OVERVIEW OF AGENCY CASE

• Why Compensation For FSS Specialists And Terminal/En Route
  Controllers is, And Should Continue To Be, Different.
   
• Why The FMCS Should Recommend The FAA Proposal
   
• Why The FMCS Should Reject The NAATS Proposal
   

1

NAATS Home Page

FLIGHT SERVICE SPECIALISTS AND
TERMINAL/EN ROUTE CONTROLLERS
SHOULD BE COMPENSATED DIFFERENTLY

• Historical Divergence Of The FSS And Terminal/En Route
  Functions
  - November 15, 1995 P.L. 104-50 (1)
  - March 28, 1996 FAA PMS Issued (2)
  - October 8, 1989 AFSS Position Upgrades
  - October 1, 1998 ATC Levels Established (3)
   
• Pay Systems For FSS And Terminal/En Route Functions Should
  Continue To Be Based on Job Complexity And Level of Work
  Performed

2

NAATS Home Page

FLIGHT SERVICE SPECIALISTS AND
TERMINAL/EN ROUTE CONTROLLERS
SHOULD BE COMPENSATED DIFFERENTLY

• Difference in FSS And Terminal/En Route Job Functions

- Position Classification Standard For ATC (4)

Terminal and En Route Positions: These positions require an
extensive knowledge of the laws, rules, regulations and procedures
governing the movement of air traffic, a knowledge of aircraft
separation standards and control techniques, and the ability to
apply them properly, often under conditions of great stress.

3

NAATS Home Page

FLIGHT SERVICE SPECIALISTS AND
TERMINAL/EN ROUTE CONTROLLERS
SHOULD BE COMPENSATED DIFFERENTLY

Difference in FSS And Terminal/En Route Job Functions (Cont.)

Comparison Of Duties In Position Descriptions (23)

� FSS (5) (6)

- Private Aviation
- Briefings- Recommendations

� Terminal And En Route (7)

- Commercial Aviation
- Separation And Control Of Aircraft

� Different Skill Sets

4

NAATS Home Page

FLIGHT SERVICE SPECIALISTS AND
TERMINAL/EN ROUTE CONTROLLERS
SHOULD BE COMPENSATED DIFFERENTLY

• OPM Qualifications Standards (8)
   
• Difference In Required Skills As Evidenced By Training
  Requirements

- FAA Order 3120.4J- Technical Training (9)
- Training Failures

5

NAATS Home Page

FLIGHT SERVICE SPECIALISTS AND
TERMINAL/EN ROUTE CONTROLLERS
SHOULD BE COMPENSATED DIFFERENTLY

• Difference In Medical Requirements (10)
  
  - FAA Order 3930.3A- Health Program
  - OPM Qualifications Standards dated August 1994
   
• Other 2152's In The Agency Are Compensated Differently
   

6

NAATS Home Page

FLIGHT SERVICE SPECIALISTS AND
TERMINAL/EN ROUTE CONTROLLERS
SHOULD BE COMPENSATED DIFFERENTLY

• Comparison of Nay Canada and FAA Compensation Plans (11)

Nay Canada FSS Compared To FAA FSS

• Pay (12)
• Duties Are Virtually The Same (13)

- Nay Canada FSS Compared To Nay Canada Controllers
- FAA FSS Compared to FAA Terminal/En Route

7

NAATS Home Page

FLIGHT SERVICE SPECIALISTS AND
TERMINAL/EN ROUTE CONTROLLERS
SHOULD BE COMPENSATED DIFFERENTLY

8

NAATS Home Page

FLIGHT SERVICE SPECIALISTS AND
TERMINAL/EN ROUTE CONTROLLERS
SHOULD BE COMPENSATED DIFFERENTLY

Using The Median Of Relative Pay Scales:

• Nav Canada FSS Specialists Make 41% Less Than a Nav Canada
  Air Traffic Controllers. (28,001 vs. 47,345)
   
• FAA Flight Service Specialists Make 31% Less Than ATC
  Terminal/En Route Controllers. (57,451 vs. 83,507)
   
• FAA Flight Service Specialists Make 100% More Than Their
  Canadian Counterparts. (57,451 vs. 28,001)
   

9

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD RECOMMEND THE
AGENCY PAY PROPOSAL

• Agency's Last/Best Offer (28)
   
• 5.5% With Offsets
   

--
--
--
--
--

10

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD RECOMMEND THE
AGENCY PAY PROPOSAL

• A 5.5% Increase Is Computed After Adjustments To Base Pay For
  Conversion To Core Compensation. (18)
   

• A 5.5% Increase Is Over And Above Newly Negotiated Premiums:

- 10% OJTI (16)
- 10% CIC (07)
 

11

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD RECOMMEND THE
AGENCY PAY PROPOSAL

• A 5.5% Increase Is Over And Above:

- Government wide general increases (18)
- Locality Increases (18)
- OS1 =1% & SCl=0.6 Increases (18)

• A 5.5% Increase Would Result In An Actual Increase of As Much
  As 41.3% Over A 5-Year Period Of Time.
   

12

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD RECOMMEND THE
AGENCY PAY PROPOSAL

• Management's Last/Best Offer Includes Prerequisite Offsets For
  5.5% As Required by OMB, Statute.

- Impact of 49 � 40121, Cost Savings (20)
- OMB Position On Offsets
- 58.4 Million in Offsets Required (29)

13

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD RECOMMEND THE
AGENCY PAY PROPOSAL

• Original Union Proposal (22)

- Compensatory Time
- Little Or No Guaranteed Savings

• Management's Proposal

- 10 Personal Days Off To Be Used In Lieu Of Holidays
- Administered Much Like Annual Leave
- No Holiday Pay For Work On What Would Have Been A Holiday
- A Win/Win Proposal

14

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD RECOMMEND THE
AGENCY PAY PROPOSAL

• Part-Timing As A Possible Offset

- Concept Of Part-Timing
- Possible Impact On:

• Consolidation

• Staffing

15

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD RECOMMEND THE
AGENCY PAY PROPOSAL

• FAA Offer Represents A 24% Gain Over The Projected Rise In
  The Consumer Price Index.

- Assuming 4.1% Average Increase In CPI Per Year (25)
- General Increases Do Not Include Locality Pay

16

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD RECOMMEND THE
AGENCY PAY PROPOSAL

COMPARISON TO CPI (Actual and
Estimated)

17

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD RECOMMEND THE
AGENCY PAY PROPOSAL

• A 5.5% Increase is Consistent With What Other Unions Have
  Agreed To:

- July, 2000 PASS-AF Collective Bargaining Agreement (26)
- February, 2001 NATCA-AF Collective Bargaining Agreement (27)

• Both Bargaining Units Converted To Core Compensation

18

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD REJECT THE
NAATS PAY PROPOSAL

• NAATS PROPOSAL IS FLAWED AND MISLEADING (24)

- Parity Argument Has No Merit

• Not all 2152's are assigned to FSS, Terminal or En Route
• FSS, since 1998 reclassification have not had parity
• FSS do not have comparable responsibilities/skills

19

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD REJECT THE
NAATS PAY PROPOSAL

• NAATS PROPOSAL IS FLAWED AND MISLEADING (24)

- Retroactivity to 1999 is inappropriate & unsupportable

• $50 Million back pay liability
• Retroactive costs for retirees
• No offsets identified for 1999, 2000 and 2001
• Would drive the actual cost of a 13.2 raise much higher
• Proposal covers an 8 year period rather than 5

20

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD REJECT THE
NAATS PAY PROPOSAL

 

- NAATS proposal includes a 5 year "me-too" clause
- NAATS proposal is "pegged" to a mythical 7.5 ATC level which does
  not exist
- NAATS proposal calls for pay increases first, with no identified offsets
  required

• True Cost Of The NAATS Proposal Is Unacceptable

- 50 Million In Backpay
- 164.6 Million More Than Agency Proposal

21

NAATS Home Page

WHY THE FMCS SHOULD REJECT THE
NAATS PAY PROPOSAL

• Pay For Virtually The Same Work In Nav Canada Is Much Less
   
• Financial Condition Of The Agency Cannot Support The Union
  Proposal (30, 31, 32)
   
• Impact On Competitive Sourcing Initiative (33)
  - Impact Of Proposal On Contracting Out

22

NAATS Home Page

REVIEW OF AGENCY CASE

• Compensation For FSS Specialists And Terminal/En Route
  Controllers is, And Should Continue To Be, Different.
  - Skill Levels & Tasks Are Different
  - Training & Medical Differences
  - Level Of Responsibility/Stress
  - Comparison To Nay Canada
   
• The FMCS Should Recommend The FAA Proposal.
  - It Is More Than Generous
  - It Is Consistent With Government Policy
  - It is Consistent With Today's Economic Situation
   

23

NAATS Home Page

REVIEW OF AGENCY CASE

• Why The FMCS Should Reject The NAATS Proposal:
  - Pay Parity With NATCA Represented Controllers Is Unwarranted
    And Would Disrupt The FAA Compensation System.
  - Nay Canada Comparison Supports Lower Pay Scale For FSS.
  - The Proposal Is Excessive, By Any Standard.

• External - CPI, Economic Conditions
• Internal - Fiscal Crisis In The Agency, AF Contracts, Core Comp.

- The Proposal Is Not Supported By Offsets.
- Competitive Sourcing (A-76) Issues

24

NAATS Home Page