National Association of Air Traffic Specialists

Aviation Safety is Our Business

NAATS NEWS, July 2000

Table of Contents

1. From The President
2. Constitutional Amendments
3. Pay Bulletins #16 - #19
4. Watch Schedules
5. Safety and Health Updates
6. NAATS Convention 2000
7. Bill Westin Bids Farewell
8. A Letter from the Bargaining Unit
9. From the Editor's Chair
10. Regional Supplements

NEWSLETTER E-MAIL ADDRESS:

[email protected]

---

This issue of NAATS News represents a new approach to disseminating the Newsletter - We are providing a Word Formatted version online for downloading and printing:

Plain DOC version         ZIPped Version

Please bear with us as we try to work out the bugs. Of course any and all comments are welcome.

-=John - Webmaster=-

From The President

Wally Pike, NAATS President

Portions of this article have been distributed to the facilities via the email update. If you’re not receiving the email update please contact your regional representatives.

As noted in Don McLennan's Pay Bulletins, we're continuing to negotiate with the management team. NAATS' position is firm, we feel reclassification is the best option for our bargaining unit and our pay proposal parallels the NATCA Pay Plan. The management team is discussing paying the facilities at different rates but their proposal falls well short of what's necessary for an agreement. Both parties are modifying and revising their proposals to attempt to reach agreement but we're still far apart. The meetings will now be continuous with smaller teams; if the talks stall the next step will be a mediator. The process may be lengthy, we ask for your continued patience and support. We're determined to get our bargaining unit a fair pay plan for ratification.

You will no doubt hear many rumors about these negotiations. The fact is there is no agreement on any of the pay elements, much less an agreement on the pay bands. Thanks to PIE FacRep Richard Anderson for supplying us with the latest rumor information. We'll keep you advised of the facts as they're developed.

During negotiations we attended two congressional fundraisers. EA Regional Director Ron Maisel, ARS Liaison Dan Petlowany, Administrative Assistant Terry Petlowany and I went to Congressman Steny Hoyer's (D-MD) on Friday June 16. Labor Relations Specialist Chris Kleem and I went to Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) fundraiser on Wednesday, June 21. We talked with both of these representatives and briefed them on our issues. Their statements of support could prove significant in the future.

I want to thank Nancy Batye (ARW Liaison) and Dan Petlowany (ARS Liaison) for all their hard work at FAA Headquarters. Nancy and Dan have returned to their facilities (COU AFSS, RIU AFSS) and Dan's replacement, Steve Glowacki (EKN AFSS) reported July 1. We've also lost Dan's wife, Terry who was our part time administrative help and who was invaluable in modernizing our office. Again, thanks to Nancy, Dan and Terry and welcome aboard to Steve.

Thanks also to Tracey Tideswell for her efforts as AK Regional Coordinator. Guylan Roberts has now re-placed Tracey as both Regional Coordinator and member on the OASIS Human Factors Team. We wish both of them well.

On a sad note I have to report the death of Gordon Jones, FacRep FAI AFSS of an apparent heart attack. No other details are available at this time.

14th July, 2000 -- UPDATE

By now you've received Don McLennan's Compensation Bulletin 19 (included in this newsletter edition) detailing the status of pay negotiations. We intend to continue to use these bulletins to keep you promptly informed about developments. Our hope is that we can expedite the issues by using the sub groups; the idea is that the Agency Chief Negotiator and I will continue to work the pay percentages in the interim. The Parties are currently far apart in their proposals but the NAATS team is determined to get a fair and equitable pay plan for the bargaining unit regardless of how long it takes.

On a related issue, yesterday the President signed a $75M FAA supplemental operations funding bill for this fiscal year. They have also given a number of their managers an 8% pay increase. Need I say more?

I've instructed our Congressional Representative Hal Gross to step up his lobbying with our friends on the Hill. We expect to see positive results from this effort, especially since this is an election year. Depending on how the pay negotiations go, we may ask that you become involved in a grass roots effort. Hal and I will keep you advised.

We are still planning to post all of our memoranda of understanding (MOUs) on our web page but we've had some file conversion problems. As soon as we resolve these problems we'll complete the posting. In the interim, if you need copies of these please feel free to contact NAATS Headquarters or your regional representatives.

NAATS Labor Relations Specialist Chris Klemm has three arbitration hearings scheduled in the next few months. One concerns the FAA's refusal to adhere to the CPP MOU, specifically the distribution of bargaining unit members to the regions/facilities. The second arbitration addresses the FAA's refusal to provide official time for our OEX Representative Dave Hoover. The third hearing concerns a bargaining unit member's removal in the Central Region. This is exactly the kind of activity we wanted and expected when we hired Chris. Our contract is only as good as our commitment to enforce it.

Wally

Back to Table of Contents

---

Constitutional Amendments

Constitutional Amendments

Editor's Note: The following are the five proposed constitutional amendments that have been initiated by the Board of Directors in accordance with Article 13 of our Constitution. The membership has been sent ballot packages to vote on them.

Also in accordance with our Constitution, these amendments must appear in our newsletter in order to ensure the membership is fully informed of this action. However, unlike last month, I have included only the amendments themselves and dispensed with the balloting information, since by this time you all should have received you ballot packages. If you want to read Wally's cover letter and see the articles with the balloting information attached, look at the May/June 2000 issue of the NAATS News available on our website at www.naats.org.

If you have not received a complete ballot package for these amendments in the mail, please contact NAATS Headquarters immediately so our staff can get a package out to you for you to cast your vote by Friday, September 1, 2000. In order for these amendments to pass they must receive 2/3 of the votes cast.

ARTICLE 6 - OFFICERS
Section 3.
The Board shall meet at least semiannually at times and places to be selected by the Board. A special meeting may be called by the President or by a majority of the members of the Board of Directors. The business of the Board may also be conducted by mail/fax vote, or by conference call. All conference call votes shall be documented. All Directors shall be given reasonable advance notice prior to the transaction of business of the Association. A quorum shall consist of two-thirds of the members of the Board of Directors. In no case shall block votes be accepted. In no case shall proxy votes be accepted, except that the Regional Coordinator may vote on behalf of their Director, in circumstances when a Director's illness or personal family emergency precludes their participation in a vote. Members in good standing shall be permitted to attend all meetings of the Board, except when the Board meets in executive session.

ARTICLE 7 - ELECTIONS
Section 3. Eligibility.
Candidates for elective office shall:
(d) Only seek or hold one office in any election; provided however, Regional Coordinators may also run for, and simultaneously hold office as, Facility Representatives or Alternates, and vice versa.

ARTICLE 8 - ADMINISTRATOR
Section 1. The National Headquarters and business office shall operate under the supervision of an Administrator. Under no circumstances may a member of the Board of Directors serve as the Administrator.

Section 2. The Administrator shall, in accordance with Association policy, be responsible for managing the day-to-day business of the Association under the supervision of the Board of Directors. More particularly, the Administrator shall --
(a)    Under suitable bond, cosign checks, drafts or orders for payment of money, receive and deposit funds;
(b)    Maintain accurate books and records, and safeguard the records of the Association;
(c)    Cause all applications for membership and renewals to be processed;
(d)    Assist in the formulation of annual budgets for approval by the Board of Directors; prepare periodic accounting, reports, and summaries of the Association's finances;
(e)    Consult regularly with the Board of Directors; keep its members fully informed concerning all significant matters on a timely basis; and obtain its prior approval for all significant policy-related or financial decisions;
(f)    Assist in the publication and distribution of informational communications to the members;
(g)    Perform other duties as assigned.

Section 3. The salary, benefits and terms of employment of the Administrator shall be determined by the Board of Directors.

ARTICLE 10 - NATIONAL CONVENTIONS, MEETINGS
AND SEMINARS
Section 1. Periodic national membership meetings and conventions, among delegates chosen by
the members, will be scheduled by the Board of Directors. A delegate convention will be held at least every two years at a location to be established by a majority of the votes at the previous delegate convention. Additional conventions/meetings may be scheduled by the Board of Directors upon 90 days notice to the members. The purpose of conventions will be to develop recommendations concerning Association policy for consideration by the Board of Directors and, when appropriate, to develop proposed constitutional amendments for membership referenda. Notices of such conventions and meetings shall be mailed to the Facility Representatives for posting in facilities at least 120 days prior to the scheduled event. Conventions may coincide with, occur during, or as a part of, national membership meetings. National educational training seminars for officers and facility representatives may also be scheduled by the Board of Directors. The President shall chair conventions and may invoke the rules in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised, to govern formal discussion or debate at such assemblies in order to insure orderly process.

Section 2. Each AFSS shall be entitled to send one delegate to conventions and that delegate's vote shall be weighted to reflect the total number of members, in accordance with section 3, eligible to vote for a delegate. In the event of any tie votes during conventions, the President will cast the deciding vote.

Section 3. No later than the 90th day prior to a scheduled convention, each Facility Representative shall conduct a membership meeting in his or her facility to discuss issues and to develop proposed resolutions for consideration by the convention; and s/he shall forward any proposals to the National Office in written form. Such proposed resolutions shall articulate a problem or issue that the facility's members wish the convention to address together with a specific recommended approach or outcome. Thereafter, the National Office shall compile all proposals received and, at least 60 days prior to the scheduled convention, send copies to all Facility Representatives who shall make them available to members. Between the 60th and 30th days prior to the convention, each facility wishing to send a delegate shall conduct a secret ballot election. This will insure all Union members associated with that AFSS and one additional delegate representing the collective membership permanently assigned to Alaskan FSS facilities and one additional delegate representing the collective membership assigned to FSDPS facilities; the opportunity to vote in accordance with the procedures employed when electing its Facility Representative and shall forward to the National Office the name of its duly elected delegate.

Section 4. The Board of Directors shall attend all conventions; members may also attend conventions but only delegates may address the floor and vote on convention resolutions. Within 120 days following a convention, the Board of Directors shall consider each resolution adopted by the convention and shall inform the membership of its disposition, by recorded vote, of the resolution.

Section 5. The National Office shall provide every duly elected convention delegate with an MI&E per diem allowance at the current union rate for up to three days when attending conventions or meetings during which a convention is scheduled to occur.

ARTICLE 13 - AMENDMENTS
Proposed amendments to this Constitution may be initiated either by a minimum of two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the Board of Directors, or by petition of 20 percent of the regular members whose signatures were accumulated over no more than a 120-day period, or by a convention. Once initiated, proposed amendments shall be reproduced in two consecutive issues of NAATS' periodic publication, together with a 500-word statement by the proponents and a second 500-word statement by the opponents, and shall thereafter be submitted within 30 days to the regular members for their approval or rejection by mail ballot referendum. Two-thirds (2/3) of the votes cast must favor the amendment for it to be adopted. Unless otherwise specified, amendments shall become effective upon their adoption.

Back to Table of Contents

Pay Bulletins #16 - #19

Don McLennan, NW Mountain RegDir.

Editor's Note: To bring everyone up to speed, I've included the previous 3 bulletins to give a summary of what's gone on with pay negotiations leading up to the current Pay Bulletin #19.

Bulletin #16
NAATS's negotiating team is meeting in Washington, DC for the period of time from June 30th through July 29th. The focus of the discussion between management and the union is the Union 2-pay proposal. This has been available to bargaining unit members on the NAATS Web site for several weeks. All of the input we have received from the field has been valuable and helpful in developing our strategy and course of action.

You all know, when in the middle of a negotiation session, it is nearly impossible to share with the world in writing what is on the table or how the other team responded to our proposal. Also you are anxious to know what is being discussed daily and what is the likely outcome to be expected based on the above. What I can share with you is that the teams are engaged in meaningful dialog on a number of substantially meaningful topics that have the potential to make some significant changes within our present compensation system.

You will recall that in our bargaining unit, we have approximately equal numbers of employees who have shared with NAATS leadership their feelings relative to change. They either want to see some sweeping changes, such as a five-tiered classification system, or just the opposite, the General Schedule system as it looks today, just with a different name. The negotiations as they have unfolded could end up going either of those ways or hybrid that moves both groups a little. That is less change than some may have wanted but more than others did.

At this time it is still to early to project what the management and union team may agree to before leaving on the 29th. Wally Pike and the entire negotiating team has been willing to explore any realistic proposal the management team has wanted to discuss. The management team seems to be primarily interested in generating cost savings based on "efficiencies" derived from the bargaining unit. They do not seem to have looked at cost avoidance as having the potential to generate significant savings. As mentioned earlier we still have a great deal of discussion to engage in before revising what is on the table into an agreeable compensation package.

I know this lack of anything more clear or concise is troubling to many of you, but as before the NAATS negotiating team respectfully asks for your patience and support in our efforts to get the best deal possible for all of our members. I will try and deliver to you, ASAP at the conclusion of this session, more information for your consideration and input.

Bulletin #17
Pay negotiations between the FAA and NAATS broke down today, Wednesday, June 28, when the management team abruptly announced, "We are through". NAATS had stated the need for a mediator because, to this point, the teams were unable to reach any agreement. It has become clear that the Agency does not value the NAATS bargaining unit as 2152, Air Traffic Controllers. The Agency's best offer, after 4 weeks of pay negotiations, was somewhat less than their agreement with the PASS bargaining unit. This offer would have required the NAATS bargaining unit to forfeit any retroactive pay and would result in less take home pay beginning 1 October 2000. The NAATS Pay Proposal parallels the NATCA Pay Plan.

NAATS had explored many means to achieve cost savings, including the possibility of reducing the size of the NAATS bargaining unit. The management team, although interested in the savings, insisted that the current political climate and technology would not allow for consolidation of facilities for at least ten years.

NAATS will make every effort to expedite a resolution to this stalemate even though the Agency's attorney declared he had no time to participate in such an effort prior to November. Please remember that until final resolution is reached, we still enjoy all the benefits of the current FG pay system, which includes within grade and annual increases. Also, the current contract "red book" remains in full force and effect.

Bulletin #18
At the conclusion of yesterday's session (June 28) we expected the management team had completed their negotiations with NAATS, since there was no agreement on when to begin another session. However, after a cooling off period, the teams were able to conclude a late morning session before adjourning with an agreement that talks will continue within the next two weeks.

Primarily the teams continue to explore the feasibility of implementing a multiple-tier system. At yesterday's session the management team acknowledged they misunderstood NAATS strong stand on the necessity of turning to this type of system. They wanted to discuss more aspects of what that system might look like and consider the pros and cons of developing and implementing one. The goals of both teams remain to implement a fair system that enjoys the benefits of incentivizing employee's performance, being more business- like and increasing productivity. A significant aspect of moving into this type of system for the Union is our need to be comparable with our sister bargaining unit, NATCA. This is something that has been a cornerstone of moving into a bolder and more modern compensation system -- the need to maintain comparability between the two bargaining units. This has been a common understanding between ATS management and this union for several years.

There has been movement by both teams to try and incorporate specific aspects of each others proposal into one that we can both agree will best fit the needs of the employees and the Agency. Unfortunately, there is still a great deal of work to be done. Both teams recognize this and have agreed to continue to explore new possibilities and approaches to overcoming our present differences.

As further information becomes available we will pass this on to you as soon as possible.

Bulletin #19
A small subgroup of the NAATS and FAA contract negotiation teams met at NAATS Headquarters on Tuesday, July 11 to discuss what still needs to be accomplished before reaching a contract agreement and the best way to accomplish that work. The two teams identified the primary subject areas that need immediate resolution before being able to move ahead with compensation talks and agreed upon a strategy to try and resolve those issues. Identified were four key areas where the teams have not been able to reach agreement. There was also agreement that the teams would divide themselves into several smaller groups, meeting as often as necessary, to identify and resolve specific areas of concern. Team members listed below will work the following issues, with help from the remaining team members:
�    Facility part timing -- Kurt Comisky
�    Facility levels -- Craig Campbell
�    Pay rules -- Don McLennan
�    Non-TAU work rules -- Ron Maisel
It will be the responsibility of the above team members to keep us posted on their progress while working towards a completion date of September 1st.
Wally Pike and Ray Thoman will continue to discuss contract issues while the team members are meeting in their smaller groups to resolve their specific areas of concern. If the smaller groups are successful in reaching agreement, within the stated time frame, the last element of the contract negotiations will be to finalize pay for our bargaining unit members. To insure all contract issues and articles are reviewed for content, consistency and compatibility, nothing will be finally agreed except by Mr. Pike and Mr. Thoman.
Mr. Randy Barber also attended the meeting in Wheaton as our expert on the identification and development of the necessary elements to accurately determine the costs associated with implementing a new compensation system. The "costing data" function is a very important aspect of contract negotiations. Here, the Agency and NAATS need to be able to agree on final decisions concerning what "efficiencies" will result in cost benefits to the Agency that translate into funds available to the bargaining unit to implement a pay increase. We have already discovered the Agency and NAATS do not agree on how much funding is available and how it is calculated. Agreements on staffing are also an integral component of funding. It is an imperative that we reach agreement with the Agency on what number of bargaining unit employees we will continue to operate the FSS system with.
Much work is yet to be done with the Parties still very far apart on their proposals. NAATS' latest position retains reclassification with the different pay levels graduated at 5.5%, 10%, and 18%. The management offer is somewhat less than the PASS agreement. Both are 5-year proposals.

Back to Table of Contents

Watch Schedules 

Kurt Comisky, ANE Regional Director

July 2000

The dog days of summer have arrived, our attention centers on family vacations, ball games, and various outdoor pursuits. There also is a growing interest in next year's watch schedule. What will next year bring? Watch schedules are a delicate balance between the needs of our customers and the needs of the specialists. Here in New England, where staffing is critical, the formulation of watch schedules presents many challenges and reveals many competing interests. The purpose of this writing is to provide guidance in the formulation of the watch schedule. At first, a brief comment on a philosophy, then contractual aspects, the main focus of this writing is on the Duty of Fair Representation (DFR).

In a larger context, throughout the recent years there has been a subtle but pronounced cultural change in the relationship between employee and employer. Long gone are the days of Ward Cleaver (Leave It To Beaver). There is a perception of the social norms that in the 50's, a model husband went to work and a good wife stayed behind to tend to the home and family. There was an unstated belief, the employee would be available for whatever time the employer deemed necessary and the time that remained went to the family. The time needs of the employer took precedence over the time needs for the family.

As we move into the 21st Century, the relationship between employee and employer has evolved into one of equal partners. As women have joined the workforce in increasing numbers, the concept of the "family" has changed. Roles within the family have changed, now both husband and wife pursue careers. Society has realized this change in the family and has placed an increased emphasis on family in relation to work. Society has realized the need to balance needs of work and home. Most employers, including the Federal Government, have made fundamental changes in their personnel practices to reflect this change. For the Federal Government, AWS and Federal Employees Friendly Family Leave Act (FEFFLA) are clear examples. I realize there are a few management officials that cling on to the notion of Ward Cleaver, but we should not let that deter us from developing a watch schedule that balances both the needs of our customers and of our members.

To every Facility Representative, the contract article for watch schedules (34) is well known. What generally happens, the Facility Representative convenes a small group, the Scheduling Committee. The Scheduling Committee will use whatever means appropriate to develop a draft watch schedule. (The "appropriate means" will be discussed further on.)

The Facility Representative will use the draft watch schedule to begin negotiations with the Facility Manager. Negotiate as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary: "1. To confer with another in order to come to terms. 2. To arrange or settle by agreement: negotiate a contract". When negotiating with the Facility Manager, the Manager does not have the final say. If both the Facility Representative and the Facility Manager make a serious attempts to agree, but are unable, declare an "impasse". If negotiations are at an impasse, the differences should be clearly definable. Our position must be based on sound judgement. The FAA, like any organization, has some good and competent managers and some that have yet to achieve that level. If the Facility Manager is unable to see the Facility Representative's "sound judgement", as Regional Director, I will raise the issue through the system until proper resolution.

When negotiating the watch schedule, also negotiate the means and methods for subsequent changes to the watch schedule after the schedule is posted. How will the schedule be adjusted for annual leave? This aspect is equally as important as the watch schedule itself, maybe even more so.

Recently there was a charge brought against NAATS by a non-dues paying bargaining unit member. The individual alleged the Union breached the Duty of Fair Representation (DFR), a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7116(b)(1) and (8). The case involved the development of watch schedules. This case provides valuable insight to the DFR; I will leave out names and other identifying facts, as they are not relevant to the principles of the case. To begin, some background on the FLRA, DFR and Remedies.

The Federal Labor Relations Authority explains their mandate as:

The FLRA represents the federal government's consolidated approach to its labor-management relations. It is "three agencies consolidated in one," fulfilling its statutory responsibilities primarily through three independent operating components: the Authority, the Office of the General Counsel and the Federal Service Impasses Panel. It also supports two other components, both of which were established within the FLRA by the Foreign Service Act of 1980: the Foreign Service Impasse Disputes Panel and the Foreign Service Labor Relations Board.

The Authority is a quasi-judicial body with three full-time Members who are appointed for 5-year terms by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Authority adjudicates disputes arising under the Statute, deciding cases concerning the negotiability of collective bargaining agreement proposals, appeals concerning unfair labor practices and representation petitions, and exceptions to grievance arbitration awards.

The Office of the General Counsel (OGC) is the independent investigative and prosecutorial component of the FLRA. The General Counsel, who is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate for a 5-year term, is responsible for the management of the Office of the General Counsel, including the management of the FLRA's seven regional offices. The OGC investigates and settles or prosecutes all unfair labor practice complaints filed with the FLRA… The OGC reviews all appeals of a Regional Director's decision not to issue an unfair labor practice complaint and establishes policies and procedures for processing unfair labor practice charges.

The FLRA references the Statute:

The Section 7114(a)(1) Duty of Fair Representation

Section 7114(a)(1) of the Statute provides:

7114. Representation rights and duties.

(a)(1) A labor organization which has been accorded exclusive recognition is the exclusive representative of the employees in the unit it represents and is entitled to act for, and negotiate collective bargaining agreements covering, all employees in the unit. An exclusive representative is responsible for representing the interests of all employees in the unit it represents without discrimination and without regard to labor organization membership.

The obligation set forth in the second sentence of section 7114(a)(1) of the Statute is commonly referred to as an exclusive representative's duty of fair representation. The Authority has interpreted this section to require an exclusive representative to represent the interests of all bargaining unit employees: 1) without discrimination; and 2) without regard to whether the employee is a dues paying member of the exclusive representative. The duty of fair representation is grounded in the principle that when a union attains the status of exclusive representative, it must use that power to fairly and equally represent all members of the unit.

 

In regards to remedies available to the FLRA:

The essential purpose of an Authority remedial order is "to restore, so far as possible, the status quo that would have been obtained but for the wrongful act and to deter future misconduct"

Section 7105 (g)(3) and 7118 (a)(7) of the Statute contain the Authority's remedial power. In sum, the Authority is empowered to: (1) issue cease and desist orders; (2) require parties to negotiate a contract and give it retroactive effect; (3) order reinstatement of an employee with backpay; and (4) order any remedial action necessary to carry out the purposes and policies of the Statute.

An Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) is filled as either a "charge against an Agency" or a "charge against a Labor Organization". The ULP is filled in one of the seven regional offices. A staff lawyer in the regional office will investigate the charge and the Regional Director of the FLRA will make the final determination. In this particular case, the individual filled a charge against NAATS. The individual alleges the Union breached the Duty of Fair Representation. What the individual wanted as resolution to the ULP is not clear, but one could assume the individual wanted a change in their watch schedule.

The individual who filled the charges apparently was displeased with the outcome of the scheduling process. The facility went from a bid the line format to a preference survey. The charge alleged a violation of the Duty of Fair Representation through the following:

1.    NAATS developed a watch schedule (WS) that provided only seven hours between two of his/her shifts, contrary to the FAA/NAATS labor agreement which requires eight hours between shifts.

2.    The Union developed watch schedule gave preference to Union members on shift selection and days off.

3.    The watch schedule was assigned without regard to service computation date (SCD) seniority, so that Union members received preferences for days off, schedule assignments, availability of premium pay.

4.    The Union used certain management officials to coerce the complainant into dropping charges against NAATS and his/her complaints about the watch schedule.

5.    The Union developed watch schedule gave non-members less opportunity to earn the 10% pay differential when working as controller in charge (CIC).

 

A summary of the FLRA response:

The majority of the employees preferred the survey process to the bid process. The Union sent all employees a survey whereby everyone could state his/her preferences for shifts, days off, alternate work schedule, and so on, as well as a two week grid on which an employee could chart his/her sample schedule. The Union then developed the draft watch schedule on the basis of the seniority list, the returned surveys, and the manning grids provided by management.

The individual indicated the willingness to work all shifts, including rotating shifts, the sample schedule charted all of the same shifts. Because of the individual's placement on the seniority list, the preferred schedule was not possible. The employee on the scheduling committee attempted to communicate with the individual to work out the differences, the individual was unresponsive. The scheduling committee developed the draft watch schedule with the information received on the individual's survey. After reviewing the draft schedule, the individual stated to the drafter "you will be bidding the schedule". The draft schedule was negotiated with the Facility Manager, some changes made, then the watch schedule was posted. The FLRA concluded that the drafter did not take membership status into account.

Under the NAATS/FAA labor agreement, seniority is to be calculated by service computation date (SCD) unless the parties otherwise agree locally. There was an oral agreement between the Union and Management to use Flight Service Time. The labor agreement does not require a written local agreement on seniority. The FLRA found the evidence had shown that the watch schedule drafter used Flight Service Time seniority to develop the watch schedule.

As for the only seven hours between a shift on one particular day, the individual brought that to the attention of the Assistant Facility Manager and the NAATS Facility Representative. They agreed that the schedule violated the labor agreement and they offered a correction. [The Assistant Facility Manager and the Facility Representative were incorrect; the contract only restricts management from imposing a less than eight hours between shifts. 34-02 "The Parties at the local level may mutually agree to waive these individual restrictions." The mere fact the watch schedule was negotiated clearly indicates the restrictions were waived.] The individual refused the corrected schedule on the basis that is corrected only one aspect of the problems he/she had with the CY2000 watch schedule. Further, the individual, on several occasions flexed to only six hours between shifts on the same day complaints were made about the scheduled seven hours between shifts.

The individual alleged that the scheduling of seven hours between one shift was because he was not a member of the Union. The FLRA found this to be an oversight and rejected this contention.

The individual contended that management made an effort to have the individual "tone down the remarks against the watch schedule". Also, the individual contented that management attempted to persuade the individual would not file a ULP. The individual again requested to management that the watch schedule be "bid" according to seniority. The FLRA determined, even if the alleged actions by management had occurred, they could not be attributed to the Union.

At the time of the FLRA's decision, there was no agreement on the new labor contact and thus the 10% CIC pay is merely speculative. Further, the FLRA pointed out that the posted watch schedule would allow for the opportunity for the individual to earn some CIC pay.

The FLRA declined to issue a complaint.

Throughout the investigation of the charge, it is clear the FLRA found no creditable evidence the Union or the scheduling committee had discriminated against a non-dues paying bargaining unit member. What is clear is that the individual was not pleased with his/her schedule. The individual filled a frivolous charge against the Union in an attempt to receive a better schedule.

To close, as we start the annual ritual of developing the watch schedule, we need to keep in mind the process must be fair. Setting a foundation of clear criteria and clear documentation will all but insure the best watch schedule achievable. There must be clear and reasonable numbers from management. The specialists must also make clear and reasonable preferences. Both management and specialists must live by what they write and must be willing to accept a compromise. As the demands increase and resources dwindle, the challenge increases in each passing year.

For all of those who volunteer to develop the watch schedule, my thanks and gratitude. This truly is a thankless job. The few specialists who get their preferences feel they deserve it, most will have to compromise, some will be disappointed and a few will be mad. All in all, few will thank you for all the time and hard work. So thanks.

Kurt

Back to Table of Contents

---

NAATS Convention 2000

NAATS

CONVENTION

2000

SAN DIEGO, CA

NOV. 15-16, 2000

The Handlery

Hotel & Resort

FACREP TRAINING

NOV. 14TH 

Reservations: 619-298-0511/800-676-6567 (M-F 8-5)

Refer to NAATS meeting for special group rate of $89.00

By Oct 12, 2000

Back to Table of Contents

---

Bill Westin Bids NAATS and Flight Service Farewell

As my career in the FAA is ending I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to the Union and its membership for all the good times and help given to me both as an FPL and a union official.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the following persons for their support and help through the years.

Wally Pike, you are one of the hardest working persons in this union. Your effort on behalf of the membership has been great. Thank you.

To the Board of Directors, I haven't always agreed with everything you have done, but that's life in this world. Anyone who is willing to standup and work for this Union and take the heat and devote their time, has my respect. Keep up the good work.

Mike Doring, your ability to do paper work was almost nonexistent. However, your ability to motivate the people to support the Union and become involved was something to watch. I know from input from the rank and file you were well liked. I don't think anyone in this union could do as well. Thanks for the classes and knowledge you gave us. Take care of yourself and leave some monies in Las Vegas.

Michael McAnaw, you became our president after some real hard times for this Union. Your efforts are the foundations for the work being done now. Thanks Mac, I still remember our Flight Watch class and your chili. John Wayne forever.

A very special thanks to Ward Simpson here in the Western-Pacific Region for the time we worked together. I learned a lot from you on how to be more tolerant of management, a very hard lesson for me. Keep up the good work for us all.

Jerry Lamb, you got me started in the union and I found it fun, believe it or not. Be well.

When I was RegCo here I worked with some of the best FacReps any region could have had. Your jobs were/are very hard and very trying. I want to thank you all (past and present) for your help and support. Thanks again RAL, OAK, RIU, HNL, HHR, RNO, PRC and FSDPS at ZLA and ZOA. Thank you all for the hard work you have done, are doing, and will do in the years to come.

Most of all I remember the members that took the time and effort to come to the National Union Meeting, thank you for some very good memories.

I wish you all the best in the years to come and hold their feet to the fire (sometimes) for me.

Bill Westin (retired)
SAN AFSS

Back to Table of Contents

---

A Letter from the Bargaining Unit

To All NAATS BOD, Regional Directors, Regional Coordinators:

If other facilities are like mine; then negotiations at the national level for contract and pay have had little impact locally, and partnership continues under a different name.  The union at the local level needs to make a united stand on support for the national issues, otherwise if I was still in Management I too would support the stopping of all negotiations as I would already be in a win-win position -- (getting the union to make employee cuts thus breaking and dividing its membership more than it already is).  Until the NAATS National and Regional Directors can bring all the Facility Representatives and Dues Paying Members into showing support and unity for NAATS then it is pretty much done!

What kind of support? Perhaps for starters stop all partnership type of activities and start doing the proper I-n-I of operational items and follow the contract to the letter.  No more of this stuff: Well we don't want to make waves here everything works good locally it’s just a national problem.  This attitude has got to stop!  PLUS you want new members.  Why should a new person join when all he/she hears from the other membership is who cares as long as the current setup last two-four more years then they can nail the doors closed and shut it all down?  It is this broken support for NAATS that has given Management the power they now enjoy holding over NAATS.

I just felt someone had to say that firm instructions and directions need to come from the national and regional levels as an order if NAATS wishes that the Union stay strong and United -- all the better if each facility suddenly suspended all partnership and committee support and started full contract support on a day like 7/4/00 - Independence Day?

Mark Senter

DAY AFSS

Back to Table of Contents

---

From The Editor's Chair

Elinormarie L. Morrissy, NAATS News Editor

Just a few words to take care of a few minor housekeeping matters. First, in the last edition's ATPAC Report from Andrea Chay, there was an erroneous address posted for the NOTAM website. The correct address is: www.notams2000.com. I became aware of the error after I had sent the file for the May/June News to the website. My sincere apologies to anyone who was inconvenienced by the error.

Speaking of sending things, the address to send input to for the newsletter has changed. DSL replaced dial-up for Internet access at the Morrissy house and that resulted in a change of address. The new (and improved) address is: [email protected].

By the way, Scott and I love the DSL - it's very fast, great for downloading large files or accessing websites with a lot of graphics. And it allows you to have a single line for both Internet and regular phone - and both work simultaneously! It also has the added benefit of not getting knocked offline by phone or server problems. For those areas where it's available, it's worth checking out.

On a personal note, congratulations to Holly Wilson, NAATS member from ANB AFSS, on her recent marriage. She and her new husband, Bart E. Coppage, Jr. tied the knot on July 4th. I hope everyone will join me in wishing the happy couple a long and happy life together.

That's all for now.

Back to Table of Contents

---

Regional Supplements

Altoona AFSS News

Dave Vitko

We seemed to be plagued with loud tone bursts in the headsets of the briefing specialists. There have been ten incidents at Altoona since the inception of the new telephone system. Yours truly is included. Some of the specialists have had ringing in their ears and loss of hearing at certain decibel levels. From my understanding the FAA will not spend the money for the equipment to filter the electronic tone bursts. One of the latest incidents was caused by a credit card machine used on one of the telephones in Annapolis, Maryland, during a briefing.

We now have our electronic message board in place at the south end of operations above the clock. It displays various information such as: assigned briefers, calls waiting, lost calls and other programmable options.

Oasis Update

Tal Haley

I recently visited Seattle AFSS, as a member of the Test and Development Team for Oasis. While there I was involved in the process of developing the test procedures that will be used for operational evaluation of the OASIS. First, I want to thank the FPLs for putting up with us as we invaded a corner of their operations.

The OASIS is still waiting another update (June) before going operational (September 11th target date), but the test procedures are what we were testing. What I saw at SEA indicated we need more "shadowing" to test the system. While set scenarios tested what has to be tested, they are not the best example of actual use. Shadowing is to have two specialists take an operational position, one on M1FC the other on OASIS and see if they can keep up with each other. I believe we will be able to do both, set scenarios and shadowing, for the final test in August.

One other note, as a member of the Eastern Region, I don't get to see WSI graphics at my facility, however, I think the SEA AFSS personnel will be keeping them for the present, hopefully, until the Human Factors Team can come up with better graphics (better than WSI not OASIS).

Is It Just Me?

Does the caliber of pilot experience seem to be lowering? How many times have you answered a call and after giving a briefing, have the pilot ask you questions about the exact information you just gave him. They either weren't listening or did not comprehend what you just told them. Does it seem that on almost every briefing, you have to ask for pertinent background information like the aircraft identification, when just several years ago all that was given to you. I like to tell pilots that when they call and say, "This is John Smith and I will be flying from Altoona to Pittsburgh and would like a briefing," that when they go home, their wife will say "Hi, John", but to me they are N12345 a Cessna 172. This happens call after call. What happened to pilot education over the years? Another example; not long ago a pilot called on Inflight and requested weather for eastern Pennsylvania. The specialist asked him to be more specific and he answered, "Is the weather broken or overcast?" He obviously didn't realize the specialist wanted specific locations.

The FAA though, not to be outdone, has contributed their share to confuse the pilot. They took 300 perfectly good flight service stations, with the personal touch, and turned them into 60 automated flight service stations that are far removed from the general aviation community. Some pilots are not even sure that actual people work inside the buildings. They are surprised to find they can come in and even tour the facility. The public relations job was never fully accomplished by the FAA. Frequencies were changed and then changed again and some cases changed back. Procedures such as, offloading, really took its toll on the pilot. When they call the 1-800-wx-brief number sometimes they get one flight service and sometimes they get another -- all from the same telephone. How about when they request a clearance with a void time and are told to call another number after calling the 1-800-wx-brief? Didn't it used to be that when a pilot would call a flight service station he would have at his fingertips a multitude of services? Now as a result of CYA we are restricted to 'legalese language'. Be careful what you say because it just might be what the pilot wants. As one veteran briefer put it, "we have evolved into defensive briefers".

Now, as we face a dwindling number of flight service specialists the FAA seems to be creating a shift in weather briefings. DUATS, PAN AM, or any internet service seems to be dominating, what several years ago, was the best briefing service in the world, the flight service station. In the twilight of our option we can be proud of the fact that we were part of the system that nurtured general aviation through many tough years. `

NAATS SEA AFSS

Greetings from Seattle!

5/23/00
The console installation is almost complete. Everyone likes the consoles, particularly the adjustable work surfaces and keyboard trays. We're still experimenting, trying to find the "ideal" location for the headset plug-in box. The size of the console makes a big difference as to where you might want the plug-in to be placed.

FYI: The expanded Inflight and NOTAM consoles are really huge. The expanded Inflight console creates a problem in seeing and reaching the frequency panels. We are trying to figure out how to correct the problem. We have 4 expanded consoles, two for Inflight, one for Flight Watch and one for NOTAM. If your facility is planning on using the expanded consoles for Inflight or Flight Watch, you may want to consider the standard consoles instead. They have plenty of workspace and everything is within easy reach.

The Test Development Team (TDT) was at the Tech Center, during the first week of May, to test the April OASIS software drop. OASIS has come a long way, but it still has some major bugs that need to be fixed. As with a lot of programs, it seems when one thing gets fixed it creates a new problems.

The TDT is in Seattle this week for dry run testing OASIS. We will be using scenarios that were developed here in Seattle, so the testing should be fairly realistic. We also will be shadowing M1FC with OASIS to test functionality and position management. I'll finish this at the end of the week, after the testing is complete, to let you know how things went. Stay tuned.
                               
6/5/00
The OASIS testing showed that many improvements have been made in the program. The briefing functions have made the most advances and that part seems fairly easy to manipulate. However, the In-flight/Flight Watch and Flight Data functions are not user friendly. As I see it, we at Seattle, will have to have at least two Inflight, two Flight Watch and 2 Flight Data positions staffed at all times. This doubles our staffing at those positions, so my question to management is: "Where are the extra people to staff these positions?" I have received no satisfactory answer; therefore I don't see how OASIS can become operational on September 11th. I do not believe we should have to transfer traffic to other facilities in order to make OASIS appear to be a viable system.

Back to Table of Contents

---

Walter W. Pike, President

This page was last updated on 18 Julye, 2000