FAA, Air Traffic Controllers Slinging Verbal Barbs

Contract talks that could have far-reaching consequences on the nation’s air travel system have begun — with a bang.

After three years of increased tension between the union that represents about 15,000 controllers and the Federal Aviation Administration, the two sides sat down last week to work out a new contract that would govern salaries and work rules for the men and women who guide more than 80,000 flights a day. But before the two sides even exchanged initial proposals on Tuesday, they had dueling press conferences blasting each other.

FAA Administrator Marion Blakey hinted that the cash-starved federal agency would ask controllers to give back some of the pay increases they received in a 1998 contract. The FAA “cannot afford” the pay and work rules from that deal, Blakey said. National Air Traffic Controllers Association President John Carr hit back and accused Blakey of inflating salary figures. “Frankly, I’m quite surprised that she stooped so low so soon,” Carr said.

As the tough talk rhetoric indicates, the chances of a speedy agreement seem remote, people who closely track aviation say. The stakes are high, as the FAA attempts to roll out new technology, reduce flight delays and deal with shrinking budgets.

“There is more rhetoric in this than I can remember since PATCO,” says Daryl Jenkins, an aviation consultant who has sometimes worked for the controllers.

PATCO, the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization, is the former union that led controllers to strike on Aug. 3, 1981, virtually grounding all flights. In response, president Ronald Reagan fired the 12,500 controllers who walked off the job.

“It’s got the potential for being a major problem,” says John Hansman, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who specializes in aviation.

No one is saying that another strike is likely. NATCA, which replaced PATCO, has stressed that it will maintain safety and keep flights on time. And Blakey has repeatedly professed admiration for controllers.

But the history of animosity between controllers and the FAA includes several disputes that have disrupted air travel. That makes stakes in these talks enormous:

*Flight disruptions. Job actions by controllers in the 1960s and 1970s caused several flight delays, says Georgetown University labor historian Joseph McCartin. Tightly scheduled airports such as New York’s LaGuardia and Chicago’s O’Hare can suffer huge delays with even minor slowdowns by controllers.

Carr says his members are bargaining in good faith despite what he calls unfair FAA tactics, and he stresses there won’t be job actions. “The folks that I represent are consummate professionals, and they will not allow policy, politics and public relations to leech into the towers and the radar rooms.”

*Modernizing technology. The FAA needs new radar, communication and computer systems to keep up with increasing flights. But the agency has been criticized for botching large projects since the 1990s, often because it could not agree with controllers on equipment design. Blakey says the FAA needs to rewrite the contract to give it greater control of technology projects. Carr says the FAA has only itself to blame for problems with large projects.

*Budget woes. The FAA is largely funded by taxes on airline tickets, and revenue has fallen sharply since the Sept. 11 attacks as people traveled less.

Blakey says that just as airlines have gone into Chapter 11 bankruptcy to lower costs, the FAA needs to cut spending. The 1998 contract was supposed to cost $200 million in its first three years, but actually cost $1 billion, she says. The agency says the average controller makes $156,400 in wages and benefits, 44% more than other FAA workers.

Carr calls those numbers inflated and says that FAA mismanagement is to blame for budget problems. He says the average controller makes about $100,000 to $108,000 in wages, which they deserve for performing highly skilled work. “I categorically reject their wage figures as being deliberately and grossly misrepresented,” Carr says.

Neither side has set a timetable to complete the talks. The current contract, which is an extension of the five-year deal signed in 1998, expires in September.