|
NATCA’s media and legislative efforts to draw attention to the looming controller retirement/staffing crisis continued this week with press coverage nationally and in the usual trade publications and online forums. Local coverage was also found in DC, Duluth, Phoenix, Denver, Minneapolis, Orlando and Chicago to name just a few. Our message is really starting to get out there and Congress is in the early stages of taking note. The House Appropriations committee met Thursday and a deal was cut (to avoid a full amendment) that involved a “Managers Amendment” to increase the 7 million dollars the aviation subcommittee had voted for to 9 million. That’s better than 7 but short of the 14 million we feel is the bare minimum to get the process started. We will be working with Senate appropriations in September to get this increased again. We have stronger friends in the majority party there and feel pretty good about our combination of lobbying, media events, press coverage and PAC having a positive effect.
Quote: Money couldn't buy friends, but you got a better class of enemy. Spike Milligan (b. 1918)
There was also a micro-flurry of other activity in congress this week as Friday was the last day of the summer session for the House and Senate. They may come back for a special August or September session to try and deal with recommendations of the 9-11 commission, but I would expect security issues to be the only subjects dealt with if that session occurs.
Of glaring note is the fact that the Bush overtime pay alterations are set to go into effect on August 23rd. Numerous attempts in the House and Senate failed to block the implementation but did result in a mild softening of the original proposals. As to the potential impact to our bargaining units, I have to confess that I’m not sure. The details of all this, even after extensive attempts at clarification, are still as clear as mud. By definition it would appear that most every job function within the NATCA bargaining units would not qualify for overtime pay due to job description, salary or both. There is not, however, any requirement for federal agencies to adopt these new rules but, as I’m sure you can guess, if one agency adopted these the others would gladly fall in line quickly to avoid overtime costs. What protections do we have against this? Well a few of our collective bargaining agreements, including ATC, have our current overtime procedures detailed in them and would be exempt as long as those provisions were in effect. Keep in mind that our current contract extension expires next year. For the bargaining units without contracts (thanks to the FAA’s attempted bypass of FLRA impasse resolution) these employees may be under a clear and present danger in the not to distant future. Either way, if a labor unfriendly administration and/or congress exists after the November elections our contract negotiations will be difficult, to say the least, and retaining or gaining protections on overtime will be problematic.
The following items are a just a few of note but remember that any bills mentioned are just making it out of the committee level process and will require passage by the full House and Senate along with the Presidents signature before they would become law.
IN THE HOUSE;
The House Appropriations Committee approved legislation Thursday that would provide equal pay adjustments for military and civilian federal employees in 2005. The panel passed by a 42-16 vote an amendment to the fiscal 2005 Transportation-Treasury appropriations bill that would grant federal civilian employees and blue-collar workers the same 3.5 percent pay raise that military personnel will receive next year. House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., joined with House Government Reform Committee Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va., and Reps. Frank Wolf, R-Va., and Jim Moran, D-Va., to steer the measure through committee. This has been a yearly battle for us especially since the Bush administration has consistently recommended lower raises for civilian federal employees every year. The legislation being introduced at this early date is starting early is a promising sign.
IN THE SENATE;
These items came out of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee;
S. 2657, which authorizes the Office of Personnel Management to negotiate improved eye and dental coverage plans for federal employees. The employees would have to foot the entire cost of premiums for the better coverage. But OPM would leverage the purchasing power of the federal government to negotiate the lowest rates. Now if they would just do this for our health insurance we could perhaps get some decent rates there. Expect resistance on this because the federal government is a major cash cow for the insurance industry offsetting their private premiums.
S. 593, which would require federal agencies to make up the difference between federal salaries and military pay when National Guard personnel or military reservists go on active duty. The legislation approved by the committee on a voice vote was a substitute by Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., clarifying that reservists would not get pay reductions and authorizing $100 million for the pay differentials. This is similar to legislation, just after the start of enduring freedom, that NATCA was the only organization to commit resources in backing it besides lip service. You can expect resistance to this (not for budgetary reasons, the reservists federal salary is already budgeted for as if they were not deployed although there is always the question of whether the military or civilian government is enjoying the benefit) but because DOD doesn’t want two classes (pay-wise) of reservists for morale reasons and several groups are cynically worried about the effect of this on the “next” war. These reservists and their families are making incredible sacrifices, sometimes even the ultimate one, and adding financial burden on them during long deployments is shameful.
Quote: Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. Groucho Marx (1895-1977)
S. 2409, which is aimed at ensuring that federal health benefits are continued for military reservists called to active duty. The bill authorizes agencies to pay for an employee and his or her government contributions to health plans for up to 24 months. An amendment by Durbin to add federal employee life insurance to the continued benefits was approved on a voice vote without debate. If you talk to some reservists who have been deployed the insurance situation, especially if they have a family, is a nightmare. This would at least keep their civilian insurance paid but you can expect resistance because of tight dollars and the same reasons listed above for S. 593.
Grant Anderson Pager 50501
|
