Vindication
Posted by Paul Cox on August 17th, 2009
You know, this might sound weird… but being more or less completely vindicated doesn’t feel nearly as good as I had hoped it would.
The arbitrator’s decision and award in the FAA/NATCA contract dispute came out on August 13th, last Thursday, and I think the reason I’m not quite as fired up about it as I could be is because the Panel, despite claiming that they weren’t trying to “split the baby”, did indeed try and do exactly that.
Their decision on the salary levels for the NATCA membership differs from their language and logic on the merits of the case itself, and I think it’s for simple, practical reasons; the money just isn’t there.
Anyway, I don’t really want to get into the whole “who got how much” deal. I’m delighted, of course, that our “B” scale is gone, phased out over 3 years. Our future air traffic controller workforce is now going to be cemented in believing in the union (and never ever trusting the FAA- but that’s a topic we can visit later.)
This post, though, I want to quote a few things from the decision.
On the NATCA BBS (where I’m on again- my “lifetime ban” only lasted a week or two) I said a few weeks ago that it looked to me, from reading the ground rules of the meditation/arbitration process, that the Panel was trying to focus on the future and kind of sidestep the question of where they were starting from.
Obviously, the FAA wanted to start from the notion that the White Book was a valid deal, and NATCA wanted to start from the Green Book and utterly rejected the White Book. The Panel probably understood that if ANY starting point was considered “valid”, the party opposing whatever viewpoint the Panel set wouldn’t agree and therefore would try to not take part, so they just pretended that everything was starting from scratch.
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. As its first order of business, at the direction of the Chair, the Panel drafted and presented to the parties a unique “Mediation to Finality” process that involved a series of extended meetings to review each and every one of some 130 specific Articles in dispute.
That said, in their decision (just prior to the above statement) the Panel made it pretty clear how they felt about the White Book itself:
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.
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. 2.
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.
I added that boldfacing for emphasis, because it is a total “ohhhh SNAP” type of bitch-slap of the FAA. I mean, seriously… “Whatever else may be said of the White Book document, it is neither a “Collective Bargaining Agreement” nor an “Agreement.””
I’m going to toot my own horn here (though I was hardly alone in saying this) and point out that’s exactly what I’ve been preaching here at the Follies for a LONG time. The White Book was never, ever a contract or an agreement. The Panel really smacks the FAA around here, and even more so they’re sending a message: You people were a bunch of hypocrites for putting that language about trust, honor, and integrity into the White Book.
This is a repudiation of the Bush Administration’s political animals of the clearest order. It’s even more compelling when you consider it comes from a panel with three people, but only one is really a politcal appointee type (Jane Garvey). The other people involved- the professional mediators/arbitrators Richard Bloch and Dana Eischen (who came on to replace George Cohen who worked the mediation but had to resign prior to the arbitration due to a potential conflict of interest) aren’t political types but instead are pros who have mediated and arbitrated high-level, big-money disputes in a range of fields. (What’s more, they’ve found against unions in addition to for them; they’re fair and follow the law.)
The Panel added, as a subnote, their own comment:
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. Whether or not it resulted in improved working conditions and contributed to growth, efficiency and prosperity are matters of open, continuous, vigorous and very heated debate between the parties.
I think they were just throwing the FAA a bone with the second sentence; the fact that the Panel so totally spanked the FAA by pointing out that the unilateral imposition of the White Book with language like:
- continuing personnel warfare
- unprecedented
- draconian
- unconscionable
- abrupt
- hostility
- distrust
- dysfunctionality
- ill-considered
- ultimately destructive
- lop-sided
Ladies and gentlemen, no matter how you look at the details of the financial award, the reality is that this language represents vindication. The Panel correctly saw that the FAA’s actions were so slimy and scummy, and correctly laid the responsibility in the horrible working environment in the FAA at the feet of the agency’s so-called leadership.
I realize I’m bragging, but I can’t help myself. (Forgive me!) I have to point out that I wrote the same kind of thing in the past a number of times.
They made a promise, and they’ve broken that promise. The only REAL contract is the Green Book, PERIOD. It says “this Agreement stays in effect until a new Agreement is reached.” (The word “Agreement” is even capitalized like that.)
That, folks, is why this whole thing pisses off the air traffic controller workforce so much. The FAA and the Bush Administration know that in a fair hearing, in a court of law, the only real answer would be “look, you signed the deal, you can’t back out of it now simply because you don’t like it.”
So they stalled and lied and stalled and lied some more, and now it’s a few years later and people are brainwashed into thinking that there’s actually some kind of “contract”. Well, there isn’t. The only real contract is green.
And that’s why yesterday’s post, and honesty within the FAA’s leadership, is so important. If they were honest, they couldn’t keep doing what they’ve been doing. In fact, if they were honest, both morally and intellectually, they could never have implemented the White Book in the first place.
If they were honest, and had integrity, they would have lived up to the Green Book, the last actual “Agreement” that the parties have come to.
Now, why does this matter? It matters because sooner or later, the nation is liable to elect a Republican as President again. (I know, probably won’t happen in 2012, but after that it might.) I just hope that the FAA develops a better institutional memory than we’ve displayed in the past few years.
I hope, for example, that the agency’s internal (and external) communications department remembers, and doesn’t lie on behalf of political leaders. Like I wrote in November of 2008.
One thing that’s frustrating to me is that the larger media- the so-called “real” media, like the big newspapers and networks- went ahead and drank the Kool-Aid. I said back in August of 2008 I was surprised anyone took the leaders of the FAA seriously.
One last thought… it’s pretty sad, and more than a bit disgusting, that the FAA continued to use Rick Ducharme on this whole matter. Oh, the agency did well by exiling Joe Miniace out to a regional office a while back, but the reality is that Ducharme had as much or more to do with this whole thing as anyone.
And back in May of 2008, I pointed out that Ducharme himself admitted that the White Book wasn’t a contract. He’s pretty two-faced to later go in front of the Panel and pretend otherwise.
Then again, maybe that’s why they found so overwhelmingly for the NATCA view of things; they recognized a liar when they saw one.
August 17th, 2009 at 11:46 am
I am waiting for Lavey's (a.k.a Baghdad Bob's) comments!
August 17th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
I agree that the quoted paragraphs were great to read, but to claim "the money wasn't there" is BS. None of the money the government is spending is there. All the bail out and stim package money is deficit spending. Take the SS "trust fund" off budget and the picture is incredibly bleak. However the pittance it would have taken for a "make whole" award would have been negligible. If you want to talk about political reality, it may be a different story; but the money is/ was/ and always has been there.
August 17th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Excellent post Paul!
August 17th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
It's too bad that we couldn't get a letter writing campaign, like we had with Balkey when she was administrator. A lot if us writing to her asking her to comment on the new deal you all just got. And maybe a few letters to the board of AIA. Maybe we could get some comment out of her. That would be a tasty little morsel I bet.
August 17th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
I think we deserve better than what we got, but take a moment to step back and look at all this.
Lets say we got FULL restitution with back pay and retirement adjustments. How much is that going to cost? $20K in my case? $100K in the 1440 that got hired on one scale and paid in another scale?
Honestly, there is no way you can explain that to a guy that got laid off from his job now working 2 fast food jobs to feed his family. We get a 3% plus locality raise for 3 years in a row and the new hires get about 20-30% raise over 3 years. Keep in mind that everyone else is looking at 2.4% this coming year so we might end up with 3.5% to 4% after locality is rolled in. The other two years could be 0%.
I think the biggest problem I see is that the panel took much greater effort on the newest hires that hired on KNOWING WHAT THEY WHERE GOING TO MAKE, than any other harmed group. Now we have thousands of under-qualified new hires that came from verizon cell phone sales, best buy and used car lots that are benefiting the most for being willing to take the job for much less. If they hadn't taken the job in the first place the FAA would have had to fix this mess 2 years ago. So now with this "FIX" you will have one of the 1440 get paid the SAME after 9 years of employment as the kid that helped continue this mess 3 years after getting here.
The panel could have met in the middle and made the pay scale 1/2 way between before and after and still gotten rid of the B-scale. With this solution you have thousands of people lumped together at the bottom of the pay scale.
August 17th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
I know what controllers would have gotten with McCain….more of the Bush Blakey same. No thank you !
August 17th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
This is why I didn't really want to get into the whole money thing. The Panel made some choices that are plainly driven by political considerations and real-world expediencies, and there's just no way around it.
Yeah, we're going to wind up with a situation where some people with as much as 4 or 5 years in are making the same amount of money as those newly signed off. Yeah, that seems unfair- but it's a HECK of a lot better than them making considerably more on a pay scale that's more than 30% less than the people that were signed off prior to September of 2006.
But the bigger point is this: The FAA's actions, and the political ideology that lie behind those actions, have been exposed as a fraud and a failure. What they did was flat-out WRONG and to call the White Book any kind of "contract" or "agreement" is plainly a lie.
About damn time someone with some common sense got a hold of this whole thing.
August 17th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Actually I think it would have been worse, much worse. Things would have continued to go down the wrong path and the result would have been the contracting out of the ATC system after it got close to collapse.
Right now as it sits I am not happy about the new hires getting the lion's share of the pay raises, but at least now we have a chance of hiring other people than fast food workers and entrants right out of high school. Our washout rates should stabilize and actually go back down once we start getting better qualified applicants.
August 17th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Lavey was the poster boy, chief drum beater and antagonist for Blakey and this imposed debacle of the last three years.
You'll recall as late as February of this year, Lavey admonishing Ray Lahood at an FAA townhall, not to "give away the store" and that we (FAA management) had "bought labor peace in the 90s". After he reminded us he was a lifelong Democrat, from a union family, 70 years old and a 40 year FAA employee (yawn).
Lavey is also representative of the arrogance of FAA management and the excess that we saw in beating the work force and the unions down at FAA.
Many of them were gleeful as they imposed the Bush Blakey "vision" on NATCA and the other BUs. And they were certainly rewarded for it, full pay raises, bonuses, TDY, per diem and travel. In Lavey's case, his lofty title and the ability to take time off from "work" to caterwaul at Ray Lahood.
August 17th, 2009 at 8:40 pm
Never, Never forget these last three years! There are people in the FAA management that abhor your existance as a controller. They despise your existance in the FAA. They are envious of everything you do and everything you have worked for. Their very existance in the FAA is based on harming you and your fellow controllers. They are mean, nasty people that get up everyday, look in the mirror and hate their own life and existance. Unfortunately they have been given a title by some other useless POS that allows them to attack you and your profession. They have no purpose or real standing in this agency and they know it. Deap down they know it.
August 17th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
It is time we as a group let everyone from LaHood and Babbitt to congress and the President that we will not allow this to happen again. If you or anyone of your peers are harmed or attacked or subject to ridicule by management in any way write a letter to someone higher than those in your facility or the FAA and demand action. If you feel discriminated against or unfairly treated let someone know. Write down names, times, dates and situations, LET THEM KNOW. Tell your NATCA reps and demand action, but DO NOT WAIT FOR NATCA ALONE they are busy with many other issues and the battle will be lost if time is allowed to pass.
Because I can guarantee you that the piss heads that have been sticking it to controllers over the last few years are rallying the troops and bending the ears of those that will listen. They are planning, scheming, organizing and calculating their next attack on our profession.
August 17th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Hey zabnut, not all of us hired under the b scale came from the streets! The white book came into effect my last semester of college after I was six figures in debt in the form of student loans. When I was hired by the FAA, they claimed to have student loan repayment program in effect for “recruitment and retainment of qualified candidates”… Which was a lie. Every other federal agency has the standard opm student loan program but the FAA. So don’t lump everyone into one catagory by making it sound as if everyone hired under the b scale are making out like fat rats. Some of us don’t feel that way! I feel just as shafted as one of the 1400 in that I could have waited a few years and gotten hired off the street and never would have gone into debt. But I don’t hold any hate to anyone hired off the street… They are doing the same job, giving the same clearances, pushing the same buttons, and have just as much right as anyone to the raises.
August 18th, 2009 at 4:31 am
Natca's next POLITICAL GOAL is to get legislation that prevents the next dyckhead in chief from tinkering with the ATC system by permanently labeling it "Inherently Governmental", only to be changed by an act of congress of at least 60% vote.
Otherwise, someone will mess with it again. However, the fight will be easier down the road because NATCA WILL BE ABLE TO POINT TO THE DEBACLE THAT FLIGHT SERVICE HAS BECOME and say "YOU SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU PRIVATIZE!!!"
August 18th, 2009 at 8:33 am
I am glad to see that common sense has finally taken hold, and things can get back to normal… Let's hope that NATCA can get the Inherently Governmental tag put back on ATC to try to limit the wrangling by the 'conservative' to privatize one of the most important services the government provides…
August 18th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
"But the bigger point is this: The FAA's actions, and the political ideology that lie behind those actions, have been exposed as a fraud and a failure. What they did was flat-out WRONG and to call the White Book any kind of "contract" or "agreement" is plainly a lie."
Exposed, but not a fraud (or a failure) Paul to those that hold and practice these views. And "lying", Blakey's forte, was one of the reasons she got the FAA job. Ask any FAA manager, or Blakey herself if they think what they did was wrong….you know what the answer will be.
The last few posters got it right. NATCA needs legislation to preclude the next POTUS who holds the ideology you described from doing what Bush did to this union and this profession.
August 18th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Yeah zabnut, I am a B-scaler who was just finishing my CTI degree when the IWRs came out. Prior to that I already had a bachelors degree and was a commercial pilot with my ATP, two type ratings and 3500 hours flying. I would like to think that I have able to successfully do this job since I have been checked out at a busy up/down for over a year and am an OJTI as well as a member of our local E board.
Vote for Ruth…..I just did!!!!
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Hi i have wondered how much you would charge to set your design up on my web logs for me, because i truly like the look of your weblogs but i do not know how to build such a nice theme.