|
Wally Pike, NAATS President If you happened to be watching CSPAN yesterday afternoon, you may have seen the House debate regarding H.R. 3150, Aviation Security. Of particular note is the wording in Section 123 in Chairman Don Young�s amendment: "It is the sense of Congress that the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration should continue negotiating in good faith with flight service station employees of the Administration with a goal of reaching an agreement on a contract as soon as possible." I was contacted by our lobbyist yesterday morning and advised that the Chairman had placed the above language in his amendment. She told me that we should appreciate the Chairman�s effort on our behalf since John Mica (R-FL) and Secretary Mineta had both been adamantly opposed to any language at all. She further stated that at least we now have potential statutory language on our pay impasse. My reaction was disappointment in that the words don�t accomplish our goal. We all know how the FAA had negotiated -- or rather refused to negotiate -- in good faith and I communicated this to her. She advised that the Chairman would be furious if the FAA didn�t initiate good faith negotiations immediately. She further stated that in that event, Young would do specific legislation. I again reiterated that some wording needed to be added to make the FAA comply. Our lobbyist replied that she would try to "beef up" the language but she was concerned about offending Chairman Young. She also mentioned that, if Young�s amendment passed the House, there would be a joint conference and there might be an opportunity to reword the language. There is also the possibility of losing the language altogether in the conference in which case the Chairman would look to another bill for the language. NAATS Alaskan Regional Director Alan Baker is an acquaintance of Don Young and he has volunteered to accompany me and meet with the Chairman. As soon as Alan can schedule the meeting we�ll express to Chairman Young our appreciation for his interest but our concern about any good faith on the FAA�s part. In the interim please feel free to contact your congressional representatives with similar comments. I�m also attempting to schedule a meeting with Secretary Mineta and I still have the November 30 meeting with Administrator Garvey. I�ll keep you advised. I talked with AT-2 Jeff Griffith on October 30th
regarding FDC NOTAM 1/1763. DOT, NSA and the FAA were very busy trying to decide
the best way to comply with Attorney General John Ashcroft�s announcement of a
possible terrorist attach within the week. Some of the discussion involved the
possibility of limiting all Part 91 flight but this was determined unnecessary. Please contact Bill at [email protected] or 301-346-6592 with any questions or comments. Shortly before the BOD meeting in October, I received a letter from the FAA Office of Human Resource Management (AHR) responding to my August meeting with Administrator Garvey on our pay impasse. The letter repeated several of the misleading and inaccurate statements we�ve seen in many of the FAA responses to our congressional letters. What was particularly disappointing about this letter, however, was that someone who knows better -- the management Chief Negotiator - signed it. (You can find both his letter and Wally�s response in the next article.) I want to take this opportunity to thank the members of the NAATS Board of Directors for their hard work and dedication during our first meeting with the new Board. There were many significant and difficult issues that had to be decided; they handled themselves professionally and with the membership�s best interests at heart. If this meeting is any indication of the future, our membership will be well served for the next three years. I look forward to working with them. I�ve been trying to schedule a meeting with Administrator Garvey to discuss the pay impasse. Apparently, she�s not taking meetings until the later part of the month. I�m on her calendar for November 30th. Several of you know or have talked to NAATS Office Manager Gretna De Stefano. She recently had initial surgery for breast cancer and will have the final on Thursday, November 8th. Gretna is doing well and we all wish her well and a full and speedy recovery. Letter to NAATS From FAA HR and NAATS's Response LETTER FROM DOT/FAA DEPUTY ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (Text is complete. Other data edited for space) September 14, 2001 Administrator Garvey has asked me to respond to your follow-up letter concerning your August 17 meeting regarding the negotiations between the National Association of Air Traffic Specialists and the Federal Aviation Administration. There are several issues in your letter that I wish to clarify. Although our team did officially take our offer off the table pending coordination within the Administration, we are hopeful of reinstating that offer in the near future. That offer provides a pay raise for the flight service station specialists (FSS) of 5� percent over 5 years above the Government wide pay raises. For example, if the Government wide increases average 4 percent a year for the 5-year term of the agreement, the general pay increase for FSS would be 25� percent over that period. Also, the offer provided an additional 8 percent average increase over the 5 years in performance payouts. As you know, we also offered to upgrade lower level FSS's in Alaska to the GS-12 equivalent level. We do not believe the parties are at impasse. In addition to the fact that we have no firm pay proposal on the table, there are several work roles still unresolved. Additionally, there have been no final agreements on any aspect of the pay system. We look forward to meeting with you soon to resume negotiations. Sincerely,
WALLY�S RESPONSE ON BEHALF OF NAATS (Text is complete. Other data edited for space) October 24, 2001 Dear Mr. Thoman: I am in receipt of the September 14 letter to me regarding pay negotiations between the FAA and NAATS. Frankly I am surprised to see your signature on this letter. NAATS has several concerns with your response to my meeting and follow-up with Administrator Garvey on August 17. As you acknowledge, your team's offer of record is a 0% increase. Saying that you are hopeful of reinstating a previous offer that you have withdrawn is tantamount to negotiating in bad faith; stating that you have no firm offer on the table is a misrepresentation of fact. As you well know, your previous offer of 5.5% over five years does not address comparability with the other FAA air traffic controllers in series 2152. Per the information your team previously furnished NAATS, the increase should be 13.2%, not including the 4.1% ATRA roll-in. To reinstate a previously unacceptable offer does not constitute meaningful negotiations and does not alter the fact that the Parties are at impasse. You further state "if the Government-wide increases average 4 percent a year for the 5-Year term of the agreement, the general pay increase for FSS would be 25� percent over that period." This seems to be pure speculation unless you are now negotiating for the White House. I assume the 8 percent average increase for performance that you mention relates to your previous SCI offer that you now state doesn�t exist. In any case, you are well aware that NAATS rejected that offer as benefiting the few at the expense of the many. You incorrectly state that you offered to upgrade lower level FSSs in Alaska to the GS-12 equivalent level. In fact you only offered to convert FG-9/10/11unit members to specialized job Category G, Level 2. Your proposal on existing FG-12 unit members was a conversion to Category H, Level 3. The inequality in your proposal amounted to approximately $12,000 annually. I would remind you that the mediators assigned to our case have stated they have no intention of calling us back to the negotiating table. Their opinion is based on your previous offer of 5.5% and not your current position. Obviously someone at FAA Headquarters has made a decision to undervalue FSS contributions to air traffic and the aviation public. That person or persons should step forward and acknowledge their responsibility for this decision. Misrepresenting the fact of the pay impasse is a continuing disservice and insult to the Air Traffic Controllers in the Flight Service option. As I�ve briefed both the FAA Administrator and Deputy Administrator, unless the FAA is willing to negotiate true pay comparability for our bargaining unit, further meetings are pointless. As you and I have previously discussed and agreed, addressing the few remaining work rules will do nothing to resolve the impasse over pay. Sincerely, Elinormarie L. Morrissy, Editor The ballots are all in and the results have been counted and verified. Congratulations to the new national and regional officers for the term from October 2001 to September 2004. They are as follows:
Our appreciation and thanks go to all the candidates for their dedication to our union, which they exhibited in their willingness to seek these often demanding offices. Almost immediately after they were notified of the election results, the new Board held their first meeting. Despite cancellation of the National Convention at the Luxor in Las Vegas after the September 11th terrorist attack, the Board met as planned. Judging from John Dibble�s observations posted on the website, Wally set a vigorous pace with sessions often lasting past 6 p.m. It�s understandable in light of the work NAATS has ahead. They have to see that our members are given their due as Air Traffic Controllers, including appropriate pay for our entire bargaining unit, proper staffing for our facilities, and modern equipment to allow us to do our jobs to our utmost ability. Our new Board will be working to see that Flight Service is respected for what it is -- an invaluable component of the Federal Aviation Administration�s mission to provide for the safety of this nation�s air traffic system. Note: Enclosed in this issue is an updated list reflecting the newly elected Directors and Coordinators, as well as recent changes in NAATS Liaisons and Representatives. It�s for you to pull out and post on your facility�s NAATS Bulletin Board. Jeff Barnes, OASIS Representative & the OASIS Human Factors Team 10/19/01 - I have just returned from Las Vegas where I briefed the new board of directors on the current status of OASIS. I was impressed by the professionalism with which the board did its job in the meeting. My first impression is a good one. I want to thank them for the recognition they have given to the Human Factors Team for what it has accomplished in the OASIS program. I am sure the Team will continue to deserve it into the future. We are working to figure out how testing will work and who will be involved. The board has selected Richard Anderson PIE, Steve Jones MIA, Tal Haley AOO, Ron Gray BGR, and Major Miller SJU to participate in the testing for the AND In Service Decision. This will involve testing at the Tech Center and at AND. AND has selected four specialists from there to participate also. I will have their names for you in a future update. Next week SEA gets the latest software upgrade and the hardware upgrade I have talked about here before. I am looking forward to hearing their thoughts on it after it�s in place. I am committed to ensuring that we have an OASIS demo available whenever and wherever our rescheduled national meeting takes place. I am also working toward getting a demo for our new board. October 15-17, 2001 GA Summit Report -- Simpson As it concerns our previous commitment to the Luxor we received a full refund because the office canceled in a timely fashion. Mr. Hoover discussed various transportation options and considerations. Mr. Pike proposes the national office to pay any rebooking costs if a member can show that they have purchased their ticket prior to the postponement of the October �01 Convention and if they can substantiate a cancellation or rebooking fee. The BOD supported this wholeheartedly. Office Report The NAATS HQ LAN will be decommissioned. President�s Report November 30th is the next time Mr.
Pike will meet with the FAA Administrator. Mr. Pike wants to stay with comparability and recommended that if we want to continue the comparability strategy, and we�re not successful this year, we should consider exploring other congressional options. The BOD agreed. Action Item: If we are not successful this year on pay comparability, Mr. Pike will work with legal counsel to cost out a class action lawsuit and possible ULP over FAA�s refusal to bargain in good faith. Chief Negotiator�s Report Voice Switch -- Mr. Dolan is trying to get the agency to sign off on an MOU like OASIS. He does not want to do anything else with the voice switch program until they sign off on the MOU. Mr. Dolan gave an update on the DF system. He requests that no one agree to the shutting down of DFs. Mr. Dolan wants people to call him if they have any questions concerning DF. Other than the SUA/ISE system Mr. Dolan said we would not sign off on any other system unless it goes through the OAISIS Human Factors Team. Discussion about the use of the Internet. Mr. Dolan said we have no MOU or signed agreement to let us use the internet. He said that the verbal word was given to all 500s and 501s from the "situation room" that they would allow access to the intranet. We are supposed to have 24-hour access to the intranet to view the web site for AOPA, NBAA etc. 2002 NAATS Budget -- presented by
Treasurer John Wesselhoft MOTION: Ms. Holmes, "I move that the office administrator receive a subsistence of the current $26,400 not a stipend with no tax liability to the union." Seconded by Dave Hoover. Motion passes 8 in favor, 1 absent. Discussion as to if we need to have a glossy quarterly newsletter. The NAATS glossy Newsletter will remain as a budget item for now but we will take this up at the next meeting to either continue or eliminate the glossy. Mr. McLennan is to write an article in the next newsletter that explains what the BOD would like to do. MOTION: Mr. Stafford, "Convert
regional training expenses back to a national expense." Second, Mr. Baker.
Discussion. Motion was withdrawn. Regional Training fund distribution for
FacReps is: NM-10, EA-9, GL-13, SW-10, WP-10, NE-4, AL-10, CE-6, SO-16. PRT News Focals -- Dibble Mr. Pike let us know that flight service is celebrating its 80th anniversary. He will call attention to this in the appropriate forums. Arbitration Advocacy Training Liaison Discussion MOTION: Mr. Stafford, "I move that all liaisons and tech reps submit job reports every other week, and workgroup and part time reps report out seven days after meeting." Ms. Holmes seconds. Motion passes 9-0. OASIS Voice Switch Steve Glowacki -- Headset replacement is on schedule. Mr. Glowacki says that the headset MOU is supposed to be in the R & I binder. February first is the schedule for headset replacement. Mr. Glowacki says originally there were 8 headsets but now there will only be 7 headsets. There must be a "onsite replacement" for each model headset at the facility and not at the regional depot. Mr. Glowacki will be the focal point for all the RegDirs who are having problems. Steve Glowacki -- Mr. Dibble is handling the web site and Mr. Glowacki is doing the Email function. Ever RegDir, RegCo, Liaisons etc. now have a post office box. FacReps will soon have post office boxes also. Mr. Glowacki explains the email functions to the BOD. Mr. Dibble also explains that the system will have a bulletin board and a chat room. Steve Glowacki -- (Voice Switch) Mr. Glowacki will be going to different companies sites and look at their equipment. After that, three will be three companies selected to go to the Tech Center and they will do additionally testing there. Mr. Glowacki said they will need four people (he will be the fifth) for the OCT team. Policies Constitution mailing to new members. It was verified that the NAATS Constitution is being mailed to new members. SW Region will look into picking up the OEX representation responsibilities for our students. Mr. Hoover discussed the NAATS Administrator position and expense reimbursement. The BOD had dialog around how best to staff this position, employees� credentials and terms of employment. Mr. Pike made a presentation on the history leading to the constitutional amendment that brought an Administrator into the NAATS organization. Subgroup formed - Ms. Holmes, Mr. Hoover and Mr. Jaffe to work with Legal Counsel Arthur Fox to come up with a job description. Ms. Homes wants some members to go through the constitution and look at changes that have to be made. It was agreed that she, Mr. Simpson, Mr. McLennan, Mr. Stafford, Ms. Colquitt, Mr. Terry and Ms. Breen would do this. Mr. Jaffe wanted to talk about call transferring. The various regions discussed how this is handled in their areas. Future Meetings -- It was agreed to have one general membership meeting. We are looking at the week of April 8th or April 15th. Board of Directors Meetings for �02
-- Washington DC the week of the 13th of January. Week of July 15th in DC. Week
of October 7th, meeting to be in DC. Mr. Dolan has talked to ATX about the intranet access availability at all facilities. ATX is to have a workgroup concerning traffic count the week of October 29th. Names of NAATS attendees are Linda Sterling, Alan Baker, Kate Breen, Al Osborn, and Don McLennan. Staffing -- Mr. Dolan is negotiating numbers with FAA headquarters. Much conversation from directors on how much they need in their regions, and how will the people be distributed. Mr. Dolan will distribute to the BOD Management 1 proposal for input. Ms. Holmes talks about the Southwest region grievance settlement on the last chance agreement. Mr. Pike to send a letter to Thoman and to some way notify the membership once Ms. Colquitt, who was the one who did all the work on this grievance, forwards all info to NAATS HQ so letter can be sent. Discussion about Mr. Pike�s updates to the membership -- Some talk that they are too detailed. Mr. Pike feels, and most agree, that the more specific is better than to go back to just general explanations. No change in policy. Mr. Pike will respond to ALR�s letter on pay negotiations and a copy of both will go on our website. FSDPS -- Don McLennan- He goes over the history of the agreement signed concerning what was to happen to our FSDPS members when the FSDPS closes down. He advises the Board that if anyone has any questions to call him. Mr. McLennan said we are down to a little less then a 100 members. IOU -- Mr. Dolan to work with Mr. Dibble to put the MOUs on the Web site. Mr. Stafford also would like MOUs and ULPs on the web site, Action Item, Mr. Glowacki. IOU -- Mr. Dolan to send out addresses of web sites that have travel information and per diem rates. Facility reimbursement -- Mr. Hoover plans on setting up an account for his facilities so that facilities can have parties, union meetings etc. He believes that somehow we should get money back to our members. Mr. McLennan stated that his region is virtually unanimous in wanting the work rules (TAUs) ratified and that they are tired of waiting on the pay. He feels this is indicative of the membership nationally. Mr. Pike was hesitant since this was discussed at STL and the FacReps voiced they wanted to hold the contract and see what happens in October. Also the same happened at the national meeting last year. Mr. McLennan feels that we should go back out to the members and see if maybe we should try to ratify the work rules without the pay. Board feels that membership should be polled again if pay is further delayed. Mr. Pike takes action item to do so if pay is not completed this year. Meeting adjourned. Andrea Chay, NAATS Rep., [email protected] "Decriminalize" Errors Items discussed in the course of the meeting that concern Flight Service were NOTAM distribution, and Pilot Report collection and dissemination (PIREPS). Ann Moore from ATP-300 briefed us on the NOTAM system upgrade. A team has been formed at the request of ADA-1 to establish a plan for the automated distribution of NOTAM data, first to the towers and TRACONs, then to centers and flight service stations. This would be accomplished through the use of personal computers or information display systems such as SAIDS, ACE/IDS connected to the FAA Intranet. Phase I is to distribute PCs to 206 FAA contract towers, with follow-on connection to the remainder of FAA towers and TRACONs to be done by Spring 2002. The question was asked why is this going to the contract towers first. Ann stated they were getting this first because of problems with displays in FAA towers. Flight Service Last to Receive NOTAM Revamp While this is true, I am concerned that, once again, we�re on the bottom of the priority list, and we�ll still have no method of getting local NOTAMs for pilots on cross country flights out of our flight plan area. And this does not just happen with local NOTAMs. We just had a situation at Seattle concerning NOTAMs that shows how we�re often "the last to know." This involved the closing of airspace around the nuclear power plants in conjunction with the terrorism problem. We were given the boundaries of the prohibited airspace around a nuclear power plant in eastern Washington. Based on that, we were briefing pilots that two popularly used airports nearby, but not within the boundaries of the prohibited area were still open. Later that day, a pilot called to tell us that the approach control facility was telling him these two airports were closed to general aviation traffic. We told him we believed they were open, but would check. We called the approach control facility, and were told that the FBI had indeed stopped traffic into those two airports, but no one informed us, and we're the ones who talk to the pilots! Since we are the information focal to the aviation community, we need to know these things first! Presidential NOTAMs
November 8-10
We hope you have a successful surgery. Our thoughts and prayers are with you. Get well soon! The Membership and Everyone at NAATS Headquarters New Direction for Public Relations Team John Dibble, PRT Chair, [email protected] FacRep to be the facility PR rep however I encourage you to solicit, from your members, someone who has an interest in performing these functions. There are three areas of responsibility for the PR Rep in your facility:
Chain of
Communication: The Focals will review articles written by the PR Reps and, if necessary contact them for additional information/clarification and then forward it up to me. I will then turn around and broadcast the information to the appropriate media outlets depending on whether it is or local, regional or national interest. (This is why it is critical you get me the contacts for your flight plan area.) I can�t stress enough, the need for your participation. NAATS does not have a huge advertising budget and it is up to you or your PR Rep to do your part to promote our services. If you have any questions or suggestions, please feel free to ask or call. Also, if you will be designating a volunteer for you facility, send me their name and email address so I can add it to my list of contacts. I need the list of News Contacts as soon as possible. For a list of news focals and who is responsible for what facilities, see https://www.naats.org/nprt/nfocals.htm. Enjoy the Glow - While It Lasts By Mike Causey FedWeek.com October 31, 2001 Is your hometown newspaper fed friendly? Do your local TV stations report the good side of government service or is every night a 60 Minutes-type expose of some bureaucratic miscue. Probably not any more. However anti-bureaucrat the media has been in the past you realize that things have changed. Feds have been getting good press lately due, almost entirely, to what the public has seen and heard since Sept. 11. The attacks on, and performance of, feds have reminded many people just what cops, firefighters, military personnel, FEMA experts, FBI agents and on-the-spot diplomats do best: Their jobs. Despite (and because of) the horror of the Sept. 11 attacks, and the anthrax follow up (which may be unrelated to terrorists) this for many people is their finest hour. People are doing what they were trained to do which is to remain calm and competent under pressure. Of the most extreme kind. The 4.6 percent federal pay raise is as good as a sure thing. The White House probably wishes it hadn�t proposed the lesser (3.6 percent) amount. It won�t do anything, given the climate of the times, to derail the higher amount. That�s good and that's right, too. Study after study, poll after poll shows (and this is a sea change) that people like the government and government workers and most want more of both. More government oversight, and control, and more government workers (not contractors) to guard and the mail, nuclear power plants, water, airports and food and chemical processing plants. But enjoy your new found status while you can. Because the pendulum swings both ways. We�ve gone from an era of downsizing and privatizing into an era where government must and will grow. That won�t last forever. And your newly-acquired (but long overdue) status as good guys, invaluable people, isn�t likely to have any long-term impact on things like federal pay. The politician who said that regardless of other issues, "it�s the economy, stupid!" pretty much got it right. Talk about (and studies supporting) pay banding, pay reform, catch-up-with-industry, etc., are nice. The media likes them because they are credentialed, they are official (accurate or not) and they are easy to report (all the hard work has been done). And often comforting or controversial. But don�t be fooled into thinking that feds are in for any major pay breakthroughs unless and until backers of reform come up with the money to do the job, and the economy improves. Two years ago the private sector was booming. Federal employment looked pretty bad to many feds even though many of the private sector types were working for low salaries as a trade-off for stock options and possible bonuses. A raise of 3.6 percent seemed almost insulting to feds. Now some new pay numbers are out. The numbers come from the Labor Department�s Employment Cost Index. The ECI measures the cost of labor, not just pay raises. It�s used to help draw up pay guidelines for the civil service. The data is stale (there is a lag of more than a year) when produced. Which in this case may be good. The latest ECI data indicates that feds are due a raise of 3.1 percent in the year 2003. Politicians can always raise the amount and they usually -- like this year -- do. But if the economy continues to tank, if layoffs bankruptcies and the like continue to happen . . . if people stop flying. . . stop traveling . . . stop spending . . . sell their stocks, there will not be any political pressure for bigger federal pay raises until the economy improves. A 3.1 percent raise might have been insulting (it was, and that's still what you got) during the 1990s when things were booming. But when people in the private sector don�t get raises, and/or don�t have jobs, a job that comes with a 3.1 percent raise looks rather good. So enjoy your new-found, and well deserved, position of respect and value in society. But don't kid yourself that it will last forever or -- in a weak economy -- that it will help with the mortgage payment. With apologies to the Beatles, Love Can�t Buy You Money. The Management Flexibility Act Courtesy of FedWeek.com The White House proposal for a "Managerial Flexibility Act of 2001" is an element of the Bush administration�s "Freedom to Manage" initiative. The managerial flexibility package has several aspects, some of them focusing on federal personnel management and others focusing on budget-related issues and management of the government�s real property assets. The overall freedom to manage package is targeted at what the White House considers barriers to effective government. The measure has not yet been formally introduced as legislation. Following are excerpts from an Office of Management and Budget document outlining the proposals. Flexibility in Managing Personnel "Currently, federal personnel laws tie the hands of federal managers who are trying to effectively manage programs. This proposal gives federal managers the tools and the authority to cultivate a workforce that is able and motivated. The legislation would: (1) provide managers with enhanced authority to use recruitment, retention, and relocation bonuses; (2) permit agencies to easily develop demonstration projects and implement alternative personnel systems, while still protecting veterans rights to preference in hiring; (3) authorize managers to use workforce restructuring tools including early retirement packages; and (4) recruit and treat senior executives more comparably with their private sector counterparts. "Federal Employment Restructuring Assistance Act of 2001 -- would create a permanent government-wide buyout authority providing cash incentive of up to $25,000. Requires OMB approval of buyout plan; includes a waiver provision for the one-for-one reduction to allow for workforce restructuring; allows buyouts to be targeted on the basis of organizational unit, occupational series or level, geographic location, specific window periods, skills, knowledge, such other similar job related factors, or a combination of these factors. "Federal Employee Voluntary Early Retirement Amendments -- would codify and broaden the existing early retirement authority to allow �early outs� for workforce restructuring, not just downsizing. Allows early outs to be targeted on the same basis as buyouts. "Civil Service Recruitment and Retention Act of 2001 -- would make it easier for federal agencies to use recruitment and retention bonuses and relocation allowances; allows agencies to pay for the cost of academic degrees and employees' licenses, certificates and professional credentials under certain conditions; and improves the effectiveness of special salary rates; authorizes agencies to pay larger recruitment and relocation bonuses based on the length of an agreed-upon service period, capped at 25 percent of the employee's annual salary multiplied by the number of years the employee would agree to serve in the position (up to a maximum of four years); authorizes agencies to pay recruitment and relocation bonuses in installments; corrects various pay anomalies that produce unwarranted windfalls or pay reductions; allows an agency to �opt-out� of a special rate authorization; improves the process of computing annuities involving part-time service under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). "Strengthen the SES -- would increase the cap on total annual compensation for SES from the current EX-I level ($161,200) to the vice president's rate of basic pay in order to allow SES to receive their full awards at the time conferred (instead of spread over two tax years), repeals the re-certification requirement, places all SES in the 8 hour leave category, and allows agency heads to offer exceptional candidates 10 full days of annual leave credit as a recruitment incentive. "Federal HRM Innovations Act of 2001 -- would make the demonstration project authority simpler and easier for agencies to use and would create a mechanism for making successful demo projects permanent and available to other agencies; eliminates the current limitation on the number of employees who can be covered by a demonstration project (5,000) as well as the limit on the number of projects (ten) that can be implemented concurrently; requires OPM, before the fifth anniversary of the launching of a demo project, to determine whether the project should be terminated, continued for purposes of evaluation, or converted to a permanent personnel system; requires an agency to submit a specific plan for implementing an alternative personnel system to OPM for approval. "Federal Human Resources Hiring Flexibility Act -- would provide agencies with authority to directly hire candidates for certain positions where there is a shortage of candidates or a critical hiring need. Authorizes alternative ranking and selection procedures. Rather than assigning numerical ratings to individual applicants, an agency could divide qualified candidates into two or more quality categories, based on an evaluation of their knowledge, skills, and abilities. The agency could select any applicant in the highest quality grouping. If fewer than three applicants were assigned to the highest quality grouping, the top two categories could be merged and any candidate in the merged category could be selected. (Preference eligibles (e.g., veterans) would have to be listed ahead of other candidates, within each quality grouping.) Category ranking was tested successfully in a demonstration project at USDA for eight years, and a five-year consultant evaluation showed that more veterans were hired at USDA using category ranking than in comparable units using the traditional hiring method." Charging Agencies For Full Cost of Federal Retirement and Retiree Health Care Benefits Agencies pay less than half of the government's share of retirement costs for about 700,000 non-postal employees hired before 1984 in the Civil Service Retirement System; and members of the non-defense Uniformed Services -- Coast Guard (USCG), Public Health Service (PHS), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) -- still have pay-as-you-go systems. The post-retirement health care costs for all Uniformed Services (including the Department of Defense) retirees under age 65 and the post-retirement health care costs for civilian employees in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program are all still funded on a pay-as-you-go basis. "This bill charges agencies the full government share of the accruing cost of all retirement and post-retirement retiree health care benefits for federal employees. Employee retirement benefits would be accrued as they are earned, and un-funded liabilities would be amortized. This proposal will not change any of the benefits provided by these programs, and will not change the level of employee contributions. "Title II of the Managerial Flexibility Act of 2001 would charge agencies the full government share of the accruing cost of all pensions, retired pay, and retiree health benefits for federal employees. This title is part of an initiative to link budget and management decisions to performance by showing the full cost of each year's program operations together with the output produced in that year. "In the 1980s, reforms placed pensions for new civilian employees and retired pay for all Department of Defense (DOD) military personnel on a fully funded accrual basis. However, agencies still pay less than half the employer share for non-Postal civilian employees hired before 1984. Retired pay for uniformed members of the Coast Guard (USCG), Public Health Service (PHS), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are still on a pay-as-you-go basis. "Last year, an accrual system was enacted for post-retirement health costs for all Medicare-eligible members of the uniformed services (including DOD). However, health care for uniformed services retirees under age 65, and for all civilian retirees in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, is still funded on a pay-as-you-go basis. "Title II would require agencies to fund the full government share of the accruing cost of pensions, retired pay, and retiree health benefits as they are earned by all federal civilian and military employees. The previously earned un-funded liabilities -- a sunk cost -- would be amortized by mandatory payments from the general fund. This legislation would not change any retiree benefits or the level of employee contributions. "Total budget outlays for the federal government would be the same as under current law, because the accrual payments from the employing agencies would be offsetting receipts to the funds that pay retirement benefits. Only the actual benefit payments would be included in total outlays. "Costs to the employing agency could change due to the additional funding for the Civil Service (CSRS), Foreign Service, and CIA retirement systems, and the shift from cash to accrual for other benefits; agency budgets would be held harmless for the initial change in costs due to this conceptual change. "Under a forthcoming companion proposal, the full annual cost of all other resources used -- including support services, the use of capital assets, and future hazardous waste cleanup from federal operations -- would be charged to the budgets of agencies and programs that provide goods, services, grants, transfers, credit, and regulation for the public. "Together, the two parts of the Budgeting and Managing for Results legislation would facilitate aligning annual budgetary cost with the outputs produced and the outcomes achieved. A consultative process of improving presentation, program/activity lines, and occasionally budget accounts could strengthen attention to program performance in making budget decisions in the Executive and Legislative branches. The improvement in alignment would facilitate more efficient program management and greater accountability for program results." Flexibility in Managing and Disposing of Property Assets "The federal government owns or controls over 24 million acres of land and facilities. Barriers exist with regard to consolidating or releasing under-performing property, renovating property, applying asset management principles to property, and the ability to use business-like financial tools to tap the equity in properties. "This proposal facilitates a total asset management approach to federal property issues by: (1) improving life cycle planning and management; (2) allowing greater flexibility to optimize asset performance; and (3) providing incentives for better property management." Freedom to Manage Act The Freedom to Manage Act of 2001 is part of the "Freedom to Manage" initiative outlined in the "President's Management Agenda" issued in late August. The Freedom to Manage Act of 2001 would establish special expedited procedures under which the Congress could act quickly and decisively to remove structural barriers to efficient management imposed by law and identified by the administration. "Under the Freedom to Manage Act of 2001: The President could at any time submit a set of legislative proposals intended to eliminate or reduce barriers to efficient government operations. Whenever the President submits such a set of proposals, the bill would call for a joint resolution to be introduced within 10 legislative days of transmittal. If a joint resolution is introduced in either House within 10 legislative days of the transmittal, it could be held in either the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee or the House Government Reform Committee, as appropriate, for no more than 30 legislative days. Once the bill is reported or the appropriate committee is discharged, the resolution could be brought to the floor of that House very quickly (as soon as one day) for a vote under special rules allowing for limited debate and no amendments. A bill passed in one House could then be brought directly to the floor of the other House for a vote on final passage." Courtesy of FedWeek.com Early Marker Set on January 2003 Raise An early indicator for the January 2003 general schedule raise has been set, with the Labor Department announcing that the pertinent employment cost index figure for the applicable measuring period was 3.6 percent. That could indicate that the White House will advocate 3.1 percent as the 2003 federal raise when it makes its fiscal 2003 budget proposal several months from now. Under federal pay law, a half-percentage point is supposed to be shaved off the ECI figure and the resulting number is supposed to be the across-the-board component of the raise to be considered in the next congressional budget cycle; locality pay is supposed to be added on top of that in order to help close the pay gap with private industry. ECI Figure is Starting Point The federal pay law has not worked according to its design -- largely because the money needed to fully fund locality pay never has been provided -- but the ECI figure typically is used a starting point for raise deliberations. For example, the reason the Bush administration has supported a 3.6 percent figure for federal employees in January 2002 is that 3.6 percent is the figure produced by cutting a half percentage point off the ECI figure for the measuring period used for that raise. Linkage to Military Raise Important With the 1990 pay law effectively abandoned, a new pay-setting arrangement based on linkage between military and civilian pay has been operating in the last several years. In 2000, Congress determined to set annual military raises at a half percentage point above the pertinent ECI figure, resulting in an indicated 4.6 percent raise for uniformed personnel in 2002-with federal employees benefiting through continued linkage with military pay. Several months ago, Congress added still more money to military pay, which will result in uniformed raises ranging between 5 and 10 percent in 2002, although for technical reasons the official "parity" figure remains 4.6 percent. It's uncertain, though, whether in light of recent developments the ECI plus a half percent formula will be followed for military personnel for the 2003 raise. 2002 Figure Still Looks Like 4.6 Percent The announced indicator for the 2003 raise doesn�t have a direct bearing on the January 2002 raise, which remains slated to be 4.6 percent. Both the House and Senate versions of fiscal 2002 Treasury-Postal appropriations bills specify 4.6 percent, and although the Bush administration has continued to advocate 3.6 percent, the higher figure seems likely to stand. The Treasury-Postal measure may be enacted on its own or folded into a larger catchall budget measure. Final Decision Coming on Locality Pay Split The White House is expected to announce by the end of November how the January 2002 raise will be divided between across-the-board and locality pay. The Federal Salary Council, a group of agency, union and outside pay experts, recently recommended that if the upcoming raise is 4.6 percent, that 3.6 percentage points be paid across-the-board and the money available for the remaining percentage point be divided up as locality pay. That would make the final total slightly higher than 4.6 percent in some localities and slightly lower in others. For wage grade employees, who are under a separate locality pay system, the pending appropriation bill once again would cap the raises indicated for them to the GS average amount. Right to Representation Reaffirmed A decision by a federal appeals court has underscored the standard that bargaining unit employees have the right to union representation when being interviewed in an investigation by representatives of the agency�s inspector general office. The decision in Department of Justice v. Federal Labor Relations Authority (00-1433) strengthens a 1999 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court by saying that unit employees are entitled to representation in either administrative and criminal investigations if they ask for it and that for purposes of representation rights, there is no difference between the two types of probes. ALASKA REGION CENTRAL REGION EASTERN REGION GREAT LAKES REGION NEW ENGLAND REGION SOUTHERN REGION NORTHWEST MOUNTAIN WESTERN-PACIFIC REGION HAWTHORNE AFSS NEWS Elinormarie L. Morrissy, HHR AFSS And the Winner Is -- Finally After a close election and a runoff, our new Assistant FacRep is Rob Erlick. Our appreciation goes out to the other candidates, Lori Collins and Steve Killgore for their willingness to take on the responsibility of representing our bargaining unit.. In addition, HHR FacRep Scott Morrissy has appointed several Shift Reps. They are Steve Killgore, John Rezler, Mike Masotto and Ron Coleman. Congratulations! Dave Chausee will be assuming the mantle of Quality Assurance Specialist in January 2002. He will be replacing Bobbie Scoville, who will be coming back to the Operations Floor. Nice going, Dave and welcome back, Bobbie. Hale & Farewell A belated hale and farewell to HHR alumnus Steve Rietz who has joined the crew up at Reno AFSS. We wish you a speedy check out at your new facility. We�ll think of you this winter as we�re watering our lawns. Awaiting a New Arrival Everyone at HHR is looking forward to the return of Duane Brownlee in mid-December from Honolulu AFSS. Apparently, he got tired of living in Hawaii? Thanksgiving Potluck Planned For those working the holiday, HHR will be holding it annual Thanksgiving Potluck. The sign up sheet for food is on the refrigerator by the sink. Maybe It�s Just Me I don�t know. Maybe I�m oversensitive, but I find myself wondering the FAA expects of us in Flight Service. We don�t seem to rate parity with the rest of the 2152�s. We have been "making due" with an outdated computer system that has out-lived its parts supply. We even seem to have trouble getting pads, pens and pencils to help us do our jobs. Now, when end-of-year money is available, we�re told we can�t use any of it to replace our breakroom furnishings -- despite the fact the our couch�s condition would qualify it for a place in the Torturer�s Hall of Fame. Maybe it�s just me, but I�m beginning to think it�s time for a trip to the Goodwill Store.
|