AUS_ATC

Decertifications in air tower
Two controllers, one supervisor cited

By Jane Roberts
Contact
February 27, 2007

Two air traffic controllers and a supervisor have been decertified as a result of errors that caused three planes at Memphis International Airport to land too close together in mid-February.

The controllers will receive as much as 10 hours of retraining and will be required to be recertified. The supervisor, at least for the short term, has been assigned to administrative duty.

Decertification is designed to identify areas in which employees need retraining and is not considered disciplinary. The training could take days or weeks, said FAA spokeswoman Kathleen Bergen.

The incidents happened shortly after noon Feb. 13 and involved two FedEx planes and two regional jets flown by Pinnacle Airlines.

The FAA requires five miles of separation between heavy jets and small jets to keep the smaller planes from flying into the turbulence large jets create.

In two cases last week, the distance was shortened to 4.85 and 4.86 miles after a FedEx pilot twice reduced speed before he attempted to land due to an auto-throttle problem.

The second time speed was reduced, it also shortened the mandatory 1.5-mile lateral distance required between planes landing on adjacent runways.

While the FAA last week said three operational errors in rapid succession was "very unusual," it characterized the loss of separation as minor.

Controllers say staffing levels in Memphis are causing them to work more overtime, increasing the possibility of exhaustion-related errors.

"Last August, we had 64 fully certified controllers," said Pete Sufka, local president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, the union that represents air traffic controllers. "Come this September, will be down to 52 or 53."

He blames the attrition on retirements and controllers leaving for bigger airports.

"Memphis has always been a steppingstone to higher-level facilities because during our peaks, we work the same level of traffic you have in Atlanta, Dallas and Chicago," he said.

But because of pay changes imposed by the FAA last year, controllers coming to Memphis from smaller facilities don't qualify for raises.

Sufka says it means fewer people are willing to work the heavy traffic during FedEx peak periods.

Of the five new hires assigned to Memphis in the past eight months, three have left, Sufka said, "including one who decided he could do better by starting a lawn-mowing service.

"Since the start of the year, we've been having more and more scheduled overtime. My guess is that some time this summer, most -- if not all -- controllers are going to be assigned six-day workweeks," Sufka said.

Although the FAA agrees that the pay changes were imposed Sept. 1, it says the authority came from Congress.

"We negotiated with the union for nine months and came to agreements on almost all the issues except for pay and benefits," said Laura Brown, FAA spokeswoman.

When an impasse was declared, the FAA sent its last offer to Congress, which had 60 days to make changes.

When there were none, the offer was imposed, which includes annual raises but "slightly lower pay rates for controllers coming in as trainees," Brown said.

"Why should controllers in Memphis get more money? We have lots of other busy facilities around the country."

The FAA, facing massive retirements among workers hired after the air traffic control strike in 1981, says it hired 1,100 controllers last year and is on target to hire 1,400 this year.

The FAA says it has a pool of "more than 2,000 controllers waiting to be hired.

"We are having absolutely no trouble attracting controllers," Brown said. "The reason is that while they are being trained in their first year, they're making close to $50,000. After five years, they're making more than $90,000."

--Jane Roberts: 529-2512

AUS_ATC

What this reporter and the Commercial Appeal refuse to print for some reason, is that the Controllers informed the Tower Supervisor that they were going to "break-out" several aircraft due to the pending loss of separation. The Control Tower Supervisor ordered the Controllers to "let 'em land". This was admitted to by the Supervisor; the order was witnessed by other Controllers in the Tower Cab; was documented in the investigation; and was published in the FAA ATO Daily report of Operational Errors.

Had the Controllers been allowed to break-out the FDX aircraft at the first indication that separation was being lost, the other errors would not have happened.

MEM_ATC

Gunter

I don't know what the work environment is over there. It probably would get ugly if you overrode the supervisor but in the FAA's eyes someone has to step up to protect separation. The FAA has to do its part to ensure office politics don't get in the way.

Hope you controllers don't get penalized too much. I hope the supervisor gets an attitude adjustment.

How you guys getting along there?

ultradrvr

Why should a controller be punished for a direct order from a supervisor????
Also, enough with this manning crap. The controllers have been complaining for a few years now about staffing. Wake up uncle sam!!! And since RVSM have we not open up more available airspace???? I fly a corporate jet (waiting for my recall) Kansas city denied me higher because of saturation of airspace above me!!! I was held down 10,000 feet from my requested altitude!!! Same number of controllers + more airspace = ??????
I rely on ATC 100%....so the last thing I want is a disgruntled controller overworked and under paid!!!! I deserve the pay I (hopefully real soon) will get and so do the controllers. Maybe we need another non-controller to be the head of the FAA!!!

Ok, I'm done ranting.

Purple F/O

For the same reason that you'd be punished if you violated a FAR because your supervisor told you to.

I'm not taking the FAA's side, or trying to downplay the role that the supervisor played in this...it's just the way it works.

Huck

Lord Jesus knows, we can't click off the autothrottles.....

MAWK90

Buddy of mine came back recently from the far east (MD11 F/O) and said the Capt. slowed to 210kts 25 miles out (NOT REQUESTED BY ATC). Then was assigned 170kts to the marker, but said "that's too fast, screw him" and slowed to approach speed 3 miles outside the marker.

According to my bud, there are a ton of Captains that basically fly scared. Slowing down Way to early. This Captain also said that he wouldn't let F/O's land if the crosswind exceeded 15kts.

If you ain't sure of your F/O it's cuz you ain't sure of your own abilities.

Bitme

That's absolute horse crap. Flying here (fdx) is like a good investment strategy; the closer to retirement the more conservative you should fly. Sorry, but with mgts track record of backing up their pilots you can't afford to let FOs have free reign as sad as that is or as much as you'd like to. Can't take the risk. Personally I have a pretty good feel of a guys competency beginning right at the preflight desk and as the man up progresses. All factors in how comfortable I am with an FOs "abilities". Luckily we have very very few that I worry about, but some Captains may have a different comfort level. Your buddy and you may not agree with said Captain's methods, but that's what seniority is about; when you get there do as you wish.

FoxHunter

Hmm? Just feed the hollow ball! 170 kts till the marker? If heavy you can't get much slower until flare!! With the MD11 the problem usually is over running that 727, DC10, A300 in front of you. Captains scared to fly? Must be those younger, less experienced guys!!!

MAWK90

I am there, and have been there.