FCT controller Sick Leave Policy - A little perspective

ATChoney Rookie Outside the beltway but still inside the sanctum.

Think about it...

— Controllers working for the FAA earn employer provided sick leave.
— Maintenance staff working on equipment and facilities for the FAA earn employer provided sick leave.
— Most police and fire fighters earn employer provided sick leave.
— A majority of sanitation workers employed by the counties and cities (to collect refuse) earn employer provided sick leave.

What do the above all have in common? They provide a necessary, public service — the importance of which is duly recognized by both the public and the federal government as critical to public health and safety.

Yet, it seems most contract controllers do not currently earn employer provided sick leave.

Are contract companies — and perhaps the FAA — suggesting by this omission that FCT program controllers are less important and less critical to public safety than the public service employees listed above even though FCT controllers are: a.) doing exactly the same work serving the exact same planes and passengers as their FAA colleagues with whom they communicate and coordinate operations on a daily basis; b.) sharing the same facility site and using the same equipment as their partners from the FAA maintenance staff; and c.) listed as critical components in local emergency response plans calling for them to work right along side the police and fire departments in the event of an emergency...? Do we think the contribution of FCT controllers working on contract is not even as important to public safety as the contribution of our sanitation workers?

I think a responsible sick leave policy for ALL controllers is in the best interests of the flying public — and the controllers who serve them.

polo708 Epic Member tower

FCT controllers aren't government employees like the job examples you listed above. FCT controllers work for a contractor. Their bottom line is a profit, not your happiness unfortunately.

Most jobs dont offer paid sick leave so FCTs are no different than the normal. Is it fair? No... but nothing requires them to provide sick leave. Its just how it is.

ATChoney Rookie Outside the beltway but still inside the sanctum.

My point exactly. FCT controllers may not work directly for the federal government, but they are doing the SAME job with the SAME equipment and working with the SAME people in the SAME system as federal employees. Are we saying that, based on safety, fairness and professionalism, FCT controllers don't need or deserve the SAME access to sick leave benefits that protect both the public and the controller ? especially since the money that pays FCT salaries IS basically the SAME federal money from tax payer coffers that pays the salaries and sick leave benefits of government employees?

You're right, it's not about my happiness ? I'm retired now. But I think it IS about safety, professionalism and quality of service.

Just because the contract companies choose to cut sick leave benefits in order to increase profits, doesn't make that choice the right one for the public and it doesn't mean things shouldn't or can't be changed. I have no problem with the contract companies making their profits, but I have a big problem with them doing so in a manner that negatively affects the public and the controllers who serve them. I am well aware that many jobs and professions do not offer sick leave benefits, but we are talking here about a system that has traditionally and historically provided sick leave benefits that are now being cut for the sake of private profits. It is the disparity of the sick leave benefits of the federal versus contract controller that disturbs me since I wonder just how much of what we deem as "public good" is for sale for private profit.

Overall, after some rough patches in a few places, I think the FCT program has operated quite effectively for the past 15 years and I see it as continuing to have some real potential benefit to the public ? but not without a little "fixing". In some places the FCT program now seems to be facing some serious questions in terms of safety concerns, lack of confidence in leadership and an increase in job dissatisfaction as expressed by well qualified and well experienced controllers who I think are in a position to know what's what. Sick leave is merely one of the issues at hand, but I think it's something we should be thinking about in the larger picture of excellence and safety within the ATC system.

Contract companies may not like the idea of the controllers questioning their choices, but the bottom line is that it's the controller's bottom that IS on the line every day on the job while the contract companies provide "management" services. Without a good working partnership between the two, the FCT program may fail to live up to the expectations of the tax paying public.

Radium Epic Member SoCal Tracon

its only the same job the way high school football is the same game of football as the NFL.

Not that im taking sides here but there is a vast difference between say LA tower and some bfe twr in Kansas.

atcguruaf Rico Suave AZ

and yet there are some contract facilities that are busier and more complex than some FAA facilities.

I worked in the FCT program for a bit. Working sick is not good. You might as well come in hung over and/or ill-prepared to work. Not to mention communicable illnesses. Getting others sick is really bad, especially when you have 2-3 controllers, out of a total of 4-5 full CPC controllers, that are sick.

It really hinders the service provided. Having sick leave, even just a week or so, really helps.

I'm with ATChoney on this one. And actually, most jobs that I'm aware of offer sick time.

I can think of more jobs that offer sick time than don't - and I'm talking careers, not the part-time job at McDonald's.

atcguruaf Rico Suave AZ

This makes little to no sense.


Does this mean KARR (66K annual ops) deserves less benefits than KORD?

It's some bfe tower in Illinois, but operated by the FAA. However, IWA (230K annual ops), CHD (265K annual ops), RYN (160K annual ops), GYR (175K annual ops) all out perform this facility and are understaffed.

By your own thought process, these towers should be closer to the NFL than ARR.

I only bring these facilities up because I'm more familiar with them.

IWA, for example, has carrier service, corporate jets, military, flight training schools, and helicopters. So the amount and type of aircraft worked there play a significant role in the complexity as well.

WatchThis Trusted Member Arizona

When working for a contract tower, you're saying there's nothing that provides for when a person takes time off when sick? The only options are no pay or take regular leave? If that's the case, then it's not right. There should be something there for you. Although a person should not come to work if they are going to infect others, I can also see how a person would do that if it meant no pay otherwise.

Patrick_Bateman Junior Member Manhattan

Or you could be Serco and do it because its fun to be dickheads. They cut the one week per year of company paid sick time and simultaneously gave all of their managers a 10% pay raise. So it can't be said they did it entirely for profits when they turn right around and spend the money elsewhere.

polo708 Epic Member tower

That is why these places are contracted out... so that the government doesnt have to pay you sick time, retirement, good health care, etc.

Im on your side, but it is what it is for a reason. If they paid out all these benefits then it would be the FAA... and most FCT controllers would be ineligible to work there now.

EFC Junior Member On a Van by the Sea

Mr Bateman.

Before you go on creating a fantasy to support your claims, let me set the record straight. According to my source (a Serco ATM) Serco Managers did not received a 10% pay raise. The did receive a 4.21% pay raise.