ERR MOU Change Campaign

[corn4ahead]

What exactly are you wanting when you say "merit-based?"

 

[MJ]

Merit based means something related to you and your job. It's defined in 5CFR, as is discrimination.
Imagine FAA said, anyone wearing nike shoes is ineligible to transfer, or only people who's facilities have no deals for 12 months can transfer. Or only if xx number of employees work at your facility... All discriminate based on something that has nothing to do with your work or performance. Any metric used must not be arbitrary or its relevancy unverified (the staffing percentages are completely arbitrary).

Merit system principles govern federal employee hiring and promotions, and though FAA is exempt from 5cfr, they still implement some of the same principles in their replacement, the personnel management system. Bids are actually called MPP, merit promotion placements; its because it takes into account the requirements of merit promotions. That's why when they implemented this MOU, they stopped bids, so they can get around the rules.

 

[JP]

The problem with this ever getting changed is that a majority of the workforce is apathetic on this issue. They can't see how big of a problem it is, or they just don't care.

 

[MJ]

The problem with this ever getting changed is that a majority of the workforce is apathetic on this issue. They can't see how big of a problem it is, or they just don't care.

110% truth. Which is why I've devoted my recent efforts to going outside the FAA/natca resolve this. Initially the goal was to create awareness, and get people to speak up. I think it was moderately sucessful. NATCA is very aware of the discontent, they just don't care. I would still say let them know how you feel at every opportunity though. Squeaky wheel gets the grease.

 

[Stinger]

110% truth. Which is why I've devoted my recent efforts to going outside the FAA/natca resolve this. Initially the goal was to create awareness, and get people to speak up. I think it was moderately sucessful. NATCA is very aware of the discontent, they just don't care. I would still say let them know how you feel at every opportunity though. Squeaky wheel gets the grease.

I know that all these supervisor openings that are getting posted, the majority of facilities are not getting who they want. When they try to get someone from a short facility, a release gets denied in the vast majority of cases. Some of them have conducted interviews, then don't select anybody, then immediately post the opening again. Something will have to change.

 

[MJ]

Not directly related to us, but it's still sorta on topic since you mention sup bids. Friend of mine (currently a supervisor) bid on 2 jobs, one a temp with option to be perm and one a perm. He got picked on the temp, which is the one he wanted, so he told the other fac that he was taking that job, so he was no longer considered for the other. Then our district manager tells him he won't be released because they aren't going to allow people to go on temp bids. Ironically, our atm is out on a temp bid, and one of our other sups is on a temp bid. But they arbitrarily decide to create and implement "policy" on a whenever it suits them. Watching the FAA manage its workforce is like watching a bunch of second graders play a game of tag, making rules on the fly to benefit themselves. These are the same asshats in charge our careers.

 

[MJ]

Update and some other info:
I received the reply to the info request, it went along these lines: "Was I considered....?", "You were not considered iaw ERR MOU."
Rest of questions answered with "N/A". Exactly what I expected, and I filed the grievance today, citing violations of the PMS under prohibited personnel practices and merit principles.

In other news, to continue with the scumbaggery associated with this...
Previous post I mentioned one of our sups getting picked up on a bid, then denied the move (to a center position btw, so a pretty significant career move). A mere days later, one of our controllers gets picked on a sup bid (we are 13/22, with 2 people released in a few months under the legacy rules, and only 3-5 trainees capable of cert w/in the next 6-12 months). They get the deviation waiver approved, and the receiving facility is told they can take him whenever they choose, IE: next month. As if that isn't crappy enough, they tell our atm if he gets any grievances related to this, to send them up and NATCA will support squashing them.

In summary:
step one: make rule that screws thousands of people
step two: tell them how it's in their best interest to get screwed
step three: do whatever the fuck you want anyway
step four: repeat as necessary

If all this happens at our dinky little tower, I can only imagine what happens around the other 314 facilities.

 

[Stinger]

A mere days later, one of our controllers gets picked on a sup bid (we are 13/22, with 2 people released in a few months under the legacy rules, and only 3-5 trainees capable of cert w/in the next 6-12 months). They get the deviation waiver approved, and the receiving facility is told they can take him whenever they choose, IE: next month.

So there was a CPC there that applied and was selected for a supervisor job....and received the deviation for a release date? Which facility selected him?

 

[MJ]

So there was a CPC there that applied and was selected for a supervisor job....and received the deviation for a release date? Which facility selected him?

Okc

 

[bluegrass_gal]

Grrr! I heard NATCA has to support the waivers and it infuriates me that they are! People who refuse to become management will continue to be stuck at their facility bc others are willing to bid as a supervisor just to get out. In other words, NATCA is supporting management!! Our ATM recently selected someone from a facility that is neither cat 1 nor 2 and last I heard he's getting the waiver.

 

[Stinger]

Our ATM recently selected someone from a facility that is neither cat 1 nor 2 and last I heard he's getting the waiver.

The job announcement that closed a couple months ago for Shreveport had openings for 2 supervisors. There's another one out now for 2 more supervisors. I was under the impression that no one was selected for the first job, and it was reposted with more PCS money. It went from 15k, to 27k move money.

 

[bluegrass_gal]

The job announcement that closed a couple months ago for Shreveport had openings for 2 supervisors. There's another one out now for 2 more supervisors. I was under the impression that no one was selected for the first job, and it was reposted with more PCS money. It went from 15k, to 27k move money.

I think like 4 or 5 ppl applied. Most of them were not eligible like no radar experience or something like that. I heard through the grapevine one person was selected and our ATM is trying to get a waiver in order to get him before the end of the year. We've recently lost two supervisors and another leaving in December. We will be down to one supervisor for 30 ppl. It's piss poor planning on the FAA's part.

 

[MJ]

I think like 4 or 5 ppl applied. Most of them were not eligible like no radar experience or something like that. I heard through the grapevine one person was selected and our ATM is trying to get a waiver in order to get him before the end of the year. We've recently lost two supervisors and another leaving in December. We will be down to one supervisor for 30 ppl. It's piss poor planning on the FAA's part.

Many places are like this. OKC was going to have zero sups. Just one more failing of this MOU and the faa's personnel management.

 

[Stinger]

Many places are like this. OKC was going to have zero sups. Just one more failing of this MOU and the faa's personnel management.

I know of another place (level 6) that had a bid out for 2 supervisors because they will be down to zero sups this fall. Everyone that applied either wasn't qualified or needed a deviation for a release. So that bid was cancelled and another was issued, but only employees at that facility were eligible to apply. That facility is below the national average, so they'll need to get a deviation approved anyway if people applied. On the plus side, there's no hassle of going through facility training like with someone new.

 

[Dolan]

one of our controllers gets picked on a sup bid (we are 13/22, with 2 people released in a few months under the legacy rules, and only 3-5 trainees capable of cert w/in the next 6-12 months). They get the deviation waiver approved, and the receiving facility is told they can take him whenever they choose, IE: next month.

Exact same thing happened to us. Controller got picked up as a sup, waiver got approved (we're below cat 2) so the sup jumps the line waiting to leave our facility. The controller, now a sup, leaves to the new facility. Sup then files an ERR to get picked up as a controller, manager lets him go and the guy jumps the line ahead of every single CPC at the new facility and gets a free pass to pretty much anywhere in the FAA he wants to go. This is insane.

 

[MJ]

I finished a first draft of a Letter to congress, looking for a few people to look it over for feedback. PM me if willing.

 

[likeaBOSS]

I

I finished a first draft of a Letter to congress, looking for a few people to look it over for feedback. PM me if willing.

I'd love to. I'll also be following suit and requesting info next NCEPT as to why I wasn't selected and filing a grievance. I know the FAA and NATCA is well aware of the infuriation, but how exactly? From your initial templates? Word going up the NATCA chain from the FacRep level? Has anyone tried collecting signatures attached to a suggestion for change? I have some things I'd like to propose. Ex:

If they're so hellbent on some arbitrary staffing number, then bring back the range. At least then you could have a revolving door of inbounds and put bounds in a timely manner...

 

[MJ]

I

I'd love to. I'll also be following suit and requesting info next NCEPT as to why I wasn't selected and filing a grievance. I know the FAA and NATCA is well aware of the infuriation, but how exactly? From your initial templates? Word going up the NATCA chain from the FacRep level? Has anyone tried collecting signatures attached to a suggestion for change? I have some things I'd like to propose. Ex:

If they're so hellbent on some arbitrary staffing number, then bring back the range. At least then you could have a revolving door of inbounds and put bounds in a timely manner...

They got a lot of backlash. It's been talked about on several occasions, as a lot of the national natca people went to the facilities after its implementation to explain to us little folks with small brains why its good for us.

I don't know of any other organized efforts, but personally I'd be willing to help anyone who tried.

 

[MJ]

Update: Not much of an update, but I did get my first level grievance back. To summarize they denied it based on the fact the process was negotiated, and I didn't cite a violation of the contract (don't have to; it can be any law, reg etc.) The regs I cited are incorporated into the contract (word for word), so next level resubmission will include that. Also looking into filing a ULP.
I think it would be incredibly helpful if facilities filed on behalf of all its employees. Something for you all to bring up with your FACREPS...

 

[MJ]

Found out my RVP is, or at some point was, reading my posts about the MOU. Leave a message to let him know what you think of his work.