NATCA Offers Recommendations for Improving Program Safety at Federal Contract Towers - (7/18/2012)
CONTACT: Sarah Dunn, 202-220-9813
WASHINGTON – National Air Traffic Controllers Association Executive Vice President Trish Gilbert affirmed the organization’s support for parts of the Federal Contract Tower (FCT) Program, but also discussed NATCA’s concerns before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Aviation today.
Gilbert explained that NATCA supports the cost-share component of the FCT Program as well as its allowance for building a new tower where one does not already exist. NATCA does not support the expansion of the program to existing Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) towers by converting or transferring current towers.
There is a dangerous lack of FAA oversight at many of these towers and NATCA is concerned that the FCT Program is pushing the outer limit of the responsible margin of safety with bare bones staffing and inadequate support for essential equipment.
“NATCA represents air traffic controllers at 63 contract towers, and we are proud of the stellar work they do,” said Gilbert. “We offer recommendations for improvement because contract towers need to provide a better working environment for the controllers who staff them.”
NATCA has made five recommendations for contract tower improvement, including that contract towers should be held to the same staffing standards as FAA towers and that contract towers should model the FAA’s safety culture in allowing controllers to report incidents without fear of punitive retaliation.
Gilbert’s full written testimony is available here:
Other highlights from Gilbert’s testimony:
- “There is a fundamental difference between an FAA tower and a contract tower. The FAA model was built on the premise of redundancy to prioritize safety above all, whereas a contract tower has incentive to prioritize the bottom line. NATCA is not criticizing the fact that profit margins are a factor, but we must keep this reality in mind. In addition to the different motivations, there exists a stark difference between a contract tower and a FAA tower’s support systems, including equipment and facility maintenance and staffing.”
-“It is NATCA’s position that there is a fundamental flaw in comparing contract towers to FAA towers in terms of safety as defined by operational errors. The flaw in any comparison derives from the fact that errors are unevenly reported – the FAA has a true safety culture, where all controllers and employees are encouraged to report all safety issues, including errors, while contract towers are dictated by a punitive culture that discourages controllers and their supervisors from reporting errors.”
-“NATCA understands that neither the FAA nor Congress is currently discussing expansion of the Federal Contract Tower program. Again, for the record, NATCA is opposed to expanding the contract tower program. Contract towers have their place, but under the current system they push the responsible limit of the margin of safety with short staffing, unreliable equipment, and a lack of technical support for the equipment. As a result of understaffing, controllers are required to tend to administrative duties while on position, as well as the responsibility for on-the-spot maintenance of any equipment malfunctions. These distractions mean that contract towers are approaching the outer limit of the margin of safety.”
The National Air Traffic Controllers Association represents over 20,000 highly skilled controllers, engineers and other safety professionals.
Follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/natca
Follow us on Facebook: facebook.com/natcafamily
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
To unsubscribe, send a "SIGNOFF PRESS2" command to LISTSERV@LIST.NATCA.NET
Show All News Headlines