N90 (Newark Area) to PHL FOIA's

[Move78]

I was talking about my area, not the building. But if we had the full 100% number I have no idea where we’d fit everyone .

Sounds like the local fucked up their CRWG 8 years ago

 

[NovemberOscar]

Most people don’t plan to wash or withdraw, they give it an honest chance and most realize they don’t want to work 60 hrs a week in a toxic environment the rest of their careers while paying 750k for a 900 sq ft home next to a garbage incinerator.

Ewr area too stubborn to realize the phl move is a golden ticket

preach!

 

[NervousBusyTrafficTapping]

It’s not moving the faciiity though. It’s moving 1 area out of the facility, which frankly will just complicate matters as far as LOA’s and look and go etc.

Is there any talk of you guys moving to Ronkonkoma again? That seemed like the best (and most obvious) solution. I know a few guys who live near the TRACON, which wouldn't be a fun commute, but it'd get you guys out of that East Palestine, Ohio garbage parking lot, and somewhere cheaper. When I toured the Center, it seemed like they had room not only for N90 but for N90 expanding as well. Maybe it'd look less doable if both facilities were 100% staffed, though. Could be tight.

 

[DankVectorz]

Is there any talk of you guys moving to Ronkonkoma again?

I haven’t heard any

 

[atc12bsthrowaway]

Is there any talk of you guys moving to Ronkonkoma again? That seemed like the best (and most obvious) solution. I know a few guys who live near the TRACON, which wouldn't be a fun commute, but it'd get you guys out of that East Palestine, Ohio garbage parking lot, and somewhere cheaper. When I toured the Center, it seemed like they had room not only for N90 but for N90 expanding as well. Maybe it'd look less doable if both facilities were 100% staffed, though. Could be tight.

I did some secretary/treasurer training back in 2017, and Paul said the plan was to move N90 next door to ZNY ultimately if they couldn’t staff it.

 

[GulfCharlie]

The declaration is made by the Senior Advisor of the Federal Aviation Administration's Technical Labor Office. The declaration is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1746, and it is made under penalty of perjury regarding the action at hand. The Senior Advisor explains that it is not the custom of the FAA to provide written notice to labor organizations, including NATCA, about the application of Section 804 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 to any determination made by the FAA. In August 2020, the Senior Advisor of the FAA's Technical Labor Office participated in a meeting during which NATCA was advised that the FAA had determined that Section 804 procedures were not required. NATCA did not even bother to challenge or the FAA's determination that the 804 process would not apply. Instead of fairly representing their membership by challenging the 804 process, it appears there was "collaboration" or better term collusion in order to expedite this move. The Senior Advisor conducted a supplemental search for responsive records related to the FAA's Realignment Determination and found none.

This document was provided to me by the Plaintiff who requested documents under the FOIA.

 

[FightingIrish2012]

The declaration is made by the Senior Advisor of the Federal Aviation Administration's Technical Labor Office. The declaration is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1746, and it is made under penalty of perjury regarding the action at hand. The Senior Advisor explains that it is not the custom of the FAA to provide written notice to labor organizations, including NATCA, about the application of Section 804 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 to any determination made by the FAA. In August 2020, the Senior Advisor of the FAA's Technical Labor Office participated in a meeting during which NATCA was advised that the FAA had determined that Section 804 procedures were not required. NATCA did not even bother to challenge or the FAA's determination that the 804 process would not apply. Instead of fairly representing their membership by challenging the 804 process, it appears there was "collaboration" or better term collusion in order to expedite this move. The Senior Advisor conducted a supplemental search for responsive records related to the FAA's Realignment Determination and found none.

This document was provided to me by the Plaintiff who requested documents under the FOIA.

 

[ncssailor]

Sounds like straight up collusion or the agency is straight up following Article 46.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Hard to fight an article in the contract if they are following it, and has been mentioned in previous post did Natca screw the pooch on the 100k incentive monies?

 

[Ad1234]

Sounds like straight up collusion or the agency is straight up following Article 46.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. Hard to fight an article in the contract if they are following it, and has been mentioned in previous post did Natca screw the pooch on the 100k incentive monies?

Sounds like a bunch of salty old fucks complained it would be a problem and sold the new el presidente on the idea to screw up a deal made by old el presidente and he believed his buddies instead of conventional wisdom that the move is a good thing.

 

[Phillyman2633]

Sounds like a bunch of salty old fucks complained it would be a problem and sold the new el presidente on the idea to screw up a deal made by old el presidente and he believed his buddies instead of conventional wisdom that the move is a good thing.

This is not hyperbole...this is one of the dumbest things I have ever read

 

[32andBelow]

Sounds like a bunch of salty old fucks complained it would be a problem and sold the new el presidente on the idea to screw up a deal made by old el presidente and he believed his buddies instead of conventional wisdom that the move is a good thing.

One scam everyone knows the rules

 

[Ad1234]

This is not hyperbole...this is one of the dumbest things I have ever read

Why is that so far from reality?

 

[Phillyman2633]

Why is that so far from reality?

Aside from your atrocious run-on sentence, if you read any of the material that was posted you would find that your post is factually outrageous

 

[Ad1234]

Aside from your atrocious run-on sentence, if you read any of the material that was posted you would find that your post is factually outrageous

Yes since any of the material seen here is the whole story

 

[GulfCharlie]

Yes since any of the material seen here is the whole story

So NATCA admitting NATCA did not adhere to fair representation is not the whole story if not the one of the key facts? These are federal documents obtained because one controller took on three FAA lawyers in front of a judge. Holding NATCA accountable is the the only way to get the whole story of why they sold the membership up the river.

Please bury that head in the sand even further.

 

[Ad1234]

So NATCA admitting NATCA did not adhere to fair representation is not the whole story if not the one of the key facts? These are federal documents obtained because one controller took on three FAA lawyers in front of a judge. Holding NATCA accountable is the the only way to get the whole story of why they sold the membership up the river.

Please bury that head in the sand even further.

I fail to see how me saying the new president backed away from 100k for some members, a deal Made by the old president isn’t exactly that?

 

[Phillytroll69]

So NATCA admitting NATCA did not adhere to fair representation is not the whole story if not the one of the key facts? These are federal documents obtained because one controller took on three FAA lawyers in front of a judge. Holding NATCA accountable is the the only way to get the whole story of why they sold the membership up the river.

Please bury that head in the sand even further.

i think we need a tl;dr
so far
FAA wants to move part of n90 to phl and was offering incentives, 100k? or something
union agrees
union leadership then cans it
the faa says you can't we're using some article

i'm a bit lost

 

[Ad1234]

i think we need a tl;dr
so far
FAA wants to move part of n90 to phl and was offering incentives, 100k? or something
union agrees
union leadership then cans it
the faa says you can't we're using some article

i'm a bit lost

Isn’t this nearly identical to what I said?

 

[Phillyman2633]

Yes since any of the material seen here is the whole story

"The FAA's sworn testimony isn't the whole story"

Keep your Kool Aid on ice and stay as far away from the flying public as possible at your L5 please

 

[Ad1234]

"The FAA's sworn testimony isn't the whole story"

Keep your Kool Aid on ice and stay as far away from the flying public as possible at your L5 please

Again you just painted a scenario that I also said, which you laughed at.

I also fail to see how saying that there are likely peices left out is drinking kool aid. Im
Not defending Natca or the FAA. In fact I think it’s fucked if 100k is taken from any member from a deal that was already agreed to.


So please tell me again how wrong I am and how having an opinion that there are things we may never know is so far off base.