32andBelow
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 9,335
It makes us look even worse for not negotiating when it’s clear they would have played ball. The OJTI and now this
Serious New N90 to EWR June 1, 2024, and June 30, 2024
- Thread starter GulfCharlie
- Start date
Well the only way we would know if this is the new standard would be if it happens again. I can really only go off of facts and not speculation. I know 804 is its own beast because that goes through congress but if something similar happens where the faa just says managements rights and takes taking a facility apart this should certainly happen again.
I agree Rinaldi should have taken the chance and negotiated our contract but he signed an extension instead and that’s who we elected to make that decision. Sucks I agree. Rinaldi made the agreement though and we have to live with it.
32andBelow
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 9,335
He couldn’t stand seeing someone else’s name on the paper guaranteed
Agreed. Based off this N90 negotiation I have faith rich will get us a way better contract. If he doesn’t and I’m made to eat my words I would do everything in my power to make sure he isn’t reelected again. We all know nick doesn’t have a plan since he said his day 1 goals are member spotlights and taking down a wall then he’s going to work on short and long term goals. I’m trying to think if I’d want any normal members in my facility with no negotiating experience involved in the next contract and that thought is terrifying. So all I’m left with for the best chance of good shit is rich.
You can believe what you want but a few of your opinions are flat out wrong when it comes to some of the previous 804s. The fact is, N90 is a 12 and Dean cares about your facility. I'm glad you guys are getting a better deal and I hope you guys get everything you want. But the biggest difference between you and the other facilities is Dean and those at the national level care about your facility and members. It's just the latest example of the haves vs the have-nots. Some of the same people fighting for a better deal for you, didn't give two shits about the other facilities and members that were getting 804'ed. There were plenty of issues, concerns, and wants for a better deal, but those at the top cared more about working with the Agency than working with and for their members at those facilities. Trust me, no one was overly excited about the 804 deal we got. Guess, how many from the workgroup and national level that "negotiated" that deal came and asked or talked to the members prior to the deal...ZERO! The Agency got the deal they wanted and NATCA was perfectly okay with pretty much going along with whatever the Agency wanted.
I guess I have three thoughts about this MOU....
1. Good for anyone at N90 or PHL that takes the deal and the cash. I'm not opposed to any member grabbing a bag of cash when it's presented.
2. With two contracts opening (or opened, haven't yet heard) and the Slate Book on-deck for opening, I'm concerned that practically all of the cash presented to NATCA members in this MOU comes in the form of 'non-High 3' benefits. And, in my opinion, this is my greatest concern with upcoming negotiations. There's nothing wrong with receiving more pay; however, I would take offense at more pay that is practically meaningless for 'High 3' purposes. When your earning years are time-limited due to mandatory retirement, pay that has little to no impact on a member's 'High 3' is unhelpful. If new CBAs do not include corresponding increases in 'High 3' pay of NATCA members, I'm going to be a vociferous NO vote.
3. I echo the thoughts of others. This deal is another reminder that we have become a union of haves and have-nots. No member that had a facility 804'd got anywhere near the consideration the NATCA members at N90 or PHL received in this MOU. And, in my opinion, this is shameful. That said, I know it's wishful thinking, this MOU should be the blueprint for all future 804s. That it won't be, however, will keep it shameful.
1. Good for anyone at N90 or PHL that takes the deal and the cash. I'm not opposed to any member grabbing a bag of cash when it's presented.
2. With two contracts opening (or opened, haven't yet heard) and the Slate Book on-deck for opening, I'm concerned that practically all of the cash presented to NATCA members in this MOU comes in the form of 'non-High 3' benefits. And, in my opinion, this is my greatest concern with upcoming negotiations. There's nothing wrong with receiving more pay; however, I would take offense at more pay that is practically meaningless for 'High 3' purposes. When your earning years are time-limited due to mandatory retirement, pay that has little to no impact on a member's 'High 3' is unhelpful. If new CBAs do not include corresponding increases in 'High 3' pay of NATCA members, I'm going to be a vociferous NO vote.
3. I echo the thoughts of others. This deal is another reminder that we have become a union of haves and have-nots. No member that had a facility 804'd got anywhere near the consideration the NATCA members at N90 or PHL received in this MOU. And, in my opinion, this is shameful. That said, I know it's wishful thinking, this MOU should be the blueprint for all future 804s. That it won't be, however, will keep it shameful.
inthrewtheoutdor
Active Member
- Messages
- 61
You're all missing the point.
This isn't you're typical 804. You're holding onto the past and comparing it to past 804s. FAA and NATCA don't even recognize it as falling under 804. This is a forced move without legitimate reason.
FAA is on its last leg trying to get volunteers to commit to something they spent a large amount of stupid money on for a reckless project of attempting to split an extremely interconnected airspace. It would also be the first time in history splitting who works a single bravo airspace.
It's reckless and dangerous and everyone knows it. The FAA arrogantly claimed that this is necessary otherwise there would be massive delays and sold this line to the airlines. They said by this time the NAS would effectively collapse; but there has been almost a 0% delay due to N90 staffing in 2 years and the FAA is backed into a corner, so the instead of admitting defeat, they're throwing their last ditch effort of whatever money they can find to attempt to complete an ill conceived idea.
The union has an obligation to attempt to get the best deal possible because the FAA is again FORCING this to happen. It's not about favoritism, it's their duty to represent the effected controllers of both facilities under FLRA.
You can not compare 804s and say NATCA cares more about N90. This isn't an 804. This is the FAA coming in saying hey I'm literally begging, can I throw more money at your controllers to convince them to do it. This is the FAAs 2nd attempt at move money for this to fulfill their original idea. It's not NATCA coming up with this. NATCA is against this move. The move is bad. This is a precedent setting union busting move that will hurt all of us in the future if it goes through.
What did y'all want NATCA to do. FAA came saying name a price , they shot high and FAA said well I got 75k a controller, you expected NATCA to say, "sorry FAA this 3 year on going forced level 12 to 11 shit show realignment misalignment irrational move isn't worth any more than any other 804. Keep your money Mismanaged FAA management! We don't want it! (This would likely be an unfair labor practice on the unions part btw)
Not to mention the average CPC at N90 earns a significant salary that 75k pre tax and 3-4 years training their dick off in another city with working conditions no where near what we have at N90 is not even remotely a great deal. This will absolutely fail and the FAA will have to come up with some other idea even though the EWR area is possibly on track to be the healthiest area in N90 in decades.
This isn't you're typical 804. You're holding onto the past and comparing it to past 804s. FAA and NATCA don't even recognize it as falling under 804. This is a forced move without legitimate reason.
FAA is on its last leg trying to get volunteers to commit to something they spent a large amount of stupid money on for a reckless project of attempting to split an extremely interconnected airspace. It would also be the first time in history splitting who works a single bravo airspace.
It's reckless and dangerous and everyone knows it. The FAA arrogantly claimed that this is necessary otherwise there would be massive delays and sold this line to the airlines. They said by this time the NAS would effectively collapse; but there has been almost a 0% delay due to N90 staffing in 2 years and the FAA is backed into a corner, so the instead of admitting defeat, they're throwing their last ditch effort of whatever money they can find to attempt to complete an ill conceived idea.
The union has an obligation to attempt to get the best deal possible because the FAA is again FORCING this to happen. It's not about favoritism, it's their duty to represent the effected controllers of both facilities under FLRA.
You can not compare 804s and say NATCA cares more about N90. This isn't an 804. This is the FAA coming in saying hey I'm literally begging, can I throw more money at your controllers to convince them to do it. This is the FAAs 2nd attempt at move money for this to fulfill their original idea. It's not NATCA coming up with this. NATCA is against this move. The move is bad. This is a precedent setting union busting move that will hurt all of us in the future if it goes through.
What did y'all want NATCA to do. FAA came saying name a price , they shot high and FAA said well I got 75k a controller, you expected NATCA to say, "sorry FAA this 3 year on going forced level 12 to 11 shit show realignment misalignment irrational move isn't worth any more than any other 804. Keep your money Mismanaged FAA management! We don't want it! (This would likely be an unfair labor practice on the unions part btw)
Not to mention the average CPC at N90 earns a significant salary that 75k pre tax and 3-4 years training their dick off in another city with working conditions no where near what we have at N90 is not even remotely a great deal. This will absolutely fail and the FAA will have to come up with some other idea even though the EWR area is possibly on track to be the healthiest area in N90 in decades.
Last edited:
32andBelow
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 9,335
By far the craziest thing about this is the date. The FAA can’t cut over an excel spreadsheet in 3 months.
ManBearPig
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 403
If they don't get enough volunteers,
If we want it to fail, shouldn't we have negotiated a terrible deal, so no one takes it? 🤔
If anyone wants to volunteer the union has an obligation to negotiate the best possible deal for them. Man the internet is a wild place
- Messages
- 120
- Facility
- DCA Washington National Tower
Non-NY controllers are validated in feeling some type of way about special treatment.
N90 controllers are generally out of touch with RUS facilities but know what is best for their facility.
If you haven't noticed:
1) Our union historically derives a lot of its power and leverage from N90 and the NY metro towers.
2) The FAA knows this and has had it out for N90 for decades.
So you might be frustrated that N90 gets special treatment and that is valid. But what's good for N90 is going to be good for the union.
Especially because the FAA pays special attention to N90 and as a result, this situation is special and important precedents are at stake.
I guarantee you the FAA would love to one day consolidate facilities enough to only have 1 center in each service area. Same thing with TRACONs.
N90 controllers are generally out of touch with RUS facilities but know what is best for their facility.
If you haven't noticed:
1) Our union historically derives a lot of its power and leverage from N90 and the NY metro towers.
2) The FAA knows this and has had it out for N90 for decades.
So you might be frustrated that N90 gets special treatment and that is valid. But what's good for N90 is going to be good for the union.
Especially because the FAA pays special attention to N90 and as a result, this situation is special and important precedents are at stake.
I guarantee you the FAA would love to one day consolidate facilities enough to only have 1 center in each service area. Same thing with TRACONs.
32andBelow
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 9,335
All of it can be traced back to not updating our contract for too long. They are not in an impossible spot. But they made their own bed.
inthrewtheoutdor
Active Member
- Messages
- 61
For 3 years Newark controllers have had a potential forced move of their lives and their families to another city. 3 years of uncertainty. 3 years of being told different things with different promises. There is no special treatment here. It's a torture for the Newark brothers. The FAA wants to bust up the strongest local in the country and will literally waste taxpayers money and lie to the users to get it done.
bravounite33
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 111
Agree, the Newark guys have been in limbo for way too long. Obviously the LGA, JFK, Islip and Liberty controllers have been too. Here's some great bonuses for seeing the EWR guys be stressed out for so long.
Exactly, why didn't they take this stance for prior consolidations. They didn't try to get a better deal, they literally didn't try to get shit at all.
Last edited:
slowtation
Member
- Messages
- 6
Why is this even happening in the first place? OOTL with all the N90 stuff
Soul_Controller
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 318
This is where I start getting sympathy for N90. The move is nakedly stupid. It decreases efficiency and since the staffing number doesn't change at N90 (another giveaway that you don't see in other consolidations), it costs money. The agency is obviously trying to fuck N90. It's been so long since the white book that a lot controllers have no idea just how vindictive the dickheads at the ATO can be.
Ask yourself how the five locals in Michigan or the two in Ohio that got consolidated are doing. Ask anyone at those facilities that got consolidated, if there was years of uncertainty and delays. If dates changed, promises made, then taken back. Sure many got out, but many had to take what they could get at the time with little say in the process because it was that or possibly get stuck at a 4 with no raise for years. I guarantee everyone of those controllers would of welcomed a better deal but they didn't get a Union that was tough at the table, they got yes men and a signature. The difference here is I feel bad for them and N90. You're pouring your heart out for N90 but tone deaf to the rules and the game the rest of us have been forced to play by for years.
- Messages
- 2,096
- Facility
- N90 New York Tracon
That was the plan until the ZAU fire.
A lot of people aren’t aware that something like 60-70% of the EWR area certified in the last 5 years. The majority of the area transferred here because they wanted to come to Long Island. This isn’t like 10 years ago where it was all just a bunch of new hires who didn’t have much of a choice in coming here and wanted off the Island asap.
Last edited:
inthrewtheoutdor
Active Member
- Messages
- 61
Remember the FAA fired 11 controllers from N90 the year leading up to the white book. N90 has been a target since the day it was built.
"In July 2005, the FAA fired 11 controllers at New York TRACON for neglecting to check one box on its 8500-8 medical form. It was a union-busting attempt that failed five months later when the “NY11” were offered their jobs back with full back pay. NATCA President John Carr escorted the controllers back to their facility, a huge victory for the Union."
This is yet another union busting tactic that is being disguised. Us arguing that it isn't fair to past 804s is exactly what a union buster wants to see, in-fghting and union distrust.
"In July 2005, the FAA fired 11 controllers at New York TRACON for neglecting to check one box on its 8500-8 medical form. It was a union-busting attempt that failed five months later when the “NY11” were offered their jobs back with full back pay. NATCA President John Carr escorted the controllers back to their facility, a huge victory for the Union."
This is yet another union busting tactic that is being disguised. Us arguing that it isn't fair to past 804s is exactly what a union buster wants to see, in-fghting and union distrust.
