|
|
Post by tornado on Mar 8, 2013 13:32:01 GMT -5
Unless the sequestration cuts are modified, agencies have to cut from their budget. I just spoke with my ATM. He says Congress is still trying to fix the sequester as the continuing resolution to fund the government nears expiration. Controllers will have to take 1 furlough day per (10 day) pay period, which amounts to a 10% pay cut. Even he as ATM will have to take the furlough days, he said. It appears the FAA is trying to assure its employees that the government is working to fix the sequester, among other budget issues. |
|
|
|
Post by zoomthundersnow on Mar 8, 2013 14:18:07 GMT -5
Thx Tornado, I wish the FAA would take a surgical approach to the CWO program rather than the advertised meat cleaver strategy. Our reason at our site for joining the Union was for Job security, prior to the rules when contract changeover were enacted. I'm sure a lot of folks would adhere to DOL wage determinations standards as a smart cut, versus total program annilhation.
|
|
binovc
Junior Member
Posts: 84
|
Post by binovc on Mar 8, 2013 15:31:05 GMT -5
"wish the FAA would take a surgical approach to the CWO program"
If ATC is being forced to take a temporary 10% pay cut, then I would certainly agree to the same terms, especially if it meant the difference between having my job or not having it. If by the same token, ATC gets paid back-pay when this is allover with, then I would expect that for us as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcfan on Mar 8, 2013 15:36:51 GMT -5
Per prior letters this furlough is different from ones in the past. They will not be allowed to use paid leave and shall not receive any back pay for work not performed. This may not be a popular stance amongst this crowd, but I personally think it's ridiculous that anyone (including me) should be paid for work they did not perform. On the flipside, nobody should ever be asked to work for free or for a promise to be paid at a later date either.
|
|
|
|
Post by zoomthundersnow on Mar 8, 2013 15:45:20 GMT -5
If the program is eliminated, I'm contemplating joining the WWE, and go by the moniker, "The Sequester." I'm getting tired of defending ourselves on a repeated basis, but won't give up the fight.
|
|
|
|
Post by hurricane on Mar 8, 2013 16:08:51 GMT -5
Ok I should've been more specific. Yes, Congress can pass a bill opposing an EO, but in this climate and with Congress being split it has zero chance of passing both houses. The FAA cannot back out of the EO unless the FAA honestly believes that handing observations over to controllers isn't considered a degradation of service. Now, the term "no degradation of service" can be argued, but it's an argument I believe they would lose. And yes, the Supreme Court could rule an EO as unconstitutional, but not this one! All in all, I'm not getting my undies in a vice over this quite yet. I believe it's all smoke about eliminating the CWO program. The FAA cannot go against an EO plain and simple!
|
|
