Table of Contents
From The President
From The CEO
Mike Doring & Wally Pike Corner
From The LR Director
Air Traffic Procedures Advisory Committee
Who Can Ride The Jumpseat?
Survey Corner
Photos
Involving Employees In Safety
National Safety And Health Updates
Hello everyone. I hope you have made your arrangements for Las Vegas. It will be my last meeting as President, and I would like to see all of you again one last time. I am in hopes to have a special announcement that affects everyone in Flight Service at the Las Vegas meeting. This year the meeting will include reports and question and answer periods from all workgroup leads, committee chairpersons, Wally, Mike Doring and myself. This year's guest speaker will be Mr. Ron Morgan AAT-1; he has been a great supporter of Flight Service.
July newsletter I asked the question Has NAATS become the Management it has so long despised?
Well last month in the regional section I got one response, from IPT. I would like to respond to it. Neither NAATS, the Board of Directors, Wally or myself has signed off on any new classification standard. The Board in its June meeting (see July newsletter Board Meeting) gave general concurrence to the Classification package as presented by our representatives on the workgroup. The classification standard still needs to be negotiated, we also have to wait and see how the traffic count test for the next year goes. Nothing is final. Heck the FAA hasn't signed off on it either. The one thing that concerns me is, that Don McLennan (ANM REGDIR) Pay/Classification workgroup lead sent out a number of pay plan bulletins to all facilities for over a year, if IPT missed them then how many other facilities didn't get them. Thank you for your letter Donna.
I know that you FACREPS are continually being bombarded by questions from your membership on different issues. If you don't know the answer call your Regional Directors, they have all been briefed on issues affecting Flight Service, and if they don't know the answer they should know were to go for the correct answer. I don't know how many of you remember a letter I wrote about 8-10 years back the subject was on the effect of having very little information; I said information is power and lack of information breeds fear and insecurity. Rumors will fly (funny rumors as well as bad), membership will get mad, and they will either quit or demand your removal. Open that line of communication with your FacReps, and FacReps with your Directors. The information is there, you just need to get it.
The latest news on the OASIS front, the FAA has selected the Harris Corporation to be the OASIS vender. The FAA has entered into contract negotiations with Harris. The First OASIS will be installed into SEA AFSS (No, I had nothing to do with site selection) spring of 1998.
Next month the memberships meeting in Las Vegas see you there!
STAFFING
NAATS Government Relations Consultant Jeb Burnside and I met with Congressman Duncan to discuss our continuing staffing problem. We expressed our concern over our declining bargaining unit numbers and the ever increasing number of critically staffed facilities. We also provided Duncan with statistics showing a negligible management/staffing decline during the same 10 year period. Duncan was receptive and we are developing a proposal and study to submit to his subcommittee. We'll keep you advised.
NEW CONTRACT
As I indicated in last month's newsletter, we're still struggling to get an agreement with the Agency so that we may proceed to contract negotiations. Although the situation has improved somewhat we're far apart on some issues. Hopefully next month I'll be telling you that we've reached agreement and when the first negotiation meeting will be held.
RECLASSIFICATION (PAY PLAN)
No dates have been set for the actual bargaining actually putting the dollars to the criteria. if you have any comments regarding this bargaining please forward them to your regional representatives. if you have any questions on the classification itself please contact our representatives to the joint work group: Don McLennan and Ward Simpson. Their addresses and numbers are on the back of this publication.
JUMPSEAT
Included in this issue of NAATS NEWS you will find an article from Airline Pilot magazine discussing the jumpseat. We thought you might find this perspective interesting.
PICTURES
You will also find some pictures of the Board of Directors. If you would like to have pictures published in the NAATS NEWS please submit them to NAATS Headquarters. Please ensure that you have the permission of all persons in the picture and that they are appropriate for our publication.
Dear Mike and Wally:
My question concerns the FAA Personnel Reform. I know that some items were excluded from reform and that Congress told the FAA to negotiate with the union on others. Can you guys explain what all this means? - anonymous
Mike (M) - Dear anonymous. Wow! What a question.
Wally (W) - Pretty all encompassing but basically it means that, with just a few exceptions, the FAA has the au~thority to run its own shop.
(M) - Right, and those exceptions are Whistleblower protection, veterans' preference, limitation on the right to strike..
(W) Antidiscrimination, security and suitability and conduct...
(M) - compensation for work injury...
(W) - and retirement, unemployment compensation and insurance coverage.
(M) Other than that we're in the game.
(W) Right and our position is that everything other than those exceptions is negotiable.
(M) Brings up an interesting question on training, it has always been nonnegotiable.
(W) For the most part right, but now, since it is not excepted, it follows that it would be negotiable.
(M) I agree with that. And that also includes pay.
(W) That's why we're negotiating the reclassification.
(M) Whole new ball game using the rules we know.
(W) With one important exception; impasses on personnel reform issues ultimately end up being presented to Congress by the Administrator -not going to the FSIP.
(M) Yeah, you can draw your own conclusions as to whether that's good or bad for us.
Picture yourself driving down a country road with posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour. You're doing 65 mph. A red light comes on and the MAN stops you and proceeds to approach your car. You know what is going to happen next. You pop two spearmint life savers in your mouth, drink a bottie of listerene and prepare to deal with the situation.
The officer comes to the side of your car and says, "Do you know how fast you were going?"
You answer in the calmest voice you can muster ,"I might have been going a little fast, but I was not speeding". After the first exchange of words your mind shifts to the officer standing there and hope this guy is not Kojak, Nash Bridges, or any member of Hawaii Five 0 who has the
intelligence to see through your defense. You pray the officer is Barney Fife of Mayberry.
Barney means well, but chances are you will be able to talk your way out of a ticket or a more serious charge.
Our job, as a Union, is to be Kojak. and not let the FAA carry on with no fear of being caught at wrong doing. I'm not accusing the FAA of any conspiracy to avoid the legal requirements of law and regulation or our negotiated Agreement. I'm merely stating it is our responsibility, as a Union to be ever watchfiil to what the FAAis doin~ when it involves our bargaining Unit. We become the cop, and in order to be the cop we must know and understand the rules as it applies to our bargaining unit.
Don't be afraid to ask questions. Don't be afraid to request help with areas of representation you may not be comfortable with. The National Office of the Union and the Regional Officers are prepared to assist you with whatever help you need to represent our members and the bargaining unit as a whole. Facility Representatives are the eyes and ears of the Union at the local level. Members must also be alert. FACREPS can't be everywhere all the time. Only by being ever vigilant can NAATS do the Job expected of this Union. We have made great strides in last few years in developing our officers, our strategies for protecting our unit and overall dealings with the FAA. It would be shame for Barney Fife to sneak into our ranks and destroy all what we have done.
The 88th meeting of ATPAC convened Monday, July 14th, 1997 at 9 AM in the conference room of the Double Tree Hotel in Portland Oregon. This was my first trip to the Northwest, and all I can say is Wow, you folks at McMinnville are lucky, the beautiful area and the nice weather we had make me seriously want to consider moving out there! To bring you up to date on a few movements at headquarters, Jeff Griffith, ATO-1 has selected Sabra Kaulia as ATO-2. Our current executive director, Chuck Reavis will be replaced by someone else not named yet as ATO-100. ATO has a brand new division now run by Mike Cirillo. It is called operations concepts and future systems. There is a big push being directed by Vice President Gore to get something called "Flight 2000" up and running by 1999. My understanding is it involves data link displays and is part of the RTCA free flight plan. The demonstration projects for this will be done in Alaska and Hawaii. We will be briefed on this at our next ATPAC in October. I mention this because directly or indirectly, all these changes will be affecting how we do our jobs. We don't know the impact yet, but we will be affected. We received a handout on something called a "common flight plan", i.e. standardizing ICAO and US flight plans, and we will be briefed on this next meeting also. This change I am sure will be just the tip of the iceberg.
We received an update on FAA hiring, and you guessed it, no new hires for FSS are planned. Within the next two years, 500 will be hired into terminal and enroute, with 300 of the 500 being former PATCO employees. The other 200 will be from the college programs FAA has in place with 9 colleges across the country. Then in three years 1100-1200 will be hired off the street from the AT-SAT screening program now being tested in 10 centers nationwide. And the fourth year another 1100 will be hired.
We did not have much that specifically concerning us in Flight Service this meeting. My AOC regarding RVR not showing up in ASOS METAR reports was reported to be a software error. According to FAA, a request has been put in with NWS to correct the software which should be done by December, 1997. Then any of the upgraded (level A & B) ASOSs with RVR capability should be reporting it. Watch for this by the beginning of next year, and if it doesn't occur, I will check again with FAA through this committee.
In the last few ATPAC meetings we learned that the VDF upgrade program for DF is dead, and that primary enroute radar is also going to be decommissioned. This means we have no way to assist lost aircraft that are either non-transponder equipped or below radar coverage. I introduced a new AOC requesting a briefing on the status of the current DF program, or its replacement system. Our chairman reminded FAA that the DF system saves annually approximately 29 lives, and without some sort of a plan, these lives would be lost. While at a NBAA user group meeting we attended while in Portland, I spoke with Pat Cates, manager at McMinnville. I asked her if her region had relocated any digital DF's from sites no longer needed due to better radar coverage, to sites where the tube types had failed. She replied that they had a request in to do so with at least one, and wasn't sure of the status of the move. Apparently relocating a DF site is not going to be a simple process. I discovered with our new trainees we have at CXO, that they are not even being taught DF orientations in their academy class, just VOR, ADF, and time and distance. So it seems FAA is not at all interested in keeping the lifesaving service of DF. We must keep the pressure on FAA to provide something to replace DF, rather than just let them eliminate yet another valuable service provided by those of us in FSS. I also checked with Bill Dolan, our BoD member in charge of DF, and he said as far as he knew, as the old DF's break, they are just being removed. As AOPA has told us in ATPAC, the digital DF's are still available, and are not that expensive, so it is possible to keep this service, if FAA has no better plan. If you think DF services are still important, let me know, and I'll forward that to FAA upper management through ATPAC. My e-mail still works!
Other items of interest: The decommissioning of LLWAS was discussed again and we will receive a briefing on ITWS next meeting. The concern was with reliability of TDWR and FAA trying to use a TDWR for more than one airport, i.e. DFW's for DAL. Tony Ferrante said that MDW and DAL are being considered for their own TDWRs and the reliability of said TDWRs is actually closer to 90%. The AOC about poor voice quality on digital ATIS brought a response that new vortices will be in place in 3-5 weeks at BWI, PIT, and DFW. We'll check on user response by next ATPAC. An AOC introducing the possibility of mandatory pireps on wake vortex turbulence was presented. The Air Transport Assoc. rep. briefed us on their forum. A tool used to measure wake vortices discovered the vortices hit the ground and actually bounce back up. However, FAA's program to measure wake vortices is underfunded and needs a program manager before any system of reporting wake vortex turbulence can be designed. An AOC presented previously regarding rapidly changing altimeter settings generated a GENOT while we were at this ATPAC meeting. The statement "pressure falling rapidly" is now mandatory in 71 10.65 when controllers relay weather to pilots at stations reporting this.
We also discussed new anti-blocking technology radios, both airborne and on the ground, a few wording conflicts between 7110.65 and the AIM, SIDS and STARS criteria, parachute jumping in high density airspace and wake turbulence behind taxiing B757s. The new Land and Hold Short (LAHSO) order was discussed. Only one airport is actually ready with all the lighting and runway markings in place (DFW), other airports will implement LAHSO as they get the equipment in place.
As you all know by now, the CWSU project of which I was one of the four participants for the Houston POC has been canceled. I received many sincere regrets from FAA managers and supervisors and do feel that we have missed a chance at a good opportunity to expand the role of FSS and to help ensure our future. Apparently NWS in their new two year contract has cut back the fee from $9 million to $7 million, thus saving the FAA $2 million per year. The FSS people in the Command Center will remain. I was glad to be part of the POC, enjoyed the training and the chance to experience Northern California living, but am very sad we did not have the chance to prove that we are capable of providing a valuable service and quality product for our fellow ATC employees. I do appreciate the e-mails of support I received from CLE, LAN and OAK regarding keeping CWSU in the centers provided by us. Maybe some day in the future...
Please provide me feedback regarding the DF system, and search and rescue services, and forward any other concerns to me at CXO.
Andrea Chay, [email protected]
ALPA’s Jumpseat Committee hosts the second meeting of an industrywide Jumpseat Task Force to deal with important issues regarding use of airline jumpseats.
Economists will tell you that just about any resource acquires a certain value simply because it is limited; generally, that value increases as demand outstrips supply, sometimes stimulating some very interesting human behavior as a result.
Capt. Bill Baer (United), the jumpseat coordinator for his pilot group’s Master Executive Council, talks about a limited resource near and dear to airline pilots—access to airline jumpseats: "More than 50 percent of the United’s pilot group now commutes to work, so the United MEC’s first priority regarding the jumpseat is to preserve the ability of the pilots to get to work.
"I do not view access to the jumpseat as privilege," Capt. Baer emphasizes. "It is a benefit, obtained during contract negotiations. United captains are strongly encouraged to control use of their jumpseats."
Likewise, Capt. Karl Seuring (Delta) indicates that after only one year, many Delta pilots are now enjoying the benefit and are "extremely happy to be able to offer it in return to their ALPA brothers and sisters."
Unfortunately, as with other commodities, the value of the item compels the less scrupulous to deceive and manipulate to get access to the jumpseat.
To deal with these and other jumpseat issues in a coordinated way, ALPA’s Jumpseat Committee hosted the second meeting of an industrywide Jumpseat Task Force February 12-13 in Las Vegas, Nev. The meeting brought together some 30 attendees, mostly MEC jumpseat coordinators from a number of ALPA pilot groups, but also representatives from other pilot organizations.
Capt. Bill Dickey (Aloha), chairman of the ALPA-wide Jumpseat Committee, welcomed the other participants to the meeting. ALPA’s president, Capt. Randolph Babbitt, was the keynote speaker and started off the conference by giving an overview of the Association’s current activities.
Capt. Babbitt thanked Capt. Dickey and the Task Force members for doing "a great job" on behalf of jumpseaters and wished all the attendees a successful meeting. He noted that "pilots can be great ALPA ambassadors while riding jumpseats."
Capt. Steve Luckey (Northwest), chairman of the ALPA-wide Security Committee, discussed security issues related to use off the jumpseat. He noted that the jumpseat rider can play an important role in security, but security concerns can jeopardize pilots’ use of that seat.
Pilots, Capt. Luckey said, need to be able to determine that their jumpseaters are bona fide; beyond that, the jumpseat rider should be viewed and used as an asset. Airlines need to coordinate, communicate, and train with the perspective of using the jumpseat rider as an asset.
Capt. Luckey cited two outstanding examples of the usefulness of pilot jumpseat riders—the deadheading DC10 instructor pilot who moved from the United Airlines DC-10 cabin to the jumpseat to help the flight crew before the July 1989 crash in Sioux City, Iowa, and the jumpseat rider who was the first pilot in the TWA MD-80 cockpit to call out about a light twin’s runway incursion at St. Louis, Mo., in November 1994 and thus helped avoid a much worse accident than the one that occurred.
Two-pilot crews on extended overwater flights, Capt. Luckey said, especially need any help they can get from additional crew members—e.g., to deal with disruptive passengers.
Legal aspects of the jumpseat
Jim Johnson, an attorney and manager of ALPA’s Legal Department, advised that in the United States fraudulent use of the jumpseat is considered a theft of interstate transportation (among other crimes) and thus is a federal offense.
Fraudulent jumpseaters have had their phony identification taken from them, but only a few criminal charges have been brought against these individuals.
Johnson noted that an NBC Dateline program that highlighted deficiencies in airport security spurred the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration to immediately release a new rule that prohibits and creates a fine for giving false information about identification.
Regarding the response of police to flightcrew calls about disruptive passengers and fraudulent jumpseat riders, Johnson said that, after a pilot calls the airport police and the police arrest the suspect, the matter is out of the pilot’s hands.
Johnson supports the concept of deputizing airport police, as Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport (DTW) has done.
He cautioned, however, that some police departments do not want to deputize airport police because the departments fear that doing so will create split loyalties among their officers.
Authorized jumpseat riders
Much of the discussion during the 2-day meeting dealt with who is entitled to ride airline jumpseats, the priority and categories of jumpseatriders authorized by various airlines, and related issues.
An airline’s FAA principal operations inspector (POI) is authorized, under U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations Part 121.547, to approve anyone to ride the jumpseat at the company’s request.
That caveat aside, the FARs say that only an FAA-certificated airman is permitted to ride the jumpseat. But who’s a "certificated airman"?
An Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) working group, on which ALPA is represented, is developing recommendations for updating requirements for FAA airman certificates (e.g., minimum required number of flight hours, etc.).
Capt. Dickey presented ALPA’s comments on a proposed rule change some 18 months ago. The definition of "certificated airman" supposedly will be redefined to mean only pilots, flight engineers, and navigators.
Current U.S. regulations, however, permit dispatchers and airframe and powerplant (A&P) mechanics to ride the jumpseat—with the captain’s approval—because they are certificated by the FAA. Assistant dispatchers are not FAA-certificated.
Furloughed pilots, and pilots who have lost their FAA medical certification, are not considered to be officially employed for the purposes of obtaining permission to ride the jumpseat. A pilot holding a valid FAA airman medical certificate but suffering from a temporary medical condition is considered to be employed for jumpseat purposes.
As for gaining jumpseat authorization for retired pilots, ALPA’s Jim Johnson has asked the FAA about this issue and learned that the FAA does not consider retired pilots eligible for the jumpseat. He is concerned that any attempt to revise the regulations to allow retired pilots to use the jumpseat might reduce the jumpseat freedoms pilots now enjoy.
In light of that, Capt. Babbitt asked that the Jumpseat Committee no longer pursue this amendment.
Capt. Dickey distributed to the attendees a copy of the Hawaiian Airlines Jumpseat Policy. Because FAR Part 121.547 allows only actively employed pilots access to the cockpit jumpseat, Hawaiian has changed its policy to allow the captain to authorize "cabin observer" status to the airline’s furloughed and retired pilots.
Striking pilots are treated as employees on leave and are authorized to ride the jumpseat according to an FAA decision made during the May 1985 United Airlines pilot strike.
At America West, simulator instructors are in the same category as technicians and flight engineers, so they are allowed to ride the jumpseat, but the airline has no reciprocal agreement with another airline to grant these simulator instructors access to the jumpseat.
United, for example, employs only line pilots as instructors, while other airlines use lower-paid pilots without seniority numbers to instruct, thus creating a grey area for purposes of authorizing access to the jumpseat.
Some local councils have attempted to contact the FAA directly about securing jumpseat authorization for other than active pilots. One such visit resulted in the loss of a benefit at a major U.S. airline. Capt. Dickey asked the meeting attendees to coordinate any future proposed changes to jumpseat policy with him and Jim Johnson.
Air traffic controllers riding in cockpit jumpseats were the subject of considerable discussion as well.
The FAA requires controllers to take familiarization (fam) jumpseat rides to better understand the flight deck side of ATC. Some controllers, however, have abused the jumpseat privilege by using it for pleasure travel.
The controller is supposed to fill out the fam request form detailing how the trip helped the controller understand his or her job better.
The controller must present FAA Form 7000-1, FAA Form 7000-5 signed by the controller’s supervisor, plus an official FAA identification card. The ticket agent collects Form 7000-5, and the controller keeps a carbon copy.
The FAA feels that having the controller ride in the cabin defeats the purpose of the familiarization program. This does not preclude the captain, in the interest of safety, from asking the controller to take a seat in the cabin.
Some pilots will not carry controllers because the pilots fear the controllers will report any violations of FARs the pilots might commit. For this reason, the task force members encourage pilots to follow all required cockpit procedures precisely, especially when a controller is in the jumpseat.
Regarding foreign airmen, ALPA attorney Johnson advised the group that, per FAR Part 121.547, non-U.S.certificatecl pilots and air traffic controllers are not allowed access to U.S. carriers’ jumpseats unless the airline’s POI has allowed it and the airline’s operations specifications and flight operations manual specifically say so.
Various pilot groups’ MECs want to accommodate non-U.S.-certificated pilots, but ALPA’s leadership is reluctant to try to get the regulations changed on this issue because those efforts might boomerang and result in the FAA’s restricting access to the jumpseat even more than the agency does today.
One airline’s jumpseat culture
Different airlines have different cultures, and pilots should be sensitive to them, the task force members agreed, especially as the world airline industry becomes a global industry. For example, most foreign airlines permit passengers to ride in the cockpit jumpseat, which is prohibited in the United States.
One line pilot attendee, the chairman of his pilot group’s jumpseat committee, described his airline as having "a unique, sensitive, and paternalistic culture." He began working to obtain jumpseat privileges for pilots at his airline about 3 years ago—but his pilot group had worked on this issue for 22 years.
The pilot said that his MEC slowly developed an understanding of the advantages of having access to the jumpseat, even though a polling firm, hired by the MEC during contract negotiations, found that developing a jumpseat policy ranked last among the pilot group’s priorities. The airline’s management began to realize that the MEC was serious about developing a jumpseat policy after it viewed an ALPA video emphasizing that the airline was the only carrier of the many named that did not have a jumpseat policy. The pilot group and the airline developed and adopted a tentative jumpseat policy early last year:
Another meeting attendee noted that Northwest Airlines lets its offduty pilots ride the flight attendant jumpseat to let pilots of other airlines ride in the cockpit jumpseat.
Jumpseat abuse
Capt. Baer defined a fraudulent jumpseat rider as one who tries to gain access to the jumpseat by deception—i.e., by using fake or invalid identification. An abusive jumpseat rider, on the other hand, is one who rides legally but deprives the airline of revenues to which it is entitled.
United, said Capt. Baer, added language to its flight operations manuals to give pilots more guidance in making these distinctions. He added that United pilots, because of their employee stock ownership plan, are increasingly more likely to view loss of revenue to the company as their own loss and, as a result, are more restrictive about who rides in their jumpseats than they were before the ESOP was put in place.
Capt. Baer was given access to United’s ticket processing facility to examine observer member crew (OMC) tickets. He pulled about 10,000 OMC tickets for the period July 3-17,1996, and found that the biggest group of abusers of use of the jumpseat was offline pilots; another large group of abusers was air traffic controllers. He has gathered economic data that will be used to demonstrate to airlines that they can gain revenue by reducing abuse of the jumpseat benefit.
Capt. Baer also cited a newspaper article that said U.S. air traffic controllers nationwide took approximately 48,000 free flights in one year to very desirable destinations. United management changed controllers’ priority; the same as that for offline pilots from carriers having reciprocal jumpseat agreements with United.
In the past, Capt. Baer called carriers when he found a pattern of abuse of the United jumpseat by the carriers’ employees. United management will be doing this in the future. The United flight operations manuals list certain individuals who are no longer allowed to ride United’s jumpseats.
United, said Capt. Baer, has not attempted to develop a "zero tolerance" policy about jumpseat abuse, but the airline’s jumpseat policy is strictly enforced.
He added that United’s new jumpseat policy gives the captain the final authority over who may ride in the jumpseat, regardless of the rider’s status (L1, L2, or L3).
Capt. Marty Quick, jumpseat coordinator for the America West Air lines pilot group, detailed three common types of deception used to obtain jumpseat rides:
(1) The "name game"—for example, pilots for Eagle Canyon Airlines who cause confusion by telling the captain they fly for "Eagle," and Northwest Jet pilots who say they fly for "Northwest." Capt. Quick cautioned that the captain needs to check the jumpseat rider’s identification carefully to make sure that this type of deception does not occur.
(2) Strong-arm tactics—Used by pilots who virtually demand to be given access to the jumpseat for some compelling reason. Captains should be encouraged to say "No" whenever the situation does not seem right to them, Capt. Quick warned.
(3) "Dumb stuff"—For example, a new FAA employee (a former Amerijet pilot) conned a captain into letting him ride the jumpseat by using an invalid Amerijet identification card. The FAA employee was fired shortly after this incident.
Some meeting attendees voiced their opposition to granting jumpseat rides to pilots who are contract student pilots who pay to receive turbine flight experience. Such pilots are issued I D cards from the contract carrier but are not employees of that carrier:
To help stop fraudulent or abusive use of the jumpseat, all jumpseat coordinators were urged to emphasize to pilots that they should automatically present a valid airman certificate, airman medical certificate, and airline identification when requesting permission to ride a jumpseat.
ALPA does not have a list of individuals who are known or suspected to have committed fraud to ride a jumpseat. Some air lines, however; have published a list of suspect individuals.
Draft policy
The task force members reviewed a draft ALPA policy on use of the jumpseat and suggested specific changes to it. The Association’s Executive Board is scheduled to act on the draft policy during its scheduled meeting this month. Air Line Pilot will publish more information on this subject as it becomes available.
Employee Attitude Survey 1997 is on the way
- FAA Administers Two New Surveys
- Private Sector Firm Survey Our Customers
- Surveys am here to stay and why
- Employee Attitude Survey Update
- Bargaining Unit will evaluate AAD Services?
- 3 Questions and Answers From the members
The Employee Attitude Survey (BAS) of 1997 will be in the mail sometime in September. A version of the EAS has been administered since shortly after the 1981 controllers strike.
There have been some changes to the 1997 EAS in which NAATS was not allowed to participate. Wally Pike has submitted a request for a briefing. As I understand it, the agency has yet to respond.
The EAS and its predecessors are important to NAATS and each individual within our option. The survey is the best way to obtain objective scientifically valid data on our working conditions, pay and compensation, supervisory and managerial performance and most importantly...a clear looks at employee attitudes and perceptions.
Why is employee attitude so important? Because your attitude will eventually be reflected in the quality of your work your espirit de corps, and your relationships both at home and at work NAATS is in business to represent you the best that we can given our resources. The Board of Directors and I remain highly focused in providing the most positive, stress neutral work environment we can.
NAATS can only work to resolve issues that are critical to those we represent. We cannot afford to run our own surveys independent of the agency. And, in this era of partnership NAATS and the FAA should share similar interests in these goals. The only way we will have an idea on how things are is by you completing these surveys.
The agency is under pressure to conduct customer service surveys. The Government Performance and Review Act (GPRA) requires agencies to establish performance measures for their programs. Executive Order 12862 mandates that each agency survey their customer groups and establish customer service standards.
At the Oshkosh Fly-in this year, I ran into a surprise at the Mitre booth. What do you suppose I found? That's right...a survey with an OMB tracking number which means it originated from the FAA. None of the Board members I spoke with since was aware of the survey.
The purpose of the survey was to determine the quality and frequency of AFSS services as perceived by our customers.
The survey had several weaknesses. One of the most glaring was the fact that Mitre stated on page one that pilots were being surveyed randomly. I stood there and watched them. If you wanted to use the term loosely I suppose you could say it was roughly random.
However, I saw several people ask lot the survey in broken English. The Mitre representative handed the survey to each person and instructed them on how to fill it out Not once did this Mitre rep. Ask to see a license or proof of Citizenship. Yet it is common knowledge that pilots from all over the world attends the Oshkosh Fly-in each year.
Also, there were no tracking questions in the demographics section to correlate responses to regional origins of the pilots.
Secondly, these surveys are important to you because the results are often used before Congress and the executive branch. In fact, the results could be framed either negatively or positively depending on who is presenting them. So, with your input, the Board, at a minimum, will be much better prepared to represent a true picture of who and what you are before Congress, the media, and our customer group if you participate.
Lastly, the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) and Executive Order 12862 mandate that each agency survey their customer groups and the employees of the agency. President Clinton has ordered the agencies to establish customer service standards and accomplish the following:
- Identify the customers.
- Survey these customers and determine the kind and quality of services they want and their level of satisfaction with existing services.
- Post services standards and measure results against them.
- Benchmark customer service performance against the best in business.
- Survey front-line employees on barriers to, and ideas for, matching the best in business.
In short folks, if we fail to participate in these surveys we end up with customer service standards that will be difficult, illogical, or impossible to perform.
So, be patient and please continue to do what we are famous for...telling it like it is. You may not see anything of substance come out of your benefits tomorrow, next week, or next month. But you will see your total effort become fruitful eventually. Believe me, it is well worth staying the course.
AAD Products and Services to be surveyed
This survey is being administered to the employees of the FAA to determine your perceptions. The information is important because AAD needs to know where improvements need to be made.
Perhaps some of you are unfamiliar with the products and services that AAD produces. They fall in the general areas of personnel, budget, accounting and administrative information resource management. For our bargaining unit the specific services you will have been exposed to directly or indirectly will be training, travel voucher processing and advice, payroll, fringe benefits, and bid promotion processing.
An example of direct contact with an AAD representative would be the processing of travel vouchers or payroll and benefits changes. Indirect contact would be the training you have received whether it was internal through your AMT or out of agency training (college after hours).
These services are all important I know that the Administrator of ADD, Ed Verberg is very interested in gathering enough information to make these services better. My own experience with training and bid promotion processing has not met my expectations. I hope that you will agree with me that building a basis for change, though it may take time, will be worth it in the long run. Expect to see this survey in your hands some time this month. If you do not see it by the last week of August, contact your regional officers. They will pass the information to me and/or Wally for further action.
Questions and Answers
Questions from the field are very important I will get the answers from a reliable, pass them on to you, and share them with everyone here. Some of the questions and comments I heard in the past are:
Q: How long has the agency been surveying us and why?
A: I only know of the surveys that were administered annually after the controllers strike of 1981. Congress wanted to know what was broken and how to fix it. SEA was one of the more infamous of these products.
Q: Why should I take the time to complete these things when no one reads them or does anything about the problems I write about?
A: People read your comments. In fact, a lot of people have read your comments. During the 1992 SEA feedback sessions I met an ATD manager that made it a point to all of the comments employees wrote. His name is Johnny Walker. Also, Larry Craig took the opportunity to read many of them. Why? because it was important to them. The reason it doesn't seem like anything happened as a result of the surveys is because we work for a very large public corporation The issues raised by the employees were very real and very serious. They had national implications. Unfortunately our agency does not practice effective communication by providing feedback to the individual employee in a manner that makes sense to us. NAATS is working on that issue. It's difficult, it's slow, and there are a lot of attitudes that have to change.
NAATS NEWS received a request for additional pictures of the Board of Directors. These pictures of the leadership were taken during some down time at CMD (and scanned from a very grainy third-generation photocopy-Webmaster).
One Director is missing. Ron Dawson (SW) was, however, featured in last month's "unknown head".
 |
Bill Dolan (OL) threatens photographer while Mike Terry (CE) practices his intimidation stare. |
Kurt Comisky (NE) affectionately known as the "grizzled ole war veteran". |
 |
 |
El Presidente Mac relaxes with his aide Ward Simpson (WP). |
Mark Boberick deep in the thougnt process. |
 |
 |
The joint work group that developed the NAATS Reclassification (Pay Plan). Palm Coast, 5/21/97. |
Safety Team Concepts
As the FAA is seemingly getting closer to establishing its OSHECOM committees, I feel that it is beneficial to address and as a prelude to building safety teams, it is important for team members to understand some basic team concepts:
- Teams increase synergy-The whole is more than the sum of the parts. This is a vital concept that lies at the very heart of the benefit of teamwork.
- Teams provide leadership stability-Individual leadership may come and go, but at least some team members will stay to maintain the integrity and stability of the process.
- Teams increase involvement and representation-Individual leadership can only involve one person at a time. Teams can involve more people in leadership and represent each area of the facility.
- Teams provide opportunities and a support system-Individual leadership can be lonely. However, in a team, members are available to each other for advice and support.
- Teams enhance credibility-Each team member brings some credibility, and sometimes liabilities, to the process; the credibility of each team member can reflect on the others. Also, the strengths of some can mitigate the weaknesses of others. This is another example of how the whole is more than the sum of the parts.
- Teams enhance productivity-Because of the complementary strengths and resources that team members bring, teams can be more productive than individuals who work alone.
- Teams tend to make better decisions-Team members bring different perspectives on situations which often leads to superior decision making.
- Teams typically generate more innovative ideas-Synergy is a powerful force for creativity. It is well accepted that, through team member interaction, groups can generate a higher quality of ideas than can individuals.
Has Your Facility Initiated The OSHECOM Committee?
The FAA is trying desperately to "establish" the OSHECOM committees at each facility by the end of the year, so the charter can be sent to OSHA for final approval and then "unscheduled" OSHA inspections will no longer be conducted at FAA facilities. I do believe that most of thc Regions do have some sort of OSHECOM established but that none of them have received official safety and health training. 29 CFR l960 specifically states that once a safety committee is established, that the agency SHALL provide training for all members of certified occupational safety and health committees commensurate with the scope of their assigned responsibilities. Such training shall include:
- The agency occupational safety and health program (3900.19A)
- Section 19 of the Act
- Executive Order 12196
- This part (29 CFR 1960)
- Agency procedures for the reporting, evaluation and abatement of hazards
- Agency procedures for reporting and investigating allegations or reprisal
- The recognition of hazardous conditions and environments
- Identification and use of occupational safety and health standards
- And other appropriate rules and regulations.
So, if your facility does initiate an OSHECOM committee, do make sure your FACREP does notify the regional OSH rep (NAATS) so that when the regional committees meet, they do have a listing of all field committees and hopefully training can be established. Will this ever become a reality? I sure hope so, but our safety committee here at Millville has been active for the past four years, and we have yet to have one ounce of official safety training. Now, I am told that the Eastern Region does not have the budget to train the field committees but instead will receive a packet of information that covers the above, will NAATS agree to this? I hardly think so. We deserve the training as mentioned in the 29 CFR 1960. Do not let your facility accept anything less.... If you do have any questions on the above mentioned, please contact me at your earliest convenience.
Also, I need to get some information from you safety committees or FACREPS! There is an FAA order out that specifies certain criteria for underground storage tanks (UST) and also for aboveground storage tanks (AST). It lists certain EPA standards and guidelines for UST and AST. What I need to know from you is what sort of tanks that your faci1itv may have such as to store fuel, heating type, etc. The Airways personnel at my facility assured me that our heating is done by hot water/boilers but that there is one underground storage tank for the fuel for the back-up generators (but that this storage tank has been properly installed and that it is inspected). If you could pass this information to your regional NAATS OSH rep or national headquarters or to myself it would be appreciated. The FAA has till 1998 to make sure its tanks are up to the EPA standards.
Well, I'm still working on an ergonomics package that would be sent out to each member and of course, correct ergonomics for when the OASIS is insta1led. Currently, I am in touch with Scott Chapman at FAA headquarters reference this item. If you do have any recommendations or suggestions regarding ergonomics please do not hesitate to call upon me at your convenience.
Hope to see you all at the NAATS convention in October !!!
1-800-WX-BRIEF
Use It Or Lose It!
Our Address:
This and associated pages and their contents are Copyright � 1998; National Association of Air Traffic Specialists.
All Rights Reserved.This page was last updated on April 10, 1998.
Please send any comments, problems or questions regarding this site to our Webmaster.
