Justin Dailey for NATCA President

[But_I_Had_Visual]

Will yachts be involved??😂

Just boats. Boats that are referred to as yachts on the company website and are owned by a company that calls itself a yachting company. I believe the accepted vernacular is “party barge” though.

 

[GulfCharlie]

Just boats. Boats that are referred to as yachts on the company website and are owned by a company that calls itself a yachting company. I believe the accepted vernacular is “party barge” though.

😂 whoever said douche canoe made me spit my drink out.

 

[Spiralbox21]

I met hilton recently and i wanted to make a yacht vote but i restrained myself. I like daily. I think he will get my vote.

 

[mikefsfr]

Cute lab!!!

 

[MJ]

Justin posted his first video!

Team NDJH has posted a rebuttal video from campaign HQ

 

[ATCJoe85]

If I'm being completely honest, not impressed with their "yacht". For 53K, real rip off. Been on nicer/more exclusive in nicer places.

On a slightly more serious note, indeed our pay is pretty close to keeping with inflation all things considered, and if not for housing prices, we'd have a lot less to talk about.

Oh... Except the fact that other major unions have secured extreme % increases for their workers in the last few years.

And as I see it, we are the boss of the pilots, and a worker cannot make more than their boss. (Source)

 

[Nothanks]

Since everyone is on about pay. Everyone on this forum is asking “what’s your plan” to the other candidates and their videos.

What is Justin Daileys plan and thoughts on a raise ? How does he plan on getting that done ?

 

[jfol]

If I'm being completely honest, not impressed with their "yacht". For 53K, real rip off. Been on nicer/more exclusive in nicer places.


Oh... Except the fact that other major unions have secured extreme % increases for their workers in the last few years.

Current NATCA leadership:

Comparison is the thief of joy. Be thankful you have a job. You won’t be included on the next chow run, dissenter.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Since everyone is on about pay. Everyone on this forum is asking “what’s your plan” to the other candidates and their videos.

What is Justin Daileys plan and thoughts on a raise ? How does he plan on getting that done ?

Yet no one has received an answer 🤔.

 

[GulfCharlie]

Yet no one has received an answer 🤔.

I know he is working on some stuff for it, just have to be patient because he works traffic XD

 

[32andBelow]

 

[blarg]

I'll say it again. Including the 1.6% in your consideration of "keeping up with inflation" is wrong. The federal raises in Jan should be what keeps us up with inflation. Mid-year is a length of service raise, which means you are getting paid more because you're a more experienced, valuable employee. Not barely keeping up with costs. What about anyone with more than 18-20 years when they hit the top of the pay band? They don't get those any more. They aren't keeping up with inflation.

 

[Nothanks]

I'll say it again. Including the 1.6% in your consideration of "keeping up with inflation" is wrong. The federal raises in Jan should be what keeps us up with inflation. Mid-year is a length of service raise, which means you are getting paid more because you're a more experienced, valuable employee. Not barely keeping up with costs. What about anyone with more than 18-20 years when they hit the top of the pay band? They don't get those any more. They aren't keeping up with inflation.

Isn’t this about JD for Pres ? Maybe he can provide insight since he’s running to carry the torch for us.

 

[Logical_Mongoose]

I'll say it again. Including the 1.6% in your consideration of "keeping up with inflation" is wrong. The federal raises in Jan should be what keeps us up with inflation. Mid-year is a length of service raise, which means you are getting paid more because you're a more experienced, valuable employee. Not barely keeping up with costs. What about anyone with more than 18-20 years when they hit the top of the pay band? They don't get those any more. They aren't keeping up with inflation.

I'm not trying to call you out or go aggro on you, blarg , I'm just using your comment to say it loudly and clearly enough for everyone to understand:

The June length of service raise is inadequate even when evaluated solely as a length of service raise.

The 1.6% length of service raise in June was meant to solve BUEs never needing to deal with the performance reviews and “Within Grade Increases" (WGIs) like the rest of the federal workforce, but the length of service raises have never been close to comparable to that system. It takes a “standard” federal employee approximately 17 years to start at Step 1 of their pay band and progress to the top at Step 10 (IIRC it's 1 step per year for steps 2-4, then 2 years per step for 5-7, then 3 years for 8-10). This 17 year timeline does not include “Quality Step Increases" (QSIs) which are awarded frequently and shortens that 17 year timeline substantially for a federal employee: a single QSI can shorten their timeline by 3 years, multiple QSIs for an employee are not uncommon, and QSIs do not negate/reset the normal progression timer of WGIs. It is not uncommon for a federal employee to be at the top of their pay band in less than 10 years due to QSIs stacking on top of WGIs. You can search federal employee reddit threads and see for yourself the amount of people that get blessed with their 2nd/3rd/4th QSI in conjunction with their normal WGI; if they get a WGI to step 9 along with a QSI to step 10, that's roughly 7 of our June raises in one go.

Our annual 1.6% “length of service” raise means that it takes us almost 19 years only when in the same pay band. Unless you are able to luck into the enroute “golden ticket” at the beginning of your career, you are doomed to spend - at minimum - several years climbing facility levels until you get to your final facility. And it isn’t until you are at your final facility when that 19 year timer starts; that effectively guarantees you will never see the top of your pay band in your career. NATCA needs to be negotiating for those that don’t win the facility level lottery in year one.

The June raise needs to be 2.5% at minimum, but optimally it should be higher (closer to ~3.2% in my opinion). At 2.5% it would still take approximately 13 years in the same pay band to reach the top; that barely beats a “standard” federal employee who never sees a QSI in their career (which is uncommon). My personal preference at 3.2% puts that timeline closer to 10 years. Most BUEs in the terminal track are defined by when they can transfer from their first facility, and usually there is at least one middle facility before they reach their “dream facility.” A 10 year progression timeline helps to account for those where transfers may disrupt the first half of someone’s career progression.

Another possible solution could be to track the length of service raises on the SF50 somehow and make them raises that don't reset upon facility transfer; it becomes a length of service raise with the agency and not the facility. With that kind of a mechanism, a 2.5% raise would seem more reasonable/acceptable at the negotiating table; a faster than average progression should still be fought for by NATCA since controllers face the earlier retirement age.

 

[CaptainObvious]

I know he is working on some stuff for it, just have to be patient because he works traffic XD

I meant from the others

I'm not trying to call you out or go aggro on you, blarg , I'm just using your comment to say it loudly and clearly enough for everyone to understand:

The June length of service raise is inadequate even when evaluated solely as a length of service raise.

The 1.6% length of service raise in June was meant to solve BUEs never needing to deal with the performance reviews and “Within Grade Increases" (WGIs) like the rest of the federal workforce, but the length of service raises have never been close to comparable to that system. It takes a “standard” federal employee approximately 17 years to start at Step 1 of their pay band and progress to the top at Step 10 (IIRC it's 1 step per year for steps 2-4, then 2 years per step for 5-7, then 3 years for 8-10). This 17 year timeline does not include “Quality Step Increases" (QSIs) which are awarded frequently and shortens that 17 year timeline substantially for a federal employee: a single QSI can shorten their timeline by 3 years, multiple QSIs for an employee are not uncommon, and QSIs do not negate/reset the normal progression timer of WGIs. It is not uncommon for a federal employee to be at the top of their pay band in less than 10 years due to QSIs stacking on top of WGIs. You can search federal employee reddit threads and see for yourself the amount of people that get blessed with their 2nd/3rd/4th QSI in conjunction with their normal WGI; if they get a WGI to step 9 along with a QSI to step 10, that's roughly 7 of our June raises in one go.

Our annual 1.6% “length of service” raise means that it takes us almost 19 years only when in the same pay band. Unless you are able to luck into the enroute “golden ticket” at the beginning of your career, you are doomed to spend - at minimum - several years climbing facility levels until you get to your final facility. And it isn’t until you are at your final facility when that 19 year timer starts; that effectively guarantees you will never see the top of your pay band in your career. NATCA needs to be negotiating for those that don’t win the facility level lottery in year one.

The June raise needs to be 2.5% at minimum, but optimally it should be higher (closer to ~3.2% in my opinion). At 2.5% it would still take approximately 13 years in the same pay band to reach the top; that barely beats a “standard” federal employee who never sees a QSI in their career (which is uncommon). My personal preference at 3.2% puts that timeline closer to 10 years. Most BUEs in the terminal track are defined by when they can transfer from their first facility, and usually there is at least one middle facility before they reach their “dream facility.” A 10 year progression timeline helps to account for those where transfers may disrupt the first half of someone’s career progression.

Another possible solution could be to track the length of service raises on the SF50 somehow and make them raises that don't reset upon facility transfer; it becomes a length of service raise with the agency and not the facility. With that kind of a mechanism, a 2.5% raise would seem more reasonable/acceptable at the negotiating table; a faster than average progression should still be fought for by NATCA since controllers face the earlier retirement age.

In before boots and the rest swarm you about how well paid we are and don’t need any raises

 

[GulfCharlie]

I meant from the others

On mid 2 out of 3, my comprehension is about shot. Sorry.

 

[ATC123]

I'm not trying to call you out or go aggro on you, blarg , I'm just using your comment to say it loudly and clearly enough for everyone to understand:

The June length of service raise is inadequate even when evaluated solely as a length of service raise.

The 1.6% length of service raise in June was meant to solve BUEs never needing to deal with the performance reviews and “Within Grade Increases" (WGIs) like the rest of the federal workforce, but the length of service raises have never been close to comparable to that system. It takes a “standard” federal employee approximately 17 years to start at Step 1 of their pay band and progress to the top at Step 10 (IIRC it's 1 step per year for steps 2-4, then 2 years per step for 5-7, then 3 years for 8-10). This 17 year timeline does not include “Quality Step Increases" (QSIs) which are awarded frequently and shortens that 17 year timeline substantially for a federal employee: a single QSI can shorten their timeline by 3 years, multiple QSIs for an employee are not uncommon, and QSIs do not negate/reset the normal progression timer of WGIs. It is not uncommon for a federal employee to be at the top of their pay band in less than 10 years due to QSIs stacking on top of WGIs. You can search federal employee reddit threads and see for yourself the amount of people that get blessed with their 2nd/3rd/4th QSI in conjunction with their normal WGI; if they get a WGI to step 9 along with a QSI to step 10, that's roughly 7 of our June raises in one go.

Our annual 1.6% “length of service” raise means that it takes us almost 19 years only when in the same pay band. Unless you are able to luck into the enroute “golden ticket” at the beginning of your career, you are doomed to spend - at minimum - several years climbing facility levels until you get to your final facility. And it isn’t until you are at your final facility when that 19 year timer starts; that effectively guarantees you will never see the top of your pay band in your career. NATCA needs to be negotiating for those that don’t win the facility level lottery in year one.

The June raise needs to be 2.5% at minimum, but optimally it should be higher (closer to ~3.2% in my opinion). At 2.5% it would still take approximately 13 years in the same pay band to reach the top; that barely beats a “standard” federal employee who never sees a QSI in their career (which is uncommon). My personal preference at 3.2% puts that timeline closer to 10 years. Most BUEs in the terminal track are defined by when they can transfer from their first facility, and usually there is at least one middle facility before they reach their “dream facility.” A 10 year progression timeline helps to account for those where transfers may disrupt the first half of someone’s career progression.

Another possible solution could be to track the length of service raises on the SF50 somehow and make them raises that don't reset upon facility transfer; it becomes a length of service raise with the agency and not the facility. With that kind of a mechanism, a 2.5% raise would seem more reasonable/acceptable at the negotiating table; a faster than average progression should still be fought for by NATCA since controllers face the earlier retirement age.

Great post and well said.

All the posters that keep justifying “keeping up with inflation” are missing that in most (all?) careers your earnings increase, or should increase throughout the length of your career. You should not make the same $, inflation adjusted, in year 1 and year 15. Teachers, pilots, factory workers, cops, nurses, just about any other labor career field the earnings increase with length of service. But not ATC.

 

[Horno]

Real question. When Santa and Mick get voted out and JD and Redmond drain the swamp…what happens to them? Do they just go back to controlling?

 

[KP-ATC]

Real question. When Santa and Mick get voted out and JD and Redmond drain the swamp…what happens to them? Do they just go back to controlling?

I don't think Mick is eligible to retire but I think Santa can retire.

 

[mikefsfr]

I don't think Mick is eligible to retire but I think Santa can retire.

Mick was a more than adequate controller. Not saying he would ever go back - but he has the skill without doubt.