User Fee Opinions

AFSS5602 Junior Member

No one in America likes being nickle and dimed for things. Most of us have to work very hard for the little money we make. In today's world money certainly doesn't go anywhere near what it used to. Many pilots and ATC folk are probably aware that the FAA would love to install user fees on pilots like they do in Canada. Are user fees really that bad? Here is my view as a flight service specialist.

I go to work everyday and provide a wide range of services for free. My salary is paid by the taxpayers of this country. Congress gives the FAA money, which gives Lockheed Martin money, which pays me. The problem is that the money we get to provide service is finite and we have no way to raise any money for new specialists or new equipment. Lockheed is essentially trying to make a massive profit off of a service they provide for free. Obviously a seemingly impossible task. Since the money is fixed, the only way Lockheed can get a profit is by significantly reducing the workforce and equipment. Bonus money is in our contract which comes from meeting performance metrics set by the FAA. Problem is that we haven't gotten any bonus money since they started this contract. That is because while many of the performance metrics are quite doable, there are several that are very unrealistic.

While NavCanada charges user fees they also have state of the art equipment/facilities, much better compensated air traffic control employees, and a more expansive flight service system.

My question to all of you is this. If Lockheed charged a fee for flight service, and that fee meant better benefits for employees, more employees, better equipment, much better service, and a more expansive flight service system ; How much would you pay?

ATCtower Epic Member

The service would be very valuable and difficult to place a tangiable dollar figure on. Personally, I would likely use FSS no matter the fee assessed (within reason). Would I be willing to take the step and say, should we pay a fee? Yes, as a matter of fact, I think it would be a benefit. After my dealings with FSS specialsts recently, it is noticable that morale is down. Our user fees (only if assessed in conjunction with continued federal support) would greatly benefit not only the employees providing the service, but the pilots utilizing it.

My $.02

polo708 Epic Member tower

Im probably going to sound like the douchebag here but i'll say what all controllers are probably thinking but wont say for fear of being the bad guy. You probably get paid over $40/hour to pass weather and keep track of flight plans with practically zero responsibility or direct control of aircraft and you are complaining about not getting a bonus on top of that? Now you are asking if pilots would have a problem paying a fee to receive services that they should be getting currently?

Sorry if this post sounds like anger but its truly jealousy. You get paid more than the majority of CPC'd controllers and have none of the responsibility.

So obviously I would say no to paying user fees. That's just me.

AFSS5602 Junior Member

I should clarify that nobody at all including me wants more money. Your right, we are very fortunate to make what we make and we all know that. The bonus money I refered to is for the company not us. We wont see any of that, go figure. User fees would help save our jobs, get us better equipment, and expand.

We all support controllers and hope your work rules and pay are restored to a level more worthy of the job you all do.

One thing most controllers don't know is that we can and do have the authority to advise headings and routing to get people out of bad weather and we often do. The only difference is we preface things with words like "Recommend" or "Advise" so it doesn't legally sound like a control instruction. I have often talked to pilots who went up into weather they shouldn't be in. Be it thunderstorms or icing they call us for help. The direction we advise them on can save their lives or cost them their lives. If an aircraft is in icing should he climb or descend, is there an inversion, are those thunderstorms building, which way are the cells advecting, which way is cell movement, can he get through, should he turn around etc... Pilots put faith in us and listen to us, because they trust us. That's why we make what we make. Because it isn't until you have worked this job that you realize that sometimes you really are someones last fork in the road between life and death. I went to school and the faa acadamy to be a controller and never would I have imagined that this job could be as scary as it is sometimes.

With that said, controllers definitely are on the front lines though and deserve far more money. Nothing really compares to for example working approach control having center throw more and more tin into a finite space at you. The stress and skill can't really be described. The politicians and business managers who let the white book come into being have no clue.

Roddy_Piper Resident Knucklehead Vegas baby

I know I want more money. To say that nobody at all wants more money is just absurd. I think I know what your getting at, but be honest EVERYONE wants more money.

I think if we get into a fee for service environment then less and less pilots will call for services. Less pilots, less controllers. That's just an underlying fact that may be lost. I don't want to see an environment where they start RIF'ing controllers cuz I might be one of them.

Pants81 Trusted Member Indiana

Can you go into detail about user fees.....not everyone here understands what is included in the fee...who is being charged...how much.....what is the main reasons. I am not a pilot, but I have read about the new fees that the governement and airline is trying to GA to help pay for the ATC system. Public in general help pay for many things we use like Parks, Roads, Library's...Why not the ATC system? I think it would help pay for many things to help increase the quality and help upgrade technology. Why should the airlines pay for everything? On the other hand GA cost keep going up and it is harder and harder for new pilots to get quality training with flight training cost increasing, user fees would most likely place more of a burden on the average joe. I think it should be you pay for what you use.....if GA uses 2% of the ATC system a year than thats what they shoud pay for...if the Airlines uses 90% of the the system than they pay, and the remainder is the government and military than so on....

noid Curtis E. Carr Jawja

You are already seeing a reduction in calls with the availability of the same information on the internet. The majority of the calls are from the oldskool pilots and student pilots when it comes to actual briefings. Other calls are for flight plan filing.

The inflight and flightwatch positions are a little different. Traffic is proportionate to bad weather.

AFSS5602 Junior Member

As far as the money thing goes, of course everyone wants more money and would take it if offered. We all do realize though that our salaries are pretty good compared to what most people make.

Now there are no plans that I have heard of for user fees for flight service. I just brought it up since it is a good topic of debate. The fact is that the taxpayer money allocated to many programs is simply not enough as we all know. That is the difficulty in privatizing things like ATC. Corporations need to make a profit where a government agency only needs to work. That makes government contracts tricky. Private corporations being funded by tax payer money to provide a service and make a profit. Without any source of income the corporation may go down to the bear essentials to make money.

I think a user fee based on use would be fair. I cant tell you what fee would be needed, but it would need to be at a rate people feel is fair for the service being provided.

otterstrom Trusted Member of NATCA

the air traffic control system is indeed "inherently governmental." this includes terminal, enroute, and flight service. it needs to be a burden on the tax payer. anytime someone tries to make a dime on this stuff corners get cut. as stated by afss5602, lockheed is a good example. their bean counters are slowly killing the flight service profession in an attempt to squeeze a dollar out of anywhere they can. no to fees and no to privatization. keep it all government.