Reply #44: yeah, so "strong" bush imposed unilateral work rules on them in 2005-6. [View All]

[Hannah Bell]

NATCA was involved in contentious negotiations with the FAA in 2005-6 under the Bush administration. Since the parties could not reach an agreement on a new contract, the FAA was forced to follow the process enacted by Congress and unilaterally implement new terms and conditions of employment. <2> The Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) determined that NATCA was treated fairly throughout these contract negotiations and they dismissed all charges made by NATCA that the FAA acted improperly. <3>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Association


what is *your* definition of "strong"?


Last year the FAA imposed a new contract on controllers after a battle that sent the bargaining agreement to Congress for action. No one thought Congress would lift a finger and they did not, so FAA imposed the document which was their right as things sit today. The new document – can’t call it an agreement since the controllers did not agree - called for a number of pay reductions while also asking for some pretty silly things, like a controller dress code where one has not existed for 30 years.

Give a listen to two interviews NATCA’s executive vice president Paul Rinaldi gave recently and tell me I’m wrong when I say that NATCA made a mistake axing the more militant John Carr for Rinaldi. The first was at AvWeb, the other on the Ed Schultz talk radio show.

If I were still a controller, I’d be worried … dearly worried by what I heard during these interviews, especially in light of the continued hammering NATCA is taking from FAA.

http://www.jetwhine.com/2007/02/the-air-traffic-controller-union-what-is-natcas-value-today/


Natca is pitiful.