Control Tower Controversy brewing in the FAA

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

That's what the Bell System thought on Long Distance calling back in the
70's and 80's regarding their industry.


Bell was wrong, you can have more than one provider of long distance
service. If more than one company attempts to provide separation nobody has
separation.

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

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


Not when it isn't the driving force in anything but vacation days.

Matthew S. Whiting wrote:

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


That is truly good to know. Are annual increases merit based or COLA?
What are the promotion criteria?

Annual increases are the same as what every Social Security recipient
gets. Usually in the 3-4% range, next year however it is about 2.5%.
There are also increases based on your localities cost of living also
added onto that. As for promotion I do not get promoted unless I put
myself in a pool for a particular job opening. For example if Denver
needs a controller or three that job will get posted for everyone to
see. If I am interested in moving to Denver I will submit my paperwork.
I may or may not get selected, none of the criteria is based simply
upon years of experience. All promotions entail a paid move. Under no
circumstances will I get to work one day and find I have been promoted
to either another facility or into management of my current facility.

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.

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

I don't doubt
that a private ATC would be more efficient, but it wouldn't
matter as
none of us could afford to fly privately any longer.


Why would private ATC be more efficient?

Automation, same as the post office.

Profit motive (over the long term) is a great incentive. What is the
FAA's incentive?

The FAA's incentive for efficiency is the political reality that they
are chronically underfunded and every time they fail to do something
because of lack of funding, some Congressman playing to the cheap
seats rakes them over the coals for failing to fulfill their mandate
to provide the highest level of safety.

Profit is not a factor in most proposals for ATC privatization.
Costs, operational control, personnel, purchasing, and funding
reliability are the main issues.

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Because most private companies that perform functions similar
to
governmental agencies are more efficient.

Sure, susccessful private companies are forced by competition to
be more
efficient or fail. But you can't have competition in ATC.

That's what the Bell System thought on Long Distance calling back in
the
70's and 80's regarding their industry.

If the phone company screws up, your call doesn't go through. If
Tony's ATC Service and Aluminum Siding Company gets the low bid and
then screws up, you die. If Big Jimbo's Fire Department and Auto
Repair screws up, you die. If Slick Sammy's Police and Pet Grooming
Station screws up, you die. There's a qualitative difference here,
which is why historically we have tended not to privatize these
functions, at least in the sense of auctioning it off to the lowest
bidder who wants to make a profit at it.

Within a few days, you'll be able to switch phone providers at will
and keep your old phone number. You can't do that with ATC, switching
contractors willy-nilly when one kills people or another comes along
with a better price.

Automation is the natural competitor of civil service.

And if they fail to deliver the goods, someone else gets the deal
(unless
ATC is privatized the way Qwest, the Postal DisService, and most
utilities
are chartered.

So are you volunteering to be the DOA from the ATC screw-up that gets
Tony dumped for incompetence?

As I said in my previous post, it's not about profitability. If we
get ATC privatization, it likely will be a government-chartered
corporation dominated by the airlines (with token representation for
government, GA, and other stakeholders) to tailor the system to their
needs - not the least of which will be keeping airline user costs to a
minimum. Not that that is inherently bad, but look at what happened
to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (two government chartered mortgage
corporations set up to serve home buyers) when they realized that they
could make big bucks using questionable accounting practices.

The current system is far from perfect, but let's not kid ourselves.
ATC privatization, whatever form it takes, will involve trade-offs
that affect safety. The only relevant question is whether these could
be managed so that we do not get unacceptable outcomes.

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

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

"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.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

That's what the Bell System thought on Long Distance calling back in the
70's and 80's regarding their industry.


Bell was wrong, you can have more than one provider of long distance
service.

That's what they found out the hard way. MCI was going on five eyars before
AT&T began to even take notice.

If more than one company attempts to provide separation nobody has
separation.

Wrong analogy.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

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


Not when it isn't the driving force in anything but vacation days.

Riggggghhhttt!!

"Tom S." wrote in message
news

Wrong analogy.


No, that's the precise analogy.