NATCA

I'm looking forward to reporting in August to my new facility so I can hopefully, finally, maybe get some EA.
 
Hey NATCA, Hazard Pay...
This truly is the mind boggling one that isn't being talked about nearly enough. It's pretty clearly spelled out in the OPM guidelines, and the covid crisis is bad enough we are having all these other discussions regarding training, alternative schedules etc., but no mention of hazard pay in what everyone at a leadership level is clearly recognizing as a hazardous situation.
 
This truly is the mind boggling one that isn't being talked about nearly enough. It's pretty clearly spelled out in the OPM guidelines, and the covid crisis is bad enough we are having all these other discussions regarding training, alternative schedules etc., but no mention of hazard pay in what everyone at a leadership level is clearly recognizing as a hazardous situation.
Were closing a center that does arrivals for one of the busiest airspaces in the country during the day because it’s considered hazardous and we need to clean. How is this not a hazard pay situation lol.
 
Were closing a center that does arrivals for one of the busiest airspaces in the country during the day because it’s considered hazardous and we need to clean. How is this not a hazard pay situation lol.
Maybe they can at least get us some vaccines.
 
12 weeks of paid parental leave was incidental to correcting a loophole that excluded us from the rest of the workforce

Annual raise was for all federal employees

No federal agency experienced RIFs

So of the things you listed, the Slate Book raise was really the only thing applicable to NATCA BUMs only.
I love it when we agree. I saw that email this morning bragging about shit that happened to the ENTIRE govt and about choked on my dues.
 
AGs that are bitching about not being able to train in order to get raises evolve in to the same people that defend NATCA for keeping AGs at home for the “safety of the NAS” when they’re certified. Removing that group, you’re left with AGs who just want to do their job and not feel like they’re sucking off the Governments Welfare tit. If you made it through OKC, you probably posses the skills and intelligence necessary to get a job where you actually work (despite Chin-UHH Virus) for the same or more amount of money as AG pay. I don’t give a damn about raises, but when I see police trainees doing take-down training (or any other profession that doesn’t have NATCA representation) and smearing their COVID juices all over each other while AGs sit at home drooling over a forum that praises polarity, something appears to be wrong.

#MakeWorkingGreatAgain
 
AGs that are bitching about not being able to train in order to get raises evolve in to the same people that defend NATCA for keeping AGs at home for the “safety of the NAS” when they’re certified. Removing that group, you’re left with AGs who just want to do their job and not feel like they’re sucking off the Governments Welfare tit. If you made it through OKC, you probably posses the skills and intelligence necessary to get a job where you actually work (despite Chin-UHH Virus) for the same or more amount of money as AG pay. I don’t give a damn about raises, but when I see police trainees doing take-down training (or any other profession that doesn’t have NATCA representation) and smearing their COVID juices all over each other while AGs sit at home drooling over a forum that praises polarity, something appears to be wrong.

#MakeWorkingGreatAgain
I think I disagreed and agreed with you every other sentence. Good job.
 
You had 9 months off, you’ve been back for a month and you’re complaining because they are having you work the positions that qualify you for your pay level.
No, I’m complaining because the entire reason we were on EA to begin with and the reason we continue to be on reduced schedules is because of a virus that we are less likely to get when we sit 6 feet apart. When I work I’m closer than 6 feet from someone, and I’ve been doing that for the last month. The only reason I can’t train now is because of reduced staffing, and we’re on reduced staffing because of COVID, but I can violate COVID safety protocols to work? It doesn’t make sense. There’s just no way around it.
 
The second the Agency brought back controllers, with partial certifications, they should have allowed those individuals to continue their training. There is no difference, in risk, from that person sitting at a handoff versus a scope. When the Agency brought back CPCs, with underlying medical conditions, ALL trainees should have been recalled. If it safe enough for the highest risk individuals to be in the building because of “staffing,” then those facilities should mitigate any staffing issues and continue to train ALL personnel.
 
This truly is the mind boggling one that isn't being talked about nearly enough. It's pretty clearly spelled out in the OPM guidelines, and the covid crisis is bad enough we are having all these other discussions regarding training, alternative schedules etc., but no mention of hazard pay in what everyone at a leadership level is clearly recognizing as a hazardous situation.
My opinion because many of us are being paid to stay at home rather than being paid extra to come in. I’m not saying I agree or disagree but when we are being paid to not work...I know not all facilities are 5/5 and are back on bws I’m just saying, I believe it’s a difficult ask.
 
No, I’m complaining because the entire reason we were on EA to begin with and the reason we continue to be on reduced schedules is because of a virus that we are less likely to get when we sit 6 feet apart. When I work I’m closer than 6 feet from someone, and I’ve been doing that for the last month. The only reason I can’t train now is because of reduced staffing, and we’re on reduced staffing because of COVID, but I can violate COVID safety protocols to work? It doesn’t make sense. There’s just no way around it.

The second the Agency brought back controllers, with partial certifications, they should have allowed those individuals to continue their training. There is no difference, in risk, from that person sitting at a handoff versus a scope. When the Agency brought back CPCs, with underlying medical conditions, ALL trainees should have been recalled. If it safe enough for the highest risk individuals to be in the building because of “staffing,” then those facilities should mitigate any staffing issues and continue to train ALL personnel.

I really really really don't understand how fucking dense people can be.

There are two separate factors in whether you get the disease, and how severe it is if you get it (at least re: transmission, obviously your immune system and maybe blood type and who knows what else play a role). Those factors are: PROXIMITY to an infectious person, and DURATION near that infectious person.

Having you back working a position next to someone is an increased risk compared to having you sitting at home. Having you, in addition, next to someone for training is another increased risk compared to sitting in the break room (or at home).

If the choice is between working next to someone or training next to someone, obviously those are the same. But if the choice is bringing someone back to work, or bringing someone back to work and also train, those are different.
 
Back
Top Bottom