|
Post by Little Miss Sunshine on Jun 3, 2016 6:04:44 GMT -5
I am not the union steward for our site, but in discussions the past few days a few of us at our site came to an unsettling conclusion.
I must also prefix our concern with the fact that our site (as many we assume) had to forgo any raise whatsoever for FY16. Patco explained this action as being the best for the program as all were on the cutting board (well at least for 57 sites - to start) however our site is not one of the 57.
Now fast forward to the present; coupled with the story out of SIA that was posted this past week and all indications from reading between the lines are that the initial cuts are still on the table as the agency "has not made any decision at this time" - pretty much a direct quote from the story.
Our office discussion has concluded that the state of the program is no better or worse off than it was a year ago, so why do we believe a raise of any type will occur in FY17?
Finally one of our full timers brought up the bleak possibility that the lack of communication could be a signal that the imposed pay freeze in FY16 very well could be in store for FY17.
comments or thoughts very much welcomed to calm? our fears.
oh yeah - is mr tuso back with patco for only help with the cwo program cutting issues or has any site talked to him concerning cba issues?
|
|
|
Post by TCU 2U2 on Jun 3, 2016 6:40:56 GMT -5
comments or thoughts very much welcomed to calm? our fears. Not sure if this will calm your fears or not, but the program has been under the gun as in whole or in part since 2007 / 2008. OES report of 2009 also gave insight of the agencies ability to perform a much indepth (and expensive) review / analysts, even though there were many holes within the final report. Since then we had strong push by agency to cut in 2011 & the largest since our current situation, 2013. If you recall the 2013 transition report gave all the finer details of overall program to disolve, with target dates to close offices in the summer of 2013. So here we sit in 2016 - nothing has changed in reality with the attempts. But on the brighter side, there has been an awakening in Congress on our importance to the NAS. While we are such a small part of the overall picture, our services are essential to the safe operation at airports currently in the CWO Program--and the news is, people are being educated and enlightened. ASOS has limitations (all well documented) ... we fill those limitations with data not available elsewhere. While the FAA can tout their claim of "391 airports being provided LAWRS / critical data via controllers" ... we have documentation that proves otherwise. The REAL story should read: There are 136 sites within the CWO Program, providing required critical data beyond LAWRS & these 136 airports are the medium & largest airports in the nation, thus allowing ATC to perform their critical jobs of aircraft separation, landing & takeoffs without having to compromise those services to multi-task providing critical weather data BEYOND the LAWRS requirements. This enhanced service ... aka ... A level, is required at these 136 CWO sites per the industry report, as agreed upon by government & stakeholders / industry. Only CWO's provide this A level service. In this respect, nothing has changed either, although the FAA would have one believe otherwise.
|
|