Friday, December 02, 2005
Sidebar
Time out for a bit to talk about this blog…
A couple e-mails arrived recently along the ‘who are you’ line of questioning. One hit our box this morning and we couldn’t have been more pleased; she has our admiration for being probably the most active among Flight Service controllers in seeking legislative relief from her Senators, and continues to do so, tirelessly, it seems. We wish her every success, both with the Senate and in her career.
There have also been a couple e-mails containing some ‘over-the-transom’ information which we haven’t discussed yet, but will soon.
We thought we should take a moment and explain why we haven’t responded to those who have been kind enough to share their thoughts and insights.
When this blog started on July 18th it was a very turbulent time. The contract had been awarded, legislative efforts were stalled, union strategy was at times unclear and coming under sharp criticism, and political affiliations were being forced to the surface, causing divisiveness among the controllers. Yet the word was not getting out to the flying public; our story was not being told. Letters and calls to Congress were proving almost valueless. In an effort that indeed can be described as a long-shot, we thought there might be another way to make a difference. You are reading the result.
The first editorial decision was that this should be an anonymous blog. This is not about us, and we’ll do nothing intended to draw attention to ourselves. We wanted the thoughts expressed taken at face value without consideration of the source or other ad-homonym dismissals.
But as soon to be minted at-will employees, we were also (and still are) paranoid. Should we say something that offends our employer, we can be fired on the spot, theoretically at least. Pardon us if we’d rather not take the chance. Which is why we have not answered e-mail. While pretty good, we’re not the most tech-savvy bulb in the chandelier, and we’d view an e-mail trace as a very bad thing. We don’t even know if that’s possible, but uninformed risk is also bad thing…
By all appearances and results we were unsuccessful in helping to turn the tide of Flight Service fortunes. For one, we started way too late in the game. But this has an element of fun and have chosen to keep going. E-mail like this mornings help the effort.
So, as the old saw goes, keep those cards and letters coming. We do read them and apologize for our lack of response. We beg your forgiveness and understanding.
A couple e-mails arrived recently along the ‘who are you’ line of questioning. One hit our box this morning and we couldn’t have been more pleased; she has our admiration for being probably the most active among Flight Service controllers in seeking legislative relief from her Senators, and continues to do so, tirelessly, it seems. We wish her every success, both with the Senate and in her career.
There have also been a couple e-mails containing some ‘over-the-transom’ information which we haven’t discussed yet, but will soon.
We thought we should take a moment and explain why we haven’t responded to those who have been kind enough to share their thoughts and insights.
When this blog started on July 18th it was a very turbulent time. The contract had been awarded, legislative efforts were stalled, union strategy was at times unclear and coming under sharp criticism, and political affiliations were being forced to the surface, causing divisiveness among the controllers. Yet the word was not getting out to the flying public; our story was not being told. Letters and calls to Congress were proving almost valueless. In an effort that indeed can be described as a long-shot, we thought there might be another way to make a difference. You are reading the result.
The first editorial decision was that this should be an anonymous blog. This is not about us, and we’ll do nothing intended to draw attention to ourselves. We wanted the thoughts expressed taken at face value without consideration of the source or other ad-homonym dismissals.
But as soon to be minted at-will employees, we were also (and still are) paranoid. Should we say something that offends our employer, we can be fired on the spot, theoretically at least. Pardon us if we’d rather not take the chance. Which is why we have not answered e-mail. While pretty good, we’re not the most tech-savvy bulb in the chandelier, and we’d view an e-mail trace as a very bad thing. We don’t even know if that’s possible, but uninformed risk is also bad thing…
By all appearances and results we were unsuccessful in helping to turn the tide of Flight Service fortunes. For one, we started way too late in the game. But this has an element of fun and have chosen to keep going. E-mail like this mornings help the effort.
So, as the old saw goes, keep those cards and letters coming. We do read them and apologize for our lack of response. We beg your forgiveness and understanding.
# posted by Skywise @ 10:02 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
There are things that need to be said in public, that have not been said yet. I welcome this blog as an alternative to the other sources of communication.
Most of us know that the A-76 competition was a set-up job between the faa and the contractor.
The faa set up the MEO to fail. They put "weak people" in charge with a poor plan. The FAA assigned aquisition managers that had failed to control their other contracts. Appropriate political pressure was applied (and is still being applied) for the administration to get the desired result.
NAATS bought off on this hook-line-and -sinker. Many people believe, that NAATS leadership was in bed with the FAA. How else do you explain the fact that they had "zero" successes over the last 5 years. A generous person might simply say they were grossly inept.
The contractor wants to keep NAATS on a string because that effectively blocks any other union from moving in (think Teamsters). Manipulating a financially broken and defeated union is a management dream.
A union dissolution vote should be taken, and reorginization, if desired by the workers, begun.
Most of us know that the A-76 competition was a set-up job between the faa and the contractor.
The faa set up the MEO to fail. They put "weak people" in charge with a poor plan. The FAA assigned aquisition managers that had failed to control their other contracts. Appropriate political pressure was applied (and is still being applied) for the administration to get the desired result.
NAATS bought off on this hook-line-and -sinker. Many people believe, that NAATS leadership was in bed with the FAA. How else do you explain the fact that they had "zero" successes over the last 5 years. A generous person might simply say they were grossly inept.
The contractor wants to keep NAATS on a string because that effectively blocks any other union from moving in (think Teamsters). Manipulating a financially broken and defeated union is a management dream.
A union dissolution vote should be taken, and reorginization, if desired by the workers, begun.
# posted by 
: 8:41 AM
: 8:41 AM
Have you read the NATCA president's blog on the NATCA site? He calls Flight Service the "Freddy Kruger" of the ATO. What do you think of that and what did he mean by that? Mr. Carr, if you read this, please explain yourself and your unions nonsupport of NAATS!
Post a Comment
# posted by : 9:17 AM
: 9:17 AM << Home
