PASS Region II

    Hits on PASS Region II           
Crucial Memory Coupon                                                                                               

Dave's Calendar

Check Out the New PASS Region II Blog.. Click Here!!

As of September 2006 I have been using the Region II Blog to make announcements and communicate timely information. Click on the green banner above to access the site.

This site will be used as a resource for stable information.

FAA HRPM’s as Guiding Principles

And the Impact on Collective Bargaining

By Dave Spero

PASS Region II Vice President

The FAA proudly exclaims for all to see on its website explaining personnel reform to its employees: 

“What exactly is “FAA PERSONNEL REFORM”?

The FAA, like most other government agencies, historically operated its personnel system under the guidance, policies, and procedures of the Office of Personnel Management. During the early 1990's, several national studies indicated that FAA mission requirements, work force characteristics, and customer expectations demanded a flexible personnel system unique to the FAA. In response, the 1996 Department of Transportation Appropriations Act granted the FAA a significant amount of personnel management flexibility by exempting the agency from most of the personnel management provisions Title 5, U.S. code, which contains the statutes that govern the Federal personnel system. This means that the FAA Administrator has the authority to develop personnel systems specifically for the agency that recognize the unique culture and contributions of the people of the FAA.” 

In addition the Agency’s website also states:

“What did we retain from Title 5?

Some portions of Title 5 have been retained; some by law, others by choice. By law, FAA personnel systems retain the portions of Title 5 that protect "whistleblowers," provide preference for veterans, require employee loyalty, prohibit strikes, restrict certain political activities, and prohibit discrimination. By choice, FAA personnel systems will continue to follow some parts of Title 5 such as those covering merit principles and prohibited personnel practices.” 

Notice the Agency themselves say "By Choice". What happens if they suddenly choose not to continue to follow those parts of Title 5? Where does that leave you if your Collective bargaining agreement doesn't provide for these long held standards? That's what the Agency is proposing. The management proposal provided to PASS from the Agency basically points out that the HRPM's are "all you need". Why would they do this? The answer is: They want the ability to change the Agency at will. Everyone who is riding that roller coaster known as the ATO with conductor Russ Chew driving knows it can jump the tracks at any time. Without a collective bargaining agreement with solid protections, you are left to the mercy of FAA.

Strangely enough the Agency forgot to mention that it is still required to bargain with its labor unions under 5 USC 7106. Please pay special attention to this point and to the text which I have emphasized. It is the basis of this analysis. 

Since 1993, OPM has streamlined personnel processes, eliminated regulations, and delegated human resource management authority to all Federal agencies maximum flexibility in managing their human resources.  As a result, the Federal Government is moving toward performance-based management. The President’s management agenda focuses on this.  

Congress believed that this would unleash the potential of Federal organizations, and the new strategic approach to Human Resource Management would encourage the flexible adaptation of an agency’s HR systems and processes to support the agency’s mission.

It is now becoming apparent that the FAA true intentions were to rid itself of the “burdens” of statutory oversight because it’s internal management and administrative processes were fatally flawed. By no longer having these “burdens” of statutory oversight the FAA is free to change the rules of the game to match the shortcomings of their organization and the partisan goals of political appointees. 

 What are the Merit System Principles? 

The merit system principles are the public’s expectations of a system that is efficient, effective, fair, open to all, free from political interference, and staff by honest, competent, and dedicated employees. 

An illustration of the Merit System Principles  (MSP) model shows that an Effective organization is based on Human Resource policies that are enforceable and are based on legal compliance. The FAA is exempt from enforcement under 5 USC 2301 c, therefore this model is only a representation of what the Agency should be doing... not what they are required to do.

 Historical Perspective; Why were the Merit System Principles enacted?

1880’s – At the height of the “spoils era” (1829-1883), each change in national administration was the signal for the wholesale removal of Government employees to provide jobs for the supporters of the President and jobs were openly bought and sold.

1883 – In 1881, President James A. Garfield was assassinated by a disgruntled job seeker while waiting to board a vacation train in Washington.  President Garfield’s death gave new impetus to a Civil Service reform bill introduced by Senator Pendleton (Ohio).  Passed in 1883, the Pendleton Act established procedures for assure that selections for certain Federal jobs would be open, competitive, and free of political coercion.

1978 – The Intergovernmental Personnel Act required states that receive Federal funds to follow six Merit Principles.  Finally, it was the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 that created the nine Merit System Principles and the eleven Prohibited Personnel Practices.

1989 – Whistle Blower Protection Act – With specific legal protections provided to Federal employees who identified instances of fraud, waste, and abuse in Federal operations, the merit system was strengthened significantly.

The Merit System Principles are covered under 5 USC 2301. The Federal Aviation Administration is exempt from this statute.

The reasons for this are best explained from an excerpt of a Gov Exec Article from February 2003:

“In 1996, the FAA announced sweeping personnel management system reforms, including a new pay-banding system that gives managers more flexibility to compensate employees on the basis of performance. The agency also started requiring supervisors to give employees more frequent feedback about their performance, undertook efforts to track its workforce skills and demographics, initiated new hiring policies and established a forum to allow union leaders and FAA management to exchange ideas to improve labor relations.

Many of these reforms were possible because lawmakers granted the FAA exemptions to Title 5 of United States Code and some of the other laws governing federal civilian personnel management in the 1995 Transportation Appropriations Act. For instance, the legislation allowed the FAA to form its own competitive hiring process, bypassing a centralized government hiring system. The more flexible pay-banding system required an exemption from Title 5.”[1]

"Congress provided these flexibilities in response to FAA's position that the inflexibility of federal personnel systems was one of the most important constraints to the agency's ability to be responsive to the airline industry's needs and to increase productivity in air traffic control operations," the GAO said.”[2]

Because the FAA is now responsible for enforcing heir own MSP’s under the HRPM, the rules of the game can be changed internally without any act of Congress. Essentially the flexibility that Congress gave to the Agency is now being used by FAA to report success to Congress on a variety of Agency objectives that may or may not meet the spirit and intent of the MSP’s.

The Effect of the HRPM’s on collective bargaining in FAA

As the FAA engages in collective bargaining with PASS in this new environment, we are seeing the impact of the new “flexibilities” and the how this is being abused to meet a political agenda rather than to build a strong Federal Agency based on the efficient and considerate use of Human Capital. FAA has suggested that collective bargaining agreements are of little value because the HRPM’s enacted by the FAA cover any and all concerns for employees. The differences between the FAA HRPM’s versus the MSP’s and other OPM requirements that FAA is exempt from are clear; the Agency can change their requirements at will as opposed to the statutes which enforced policies from the light of day.

Collective bargaining in the Federal Government achieves many goals that serve the MSP’s and efficient government. “The ability to organize, bargain collectively, and participate in labor organizations helps to ensure that the perspectives of agency employees, presented through their representatives, can be heard. Engaging employee unions in major changes, such as changing work rules, can help achieve consensus on the planned changes, avoid misunderstandings, speed implementation, and more expeditiously resolve problems that occur.” [3]

FAA no longer has a need for collective bargaining since it can dictate policies to its employees not covered by collective bargaining at will. This was not the case when the Agency was required to adhere to Title 5. During collective bargaining in 1996-2000, the political landscapes were different and Federal Labor Unions were held in higher regard than they are under the current Administration in the Executive Branch.

In the first exchange of substantive proposals during the 2006 PASS contract negotiations, the FAA summarily gutted the current PASS AF collective bargaining agreement and proposed that the articles of the contract were no longer of any value since they were covered by the HRPM’s. FAA states this to be in their interest based on the aforementioned political philosophy but it does not correspond to any of the MSP’s that were originally enacted to support fair and efficient government. Bargaining unit employees should wonder: If the Agency follows certain personnel policies and practices " by choice" , what happens if they suddenly choose another path? Without a collective bargaining agreement that mandates certain policies and practices be adhered to, FAA bargaining unit employees will have about as many employment rights as the local Wal-Mart employee.

In summary, the Agency believes labor Unions and the right to organize and negotiate for the bargaining units it represents to be irrelevant. Faced with the elimination of thousands of jobs for political purposes, bargaining unit employees should be alarmed by the concept of the agency left to it’s own standards for personnel policies and conditions of employment.

The differences between the FAA proposals and the protections of the collective bargaining agreement are vast. PASS Members must clearly understand the threat PASS AF bargaining unit employees face if FAA is successful in forcing a contract that is contradictory to the Merit System Principles. The FAA no longer appears to support an effective and efficient government that is free from political interference.

Send mail to davespero@cox.net with questions or comments about this web site.
Last modified: 02/13/08