PRIVATIZE 

Air Traffic Control ???

We certainly don't believe it to be in the best interest of the nation... and neither do many other members of the aviation community. 
 

If you want to help the cause and voice your opinion on ATC privatization

=====>    please call 1-866-I FLY SAFE   (866-435-9723)    <===== 

Advise your congressman and senator to vote NO on any effort to privatize ATC.

DOW JONES NEWSWIRES:  
The following is a press release from Standard & Poor's: TORONTO (Standard& Poor's) Feb. 12, 2004--

Standard & Poor's Ratings Services today said it affirmed its 'AA-' long-term issuer credit and senior secured and unsecured debt ratings on air navigation services provider Nav Canada. The outlook is stable.  The ratings on Ottawa, Ont.-based Nav Canada continue to be supported by its strong legislative framework that establishes a solid business profile for the company. Key credit features contributing to the company's strong business position include its national monopoly in the provision of an essential transportation service, as well as its ability to adjust user rates without seeking any senior government or regulatory approval. In addition, Nav Canada's very high collection rates (in excess of 99%) and low bad debt expense are a product of stringent account receivable policies and the ability to withhold service for nonpayment of fees "Nav Canada has substantial liquidity in the form of reserve funds and credit facilities--these help it to manage timing differentials between cash outflows and receipt of revenue, as well as providing backup support for bullet debt maturities," said Standard & Poor's credit analyst Paul Calder.

For example, Nav Canada has two C$250 million bullet debt obligations maturing in June and November 2004. The company may prefund these obligations before their maturity; however, Nav Canada's available liquidity (about C$680 million on its credit facilities after a restriction to meet contingent capital lease obligation commitments) significantly exceeds its C$500 million maturing debt obligations in 2004. 

The ratings continue to be constrained at the 'AA-' level by the company's high fixed cost structure, evidenced by the company's requirement to provide an essential service regardless of traffic levels. Also, approximately 70% of Nav Canada's operating expenses before interest and depreciation costs pertain to salaries and benefits and about 90% of its total workforce is unionized. Higher pension costs to remedy Nav Canada's substantially unfunded defined benefit pension plan at Aug. 31, 2003 (C$348 million), together with potential cost increases due to ongoing labor issues with three collective bargaining units, are expenditure challenges that affect the company's fiscal turnaround. 

Finally, the ratings are constrained by continuing uncertainty in the aviation industry, including ongoing rationalization of fleet and route networks by struggling mainline carriers, such as Air Canada.

February 12, 2004

THE AUSTRALIAN: Air traffic chief quits after reform bungle 

AIRSERVICES Australia chairman John Forsyth has fallen on his sword in the wake of the air traffic control organisation's bungling of airspace reforms. 

Transport Minister John Anderson announced the long-serving Airservices chairman's resignation yesterday after a week of controversy sparked by a proposal to wind back the reforms.

Mr Forsyth will be replaced by his deputy, Air Marshal Les Fisher, as the board meets today to decide whether to significantly reverse the airspace changes or make less dramatic modifications.  The resignation comes after a fiery meeting on Monday between Mr Anderson and the Airspace Reform Group charged with guiding the airspace changes. Mr Anderson has personally backed the reforms and is angry public confidence has been undermined by controversy about the proposal to reverse the changes.

Airservices admitted this week that it had botched the introduction of the airspace reforms by failing to meet "certain governance obligations".   It is understood Mr Anderson did not ask for Mr Forsyth's resignation.  Given Mr Forysth's decision to resign, Mr Anderson felt it was appropriate that he accept that," a spokesman for the minister said. "The board and the (NAS) process needed immediate certainty and strong leadership which we believe Air marshal Fisher will most certainly provide."

Mr Forsyth had been chairman since 1996 and presided over significant advances at Airservices.

"Airservices is vastly improved and more efficient organisation than when Mr Forsyth was first appointed," Mr Anderson said yesterday.

"The organisation is held in high regard both in Australia and internationally."  Airservices has refused to elaborate on the nature of its bungle but The Australian understands it relates to requirements that a decrease in safety standards be offset by a corresponding benefit. Industry sources believe the oversight left Airservices exposed legally.

The November 27 airspace reforms replaced some class-C airspace, where air traffic controllers separate commercial aircraft from light aircraft, with class-E airspace, in which the onus is on pilots to look out for other planes. Unions say the changes increase the risk of a mid-air collision but Airservices maintains the reforms are safe and says the recent problems have not changed that assessment.   At a hazard identification meeting last week, however, Airservices stunned industry representatives with a proposal to change significant sections of the new E-class airspace back to C-class.   That proposal remains the only one taken to industry, although Airservices earlier this week said it was still reviewing other options.   Canberra sources believe today's decision will involve some winding back of the November changes but not necessarily the dramatic reversal suggested to industry.

November 21_2003
LONG BATTLE ON FAA BILL ENDS IN VICTORY AGAINST PRIVATIZATION
WASHINGTON – The following statement was released this evening by National Air Traffic Controllers Association President John Carr on Senate passage of the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill:

“The American flying public can breathe a sigh of relief for now. Congress has declared that selling out air traffic control to the lowest bidder will not be tolerated. From day one this has been about safety and safety has finally won. Now it’s up to all of us concerned about the safety of our skies to make sure that the Administration sticks to its promise not to privatize. Actions speak louder than words and rest assured that we will be watching.

“It’s been a long, remarkable road since July. We thank the tens of thousands of people who called their members of Congress. As a result of this public outcry, the House took the extraordinary step of recommitting a conference report and the Senate failed to get the votes they needed to move it forward. As a matter of fact, a Republican-controlled Congress told the White House that privatization is unacceptable and something needed to be worked out. Congress knew that the flying public was not going to tolerate privatization.”

“We’ve come a long way since that dark day in July when privatization seemed inevitable. We thank members, particularly Senators Lautenberg and Reid and Representatives Oberstar, Hoyer and DeFazio and the Republican members who stood strong under enormous pressure, and did what was right for the flying public. And for those who opposed efforts to ensure that the world’s safest and most efficient air traffic control system is not sold to the lowest bidder, we can only hope that they have now seen that safety should never take a backseat to political ideology.

“A sigh of relief can be heard throughout our nation’s skies. Now, we need to work together to make sure that promises made are promises kept. We’ll be watching, and, in the words of Governor Schwarzenegger, ‘We’ll be back.’”

November 3, 2003
The House has voted to pass the bill and has removed the language.  It will now to the Senate where Senator Lautenberg has vowed to filibuster the bill.

September 30, 2003
The privatization debates continue at our nations capitol with no defined winner as yet.  Testimonies have abounded on "The Hill" last week and the Continuing Resolution has temporarily funded t he FAA.  The FAA states they have no intentions of contracting out any towers now BUT, must have that option in their toolbox to maintain "flexibility" ????!!!  They have spent more time and resources fighting this legislation than they have to move along the stalled modernization of air traffic control technology.  Maybe we need a basic priority check here...

NATCA President John Carr testified last week and his testimony contained more factual data and figures that all of the pro-privatization advocates combined.  The data presented by John makes the truth ring out loudly compared to the innuendo and half truths being wielded by the other folks.     (Read John Carr's prepared statement to Congress.)

September 11, 2003
Opposition to the proposed privatization of 69 FAA air traffic control towers is mounting in the House and the Senate.  US Senator House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Don Young (R-Alaska) claims that in an effort to avoid a threatened presidential veto, he and Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) had to add a last-minute provision to the FAA conference report allowing the agency to privatize as many as 69 government-run air traffic control towers at small to midsize airports across the country.  "I'm, very frankly, on your side," Young reportedly told opponents of the provision upon completion of the conference report in July. "But I'm looking for ways to get a bill."   Young used his position as conference chairman to exempt two Alaska air traffic control towers from the rules.

In parallel action, DOT Inspector General Kenneth M. Mead recently released the report on the safety of privatized towers.   After reading DOT-OIG report AV-2003-057, I was appalled at the number of understatements, half-truths and outright untruths contained in this report.  If this report is any indication of the IG's knowledge and understanding of the air traffic system, he is not qualified for the position he holds.  As an example the IG reported that BRITE radar is not used in the separation of air traffic.  If this is a fact, ERI has been illegal in the separation of air traffic since it was installed in 1972 !!!  Nearly all major towers in the United States use BRITE radar to separate aircraft and the authorization is in the air traffic bible (FAA Order 7110.65), except for a handful who have modernized their tower equipment with STARS tower displays.  At least 58 of the 69 towers on the "chopping block" have BRITE radar equipment in their tower.  NATCA President John Carr has requested the IG to immediately retract  Report No. AV-2003-057, and publish a corrected version.

We feel that most contract tower controllers, mostly at small facilities, do a good job; however, there is no oversight similar to FAA towers.  Also, the reduced staffing in contract towers require extended working times on control positions... this action counters the numerous medical studies on controllers physical and mental alertness and ability to maintain attention to detail.  The data from these studies was instrumental in the staffing numbers used in FAA towers.  This formula was instrumental in producing the safest air traffic control system in the world.   

Many people do not understand that the FAA continues to finance the building, maintenance and equipment of contract towers and I'm not sure this is figured into the savings realized at contract towers.  So the main savings is from reductions in salaries and benefits paid to the contract controllers.  

As many readers of this home page are aware, several ERI controllers (and numerous FAA controllers nationwide) participate in the evaluation and oversight of production of the modernized air traffic control equipment.  The end result is a huge taxpayers savings when new equipment is fielded and does not require years of adaptation and modifications to function properly in towers and TRACONs throughout the country.  Contractors have not given an iota of input into the future of air traffic control modernization.

August 28, 2003
A news conference was held today at Erie International Airport addressing the proposed privatization of 69 FAA control towers in the United States.  US Representative  Phil English attended the event and spoke in opposition to privatization.  Congressman English has been onboard with controllers opposing privatization for quite some time now.   Representatives from North Coast Air (Erie's premier FBO) and many other local aviators were on hand to lend their support to the local controllers.  We at ERI appreciate the support of all our long time friends.  (Erie Times article on 8/28 event)

July 31, 2003
With pressure from the White House, Republicans legislators have drawn back their support for U.S. air traffic controllers.  Traditionally the pipeline of FAA trained experienced controllers has come from the VFR Towers in the U.S..  These younger controllers have been initiated and trained by FAA personnel and policies and are poised to move up into the larger radar facilities of the nation.  Their intensive initial, concurrent and upgrade FAA training makes their developmental training in the large facilities a fluent progression.   This may never be the same if the President gets his way. 

Sixty-Nine FAA towers, of which 11 rate in the nations 50 busiest airports, are now poised to be absorbed into the private sector.  Many controllers who have entered the FAA have told horror stories of the companies they previously worked for in the private sector.  These companies have reputation for corner cutting and bare-bones staffing in order to turn a profit for the company.

As an air traffic controller who has personally given over 30 years, serving the flying public in the guise of air safety, I take this as a slap in the face.  The same air traffic controllers who so gallantly saved the flying public from possible further disaster on 9/11, created the safest and most dynamic air traffic control system in the world all in the service to the flying public which includes these same Congresspeople and White House residents, are now being treated as a disposable item in the government arsenal.  THANK YOU PRESIDENT BUSH

July 30, 2003
CONTACT: Doug Church
202.220.9802; Cell: 301.346.8245

CONTRACT TOWER COSTS OUT OF CONTROL; NATCA ASKS DOT INSPECTOR GENERAL TO INVESTIGATE

WASHINGTON – Funding for the Federal Contract Tower Program has increased by more than 49 percent over the last three years, dramatically outpacing the rate of growth of the Federal Aviation Administration’s operations budget. The National Air Traffic Controllers Association has asked Department of Transportation Inspector General Kenneth Mead to investigate this and other examples of uncontrolled costs and unfulfilled contractual obligations.

According to Mead’s own past findings of the Contract Tower Program, towers were not staffed in accordance with contractual staffing agreements, payment for services which were not delivered, contractors were overpaid and the overall performance plan was inadequate.

“The inspector general is fond of noting the growth in the FAA operations budget, which is 18 percent over the past three years. We think we have found one of the main causes,” NATCA President John Carr said. “The growth in the cost of contract towers cannot be sustained and we urge Mr. Mead in the strongest possible terms to investigate the financial morass known as the Federal Contract Tower Program.”

Carr noted the urgency for an investigation, in light of a Congressional conference committee report on the FAA Reauthorization bill. If passed by the U.S. House and Senate, this bill would allow for the removal of FAA controllers from 69 air traffic control towers and replace them with contracted employees. Eleven of these towers rank among the 50 busiest in the country, according to the FAA administrators’ latest figures.

While the contract tower program’s funding level has increased 49.71 percent since 2000, the number of contract towers has increased by only five percent during the same time period. Additionally, the Contract Tower Association has stated that the annual cost for a contract tower is $271,000. However, data taken by NATCA from the CTA’s own information shows the actual average cost is more than $413,917 – nearly twice what the contractor previously represented.

“The need for the facts on this matter is urgent, given the fact that the FAA reauthorization bill pending before Congress proposes to expand the Federal Contract Tower Program significantly,” Carr said. “The record of the Contract Tower Program to date suggests that an expansion will be a boon for the contractors, but a disaster for taxpayers.”

July 29, 2003
With pressure from the White House, Republicans legislators have drawn back their support for U.S. air traffic controllers.  Traditionally the pipeline of FAA trained experienced controllers has come from the VFR Towers in the U.S..  These younger controllers have been initiated and trained by FAA personnel and policies and are poised to move up into the larger radar facilities of the nation.  Their intensive initial, concurrent and upgrade FAA training makes their developmental training in the large facilities a fluent progression.   This may never be the same if the President gets his way. 

Sixty-Nine FAA towers, of which 15 rate in the nations busiest airports, are now poised to be absorbed into the private sector.  Many controllers who have entered the FAA have told horror stories of the companies they previously worked for in the private sector.  These companies have reputation for corner cutting and bare-bones staffing in order to turn a profit for the company.

As an air traffic controller who has personally given over 30 years serving the flying public in the guise of air safety, I take this as a slap in the face.  The same air traffic controllers who so gallantly saved the flying public from possible further disaster on 9/11, created the safest and most dynamic air traffic control system in the world all in the service to the flying public which includes these same Congresspeople and White House residents are now being treated as a disposable item in the government arsenal.  THANK YOU PRESIDENT BUSH

June 2003

Last month, despite a veto threat from the White House, the Senate approved an amendment by Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., to the FAA reauthorization bill, S. 824, which would protect nearly all air traffic control jobs at the agency from possible outsourcing.  The US Senate passed S. 824 by a margin of  56-41 as an amendment to a spending plan for the FAA.   Air traffic controllers supported the amendment, sponsored by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J.

"One thing we learned from 9/11 is that the public does not want private contractors responsible for the safety and security of air travelers," Lautenberg said.

On June 12, 2003, the full bill passed by a vote of 94-0.

The move by the White House to privatize the United States air traffic control system may be stalled by this action.  Our system is the busiest, safest, most technologically advanced system in the world.  The reaction time of our closely knit organization was displayed by the never before executed grounding of all aircraft flying over the United States on 9/11.  Had the system been dispersed among various companies, who knows what the outcome could have been.

See Letter to the Editor of the Erie Times from NATCA Safety Erie Tower, which never reached the printed media

Congressman Phil English is standing with us, opposing any form of privatization.  

Recent action by the White House has the OMB directing the FAA to reclassify air traffic control from "inherently governmental" to "commercial-category A".  Category A is critical-core mission and should probably stay within the government.  HOWEVER, last year Flight Service Station and some Airways Facility Sector employees positions were moved to category A... and this year they were moved down to commercial category C and D... ripe for privatization.  So if the president has no plans to privatize ATC, then why reclassify ATC??  This action has many of us wondering if aviation safety will soon be controlled by "the lowest bidder" ??!!      (Nov, 2002)

NATCA Erie Tower has responded with a Letter to the Editor of the Erie Times from the NATCA Safety Representative.  This letter was sent 12-19-02, but yet to reach print.  Congressman Phil English is standing with us, opposing any form of privatization.   (Jan, 2003)

NATCA will be visiting our Congressional workforce in Washington next month during our yearly NATCA in Washington (NiW).  Congressman English gave a great speech last year and we are looking forward to another enjoyable and productive NiW.  Matt Bonidie will represent Erie this year along with assistance from Edinboro's Don Mead (Cleveland Center controller).

FAA INTENDS TO DECLARE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL

A "COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY"

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ARE DEEPLY CONCERNED, BUT NOT SURPRISED

  WASHINGTON - The National Air Traffic Controllers Association has received notice that the Federal Aviation Administration intends to declare air traffic control a "commercial activity."

Under the FAIR Act of 1998, government agencies must declare their job functions to be either commercial or inherently governmental.  Commercial activities are those subject to contracting out and privatization, while inherently governmental functions are those which are defined as, "so intimately related to the public interest as to mandate performance by federal employees." The law goes on to cite control of space and navigation as criteria for declaring a function to be inherently governmental.

"This move doesn't surprise me," NATCA President John Carr said. "This administration has already indicated on several occasions that it would consider privatization of our nation's air traffic control system. It should come as no surprise to anyone that the safety, security and efficiency of the greatest aviation system in the world is now threatened not by terrorists but by government policy towards privatization, which, in air traffic, has a proven record of failure worldwide."

Carr added, "This action makes no sense. The public demanded federalization of our nation's airport screeners by rightly recognizing their importance to public safety and yet air traffic control is on the list of activities we are willing to sell to commercial interests, possibly even foreign ones."

Interestingly, the FAA's action in complying with Office of Management and Budget directives places air traffic control in a designation which contradicts the OMB's own recent guidelines for what should remain in the hands of government. In a Nov. 14 document, under Section E, paragraph 1-C, OMB states that activities which "significantly affect the life, liberty or property of private persons" are inherently governmental. "I can't think of too many activities which more directly or significantly affect the lives of people more than air traffic control," Carr stated. "As for control of space and navigation, if you don't think we control it, try getting into O'Hare at five o'clock this afternoon without us."

According to Carr, there was a silver lining in the administration's decision. "With 10,000 air traffic controllers poised to retire in the next decade, I'm grateful that my generation of public servants won't have to be around to witness the dismantling of their pride and joy, the safest and greatest air traffic control system in the world."  (Dec, 2002)

NATCA President John Carr has been very adamant about the obvious reasons that NATCA and the aviation community should not support the privatization movement.

Challenges Facing The Association

The National Press Club, Transportation Table
Friday, Feb. 23, 2001

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.  My name is John Carr, and I am the president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association.  We represent over 15,000 air traffic controllers, engineers, and other safety related aviation professionals.  I’m honored to be with you here today to discuss the challenges facing my association.

The number one challenge facing the people I represent is the continuing drumbeat for the privatization or commercialization of the air traffic control system.  This idea, which has become the cottage industry of the Reason Foundation, is no less reckless or irresponsible than it was when Robert Poole first proposed it twenty years ago.

Privatization will not address any of the aviation-specific public policy issues currently facing our nation, and very well may detract from the important tasks which lie ahead.   Commercialization will balance a business-oriented bottom line against my bottom line---the safety of the flying public.  Mr. Poole has reported that our opposition is confined to a for-profit scenario, and that we may be more accepting of a not-for-profit corporation.  Nothing could be further from the truth, and I am dumbstruck by such a mischaracterization.   The Reason Foundation could have checked their facts with a phone call to us but chose to blatantly mischaracterize our position instead.  Mr. Poole’s methodology also caused Northwest Airlines to rebut him in a press release yesterday afternoon.  Mr. Poole also uses a clever and disingenuous technique at footnote number five, where he cites his own previous work as a reference.  I suppose it’s only natural to expect that if you repeat something long enough you’re duty bound.

It’s not about money or profit with the people I represent.  It’s about aviation safety.  According to AVFlash, an internet aviation news service, controllers who work for Airservices Australia may soon have to “severely limit” ATC help given to airplanes in trouble because of liability concerns.  A confidential draft memo states that due to pending litigation, “Airservices may be forced to severely limit our capacity to assist aircraft in distress.”  As a professional who has worked airplanes for over twenty years, everywhere from the Gulf of Oman to Chicago O’Hare, news like that makes my blood run cold.  I venture to guess Bob Poole forgot to mention little details like that when he was rolling out his report yesterday.

And it probably wouldn’t have helped matters any to mention the discontent currently roiling through the German air traffic control system, as characterized in the Article, “DFS---A Wasted Opportunity,” in the 4th quarter of 2000 edition of the International Federation of Air Traffic Control Associations newsletter.

The National Air Traffic Controller’s Association believes air traffic control is so intrinsically linked with the public interest as to mandate it’s performance by federal employees.  This phrase is the very definition of “inherently governmental” as defined by OMB Circular A-76.  The president recognized this important designation in his Executive Order forming a PBO for the FAA in late 2000.

We believe our aviation infrastructure is a national treasure which belongs to the citizenry, and it is reckless, foolish and more than a little naïve to believe that a change in ownership will improve safety, or increase capacity or reduce cost.  We believe that our aviation infrastructure has very serious national defense implications.  As I’m sure you know, those aircraft in Desert Storm and Desert Shield didn’t get to Kuwait by boat---the men and women I represent worked them there, while you were all at home sleeping.  And it is shortsighted and irresponsible to open Pandora’s box of military secrets to the lowest bidder.

We do not support transforming an inherently governmental safety function into a commercial enterprise, and we aren’t fooled by the fuzzy math used to fund it, either.  “User fees” are just another way of saying brand-new taxes.  The users of the system already pay many fees in the form of gas taxes, ticket taxes and other service charges.  AIR-21 finally unlocks the aviation trust fund for use in improving our national aviation infrastructure.   Adding a new tax in the form of user fees isn’t going to fool anybody.

Are there problems with the current system?  Certainly, and we are working night and day with the agency to address these problems in a prudent, responsible and strategic fashion.  But let’s not forget that air traffic control is in many ways like an episode of the old “I love Lucy Show.”  Do you remember that episode, where Lucy is wrapping chocolates?  The conveyor belt keeps speeding up, and more and more chocolates are coming, and Lucy is frantically wrapping chocolates, eating them, stuffing them in her blouse and hat, and generally trying to cover up the fact that she’s overwhelmed.

Air traffic controllers stand at the end of that conveyor belt, only it’s airplanes, not chocolates.  We can’t control the speed of the belt, and we can’t control how many airplanes you put on it.  You want to add six hundred flights a day to the conveyor belt at an already overcrowded LaGuardia?  Have a ball.  We’re moving these aircraft just as quickly as we can safely accommodate them.  But remember:  our system is built to allow for unfettered discretion in adding demand.   And at New York’s LaGuardia airport, that meant adding six hundred new flights last summer in the space of about a week.

The FAA finally had to step in and bring some semblance of order to the chaos, and even then, they were blamed for the gridlock.  A delay problem, exacerbated by the competitive nature of the business, and blamed on the federal government.  What’s better than that, right?

For anyone under the mistaken impression that you can add limitless demand to a finite system, I’ve got a news flash for you:   you can’t.  And privatization isn’t going to change that, either.

It’s time for this industry to stop pointing fingers at each other and start working on concrete solutions to the capacity problem.  And by concrete solutions, I mean someone’s got to shut up long enough to start pouring some runways.  As Phil Boyer, President of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association said in his most recent monthly column,  and with apologies to the Democrats in 1992, “It’s more runways, stupid!”

We need more controllers, and we need more runways.  Fifty miles of concrete poured at the twenty-five busiest airports would do more for this country’s aviation needs than twenty years’ worth of Mr. Poole’s reports ever will.

Our delay problem is like a three legged stool.  The first leg involves air traffic control technology improvements, and we are well on our way in that regard, assisting the FAA with moving new technologies into the workplace as quickly and as safely as we can.   Anyone who touts satellite based navigation and separation systems as a panacea for current delay issues hasn’t got the foggiest notion what they’re talking about, and won’t even confess to their problems with fleet equipage issues, lack of redundancy and astronomical cost.

The second leg of the delay problem is the infrastructure issue.  Unless and until airport capacity increases, delays will continue to escalate.  You can privatize, corporatize, or commercialize until you’re blue in the face.  Unless you convince Mayor Daley to add another runway to Chicago O’Hare, passengers are going to wait at Chicago O’Hare.  It’s just that simple, and nothing is going to change the geometry of that event.

The third leg of the delay problem involves prudent demand management, and the users are understandably reticent to talk about it.   The DOT Inspector General has mandated that the FAA establish “capacity benchmarks” for the busiest airports, and you can mark my words:  When those benchmarks come out, this industry is going to be like a dog watching television:  We’re all going to know something important is going on, but we’re not going to know what it is.  And nothing, I repeat nothing, will change at those airports.

But you know, clearly we have the capacity in the system.  I mean, we haven’t left one up there yet.  UPS has made a fortune flying late at night, and Southwest has made a fortune flying where the others aren’t.  We have capacity.  What our nation lacks is peak hour capacity, and I hope the industry will put aside petty differences and pie-in-the-sky proposals long enough to work on concrete solutions to this problem.  Customers aren’t unhappy with airline service.  They’re unhappy with waiting for airline service, and I hope we can all work together this summer to safely increase capacity to meet demand.

I can speak long, loud and passionately on this subject because I believe very strongly in my organization’s position.  I have been reminded on numerous occasions that labor may stand to gain from a privatized or corporatized system, and Mr. Poole has tried to sweeten the pot by offering seats on his imaginary board of directors.  The Reason Foundation has grossly mischaracterized my organization’s position, so let me state it for you all loud and clear:  We oppose corporatization, privatization, commercialization, for-profit, not-for-profit, and every other cockamamie scheme cooked up by so-called think tank experts who’ve never spent so much a one hour plugged in to a busy air traffic control position.  I’m sorry, ladies and gentlemen, but the safety of the flying public is not for sale.   The men and women I represent are the guardians of that safety, and we will use every resource at our disposal to defeat these reckless, ill-concieved fantasies.

I’d like to touch on a few other issues facing my association before opening this up for questions.  My organization is not a one-trick pony, and our dance card is filling up quite rapidly.

A few of the challenges we face are working together with the Federal Aviation Administration in the spirit of cooperation now that President Bush has terminated Executive Order 12871 on Labor-Management partnerships in the Federal sector.

We face the coming wave of controller retirements.  As you know, this August will mark the twentieth anniversary of the PATCO strike of 1981.  As the workforce gets older we face more retirements, more health issues, and more benefits concerns.  I worked at Chicago O’Hare for over ten years, and in all the time I was there I did not see a single controller retirement.   People either moved up, moved out or died.  It is, indeed, a young person’s game.  The men and women I represent have given the very best years of their lives in the service of the people of this country, and I’m going to work
very hard in the next few years to insure they aren’t thrown out like yesterday’s garbage.

NATCA is very busy assisting the agency with their modernization efforts.  When Jane Garvey took office she instituted her now famous, “build a little, test a little, deploy a little” strategy, and we have been her partners in that regard.  Every center in the country has new scopes, and we’re working on over 100 technology projects even as we speak, from PFAST to Multi-Center TMA to Direct-to.  If any of you ever runs into Federico Pena, you can tell him to put away his vacuum tubes, because we certainly have retired  ours.

We are working with the Agency on a comprehensive national airspace redesign.  The current airspace structure no longer serves the needs of the system, and we are the most equipped and qualified to assist in modeling the nation’s airspace for maximum efficiency.  Along the same lines we advocate an examination of separation standards to allow for aircraft to be safely spaced more closely together, freeing up capacity overnight in the system and taking advantage of controller skill and technological advances.

NATCA continues to work with the Congress, user groups and other interested individuals to improve the world’s largest, most complex and safest air traffic control system.  I have the honor and privilege of representing the finest aviation professionals in the world, and our air traffic control system, warts and all, is still the envy of every nation on the earth.   I greatly appreciate the opportunity to join you this afternoon, and I’ll be happy to take any questions you may have at this time.

ATCA Journal Article by John Carr in the April-June, 2001 issue.

From the ATA Homepage (March 2, 2001)

Major Airlines Deny Support of FAA Privatization

Washington, Mar. 1, 2001 -- Denying recent press reports of support by major airlines for the privatization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Air Traffic Control (ATC) system, Air Transport Association (ATA) President and CEO Carol Hallett stated today, "Whoever is claiming that the major airlines support ATC privatization clearly has not spoken with the airlines' chief executive officers."

Speaking on behalf of the member airlines of the Air Transport Association , whose board of directors met today in Washington, Hallett continued, "There are many tasks that need to be implemented to modernize the government's ATC system, to make it more business-like and efficient, and to equip it to meet the demands of our economy -- privatization is not on the list."

"Although a number of carriers contributed to the work of the Reason Public Policy Institute's publication How To Commercialize Air Traffic Control, statements and assertions that the major airlines are "proponents" of ATC privatization are inaccurate," said Hallett. "Furthermore, the policy conclusions contained in this publication should not be interpreted as endorsements of its findings by those airlines."

"Our nation's ATC system, in addition to aviation infrastructure in general, is falling further and further behind in its ability to meet public demand for air transportation. Although last year's enactment of the AIR-21 law provides the necessary funding stream and revenues for capacity enhancements, we must now set real, achievable priority targets to rapidly address system inadequacies. What we do not need is another protracted debate among academics and theoreticians about the merits of a privately run air traffic control system," Hallett said.

The Air Transport Association is the nation's oldest and largest airline trade organization, with 22 U.S. and five international members. ATA member airlines transport over 95 percent of all passenger and cargo traffic in the United States.

AOPA calls air traffic control think-tank proposal "a solution in search of a problem"

Feb. 23, 2001 — AOPA says a proposal to commercialize the air traffic control (ATC) system is "a solution in search of a problem."

A Reason Public Policy Institute study, funded in part by several large airlines, advocates creating a government-owned corporation, much like the postal service, to run ATC. The corporation would charge user fees for air traffic control safety services.

"But the real problem is the lack of runways," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "It doesn't matter what changes you make to air traffic control if there aren't enough runways to handle the aircraft at the end of the flight.

"This proposal does absolutely nothing to address the major cause of airline delay. Commercializing ATC doesn't build more runways."

Boyer noted that Mitre Corporation and FAA studies predict that the most sweeping changes to ATC technology would only yield a ten to 15 percent increase in capacity. But a new runway at a delay-plagued airport would increase capacity there 40 to 80 percent.

"The time for user fees schemes had passed," said Boyer. "The new AIR-21 legislation provides sufficient funds to modernize ATC."

Congress has also exempted FAA from burdensome federal procurement and personnel rules, allowing the agency to move quickly to acquire modern equipment and make necessary changes in staffing.

And air traffic control is now starting to operate under "corporate" structure, with a board of directors providing management advice and a chief operating officer (COO) with the authority to manage all aspects of air traffic control.

"All of the elements of a corporate structure that are supposed to lead to greater efficiency are now in the place," said Boyer. "Let's give these significant t reforms a chance to work."

On the Local Front......

Erie Times-News      March 10, 2001          Editorial

Air traffic control: Start overAir traffic control: Start over

In the fine print deep within President Bush's mini-budget proposal --- pages 138 and 139 -- comes some interesting reading. The administration criticizes "delays in the national airspace system" and says it will draw up "a plan of action for improving the nation's aviation record, and in particular, to examine the success that various nations, such as Canada, have experienced with individual air traffic control systems owned and operated by private companies."

Plain English: The administration is looking into privatizing the air traffic control system.

We don't have a problem with looking into the concept. Privatizing is worth studying. But what we are interested in -- what the nation's air travelers are desperate for -- is the action the administration hints at.

The air traffic control system is a creaking mess. It needs to be blown up and reconstructed.

The statistics grow worse by the month. As reported by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, about one in five commercial flights arrives late. The average delay is near 50 minutes. Delays are up more than 58 percent in the last five years. Cancellations increased 68 percent in the same time.

It's clear that the Federal Aviation Administration is incapable of fixing the air control system.

Let's hope the Bush administration is truly willing to force the issue.

And sooner rather than later.