LEAVE DONATIONS NEEDED

Mike Sheldon, ANE RegDir

Bruce Ayer, ATCS at BGR AFSS, has been approved for the Voluntary Leave Transfer Program (VLTP). Bruce was diagnosed with Diabetes in 1999. At that time he was out of the Facility for nearly 8 months due to the medications he was prescribed. This year he has been diagnosed with Diabetes Gastroparesis. This has limited his ability to work a full time schedule for the next 6 to 12 months. The result of this ongoing medical emergency has depleted his leave.

Bruce worked at Appleton WI Tower prior to coming to BGR AFSS over 6 years ago. He has been a NAATS member his entire time in Flight Service. Bruce has run the ACE Camp which is an Aviation Summer Camp for kids in Maine.

Employees interested in donating leave may submit their donations through the Online VLTP Intranet site located at https://webapps.awp.faa.gov/ovltp/enter_donorapp.cfm?RecordID=1157.

In order to donate you must click on the "Online Leave Donor Application."

For information on Manual Submissions contact FacRep Dan Holodick at BGR AFSS.
 

   FAA Misleading Pilots

NAATS Press Release

In yet another case of the FAA confusing the issue of privatization of air traffic services, Administrator Blakey�s speech addressing the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), indicated that every pilot contact with an air traffic control specialist cost the government $25.00 and flight service as a whole cost the FAA $500 million dollars annually. The truth of the matter is flight service cost an average of $12.00 per contact until you factor in the cost of all the technical and administrative support costs. These support personnel are not included in any privatization or job elimination study. A simple consolidation of facilities and attrition of personnel would alleviate most of the issues the administrator spoke of, in her own words, "Almost 40 percent of Flight Service employees are eligible to retire." and "The Inspector General�s office has been saying since 2001 that consolidation of these automated flight service stations is the right thing to do. He projected that we could save $500 million over seven years." The need for upgrading the flight service option has already been addressed and partially implemented by the FAA. In yet another twist of wisdom, the FAA a few short years ago advertised and lobbied for funds to upgrade flight service with OASIS systems. These systems have been implemented and operational at several facilities with outstanding response by the air traffic specialists and pilots. The FAA that once saw a bright future for flight service with the implementation of this new system have since suspended funding and distribution and now claim flight service is in dire need of privatization to upgrade outdated equipment. What happened to those lost promises of a bright future? Where will we eventually find the current promises from Administrator Blakey and the FAA?

Although Administrator Blakey stated, "The FAA doesn�t support a fee-based system." The FAA can not rule out the possibility that a private company can and will eventually evolve into just that, a fee based service. This system has had a devastating affect on general aviation pilots in Canada and Australia. Privatization of any air traffic services in the United States would mean a slow painful elimination of general aviation.
 

   A-76 UPDATE

Kate Breen, A-76 Representative --

10/6/04

RECAP
I�m going to start this off with a recap of the dates, there has been several questions lately about time frame and I haven�t talked about it in a while so here is a quick recap. The Source Selection Decision will be made after January 1, 2005, after the decision there is a phase in period that will run between 6-9 months. Right now it looks like 9 months which brings the transition date to October 1, 2005 which is the start of the new fiscal year. Remember this whole process is about money and when you talk about money the agency operates on a fiscal year starting October 1st. If the MEO wins, you will stay government employees and the number employees that will be given RIF notices should be smaller, although not knowing what the bids look like it�s hard to say right now. If a vendor wins then the entire Flight Service Option will be given RIF notices and separated from government roles on October 1, 2005. This of course depends on the process finishing and excludes our Brothers and Sister in Alaska.

FSDPS EMPLOYEES
There has been discussion lately on whether or not the FSDPS was included in this process, here is what I know. The FSDPS was never included in the feasibility study, PWS activities dictionary, statement of work, or final SIR. Those employees have been following the transition plan that was negotiated in good faith as the FSDPS facilities started to shut down with the transition to OASIS (now put on hold) and lack of staffing. The agency is offering M1FC as government furnished equipment and would need to keep FSDPS employees in place until such time as the phase in and transition is complete. If left to be part of this process, employees in the FSDPS facilities would be treated like the rest of the Flight Service employees if a vendor wins and taken off government roles October 1, 2005. This is not only changing the rules mid-way through the process, but is a decision that was made solely because these employees are part of the Flight Service Line of Business. Since when is an acquisition/A-76 done on a line of business? It�s done on a job series or equipment, not a Line of Business. The reasoning that was given to me was that the Vice-President that covers the AF Technicians who would have been affected by this process promised to find them jobs and take care of them so they are no longer affected employees and are not a part of this process. However, the FSDPS Employees are covered by the Flight Service Line of Business and that Vice-President has not given those same assurances so they are affected employees and included in this process. Both the AF technicians and FSDPS employees assist in keeping government furnished equipment up and running so we can do our jobs, yet because of different Vice-Presidents they are being treated differently. This issue is far from over and I�m sure Scott will handle it accordingly.

RUMORS
Other rumors that are out there about decisions being made on the age 31 waivers and age 56 retirement issues are just that rumors, nothing has been decided to date. There was also a rumor that if the MEO won it would only keep about 30% of the work force in about 10-20 facilities, also just rumor. If that information has been leaked or is being talked about, someone is in serious trouble for violating firewalls on the acquisition.

DEALING WITH "THREATS"
There has also been talk out there about people being "threatened" that if they use their sick leave when needed that it may reflect badly on them if a vendor wins. It�s been said the Agency will somehow convey all this personal information to vendors about employees and those employees perceived to be using too much sick leave won�t be offered a job. If anyone threatens or tries to intimidate you about taking sick leave when you are not fit for duty let me know right away. There have been assurances given that this should not and will not happen, if it is I need to know about it or have the person who is doing the threatening call Nancy K. and ask how she feels about it. All you have to do is go by the book, do your job by the 7110.10 and if you are not fit for duty follow the process just like you�ve been doing. The pilot�s safety depends on your being fit for duty.

EX-DOD CONTROLLERS
Larry from PIE brought up an issue about employees who came in from the military, are they eligible to cross option. What I was told in an HR meeting last week was that if an individual was a military controller who entered into the FAA prior to age 31 and trained at an FAA tower, that individual could cross option. If an individual was a DOD civilian controller prior to age 31 they could cross option, even if they came into the FAA after age 31. This is supposedly due to DOD civilian controllers being classified as 2152s also. Now retired military personnel do have other options within the agency and they should refer to HRPM EMP -- 1.20 Employment of Retired Military Air Traffic Controllers Program. To be honest with you I�m still a little unsure of this topic, so if you have a specific question please send it to me and I�ll be happy to either research it or forward to the experts.

FSAS
Lastly, from a friend in Southern Region some information on flexible spending accounts. I�ve talked before about making sure that you don�t set up a Flexible Spending Account [FSA] with too much money because if you don�t use it by year end you lose it, well here is the other side of the coin that nobody talks about. Let�s say you set up a flexible spending account for $2000.00 because you need/want some medical procedure done in the upcoming year. You start to pay back into the account the beginning of January (approximately $80.00 per pay check), have the procedure done in February, and then retire in March. You have only paid back into the account that amount which was deducted out of our paycheck for those months (approximately $320.00 $80.00 per pay check for 4 pay periods) and the balance gets paid for by the flexible spending account. Bottom line is you get $2000.00 worth of medical work done for $320.00. It is a glitch in the system and they are trying to fix it, but until such time take advantage of it. They would have no problem keeping your money if you input too much or if you get RIF�d and you didn�t use it all. If it�s something you�re interested in, ask your HR specialist.

That�s about it for now, as always let me know if I need to clarify anything.
 

   AGENCIES GET NEW ORDERS TO REPORT ON COSTS, SAVINGS OF JOB COMPETITIONS

By Kimberly Palmer, GovExec.com, Oct. 25, 2004

Contractor groups and federal labor unions welcomed requirements that federal agencies provide more information about their efforts to put federal jobs up for competition, while each group said it still faced significant disadvantages in such competitions.

An Oct. 15 memo from the Office of Management and Budget outlined additional requirements for agencies to report on their competitive sourcing practices passed by Congress last year. They include reporting on savings from competitions, costs associated with holding the competitions, the number of bids received and how the winning bid was chosen. Agencies must give Congress reports on their competitive sourcing efforts with this information for fiscal 2004 by Dec. 31.

Federal employee organizations and representatives of contractors said information about competitions and what it takes to win them are currently shrouded in mystery. "I�d love to know how many bidders there are, and when you don�t have any, I would want to know why. It�s almost impossible to find that out now," said Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, which represents companies that bid on government contracts.

"The number of bidders you get is an indicator of the quality of the competition," Soloway said, adding that the fact that most recent competitions have been won by in-house teams suggests a bias toward federal workers in the competition process.

Frank Carelli, director of government employees for the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, a member of the AFL-CIO, argued that federal workers face a significant disadvantage when bidding. "Federal employees just aren�t trained enough to compete with contractors," he said.

Part of the problem, Carelli said, is that agency officials selecting the winning bid make their decision based on contacts and friendship. One of the new reporting requirements, the obligation to explain how agencies chose the winners, might show whether or not that is the case.

Carelli called the new requirements a step in the right direction. "If the process is transparent, and federal employees understand what the process is, it will help them compete," he said.

The additional information, however, may also help contractors understand how the bidding process works and improve their chance of success in competitions, said John Threlkeld, a lobbyist for the American Federation of Government Employees. The reporting requirement is "clearly not something that is designed to help federal employees," he said.

Besides providing more information to those bidding on contracts, the revised procedures should also help Congress and the White House measure efficiency gains from competitive sourcing, said Richard Keevey, director of the Performance Consortium at the National Academy of Public Administration, a congressionally chartered independent organization to help improve government efficiency. "Congress wants to know, and OMB wants to know, the status of these competitions," he said.

Geoffrey Segal, director of government reform at the Reason Public Policy Institute, a pro-privatization think tank in Los Angeles, said more information will enable agencies to improve competitions: "With these rules, you will be able to see trends, and perhaps identify flaws in the system, that will enable you to further tweak and enhance the process."

Controversy continues to rage over calculating the costs of holding the competitions. In March, the National Treasury Employees Union said agency reports on such costs exclude expenses related to time spent by federal employees who work on the competitions.

The Oct. 15 memo instructs agencies to exclude costs of employees� time spent during regular working hours, but to include overtime pay.

"There are always going to be disagreements about cost comparisons," said Segal. "You could put procurement experts in a room for a week and you�re not going to come up with a standard."
 

    AIR TRAFFIC PROCEDURES ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Terri Michel, NAATS Representative

ATPAC�s 117th meeting was held at FAA Headquarters October 4th - 6th. Russell Chew provided a verbal and graphical briefing on the 2005 Proposed Business Plan. The plan has not been finalized and approved. Therefore, we were asked not to discuss it outside the committee. Suffice it to say - do more with less - appears to be the continuing fiscal strategy for the FAA.

Document Change Proposals

Action Completed

AIM 4-1-17 and AIP 1.6-11
AIM 4-3-20 and AIP ENR 1.1-23
AIM 4-4-9 and AIP ENR 1.1-31

Action Pending

Awaiting Comments

- AIM 1-1-9 and AIP ENR 4.1-7
- 7110.65 2-1-6

Due for Publication 02/05

- AIM 4-3-15 and AIP ENR 1.1-13
- 7210.3
- AIM 3-2-4 and AIR ENR 1.4-24
- AIM Misc, typos

Areas of Concern

Deferred

Runway Incursions by Taxiing Aircraft
Instrument Approach Clearances to other than IAF
Clarification of Intent of "Radar Required" Notes on IAPs
ICAO Phraseology Change to PANS-ATM
Assignment of Code 7700 for Weather Avoidance
Clarification of "Direct" Clearance
Pilot/Controller Glossary Addition: Comply with Published Restrictions
Revision to FAAO 7110.65 and AIM
Revision to FAAO 7100.9D on STARs
TWEB Forecast

New

Definition of "Airborne"

ATPAC has not made a recommendation regarding the discontinued issuance of the TWEB once the Graphical Area Forecast (GFA) is produced. THE GFA and associated GAMET would eliminate not only the TWEB, but also the FA, WA, and 12/24-Hour Prognosis Chart. Art Finnegan is the NAATS subject matter expert and representative on the GFA workgroup. Contact him with specific questions at the email address on the back of the NAATS News. I have requested a briefing from Steven Albersheim, Aerospace Weather Policy Division. Hopefully, he will update ATPAC at the April 2005 meeting in Washington, D.C.

The next ATPAC meeting is scheduled for January 10th -13th in Miami. Contact me with questions or concerns at: .
 

   FSOSC UPDATE

Jose A. Vasquez -- 202-267-3739 --
Barbara Westermeier -- 202-267-3726 --

CHANGES AT THE FSOSC
There have been some personnel changes at the FSOSC, the new liaisons are Barb Westermeier from BUF and Jose Vasquez from FTW. Both of us believe the TODS program is a valuable asset to all facilities and we�re looking forward to providing a quality product.

ADVANCE NOTIFICATION OF PRESIDENTIAL/VIP TFR�S
The FSOSC is providing quality assurance for all VIP NOTAM proposals and we are drawing and publishing graphical TFR�s using the TODS equipment as soon as we get the information. Advance notification is usually 1 or 2 days but we have also gotten the proposed TFR 7 days in advance. FAA sites that have the TODS equipment can only view these proposals, and as we�re all aware some of these TFR�s can be quite complex. The more elaborate bus trips can take up to a dozen or more individual graphics. If any corrections are required these are sent out as soon as possible. Once the NOTAM has been published, the information is updated and graphical changes made as necessary. This is then transmitted to AFSS sites via TODS, and transmitted to the public via the AOPA website and the other Jeppesen Flite Star customers. The advance notice of VIP TFR�s is something every briefer needs and can use!!

GETTING THE TODS GRAPHIC TO THE BRIEFER
With the Presidential race in full swing, we�re seeing more TFR�s than usual and many of these are complex, such as the bus trips. As we all know graphical representation is priceless when trying to present this information to pilots. Those lucky enough to have OASIS have the basic TFR�s displayed but the more difficult TFR�s are easier to read from the TODS equipment. The TODS program can help all facilities by providing TFR information along with a graphic for both the proposed TFR and the final published version. The proposed data gives you warning of what to expect in your area and upon NOTAM publication the information is updated and any required changes to the graphic added.

While TODS is not available to every position in a facility, the image can be copied and placed on WSI or as a local image on OASIS. Here are the basic steps.

1. Display the TFR on TODS with any additional information you may want to see (airways, NAVAIDS, etc.).

2. Press the "Print Screen" button on the keyboard (this places the image on the clipboard).

3. Open MS Paint, usually under Programs/Accessories/Paint.

4. Go to EDIT on the menu bar, click on Paste.

5. Save the image to a floppy and transfer it the PC with PaintShop Pro.

6. Open the image with PaintShop and Crop it to fit your needs (WSI requires a 796x496 image).

7. Use PaintShop to add text such as times.

You now have an image that can be an invaluable briefing tool. The image can also be printed out and a hard copy provided to all users. The steps involved may be a bit different for each facility so if you have any questions call the FSOSC for help (202-267-3739/3726).

LACK OF TRAINING
We realize there was no formal training for the TODS equipment and feel that that is an error and we are trying to work on getting training out to the field. However, there is an instruction manual with the equipment at each facility that explains the basics of the program and how to use it. Some of the easy things are to zoom in to see all the "little" airports, put the graphic on a road map, etc. With the basic information contained in the manual, each facility can make use of the TODS equipment, especially during these weeks surrounding the presidential election.

MAKING TODS MORE USEFUL
If you have any suggestions that would help us:

• Get information out to you, via e-mail or telephone,

• Use of the equipment, printing graphics on paper copy or transferring the image to OASIS or WSI,

• Additional geographical data,

• ETC.

Once again, please feel free to contact us with any questions.
 

   COMPROMISE ON JOB COMPETITION PROTESTS GETS MIXED REVIEW

By Amelia Gruber, GovExec.com Oct. 12, 2004

A legislative compromise broadening federal employees� rights to appeal job competition decisions is getting a lukewarm reception.

The compromise, reached late last week during House-Senate negotiations over the fiscal 2005 Defense authorization bill, grants "agency tender officials," the formal representatives of in-house teams, legal standing to challenge public-private job competition results at the Government Accountability Office. Under the conference agreement, the agency officials could initiate GAO protests on their own, or at the request of a majority of employees involved in the competition.

Proponents said Tuesday that the compromise language grants federal employees equitable appeal rights and at the same time safeguards against frivolous protests. The Office of Management and Budget�s May 2003 revision to Circular A-76, the competitive sourcing rule book, allows in-house team officials to challenge job competitions at the agency level, but remains silent on outside appeals.

"We can�t overstate that this protest right on behalf of federal employees is a huge step forward," said David Marin, a spokesman for Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va. "No such right has ever been recognized by the courts or GAO."

But critics decried the measure as a watered-down and ineffective version of appeals rights language sponsored by Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and passed in June as an amendment to the Senate version of the Defense authorization bill. Collins� provision would have amended the 1984 Competition in Contracting Act to allow either the agency tender official or a separate official elected by in-house team members to file appeals at GAO.

The option for elected in-house representatives to file protests is critical because agency tender officials can't necessarily be trusted to act in the federal employee team's best interest, union officials said. Dan Duefrene, head of the National Federation of Federal Employees, said he is "extremely disappointed" with the compromise language because decisions to file protests remain primarily under management�s control.
"Senior managers are charged with carrying out the agenda of the sitting president," said John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees. "When it comes to [the] Bush administration�s privatization agenda, senior managers do not have the incentive, do not have the autonomy and do not have the resources to adequately represent the interests of federal employees."

But Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, an Arlington, Va.-based contractors association, noted that the compromise requires agency tender officials to appeal A-76 decisions to GAO at the request of in-house team employees unless there's no "reasonable basis" for such an appeal. When tender officials decide to act against the request of the majority of in-house employees, the officials must explain themselves to congressional oversight committees.

Agency tender officials have an "ethical and legal responsibility" to file protests when they believe in-house team members have a valid complaint, Soloway said. He added that he supported the right of the tender official to file an appeal at GAO, as long as the challenge involves allegations of procedural errors substantial enough to potentially alter the outcome of the competition.

"There�s more oversight in Congress on A-76 competitions than any other procurement I�ve ever seen," Soloway added.

"The congressional notification requirement will raise the visibility of every case that is not pursued," Marin said. "Given the intense interest in competitive sourcing in Congress, I don�t see how there will be anything other than persistent scrutiny."

But John Threlkeld, a lobbyist for AFGE, said that the union has "brought numerous instances of contracting injustices" to the attention of the House Government Reform and Armed Services committees, to no avail. He cited an EEOC decision to contract out a national customer service center without first offering the work to federal employees as one example.

"Based on their own records, asking the chairs of those two committees to act as impartial checks on agency tender officials is futile," Threlkeld said. "We have more luck petitioning the contractors."

Angela Styles, former head of OMB�s Office of Federal Procurement Policy, called the appeals rights compromise a "step in the right direction," but said that agency tender officials may lack incentives to file protests at GAO. "Maybe there will be some out there who feel an obligation," she said.

But to file an appeal, tender officials would need financial backing and legal support from the agency�s general counsel, Styles noted. General counsels may be reluctant to provide that support because they would in effect be suing their own agency, she said.

The conference committee compromise also leaves in-house teams without any legal means of challenging a decision by a tender official not to file a protest at GAO, Styles said. If Congress is the only body overseeing tender officials, complaints from in-house team members might get "lost in the mix," she said.

Collins, the author of the original protest rights language, said she believes the compromise "is good for federal employees because it now gives them the power to force a protest about outsourcing decisions, and it allows employee representatives to argue their case before GAO." She pledged to "monitor closely the effectiveness of this provision and continue with efforts to ensure that federal employees are able to compete for projects with confidence that they will have a chance to have a neutral third party review adverse agency decisions."

    TECH CORNER: PAJA

Gregory McGann, RDU AFSS

FAA Automated Flight Service Stations (AFSS) are responsible for issuing Notice To Airmen (NOTAM) information for dissemination on several wide area networks. These NOTAM�s are provided to pilots during weather briefings by other AFSS�s, FAA sponsored weather briefing services such as Dual User Access Terminals (DUATS) and Aviation Digital Data Service (ADDS) on the internet. These NOTAM�S provide information critical to aviation safety such as unpublished data on airport and runway closures, navigations aid and communications outages, etc.

Parachute jumping operations are somewhat unique in that they can affect aircraft in both the enroute portion of the flight as well as at the airport of departure or destination. Therefore, there must be a method that ensures that this NOTAM information will be disseminated to all aircraft. Fortunately, a method exists to do this, but the current guidelines do not allow us to use it.

FAA Handbook 7930.2G is the latest revision to the NOTAM guidelines. With regard to the dissemination of NOTAM�S the handbook provides the following rules

4-2-2. NOTAM ACCOUNTABILITY
Maintain separate accountability (NOTAM file) for each location whose weather report is disseminated via WMSCR and for the location of the tie-in FSS.

Issue NOTAM�s for a weather reporting location whose report is disseminated via WMSCR under the location identifier of the weather report.

B. Issue all other NOTAM�s under the location identifier of the tie-in FSS. This includes NOTAM�s for weather reporting locations whose report is not disseminated via WMSCR.

The M1FC computer system looks under the airport identifier if that location reports weather, or the tie-in FSS identifier if it does not, or if it is not distributed, so requesting NOTAM information for a specific airport will retrieve that information regardless of the situation. With respect to parachute jumping activity the 7930.2G says this:

6-2-7. PARACHUTE JUMPING/SKY DIVING (PJE)

b. Obtain the following data:

3. Location of the center of the affected area in relation to:

a. The nearest VOR/DME or VORTAC when it is 25 nautical miles or less from the center of the activity.
b. The nearest public-use airport when the center of activity is more than 25 miles from the nearest VOR/DME or VORTAC.

This makes sense for the most part, but a situation not specifically addressed is that which occurs when the parachute jumping activity is conducted at an airport whose weather reporting location is not disseminated via WMSCR. Common sense would still dictate that the NOTAM be issued under the tie-in FSS with the airport identifier, but the NOTAM office interprets this differently, in conflict with the provisions of 4-2-2, and requires the NOTAM to be issued reference the VORTAC.

A recent NOTAM illustrates this problem. Parachute jumping operations were scheduled at the Wallace, NC airport (ACZ) which is located on the Wilmington, NC VORTAC 351 degree radial at 23 miles. Since it is within 25 miles of the VORTAC we were forced to issued the NOTAM as follows:

!ILM ILM PJE 3NMR ILM351023/ACZ

The safest way to issue it would be like this:

!RDU ACZ PJE 3NMR ILM351023/ACZ

The reason for this is that in the first example, a request for ACZ NOTAMS will not retrieve the parachute jumping NOTAM because the M1FC computer system in the AFSS looks at the NOTAM Location or tie-in when choosing which NOTAM�s to display. Conversely, issuing the NOTAM as in the second example will cause the NOTAM to be displayed upon individual request when ACZ is shown in the route of flight as either the departure or destination, and also if the route of flight is within 25 miles of either ACZ or the ILM VORTAC. This situation also occurs regularly at other parachute jumping locations, including NC28 (GSO335019), 9W7 (ECG049012), and 3A4 (LIB339009), as well as at other airports meeting the criteria.

Proposed Solution

A third paragraph should be added to the provisions of 6-2-7 that reads as follows:

6-2-7. PARACHUTE JUMPING/SKY DIVING (PJE)

a. Obtain the following data:

3. Location of the center of the affected area in relation to:

a. The nearest VOR/DME or VORTAC when it is 25 nautical miles or less from the center of the activity.
b. The nearest public-use airport when the center of activity is more than 25 miles from the nearest VOR/DME or VORTAC.
c. The airport itself or the tie-in FSS when the center of the activity is located at a public use airport.

This procedure will ensure that the NOTAM information is retrieved if the route of flight passes within 25 miles of the center of the activity, regardless of whether it is an overflight or is originating or terminating at the affected airport. The response of the NOTAM Office to this suggestion has been to shift the burden to the pilot by saying that it is up to the pilot to familiarize himself with all information for the route of flight. This is fine in theory, but not in practice. When designing a procedure to impart safety related information to the user the primary focus must be on the successful completion of that information transfer and the procedure should be designed to minimize the possibility of error. Designing the system so that the FAA can simply shift the blame to someone else looses sight of that primary focus and adversely affects aviation safety.
 

    PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE

What Not to Do When Retiring

By Reg Jones, FEDweek, October 19, 2004

In prior articles, I�ve discussed the things that you, your agency and OPM need to do to assure that your retirement goes smoothly. Now it�s time to talk about a few of the stupid things you might do that will screw everything up, and to urge you to avoid them. While these may seem like mistakes you�d never make, believe me when I say that I�ve seen them all many times over -- sometimes with heartbreaking consequences. So here is my list of "don�t dos."

First, don�t retire on an impulse, for example, when you�re angry at someone or fed up with the job. In all likelihood, you�ll live to regret it. It�s far better to retire to something than to retire to get away from something.
Second, don�t retire unless you are sure that you have been given credit for all your years of federal service -- both civilian and military. It�s amazing how many retirees have gotten a smaller annuity than they were entitled to receive because they had forgotten to include bits of creditable civilian service such as from employment when they were in high school or college.

Third, don�t retire if you haven�t evaluated your future financial needs and probable income to verify that you�ll be able to maintain your standard of living. Having to cut corner after corner in retirement can take the shine right off those "golden years."

Fourth, don�t retire if you haven�t been covered by the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program for the most recent five years (or from your first opportunity to enroll). If you do, you�ll be losing out on one of the greatest benefits available to federal retirees. (The same five-year rule applies to the Federal Employees� Group Life Insurance (FEGLI) program, which may or may not be as important to you.)

Fifth, don�t retire unless you have checked out all the options and timings. To do that you will need professional help, not water-cooler advice. You can get such help from the benefits officers in your personnel office, government agency websites, or private sector specialists.

Sixth, if you are married (or have a special someone), don�t retire unless you have discussed it with that person. That old saw, "I married you for better or worse but not for lunch," has a measure of truth in it. Accommodations will need to be made and the implications of that need to be worked on before you start being together 24/7.

Seventh, don�t retire if you feel like you�re walking the plank and facing a life without purpose. As noted in the first point above, it�s far better to retire to something. That something can be another job, starting a business, perfecting a hobby, travel, volunteer work, etc. What is most important is to understand that we are what we do. The common question, "What do you do?" needs an answer that makes you feel good about yourself when you are retired.

Oh, yes, there are other boo-boos you can make; but the ones I�ve listed are the ones that have created the biggest messes in my experience. May you make none of them when you decide to retire.
 

    Highlighting Your Skills

John Grobe, FEDweek, Aug 5, 2004

Identifying your job related skills and highlighting them in your resume or in an interview is necessary to be considered for virtually every position in both the federal and private sectors.

When we think of skills, we tend to think first of skills that relate to a specific job. This is especially true with jobs in the skilled trades and in the technology area. In fact, many occupations have specific skills that one should possess in order to function successfully. For example, among the skills a litigation attorney would need are presentation skills and a law degree. Some skills (e.g., the law degree) would be gained through education and some (e.g., the presentation skills) would be gained through practice and on-the-job training.

Many occupations (such as physician or attorney) require that you possess specific skills and education before you enter the field. Other occupations, however, do not require that an entry-level employee possess job specific skills when they enter the field, assuming that the skills will be gained through on-the-job training.
It is generally easy to determine if you possess a job-specific skill. You either have a law degree, or you cannot be a lawyer. You either have knowledge of a specific computer program, or you don�t. You either can repair a diesel engine, or you can�t. Your standard federal job announcement generally contains details on the job specific skills that are required. Therefore, it is easy to know if you qualify.

Job specific skills and knowledges are often the "keywords" that recruiters are searching for in resumes and applications. However, if the only skills we communicate to others are our job specific skills, we are ignoring a large part of what makes us unique and valuable as a prospective employee. Transferable skills, not specific to any particular occupation, and traits help describe us at our fullest.

Transferable skills are not specific to any one job, being useful in many different occupations. These are often harder for us to identify as they frequently consist of things we do every day. These skills usually fall into the following areas:

Information management
Designing and planning
Research and investigation
Communication
Human relations and interpersonal
Critical thinking
Management and administration
Valuing
Personal and career development

We also find that many of the traits we posses are helpful with most jobs. Traits such as dependability, creativity, self-motivation, adaptability, being a team player or a quick learner are sought after by hiring officials.

Once you have identified your job-specific skills, your transferable skills and your traits, use them throughout your job search communications. Include them in your applications, resumes, networking conversations and interviews. By painting a full picture of all the skills you possess, you will be giving yourself a valuable advantage in the competition for jobs and promotions.

John Grobe, President of Federal Career Experts, is the contributing editor of FEDweek�s The Federal Employees Career Transition Handbook and an expert in employment and job search issues. He provides career advising services to individual employees. John can be reached at (708) 771-2445 or .

 THE WEBMASTER�S NOTES

John Dibble, WebMaster

Anti-Spam Measures

In order to thwart WebCrawlers from harvesting email addresses off the NAATS website, I am changing email addresses to pictures. This means, to send email to someone off this sight, you will have to type their email into your email program.

I am doing this because to many crawlers simply visit WebPages for the express purpose of collecting addresses to inundate with spam.

Update List Lost

Well, I finally got caught unprepared, after 23 years of using computers! The laptop I used for NAATS (Webpage and email) crashed and the hard drive has, so far been unrecoverable. This means I have lost the lists of people requesting updates.

I apologize for this, and if you are still interested in receiving updates, please take the time to send me your name and email address again.
 

 THE MONTHLY RANT

Greg McGann, RDU FacRep

Is there a difference between privatization and outsourcing? In reading about the A-76 process it appears that most people, both in government and in private industry, seem to think there is no difference. The terms are used interchangeably by NAATS, NATCA, FAA, AOPA, ACA, BYOB ASAP, yet there are clear and stark differences between the two.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines privatization as changing (an industry or business, for example) from governmental or public ownership or control to private enterprise. Outsourcing, on the other hand, is paying another company to provide goods or services that a company might otherwise have employed its own staff to perform. When it comes to the functions we perform in flight service this difference is crucial although the similarities often mask the differences.

If the government were to privatize flight service it would transfer all functions and control to the private sector. They might set guidelines and regulations that the company would have to follow, but the company would operate independently. This would also apply if they outsourced flight service.

If the government were to privatize flight service it would cease to deal directly with pilots for those functions. The pilots would deal directly with the private vendor. This would also apply to outsourcing.

If the government were to privatize flight service the private company would set profit as it�s highest priority. Again, this would also apply to outsourcing. So if these are the similarities, what are the differences?

From the pilot�s point of view, the most obvious difference would be that under outsourcing the government continues to pay for the service while under privatization the pilots would pay. This is Phil Boyer�s main concern, and he doesn�t seem to care about anything else. As long as access to flight service remains free AOPA is happy.

The second difference is that under privatization, the government transfers flight service functions to the private sector as a whole. In other words, anyone can now operate a flight service station or provide flight service functions to the aviation community as long as they follow the applicable regulations. Under outsourcing, a single company gets the exclusive contract to provide the services. This has a major impact on the quality of services provided. Under privatization, where a company might need to compete with other private companies for the same market group, the usual principles of price and quality apply and the vendor must provide a good product at a competitive price in order to survive. Under outsourcing, the vendors compete only with each other to win the contract. Once the contract is awarded, the goal shifts to maximizing the profit, which can only be done by reducing quality and service.

As employees, this difference also affects us. To succeed in the private sector a company must hire and retain qualified employees, especially in a highly specialized field such as ours. This means they must compete with each other in offering salary, benefits and working conditions that will attract the best employees. This is not an area where the company can disregard the welfare of the employees because there is an unlimited pool of cheap labor that can do the job adequately. Ours is not a job that falls in the "hamburger flipper" category. In the private sector as a whole, the more specialized a position is, the better the employee is treated.

Under outsourcing, the company does not need to compete to attract customers for the service. Consequently, it has much less regard for its employees. The quality of the job they perform in not nearly as important as the quantity. The goal becomes to get the most work, at the least cost, from the fewest number of employees possible. For us, this means working in a call center for a third of our current salary and minimal benefits.

From the standpoint of safety, efficiency, and employee satisfaction privatization wins hands down. From the standpoint of cost to the system, privatization also wins because private companies are either inherently efficient or they don�t survive. Government services outsourced to a private company are horribly expensive to the taxpayers because the waste and abuse inherent in the system. There is only one thing that makes outsourcing more attractive to people like Phil Boyer -- it�s "free."

For the companies bidding in this A-76 process, the work ends with the contract award. The shareholders will cheer, the CEO will take a bonus, and the pilots will be forgotten. Hey, we got the contract -- who cares about anything else?

It�s like the two guys who come across a sleeping bear. "Shh..." says the first guy. "Don�t wake him up."

"Why not?" asks the second.

"Because he�ll eat us!" replies the first. "Do you really think you can outrun him?"

"Well," says the second guy. "I don�t have to outrun the bear. I just have to outrun you."
 

 PILOT DEVIATIONS AVOIDABLE

NAATS Press Release

Everyone in the nation understands that in recent years security has become a serious issue in the aviation community. What most people are not aware of is the availability of a single organization that can inform the aviation community of these procedures. Most of the general aviation community is aware and takes advantage of the availability of FAA services.

Flight Service Stations across the nation employ Over 2000 Air Traffic Control Specialist who are trained to provide important information to pilots prior to their departure and while in flight. This includes Temporary Flight Restriction around Presidential and VIP movement. The pilot and passenger that no doubt were terrified by their F-15 escort in the Philadelphia area could have avoided this incident by placing a single phone call to a Flight Service Station. The FAA itself has required that all pilots must file a flight plan with a Flight Service Station prior to entering modified airspace during certain events that require flight restrictions. Air Traffic Control Specialist across the nation have this information available for pilots to access. This is provided to ensure that they are flying with the safest, most accurate information available.

As important as these services are, the FAA is considering discontinuing some of these services. If this were to happen then we can all expect to see more of these stories of uninformed pilots violating airspace across the nation. This is a senseless consideration by the administration considering the importance of the integrity of our national airspace system.
 

    FLAT SCREEN TV EMITS INTERNATIONAL DISTRESS SIGNAL

CNN.com, Oct. 19, 2004

EUGENE, Oregon (Reuters) -- TV hardly gets much better than this.

An Oregon man discovered earlier this month that his year-old Toshiba Corporation flat-screen TV was emitting an international distress signal picked up by a satellite, leading a search and rescue operation to his apartment in Corvallis, Oregon, 70 miles south of Portland.

The signal from Chris van Rossmann�s TV was routed by satellite to the Air Force Rescue Center at Langley Air Base in Virginia.

On October 2, the 20 year-old college student was visited at his apartment in the small university town by a contingent of local police, civil air patrol and search and rescue personnel.

"They�d never seen signal come that strong from a home appliance," said van Rossmann. "They were quite surprised. I think we all were."

Authorities had expected to find a boat or small plane with a malfunctioning transponder, the usual culprit in such incidents, emitting the 121.5 MHz frequency of the distress signal used internationally.
 

   OPINION

The opinions expressed here are strictly those of the authors and in no way reflects the position of the Union or its elected or appointed officials or liaisons.

With union elections just concluded, the U.S. election upcoming and the shadow of A-76 looming over everything, it�s a pretty sure bet everyone could use a bit of humor. So this month will be devoted to commentary of a more visual nature. Thanks to Scott Morrissy, Paul Cahoon and Greg McGann for their submissions. -- Editor

This is an appeal to ALL flight service controllers,
NAATS members and not, to make contributions
to the NAATS Political Action Committee Fund.

No matter who wins the presidential election, there will
still be plenty of work to do on killing A-76 and restoring
funding for OASIS and other technological

advances to enhance our service to the flying public. It
takes a lot of money to lobby our national politicians,
and like it or not, that�s the way the game is played in
Washington D.C.

We challenge ALL bargaining unit members to donate $5
per pay period to the NAATS PAC until A-76 goes away.

If you can�t afford $5, then make a one time contribution
of $5 or $10 or whatever you think you can afford
to help save your job.

If the forms aren�t posted on your facility�s
NAATS Bulletin Board,
just ask your FacRep for a contribution
payroll deduction form.

Contributions can be stopped at any time.

It�s your future. Help us protect it.
 

   FEDERAL EMPLOYEE NEWS

Brought to you by FedWeek.com

3.5 Percent Raise Advances
The House has approved a fiscal 2005 spending bill setting the January 2005 federal pay raise at 3.5 percent in the name of maintaining pay parity with uniformed military personnel, leaving Senate passage of a counterpart, a House-Senate conference and a Presidential signature as the last remaining needed steps. It�s unclear whether the Transportation-Treasury appropriations bill (S-2806 and HR-5025) will be passed as separate legislation or rolled into a catchall measure, however. The uncertainty on the budget process also has led to the possibility of a repeat of the experience of the last two years, in which the legislation bearing the raise was put off until after the start of the new calendar year. That situation allows a lower raise to kick in by default, with the higher amount paid retroactively once action is completed. Both versions of the spending bill would require that wage grade employees, who are under a separate locality system, get the same raise going to general schedule employees in a locality, and would require the Defense and Homeland Security departments, which are planning market-based and performance-based salary systems for their employees, give their workers the same raise going to other federal workers in 2005.

Performance Fund Request Doesn�t Perform Well
The Senate�s Transportation-Treasury measure would not provide any money for the "human capital performance fund" that Congress created on paper last year but for which it provided only $1 million in start-up money during the current fiscal year. As it had last year, the Bush administration this year requested $300 million for the fund, which would be divvied up among agencies according to their share of the federal payroll, to be used to reward good providers. The House�s version of the 2005 measure would provide $16.5 million. In a report, the Senate Appropriations Committee said it "supports the concept of a performance-based pay system, but continues to be concerned about the creation of the human capital performance fund. The committee believes that an initiative of this type should be budgeted and administered within the salaries and expenses of each individual agency."

Other Provisions of Senate Bill
The Senate Transportation-Treasury bill differs from its House counterpart in several other ways. First, it does not continue the general ban on abortion coverage in the Federal Employees Health Benefits program; last year, in a similar situation, the ban was continued by House-Senate conferees. Also, the Senate bill contains a provision struck out in House voting requiring agencies to evaluate the creditworthiness of employees before giving them travel or purchase charge cards. However, like the House bill the Senate measure would generally require FEHB plans to pay for prescription contraceptives, generally bar agencies from providing employee names and home addresses to labor organizations and prohibit training not directly related to the performance of official duties.

House Passes Contracting Restrictions
During floor voting on its Transportation-Treasury bill, the House accepted an amendment that would bar use government-wide of the revised contracting out guidance in Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 that the Bush administration issued last year. The major points of contention involved the lack of employee appeal rights in the revised guidance, its lack of a guarantee that employees could reorganize into a "most efficient organization" before undergoing bids and its allowing factors other than cost to be considered in the final decision. The Senate version of the bill also would prohibit the use of any funds to carry out the 2003 changes to A-76. The White House has threatened a veto, saying that barring the revised A-76 policy would effectively shut own its competitive sourcing initiative, one of the cornerstones of its management agenda. Similar restrictions already have been signed into law as part of a budget bill affecting the Defense Department, which does about two-thirds of the government�s contracting out. Last year in a similar situation, conferees on the Transportation-Treasury bill modified similar language so that it applied only to agencies directly funded by that bill.

TSP Funds Have Positive Month
All five Thrift Savings Plan investment funds had up months in September, with the small capitalization (S) fund leading the way with a 3.92 percent gain, followed by the international stock (I) fund, 2.05 percent, the common stock (C) fund, 1.11 percent, the government securities (G) fund, 0.38 percent, and the bond (F) fund, 0.29 percent. In terms of 12-month returns, the I fund leads with a 21.63 percent gain, followed by the S fund, 18.21 percent, C fund, 13.87 percent, G fund, 4.34 percent, and F fund, 3.61 percent.

TSP Open Season Arriving
The Thrift Savings Plan on Friday (October 15) will begin one of its twice-yearly open seasons, an opportunity for eligible employees not currently investing in the program to begin investments and one for those currently participating to change their levels of investment. During the open season, which runs through the end of the calendar year, FERS system investors may raise their biweekly contributions to as much as 15 percent of salary and those under CSRS may raise theirs to up to 10 percent, with both subject to an annual dollar cap, which itself is rising in 2005, to $14,000. The percentage of salary limits are set to end a year from now, although the annual dollar caps will remain.

Could Be Last One
This could be the last of the TSP�s open seasons, a fixture of the plan since its inception; legislation is pending in Congress to abolish open seasons and allow new enrollments or changes in investment amounts at any time. If that measure is enacted this year, the TSP would issue rules which presumably would take effect before the scheduled start of the following open season, next April 15. The Senate has passed its version and the House Government Reform Committee has passed its own version, which differs mainly in that it would allow government contributions for newly hired employees to start immediately, rather than remain on the same waiting period schedule currently used--a schedule that can mean a delay of nearly a year in some cases. That has proven to be a hang-up, since the Congressional Budget Office has estimated the additional cost of that provision at $1.1 billion over 10 years.

What the Travel Comp Time Provision Says
Another provision of the reform bill would authorize compensatory time off for federal employees who must travel for official purposes on off-duty time. This provision is of significant interest to many employees who travel, since they have long complained that they in effect are being forced to donate time to the government since travel time is paid time only under limited circumstances. However, It likely will be some time until decisions are made on exactly how the new authority could be used. Here�s what the bill's language says: "each hour spent by an employee in travel status away from the official duty station of the employee, that is not otherwise compensable, shall be treated as an hour of work or employment for purposes of calculating compensatory time off. An employee who has any hours treated as hours of work or employment for purposes of calculating compensatory time... shall not be entitled to payment for any such hours that are unused as compensatory time." The measure orders the Office of Personnel Management to issue implementing regulations.

Vision-Dental Bill Clears House
The House just before recessing until mid-November passed a bill (HR-5295) to authorize a vision-dental benefits program for federal employees, retirees and family members apart from the Federal Employees Health Benefits program. The bill supersedes an earlier House approach that merely would have required a study of such a benefits package, and adopts the approach favored in the Senate (S-2657) to authorize such a program. The new benefits package, which would not be available until at least 2006, would be modeled on the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program in that the Office of Personnel Management would create a general structure and oversee contractor bidding, but individuals would pay the entire cost. The House version differs somewhat from the Senate approach because the House bill also would order a study of whether hearing benefits could be added as well. The Senate could act when Congress returns.

Regional Supplements

ALASKA REGION

CENTRAL REGION

EASTERN REGION

GREAT LAKES REGION

NEW ENGLAND REGION

NORTHWEST MOUNTAIN REGION

SOUTHERN REGION

SOUTHWEST REGION

WESTERN-PACIFIC REGION

HAWTHORNE AFSS NEWS
Eli Morrissy, HHR FacRep

FacRep Changes
Now our elections are complete, the I�m the new FacRep and Stuart Macofsky the new Alternate FacRep. This is a unique and challenging time for all of us, hopefully we can all work together to get through the days ahead.

FSDPS FacRep Designation
I have designated Dan Smutz as the FacRep for the FSDPS bargaining unit. Dan is a long time NAATS member and an experienced FacRep. He will also receive 2 hours of FacRep time from the 16 hours allocated by the NAATS/FAA CBA (contract).

Training News
Mark Smith (MC) continues toward his facility recertification.

2005 Schedule
Work is in progress on the 2005 Schedule, thanks to maximum assistance from Scott Morrissy and FW Shift Rep. John Rezler. This schedule will be shorter than ever. We�ll be writing it for 24 lines, plus 5 Flight Watch and a FacRep line designed to maximize my interaction with Management. Fair warning -- it ain�t goin� to be pretty!

Special Visitor
Mark Smith�s lovely wife, Jordis, was recently back for a brief visit while on leave from her post as a U.S. Marine serving in Japan. She got to meet a number of the HHR crew before she and Mark had to leave for the airport to catch her flight back to Japan. We hope she enjoyed her visit as much as we did.

HR Briefings Held
We finally had our Human Resources briefings on the implications of the A-76 competition and a possible Reduction in Force (RIF) for all our futures. The briefing team consisted of HR, benefits and retirements specialists from Western Pacific Regional Headquarters. They were all very well informed and well prepared. Overall, they gave a very thorough and professional presentation -- despite the fact they weren�t carrying the most joyous of tidings. The one thing that can be said is we all now have more information with which to plan future actions.

One controversy did arise during the afternoon briefings on Tuesday which NAATS RegDir Mike Puffer attended. It revolved around the term "surplus" employees and when we may exercise our rights to administrative time for career transition activities. You�ll be hearing more about this in the near future so that NAATS can aid everyone in protecting their negotiated and statutory rights.

It seems that these discussions have solidified in everyone�s minds the reality of A-76 and its potential effects on our futures. Dealing with such radical changes to our lives is highly stressful, even for those who choose not to show it. Living with stress over a prolonged time, as we are, can adversely affect our bodies, minds and relationships with our families and co-workers. With that in mind, I will be submitting a request through the ATM to set up the classes offered through the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) on the subjects of Stress Management and Dealing with Change. These are group classes that offer healthful strategies to handle the difficulties imposed by such radical changes as retirement or major changes in working conditions or personal life. I will post a sign up sheet in order to get a head count of those wishing to attend.

Weather News
With all the news from the hurricanes that ravaged the Atlantic and Gulf coasts over the last few months, we shouldn't forget that Southern California can get its share of devastating weather also.

The following page carries a photo illustrating the excessive damage caused to a home from the storms that passed through the Los Angeles area a couple of days ago. It really makes you cherish what you have, and reminds us not to life for granted!!!

Warning: The following picture is quite graphic and may not be suitable for overly sensitive viewers...

Click here to view image
 

NAATS News Editorial Policy

Nothing that is inflammatory or scurrilous, libelous, attacks members by name or which contains words or phrases that are in poor taste and likely to be unnecessarily offensive, should be printed in the NAATS News or Regional Supplements. Individual(s) views expressed in the newsletter do not necessarily reflect the position of the Union.

ADDRESS UPDATE

Effective immediately, the new address is: . The old newsletter address will be shut down by August 31st. My contact information has also been updated on both the front and the back pages.