FAA's Answer to ATC Retirement Bubble Staffing Shortfall

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
"Morgans" wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Larry Dighera wrote:
Isn't a policy that reduces staffing, and then authorizes mandatory
overtime (with its federally mandated time-and-a-half pay rate) just
a bit irrational?


I'll bet is cheaper to pay two guys for 60 hours each than 3 for 40.

You bet correctly.

When you consider the benefits, such as vacation, health insurance,
and retirement, and that by not hiring another person that will have
to get all of those benefits, you can afford to pay a lot of overtime.

Also overlooked is the cost of training. There is a large up-front cost to
add an additional controller that doesn't exist if you merely extend the
hours of already trained controllers - even if those extra hours are more
costly.

Many NA car companies (Delphi, etc) have huge ongoing costs from benefits
due to employees that have not worked for years. IIRC it amounts to ~$1400.
/current car produced. I suspect that a similar situation will apply to the
soon to retire ATC employee benefits.

Private wrote:


Many NA car companies (Delphi, etc) have huge ongoing costs from benefits
due to employees that have not worked for years. IIRC it amounts to ~$1400.
/current car produced. I suspect that a similar situation will apply to the
soon to retire ATC employee benefits.

Once an employee retires the money for retirement does not come out of
the FAA budget. That employee simply disappears as far as the FAA is
concerned.

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Private wrote:


Many NA car companies (Delphi, etc) have huge ongoing costs from benefits
due to employees that have not worked for years. IIRC it amounts to
~$1400. /current car produced. I suspect that a similar situation will
apply to the soon to retire ATC employee benefits.

Once an employee retires the money for retirement does not come out of the
FAA budget. That employee simply disappears as far as the FAA is
concerned.

The fact remains that these are real costs and should be considered in any
proper analysis. As in all other government expenditures, ultimately the
cost is borne by the taxpayer.

On Thu, 24 May 2007 15:09:38 GMT, "Private" wrote
in SUh5i.214501$DE1.211260@pd7urf2no:


"Newps" wrote in message
...


Private wrote:


Many NA car companies (Delphi, etc) have huge ongoing costs from benefits
due to employees that have not worked for years. IIRC it amounts to
~$1400. /current car produced. I suspect that a similar situation will
apply to the soon to retire ATC employee benefits.

Once an employee retires the money for retirement does not come out of the
FAA budget. That employee simply disappears as far as the FAA is
concerned.

The fact remains that these are real costs and should be considered in any
proper analysis. As in all other government expenditures, ultimately the
cost is borne by the taxpayer.


Are you suggesting, that the entity charged with ATC hiring and
staffing schedules, the FAA, would actually be concerned with the
expense incurred by other agencies as a result of their policies?

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 May 2007 15:09:38 GMT, "Private" wrote
in SUh5i.214501$DE1.211260@pd7urf2no:


"Newps" wrote in message
...


Private wrote:


Many NA car companies (Delphi, etc) have huge ongoing costs from
benefits
due to employees that have not worked for years. IIRC it amounts to
~$1400. /current car produced. I suspect that a similar situation will
apply to the soon to retire ATC employee benefits.

Once an employee retires the money for retirement does not come out of
the
FAA budget. That employee simply disappears as far as the FAA is
concerned.

The fact remains that these are real costs and should be considered in any
proper analysis. As in all other government expenditures, ultimately the
cost is borne by the taxpayer.


Are you suggesting, that the entity charged with ATC hiring and
staffing schedules, the FAA, would actually be concerned with the
expense incurred by other agencies as a result of their policies?


I have insufficient knowledge to allow me to comment on whether they would
be concerned, my comment was meant to imply that they should be. IIRC, the
GAO? is the oversight department that is ultimately responsible to ensure
that they are. I have no knowledge to allow me to comment on the
effectiveness or motivation of the GAO.

Ultimately, 'We get the government that we deserve', and it is time that
citizens took responsibility for the actions (and crimes) committed in their
names and on their behalf.

On Thu, 24 May 2007 22:52:44 GMT, "Private" wrote
in 0Ho5i.215135$DE1.125358@pd7urf2no:

it is time that
citizens took responsibility for the actions (and crimes) committed in their
names and on their behalf.

It's hard to argue with that.