Dear Members,

I have painfully read a variety of opinions regarding the Union�s settlement with ACA on our SIR contest. I am conscious of the fact that unfortunately most everyone knows little of what is happening or the underlying influences in the Union�s decision. As one who has been engaged in the arenas of the MEO, ATO and the NAATS Union at the national level, I hope to offer a credible personal opinion.

It should be obvious that our decision was fundamentally based on advice from our legal counsel. Let me first establish what I believe was the hand we had to play:

1. Any challenge by a competing vendor to our standing (legal right to contest) may have eliminated any opportunity to address our issues with the SIR. In short, our standing would have been the first hurdle and, although we may have been confident in our position, litigation is never certain (i.e. pay mediation).

2. Just as important is realizing what we were allowed to challenge. It is my understanding that we could not contest the SIR in the abstract, that is to say, because we were not a �bidder�, rather an �interested party�, the FAA is afforded great latitude in determining what specific elements are contained and how they are identified in the SIR; for lack of better words, call it �Management�s Rights� if you will. Therefore, our position could only be that the SIR favored the private sector over the MEO. To that end, we were able to get at the selective issues within the SIR itself.

It is my opinion that this second condition severely restricted what was attainable. Nonetheless, the Union�s contest included everything that was thought to be remotely challengeable, regardless of its attainable prospects.

In order to leverage our position we needed help from the FAA and the MEO. The reality is that the MEO would not contest the SIR, or even intervened to support our contest. I know that the MEO had issues with the vagueness and ambiguity of the SIR. I know that there were statistical advantages, as well as performance and certification requirements that favored our competition. Several letters were generated by the MEO and formally presented to ACA; they were not legitimately resolved. Although I have been restricted in speaking to any specifics regarding the MEO�s bid, I believe there was substantial common ground with the Union�s position.

Wally met with Jim Washington, even late in negotiations over our contest, pleading for support from the MEO. Washington�s response:

• Wally didn�t understand his position because he wasn�t aware of other activities

• Washington�s legal advice was to �stay out of it�

• Donna and Dave had input, therefore, the Union was represented

Given no action by the MEO or a letter of support by the FAA, I have to assume that ACA characterized the MEO�s silence as a gesture of total agreement with SIR. The FAA-MEO stood silent on your behalf. We had no chance of winning all our issues or derailing the process. Reservedly, I am grateful that we attained the wage determination and announcement date.

The wage determination is significant in that according to one of the CFR, if a revision to a wage determination is received by the contracting agency after the award, then the wage determination does not apply to the contract. Clearly, this one concession closes the gap that private bidders must submit as wages relative to what the MEO is required to estimate. Low-balling with wages and number of personnel is the MEO�s biggest challenge in defeating the private sector. It is not known, yet, how long it will take the Department of Labor to meet this obligation?

What was abandoned, in my opinion, amounted to several sections of the SIR that failed to specifically identify technical requirements and relevant FAA Documentation (i.e. 7110.10, 7110.65, 7930.2, 7210.3, 7210.56, 7010.1, and other safety standards and FAA directives) a total of 11 separate issues. The others I am not sure that ODRA has any jurisdiction, such as Collective Bargaining Agreement and age 56 requirement.

Well, that is as short and objective as I can be about it; however, I have some personal comments. Some are saying that the January announcement is meaningless, I disagree. Blakey never promised a March 05 decision date and ACA is perfectly within the scope of the A76 Circular to announce in October. For those that say that the Union is counting on the Presidential Election to terminate the process, I say "you bet your sweet ass" we are. January gets us in that game.

There are no heroes in the FAA, if so where are they? Managers, administration, support specialist, supervisors, bargaining unit members, the FAA has not lifted a finger to save your jobs and this option. Flight Service Unit, bull; everyone making decisions today in the FAA is a role player. Their role is to let Flight Service sink!!!

For those lashing out at the Union for having met with another dead end, we will turn around and take another road. It is a personal frustration to be taking a beating at the table from the very organization we are trying to save. Don�t you believe that a MEO win will return your world back to normal; this contest was a slaughter of Flight Service and the worthy service we provide to the aviation community.


Dave Hoover