Bill Would Force FAA Back To Bargaining Table

If you can't mediate... legislate. That seems to be the message in the latest volley from the National Air Traffic Controllers Association in its contract fight with the FAA.

On Friday, NATCA issued a statement in which the group reports a majority of lawmakers in the US House of Representatives support a bill that would stop the Federal Aviation Administration from unilaterally imposing a contract on air traffic controllers on June 5. NATCA says that act would exacerbate a growing staffing crisis, by encouraging controllers to take early retirement in lieu of less pay.

NATCA claims support for the "Fair FAA" Act -- which the group claims would usher in the return of a fair and accountable process to collective bargaining -- has reached 229 co-sponsors, including 59 Republicans. Several lawmakers have also urged the FAA to return to the bargaining table with the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.

"Congress is hearing the voice of the American people on this critical issue and their message is loud and clear: don’t let the FAA fly in the face of fairness and safety in the skies," said John Carr, President of NATCA. "It’s time the FAA stopped playing political games and did what’s best for aviation safety and the taxpayer. It’s time for the FAA to get back to the bargaining table."

As Aero-News reported, NATCA had also formally asked FAA Administrator Marion Blakey to reopen talks -- an offer that Blakey sharply rebuked this week, claiming NATCA has had plenty of opportunities to reach a fair agreement with the FAA. 

NATCA says the legislation currently under consideration by Congress would create a three-step process to restore accountability and fairness to the negotiating system:

1. MEDIATION – If the FAA does not reach agreement with the union, the parties will use the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to try and make a deal.
2. CONGRESSIONAL ACTION – If using FMCS does not result in an agreement, the FAA can send its contract offer to Congress, along with the union’s objections to the disputed portions of the offer. The FAA could not implement the offer unless a bill is enacted into law that specifically approves the offer.
3. BINDING ARBITRATION – If a bill is not enacted within 60 days of Congress receiving the FAA’s offer, the agency and the union must take their dispute to binding arbitration.

"The stakes could not be higher for the safety and the integrity of the aviation system," said Carr. "The FAA must back away from the precipice and commit itself to a solution that safeguards safety and fairness. We’re committed to a voluntary agreement -- that’s why our final offer would have saved taxpayers $1.4 billion and cost the average air traffic controller over $93,000 over the life of the contract."

The FAA’s negotiations with the NATCA were in progress from July 2005 until April 5. Most articles in the talks were agreed to in just nine months –- which NATCA claims as the fastest progress in the FAA’s history of talks with its employee unions -– both sides refused to budge on the issue of controller pay, which led the FAA to declare an impasse in talks earlier this month.

FMI: www.natca.org, www.faa.gov