Will NATCA and the FAA extend the contract?

[GulfCharlie]

Maybe some people are, but you weren’t willing to stay a controller to find out.

Some? I would say a pretty fair margin given the last election. I did my time and feel no regret, you get one go in life and my determination was family / health were far more important than making do with less while slowly killing myself. Hopefully one day you can look back and say the same but I doubt it. If you are going to take a personal shot at me, do not miss.

 

[Move78]

People are willing to take a stand on principle. It is better to try and fail than never try at all. More people are coming around to this idea because NATCA cannot keep “playing it safe” all the time. Not everyone is at a level 12 and it resonates with the lower levels.

Life has wins and losses, people accept this.

I don’t know what you’re replying to. My post was a response to a post about arbitration

 

[GulfCharlie]

I don’t know what you’re replying to. My post was a response to a post about arbitration

TLDR: People would rather go to arbitration and lose than extend.

 

[Nothanks]

TLDR: People would rather go to arbitration and lose than extend.

Are you sure ? That’s not how people voted it seems.

 

[LennyA21]

Are you sure ? That’s not how people voted it seems.

To be fair Nick rescinded his motion to extend and said in his videos in the run off he would be negotiating a new contract

 

[Move78]

TLDR: People would rather go to arbitration and lose than extend.

Yeah that’s just not what I was talking about.
Going to arbitration because the agency refuses to move an inch on pay is bad. Good would be negotiating with an agency that was willing to compromise.
It’s also a guarantee like mick said. Point is the agency will give up nothing unless they’re forced to do so.

 

[Shikaka]

How many? And how many of those Delta applicants are off the street with zero experience?

The point stands. 30-50k applicants on a bid communicates a high supply to leadership.

That's not necessarily a good arguement, if the 30-50k applicants were capable of doing the job day one then it'd be a good arguement. The development of a high level terminal controller can easily take half a decade. Refined products always surpass the value of the unrefined version.

Either way history has the precedence that 30-50k applicants also doesn't fix the staffing issue for a workforce almost a fifth that number as well.

This isn't Wendy's.

 

[32andBelow]

How many? And how many of those Delta applicants are off the street with zero experience?

The point stands. 30-50k applicants on a bid communicates a high supply to leadership.

I don’t know but this is the reason the pilot union has advocate for things like 1500 hours and atps for both seats. Not cus it’s necessary but because it puts a moat around their Profession.

 

[PooseMaGoose]

That's not necessarily a good arguement, if the 30-50k applicants were capable of doing the job day one then it'd be a good arguement. The development of a high level terminal controller can easily take half a decade. Refined products always surpass the value of the unrefined version.

Either way history has the precedence that 30-50k applicants also doesn't fix the staffing issue for a workforce almost a fifth that number as well.

This isn't Wendy's.

You guys are missing the point I’m making. I agree. It doesn’t matter if we had 100k applicants per bid for our staffing numbers. The issue has nothing to do with willing or capable applicants and has everything to do with our internal mechanisms. Since 2016, we have a net gain of SINGLE DIGIT cpcs. That has nothing to do with applicant numbers.

The point I’m making is that the large amount of applicant numbers clearly work against the notion of pay increases because it’s justification for leadership that there are enough willing participants for status quo.

I don’t know but…….

Exactly. Stop there.

 

[32andBelow]

Exactly. Stop there.

You and Mike are both morons. Keep being against everything and your interests. That will work out well.

 

[Ad1234]

You guys are missing the point I’m making. I agree. It doesn’t matter if we had 100k applicants per bid for our staffing numbers. The issue has nothing to do with willing or capable applicants and has everything to do with our internal mechanisms. Since 2016, we have a net gain of SINGLE DIGIT cpcs. That has nothing to do with applicant numbers.

The point I’m making is that the large amount of applicant numbers clearly work against the notion of pay increases because it’s justification for leadership that there are enough willing participants for status quo.

We do a poor job of training, combine that with working conditions some people don’t like.

And some people advocate in this forum to allow facilities to home grow their employees as a way to make better controllers when we don’t do a good job training them now. Laughable.

 

[ajmezz]

We do a poor job of training, combine that with working conditions some people don’t like.

And some people advocate in this forum to allow facilities to home grow their employees as a way to make better controllers when we don’t do a good job training them now. Laughable.

I’m sure it’s facility dependent, but I’ve been at multiple facilities now where people bend over backwards to accomplish training (short breaks, De-combining/combining positions, etc).

 

[PooseMaGoose]

You and Mike are both morons. Keep being against everything and your interests. That will work out well.

If you’re going to be a fragile little bitch, do us all a favor and keep it to yourself, okay?

 

[Ad1234]

I’m sure it’s facility dependent, but I’ve been at multiple facilities now where people bend over backwards to accomplish training (short breaks, De-combining/combining positions, etc).

Absolutely there are good examples. But at all 300 facilities? Unlikely. And in some cases it doesn’t mean that training and instruction is actually any good

 

[ATCJoe85]

The point I’m making is that the large amount of applicant numbers clearly work against the notion of pay increases because it’s justification for leadership that there are enough willing participants for status quo.

You're being too kind to leadership if you're willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they're putting even just that much thought into it.

I'd bet leadership thought process is more along the lines of: "can they strike?---> No?---> No raise!"

 

[SquawkHijack]

You're being too kind to leadership if you're willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they're putting even just that much thought into it.

I'd bet leadership thought process is more along the lines of: "can they strike?---> No?---> No raise!"

This. If we are to achieve any kind of significant pay raise like the rest of the aviation industry it’ll have to be a battle fought through public relations. And preferably not at any lvl 10+ facility.

 

[DADDYSbabyBIRD]

I don’t know but this is the reason the pilot union has advocate for things like 1500 hours and atps for both seats. Not cus it’s necessary but because it puts a moat around their Profession.

I never upstanding the "no one should fail" people in this profession. First it lowers the standard and impacts safety. But it also makes it seem like just anyone can do our job. No one likes to talk about it, but a fair amount of failure is good for the system. We should only accept high levels of success, this whole 2+ trbs and going back for sim training over and over just to finally stumble through a checkout is crazy.

 

[CF]

Brothers and Sisters:



NATCA has always been committed to supporting lawmakers and policymakers who support NATCA and the interests most important to our members and their families. This has been referred to as “The NATCA Majority” and is a bipartisan approach.



Thanks to our legislative activists, active and retired, this election cycle resulted in over 90% in NATCA majority-supported races. Our Government Affairs Office and National Legislative Committee will continue utilizing the relationships we have built. Additionally, we will continue to educate lawmakers, policymakers, and aviation industry leaders about the issues affecting our Union members, aviation safety professionals, and, ultimately, the National Airspace System.



The status of our CBAs:

• Slate Book CBA will remain in effect until July 24, 2026. In accordance with Article 106, from Jan. 25, 2026, through Feb. 24, 2026, the FAA or NATCA can initiate the action to amend the agreement through negotiations.

/thread

 

[Raise when?]

I never upstanding the "no one should fail" people in this profession. First it lowers the standard and impacts safety. But it also makes it seem like just anyone can do our job. No one likes to talk about it, but a fair amount of failure is good for the system. We should only accept high levels of success, this whole 2+ trbs and going back for sim training over and over just to finally stumble through a checkout is crazy.

There are so many of these people though it’s wild

 

[ajmezz]

Absolutely there are good examples. But at all 300 facilities? Unlikely. And in some cases it doesn’t mean that training and instruction is actually any good

There are definitely people being pushed through that either shouldn't be or before they're ready. The biggest culprit of that is NCEPT and people doing whatever they can to be able to move.