, our last fairly negotiated contract.

Now is your opportunity to review it before voting to adopt the tentatively agreed upon articles. It is important to remember that we are not voting on the arbitrated articles. It is normal and natural to be upset that we got screwed by a supposedly fair arbitration process. However, a 'no' vote on the tentatively agreed upon articles may be a show of dissatisfaction to the FAA, the arbitrators and to the Obama Administration, but it will not help our situation.

There are definitely some 'wins' in the TAU articles. A no vote will merely delay their implementation and send the TAU articles back for arbitration. Given how unfair the last arbitration was, I don't think we want to take our chances on the arbitrators being more fair this time around.

In addition, since apparently we were negotiating from the White Book, the illegally imposed work (IWRs) rules the FAA shoved up our collective asses, it is also important to remember that the longer we delay implementation of the new contract, the longer we will have to live under the IWRs.

Even an unbiased outside observer will have to note that this process is anything but fair. Unfortunately, we have little real choice.

The evil truth

The FAA and NATCA, the controller's union, had been quietly negotiating a new contract. What went on behind closed doors is still a mystery. Ground rules stated that the air traffic controllers could not be told what the ground rules were. We couldn't even be told where we were negotiating from.

Last week, the arbitrators rendered their decision on several key issues. One of those issues was pay.

For the past three years, every senior air traffic controller's pay was frozen, while every other federal employee received their Cost of Living Adjustments. That includes every FAA supervisor and manager, every staff person and every Washington headquarters staff.

According to the arbitrators, that was just peachy. There was no award of back pay for the COLAs we lost. There was no adjustment to our base pay to put it where is should be based on the COLAs and step increases that everyone else got.

I wonder, how did they come to that decision. Someone out there is likely to say that the economy sucks and people are out of work, which is true. However, every other federal employee got their step increases and COLAs. If the economy mattered, then why wasn't their pay frozen? We are by a small drop in the bucket compared to the entire federal workforce. The argument that times are tough just doesn't hold water.

Still, what were they thinking?

In 2006, these parties failed in an attempt to achieve a mutually bargained successor to the then-existing “Green Book”. Subsequently, management imposed its own version of all conditions of employment. That so-called “White Book” contained numerous provisions that served, from 2006 to 2009, as the terms and conditions of employment for bargaining unit employees; ranging from the trivial to the essential. Some provisions addressed work rules related to the daily business of running this highly complex shop. Others were economic take-backs, in the name of fiscal prudence, that constituted unprecedented draconian reductions in compensation, bordering on the unconscionable.

Well, it seems they had a fairly accurate picture of how the Imposed Work Rules (IWRs) got shoved up our collective asses.

The “WhiteBook” included the following preamble, evidently imported wholesale by the Agency from the negotiated 2003 (“Green Book”) Labor Agreement:

This Collective Bargaining Agreement is designed to improve working conditions for air traffic controllers, traffic management coordinators/specialists and US NOTAM Office (USNOF) specialists, facilitate the amicable resolution of disputes between the Parties and contribute to the growth, efficiency and prosperity of the safest and most effective air traffic control system in the world.

The true measure of our success will not be the number of disagreements we resolve, but rather the trust, honor and integrity with which the Parties jointly administer this Agreement.

This hortatory language, stands as a monument to wishful thinking. Among other things, unilateral imposition of this document generated more than 450,000 grievances which, to this day remain unresolved.

That quoted language from the IWRs represents the FAA's total disregard for what is right and fair. What about that Evergreen clause? If the FAA couldn't be relied upon to uphold language from the previous agreement, what difference did it make what they put in their Imposed Work Rules.

Whatever else may be said of the White Book document, it is neither a “Collective Bargaining Agreement” nor an “Agreement.” The abrupt imposed changes in working conditions from the collectively negotiated Green Books to the unilateral White Book was so profound, and spawned so much hostility and distrust, that the labor-management relationship since has degenerated into a state of dysfunctionality.

That is what we have been saying all along. It helps to have been vindicated, but the outcome of the arbitration takes all the joy away.

Having considered the deteriorated relationship of these parties, the damage inflicted by continuing personnel warfare, and the substantial stakes in maintaining a safe and efficient air traffic control system, the Obama Administration intervened. In March 2009, the undersigned Panel was appointed to explore ways by which the parties could confront, and hopefully ameliorate, the existing situation.

That's right. Change was needed. Unfortunately we got a lump of coal instead of the promised fixes.

Predictably, the years since the birth of the White Book have been characterized by a steady drumbeat of protest from the Union, which has sought, in many venues, to voice its claim that the White Book, as an operating document, is void ab initio.

...the Union has vigorously urged this Panel to compensate affected bargaining unit members for White Book reductions of money and prerogatives, by “reinstating the Green Book and by making whole members affected by the imposed rules, including full retroactivity on all economic losses”.

Maybe the arbitrators missed the meaning of the words 'made whole'. All we wanted was the money the FAA stole from us.

Management, for its part, took a markedly narrower view of the issues in dispute; advocating from the outset that any future movement must be premised on the proposition that one takes the validity of the White Book as a starting point.

We reject both these backward-looking assumptions.

How exactly do you ignore what you wrote above:

Whatever else may be said of the White Book document, it is neither a “Collective Bargaining Agreement” nor an “Agreement.”

How exactly do you reject the premise that you should be negotiating from the Green book when the IWRs is neither a “Collective Bargaining Agreement” nor an “Agreement"? How is negotiating from our last legally negotiated contract a backward-looking assumption?

From the start, this Panel has proceeded with an announced goal of achieving mutual agreement when possible and, when it was not, of rendering a decision that approximates, in our best judgment, the result the parties themselves would have achieved had they bargained all issues to a mutually satisfactory conclusion.

Wrong! How exactly do you justify the last three years in which our pay was frozen while everyone else got their COLAs.

You have failed to act fairly and the result can only be another mass exodus of experienced air traffic controllers, disillusioned by the outcome of what should have been a fair procedure.

You ought to be ashamed!

Nothing plus nothing

Still here, barely. I have been hibernating this last month, because our future is out of our control. Not that we are all control freaks (we are when doing our job), but it would have been nice to be in the loop. Thanks to an agreement between NATCA and the mediators, the air traffic controllers were specifically kept in the dark.

So, the news is out and it isn't good.

For the past three years, every single senior air traffic controller has had their pay frozen, while every single FAA manager, supervisor and staff person got the equivalent of the same Cost-of-Living Adjustments and step increases that every other federal employee received.

So, after 3 years of imposed work rules, what did the arbitrators decide to give us back? Not an award or raise mind you. We were just interested in the money that the FAA stole from us.

What did we get?

Nothing.

That's right. To make up for three years of lost COLAs and step increases that every federal employee is entitled to, we got zip. Nada.

The sound you hear is another huge chunk of experienced air traffic controllers pulling the plug for the last time.

Penny wise and pound foolish.

Visit the Potomac Current and Undertow for copies of the actual arbitrator's decisions.

Tentatively argreed upon articles

Still on vacation.

However, interest is very high, so here is a link to the TAU'ed articles from the latest negotiation between NATCA and the FAA:

http://www.natca.org/members/2009taus.aspx?

Take a look.  By tomorrow, this blog or another will likely have a review out.


Change is coming, that much is certain.

A good cause.

I received this from a fellow controller. Since I am on summer vacation or so it seems, here is something for you:

Every fight needs a good team, and the fight against cancer is no exception.
Join Team ATC for the LIVESTRONG Challenge Austin October 25, 2009 and pick a fight with cancer.

Team ATC is a group of Air Traffic Controllers and aviation professionals who have joined the Lance Armstrong Foundation in the fight to find a cure for cancer.

The LIVESTRONG Challenge is the Lance Armstrong Foundation's signature fundraising event inspired by the hope, courage and determination that exist in all of us. We take to the streets on bikes and on our feet, uniting individuals to stand together to fight cancer.

For the 2009 LIVESTRONG Challenge, Team ATC is looking to recruit 25 team members and raise $10,000 to support cancer prevention, provide access to screening and care, fund research, and enhance the quality of life for cancer survivors everywhere. Whether you walk, run, or ride, your participation is one more powerful weapon in the crucial fight against cancer.

Ready to join Team ATC? Register today by following these easy steps:

1. Visit www.livestrongchallenge.org
2. Click on Austin
3. Click on Register for Austin ($50 fee)
4. Agree to the waiver ($250 fundraising minimum required for riders to participate)
5. Choose “Join a Team” and select Team XX from the drop down list.

Remember to recruit your friends and family to join you on Team ATC. We need their help to reach our fundraising goal.

Through the dollars and awareness that we raise, we will inspire and empower individuals, and we will make life better for the more than 12 million Americans living with cancer. We look forward to having you unite with us as a partner in our fight.

Join the Fight. Take the Challenge.

LIVESTRONG,


Follow This Link to visit my personal web page and help me in my efforts to support Lance Armstrong Foundation

******************************************************************************
Some email systems do not support the use of links and therefore this link may not appear to work. If so, copy and paste the following into your browser:
http://austin09.livestrong.org/faf/r.asp?t=4&i=294758&u=294758-261452941&e=2552909895
******************************************************************************

Peter Nesbitt

A must watch video

I wish I could embed this video here.  It is that good.


http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2009/07/02/chernoff.is.faa.ignoring.safety.cnn

"it means the FAA is a very sick agency..."

At the very end, LaHood and Babbitt show up to promise to fix everything.  I have every confidence in LaHood, but Babbitt represents a clear and present danger to the American flying public.

NATCA elections

NATCA elections are coming up next month and while I won't directly endorse a candidate, I will emphasize that change is good.

There are three candidates for NATCA President. Eliminate the incumbent and you have just two choices.

A fellow air traffic controller took the time to set up a blog and solicit answers to specific questions concerning the future of NATCA.

Please take the time to visit this blog:

http://natcabu.blogspot.com/

The following is reposted here with permission:

NATCA's last election was an important one. There was truly a difference in our choices. In the last election the presidential candidate's visions of NATCA's strategy for the future could not have been more different. I mean, if ever there was a time we wanted our 1.5% dues money to say something, to have an impact- 2006 was it. Only 52 per cent of eligible members voted. This is untenable if one wishes our union to move forward. This is unacceptable if we want those in Congress and the aviation community to take us seriously.

This election is just as important. Early signs are the membership is still disconnected, disinterested, uninformed and disenfranchised. The videos made at the Memphis and New Orleans candidates forums are spectacular if you are looking for a way to compare the candidates. There are less than 400 total views of those videos to date. Probably fewer than 1,500 people have attended all the forums put together.

Why the low turn out? It's a combination of apathy, laziness, taking things for granted, an erroneous belief that it just does not matter as government unions are weak and another mistaken belief that all candidates are the same, "part of the club". There is also a feeling among some members at smaller facilities that their vote does not make a difference and they are never truly represented at the national level anyway.

The biggest reason is a total disconnect between our membership and the leadership at the national level. The leadership cranks out a laundry list of what they are doing to promote solidarity and yet a large group of members still feel disenfranchised, apathetic and discounted. What came first, the chicken or the egg?

The membership has to own this. Voting is not just your choice; it is your right and your duty as a member. Excepting our first national election, turnout has consistently been low. Some leadership teams have been better than others at communication and organizing but membership participation at the most basic level-casting a ballot, remains dismal.

Now we find ourselves in this position. A well organized campaign can focus on "block voting" to garner 4,000 votes and feel confident that they will achieve victory. A candidate's ability to get out that block vote in a couple of regions or several centers can win out the day instead of having to take their campaign to every member. Block voting will always be a strategy and I am not even saying it is bad, per se. But a situation where the candidates are counting on a low turn out elsewhere in order to win is a formula for disaster.

In the 2006 election there were 14,132 members eligible to vote and were either sent a mail ballot or signed up over the Internet for online voting. Of that total 7280 members voted for an overall turnout rate of 52%. Pat Forrey received 52% of that vote, around 3,995. There was a FACREP/RVP organized "block voting" that resulted in the relatively high turn out in the Central, New England and Eastern Regions for Forrey and dismal turnout elsewhere where Forrey lost or tied. This strategy enabled Forrey to garner enough votes from the Eastern and Central regions alone to win the election.

I am not saying Pat Forrey was not the best candidate or that he would not have won if there was a 100% turn out. That is not my point.

My point is this: When only 3,995 (28%) of the 14,132 members eligible are able to vote in our leaders then we have a serious problem and the problem is us.

So for those in NATCA that left their ballots on the break room floor, sometimes this is what you get when let 4,000 or so decide the leadership of your union out of a 19000 strong electorate.

The more informed people that vote, the more likely the best candidate will win. The more people that vote, the less likely another someone will gerrymander their way into power.

I am contacting those that I have met over the years and selling the candidates I support. But more importantly I am brow beating them into voting one way or the other. I see peer pressure as the single most influential tool to accomplishing participation and voter turn out. These guys in the Eastern region have known it for decades. Wake up!!!

Result of FAA management failures

Last Friday, staffing was so short at the Washington enroute air traffic controller center that some airspace had to be shut down. This is a matter of record.

What exactly does this mean and what were the consequences?

Washington Center, like other ATC facilities across the nation, are re-sectoring. This means that due to short staffing, FAA management is combining up airspace. So before, for instance, a certain chunk of airspace, let's call it an area, was divided into six sectors. Each sector can be worked by one or more air traffic controllers, depending on the amount of traffic.

After, that same area is now divided into 5 sectors. Now, theoretically, that area requires fewer controllers. Poof! The FAA fixed the staffing crisis.

Neat trick right?

The reality is a little different. What the FAA's bumper crop of new, useless managers/supervisors failed to take into account was that whenever you reconfigure sectors, you must retrain your controllers. Fully certified air traffic controllers suddenly become controllers in training.

The Federal Aviation Administration on Friday evening was forced to close several air corridors above eastern North Carolina for 30 minutes as a desperation move to avoid a serious safety risk when its poor management and woeful staffing reached this breaking point at Washington Center: One controller, forced to do the job of two for four hours alone with nobody to relieve him, working two new sectors of airspace at the end of a long shift that included forced overtime.

The FAA spokesmodels should be out in force today, denying that safety was compromised. The reality is much more scary.

The only controller on duty worked two sectors without assistance for four hours. I know this is hard to understand, when most people work many hours without a break. Consider this. Try playing a video game, one that requires constant attention, continuously for hours with the caveat that, if you make a mistake, hundreds of people will die a horrible death. This raises the stakes quite a bit.

The supervisor had to close the sectors, and thus the airspace, in order to give the controller a break. But wait, there's more! Why didn't the supervisor give the controller a break? Because the supervisor was either not certified to work that position alone or was not proficient.

Huh? How is it that a supervisor can be qualified to supervise controllers working a position he/she is not certified to work? Exactly what good is such a supervisor?

This clearly shows how messed up the FAA is today. The FAA is packed with worthless supervisors like this one, pulling down top dollar to do, well, nothing of value.

The closure, from 5:25 p.m. EDT to approximately 6 p.m., created the biggest impact on Raleigh-Durham, N.C., traffic. Eastbound departures were delayed for an hour, forced to wait on the ground at the airport. Those flights already airborne were forced to be re-routed, having the same fuel-burning, delay-inducing negative effect as if a giant thunderstorm covered eastern North Carolina.

Nothing like having the right people at the right time, huh Randy.

Washington Center is the nation’s third busiest air traffic control facility, handling more than 2.7 million flights a year traversing a large chunk of busy airspace extending north to southern New Jersey, south to the Carolinas and west to the middle of West Virginia.

Friday’s incident was just the latest symptom of chronic management failures and surrounding the FAA’s nearly two-year long effort to redesign the airspace boundaries that controllers work at the facility, shrinking the number of separate areas of jurisdiction from eight to seven. The project, undertaken to try and hide the staffing problem prevalent at Washington Center for several years, specifically excluded NATCA. As a result, the current situation has created a proverbial “no man’s land” – three sectors of airspace in eastern North Carolina virtually ignored by the FAA as far as ensuring adequate staffing and training.

There are no trainees assigned to these sectors. There are just five veteran controllers certified to work this airspace, but the training given to them was rushed and inadequate, leaving them uncomfortable handling busy times of their shifts. There is very little to no relief available, meaning long hours on position, forced overtime and many six-day weeks, leading to chronic fatigue and the loss of focus.

Where is FAA administrator Randy Babbitt? Rather than taking the word of and advice from the very same people who are trying to bring the FAA down and destroy the National Airspace System, he should have been weeding them out and discovering how critical the staffing problem really is and taking real action to fix it.

Instead, Randy took the blue pill, choosing to live in an artificial fantasy world that has little connection to reality.

Still no agreement.

Anyone surprised?

One of the mediators George Cohen, will be nominated by the Administration this week for the position of Director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.

Uh huh. Wasn't that what he was doing? You know, mediation.

Cohen will recuse himself from the hearing scheduled on June 22nd and 23rd.

Uh huh. Isn't that today?

Meanwhile the FAA has not budged on certain key issues, most notably pay. So the FAA, and by his lack of action, Randy Babbitt, FAA administrator, has determined that it was okay for every FAA manager, supervisor and staff person to have gotten their Cost-of-Living adjustments while the air traffic controllers, you know, the ones who actually do the work, got squat.

Sound fair?

So the arbitration has been pushed back to some undetermined date and we are still working under the FAA's imposed work rules.

FAA management must be laughing their fat assess off.

NATCA elections are coming up next month. Change is good.

Strike two!

Wow! Despite having a democratic President, House and Senate, the FAA is still being run into the ground by an out of control rogue FAA management.

Who is to blame? FAA administrator Randy Babbitt.

Apparently Randy thinks he is still working for the shrub and is still using the talking points of Bush appointee Marion Blakey. Check out the Potomac Current and Undertow for their take on this.

I guess Randy is going with the Blakey/Sturgell mode of operation, ie. it won't blow up on my shift.

How about actually taking charge, examining the failed policies of your predecessors and fixing the mess they created?

Here are some excerpts from Randy's recent testimony before the Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Transportation:

Our highly trained air traffic controllers play a critical role in achieving the outstanding level of aviation safety we enjoy in the U.S.

This is the only wholly true statement in Randy's testimony on the air traffic controller workforce.

Looking forward, I am dedicated to maintaining and improving the levels of safety we have achieved thus far while continuing to improve working conditions...

No kidding? By failing to negotiate fairly with the air traffic controllers union. How do you figure?

Over the next decade, FAA must hire almost 15,000 air traffic controllers.

We won't need 15,000 controllers over the next decade. We will need 15,000 trainees to get the 9,000 fully certified controller we will need.

Last year we hired 2,196 controllers, exceeding our original target by more than 300.

Strike two Randy! Why are you perpetuating the lie put out by your predecessors? We hired 2,196 controller trainees, many of whom will never become fully certified air traffic controllers.

This hiring, combined with lower than projected retirements...

There are lower that projected retirements because we are waiting to see if the mediation ordered by the Obama Administration fixes the problems created by the Blakey/Sturgell regime. Problems that you are ignoring. If we are not made whole, expect to see a huge spike in retirements.

...brought our total controller workforce to 15,381 at the end of FY 2008.

Lie. There are around 11,000 certified controllers. The rest are trainees, most of whom are not certified to work by themselves.

There are as many controllers on board today as there were in 2000, and on a per-operation basis, there are more Certified Professional Controllers (CPCs) on board today than in 2000.

Uh huh. In other words, traffic is down, helping us to hide the air traffic controller staffing crisis that WE CREATED! Whew!

Our new plan calls for hiring an additional 1,742 controllers this year and 1,702 more in 2010, bringing the total controller workforce to 15,692 by the end of 2010.

Of course, your plan does not take into account how all this hiring has many of our busiest facilities choked with trainees.

The agency continues to recruit high-quality candidates into the controller workforce. Of the 2,196 controllers hired in FY 2008, 823 (37 percent) were graduates of CTI schools...

Good luck with that. Do the CTI schools screen their applicants for aptitude? Didn't think so. I guess it doesn't help that the FAA doesn't screen for aptitude at the FAA academy anymore either.

...while an additional 720 (33 percent) had previous air traffic control experience, either gained in the military or at the FAA.

I see. Can you explain how new hires got air traffic control experience at the FAA? Previously washed out?

To augment the centralized hiring activities regularly conducted in Oklahoma City, FAA has implemented Pre-Employment Processing Centers (PEPCs) to save time and money for applicants and to get qualified air traffic controller candidates into the FAA pipeline faster and more efficiently.

Great! Way to go, creating a huge backlog of trainees at the facility level waiting for a spot to open up to begin on the job training or worse, getting substandard training because too many trainees are competing for time on position at the same time.

In the past five years, AT-CTI schools have graduated more than 4,000 students from their aviation programs, 3,000 of whom were hired by the FAA.

This is something that potential CTI students need to be aware of. According to these statistics, a student, who gets a specialized degree that is good for only one career path, has a 75% chance of being hired. Of course, the 'lucky' ones have only a 50-60% chance of becoming fully certified. Why would anyone plunk down $100,000-$150,000 for that?

We are issuing our second annual comprehensive outreach plan that outlines our efforts to promote aviation occupations to a broad-based pool of applicants.

Because your pool of applicants with ATC experience has dried up.

The FAA’s recruitment approach utilizes a variety of media outlets to reach the widest population of candidates. These strategies include community outreach events, job fairs, employee association events, military sponsored events, direct e-mailings, Internet recruitment, internship opportunities, newspaper and magazine advertisements, promotional videos, television, radio and bus advertisements.

Thanks for making my point for me. Salary goes down and the pool of quality applicants dries up.

Our goal is to limit the trainee ratio to less than 35 percent of the total controller workforce, ensuring there are adequate numbers of fully trained controllers in all facilities. The current ratio falls into the historical range of 23 to 44 percent.

I see. Let's include stats from the controller strike in '81 to muddy the waters.

The FAA’s current hiring plans return trainee percentages to their historical averages. By phasing in new hires as needed, the FAA will level out the significant training spikes and troughs experienced over the last 40 years.

No kidding. The FAA has been way behind in hiring and certifying new air traffic controllers.

The painful part is that Randy probably believes all the bullshit fed to him by the very people who created the air traffic controller staffing crisis.

FAA CREATES AN INSTANT STAFFING PROBLEM

This NATCA press release highlights another FAA folly:

MEMPHIS, Tenn. – The Federal Aviation Administration’s highly controversial rush to split the tower and radar control functions at Memphis International Airport last week has created an immediate staffing shortage. The FAA is now seeking to fill six new controller positions at the Memphis TRACON (Terminal Radar Approach Control). The agency’s official vacancy announcement – which was posted three days after the split – can be found here:

http://jobs.faa.gov/announcement_detail.asp?vac_id=115539

NATCA believes the staffing shortage is further proof why the FAA’s realignment of the facility – a precursor to closing much needed radar facilities across the Mid and Deep South regions and moving those operations to Memphis – was both unwise and unnecessary.

The move also justifies the concern of over 150 members of Congress nationwide who have registered their opposition to the FAA’s realignment agenda until there is a common sense approach in place; namely a review procedure that compels the FAA to subject all current realignment efforts to a much needed layer of oversight, accountability and transparency. The House FAA Reauthorization bill, passed last month, does just that. NATCA is supporting passage of a final FAA bill this year.

“We look forward to briefing (FAA) Administrator Randy Babbitt on the folly of splitting the air traffic control functions at Memphis and to assist him in returning accountability to the FAA,” said NATCA Southern Regional Vice President Victor Santore. “NATCA continues to offer to work on realignment issues with the FAA once a legitimate process is adopted. Through true collaboration, taxpayer dollars could be saved without compromising safety.”

The split of Memphis’ facility also has ramifications for the efficiency of the airport’s operations. It takes a certain amount of controllers in order for the FAA to safely run simultaneous instrument landing system approaches into the airport for the big daily Federal Express inbound push. But the staffing is now so strained in the TRACON that even one controller who is sick and can’t work means the FAA has to wastefully spend money on overtime to bring in relief help. Additionally, in an episode last Thursday, short staffing forced local management to use two supervisors to work traffic instead of experienced front-line controllers.

Similar problems are occurring at Orlando International Airport, where the FAA rushed to split the tower and functions in January, using an admitted crisis of short staffing to justify the action. The FAA claimed the split would improve efficiency and reduce training times. However, Orlando radar controllers are still working six-day work weeks and 10-hour days – spending thousands of taxpayer dollars in overtime – with little if any improvement in sight.

You get what you pay for.

The FAA just held their top secret 'call to action' summit that included FAA administrator Babbitt and Transportation Secretary LaHood as well as representatives from the major air carriers, their regional partners, aviation industry groups and organized labor.

The result? Well, since the public and press weren't invited, we don't know what really was said. The only tangible result is:

Babbitt said the "advisory flight circular" on pilot records is being updated...

Thanks. I think that will make all the difference. Not!

I found this quote to be quite telling:

"We can and we must regain the public's trust," LaHood said. "We must inspire confidence in every traveler, every time he or she steps on a commercial aircraft of any size at any airport in our country."

Rather than regaining trust or inspiring confidence, how about actually making the system safer? The answer is you won't, because safety has taken a back seat to, well, just about everything else.

Besides, how exactly do you make our regional pilots safer? The airline industry has been losing money hand over fist for as long as we can remember. In response, they have been trimming their pilot's salaries.

The pilots for major airlines got hit hard, but working for the regional airlines is a joke. Most salaries start under $20,000 per year, making it impossible to afford to live near your assigned duty station. The copilot of Continental Express Flight 3407 lived in Seattle, WA with her parents and had to commute all night to Newark, NJ to report for duty.

...fatigue played a role in the failure of Renslow and First Officer Rebecca Shaw to save the plane as it approached Buffalo Niagara International Airport.

How exactly do you fix this, besides paying people in safety related occupations enough to afford to live nearby?

There is also the question of the quality of applicants for highly skilled jobs that don't pay well. It would seem obvious that the smarter ones would go for a higher paying career elsewhere. So, you are left with those who sank too much money into it to quit, love to fly and are willing to let their parents subsidize their 'hobby' or those who would have been weeded out had the requirements been more demanding.

When the airlines started having trouble recruiting new pilots due to their ever shrinking salaries, they resorted to lowering the experience requirements to make up for it. It is positively scary how little experience will get you into the cockpit of a regional airliner these days.

What about air traffic control? Well, the FAA, under Marion Blakey, decided that 'anybody' could do this job. So, they put off hiring replacements for the aging ATC workforce until they could impose work rules and cut the new hires pay by 30%. The FAA had, up to that point, boasted how many potential trainees they had in the pipeline.

Once they cut the salaries, their pipeline dried up and they were left recruiting from high schools, advertising on buses, craigslist and myspace for potential new hires.

Cut the pay for professional safety sensitive jobs and watch the quality go down and safety margins evaporate.

Unfortunately for the American flying public, you get what you pay for.

Choose the right path

Administrator Babbitt,

Please take the time to read my advice. I am not issuing edicts today, but merely offering you a different point of view.

Consider that you were appointed to the position of FAA administrator by President Obama, who introduced legislation while in the Senate to fix the impasse procedure and force the FAA to negotiate with the air traffic controllers fairly.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said that getting the air traffic controllers a new contract with better work rules and a raise will be the top priority of the new FAA administrator. (bad choice of words; we are not looking for a raise, but rather the money the FAA stole from us)

Uh huh.

So why are you listening to the very people who created this mess.

I already stated, in bold terms, the actions needed to be taken to fix the mess left to you by Marion Blakey, who turned a well staffed, smoothly running National Airspace System into a critically staffed air traffic control system ready to collapse, in exchange for a cushy $600,000 plus job with AIA to sell NextGen to the American taxpayers.

However, I understand you may be reluctant to act quickly on advice from an air traffic controller blogger, so I am going to spell it out for you. I hope to take a chunk at a time over the next week or so.

First, consider the people you are talking to and probably taking advice from. They are the very people who have compromised the integrity of the National Airspace System.

Consider actions being taken to split off air traffic facilities across the country. Why are they rushing to split off all these facilities? To hide the staffing problem they created by imposing work rules on their air traffic controller workforce.

Check out:

Poof! No more staffing problems

Think about the people you have working for you. Do you really think it wise to depend on those very people who created the problems you are charged with solving?

I realize you have a lot on your plate. However, spend some quality time deciding how fix this mess. I understand you cannot fire your entire Washington headquarters staff, no matter how much they deserve it, but start the ball rolling by firing the heads of the various departments who created the problems you need to solve. Consider the fact that they were recently shuffled around just prior to your arrival.

Understand that they bullshit with the best of them. There is a reason why they rose so high in such a dysfunctional organization as the FAA. I trust you to be able to see the truth in my words.

Don't want to fire them? Move them someplace where they can't hurt anyone. The FAA is good at that, ie. moving controllers into management where they can't kill airline passengers. Ask around, I am not kidding.

Thanks for listening.

No agreement!

The FAA and NATCA have been conducting double secret probati...er, negotiations for the last few weeks and guess what, they haven't come to an agreement yet.

As of last week, the two parties have been unable to reach an agreement on an undisclosed number of articles. Anyone want to bet they are the same ones the FAA refused to budge on during the negotiations for the 2006 nontract?

The mediators haven't given up yet, so there will be another mediation session this coming Tuesday the 16th. If no agreement is reached, the mediators will change suits and become arbitrators, hearing the case on June 22nd-23rd. They will then have 30 days to render a decision.

This is neither good news nor bad.

I find it interesting and telling that the FAA was not able to come to an agreement. Certainly pay will be one of the issues remaining. How is it that the FAA is able to argue that is is fair to withhold cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) to their air traffic controllers while giving the COLAs and bonuses to their staff and management.

This is another black mark for FAA administrator Babbitt. I guess he couldn't even order his team to negotiate fairly.

I can't understand why Babbitt would choose to take the low road, continuing the failed policies of Bush appointee Marion Blakey, having all of his mistakes highlighted here and elsewhere, instead of having legitimate praise of his potential actions broadcast far and wide.

It is not too late, but is becoming later by the minute.

Babbitt's first speech

I am an air traffic controller. I love my job, but I hate my employer.

After years of working under imposed work rules, it seems we are finally catching a break. President Obama has ordered the FAA to negotiate with NATCA, our controller's union with 'binding mediation' if an agreement cannot be reached.

How did we get here? Did Pat Forrey get us here? No, we are here because, for the first time in recent history, we have a democratic House and Senate and a democratic President who appears to value the place of labor in our society.

President Obama nominated Randy Babbitt as the next FAA administrator and the Senate confirmed him. Babbitt would never have been my first or second choice, but unfortunately it was not up to me.

Babbitt recently delivered his first speech as FAA administrator.

I also know that we must achieve labor stability. Those talks are under way. Hank and I talk frequently, and I'm optimistic.

Just hearing this makes me less optimistic. That is how close you are to the negotiations, listening to Hank Krakowski? Weren't you paying any attention before you took this job? Hank is part of the problem. A big part.

Before you run out of the room debating what does optimistic mean, I'm just saying that the talks are proceeding, both sides are at the table, and I think we'll reach an agreement.

You know what? I know we are going to reach an agreement. We are because the ground rules states that any articles that cannot be agreed upon will be subject to 'binding mediation'. Thanks for the vote of confidence. Not!

The best agreements are reached when everyone wants an agreement, and right now there is both that desire and a positive atmosphere.

Well, I know NATCA wants an agreement because we are being forced to continue to work under the Imposed Work Rules (IWRs) while a new agreement is being negotiated. What does this mean? It means we are under the gun, probably being forced to agree to stuff we would not agree to if we were able to negotiate from the Green Book, our last fairly negotiated contract. Also, if NATCA does not forge a new agreement, we are stuck with the FAA's IWRs.

Sound fair? Hardly. The FAA is still holding all the cards. No wonder they want an agreement under these circumstances. It can't help but be a slightly watered down version of their IWRs.

But I will take a moment to talk about what I mean by labor stability. I'm not just talking about getting our biggest union squared away.

Squared away? You haven't a clue. NATCA has been working under imposed work rules for the last three years. Pay has been cut, while management continues to get COLAs and bonuses. All the while, the FAA continued to change our working conditions without negotiating with NATCA, contrary to previous agreements and law!

I'm also talking about the other 7 unions we have. And I'm also talking about the 15,000 employees we have who aren't part of a union.

Yes, of course, so they can cower in fear after you put NATCA is its place.

We need to restore confidence for the entire workforce. We need to make sure we have accountability and credibility across the board.

Accountability and credibility? You need to fire most of your Washington staff, all of your Washington headquarters management, every single facility manager and put half your supervisor staff back on the boards working traffic and fire every supervisor who simply can't work traffic.

Every facility manager has become just a mouthpiece for Washington management. Over the last three years, facility managers have gone the opposite of empowerment. Best to just save millions and millions each year by kicking out those worthless bodies.

As for Washington headquarters staff, they stood by while the FAA coldly and deliberately singled out their air traffic controllers for pay cuts, extraordinary punishment and other illegal actions. Had everyone or at least a majority, stood up and refused to participate in this illegal action, we would not be in this mess.

As for the supervisors...the FAA spent the last three years padding the supervisor ranks with one year wonders. These traffic dodgers are making top dollar sitting around playing minesweeper. A shift can be better run by a controller in charge who at least is proficient in working ALL the positions in the area.

You can put a serious dent in the air traffic controller staffing shortage by putting those excess supervisors back to work controlling traffic.

Can't work traffic? Then you have no business being a supervisor.

I want to see all 45,000 move with confidence in their skills and pride in their work. I don't see that now. We've got to get that restored.

Unfortunately you won't achieve that by listening to Hank.