Control Tower Controversy brewing in the FAA

Tom S. wrote:



Seniority is a nonfactor at the FAA. We only use it to bid our days off
twice a year.


Bull!! Seniority is a major (the major?) key in any bureaucracy or Union.

I am not in the union. The only thing based on seniority is the order
in which you get to pick your days off every 6 months. The union local
used to get to set their own seniority policy for their own facility.
NATCA National put the kabosh on that several years ago and now we are
all under the same seniority policy nationwide. There are only 5 union
members at BIL ATCT out of 18 controllers. I will say that the FAA has
bent over and let NATCA run ATC for many years now but as far as
seniority goes it ain't nuthin' like say the UAW.

"Newps" wrote in message
news:lkCub.180151$mZ5.1290067@attbi_s54...

Tom S. wrote:

Seniority is a nonfactor at the FAA. We only use it to bid our
days off
twice a year.

Bull!! Seniority is a major (the major?) key in any bureaucracy or
Union.

I am not in the union. The only thing based on seniority is the
order
in which you get to pick your days off every 6 months. The union
local
used to get to set their own seniority policy for their own
facility.
NATCA National put the kabosh on that several years ago and now we
are
all under the same seniority policy nationwide. There are only 5
union
members at BIL ATCT out of 18 controllers. I will say that the FAA
has
bent over and let NATCA run ATC for many years now but as far as
seniority goes it ain't nuthin' like say the UAW.

That's because, as Reagan proved in 1981, federal unions such as PATCO
and NATCA are toothless tigers because they cannot strike. Their
sole power resides in their ability to convince management by the
logical force of argument - and we all know how well that works if
management doesn't want to cooperate - or lobbying for political
support on Capitol Hill. NATCA's expensive PR campaign to influence
Congress in the FAA Reauthorization Bill, necessitated by the loss of
the political support that they enjoyed during the Clinton years,
proves that point.

All of which confirms your response to Tom Ass that he has no clue
about federal unions.

John Mazor wrote:

That's because, as Reagan proved in 1981, federal unions such as PATCO
and NATCA are toothless tigers because they cannot strike. Their
sole power resides in their ability to convince management by the
logical force of argument - and we all know how well that works if
management doesn't want to cooperate - or lobbying for political
support on Capitol Hill.

NATCA just goes right over the head of management and directly to Congress.


NATCA's expensive PR campaign to influence
Congress in the FAA Reauthorization Bill, necessitated by the loss of
the political support that they enjoyed during the Clinton years,
proves that point.

NATCA is always going to Congress about something or other.

"Newps" wrote in message
news:HRUub.188068$mZ5.1366651@attbi_s54...


John Mazor wrote:

That's because, as Reagan proved in 1981, federal unions such as
PATCO
and NATCA are toothless tigers because they cannot strike. Their
sole power resides in their ability to convince management by the
logical force of argument - and we all know how well that works if
management doesn't want to cooperate - or lobbying for political
support on Capitol Hill.

NATCA just goes right over the head of management and directly to
Congress.

Right. They can't strike, so they play the only power card they have.

NATCA's expensive PR campaign to influence
Congress in the FAA Reauthorization Bill, necessitated by the loss
of
the political support that they enjoyed during the Clinton years,
proves that point.

NATCA is always going to Congress about something or other.

Right. They can't strike, so they play the only power card they have.

FAA is trying to get its ATC act together, see the ATO announcements
today. Time will tell if they can straighten it out enough to
forestall privatization.

-- John Mazor
"The search for wisdom is asymptotic."

"Except for Internet newsgroups, where it is divergent..."
-- R J Carpenter