National Association of Air Traffic Specialists

Aviation Safety is Our Business

Bulletin #11

From

Don McLennan

Pay system "conversion" is that process of how to move from one pay system to another pay system. Our view is that we would like to "buy out" our pending WIG increases. This means that you would have added to your initial "new", base pay, in the new system that percentage of a WIG you had already earned within the old system. As a conversion element for bargaining unit people now getting Interim Incentive Pay, the IIP will be rolled into their initial base pay setting, and IIP will no longer be a factor for FSS option. There is the whole subject of how do you convert somebody’s pay at the Academy at the time of conversion. NAATS suggested "Grandfathering" those individuals who would be caught up in this dilemma. Instead of running two pay systems, management suggested converting everyone’s pay to the highest level of pay then in place at the Academy at the time for conversion. We also tried to categorize how we feel about which is most important to pay for Reclassification, Job Levels or Performance. The Union felt it was 1,2 and 3, while management felt it was 1,3 and 2. This means that at the time a new pay system is turned on we would begin to immediately pay people differently. Some employees would get more of a pay increase than others would.

We need to agree with management on a break-even amount to make an ATRA roll-in acceptable to both management and the Union. That is, how much money would go to an employee and how much money reserved to the government so they do not incur any additional expenses as result of taxes, retirement, etc? The Agency agreed with NATCA and PASS to an amount of 4.1%. NAATS wants to cost this out but agreed to that amount for the sake of consistency with how the Agency deals with Unions. Any available money left over (should it not really cost the Agency .09% to fund our roll-in) should be identified as potential cost savings to be spent elsewhere.

We also continued our discussion of pay banding. The point of having wider bands is to insure adequate overlap. Also, the wider the band is enables you to capture more people within the band as opposed to having to set people’s pay outside the band. If you have more money you will need a wider band to accommodate placing people at higher levels. This was the philosophy used when determining where to set the Core Compensation System bands where they are. Currently the Core philosophy is that in a voluntary change to a lower level of pay your pay is set in the lower band just as it is in the higher band. If you fall outside the band you need to have a pay rule to establish the new point of pay. Do we want to utilize pay retention, set pay at the highest point in the new band, have the same relationship in a new band as they were in the old band, etc? All questions to be answered soon.

Back to Bulletin List.

Walter W. Pike, President

This page was last updated on 26 June, 2000