STATEMENT OF
MICHAEL F. McANAW, PRESIDENT
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF AIR TRAFFIC SPECIALISTS
ON THE PROPOSED FY 97 FAA BUDGET AND ON THE NEED FOR FAA PERSONNEL REFORM
BEFORE THE HOUSE TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE
FEBRUARY 27, 1996
NAATS is the exclusive representative of the more than 2,700 controllers who work at the Flight Service Stations of the United States, and I am here today to give you the views of the people who provide vital safety functions to the flying public. My testimony is in two parts: a status report on the FAA's personnel reform efforts as mandated in last year's appropriation bill, and recommendations for the FY 97 budget. Specifically, we are very concerned about the uncertainty faced by the employees we represent while we go about the business of reinventing the FAA's personnel system. I request that my entire written statement be made part of the record.
As mandated by the FY '96 DOT Appropriations bill, we have been hard at work with the FAA trying to establish a framework for a new personnel system to take us into the next century. While we have significant concerns about the process and its numerous components, we would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, and the Subcommittee as a whole for the courage and foresight you displayed in including reform language in last year's bill. In an effort to help the FAA implement personnel reform, our members have been working on task forces, virtually around the clock, since early December, and are continuing their efforts as I speak to you today. As you will undoubtedly hear from FAA spokespersons, this task has been and remains monumental. It's not easy to create a personnel system for a 40,000 employee, 24 hours a day 365 days a year entity. Issues like compensation, leave, travel, training, recruitment and retention, performance management and discipline all have to be dealt with.
I am pleased to say that we are working closely with the FAA, and have experienced a positive atmosphere in large part. In fact, we as a Union have been expending significant resources to support our involvement in the ongoing process of FAA personnel reform. There is one specific area, however, which requires an immediate fix.
H.R. 2002 called for the implementation of the new personnel system by April 1, 1996, less than 5 weeks from today. It is now clear that despite our best efforts and the best efforts of the FAA, that a complete system will not be in place, and the agency will be required to phase in many aspects of the new system, over months and perhaps years. As April 1 comes and goes, unless the Congress takes action, the employees of the FAA will be left in limbo. Of special concern to us is the fact that coverage of Chapter 71 of title 5 - which provides the statutory basis for employees to elect unions, to participate in their operations, and to be represented by them concerning terms of conditions of employment - is scheduled to expire on April 1, 1996, leaving us and the people we represent without any statutory protections in the labor-management relations arena.
The Administrator and the Secretary have both promised to continue to adhere to our collective bargaining agreements and other rules of Chapter 71 until a new system is in effect, and we sincerely appreciate their good intentions. However, the fact remains that with the elimination of Chapter 71 coverage on April 1, the promises of these honorable gentlemen cannot be enforced, because they do not carry the force of law. Already, the Federal Labor Relations Authority, which hears unfair labor practice complaints and conducts elections for unions, has announced that it cannot handle any matters from the FAA effective April 1.
In fact, on April 1 we and the employees we represent lose all rights to appeal any determination made by the FAA's management outside of the FAA. We cannot appeal to the FLRA, or complain about adverse actions or prohibited personnel actions to the Merit Systems Protection Board, and we cannot seek the assistance of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service in the event of collective bargaining impasses.
At the very time that a new personnel system is under active development, stripping the elected representatives of their very right to exist - and the statutory basis to make sure that their rights and those of the employees they represent are maintained - is a serious matter indeed. While we have every anticipation that the FAA will continue to deal with us as the freely elected representative we are, we are also aware of the fact that the FAA has a history of labor-management relations that is not a hallmark of success. While we strive to improve the atmosphere between us through the Partnership process, without the ultimate guarantee of statutory protection we are forced onto an unfair, unlevel playing field.
The men and women controllers at Flight Service Stations across the country are already concerned that the new personnel system under development will have adverse implications to themselves, their careers, and to their families. We of course hope that their fears will not be realized. To take away their security of a statutory right to union representation at (missing text...) th the sense of security they need during the process of creating a new personnel system for the FAA.
Mr. Chairman, we know of your personal commitment to the rights of federal workers. We are asking for nothing more than the rights already available to virtually all federal employees, including those in the legislative branch. The simple reinstatement of Chapter 71 will go a long way to insure that the transition to the new personnel system is smooth and meets the safety needs of our air traffic control system. The help and consideration of you and your colleagues on the Subcommittee will be invaluable to us as we continue to work with the FAA to implement the reform you set in motion last year.
For many years, criticism has been leveled at the way the air traffic control (ATC) system of the United States operates, despite the fact that the American ATC system is the envy of all other countries and is indisputably the safest and most economical system in the world. Nevertheless, problems exist related to procurement, management, personnel matters and capital investment. The FAA and the Administration were unsuccessful in gaining acceptance of a privatized or government corporation to replace the FAA. We congratulate Congress for understanding the many flaws in this scheme and for reinforcing the need to keep this critical function within its oversight. We support the fact that the FAA is working hard - with our close cooperation - on steps to replace the current personnel and procurement systems. We will continue working with the Congress on statutory reform, particularly in the areas of personnel and procurement.
Does the FAA have problems with its procurement system? Of course. These problems come from complicated procurement rules and from poor management. These problems have been exacerbated by adding additional levels of review at the departmental level that are unnecessary. Bashing by DOT officials about vacuum tubes in ATC equipment serves no purposes other than to frighten the public and to divert attention from the very real management problems at the agency. When we look for advanced "cutting edge" technology, we should ask whether the ATC system should operate on "the cutting edge" or from "within the envelope" of technology that is demonstrably efficient and safe. The failures of FAA procurement are too many to list. We in Flight Service have borne the brunt of many costly failures, and we remain woefully under-equipped. Of course, it is ironic that the personnel tasked with dealing with operationally aging equipment are even more at risk without restoration of Chapter 71.
It is somewhat awkward for us to be testifying today about the FY '97 Appropriation for the FAA, since details regarding the budget request have not been made public so far. Therefore, my comments on the budget must necessarily be general in nature.
I would first, however, like to take this opportunity to express our sincere appreciation to the Chairman and members of this Subcommittee for their efforts during last year's Conference to secure adequate funding for the FAA's Operations Budget. Without your actions on this particular issue, there would have been severe adverse impacts on the day to day operations of the nation's air traffic control system. We are confident that you will again make sure that sufficient funds are allocated for Operations in FY 97.
We at NAATS believe that it's past time for the FAA to stop coming to Congress and asking for more and more when we know, in today's climate, that they won't get it. Instead, the FAA ought to stop paying for equipment that won't work and spend it on proven equipment that is commercially available "off the shelf" today.
We also believe that it's time for the FAA to stop complaining about their antiquated equipment and using it as a justification for giving them a free hand to proceed as they wish. If they are using vacuum tubes or old radar displays, they have no one to blame but themselves. Congress has been more generous, proportionately, to the FAA than almost any other agency in terms of funding. The delays and problems have not been caused by procurement red tape alone. A major part of the blame simply must be attributed to plain poor management - and the revolving door that lets managers walk out of the FAA and come in the next day as contractors. Questions have recently been raised about individuals who accepted FAA buyouts and came back soon thereafter as contractors - doing virtually the same job! Each and every such case needs to be reviewed, and we strongly suggest that Congress look closely at the current ethical requirements - and make sure they are being enforced.
The FAA is commencing the creation of a new procurement system under the terms of the FY '96 Appropriations measure, H.R. 2002. We hope that they will come up with a system that takes advantage of what the private market place can supply. We say this as the people who need new equipment to do our jobs better and with greater safety, and those who have to work with the equipment management decides to install.
Please remember this: whenever the news reports on an equipment failure, or a facility going off line, it is the men and women who provide the service to our air traffic control system that keeps the system operating - and safeguards the lives of air travelers. While outages at radar facilities and control towers receive most of the publicity, they occur at Flight Service Stations also, inconveniencing the flying public, and posing a hazard to air safety. We are the ones whose knowledge and experience can override the shortcomings of our equipment. But how long should we be expected to be painted into this corner?
While the procurement reform effort goes on, and we assume it will be a long-term project, the FAA is continuing to waste money on their in-house designed systems when commercially available alternatives exist out there. As an example, the FAA has spent more than $100 million over ten years on the VHF Direction Finder (VDF) program, and has 60 systems sitting in a warehouse. They have not been deployed for a simple reason - they don't work! Instead of trying to use these inoperative systems, why not adapt the GPS system - technology we know that works - for inflight enhanced services through the Flight Service Stations. We should use this proven technology to serve our vital search and rescue mission, improve special use airspace avoidance, and better protect the flying public - at a fraction of the cost already spent on useless equipment.
The FAA continues to spend millions every year on the Direct User Access Terminal System (DUATS). In October 1994, when the FAA instituted a rule limiting access to the system to pilots and student pilots, demand for the service fell dramatically, saving the FAA $22,000 a day. If you figure out the cost of transferring DUATS into Flight Service, you come to the conclusion very quickly that the FAA could save millions by making DUATS an integrated part of the Flight Service system. We urge Congress to instruct the FAA to initiate steps immediately to bring DUATS into Flight Service, so that this service can be continued for those of our customers who like to supplement their pilot briefings via this system. We would be pleased to work with the Subcommittee to craft an appropriate means to implement such savings.
Our biggest concern with the FAA relates to the fact that our current equipment, based on the Model 1 Full Capacity (M1FC) computer, is antiquated and overloaded. For years, the FAA has talked about the OASIS program as the "interim" successor to M1FC. Recently, the FAA informed us that the OASIS will, in fact, be a replacement for M1FC. But repeatedly, the program has been delayed, despite specific budget authorization from Congress, due to the actions by top FAA management. We thank the Congress for specifically authorizing funds for the OASIS program last year, but have to ask why the FAA has not moved ahead as instructed. We can't wait any longer. The system is on the verge of data overload. We have learned from the FAA that with the introduction of METAR/TAF (ICAO format weather information), the system will be so overloaded that weather trending data will be reduced from three hours to two hours. This is a threat to the safety of the pilots we brief and to their passengers. When you fly on a general aviation or commuter aircraft, would you feel safer if the FAA's real-time weather data bank was reduced by one-third? Unless the FAA rapidly moves to the next generation of equipment, this is a very real possibility.
For some reason, the FAA prefers not to include the GS-2152 air traffic controllers who work at Flight Service as part of the controller work force for manpower or statistical purposes - even though there is absolutely no question that we are safety-related personnel. When the PATCO strike took place in 1981, were it not for the controllers in Flight Service, the entire air traffic system would have come to a halt. We have been told by top FAA officials that the Flight Service will never hire another new employee from outside of the Air Traffic Division of the FAA. This is tantamount to a decision to terminate this vital safety service - and they're planning to do it without coming clean to Congress or the public. The FAA plans to reduce our numbers (primarily through attrition) for the foreseeable future. Congress should remind the FAA - and do it forcefully - that the controllers at Flight Service are part of the safety net for this nation's aviation industry, and that their numbers must be maintained and strengthened. We've been downsized already!
We assume that the FAA Budget request will contain millions for Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS). This request is based on the assumption that these stations can replace human observers. The short response is "nonsense!" In fact, the cost for so-called "augmentation" of ASOS systems is escalating rapidly. With the Weather Service now considering ASOS acceptable for general weather purposes, the FAA is left holding the financial bag for human observers to watch the machines - since they don't work. This is precisely what we have been saying for years: an ASOS can't replace a human weather observer.
We thank the Committee for the opportunity of providing these comments, and look forward to working closely with Members and staff to insure that the best interests of the public are secured. I would be please to respond to any questions.
Thank you.
Our Address:
NAATS 11303 Amherst Avenue Suite 4 Wheaton, MD 20902 301/933-6228 301/933-3902 fax Walter W. Pike, Chief Executive Officer
All Rights Reserved.
This page was last updated on October 31, 1996.
Please send any comments, problems or questions regarding this site to our Webmaster.