This AP story about the failure of air traffic control communications in southern California marks an interesting milestone in the American culture of victimhood. Pilots and passengers were the ones at risk but “Three [FAA ATC] workers filed injury claims, saying they were traumatized by seeing flights veer toward one another on radar without being able to do anything.”
In a society where “software and medicine are the only things that regularly fail,” the last line of the article was not too surprising: “Ghaffari said a backup computer system was activated, but it failed too.”
[This letter from an FAA controller published by avweb.com might inspire some young folks looking for career ideas.]
Hah, this reminds me of the case of S. Brian Willson, a protester whose legs were cut off by a Naval munitions train in 1987. Willson had positioned his body across the railroad tracks as a protest against the alleged shipments of US weapons to Central America. Willson went on to be sued by the train’s crew for the emotional trauma created by the incident. The suit was eventually dismissed.
I’m still having trouble with the concept of “unionized gov’t workers”.
Extrapolated, maybe we’d get a unionized army… “We want a pay-raise NOW or we join the taliban!”
P.
Forgot this…
The real problem (“Near miss”) is insufficient separation between aircraft. Demands by airlines (who, trust me, bully the congress and FAA both) yield a flight-separation (“nose-to-tail”) only long enough to land and clear the runway for the next landing. This is ludicrous.
That the FAA is going to high-altitude 1000′ vertical separation (from 2000′) is insane.
Radio failure in 2004? God help us.
On the Concept of Unionized Government Workers:
The Government, as an employer, has the ability to exploit workers just like any multinational corporation. Without the right to organize, laborers can and will be exploited because the best interest of the employer is almost never in the best interest of the employee.
In Chicago today was erected a statue in honor f the Haymarket Riots, a monument to the struggle of the working class. Despite the image of corruption and perception of dilatory employees, unions have provided many of things employers failed at doing, such as pensions, health care, and forms of social security nets like workers compensation.
So why shouldn’t government workers have the same rights to organize as anyone else?
Not only should government workers have the right to unionize, they should have the right to strike, which many have been stripped of. Just imagine New York and Boston this summer with police officers striking rather than coralling protesters. Neither city’s police force were working with a contract. If they had been allowed to strike, I bet their respective mayors would have signed an equitable agreement very quickly.
Ian,
1) Government employees can vote (in normal elections) to change management!
2) Government employees are public servants, not whores to a corporate empire.
3) Government is (generaly) the expression of the will of the people.
And please, reference the constitutional “right to strike” or “unionize.”
You seem to neglect the fact that government employees/and the government lack competition in many arenas – like air traffic control. Without the hand of the market, inefficient government agencies face no restraint to the constant demands of union leaders (whose SOLE purpose is the advancement of union leaders, not society as a whole).
I mean “advancement of union members” rather than “advancement of union leaders”…
(1) Certainly government employees can vote, But to assume that government employee who vote have control over the management of any particular agency of the government is absurd. Using that same false logic then, employees of private companies could ‘control’ their management by not buying products from that corporation. This has obviously worked well for Walmart employees as the nation’s largest employer has (1) locked employees in Walmart facilities, (2) require hourly wage workers to work after hours off the clock, and (3) grant promotions based on sexism rather than merit. Or take for example McDonalds who’s corporate policy encourages restaurant owners to keep employees working under 29 hours a week so they do not become full time employees eligiable for benefits. In both these cases, employees are non-union. Surely these employees, under the suggested conditions, be able to change the management through voting (or in this case, selecting to shop or not shop at a retailer). So in this way, government employees are no more or less free to choose their management as any other laborer.
(2) If it looks like a busines, if it acts like a business, it is a business.
A business provides services and in return collects revenue. From this revenue, employees are paid to provide more services and continue on. This is not different from a government that provides services and collects taxes (revenue) to administer those services. In both cases, government and business hire employees. Elected officials are accountable to the electorate, and CEO’s are accountable to share holders. In both instances, the EO [elected official] and the CEO want to reduce costs as much as possible to look good for their shareholders or voters. The employees that they have hired are not going to benefit from cost cutting any more than a GM employee in Flint MI benefits from the CEO moving jobs to Mexico.
(3) What the hell does the will of the people have to do with labor relations?
Finally, the right to organized labor is derivative from the first amendment of the constitution (we are still talking the United States here, right?) “Congress shall make no law… abridging … the right of the people peaceably to assemble.” If I had access to Lexus, I would not hesitate in finding the specific cases. But as it is I don’t.
On the final point: Employees always have competition. They have competition from people who are willing to do the work for less then the union wage, and in many cases, union workers do not always go along with leadership decisions to strike. Union members routinely cross picket lines because they must earn money, even if it is less than a living wage. The Boston and NY police officers did not strike during the conventions, mostly because it is illegal for them to do so. However, if you honestly believe that a New York City Police officer deserves less money and fewer benefits then they are demanding, then by all means you should volunteer as a replacement police officer willing to work for whatever the city is offering, since clearly you think unionized police officers are earning more than the value of the work they are doing.
I saw that letter from the FAA controller last week. My immediate reaction was to jump on the web and apply. Then I found out I’m too old (that’s been happening a lot lately).
Do you think they would bend that age 30 cutoff for a minority applicant – hispanic? 🙂
I think the discussion of unions here is very relevant, considering that air traffic controllers were involved in the biggest labor dispute in recent memory. In 1981 Reagan fired 12,000 air traffic controllers (80% of the workforce) and banned them for life from ever returning to work. (http://www.house.gov/transportation/press/press2004/release63.html) One of the effects of this was that most of the controllers were hired quickly after the strike, and they are reaching retirement age in the next few years. Without the strike, there wouldn’t have been a hiring surge and retirement patterns would be more spread out.
I saw that one of their top demands was a 32-hour work week, but according to this (http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos108.htm) they still work 40 hours.
About 6 months ago I heard Tom Morello on the radio show Axis of Justice report that commercial pilots flying into Reagan Airport in DC (renamed from Washington National) still refer to it over the radio as Washington National, in solidarity with the traffic controllers whose union was busted by the former president. I haven’t been able to find anything to confirm this, but it’s a good story. Any pilots out there to confirm or deny?
So now the ATC union is fighting to hire more staff, but what leverage do they have? Clearly, not much with the threat of a lifetime ban hanging over your head.
As to whether government workers should be able to join unions, the right to unionize is recognized under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, section 23:
Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
(http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm)
There aren’t, not should there be, any exceptions for government employees. Of course with the military, one could argue that the members aren’t employees and so don’t have the right to unionize.
We’re not so lucky here in the US, but in many countries the right to strike is in the constitution. It’s also in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, available here: http://www.europarl.eu.int/charter/default_en.htm, chapter IV article 28.
Ian,
I understand where you are coming from and respect your opinion. And I did work as a volunteer for the NYC 2004 host committee (working security with the NYPD and Secret Service) during the RNC. During the week I talked with many (although admittedly a small percentage compared to the enormous police presence in the city) officers during my commitment. Every single one was working long/double shifts. Not a single one (out of the number I talked with) complained at all about their duty or mentioned their frustrations with the inability to strike.
And it’s true that it’s not fair to make generalizations. Not every FAA employee is a slacker just looking to collect a paycheck. Not every NYPD employee is happy with his wages/etc.
But I think it is important to consider the balance of the rights of government employees with the purpose/goal of government operations. Unfortunately most government employees belong to unions that hold a monopoly (granted by the Feds) over their function. I think asking whether the flight controllers should be able to stop all public and private air traffic in the United States by striking as opposed to whether the employees of one steel mill can shutdown production of that mill (while countless others continue to produce) is a valid question.
President Reagan’s actions in 1981 may have created part of the problem we’re seeing today. And to Matt, UN declarations have no legal value in the United States. Off the subject, what is the UN today doing about the genocide occurring in the Sudan? Despite the restrictions in NY and Boston, people are certainly allowed to practice the right of free assembly. People can form unions as they wish. But companies/government must certainly be allowed the same freedom to employ/bargain at will.
There are both pros and cons to strong organized labor. But I’m not saying all unions are evil, etc… I’m the son and grandson of union members. Just as unions prevented my grandfather from toiling in the hazardous steel mills (of Pittsburgh, did you guess?) for a pittance do they prevent me from getting decent service at the local DMV? The last time I checked the 29/hour week high school kids working at the McDonalds provided much better service (for a lower cost to the customer) than the government employees working at the DMV. And neither of the two was responsible for the well being of the air-traveling public!
I enjoy the debate!
Sean,
Yeah I only brought up the UN and European documents for comparison. Of course they don’t hold legal water in the US.
I think particularly in this example it’s interesting to examine how other countries handle the same situation. France has air traffic strikes frequently, but planes haven’t fallen from the sky and I think most people still consider it a valid travel destination. Other European countries also have ATC strikes, I’m just using France as an example.
Just with a quick search I found strikes in
2000:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/world/europe/806328.stm
2001:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1693429.stm
2002:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2512603.stm
2003:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2939270.stm
2004:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3492069.stm
It’s an inconvenience to be sure if you happen to get stuck in the middle of one, but I haven’t seen anything to indicate that it endangers anyone.
You’re right about the government enforced monopoly in certain areas, which at the same time gets rid of competition and also gives workers in those fields massive amounts of leverage. That holds true of course only as long as they are given the right to withhold their labor when they feel it’s necessary to improve their working conditions.
In these cases, we (the govt, “the will of the people”) have made an implicit decision that these jobs are so important that the benefits (or necessity) of having a monopoly outweigh the detriments. But we handicap the game by crippling the workers ability to take advantage of that monopoly. Because if they had the same rights as other workers, they would reap benefits proportional to the importance of their job – which we have already decided is massively important.
So in essence, we’ve said (to use your example profession) “Being a police officer is vitally important to this community. If you don’t work – we are all unsafe. But we’re going to pay you less than people whose jobs play no part in the safety of the community. You could be a web programmer and make twice as much, easily. In order to maintain this disparity and keep taxes for programmers low, we have to take away your ability to strike.”
I think there are lots of examples of massively underpaid “public servants” – the salaries for public school teachers are appalling.
To bring it back to the air traffic controllers – how do their salaries stack up against the passengers on the flights that they are making sure land safe and sound? I found an ad brochure for LaGuardia which claims that 50% of all travelers who fly there make more than $75k. (http://www.jcdecauxairportus.com/pdfs/factsheets/LGA.pdf) The average for traffic controllers is around $95k, so not bad. Still, I would bet the total income of the population of a first class cabin on any international flight would dwarf that of the entire tower staff. Nevermind the private jets…
Great discussion – not sure how we ended up here from talking about Software and Medicine…
It sounds to me like the issue is not one of whether or not we should have unionized air controllers, but whether any federal employees — unionized or not — should be paid to behave the way that letter describes. The answer to that question, to any tax-paying citizen, should be obvious.
Any employees underperforming so egregiously should be fired immediately. (Note that I plan to vote against the FAA’s current management.) If the union is creating an environment that fosters gross insitutionalized inefficiency and mismanagement, then it needs to be fired. If there can be good employees and bad ones, then surely there can be good unions and bad ones.
Bad employees get fired. What happens to bad unions?
Sean,
Asking a Police office if they don’t like working overtime is like asking a kid if they don’t like Christmas.
In my neck of the woods, there are municipal laws that events have to have badged police officers for security.
These officers receive considerably more than time and a half for this overtime duty which consists mainly of having a demonstrable presence. In many cases more than half of an officers pay can be made up from this ‘event overtime’
It’s interesting the subject of laws which don’t apply to the USA should be brought up, in this case the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
I was just reading Chomsky’s blog: http://blog.zmag.org/ttt/archives/000711.html
Apparently in the U.S. dictionary genocide is something *other* countries practice.
It’s particularly interesting given the context here, in which a reference to a noble document like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is turned into into a cheap jibe on genocide, all the while forgetting very recent history:
http://blog.zmag.org/ttt/archives/000493.html
Regarding this quote, “Tom Morello on the radio show Axis of Justice report that commercial pilots flying into Reagan Airport in DC (renamed from Washington National) still refer to it over the radio as Washington National, in solidarity with the traffic controllers whose union was busted by the former president”
Not true in my sample. From 10 pilots I contacted who regularly fly into “National”, none of them even heard of this story. The consensus was that the old name “National” is simply a years-old habit and likely will not die out for a generation of pilots.
Back to the original story/subject (in case anyone is still reading) – they released details of what went wrong with the radio system.
http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=2275
After migrating to Windows 2000 from Unix, the systems would regularly crash, so they instituted an automatic reboot every 47.9 days. Technicians are supposed to manually reboot it every 30 days but they didn’t, so it rebooted itself, failed, and the backup system failed as well.
Dood, they got a Dell!
Matt, that article begs a few questions:
1. What hole in the ground did Harris consulting crawl out of that they expected five-nines performance out of a Wintel machine?
2. Just why did the idea of putting a mission-critical system on a least-cost-of-ownership platform sound like a good idea to the FAA?
3. And why oh why does the system only function properly in Seattle?
This is too painful to be funny, fortunately nobody died over this idiocy
Ice Institute Skating