First off, a disclaimer: You must always remember that I am not an official voice for the FAA or NATCA, the air traffic controllers’ union. However, being an honest, anti-fraudulent employee of the bureaucracy I will always raise my voice where I disagree with the “norm.” So here goes….

One of the “norms” of late has been a verbal fight about controller staffing between FAA’s executive management and NATCA. NATCA claims foulplay on the part of the FAA in their hiring practices, specifically that they are at least 2 years too late in addressing the controller staffing crisis and they are not doing enough to remedy the problem now. Meanwhile the FAA thinks all is well. Read the recent rebuttal of Jim Trinka, the FAA’s Director of Technical Training and Development, has to say about it:

“They [NATCA] can make claims all they want, but their claims don’t compare to the numbers that we have. Their accusations and allegations don’t hold water…. I’m very confident that safety is never compromised.” (source: AVWEB)

As one “in the ranks” let me set the record straight. In the five plus years I have been employed by the FAA I have watched controller staffing within my immediate area of responsibility dwindle 25% due to retirements, lack of retention, and other reasons. In one case I watched an employee take the full two plus years to fully certify and immediately upon certification (i.e. with 1 week) resigned in order to accept a position with the DOD in Louisiana for 75% more pay. So Mr. Trinka, here are ACTUAL numbers to provide the public, rather than speaking rhetoric to pacify congressional inquiries:

Number of controllers in my area when I hired on in September, 2002 (about 5 years ago) = 48

Loss of Controllers:
Retired controllers during my employment = 7
Employees permitted to transfer away from my area = 5
Controller who quit for medical reasons = 1
Controllers promoted or assigned other duties (away from active air traffic) = 7
Controller who quit for higher controller pay in the DOD = 1

Gain of Controllers:
Newly certified controllers = 7
Controllers who transferred to my area (from other facilities) = 2

CURRENT CERTIFIED CONTROLLERS = 36!

Mr. Trinka and others in the FAA will argue the agency has hired thousands of other controllers, meeting their hiring objectives. The problem is that the attrition rate normally dissolves a good portion these new hires. Again, here are actual numbers:

Controllers who were hired but never made it through “the system”:
Controllers who quit for better pay = 2
Controllers who quit for lack of ability = 3

So if you look at the number above indicating “newly certified controllers” over this period there were 7, while over the same period we lost 6 (5 during training and 1 immediately after completing training). That is a 54% retention rate in my area of responsibility. To make the situation worse, while controller staffing is shrinking air traffic is getting busier as airlines (like Delta) transition from a single flight carrying 130+ individuals migrate to 2 or 3 regional jet flights (like SkyWest) carrying 50 to 70 passengers, resulting in more aircraft in the sky. And Mr. Trinka has the gall to say, “safety is never compromised.”

Now as if this is not enough, Mr. Trinka in his interview went on to indicate that new controllers are becoming qualified in half the time it took just a few years ago. This may be true in some facilities, but in mine it is taking longer. I have publicly scrutinized the en route air traffic training program inside the workplace only to be rebuffed with comments like, “we are doing better than other facilities.” Since when is just being “better” our goal? The FAA’s goal should always be to be at its best all the time and to be trying to improve every step of the way. Here are some concepts I have introduced that somehow have never made it through to the thick heads in the bureaucracy:

1) Additional simulators - By adding simulators more controllers can be trained concurrently. My facility finally brought in new simulators last year but have yet to use them. Then just last fall I learned that we only have them as a “loan” through the Summer 2008 in order to implement a new techology. After that they are off to another facility. Huh?

2) Perform Stage I Training in Universities - Right now the FAA is hiring controllers and sending them to Oklahoma City to live for three months, paying them a salary and providing them per diem. Why not permit our prestigious universities to train controllers on their own dime and time, saving the FAA millions of dollars and endless hours of training.

3) Reduce Class Time by 2/3 - I can vouch firsthand that the FAA is performing a fraud on the public. There were literally days during my training program in which I sat at a desk doing literally nothing. This is due to classes being geared towards the “slowest possible student,” in order to thwart lawsuits of unfairness. Since when do we train our controllers to the lowest common demoninator? We should expect excellence in everything we do as controllers and therefore if developing controllers are unable to maintain a rigorous pace they should be swept aside from the program. I can not begin to tell how how this could save the FAA hundres of millions of dollars. This is not rocket science. It is a simple concept anyone learns in a Management 101 course.

The FAA needs serious change, not just a little shuffling around of employees. The FAA needs someone in charge who has vision and talent to accomplish dramatic change. The FAA needs someone who will actually negotiate with NATCA with the goal of increasing safety and efficiency while elevating employee morale. The FAA needs someone in charge who will slash the bureaucracy into a simpler, leaner system without compromising the safety of the flying public. If only I were in charge. <sigh>